governance, political economy, institutional development and economic regulation

Posts tagged ‘NATO’

Indo-German Defence Pact- New beginnings for subaltern states.

Leyen

(photo credit:www.junglekey.fr)

Ursula Von Der Leyen, the scarily efficient and glamorous German Defence Minister, who is also incredibly mother to seven children, ticked all the required boxes for soaring rhetoric on a bilateral strategic partnership with India. Democracy, freedom, an open society, diversity and religious plurality being the ground for shared values.

Of course, she was careful to not mention the closest strategic arrangement yet between India and Germany, forged by Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose whose “Indian National Army” joined the “Axis” forces in World War II.  This fact is inconvenient on two counts.

First, Germany is still defensive about its authoritarian past under Hitler. Second, Netaji, whilst acceptable to the current BJP government, remains a big no- no to the Congress. He was Pandit Nehru’s rival within the Congress and had to quit. Displaying characteristic German caution, Ms. Leyen preferred to give the past a brush-over and concentrated on the future.

Today, the most visible link is the fascination of the Indian nouveau riche for high-end German cars- the Audi and its cheaper cousin the Volkswagen and the BMW stable- thereby uncharacteristically forsaking the “value for money” Japanese options.  The second common link is a taste for beer though German brands remain unrepresented in the Indian beer sweep stakes which is dominated by Dutch, American, UK, Australian and home grown Indian brands.

Human Rights and Democracy go together

To a direct question from a media representative whether a dodgy human rights record for India could sour any proposed strategic partnership with Germany, Ms. Leyen was quick to brightly aver that since the two countries were democracies,  safeguarding human rights was, by definition, of equal value for both. She could not have done better.

The response was in sharp contrast to the US Ambassador’s apprehension, recently voiced publicly, that freezing the activities of Ford Foundation and Greenpeace in India could chill Indo-American relations. But Ms. Leyen’s response also came as recognition of India’s long standing support for the rights of the exiled Tibetan community, resident in India. Chancellor Merkel has been an international exception in publicly snubbing China by maintaining warm relations with the Dalai Lama. PM Modi in turn has been quick to project the Indian origins of Buddhism.

Can Germany subvert NATO discipline?

For all the talk about a strategic partnership, it was not clear what the substance of this partnership could be. Germany and Japan (the defeated Axis powers of WW II) have both reaped the economic advantages of aligning with the victors and outsourcing their external protection to the US Nuclear umbrella for the last seven decades. Japan and Germany are the third and fourth largest economies, respectively, but on defense spend they rank a lowly eighth and ninth, behind the UK, France and even India (SIPRI 2015).

Is Germany seriously considering abandoning the US crutch and shouldering more of the defense burden versus Russia’s currently expansive ambitions in Europe? Would the additional fiscal burden be feasible given that the dodgy economies of Southern Europe are fast becoming Ms. Merkel’s subsidy problem?

This would be uncharacteristic for the cautious and pragmatic Ms. Merkel. Germany is increasingly dependent on natural gas imports, subsequent to it closing the nuclear power option. Russia is right next door with the largest reserves of gas and the pipeline infrastructure to supply it. It makes perfect sense for Ms. Merkel to continue to depend on the US for “protecting” Europe and avoid a direct face-off with Russia.

One lesson to learn from Germany is how aligning with a stronger partner for strategic purposes can free up public resources for development and growth. But it is unlikely that the context will ever fit the tough neighbourhood India is situated in and the compulsion of living with a “muscular” China.

Indo-German strategic partnership?

Indeed the question uppermost in Ms. Leyen’s mind was whether there was any future for an “alliance” with India, given our long standing adherence to the doctrine of non-alignment. It is unlikely that she will get a straight answer.

First, strictly defined “for-ever” alliances are now old hat. Germany, together with the UK, Netherlands, Denmark, the Nordics, Australia and New Zealand have ignored US chagrin at their participation in establishing the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank- China’s counter to the Japan dominated Asian Development Bank.

Second, the past shows that alliances do not suit India. We are too large and too poor, to hang our hat exclusively on any one peg though it is not for want of trying. India has all the characteristics to be a natural ally for the rich, democratic world.  But the accident of history, or the perversity of diplomacy, has been that none of the rich, democratic countries (US, UK, EU) actually showed much interest in having an alliance with democratic India and its messy politics.

The rich, democratic world (G8) found it more convenient, during the extended “cold war years”, to team up with developing country dictators in Asia, Africa and South America in a global pact against Communism. Unfortunately, this also meant teaming up with elites and against the poor citizens of their allies in the developing world. This is what drove India into a strategic alliance with Russia in 1971 which has since lost its salience.

Make for India

Germany is today Europe’s powerhouse. India has shrugged off its mantle of lethargy. Demography is waiting to be exploited in India whilst ageing Germany needs skilled, temporary immigrants to drive their economy. This presents a huge opportunity for India’s unemployed but tech savvy youth.

Language will be a problem for Indian immigrants and this is one good reason why India should free up the language curriculum in schools and make it market oriented. Ms. Leyen is multi-lingual as must Indian kids become.

Around 12% of the German population has roots outside Germany but mostly in other European countries and Turkey. Ms. Leyen’s proposal for temporary migration, at scale, from India must be pursued.

A partnership with Germany will likely cater more to optics than substance. But the proposal to integrate the technical workforce in the two countries is a substantive addition via Indians making, for India and the world, in Germany.

A packed house turned out in the burning, mid-day heat of New Delhi to listen to Ms. Leyen and to get a glimpse of the endearing German ambassador and India buff- Michael Steiner.

Part of the curiosity was to see what the Germans had to offer in this new area of defense international co-operation. What was on offer publicly was underwhelming. Seeing and hearing the first woman Defence Minister of Germany was itself a novelty. But mostly, it was an opportunity to be with a possible future successor to Ms. Merkel once she decides Germany no longer needs her.

If this happens in 2017, PM Modi may be dealing with a powerful transatlantic woman-power tie up: Hilary Clinton in the US and Ms. Leyen in Germany – both of whom are likely to provide him stiff sartorial competition.

“Tweak” the process transparently to deliver PM Modi’s “Big Things to Small People”

Obama Modi

(photo credit: article.wn.com)

Charismatic leaders can mould crowds like putty. Bill Clinton’s March, 2000 “US and India are natural allies” address to the Indian Parliament; Barrack Obama’s University of Cairo “New Beginnings” address to the Muslim world, June, 2009 unleashed a Tsunami of optimism and “feel good”. In much the same way, PM Modi-the man with an agenda of Big things for Small people- in his recent Madison Square address, won over the hearts and minds of a “massive” (by US standards) crowd of 18,000 Indian-Americans in New York and an even larger audience back home in India.

For many Indian expatriates, including us in India, it is a relief to have a Prime Minister who radiates strength, speaks extempore and from his heart. It also helps that he is a consummate performer, who draws energy from the crowd and returns it to them magnified many-fold.

Those looking for suave wit and a sophisticated exposition of geo-political gyan were sorely disappointed. Modi was deliberately folksy and simplistic. He capitalized on his strengths magnificently, just as Indira Gandhi, the last Indian PM with an international stature, used to do more than three decades ago.

Of course, it helps if one can live on water endlessly and still have the physical ability and mind space to go through a deliberately, whirl-wind program. By doing so Modi has become a live bill-board for the low carbon footprint potential of solar energy. His eschewing food altogether, through the trip, was akin to the Mahatma wandering through the London chill in his sparse loin cloth, protected only by the churning energy generator in his mind.

Till now the West has been wowed by India’s IT skills, thanks to our Silicon Valley diaspora. Next, we are likely to be branded as Yoga maestros all and expected to perform never-before feats of physical endurance.

But it was not all plain sailing.

Three areas where plain speaking-PM Modi’s forte, would have helped, are listed below.

First, what exactly is our stand on joining the fight against Islamic Terror and the linked approach to Afghanistan? The message coming through till now is fuzzy. It seems India is likely to carry on in much the same muddled way we have done till now; remaining visible in Afghanistan, but primarily as well wishers, bringing development to the people of Afghanistan. This is clearly dissatisfactory and unrealistic in the context of the impeding US withdrawal and the likely security turmoil courtesy the unresolved political contestation between the Ashraf Ghani and Abudullah Abdullah groups. National governments are prone to fail. Similar recent experiments in Nepal, Zimbabwe and South Sudan illustrate the illusive nature of such options for “externally enforced” stability in the face of unresolved local contestation.

Our interest lies in clearly establishing that we view the Taliban, the Pakistan Army and Militant Kashmiri jihadi groups as part of the same set of Islamic Terrorists, which are a direct and existential threat to us and our secular, plural democratic system. We must be willing and able to take the most effective action in our near abroad to crush Islamic Terror. But where Islamic Terror is not a direct threat to us (as for example the ISIL) whilst any UN endorsed initiative will have our support, we do not have the resources to join a plurilateral initiative against global terror. This is strictly for the big boys; the US, its NATO allies and China.

PM Modi has been at pains to explain that on this trip that whilst he has been trying for more than the last two decades to get the US to recognize the global consequences of Islamic terror, they took cognizance only after 9/11, when it hurt them directly. The fact is we must be similarly discriminating in unbundling Islamic Terror into immediate and distant threats and not be distracted by the enormity of global threats and ignore focusing on managing immediate threats, closer home.

Plain speaking about our threat perceptions, our limitations and our determination not to be cowed down by terror would have helped.

Second, the message on trade and investment needs to be distilled better. The economic opportunities in India are well known. The demographics; the steady economic growth and resultant demand and our democratic architecture.

Unfortunately most foreign investors live in the present. No international manager has a business perspective beyond a decade-even if they draw up beautiful thirty year perspectives. What big business looks for is leadership level facilitation to get their specific project up and running quickest with commercial and political risk minimized.

Tardy environmental clearances; tax opacity; poor infrastructure and most recently, the extended ambit of judicial review of contracts are big dampeners. Many of these constraints are institutional and require structural change, which is long term. What we need are near tern solutions, of the fire-fighting kind, to establish the enabling business environment. Selective but transparent tweaking of dilatory process is an obvious option but there are challenges even here.

At the leadership level, “successful tweaking of process” requires political credibility that the selective attention is in national interest and not another manifestation of crony capitalism. Consensus building between the executive and the judiciary of the acceptable envelop of “process tweaking”, in national interest, is key for retaining the credibility of the executive and the independence of the judiciary, whilst simultaneously ensuring that the judiciary does not get drawn into settling political scores.

PM Modi is best placed to manage the optics on this score. At the operational level, he will need the support of a highly skilled and empowered team of state government officials working with counterparts from the Union Government, to pilot the tweaking process towards accelerated launch of projects.

What should constitute the government’s decision matrix for determining the “hurdle rate” for projects to be eligible for tweaking the “way we do business”? In such circumstances it always helps to have narrow objectives. “Employment and poverty reduction”, both of which are urgent near term investment related goals, present themselves as excellent “filters” for evaluating and identifying proposals which merit the highest level of facilitation.

50 projects; 5 million jobs; US$15 billion investment can be the rolling target with automatic replenishment by new proposals as projects get launched. Unfortunately, we missed the opportunity to generate the frisson of excitement which the project based approach generates.

Third, plain speaking on our environmental and energy policy would have helped. It is clearly in India’s interest to clean its water bodies and rivers; reduce air pollution and reverse the denudation of forests and degradation of land. Degradation of these natural assets has immediate economic and social outcomes usually with adverse poverty consequences. It is the poor who are impacted negatively when water bodies and rivers become polluted because they use them directly for personal needs and business. The poor similarly suffer the most from atmospheric pollution because they are incapable of insulating themselves and their children, from such ambient pollution. Unregulated deforestation robs the poor of their eco-system and their livelihoods. Combating land degradation, like increased salinity often caused by unsustainable use of ground water and poorly managed large irrigation schemes, is a costly undertaking, which is often beyond the financial ability of the poor.

On energy our big concern is energy security. The use of coal is likely to remain a staple component of our energy profile. Similarly, more aggressive utilization of the hydro potential in India and in South Asia is an efficient option. Embedding passive energy efficiency building design is another significant option. Urbansiation levels are relatively low but there is a big stimulus in the offing under the PMs target of a house for all by 2022.

More generically, India is committed to technology choices which are congruent with our two, often conflicting, goals of reversing the degradation of natural resources whilst ensuring energy security. An increasing share of wind and solar energy is one such technology choice. Increasing the share of public transportation by railways relative to roads is another which the government is pursuing. But capping India’s carbon footprint at an unrealistic level is similar to capping food subsidy at historical prices which India has already rejected.

The mantra for plain speaking on the Indian strategy for managing terrorism; enlarging trade and safeguarding the environment is to rely on the simple rule of first reserving the fiscal and the physical space for the developing world to “catch up”, before providing breathing room for the developed world, who have abetted and often perpetrated all three global problems, by agreeing to hold them harmless.

Accidents happen

Image

Can accidents be completely avoided? Can our environment be monitored; analysed and controlled to make everything predictable? Astrologers will tell you they have been doing exactly this for ages. Not everyone believes them.

An astrologer has predicted that India’s next PM will be a bachelor. This had raised the hopes of Rahul, Bhenji, Amma, Didi and Naveen Patnaik. Modi has a wife and so clearly is not in this contest.

The BJP- India’s Hindu party, the one supported by “fundamentalist Hindus” and backward sadhus and sadhvis- oddly does not seem to believe in Astrology. They decided to go with Modi despite knowing that he was not strictly a bachelor. Possibly, the BJP has other in-house Astrologers who do not agree with the first prediction. But then that calls in question the science of Astrology itself, if practioners disagree on outcomes just two weeks away.

Medical “science” is no different. It junks homeopathy as being theoretically indefensible. But it has no explanation of why Buddhist lamas can die “clinically” and yet remain “alive” in the Lotus posture in which they died, with no decay of the body for years, till they decide to “leave” it. Modern science is far from the frontiers of certainty.

What about parenting? How long should you shield your growing children from risk and uncertainty? Indian parents go out of their way to protect their children as long as they are physically and financially able to do so. This is how they themselves were brought up. In a closely controlled and rigidly stratified environment this is possible. But in an “open” environment, where innovation is key, the past presents very few lessons for the future because the future bears no resemblance to what has happened. IBM did not know this and where are they today?

In the financial world, bankruptcies happen to the ”best” companies. They also result in better companies prospering against the inefficient ones. In India we still do not let companies die. We protect banks and large corporates from the risk of bankruptcy. “Industrial reconstruction” is the name of the game. It doesn’t work. Instead, such protection creates a culture of weak and fat companies like Air India and Kingfisher. These companies, which gorge on the tax payer’s money, the equity of minority investors, who are foolish enough to invest in them and our money saved in Banks, bur negligently lent to such companies as for example Bank of India. The lesson is that death, sometimes by accident, should not be averted beyond a point.

If there were no accidents and we had absolute certainty, there would be no progress, only the stillness of the grave. An apple accidentally fell on Newton’s head which lead to the theory that in the absence of balanced, countervailing natural forces the world would explode/implode.

Can there be reward without risk? The trick lies in drawing the line between the two sensibly. Merchant bankers, private equity managers, political pundits, businessmen, doctors, human resource managers and teachers and know how to balance risk and reward. For this core skill they are compensated handsomely except GP doctors, HR managers and Teachers. All three cater to the human mind more than to the dry dictates of their discipline. But science is increasingly making them redundant by progressively degrading the value of basic human skills. It is substituting human skills with more efficient machines at an alarming rate. Driverless cars and pilotless airplanes; robots on the production line; robots in shops and soon robots in the home; robots for ground level surveillance; drones in the air.

On the flip side science has also progressively reduced the risk from accidents for humans. People live longer and healthier lives but whether net productivity has increased as a result is debatable. A rigorous analysis of net economic growth after accounting from the environmental loss from negative externalities has never been done systematically in any country. It was tried in China in 2005 but quickly abandoned when the high economic growth rate got reduced to zero in some provinces.

The problem with not accounting for natural resource use is similar to a consumer overusing her credit card. For such feckless consumers a “debit card” which deducts the bank balance for every use is better. Green GDP accounting applies the “debit card” discipline to countries.

Seemingly “riskless” economic and “quality of life” benefits encourage wasteful use of resources because they appear “costless” in the near term. Climate change is an outcome of our successful endeavor to cocoon humans from want, disease and death. This has increased population to unsustainable levels. It has also made the rich across the world highly resource intensive. Delicate lives require air conditioning; motorized transport; communication networks and vast quantities and varieties of food, all of which degrade water sources, air quality and the biosphere in which we live. Bottled mineral water for drinking; gallons of water for endless showers; swimming and golf courses have made us water addicts. Our rivers and seas, air quality and land degradation can be directly related to the pressure of a growing population and an increasingly unsustainable lifestyle.

Upgrading all 7.2 billion of us to the average quality of life of the top quintile would either require a quantum leap in clean technology to outpace current population growth or very quickly degrade us to destruction. Paul Ehrlich (The population bomb. 1986) posed this question. Half a century on we still face the same conundrum.

More people live in degraded environments today than in 1965. Whilst the “environment hot spots” of 1965 in the industrialised countries have been cleaned up, the “hot spots” have shifted to more populous locations in developing countries. In 1955, air pollution was the biggest killer in Texas, US. Today smog from burgeoning automobiles and factories is the killer in Beijing. If rivers were fetid in the 1950s in the US, the Holy Ganga River is a cesspool today in India. Despite huge advances in technology since 1965, we still do not know how to give 7.2 million people the minimum acceptable standards of life within the available resources.

Economic theory tells us a young population is a demographic dividend. What it ignores is that barriers to international migration for the young into the rich world, severely limit the world demographic dividend. Meanwhile poor countries are unable to utilize the abundant volumes of young people available to them. They do not have the resources to push the young up the “skills ladder” faster than technology makes old skills redundant.

As a race we are increasingly unable to deal with nature. Modern armies have such a heavy supply chain to keep their soldiers healthy, well clad and alive that they lose out on tactical flexibility. They face the classic logistics problem Rommel faced in Africa with his tanks outpacing the supply chain. This is also why the US troops were no match for the Vietcong (1956-1975) and NATO troops have failed against the Taliban, in Afghanistan (2001-2014). Both the Vietcong earlier and now the Taliban, are comfortable living with nature and use nature to their advantage. The average GI from the streets of Kiryas Joel, New York (the poorest place in the US) does not have this advantage.

Accidents happen and they are a must if we are to keep growing. What we can do is to enhance our capacity to manage and deal with accidents.

As parents we have learn to deal with the inevitable misfortunes and misadventures of our children with fortitude.

As citizens we have to become resilient to destabilising political change by making government progressively less crucial for our welfare. We must take on the risks and responsibilities ourselves.

As humans, we need to drastically reduce our foot print on nature and learn to live with personal discomfort; the loss of loved ones and shifting fortunes with equanimity.

At the end of the day all anyone wants is to lie on the beach with a drink at hand; or get our lunch ourselves from the fruit trees, vegetable garden or the river next door. We must not fool ourselves into imagining that this idyllic life comes without the need to swat flies and mosquitoes; avoid snakes, rats and lizards or sans sweat, cold or fever.

The price of accidents is discomfort. The benefits are sustainable life. Choose wisely. How long can we observe nature through a protective plate glass?

 

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: