Young Diplomats

Post World War Two, The USSR and USA emerged as super-powers who later formed their respective military alliances and pitched against one another; the Soviets, having realized the potential of ‘Soft Power’ employed a substantially large public diplomacy program against the west and promoting the Communist system. Subsequently, they succeeded in making East European countries believe in the goodness of Communism, as a result, many of those countries assimilated Communism into their political system. This was largely possible because of the USSR’s ‘Soft Power’ a concept introduced by Joseph Nye – an American Political Scientist – is relatively newer in today’s world. He goes on to define ‘soft power’ as ‘the ability to affect others to obtain the outcomes one wants through attraction rather than coercion’. In today’s world, knowing that public perceptions play a large role in determining a Country’s global image, the concept of soft power has never been as important as it it is today.

Joseph Nye talks of America as a quintessential employer of soft power(1) in a way that it is home to some of the World’s most eminent brands like Boeing, IBM, Levi’s, Starbucks among others which are part of the daily life of people across the globe especially in metropolitan cities and it has largely been the reason why the world has become ‘Americanised’ to a great extent ; this is coupled with America’s global military presence, deft diplomacy and the ability to forge alliances and partnerships to their advantage. These factors can be attributed to America’s success to establish itself as the sole power-house of the world.

The 2018 ‘Soft Power 30’ index has placed the UK at top followed by France and Germany. India does not figure separately in the list but the report features a chapter solely on Asia, listing ten countries in the region, ranking India’s soft power as eighth. The report is certainly not satisfactory vis-à-vis India knowing that therein lies a huge yet largely unidentified prospect of harnessing India’s soft power and channelizing it our advantage. In India’s context, everything from Buddha to Bollywood(2) may be used as a tool to advance and employ its soft power. India’s rich cultural heritage, status of being the largest democracy, palatable cuisine, bollywood film industry among other factors may rightly be termed as our soft power assets. An example of successful usage of soft power is reaching global consensus to observe 21st of June as International Day of Yoga. It is at least one day that every informed citizen of the world would think about India in a positive way, as a result, India’s global image gains momentum. I would now like to shift focus to Afghanistan; both India and the USA have been involved in rebuilding Afghanistan’s ravaged infrastructure for some time now. India may not have contributed as much as the USA have in monetary terms but in the eye of common Afghani citizens, India enjoys a much better image than the USA; it won’t be an exaggeration to say that it has largely been possible because of the soft power that India wields in Afghanistan in form of people-to-people contacts, promoting cultural linkages and undertaking gestures like inviting Afghanistan’s cricket team to play their first Test Match in Bangalore, goodwill visits et alia. India’s relations with Bangladesh have been going through ups and downs ever since Bangladesh’s inception; apart from the fact that issues concerning both countries need to be sorted out in a way that the outcome is acceptable to both India and Bangladesh, a gesture by India’s External Affairs Minister Mrs Sushma Swaraj is worth mentioning. While on her official visit to Dhaka, few months ago, she presented Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Ms Sheikh Hasina with the weapon of the then GoC-in-C of erstwhile East Pakistan Lt Gen AAK Niazi, which was captured by the Indian forces as a result of Pakistan’s surrender during Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. The gesture was very well received by Bangladesh’s citizens and has gone a long way in cementing India’s relationship with Bangladesh. However, there are certain domestic bottlenecks which do not help India leverage its soft power across the global spectrum; in 2012 the awful rape of a young woman in Delhi created global headlines showing India in extremely negative light(3) and even dubbing Delhi as the ‘rape capital’ of the world gave a significant jolt to India’s global image bringing down the number of foreign tourists after the above-mentioned incident took place. Every time an incident of lynching takes place in some nook or corner of the country, it sends an unpleasant signal to the world that India and its establishment have been fostering radical elements in the society contrary to the image of what India has been known for historically; its composite culture, deep-rooted secularism and one of very few countries in the world where every person has the fundamental right to practice, profess and propagate any religion. India does not only preaches but practices the principle of ‘acceptance’ which is many steps ahead of the western concept of ‘tolerance’. However, every time an untoward communal riot takes place it poses a big question-mark whether India has failed to remain on the moral high ground that it has attained over centuries. The essence of Soft power may be summed into what Shashi Tharoor, an Indian Politician and former UN Under-Secretary General said ‘In today’s World it’s not the side with bigger Army that wins, it’s the country which tells the better story that prevails’(4).

According to many eminent economic think tanks across the globe, India is set to become the world’s third largest economy by 2030 after the USA and China. China is constantly pitched against India along with a question that who wields the better prospect to establish itself as the next super-power of twenty first century; undoubtedly China has been faring better than India in economic and military domain and therefore its chances to establish itself as the next super-power are much brighter than India’s. However, one of the domains where China lags behind India is the potential to harness and use soft power to its advantage. China is a relatively closed society where people do not enjoy liberties beyond a certain limit; the historical baggage of Mao’s brutal tenure; ethnic cleansing of Tibetans; lack of religious freedom especially vis-à-vis Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang province; Tianamen square massacre are some factors which limit China’s capacity to wield influence on people across the globe. India, even though it had its share of political upheavals, is seen with a more positive view. It is not only for the Government but also for the civil society to lend a helping hand in identifying and employing India’s soft power assets to its advantage.

References

Pax Indica – Shashi Tharoor
Communicating India’s Soft Power – Daya Kishan Thussu
The Oxford Handbook of India’s Foreign Policy – Rani D Mullen
Pax Indica – Shashi Tharoor

Last week Colombia announced its withdraw from the Union of South American Nations (USAN or UNASUR in Spanish) by denouncing its treaty with full effect in 6 months. This news came after the decision of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru, and Paraguay, to provisionally suspend their membership of the organization back in April. All these States accused the organization of being an accomplice of the Venezuelan dictatorship and thus justifying its suspension or retirement of the entity.

The UNASUR Constitutive Treaty was signed on May 2008 and entered into force on March 2011 with 12 members (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela) and 2 observers (Mexico and Panama). The goal of the community was to create a space for integration on the cultural, social, economic, political and commercial aspect as a first step of a much bigger integration that included a unified passport, a parliament and a single currency; completely inspired on the European model.

UNASUR was Hugo Chavez’s dream at the time and as the left was rising in South American, the majority of its States adhered to it as a way to counter the power of other States like the USA. Nevertheless, as the situation in Venezuela worsen, the right wing (in some cases extreme) started to win elections in South America, for example Argentina, Colombia and Paraguay, causing the start of the end of UNASUR. Accordingly, UNASUR is now left with only half of its original members, and it’s currently blocked without a Secretary General since January 2017, situations that considerably diminish if not destroy, the dream of an integrated South America.

Although is true that various organizations with a goal of integration exist already in South America, like the Andean Community (CAN) and Mercosur, they are solely based on an economic interests with no plans of moving forward like UNASUR was planned to evolve.

So the questions are: if Europe did it, with its various languages and cultures barriers, why South America or even Latin-America can’t? If we share the same language (except Brazil) and very similar cultural, educational and social traits, what is stopping us? When are we going to realize that there is strength in numbers? There’s no answer, and meanwhile the dream of integration with UNASUR will continue to crumble and even lead to bankruptcy, due to, in a paradoxical matter, the legacy of Chavez.

The chances are that something like USANUR will surely not repeat itself in years, because of the political inability of most of the South American presidents to look pass the political differences between them, even in the Trump era, when Latin-America should unite itself the most.

Bobi Wine: The New Face Of Opposition In Uganda

Yoweri Museveni like many other revolutionary leaders in contradiction to their own radical standing hardly allows for a healthy opposition politics or the rise of a similar figure in their national politics. As much as Uganda has grown under the long sitting septuagenarian, his constitutional maneuver to remove any limit to his reign as opposed to the principles he enunciated when he came to power in 1986 has distracted a lot from his achievements in the international scene. The opposition camp has since 1999 been led by Dr. Kizza Besigye who was once his ally and personal physician during the struggle of the bush war in the 70s and early 80s. Dr. Besigye has contested four times and lost to Museveni in elections that were trailed by legal contest. In a recent press conference, the opposition leader acceded to the view that the present regime can only be removed from power through a concerted effort by all the opposition parties.
The rise to fame of the musician turned parliamentarian, Robert Kyagulanyi popularly known as Bobi Wine has been said to cause discomfort to both the government and the hitherto opposition camp led by Dr. Besigye. The 36 years old Bobi Wine has leveraged effectively on his youthfulness, musical fame and digital technology to project himself as a new voice in Ugandan politics. Bobi Wine became a member of the parliament having won the Kyandodo east by-election June last year.

In one of the quotes attributed to him, he said:
“When our leaders become misleaders, and our mentors become tormentors, when our freedom of expression become the target of suppression we cannot but make opposition our position.”
The position of opposition has brought him to the blacklist of the government. In a major constitutional controversy last year on amending the age limit for seeking the highest position in the country which was initially between 35 and 75, Wine revealed that lawmakers were bribed for their support in scrapping age limits for the presidency. He further said that he received 29 million Uganda Shillings ($8,000) and asked his bank to return it to the sender before exposing the corruption on social media in what brought embarrassment to the presidency. Safe the amendment of the Article 102 (b) Museveni would have been barred from contesting for the sixth time in the next election in 2021. In a similar scandal in 2004, parliamentarians who openly supported the president third term bid were given US $3,000 which many people regarded as bribe to ensure the required two-third of parliamentarian vote to lift the two-term limit.
Following a clash between the supporters of Bobi Wine and those of the president, the former has been arrested and detained in Makindye military prison near Kampala. The hash tag #FreeBobiWine has since then been trending on social media and fast dominating the internet space. The trial of Wine in military court despite the fact that he is civilian has received serious condemnation. In what further attested to the rise of Wine as the third force in Uganda, while in detention the candidate supported by him, Kassiano Wadri won Arua Municipality by-election with the candidate of the NRM –the president party coming second while the major opposition party FDC came distant fourth. However, it is clear that Museveni is undermining the power of the new generation politicians who are equipped with the soft power of digital technology. The use of brutal force is making a hero of Wine and showing that the government might be on the path to self-defeatism.

There are lessons in the regime change that took place in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya as well as Zimbabwe for Museveni. It is better to allow for a peaceful atmosphere for opposition politics than precipitating a forced regime change.

*Kamal Ololade Ahmed is a postgraduate student at the Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna can be reached via ebullientololade@live.com

On October 7, around 147 million Brazilians are expected to head to their polling station, show their I.D. and then get into a booth to choose our leaders for the next four years. Elections in Brazil are paramount and really important!

We will elect a new president, 27 new governors, 513 congressmen, and over 1,000 state lawmakers. But how exactly will that process happen?

LISTEN

Financial Action Task Force commonly known as FATF was established in 1989 with the aim of discouraging terror financing, money laundering and other similar threats that can pose a potential threat to the world in terms of looted and illegal money transactions. The composition of FATF consists of two separate but interrelated lists called grey list and blacklist. Pakistan has been on the Grey list before during 2012-2015. In its recent meeting on 28th June 2018 at Paris the country was placed again on the list by describing somewhat similar facts. For example, the country did not take concrete measures to counter ‘’financing of terrorist’’ from her soil, frequent money laundering and structural deficiencies in its anti-money laundering law (AML).

Many of the analysts might consider this ‘’a step in the right direction’’ which is not a true picture of the story. Let’s break it down to analyze whether the FATF action against Pakistan is a rational step on not.

Starting with the factual data, the Basel Institute of governance disclosed its anti-money laundering index 2017. According to the report, Pakistan ranked at 46th place out of 146 countries that were evaluated on the basis of their efforts and laws to counter money laundering. Common sense suggests that 45 countries are on the upper side of Pakistan making them more disclosed to such illegal practices. But the irony is that very few from them are placed on the Grey list. Take the case of Afghanistan which is at number 2 out of 146 countries is not placed on any list. So despite taking a rational and factual action, FATF decision fallowed favoritism policy in its approach in taking decisions of fragile nature.

Moving on, Pakistan submitted her 26 point plan of action to FATF-ICRG (international cooperation review group) before the deadline given by the review group. Despite this, the decision was taken against the country. The committee should have considered the political situation of the country at that time as there was a caretaker government at the Islamabad which cannot take any policy decision of specific nature. Without considering the fact, the FATF committee opted for the decision of placing Islamabad on the Grey list which came as surprise to Pakistanis.

The best possible way perhaps would have been a consensus among all the stakeholders. The country’s newly elected government should have been given some time to revise the policy regarding anti-money laundering and terror financing. As the PM Imran Khan’s political agenda was based on this issue that he will bring the looted money and will strengthen the laws regarding anti-money laundering and terror financing.

Now, as the decision is in place; the already fragile economy of Pakistan may face multiple challenges ranging from adverse impacts on Pakistani banks, relatively bad impact on import, export, remittances, and access to international lending’s. It may disrupt the balance of payment. In such a scenario, the end result might be against the wishes of the international community which will do harm to Pakistan in particular and the world in general.

Pink tide is an important phenomena in South America. By the end of the 1990s, South America was desperate for change. A debt crisis drove most countries in the region to elect neoliberal governments, before subsequent periods of hyperinflation and banking crises caused unemployment and poverty to rise. A groundswell of dissatisfaction was latched onto by galvanized social movements, clearing the decks for what we know today as the Pink Tide.

The Pink Tide was a historical moment, beginning in 1999, in which throughout South America, left-wing and center-left governments came into power. It was so named as even though the leaders in question were to the left of center, many were not so radical, neither traditionally socialist, hence the use of the color pink.

The Pink Tide was hardly a homogeneous or unified movement, either. In fact, what made the phenomenon so striking was the wide range of leftist ideologies on show. A reformist-turned-Marxist populist became president in Venezuela. Brazil elected a trade-unionist, Bolivia, an indigenous activist. The period also saw a Peronist take charge in Argentina, a Keynesian economist in Ecuador, a once guerrilla Marxist in Uruguay, and a Christian socialist in Paraguay.

READ THE FULL STORY NOW!

Introduction

The US and China are great powers and when it comes to them, diplomatic relations are far from simple. When Trump came to power, he praised Xi Jinping and he was willing to have a good diplomatic tie with China. However, China has disappointed the US by not pressurizing Pyongyang to give up nuclear and missile programmes. This resulted in a trade war between these two major powers and reflects in the recent move in the South China Sea. Through economy, the US and China has launched a war.

The USS Stethem, a guided missile destroyer of the US entered within 12 nautical miles of Mischief Reef. It is the artificial reef in the Spratlys which was seized by China from the Philippines. Therefore, China accuses the US of this unauthorized entrance into its territorial water and defined it as a provocative action which violates China’s sovereignty. Therefore, it sent its battleships and fighter jets to warn the US and to protect its sovereignty. The US criticizes China for militarizing the region by constructing infrastructures such as naval docks, landing strips, airbases and radar communication systems. The Pentagon has already given a warning that China plans to construct floating nuclear power plants on disputed islands it created in this area.

The South China Sea and its importance

The South China Sea is the 3,500,000 square kilometers area of sea south to China and gives the countries fishing rights and opportunity for energy exploration. China, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Brunei, Singapore, and Vietnam are sharing the South China Sea and they are not happy with China’s influence in this sea as they have disputes over the Spratly Islands, Parcel Islands, Pratas Island and the Scarborough Shoal.

Having the ongoing military presence in the South China Sea for decades, the US counters China’s ambition of ruling the sea. It made China deploy anti-ship missiles which can target within the range of about 300 nautical miles.

China’s interest in South China Sea

It is of strategic importance because one-third of the world shipping passes through this worlds second most used sea route that allows USD 3.4 trillion worth of world trade every year. China wants to bring this sea lane under control as part of its One Belt One Road initiative.

Also, China is interested in huge oil and gas reserves beneath the seabed. This sea is also important for the fisheries industry of China. More than these economic reasons, China’s ambition of becoming a strong maritime power in this region by controlling the sea and the other competitors in the region, plays a major role in China’s growing interest in the region. Thus, China claims 80 percent of the South China Sea and behaves more aggressively towards other countries in the region.

Though there is a conflict arising between the two economic giants in the world, there is less possibility of the outbreak of war as the main focus of these two countries is to upgrade their economies. YoungDiplomats has published a military comparison between the US and China and this is a must-read http://www.young-diplomats.com/china-and-the-us-who-would-win-military-comparison/ 

On 26th of July a significant event unfolded in Pakistan, perhaps one of the most politically volatile countries in South Asia. Imran Khan emerged victorious amid the allegations of pre-poll rigging by Pakistan’s military establishment. Later in the evening, in a televised address, Imran Khan expressed his intent to improve the bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan, he also mentioned that Kashmir remains the bone of contention between two countries. However sincere he may be in trying to improve bilateral relations with India, history stands testimony to that fact that Foreign policy of Pakistan remains the monopoly of its Military establishment which might want to keep the pot boiling.
On same day in 1999, India retrieved the strategic heights of Kargil that were captured by Pakistan Army regulars disguised as mercenaries. An understanding of political events which led to a military conflict between India and Pakistan would be able to give reader an understanding as of who calls the shot regarding Pakistan’s involvement with India. Towards the end of twentieth century, both India and Pakistan had tested nuclear weapons which resulted in an outrage from the global community. Of late, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif, Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan respectively, decided to put an end to the speculations of a nuclear conflict by indulging in a bilateral dialogue. Mr Vajpayee undertook a groundbreaking bus journey from Delhi to Lahore to sign the famous “Lahore Declaration” on 21 February 1999 and reinstate the “Simla Agreement” of 1971 in letter and spirit. The Lahore Declaration was aimed at easing the tension between two countries.Under the terms of the treaty, a mutual understanding was reached towards the development of atomic arsenals and to avoid accidental and unauthorised operational use of nuclear weapons.
When the Lahore Summit was being planned, Pakistan’s Military had already outlined the nitty-gritty of ‘Operation Badr’ which, broadly put, was aimed to capture the ‘winter vacated posts’ along the strategically important NH1-A of India which connects Srinagar to Leh. Their objective was to thwart the movement of Indian troops towards Leh and subsequently seize the Siachen glacier, which Pakistan likes to call a “low-lying fruit”. ‘Operation Badr’ was materialised in May 1999 under the command of Major General Javed Hasan, Force Commander Northern Areas(FCNA). Whether Mr Nawaz Sharif was kept aloof of the above-mentioned developments still remains unclear. Either way, it was established that the elected representatives in Pakistan have no say in the foreign policy. In response to Pakistan Army’s misadventure, India launched ‘Operation Vijay’ aimed to regain the Kargil heights with a clear operational mandate to not cross the Line of Control (LoC), however grim the circumstances may be. After nearly two months of intensive military involvement, India evicted Pakistanis from Kargil.

More recently, in yet another unprecedented effort by India to establish peace with Pakistan, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Lahore on his way back from Kabul on 25 December 2015. He visited the farm house of the then Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif in Raiwind and both leaders reiterated their sincere resolve to put an end to all disputes including Kashmir through ‘comprehensive bilateral dialogue’ – a phrase deviced by Pakistan’s government itself. However, seven days after Mr Modi’s Lahore visit, a group of heavily armed militants,  belonging to Pakistan-based terror groups United Jihad Council and Jaish-E-Mohammad, aided and abetted by Pakistan Army crossed over the International Border(IB) and attacked the Indian Air Force base in Pathankot. The attack was perpetrated in response to the peace effort by Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan. Mr Sharif was perceived to be a ‘dove’ by Pakistan Army and it has largely been the reason why they played Imran Khan against him.
Now that Mr Imran Khan is set to form the Government in Pakistan, it is pertinent to look at his political background. Early in his political career, he was accused of being a person of ‘westernised’ thought by opposition parties in Pakistan, his ex-wife’s Anglo-Jewish identity did not go very with Pakistan’s orthodox society. After a plethora of political upheavals, Mr Khan matured into an ultra-conservative right-wing politician who was even dubbed as ‘Taliban Khan’ for having praised the Taliban. He supported the blasphemy law and vowed to establish an ‘Islamic welfare state’ on the lines of Medina.

Conclusion

It has now been established that Mr Imran Khan has been backed by Pakistan’s Military because of his ideology is more in sync with theirs. Whether he would toe the line of General Headquarters, Rawalpindi to go ahead with the peace process with India seems improbable. Since Pakistan’s inception, no elected Head of Government has been able to complete full term in the office. Imran Khan may want to break the jinx but for that he may have to comply with Pakistan’s all-powerful Generals.

According to the Time magazine, Vladimir Putin was, in 2007, the person of the year. Ten years later, he still can be described with those words. He is the president of the third global power and every single of his acts affect the lives of millions of people. Vladimir Putin is surprising, strong and, for many, looks like a superman ! But what do we really know about him ? YoungDiplomats worked a lot on this quiz in order you to understand this leader. Go ahead and good luck with this quiz !

It is inevitable to talk about emergent countries, namely China, when trying to understand this new global order, less and less dominated by the United States’s power. Times change, they evolve and what is guaranteed in the present, it is not in a near future, especially when it comes to geopolitics and finance.
The first sentence of this post is directly related to how China is using its power to expand its influence throughout the World, especially in the African continent. It is more and more relevant to speak about China and I consider it to be a good way to start what will be an attempt of a (geo)political/development themed blog.
After this introduction, let’s get back to the main idea of the post. “It is a full package”, that was an expression used by Professor Daniel Bach in a conference in Lisbon, when talking about the Belt Road Initiative and its impact in Africa. Let’s get into details: the Initiative goes way beyond a couple of simple transactions and investments in a couple of countries worldwide. Nothing is random, nothing is miscalculated.
More than 60 countries will receive/are receiving Chinese capital to build, create and renovate their infrastructures – roads, ports, airports, etc. In Africa, the Chinese investment is felt in three different areas: the first is concerned with the connectivity, which can only be possible if there is an improvement of the railways and roads for a better circulation of imported and exported products and the second is related to soft infrastructures by simplifying the administrative processes (Gana Single Window System, for example).
However, not every country sees the “good deeds” coming from the Chinese authorities, especially because of its lack of transparency, when it comes to its businesses. Consequently, what was meant to be a partnership between two countries, easily turns into… Politics. When big investments shape domestic politics of independent and internationally recognized countries, then something is wrong.
In Africa, that is yet to be seen. What African political actors must consider right now is what kind of development they want to adopt: one focused in foreign (unreliable) investment coming from China (and from Western countries in a less quantity), liberalization of trade and inequalities or a type of development that integrates people, gives education and equal opportunities to all.

“It is a full package”, but for who?