'Kem Chho' Mr Prime Minister? - President Obama

One of the most anticipated visits of Prime Minister Narendra Modi was to the United States that ended up early this month. Anticipated one because this is the same US which denied him a visa earlier in 2005 for the alleged violation of human rights/minority rights for his 'alleged' role in 2002 Godhra riots. Now, the times have changed, the visa seeker CM Modi has turned out to be PM Modi in the run up to the world's biggest democratic elections ever.

Although Obama Administration was pre-occupied with internal as well as external issues, but they showed apparent interest in building new ties with India. It is because, the world has understood that PM Modi is a forceful personality, decisive, capable to take hard decisions and also business friendly. All these templates made it clear that Americans were very much looking forward to engage with the new powerful Prime Minister of India.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi went there with a tag of political as well as economic salesman, carrying brand India in his baggage to the far off the North-West Atlantic Ocean. Narendra Modi's departure statement carried 1/3rd mention to the meeting with President Obama, signaling other significant issues that would come on the table of negotiations during the bilateral talks.

The departure statement can be construed as the marking of start of Indian Renaissance era, and less of geostrategic angle to it. The visit of the United States was perfectly synchronized with the September 25th launch of 'Make In India' campaign to communicate that India is not merely a market now, and it is the upcoming hub of manufacturing. He further advocated his 'Make In India' vision to the US Business community by enlightening the importance of investing in India with the vision of 3D's - Democracy, Demography and Demand. In the strategic point of view, his statement clarified that India wants to be a bridge between the West and the East and at no circumstances, India would be pressurized to make a choice between the two. His article in the Wall Street Journal after his immediate arrival, made it clear that we are interested to re-energize the bilateral relation which was in a state of stagnation from the past few years. In the end, the efforts concluded with the relationship coming on track of incremental improvement with few small steps and big leaps.

The driving force behind the visit were two important issues -

• First was the act of rebalancing visit of Chinese President in the same month of September.
• Secondly, PM Modi is the new 'Head of the State', so there were a lot of contemplations regarding him in the West.

It was intended to be a transformational visit from the Indian side, and not from the US's side as Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Nisha Biswal made it clear that US is not looking for a transformative action in this visit. But the Indian expectations of transformational visit didn't materialize in reality. To look at the visit in the context of deliverables, there was nothing substantial on the papers, but off the track, it spread the gospel that Modi era has begun and India will have effective governance, rule of law and predictability in the market, that the businessmen expect.

Liberals complained that major irritants were not discussed in detail like Solar equipment export to India on which US moved to WTO, IPR issues, Federal Aviation Authority of US downgrading Aviation Safety Ranking of India (DGCA), Federal Drug Administration clamping down on Indian pharmaceutical companies like Ranbaxy, Doha Round of Conference on Food subsidies (WTO FTA), impasse over the wrinkled Civil Nuclear Liability Act etc. Liberals also complained that India kept on adding task forces and working groups in this high profile visit too, which was not necessary as it could have been done at the bureaucratic level too and there was no need for a Head of the State visit for it.

Although, the visit should not be envisioned in the context of financial deliverables, but also to the intent that has been imparted through the momentum of forwarding the bilateral relationship. Both countries extended the Defense Cooperation Agreement for another 10 years, which was about to expire in 2015. US agreed for a comprehensive investment strategy in Indian infrastructure, especially building up 3 new smart cities at Ajmer, Allahabad and Vizag.

Joint statement by the head of states of both nations called for an agreement in near future that they will try to resolve the differences over the Civil Nuclear Liability law and America originated nuclear reactors will produce nuclear power in energy hungry India soon. Prime Minsiter Modi also made it clear that he is not against the Free Trade Agreement but he also wants to push his case in the WTO. President Obama looked towards increasing the bilateral trade from current $100 billion to $500 billion in the times to come.

Addressing the business community in US, PM Modi said, " I'm going to reform the policies and processes to make it easy to do business in India." These were the two major issues of US investors as they saw 'Policies' = Never meant to be reformed and 'Processes' = Bureaucratic red tapism. He also said, " You people can come to make money in India, we don't expect you to come and not make money, businesses are born to make money." Such a statement ran like a music to the ears of US investors as it was an out of the line statement by an Indian PM ever, indicating the pro-business image of the head of the Government of India.  But US investments would be guided by the time when Indian industry would start investing seriously and begins to place faith manifestly in Indian market.

The biggest task for which Prime Minister Narendra Modi took out a lot of time is to unite the Indo-American community and build it up as a powerful group to use them in the case of need for lobbying for national interest of India. It was inspired by the Jewish diaspora and their activities that gives legitimacy even to the illegitimate actions of Israel by the US.

Finally, the relationship has been reset at the highest level and the sourness of despair that was prevalent in the bilateral attitude has been neutralized up to some extent. Next few years, especially 2016, when the new President would be sworn in the US, would guide the future course of action. Till then, both India and US do realize the fact that they need each other at least for the next two decades to balance the strategic equations crossing each other's path and destiny.

A renewed U.S.-India partnership for the 21st century

Sharing a piece written by Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi and US President Barack Obama in The Washington Post, first of its kind initiative.

As nations committed to democracy, liberty, diversity and enterprise, India and the United States are bound by common values and mutual interests. We have each shaped the positive trajectory of human history, and through our joint efforts, our natural and unique partnership can help shape international security and peace for years to come.

Ties between the United States and India are rooted in the shared desire of our citizens for justice and equality. When Swami Vivekananda presented Hinduism as a world religion, he did so at the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago. When Martin Luther King Jr. sought to end discrimination and prejudice against African Americans, he was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi’s nonviolent teachings. Gandhiji himself drew upon the writings of Henry David Thoreau.

As nations, we’ve partnered over the decades to deliver progress to our people. The people of India remember the strong foundations of our cooperation. The food production increases of the Green Revolution and the Indian Institutes of Technology are among the many products of our collaboration.

Today our partnership is robust, reliable and enduring, and it is expanding. Our relationship involves more bilateral collaboration than ever before — not just at the federal level but also at the state and local levels, between our two militaries, private sectors and civil society. Indeed, so much has happened that, in 2000, then-Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee could declare that we are natural allies.

After many years of growing cooperation since, on any given day, our students work together on research projects, our scientists develop cutting-edge technology and senior officials consult closely on global issues. Our militaries conduct joint exercises in air, on land and at sea, and our space programs engage in unprecedented areas of cooperation, leading us from Earth to Mars. And in this partnership, the Indian American community has been a vibrant, living bridge between us. Its success has been the truest reflection of the vitality of our people, the value of America’s open society and the strength of what we can do when we join together.

Still, the true potential of our relationship has yet to be fully realized. The advent of a new government in India is a natural opportunity to broaden and deepen our relationship. With a reinvigorated level of ambition and greater confidence, we can go beyond modest and conventional goals. It is time to set a new agenda, one that realizes concrete benefits for our citizens.

This will be an agenda that enables us to find mutually rewarding ways to expand our collaboration in trade, investment and technology that harmonize with India’s ambitious development agenda, while sustaining the United States as the global engine of growth. When we meet today in Washington, we will discuss ways in which we can boost manufacturing and expand affordable renewable energy, while sustainably securing the future of our common environment.

We will discuss ways in which our businesses, scientists and governments can partner as India works to improve the quality, reliability and availability of basic services, especially for the poorest of citizens. In this, the United States stands ready to assist. An immediate area of concrete support is the "Clean India" campaign, where we will leverage private and civil society innovation, expertise and technology to improve sanitation and hygiene throughout India.

While our shared efforts will benefit our own people, our partnership aspires to be larger than merely the sum of its parts. As nations, as people, we aspire to a better future for all; one in which our strategic partnership also produces benefits for the world at large. While India benefits from the growth generated by U.S. investment and technical partnerships, the United States benefits from a stronger, more prosperous India. In turn, the region and the world benefit from the greater stability and security that our friendship creates. We remain committed to the larger effort to integrate South Asia and connect it with markets and people in Central and Southeast Asia.

As global partners, we are committed to enhancing our homeland security by sharing intelligence, through counterterrorism and law-enforcement cooperation, while we jointly work to maintain freedom of navigation and lawful commerce across the seas. Our health collaboration will help us tackle the toughest of challenges, whether combating the spread of Ebola, researching cancer cures or conquering diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria and dengue. And we intend to expand our recent tradition of working together to empower women, build capacity and improve food security in Afghanistan and Africa.

The exploration of space will continue to fire our imaginations and challenge us to raise our ambitions. That we both have satellites orbiting Mars tells its own story. The promise of a better tomorrow is not solely for Indians and Americans: It also beckons us to move forward together for a better world. This is the central premise of our defining partnership for the 21st century. Forward together we go — chalein saath saath.

An Invitation to 'Make In India'

Sharing the debut piece by our Honourable Prime Minister @narendramodi in Wall Street Journal giving a call to "Make In India", to boost manufacturing that is currently contributing merely 15% to our GDP.

An Invitation to 'Make in India'
With 800 million people under age 35, we are a nation ready for rapid, responsible economic development.


Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) scientists and engineers cheer after India's Mars orbiter successfully entered the red planet's orbit.

There is a high tide of hope for change in India. This May, across India's immense diversity, 1.25 billion people spoke unequivocally for political stability, good governance and rapid development. India has a government with a majority in the Lok Sabha, our lower house of parliament, for the first time in 30 years. A young nation with 800 million people under age 35, India is brimming with optimism and confidence. The young people's energy, enthusiasm and enterprise are India's greatest strength. Unleashing those attributes is my government's biggest mission.

We will pursue this mission by eliminating unnecessary laws and regulations, making bureaucratic processes easier and shorter, and ensuring that our government is more transparent, responsive and accountable. It has been said that doing the thing right is as important as doing the right thing.


We will create world-class infrastructure that India badly needs to accelerate growth and meet people's basic needs. We will make our cities and towns habitable, sustainable and smart; and we will make our villages the new engines of economic transformation. "Make in India" is our commitment—and an invitation to all—to turn India into a new global manufacturing hub. We will do what it takes to make it a reality.

We ran our election campaign on the promise of inclusive development. To me, that means many things: skills education, and opportunity; safety, dignity and rights for those in every section of our society, especially women; a bank account for every Indian; affordable health care within everyone's reach; sanitation for all by 2019; a roof over every head by 2022; electricity for every household; and connectivity to every village. In addressing these daunting challenges, I draw confidence from countless extraordinary stories of ordinary Indians that I have seen through decades of travel across India.

I also strongly believe in the possibilities of technology and innovation to transform governance, empower people, provide affordable solutions for societal challenges and reach people in ways that were unimaginable not so long ago. The number of cell phones in India has gone up from about 40 million to more than 900 million in a decade; our country is already the second-largest market for smart phones, with sales growing ever faster. When I think of the growth in computing power and storage capacity and its miniaturization that the world has witnessed over the past two decades, I am confident that this can be replicated in renewable energy. With solar and wind power, thousands of Indian villages will be able to get access quickly to reliable, affordable and clean energy, without waiting for large, faraway conventional power plants to be built.

For this reason, India's journey to prosperity can be a more sustainable and environmentally sensitive one than the path followed by countries that came of age in earlier eras. This is a journey of our choice, rooted in our tradition that worships nature's bounties.

India will pursue its dreams in partnership with our international friends. History tells us that India's natural instinct is to be open to the world. India will be open and friendly—for business, ideas, research, innovations and travel. In the coming months, you will feel the difference even before you begin your travel to India.

The United States is our natural global partner. India and the U.S. embody the enduring and universal relevance of their shared values. The thriving Indian-American community in the U.S. is a metaphor for the potential of our partnership, and for the possibilities of an environment that nurtures enterprise and rewards hard work. Our strengths in information technology are especially important for leadership in the digital age. The partnership between our businesses takes place in the comfort and certainty of similar political systems and shared commitment to rule of law. In education, innovation, and science and technology, the U.S continues to inspire India.

India and the U.S. have a fundamental stake in each other's success—for the sake of our values and our many shared interests. That is also the imperative of our partnership. And it will be of great value in advancing peace, security and stability in the Asia and Pacific regions; in the unfinished and urgent task of combating terrorism and extremism; and in securing our seas, cyber space and outer space, all of which now have a profound influence on our daily lives.
The complementary strengths of India and the U.S. can be used for inclusive and broad-based global development to transform lives across the world. Because our countries' values and interests are aligned, though our circumstances are different, we are in a unique position to become a bridge to a more integrated and cooperative world. With sensitivity to each other's point of view and the confidence of our friendship, we can contribute to more concerted international efforts to meet the pressing global challenges of our times.

This is a moment of flux in the global order. I am confident in the destiny of our two nations, because democracy is the greatest source of renewal and, with the right conditions, offers the best opportunity for the human spirit to flourish.

Mr. Modi is prime minister of India.

Happy Birthday Narendra Modi. With love - Xi Jinping

When we talk about India and China, the first thing that is highlighted in our minds is that these two giants contribute 2/5^th to the total population of the world. Therefore, a Chinese President’s visit to India (after 8 years) bewitched global media.

For China, India is a part of its South Asian policy which itself is a part of its peripheral diplomacy. But for India, the visit embarked the biggest objective of including China in Indian economy to achieve the developmental goals. As per World Bank estimates, India requires $110 billion investment in infrastructure to come at par with Middle Income countries or we can say that India requires $1.6 trillion investment in infrastructure over the next 10 years to prove his metal in the geopolitical arena.

To make the visit a success, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi made personal gestures to the Chinese President by breaking various protocols (the same gesture he received from Japanese PM Shinzo Abe during his Japan visit). India knows that Xi Jinping will be in power at least for the next 8 years and he is very powerful in China and almost projects himself as not only the President but also as the ‘Chairman’ of China, so it was important to lure him through such gestures. Unfortunately, the border incursions by the PLA of China breed suspicion and diverted the purpose and objective of the visit and brought security issues back to the forefront. Prime Minister of India raised the border issue with China for the first time ‘publicly’ and categorized it as the foundation of overall Sino-India relationship. In return, Chinese President used an encouraging formulation with regards to the border agreements in the joint statement by calling to settle the boundary disputes at the earliest. It is an unusual formulation with respect to a Chinese President, irrespective of the actual delivery of the promises.

Absurd claims by the Chinese consulate of Mumbai, of Xi Jinping planning to invest $100 billion in India (when its total investments worldwide is $80 billion) and thereby Indian media going berserk over the issue of reduction in the contemplated investments disappointed Indian masses. There is a huge difference between investment and supply contracts, therefore only MoU were signed and China will only realize the objective of investing $20 billion in India over the next five years. Moreover, Chinese investment in India will come in the form of ‘Investor Funds’ (usually 5-10 year) which will create production capacity in India and not in the form of ‘Sovereign Funds’ (usually 30-40 years) which creates infrastructure. But it’s reasonable because sovereign funds take time to negotiate.

Two issues drive China’s foreign policy in Asia Pacific region –

1.       The very serious economic difficulties being concealed by China which is weakening the Chinese economy week by week.
2.     Chinese isolation in Western Pacific region. One after the another frictions from his neighbors, and over arching it is the US’s strategy of a rebalance, which is on hold but not gone till now. China has a nightmare that it will solidify when India will join US as an ally in the region.

But China also contemplates that India is a very independent player with a sense of strategic autonomy and India will never be a part of any camp. This is soothing for Chinese ears.

Despite being his most ambitious project, China didn’t talk about the Maritime Silk Road project except at a very low key and not at all in the official address to the media because it knows that India is not willing to buy it, but on the BCIM corridor (Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar) issue, China has got a positive reply from India. Chinese MSR project is actually a repost to the American rebalance and it is busy to garner support from wherever it can. It got enough support in the Indian Ocean but Western Pacific region didn’t give him enough leverage. Also, India has also come up with MSR’s counter, with a project named MAUSAM/ MAWSIM (in Arabic) – Maritime Routes and Cultural Landscapes. It aims to reconnect and re-establish communication between countries of the Indian Ocean and reinvigorate the traditional sea links and cultural landscapes.

China will upgrade Indian Railways, supply us bullet trains, set up Industrial Parks, especially in Maharashtra and Gujarat. But there is a hurdle in the trade balance too, because Chinese banks are very reticent to lend to Indian Corporate houses (Chinese investments in India currently lies at $415 million) except to blue chip companies like Reliance, and there is no direction from Govt Of China to them to look at the Indian market as a serious investment destination. Also, the sectors in which India has strengths, like pharmaceutical industry, China is not giving market access to India till today. But in a joint statement, China has agreed to look up to the demands of opening up their domestic markets for Indian Pharmaceutical companies, IT industry, Agricultural products.

India seeks Civil Nuclear Cooperation with China but if it is established then India would be left with no grounds to oppose the same cooperation of China-Pakistan, except that India has a NSG waiver and Pakistan doesn’t. Also there is no sufficient need and evidence for India to go for a civil nuclear partnership with China, but if it needs to expand its resource allocation base, India could eye towards South Korea in this matter.

Broadly, the recent bilateral visit of Chinese President was accompanied with mixed signals from China where on one side it used positive signals to enlarge futuristic cooperation of our bilateral relationship, whereas on the other side, the security issues were dominating the negotiation tables too. Since 1988, India has a strategy to carry on the relationship with both China and Pakistan on two parallel tracks – One is the dispute resolution track for which the framework was set up in 2003 and the other is economic cooperation and development.

Sacrificing her illegitimate children (Special report on the birth of ISIS)

After ‘proclaiming’ to kill her own baby (Al Qaeda) in his paternal home  (Afghanistan), US is back with so called fundamentalists ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) militants. US nurtured the first baby (Al Qaeda) during the Cold War to counter USSR who had been honeymooning in Afghanistan for 10 years (Dec 1979 – Feb 1989).

This time, there is a strong blizzard forming in the Arctic Circle from East to West with Russia surfing solely on it victoriously this time. The ‘czar’ of Kremlin has left no stone unturned to veto all the Western moves that could undermine Asia’s authority over world affairs, or particularly, Russian authority over the international politics. As the game between the West and the ‘East’ (led solely by Russia) was going uneven, with Russia scoring all the points and the West succumbing with zilch.

• The West, or say, just US tried invading West Asia (Middle East) again to show off her defense skills and machines, to market their products to nations like India (huge importer of arms). But, Russia vetoed the move in the UN Security Council (Syrian talks). US failed the opportunity to rob West Asian wealth, to comfort her dwindling economy.
• Russia also created a mess during Ukraine’s admission to European Union and ended up giving anarchy to Ukraine by supporting the rebels, Crimean accession was a huge blow too. West merely saw the actions and replied back with childish economic sanctions which affect the European themselves.
• Allegedly, US even tried an assassination attempt on Vladimir Putin in Ukraine via CIA but failed to do the same and ended up fuming Malaysian Airlines to flames.
• Unease of European nations for economic sanctions on Russia because of the huge investments by Russian oligarchs in their respective countries, further tensed US about the Western grouping’s future.
• Most importantly, the emergence of the BRICS Bank, a parallel institution to World Bank, undermining Western dominance over world economy, the growing closeness of Russia, India and China, or say the BRICS countries as a whole forced US to bite her nails.

All in all, US had been a loser till now by scoring, literally zero points against the game with Russia. All thanks to the ‘able’ leadership of Mr. Obama.

But then, the security experts of Mr Obama like James Clapper, reminded him of their illegitimate child of a subsidiary of Al Qaeda, living in Iraq, with the funding of CIA (Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi) ready to die for his mother (US). Mr Obama cheered in joy and ordered the multiplication of his funds and a special military training to combat Iraqi forces. By this, US would be able to exert pressure on the world to invade West Asia (failed invading Syria earlier) and would be able to control the region that has turned anti-US from the past few years. This way the region would stop porting to Russia for their needs and will again be neo-colonized.

Recent air strike combat operations are an eye wash, the beheading of US journalist James Foley is as true as the assassination of Saddam Hussein, Qaddafi and Osama Bin Laden (wondering what is Area 51). The motive is to invade Syria, via Iraq (that's why the last S in ISIS stands for liberation of Syria) and to control Shia population which is on the rise in West Asia. Forgive me for the words, but Sunnis have been secret weapons of CIA in their operations.

At last, the whole world knows that this wicked mother (US) will kill her child (ISIS) after his use and will look towards another child to sacrifice for her. The history is repeating itself, the Cold War has returned with an open conflict and this time, the West seems weak because of lack of unity and a severe leadership crisis.

What is the intention of 'The Kremlin' ?

In the past few months, Russia is deliberately making calculated moves to supersede Western influence in the matters concerning world community. For instance, Syrian crisis, support for Iran despite US sanctions, defense cooperation with Egypt to mention a few.

In all of the above instances, one thing is common, that they all are Middle Eastern countries who are criticizing western powers in hush voices. US and allies have been dominating the region from a very long time since the disintegration of USSR in 1991. The western influence has more or less been effective in combating the rise of Middle Eastern influence in the world by invoking measures like economical, political and military sanctions, military strikes, invoking civil wars through secretly supporting the rebels to allow for a coup and overthrowing most of the dictators in the region with the help of their respective intelligence agencies. All this has been possible with the consistent support of Israel and Saudi Arabia, the dominant players having a strong political and economical hold in the region. The geographical location of the Middle Eastern region has also been supportive for the Western alliances to pursue their respective goals as it is surrounded by Europe. In-fighting and lack of unity among the region’s countries has been contributing towards their exploitation since the beginning of Western dominance.

Since the peak of Syrian crisis in August 2013 when the chemical weapons attack in Damascus by Bashar Al Assad’s regime invited worldwide criticism, Russia has been strongly supporting and combating threats on Syrian security by making all out efforts to persuade UN Security Council that there is no immediate need to militarily strike Syrian soil without having adequate evidence against Assad’s regime. Russia gathered support of various peace mongering nations to persuade Western alliances diplomatically to give up the idea of strikes and thereby, despite of Israel and Saudi Arabia’s push for strikes, US President suspended the idea of striking Syria. Largely the idea to oppose strike grew within the Western nations, especially in the US when the citizens of US opposed the idea of starting a new war and behaving like a ‘World Policeman’. Whatever the reason may be, but Russia succeeded in its intention to protect its ally (Syria) from the Western influence. By convincing US to suspend the idea of strikes, Russia also hit the ‘bull’s eye’ by disturbing the long time good relations between US and Saudi Arabia which came out open in the recent rejection of a temporary seat of the UN Security Council by Saudi Arabia.

Russia didn’t take rest after the handling of Syrian crisis, but it also went further in helping Iran militarily and negotiating a defense cooperation deal with the nation. Russia decided to sell an improved version of S-300 air defense missiles and strategic help in building a nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Russia also agreed to supply five batteries of S-300VM long range air defense system, also known as Antei-2500 which is more effective in intercepting missiles. It was a clear message to the United States that Russia will not adhere to US sanctions if their economic and political interests lie in a deal with any nation, irrespective of the relations of US with that nation. Russia has also been optimistically supporting Iran in the ongoing talks between P5+Germany and Iran in withdrawing sanctions by striking a deal with Iran. Although, it has not yielded the result yet but both sides have indicated a positive breakthrough in the ongoing talks in Geneva.

Russia recently moved a hand of friendship to Egypt which is striving hard to tackle the civil unrest lying because of the rebellion against Morsy. Russia took advantage of the rift between Cairo and Washington as the United States had withheld military supplies to Cairo, following Morsy’s ouster. Russian warship, VARYAG, the flagship of the Pacific fleet, docked in the port city of Alexandria symbolizes Moscow’s deepening interest in the Mediterranean Sea. Russia’s permanent presence at the port of ‘Tartus’ in Syria has already underscored its intention to implant strategic footprints in the region. Both Russia and Egypt are looking for a military tie-up soon to revive the defense cooperation when USSR had a presence in the region.

The worst blow to the United States was the approval of temporary asylum request by Russia of the NSA whistleblower Mr. Edward Snowden that shocked the whole world over the surveillance programmes creating differences between the western alliance itself. For the first time, Germany, rather the whole European Union criticized and summoned US diplomats over the issue of bugging the EU leaders. It was a clear sign that a hole was created in the relations between US and EU, indirectly by Russia as it was supporting Snowden revelations from the backdoor.

The question arises – Are we really marching in the cold war era of 1960-70s when the influence of USSR was undeniable? The present Russia is expanding its arms either by undermining ‘Western authority’ in the Middle East or by inciting disturbances between the US and EU itself. Whatever the intentions may be, but we surely do understand that Russia cannot compete economically in the present form although its economic growth is in full swing but it still relies on hydrocarbon and mineral sale which do not yield the desired results as per the renowned world economists. The present era is of economical superpowers, and the days of military domination has gone in the wind. World population wants peace with economical independence and the war mongering motives of the ‘wannabe superpowers’ may not succeed due to this concept.

Implications of US Government Shutdown

Democrats and Republicans are busy in a power tussle over the condition to drop/sustain President Obama’s healthcare reforms in the shape of Obamacare. The ultimate sufferers are not just the 800,000 employees out of the total 2.8 million government employees but the whole nation. Smithsonian Institutions (19 museums, 9 research centres, National Zoo and National Parks) are closed in the wake of this financial crisis engulfing, the otherwise prosperous nation. Fortunately the Federal Reserve, Department of Defense, Air traffic control, Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department are among the many exceptional sections that will see no disruptions.

According to the Goldman Sachs report, a three week shutdown could shave as much as 0.9% of the US GDP this year. Now, certainly this is a cause of concern which cannot be avoided irrespective of the struggle to show off the dominance by both the political parties in the Congress to each other.

October 17 – The deadline which if crossed, would lead to the financial risk of default in debt payment by the US Government. This implies that the upcoming days are not the good days for the world economy to enjoy sunshine on the beach of ‘return on investment’ ocean. The dark clouds of financial risks have engulfed the city of ‘World Economy’ from the western direction. Weathermen (world economists) are keeping a close look at the possible storm, forming in the western coast of the city. The storm may cool down a little if the ceiling limit of the debt by the US Government is raised before the deadline.

Investors around the globe, who were smiling incessantly over the last few months when the outgoing Fed Reserve Chairman- ‘Ben Bernanke’ assured higher rate of returns through their investment in the gilt-edged securities (US Treasury Bonds) are now on a verge of shedding tears as their investments will be at risk. These include countries like Japan, China and India who are possessing nearly $1.135 trillion, $1.277 trillion and $59.1 billion US Treasury bonds respectively.

On the diplomatic front too, United States is getting harmed, as in the wake of the shutdown, President Obama had to cancel two important Asian visits (Philippines and Malaysia), that gave a strong prospect to the Chinese President Xi Jinping to avail the benefits of the geopolitically important Southeast Asia Summit in Malaysia. Chinese President is the star of the summit now which Obama would have been, if there was no financial crisis at home.

There are some serious questions being raised in hush voices over the ability of United States to lead the world from front, if it cannot even pass a budget bill of their own country. There is not even a single year since 1997, in which there was a smooth passage of the budget. Who is at fault - the presidential style democratic system of the country or the dominance of political interests over national interests by the two political parties of the country?

Why is the UN Security Council divided over Syria?

Life of world peace, in the last few days is dwindling in the wake of Syria’s alleged chemical weapon attack killing more than 1,400 people (rebels), according to US reports. World’s policeman – United States along with his allies, mainly France & UK is trying to cure the ailing ‘peace process’, currently admitted in an Intensive care unit with its ECG graph showing little signs of relief. It is no rocket science to understand why the CIA has been consistently helping the rebel groups (militarily & economically) to dominate the Syrian regime of Bashar Al Assad as this policeman supports democracy (as proclaimed by it) & most importantly to pluck out the communist backed Russia and China’s rising power & support in the Middle East. US and friends (mainly UK & France) are backing rebels to maintain the support and domination of Western allies in the Middle Eastern region because of the power struggles going on in this region like in Egypt.

On the other hand, Russia, once a strong contender of being a ‘World Hegemon’ in the past few decades, is helping the Syrian regime (militarily & economically) to mark its presence and rise in the world’s political classes yet again. Russia is backed by China, another communist which has overthrown many challenges of democratic rule politically or militarily (not to forget the Tianamen Square incident of 1989). China, considered to be – Number 2 in the world in the context of military and economic power wants to attract the Middle Eastern countries towards the East side, particularly to the communist side. Both the Eastern superpowers, Russia and China are well versed with the fact that the current power struggles in the Middle East region is the best time to inject communism in these countries which are struggling hard against their rulers. Therefore by supporting the rulers, these two superpowers are white-washing the long seen dream of democracy by the people of Middle East.

The situation is somewhat like the “Cold War Era” of 1961 after the Cuban Missile crisis shocked the United States and marked the presence of another superpower that was if not equal, then at least not lower than US in any form. Syrian ruler Assad has nothing personal to do with the communist powers or Western powers nor these two communist powers and Western powers have any personal interest in the lives of Syria and its people, the Syrian crisis is just a medium for all these UN Security Council Member countries, divided in two groups to prove that who is the real hegemon in the world politics.

In the second week of September it was vague that US (and friends) are going to strike Syria, irrespective of the outcome of G-20 meetings in the St. Petersburg in Russia. Developing but ailing economies (from the current global slowdown) like India & Brazil opposed strike on Syria for economic reasons – currency volatility due to hike in crude oil prices. This gave an edge to Communist countries over Western powers to give up the idea of striking Syria. But Western team led by Barack Obama was adamant in their decision. On one side, Barack Obama was struggling hard to gather Congress’s support on the decision, then on the other side, David Cameron was seen having talks with Ed Miliband of Labour Party to gather support in British Parliament. Francois Hollande too was seen seeking support from other European allies over the decision.

In an ad hoc manner, UN Security Council meet was called by British PM David Cameron to talk on the resolution (forwarded by Britain) to attack Syria, well knowingly that Russia and China will veto against the resolution. Disappointed by the fall of its resolution, Western powers decided to go against the UN Security Council to bring ‘peace’ in the region by punishing Assad regime with a limited ‘air strike’ on the land of Syria. The feeling to strike Syria was so strong that Western powers didn’t even try to wait for the UN inspector’s report on the chemical weapon attack in the region. In this hurry, Russia too got in quick mode to announce that military strike against Syria may halt the peace process and Russia will respond too in order to bring peace in the region. Giving not much attention to the Russian claim, Western alliance was in the midst of persuading their people to go for a limited strike against Syria ( which according to surveys, people of these countries oppose) and come out as the ‘Messiahs of World Peace’, with the use of force.

But suddenly Russia came out with a universally acceptable plan to ask Syria to surrender its chemical weapons to the International community. In response to Russian proposal, US President Barack Obama came out in the public on 10^th September and declared that he will put the Congressional vote on hold if the middle way is accepted unconditionally by the Assad regime. Obama also clarified and tried to persuade its citizen in his old traditional way of diplomatically and emotionally attracting public support (seen in his Presidential campaigns) and justified his decision to attack Syria and promised his citizens that he won’t let any American boot to land in Syria and the situation will not be as worse as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Several meetings were held between US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva, Switzerland to find a mid way and then after a lot of negotiations, both the representatives agreed on 14^th September to ask Assad to submit a comprehensive list of its chemical weapons within a week to the International community and by the middle of 2014, the weapons will be destructed. Assad is also asked to allow UN Inspectors to verify the chemical weapons list by this November.

Is this the end of Syrian crisis? Will these two groups come face to face again? Is everything settled now? Or are we marching towards a third world war (not exaggerating), or atleast another Cold War