Left Flank

Robin Koerner rightly highlights this Le Monde editorial on the India-PRC center in Asia.

"American temptation" thus works the strategic circles of New Delhi. But it would be a hasty mistake to forget Indian diplomatic history, in which non-alignment and an obsession with "strategic autonomy" are articles of faith. Coupled to India's deep distrust of Beijing, is an equally intense allergy to any American manipulation, which might seek to recruit India into an anti-Chinese strategic coalition. New Delhi does not want to be sucked into a conflict with Beijing by mechanically playing its role in a new alliance with Washington.

India fears becoming an instrument of a super power. This fear may explain the difficulties that have accrued in the last few months to the Indo-American civil nuclear cooperation agreement, which grants a few minor favors to New Delhi.

The Communists, who form part of the coalition presently in power, headed by the Congress Party, exploit this weakness. It weighs in by threatening to bring on a political crisis if the agreement is endorsed.

The wind has turned. There is a widespread feeling that the process of opening up to the West has gone too far. So much so that the Congress government of New Delhi must chill out its pro-American inclination.

There's another implication missing: Washington must also resist the temptation to offer Delhi too much, because India has little reason to reciprocate. The US goal should be Delhi's neutrality.

Here's a game that will keep some of us occupied for days: just who said what in this poll of elite opinions on the Koreas? My favorite question and response:

Would stronger political and economic ties between the two countries advance US interests? 11% NO

«Absent the North Korean threat, the South Koreans will lose remaining inhibitions about the US. As it is, monstrous ingratitude is the societally approved stance towards the U.S.—understandable given the prevalence of grandmothers who serviced G.I.s , but still...»

«If North Korea is playing around on the nuclear issue, then South Korea's cozying up is real bad news. If, against all odds, North Korea goes non-nuclear and quasi-decent, then South Korea's cooperative attitude is fine. But let's not count on that.»

Probably the same guys who doubted even that the two Koreas would normalize relations within the next five years. But, enough quotes to mine for the year ahead.

TMH's R. Elgin has stayed interested in the warped relationship between ROK's Daewoo and Myanmar with this Brian Lee feature on an artillery deal.

«There is a watch list of countries with certain concerns. If an arms sale is made to a country on the list, it won't be for firearms or weapons but nonlethal military equipment such as transport vehicles,» Park says.

Air Force Captain Koh Hyung-geun of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration says the list includes about 30 countries and gets updated on a case-by-case basis.

«Countries that are subject to a UN arms embargo such as Burma are included on that list,» Koh says.

As human rights groups have frequently pointed out, companies and the South Korean government have colluded on arms deals in the past, which is what happens in other nations, too.

Industry officials say international arms dealers contact South Korean companies to broker deals, but the government actively lends a helping hand.

Hong Sung-jin, an official at S&T Daewoo, says military attaches working in South Korean diplomatic missions abroad sometimes oversee contracts.

I'm surprised some South Korean bureaucrat didn't complain off-the-record about why shouldn't Koreans benefit a little when the bigger corporations and states flout their influence in Myanmar openly. Aside from the indignation, though, how different is this from selling F-16s and Mirage's? Or, negotiating a treaty with a nuclear state just to sell to sell civilian nuclear technology? And, again, a South Korean corporation takes liberty with what can possibly be called the «law» in ROK.

I wonder—pardon the pun—if these two locomotive stories are linked, the Kaesong Express and the Raijin Gambit?

There's a train running through Siberia, too. But, has it recouped its construction costs? This seems to be a Korean specialty—spending money with no return in sight!

Just call me far-sighted, but if outer space—let's not even belabor the point, that all this talk about "space" is about WMD—is left pristine, how will private enterprise ever reach farther than the lower reaches of Earth's atmosphere?

Virginia Democratic Senator Jim Webb is doing his fair share to keep the ROK-US alliance going strong.

Echoing comments Tuesday by the Navy's top officer, Adm. Gary Roughead, Webb called for increasing the size of the Navy's fleet beyond its current target of 313 vessels and strengthening maintenance and modernization projects by encouraging more free-market competition among contractors.

"Three hundred thirteen can't do it, I can't see, in the long run," Webb said. "We're building one (submarine) per year and the Chinese are building three per year. We need a strategy based on the United States being a maritime nation, and the United States should be a sea power."

With a current fleet of 280 ships, and only 109 under way, the Navy's fleet, Webb said, is at a 90-year low. During his tenure as Secretary of the Navy, Webb said he oversaw a fleet of 568 ships.

"Simply stated, we are decommissioning Navy ships faster than we are building them," he said. "It is imperative that we reverse this steady slide in shipbuilding."

He said industry, the Navy and Congress all bear responsibility to find ways to cut costs in shipbuilding, and shipbuilding facilities need a steady, reliable stream of work so they aren't forced to lay off workers during slow periods.

Let's not forget all that sealift capability!

Wake up!

Europeans may not always like it, but America still matters most for their security. As Kosovo edges towards independence, NATO ponders further expansion and Russia rips Europe's threadbare energy policy to rags, every debate involves America. And the mood is gloomy.

I'm surprised The Economist can actually write something like "Europeans".

Largely silent is the EU, whose members appear more concerned over institutional reform and emissions targets than geopolitical issues. That worries the Americans. They seem to have settled a row with Poland over a planned missile-defence base. But not much else is going right. Ron Asmus, a former American diplomat now at the German Marshall Fund, a think-tank, frets publicly about a «rollback» of the West's influence in eastern Europe. He is not the only one.

Sales must be suffering on the continent?

The Florida (and the National) Democratic Party doesn't deserve these election returns!

The Economist, as usual, finds the silver lining in my embarrassment:

Electability also depends on whom the Democrats choose. That took a twist on Tuesday. The Democratic Party organisation had earlier decided to punish Florida for holding its primary too early, by giving warning that its nominating delegates would not be allowed to sit at the national convention. All candidates promised not to run or campaign there. But late in the day Mrs Clinton declared that she did want Florida's vote to count and visited the state, where polls showed her ahead. Perhaps she wanted to divert attention away from Mr Obama's vivid victory in South Carolina on Saturday. In any case, she handily «won» Florida with 50% of the vote to Mr Obama's 33%, and in post-vote interviews claimed it as a satisfying victory. Just another twist in the most entertaining election season in recent memory.

(Oh, and John McCain won.)

Even more entertaining would be the spectacle of state legislators and party officials panhandling under overpasses for the campaign funds and the write-in votes they should never, ever receive again!