Left Flank

Image via Wikipedia

The nerve of those farmers!

Who says farmers are inflexible? In rich countries, they have long justified farm hand-outs by pointing to low world prices for food (never mind that low prices were partly caused by their own subsidised overproduction). Without public cash, they said, farmers would desert the land, leaving meadows to brambly ruin. Now that the world is running short of food, the farm lobby has deftly changed tack. Prices for many crops are at record highs, the new line goes, and rich countries need to protect their farmers in order to ensure that their people get fed.

Thankfully, Jagdish Bhagwati and Jeffrey Sachs stress three suggestions to tackle the long-term consequences of the current food crunch that are not mentioned too often.

1. Meat production consumes grain, so, either through lifestyle changes or by removing subsidies, reduce meat production;

2. Bhagwati talks about GM food, and Sachs about climate-proof food, but science needs another Norman Borlaug to revolutionize agriculture;

3. Again, Bhagwati talks about the IMF offering short-term balance-of-payments help, and Sachs about a new Global Fund for Africa, but this crisis illustrates again how small the world is becoming.

But, reform starts with the first big swing, and that's the EU's (and American) subsidies.

The Dalai Lama is a likeable kind of guy, but I'd like to see, and hear, less of him.

Tibet's case is not helped by world leaders. US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's actual words were quite measured, but standing in Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan government-in-exile, is incendiary. «We insist the world know what the truth is in Tibet,» Pelosi said.

PRC's Premier, Wen Jiaobao, even more explicitly makes the mistake Pelosi only staged with symbolism: demonizing the Dalai Lama directly.

The EU eschewed the long tradition of childishly pursuing its own foreign policy and spiting every other western state, agreeing with Pelosi not to boycott the Summer Olympics. But still, Beijing can always thank Brussels for relieving the diplomatic pressure.

I also think the Dalai Lama erred tactically by broadcasting his pledge to resign if Tibetan resort to violence. The nature of this gamble exposes Tibet's problem: there are no responsible leaders in Tibet ready to speak for Tibetans. Fortunately, the Dalai Lama maintains that he only wants "autonomy" for all Tibetans in Tibet and in western PRC.

The 73-year-old religious leader was reacting to statements made by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. In a telephone conversation with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Wen said that Beijing was prepared to talk to the Dalai Lama. The condition, however, would be that he could not demand independence for Tibet and he would have to distance himself from the violence.

Beijing accuses the Dalai Lama of being a "separatist and traitor," who talks of autonomy but really means the independence of Tibet from China. The Dalai Lama calls for broad autonomy for Tibet, not only for the current so-called "Tibet Autonomous Region," but also for areas in the neighboring provinces of Gansu, Qinghai and Sichuan which have large Tibetan populations.

When asked by SPIEGEL ONLINE whether he might be ready to limit his autonomy plan to just central Tibet, the Dalai Lama said no. The proposal to include other areas as well proves that he has no separatist intentions, he said. For the Tibetans, the only important thing is to "protect their culture."

"I have now repeated a thousand times, it is my mantra: We do not want independence," he said. The Chinese government should take seriously their constitution, which talks of autonomy for certain regions, he added. "It should not only be on paper," said the Dalai Lama.

Of course, Beijing will never consider an autonomous Tibetan zone encompassing western parts of its geo-economically strategic western provinces. For a refreshingly unromantic viewpoint on Tibet, FT reprises the Chinese perception of the Tibetan protests. Yet, I agree with Jeffrey N. Wasserstrom, that Beijing needs to act more responsibly.

Still, the tragic and farcical developments of recent weeks underscore the inherent conflict between China's desire to place itself in the global spotlight and its hope that no one will focus on the nation's flaws. They want internationally acclaimed artists to perform in cities like Shanghai without doing unexpected things--even if, like Bjork, part of their cachet is an ability to surprise an audience. But the Chinese leadership is no more capable of balancing these tensions than Don Quixote was of slaying windmills.

Beijing knows better; Tibet just needs to learn. At 73, the Dalai Lama is past the mark where he can continue to lead Tibetans, who should find their own secular path in a very dangerous region. A new generation of leaders should realize, that simplistic notions of self-determination and autocracy are fighting words where the mountains and rivers run between vital trade, pipeline, and resource routes.

There is opportunity as much as crisis here: even the meanest dictator doesn't want to have blood all over the Internet, or disrupt his cash flow (also check out Tim Johnson's report from Sichuan province).

Military looking vehicles had their license-plates covered or removed and many troops displayed no insignia, suggesting an attempt to cover up the use of army personnel to control the unrest. China does not want the run-up to the Olympics overshadowed by accusations of military repression in Lhasa. But the army is almost certainly playing a big part in the city's clampdown on the ethnic violence that erupted on March 14th and 15th. The authorities say 160 rioters in Lhasa have turned themselves in to the police and 24 people have been charged with «grave crimes». But Tibetans say they fear widespread and indiscriminate arrests.

Ethnic Han Chinese who were targeted in the violence (officials say 13 people were killed by rioters) are fearful too. Several told your correspondent that they would leave Tibet. One Han on the flight from Lhasa to the neighbouring province of Sichuan said he would normally travel in and out of Tibet by train, but he was now afraid that Tibetan terrorists might target the line. No terrorist incidents involving Tibetans have yet been reported, but China—partly in response to an alleged attempt by an ethnic Uighur woman to start a fire on board an airplane earlier this month—has stepped up airport security in recent days.

The huge security deployment in Lhasa has prevented further outbreaks of unrest there, but reports of smaller incidents in other areas of Tibet and ethnic Tibetan regions close to it have continued to emerge. The authorities admitted on March 20th that security forces had fired at protesters in the southwestern province of Sichuan four days earlier, injuring four people. A correspondent for Reuters news agency reported from the area that local residents believe several Tibetans were shot dead. Foreign reporters are now barred from Tibet and several have been turned back from ethnic Tibetan areas of surrounding provinces.

A younger generation of Tibetans raised in the the Dalai Lama's medieval aura, but with feet and senses in the real world, would take a shrewder gamble.

(For those with an open, unclouded mind, check out the bevy of high-quality links China Beat has collected from across the Internet on Tibet.)

Without resorting to the human rights card, the European Union business lobby has found a way to stymie FTA talks with the ROK, because of an unfair mix of politics and trade.

BusinessEurope fears EU employers would be at a disadvantage if goods produced at South Korean factories in Kaesong were classed as southern-made, it said.

In a letter, BusinessEurope's secretary-general Philippe de Buck, asked David O'Sullivan, head of the European Commission's trade directorate, which is leading trade talks with Seoul, to ensure Kaesong is excluded, it said.

«I would like to express our concerns about the risk of unfair competition from products manufactured in the Kaesong industrial zone in North Korea - an area which is likely to remain off-limits for European companies given the current political situation in that country,» de Buck was quoted as saying.

South Korea sees Kaesong as a flagship project to reform the North's moribund economy and ease the massive costs of any eventual reunification.

No matter what the ROK Constitution says about the boundaries of the Korean state, the EU still finds the DMZ more legitimate. Seoul will just have to reform its economy the hard way...by itself.

As pundits justifiably single out China for opprobrium, no one is pointing a finger at India, the Bush administration's new friend in South Asia. In the end, though, India's geo-strategic designs in its northeastern frontier are as compelling as China's southern concerns.

India has expressed concern over the developments in Myanmar and urged its government to be more inclusive and broad based. «India is concerned at and is closely monitoring the Myanmar situation. It is our hope that all sides will resolve their issues peacefully through dialogue. India has always believed that Myanmar?s process of political reform and national reconciliation should be more inclusive and broad-based,» External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Navtej Sarna said.

The developments in Myanmar have the potential to upset India's security calculations in the northeast, besides delaying its attempt to find a firmer foothold in the hydrocarbon sector. Other initiatives that could take a back seat if the situation worsens are a breakthrough in getting an alternate terrestrial route to the northeast via Myanmar and bilateral and multilateral negotiations to promote greater economic cooperation.

The uncertainty in getting offshore exploration blocks ended last week with the signing of production sharing contracts for three deep-water exploration blocks. In addition, India is part of a consortium looking for gas in two more blocks. More business would depend on India engaging more intimately with the current regime, including a second line of credit of $ 20 million to refurbish a refinery.

Not much solidarity with Buddhist monks (and non-Buddhists, too!) here! And, at least Beijing contemplates the possibility of opposition rule; New Dehli is so far from calling for an opposition government, it fears anything but a strong central government. Even Michael Goldfarb's tribute to Mia Farrow and condemnation of Moscow is all a bit hollow. After all, if pundits of any ideological stripe are determined to frame Beijing's ascendance in Asia as a new cold war, will they lecture the US if it arm-twists South America again? The sin, Goldfarb, and Sullivan, all bloated rhetoric about revolutions aside, seem to be imputing, is that Beijing and New Dehli are doing (in a dark-side-of-the-Force way), but Washington, and all American do-gooders, can only watch impotently. But, if we could, by golly, we'd be Skywalker! I'd prefer to be Indian, if that's all America has to show.

Reading the statements offered by various Burmese and world leaders, one problem, aside from the fundamental geo-strategic predicament of Myanmar and Chinese and Indian indifference, is the lack of agreement about what to do. Actually, I think the EU's comprehensive recommendations point to the immediate tactic: beef up ASEAN. The troubled IGO is Southeast Asia's best hope against Chinese and Indian encroachment and internal rebellion in its member-states. But, the US spends about as little time supporting it, and about as much time enfeebling it as China.

But, first, a common statement from the world would really make the Burmese junta listen. Washington could lead that effort.