US attitude vis-a-vis North Korea

“I’m the next” was never the feeling of the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea (DPRK), commonly known as North Korea even either after the invasion on Afghanistan or aggression on Iraq by the USA in the name of ‘War on terror’ though she along with Iran was branded as ‘axis of evil’ by the same country, America, based on a common floor of accuse. On the contrary to the set-up of US policy of preemptive attack against any of the parties involved in seeking WMDs, whoever knows what does it mean and whether there really is any country or not, Iran is always under the menace of a possible USA’s front of raid. Why this discriminatory behavior between Iran and North Korea exists though both of them are categorized under the same umbrella of so called ‘rogue state’ or ‘axis of evil’? The answer of this question will probably offer you the principle of USA’s policy and attitude towards North Korea vis-a-vis other discolored states.

The American policy towards North Korea includes neither a complete release of threat nor a panic of assail. This hammer-pillow tricky play is handled concerning two hidden grounds e.g. to eye wash the people that war on terror is not a war on Islam and Muslims and to make a perpetual pressure on North Korea to refrain her from being a nuclear power. It’s as true as the day comes after night that no document, no mater whoever it makes including Mr. Bush himself, can prove any connection of North Korea with any terrorist group, organization and country. But in the same time North Korea is only one country from the list who has a capability to make a physical attack on USA through Taepo-dong-2 missile which covers South Korea, Japan, or perhaps even Hawaii, Alaska, or San Francisco. In this context we have to revisit the American and North Korean objectives towards each other.

America has never considered North Korea as a patron of terrorists either religious or any other forms but, at the time, is always concerned about her aspiration for nuclear weapons, advanced missile technology covering her physical frontier, other conventional and nonconventional weapons. But how much headache does America have regarding North Korea? Perhaps it suffers less annoyance than Iraq, Iran and even Libya. Because of some strategic points of view she always over focuses North Korea as a source of intimidation. The most important reason is, as I’ve already mentioned, to bring a flavor of non Islamic identity on the term ‘war on terror’. With the exception of this eye-puzzling argument there are also real grounds for overwhelming North Korea as an adverse party. The Pentagon has inflated the North Korean threat in order to rationalize its desire for a missile defense system in Asia really for containing China and, if need, Russia; to justify a capacity to fight another war simultaneously, and to explain the need to maintain 37,000 troops in South Korea. The question of legitimization and legalization of the presence of American troops in South Korea comes first for building an image of devastating North Korea in the world or at least in the South Asian region. Moreover since Clinton administration America is trying to over emphasis the necessity for implementing national missile defense system (NMD). Without showing a common, visible and proclaimed enemy how can you employ such a balance of power dismissing military logistics? In a true sense, who bothers you like or not, in this USA guided unipolar world there is no sway to dare her in both economic and military fields, two mutually interdependent elementary sources of muscle and political power. Having no threat at present the USA is planning game for the possible upcoming shadow enemy, some suggest, China. But the problem lies on the matter that it’s not possible for socio-politico-economic rationales to label China as a declared concerned state. In such an odd and mystifying situation the USA is fervent to slaughter China keeping gun on the shoulder of North Korea in the course of making a blame game over her. If a destructive image of North Korea let you an opening to exterminate three birds in one stone i.e. legalization of the deployment of 37,000 troops, implementation of NMD and containing future contender party; why would you not ensure it done?

One may ask if there is no probability of aggression on North Korea why she worked in full swing to acquire nuclear weapon. The answer goes straight forward within two points as increasing bargaining power and, secondly, protecting regime interest. Being an acutely poverty injured country North Korea needs international assistance in energy, food, agriculture and other economic sectors as well as a direct relations with America. She knows if she is not aware of gaining nuclear weapon America will never pay any heed towards her needs and as a result dirty blame game will get the worst point and at last nothing is possible to be obtained. Thus bargaining capability turns into another interpretation of nuclear capability. From the second point of view, described as regime interest, the present government of DPRK, like Saddam Husain of Iraq, is more antagonists to USA rather than state itself. Who does not know the real true that Saddam Hussein would not be dug up and finally Iraq would not be attacked accused of nuclear weapons and WMDs if he really had those things in hand? So the real fault of Saddam was not ‘to try for nuclear weapons’ but ‘not to try for nuclear weapons’. The present government of DPRK did not craft the same slip though it promised four times not to seek for nuclear weapons i.e. through Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1985, Inter-Korean agreement on denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in 1992, The 1994 Agreed Framework with the United States and Six Party Joint Statement 2005 about not to attain nuclear weapon.

In the coming days America may retake a policy of not to follow hard attitude of implementing fully the UN sanctions to penalize and isolate the regime; but a soft attitude of keeping the door open to discussions through the Six Party Talks. Basically Clinton administration started that policy and ran a long race and at last reached a solution named ‘The 1994 Agreed Framework’. But the step did not get a continuing shape because of Bush’s aggressive attitude. The American presidential election along with economic disruption may insist her to return the old policy but under some conditions. First of all America wants to assure not to develop any nuclear weapons and arrest the programme on the foundation of touch-the-switch-off immediately and trustfully. In return it may recognize the running ruling elite of the DPRK and economic as well as energy aid. In this context you can’t forget the other parties of the table specially Japan and South Korea. The peaceful rapprochement between two Koreas is the fundamental policy of South Korea through “Sunshine policy". On the contrary Japan is willing to contain North Korea in its full meaning by her all means. In this multi dimensional interests of different countries related to the problem will make an awkward state for the USA. Neither the policy of rapprochement nor the policy of full containment is USA’s interest today. So America, in this region, will develop the policy of blame game against North Korea in a soft tune and in the same time will furnish Japan with a better military position obviously under the USA’s management with slight touch of India. Thus in the name of North Korea, which is not the real concern of America, China will be contained. Who does not recognize that this is the genuine diagram of USA in this area?

Policy towards peaceful Palestine; No probability possesses Gaza penetration

“Blood is the most valueless, worthless and insignificant thing in the world” is probably a statement not to be accepted accusing of its atypical meaning to guarantee respect en route for human community. On the contrary to this account if someone says “The blood of the Palestinian people is the least valuable, most unnecessary and redundant thing in the world” it seems that most of ‘you’ have no say to this corollary. Yes! Here the pronoun ‘you’ has been used in italic completely enthusiastically as the indication of the pronoun varies from person to person. If this ‘you’ encircles the so called world leaders; no matter they are from two Americas, European Union, Arab land or where not let alone atrocious Jews larders, the previous assumption expressed in the second phase is obviously beyond question. On the other hand if this ‘you’ envelops world’s mass and moral based community they will strongly rebuff the blood peeling ferocious assault towards the fortune deprived Palestinian people thought the real tragedy is that the mass are always thrown away from the scale of judgment regarding whatever is to be time-honored as well as abandoned. Consequently the same blood from the Israeli acquires the highest worth but embraces only negligence if drops from the innocent Palestinian people; the real possessor of the Arab land. The last one sided assail on Gaza strip from Israel, really to be read America in lieu of Israel as many argue her as ‘Middle Eastern version of America, is nothing but another burning example of such brutal treatment towards Arab Muslims of Palestine.

The almost month long shadow American molest on Gaza is, in fact, a duplication of frequently, at least once in a year, harassment on Palestinian people to destroy their slow decaying psychological and physical strength for thirst for independency, ownership of own land won unjustly by Israeli hyenas by means of tricky play of international playmakers from the field of international politics. This molest, however, includes every type of inhuman activities from using white phosphorus bomb, though prohibited from any angle of international law, to human-shield. In the name of bringing to a halt the simple rocket firing by Hamas she used all sorts of ultramodern conventional weapons from the tri-sided application I.e. navy, army, air force and what not. Was the target Hamas or the unarmed and sinless deprived people? If Hamas was the goal then the answer is Israeli attack went completely in vain as only below fifty Hamas activists were killed whenever more than thirteen hundred people were roughly slaughtered with an unimaginable loss of twenty thousand habitats, one thousand and five hundred mills, factories, workshops, countless mosques and even schools driven by UN and so forth. For this reason it has been mentioned in the above that the attack was not for hunting Hamas but a routine work of Israel to seal Palestinian independence in a slow and sluggish, but definitely effective, way. The real goal of this writing is, however, to review the upshot and characteristics of the assault from the political backdrop of the region not merely portraying the fact of damage, killing and other physically visible items as you are already well known about those matters including pictures through news papers and other print and electronic media available around you.

Through Gaza assail there has been created a never erasing crack in two fronts i.e. between and among Palestinians as well as Arab leaders since Hamas has already pointed fingers towards Fatah for backing up Israel to rein in Hamas leaders from their dens. This is the first time when one Palestinian is accused of helping their common adversary the Zionist against another of Palestinian. Though there are inescapable differences between Hamas and Fatah from political point of view as well as policy adopting process, there was no direct clash at least in a massive scale till Arafat’s death let alone lending a hand to Israel against one another. But this time honored unwritten principle between Hamas and Fatah is now under question which from any point of view is the most important achievement for Israel. What a wonderful equation it is for Israel that a Palestinian goes against another Palestinian! This tendency of split has been glimpsed in the second level as Arab leaders also became divided in captivating any united choice. Though never in any phase of history Arabs leaders were capable to capture a combined step in any affair, it is also true they have crafted an amalgamated choice whenever there was attack from Israel on the Palestine. But now at the peak of climax of slaughtering, destroying and eradicating Palestinian they showed differences in the question of Hamas. What a tragedy it is for the Palestinian people that the age old policy of divide and rule is now getting on the extreme level against them not only by their national leaders but also by regional leaders through a tactful policy applied by the Western powers. Is that the last catastrophe for Palestine? If you are an open eyed person with a power of filtering politics, some eye-catching changing, which go beyond the region, have already been scanned by you. Let’s excavate that scenario.

In the above lines we have visualized development of state within the region but there have been taken place some apparent transformations in the political behavior beyond the region. The most important one is the USA’s stand which meets a u-turn in the latest Gaza attack. Prior to that attack all the affairs related to Middle East were tightly controlled, visualized, organized and even materialized under a full attachment of the USA’s attitude, willing, permission and signal. This is the first time when Israel could manage the USA to resettle the decision in UN by direct force though taken, nurtured and made with full attachment of her secretary of foreign affairs. America is always used as safeguard for Israel in UN but not by force which happened first in the event of Gaza. What does it say? You may think nothing but the scenario tells that the full control of the USA is shifting to Israel as she is not willing to rule the region via America. If it comes true, the total phenomenon will change not only dramatically but also drastically as Israel has no intention to pay any heed towards international law, customs and rituals. In spite of this interpretation we may have another alternative that this was an exception which was possible for the weak leadership of Mr. Bush and with the visionary and missionary aim of Obama, the new Afro-American black inhabitant in White House, any kind of disobedience from Israel is possible to be curbed. We all hope this to come true but reality, most of the time, does not follow common will. Another significant change was Canada’s new stand about the attack in UN. Though in reality none of the Western powers takes any step goes against Israel, they always try to act as if they did supporting the Palestinian people. Now in this case Canada went directly against Palestine. You can never take it as a usual incident as it may pave the way for other Euro-American nations to go directly against Palestine in future dangers. If it happens frequently Palestine will turn into nothing but a hell or grave for Arab.

After the whole discussion now make a bird’s eye view on the total aftermath of the Gaza assault. The facts that will come in your mind can be described in short as the division of Palestinian people as well as Arab leaders in the region and transformation of power structure from the USA to Israel and at the same time an alteration of Euro-American, excluding the USA, moral support from Palestine to Israel. If those happen why I should not say what I depicted in the first paragraph within inverted commas-“The blood of the Palestinian people is the least valuable, most unnecessary and redundant in the world.” Tell me why I should not say it!

Contemporary Tibet politics

You need neither to be an academic nor to be a foreign policy analyst to come back with the query regarding the foundation of China’s relations viz-a-viz other countries. Yes! You got the point and it’s cogent not only to you but also to all that the first and foremost prerequisite clause to maintain normal relations with China is to acknowledge ‘One China Policy’. What does it mean by the term ‘One China Policy’ and why does China need an autonomous principle whenever all the countries follow the same core value technically to be told ‘maintaining territorial integrity’ in keeping up both internal and foreign policies without developing an independent code i.e. ‘One America Policy’ or ‘One Pakistan Policy’? This unique policy, admitted by China, confirms us about her great integration problem though she was able to annex Hong Kong fruitfully. It, however, is a principle that there is one China and that mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan are all parts of that China. This is the broad aspect of the definition as most of the time the designation refers only the name of Taiwan to be embraced in a narrow perspective under the condition that China’s claim over Macau and Hong Kong is proved and widely time-honored. In this context it is surprisingly noticeable that neither the broad nor the narrow explanation of the term ‘One China Policy’ ever integrates the name of Tibet as though there were no trouble over that particular territory. But the wheel of history has turned. In one hand the relations between China and Taiwan is coming closer particularly after the ascending of the new government in power under Ma Ying-jeou, though the process is tight and tough as USA is always adding fuel to the flame, the question of Tibet has come to focus in the global political arena as a protest of Tibetan has been managed with a bloody way.

The history of Tibet, known as the roof of the world, is full with great clumsy. The debate starts with the question of geographical identity as some argue it is adjoining to Central Asia and in the same time some suggest as a part of South Asia. The history of united Tibet starts under the ruling of Songtsän Gampo(604–50 CE) who spreads the kingdom in the valley of Yarlung River. Latter it came to the contact of Arabs and eastern Turks as some advocate that the word Tibet is derived from the Arabic word Tubbat which is derived via Persian from the Turkic word Tobad, meaning "the heights". Under Kublai Khan, the prominent Mongol warrior and founder of Yuan Dynasty spreading Northern China, much of Central Asia, Russia and modern Ukraine, Tibet came under Yuan Dynasty. No matter Tibet was a part of any dynasty or ruled under tributary rulers the relations between Tibet and China did not go, most of the time, with a straight line. It is true that various Chinese dynasties had on several occasions interfered in Tibetan affairs and simultaneously it is equally true that various Tibetan kings and rulers had invaded China or otherwise exercised influence in Chinese affairs. On one occasion in 763 AD Tibetan troops even occupied Chang’an - the then Chinese capital - deposed the Chinese Emperor who was not friendly towards the Tibetans and appointed the son of another branch of the royal family as Emperor. In 82 it was decided through a treaty that the two countries shall never interfere in each other’s affairs; believing that ‘Chinese shall be happy in the land of China and Tibetans shall be happy in the land of Tibet.’ The text of this Treaty were carved on three stone pillars in two capitals of Lhasa and Chang’an and the third one for the border Gugu Meru. But neither party pursued the commitment and finally China annexed Tibet in between 1949-1951 and signed a treaty titled ‘Agreement on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet’ commonly known as ‘17-point Agreement’ in 1951 which confirms in its first point ‘the Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the Motherland-the People's Republic of China. It’s, however, not a matter what contains the agreement as the Tibetan leader 14^th Dalai Lama snubbed the treaty carping that it was not singed by the government and the five-member-delegation party to Beijing led by Kalon Ngapo Ngawang Jigme was enforced to allow the treaty. At the point of a great climax Dalia Lama went to India and founded the exile government in Dharmashala. Since then China is piling the policy of ‘association with China’, ‘genuine autonomy within China’ etc. In this context it is also substantial that none of the big powers or neighbor including India, though it has a great interest regarding Tibet since it could be used as a buffer state, have never disregarded the demand brought by China over Tibet and even astoundingly India held back the question to be conveyed to the United Nations in the name of mutual understanding between China and exile government. So the politics over boycotting Olympic Games arranged firstly in China is not to free Tibet but only to create pressure on China.

If there were no Tibet would there be any issue of refusal about participating in the inauguration program of Olympic by leaders of western countries? Yes and obviously as the day follows night. The question is not Tibet the question is human rights as we see that BBC reported ‘Human rights campaigners accuse China of exaggerating an alleged threat to the Olympics to justify repression of the Muslim Uighur population in Xinjiang.’ Western countries always charge China for violating human rights continuously and why would they allow going the games without any scene creating while it has been practicing for a long history to use the Olympic Games as political pressure in different purposes in several time in numerous occasions. The US boycott of the Soviet games in protest against the invasion of Afghanistan in 1980 and the tit-for-tat boycott by the Soviet and their allies of the LA games in 1984 are proved documentation of politicization of the games.

The dirty political game in the games was started to be carried out from the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin and frequently repeated in The 1956 Summer Olympics in Melbourne, The 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City, the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, Moscow's 1980 Summer Olympics and Los Angeles 1984 Summer Olympics. So the question is not Tibet the issue is human rights the oldest and most used against all countries who are divergent to the west. Tibet has only paved a new front for them. The emergence of new China powerful both economically and militarily with the largest number of population is not a nightmare for the west.

Moreover the frequent stand of China against West in different political views both in and out of United Nations such as regarding Darfur, Iran nuclear deal, support to North Korea, and making obstacle in taking measures against Mugabe is annoying to them. USA also thinks China as a naked threat to its unchallenged hegemony over the globe in near future. In this circumstance the blame game of violation of human rights is exercised as an everyday routine work by the West predominantly USA. In the mean time it’s also true that the rejection by Taiwan government, however, on the proposal of making a rout of Olympic torch through its capital Taipei claiming that such arrangement would make the Taiwan relay be seen as part of China's domestic route, rather than the international route has set China in harassing position. The Tibetan protest in several places such as Canada, European countries, USA and Tibet itself has worsen the situation and opened the door for Bush, Nicholas Sercogy and some other leaders to threat for boycotting the opening ceremony of the games though, at the same time, it was clear to all that it will never happen and subsequently was proved by their proclamation to attend the occasion.

Tibet issue in determining relations between west and China and even India, where the exile government is working, and China is never been considered as to be the boss because they no that freedom of Tibet is nothing but castle in the sky. But, at the same time, the issue will be used for bargaining and blaming over China to keep her in psychological strain. The main game will be started in selecting the next Dalia Lame as it is deemed not a person but an authority over Tibetan having a spiritual power. Traditionally it has been the responsibility of the High Lamas of the Gelugpa Tradition and the Tibetan government to find his reincarnation. The process can take around two or three years to identify the Dalai Lama, and for the 14th Tenzin Gyatso it was four years before he was found. The on going ‘His Holiness’, stands for Lama, told in mid 70s that he might be the last Lama. It creates a big mystification among Tibetan and at last they along with present Dalai Lama they have recognized a child, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, as the reincarnated Panchen Lama. But Beijing, in the mean time, has selected a different Panchen Lama considering it as her own rights and naturally the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Buddhists in exile do not regard PRC's Panchen Lama to be the legitimate one. The new Lama, who knows who will be and from which side, is an important issue as he will the real actor of shaping the fortune of Tibetan people as no one including China and India keeps hope to present Lama for an acceptable solution regarding the problem. We are enthusiastically lingering for His Holiness to find a apt and decent elucidation of the problem keeping both sides in pleasant. A new Lama with a new dream!

Chinese economic rising; a shift from ideology to re-shift towards power struggle

“The disguised economy” perhaps would be the genuine naming of the Chinese economy as it is misread a socialist one from ideological perspective. The real fact is if you want to furnish Chinese economy with the socialist skin, you will not only be aggravated but, at the same time, will be dazed seeing that it has already surpassed the extreme phase of capitalist economy. This dissocialist process in Chinese economic turf was started in 1978 when China’s domestic economy experienced wrenching change. After raising prices for farm products dramatically in 1979, China converted its socialist communes to family farming in the early 1980s, when it also created banks and replaced government budgetary financing for enterprises with bank loans. In the latter 1980s, China shifted operational control of factories from Communist Party secretaries to factory managers, who were given incentives to make money. Thus, by gradual repositioning, it finally hammered the last nail on the coffin of the socialist economic system and instituted keeping the new wine of capitalist system under the old brand of socialism.

But this disguise musky nature and the shifting process of Chinese economy never come to the round table discussion of the economists, specialists, politicians, social workers and even the critiques of the China’s socio-political-economic point of views though the economy itself is well talked from different angles i.e. the question of morality, major challenges such as environmental pollution, inflation, future low paid labor crisis, economic crisis in the world, energy crisis, challenge for or from the USA, Brazil and India etc. Other much talked points regarding the rapid expansion of Chinese economy are its impact on world’s politics, capability and probability of her power expansion, opening new political fronts in south Asia, Africa along with such other places obviously including Latin America. We will also, in the next coming lines, turn one after another all unturned stones of the Chinese economic terrace.

First of all we can click the mouse on the folder carrying the files and documents regarding Chinese economic expansion. If you do so your eye ball may come out of your eye pit after seeing the rate of her economic expansion. Since 1990s China is successfully maintaining a double digit GDP whenever most of the developed countries assume it a kismet to assure the rate in between 3-5 percent and thus her growth rate since 1990 has well outstripped the twentieth-century growth records of Japan other East Asian “miracle” economies like South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. Today China is in the longest sustained period of rapid expansion since reforms began. China’s integration into the international community also goes far beyond what Japan or South Korea ever attempted at this stage of their development and obviously her embrace of the World Trade Organization and foreign direct investment is unprecedented and contributes importantly to its growth success.

Though the rotation of the wheel of economic development of China is intact till today, the total process is going under a u-tern shift from affirmative to interrogative. Many of the specialists in the field of economics are arguing that this swift development process may slow down because of some visible and unavoidable reasons. The indiscriminative exploitation of natural resources and unwise treatment with pollutant particles have caused a severe environmental mayhem what may within the shortest possible time cause limitless troubles from natural disasters to epidemic spread of diseases. More over the quick industrialization has opened immense bargaining opportunities for the able employment seekers and at the same time has increased the every day expenses and together these two facts have made the wages higher which, in return, may press the trigger against flow of foreign investment. The current world wide economic crisis is adding salt to the injury. People from different countries, where China has a big share of export, have started to save money and shorten the rate of consumption as a result shoe, motor car and some other markets are now under great depression. Melamine scandal in dairy milk industry, animal food is considered as bolt from the blue and has already inserted a big question mark about the morality of China in business as some allege that China engages in unfair commercial practices, such as policies affecting exchange rate levels, intellectual property rights, subsidies, and accumulation of foreign exchange reserves etc. All these issues may become as catalyst for slowing down the GDP rate though some say China has its own big population to be interpreted as market and consumers which may deter the crisis. Who knows what the decision of time is!

No matter it expands or abbreviates critics are always busy in calculating the after math of becoming China as economic power with exact reference of time. Many suggest after pressing the buttons of calculator for a long while that China’s total GDP will become larger than that of the U.S. sometime between 2035 and 2040. After that, China’s GDP will likely become twice that of the U.S. by sometime in the 2060s. In this connection they also remind that this is not only an economic challenge towards USA from China as head always follows the ears and economic supremacy opens the doorway of political as well as military power. The symptoms of Chinese power and hegemony expansion are clear in different regions with special reference of Africa, South Asia and a slight touch in Latin America. China has already started expanding its investment in energy sector in various African countries along with a hand some number of investment-economic aid oriented projects in some developing countries. A tight military tie with different countries in various fields and levels are also a luminous indication of China’s big military ambition. The feeling of Middle Kingdom, problem of territorial integrity regarding Tibet, Taiwan and so on and USA’s aggressive policy of preemption, making sea boundary safe, assurance of regional stability are the main military headache of China. To acquire all those needs China is triggering her shoot towards space technology whenever navy is also getting a remarkable importance. All these activities seek a close investment which is to be assured by the current economic rising. When it is done, with such a big population, China obviously can craft an everlasting confront towards unipolar world order which is tilted towards America. At least the ill feeling of India and Japan regarding China’s emergence may insist America to interfere in the region which in the long run will open a new form of impasse like situation between China and America.

The rapid rising of China as an economic giant has also another aspect. With her low paid labor China is becoming more and more business counter for Japan, USA, European countries and even India and some other developing countries in spite of their having cheap labor. Chines car, electronic parts and IT to agriculture based industries can provide products in so low price that local entrepreneur of different countries are on the brink of ruin. More over China’s new will to reshape the G8 to G9 has put Japan aside on the table. Thus the rising of China as a commercial magnet has multidimensional effects from soft issues like social, cultural to hard issues such as economic, political, security and strategic fields and so on. But all these will certainly depend on the capability of Chinese leaders how much they can prolong the economic uprising with the best use of every single opportunity. Who knows how it will go!