What's new

US breathes life into a new cold war

Tigershark

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
611
Reaction score
0
This article, written by an Indian diplomat, puts the inclusion of Pakistan and India into the SCO into the context of geopolitics and energy politics.

By M K Bhadrakumar

There might have been a difference of opinion between the classical Greek dramatist Aeschylus and British romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley regarding the circumstances of the release of the Titan god Prometheus from captivity: whether it followed reconciliation with Jupiter, as the classicist thought, or a rebellion, as the romantic insisted. In either case, Prometheus was "unbound".

The exact circumstances of the endgame in Iraq and Afghanistan will remain a moot point, but the outcome is certain to be that the United States, which like Prometheus was chained to a mountain where he was daily punished by Jupiter's eagle and underwent immense suffering, is being "released" to normal life.

For Prometheus, it came as an existential moment and when


Hercules came to unbind him, he was so relieved at the freedom "long desired/And long delayed" that he pledged to his love that they "will sit and talk of time and change/As the world ebbs and flows, ourselves unchanged".

The United States, too, is re-emerging "unchanged". There is a flurry of activity as if making up for lost time - "unilateralist" military intervention in Libya; deployment of a F-16 squadron in Poland; establishment of military bases in Romania; resuscitation of the George W Bush era plans for deployment of a US missile defense system in Central Europe; revival of the entente cordiale among "new Europeans"; threatened "humanitarian intervention" in Syria; renewed talk of military action against Iran; a push for a long-term military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan; revving up of the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into Central Asia; violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan; the threat of "regime change" in Sri Lanka; and last weekend the announcement of the deployment of light combat ships in Singapore.

All this has happened within a 100-day period. It was almost inevitable that the Caspian great game would be revived, too. After the unexplained hibernation in the period since the exit of the Bush presidency in the beginning of 2009, Richard Morningstar, the US's special envoy for Eurasian energy, has returned to the arena.

If his testimony at the hearing conducted by the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs last week had one single message, it was that the US's Eurasian energy strategy remained "unchanged" in its core agenda, namely, to challenge Russia's potential to use its vast reserves as an energy exporter to re-emerge as a big power on the world stage.

Cold War rhetoric surfaces
The geopolitical agenda of the US's Eurasian energy strategy was spelt out with characteristic bluntness at the same congressional hearing by noted Russia expert Ariel Cohen. There may be nothing strikingly new, arguably, in Cohen's thesis about Russia's "expansionist agenda" reflected in its energy policies, but nonetheless it merits reiteration by way of providing the backdrop to Morningstar's testimony. He was constrained by the norms of diplomatic practice to hold back on direct criticism of Russia, with which the Barack Obama administration is engaged in a "reset" at the moment:
# The Kremlin views energy as a tool to pursue an assertive foreign policy.
# Europe's level of dependence on Russia for energy is unacceptably high.
# Russia's attempts to exclude the US from Central Asian and Caspian energy markets.
# Russia is using energy to "re-engage" India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
# Russia forces neighboring countries to direct their energy exports via its pipeline system.
# The absence of a "rule of law" blocks Western companies' entry into Russia's energy sector.
# Russia remains disinterested in developing energy ties with the US.

Cohen candidly spelt out the geopolitics. One, European demand for energy is projected to grow further and it could lead to greater dependence on energy from Russia, which has serious implications for Moscow's ties with Europe.

The point is, the US apprehends that Moscow will exploit the growing energy ties to stabilize its relationship with the countries of Western Europe, and that could weaken the spirit of Euro-Atlanticism and incrementally loosen the US's trans-Atlantic leadership.

Two, Germany has taken a strategic decision to abandon nuclear energy and to instead increase its energy imports from Russia. From the US viewpoint, steadily growing Russo-German ties have not only a historical resonance of great significance for European security but they could eventually weaken European unity and the underpinnings of NATO itself, which the US commands as its principal instrument for the pursuit of its global strategies.

Three, Russia is aspiring to graduate from the role of energy exporter to Europe to participation in the continent's energy distribution system and retail trade as well. Europe may eventually "face tough choices between the cost and stability of their energy supply, and siding with the US on key issues".

Conversely, Cohen anticipates, "As oil prices rise, it is safe to expect Russia's cockiness to return." What is this "cockiness" about? In geopolitical terms, it means a more assertive Russia in global politics. Cohen mentioned India more than once as a worrisome prospect for the US.

Chalk circles in South Asia
In essence, countries like India, where the US hopes to become entrenched as a strategic partner, may choose to be autonomous or "non-aligned" if Russia succeeds in developing stronger energy ties with them. With regard to India, in particular, the implications are far-reaching since the US's Asia-Pacific strategy and its containment policy toward China would become seriously debilitated if New Delhi opted out.

Interestingly, Cohen brings in Syria in this context. He claimed that Russia was "seeking to re-engage in a centuries-old balance of power in the Middle East" and Syria - like India in the Asia-Pacific - is pivotal, which is the reason why Moscow is rebuilding naval bases in Tartus and Ladakiye and is "supplying modern weapons" to it - like it does with India.

Four, Russia is fostering the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as an exclusive preserve to keep out the US, especially in the grouping's energy club. The SCO comprises China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

The US is getting frantic that the SCO is gearing up to admit India and Pakistan as full members and Afghanistan as an observer. So far, the US had banked on the reservations of Russia and China over the SCO membership claims of Pakistan and India respectively, but the rethink in Moscow and Beijing on this score has set alarm bells ringing in Washington.

Moscow is outflanking the US by rapidly building up ties with Pakistan. A crucial vector in this accelerating relationship is energy cooperation. Moscow has begun discussing with Pakistan the nuts and bolts of its participation in the TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) gas pipeline project.

The countries are restoring their air links; they have held two summit-level meetings within a year; and begun closely coordinating their approach to the stabilization of Afghanistan (which is integral to the execution of TAPI). Incidentally, Russia's special representative on Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov (the Kremlin's ace hand on Afghanistan) visited Islamabad last week for in-depth consultations.

The thrust of the Russian approach is to augment Pakistan's strategic autonomy so that it can withstand Washington's bullying. And Moscow estimates that Pakistan is keen to reciprocate. As a prominent South Asian scholar in Moscow, Andrey Volodin, wrote last week, "[Pakistan President] Asif Zardari's visit to Russia has shown that Pakistan is actively diversifying its foreign economic ties and foreign policy. This attitude is welcomed by Pakistan's main all-weather ally, China, which is pursuing a policy of 'soft reverse containment' of America in Asia, including Pakistan."

No more a Turkmen pipedream
Thus, the Russian-Chinese initiative to induct Pakistan and India as full SCO members holds out the prospect of dealing a devastating blow to the US's strategy to get "embedded" in Asia. The underpinning of a regional energy grid tapping into Turkmenistan's energy reserves gives a profound character to the matrix.

The fact is that the US all along paid lip-service to the TAPI, but its real interest has been in the so-called Southern Corridor for transporting Turkmen energy to Western Europe so that Russian dominance of the European market would be whittled down.

Russia is killing two birds with one stone. By diverting Turkmen gas to the huge energy guzzlers of South Asia - India is potentially one of the world's two or three biggest consumers of energy in the coming decades - Moscow is on the one hand undercutting the US's Eurasian energy strategy to evacuate the gas to Europe, while at the same time retaining its pre-eminent footing on the European energy market from being challenged by the Turkmen gas.

The big question mark on TAPI has been all along two-fold. First, there was doubt regarding Turkmenistan's energy reserves. However, the confirmation by British auditor Gaffney, Cline & Associates last week that Turkmenistan is sitting on the world's second-largest gas field - South Yolatan - completely changes the scenario. (Afghan President Hamid Karzai made an air dash to Ashgabat as soon as he heard the news.) The vast South Yolatan field covers an area of about 3,500 square kilometers - bigger than the country of Luxembourg - and as a top executive of the British auditor put it, "The South Yolatan field is so big that it can sustain several developments in parallel."

In short, Turkmenistan has the proven capacity to meet the energy requirements of China, India and Pakistan for many decades to come, and would still be left with a surplus for exports to Russia.

The prospect is shocking for US strategy if the so-called "SCO energy club", which is an idea that then-Russian president Vladimir Putin floated in 2005 a little ahead of time that is finally coming to fruition.

Thus, the robust Russian and Chinese diplomacy on Pakistan to encourage a paradigm shift in its Afghan policy; the growing US impatience over Pakistan's "recalcitrance"; the SCO's keenness to get involved in the stabilization of Afghanistan; the US's insistence that it must have direct dealings with the Taliban rather than through an "Afghan-led" peace process; Washington's push to establish a long-term military presence in Afghanistan; Russia's and China's hurry to get India and Pakistan on board as SCO members; the US's overtures to India with a partnership that US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates described last week in a speech in Singapore at a regional gathering of defense ministers (including from China, Russia and India) as the "indispensable pillar of stability in South Asia and beyond"; Gates' affirmation of US commitment to a "robust" and "enhanced" military presence in Asia, especially in the Malacca Straits - all these have a hugely important "energy dimension", too.

Cohen is a Russia expert, but he mentioned Central Asia more than once in this testimony and pointedly brought to the notice of US congressmen that Russia was attempting to "push the US out of Central Asia, and successfully limited US participation in new Caspian energy projects, excluding it from the SCO's energy club".

Containing the energy superpower
Ambassador Morningstar in his congressional testimony kept up the diplomatic decorum and neatly sidestepped the geopolitics, sticking to a detailed presentation of the US's Eurasian energy strategy, which he projected as a mix of continuity from the George W Bush era but imbued with new realities. The principal vectors of the US strategy can be identified in the following terms:
# The US's intention to be deeply involved in Europe's energy security is never in doubt since "Europe is our partner on any number of global issues from Afghanistan to Libya to the Middle East, from human rights to free trade.
# The US will work for Europe's "diverse energy mix" both in terms of its sources of supply and transportation routes as well as the type of energy - " diversity of suppliers, diversity of transportation routes and diversity of consumers, together with a focus on alternative technologies, and renewable and other clean energy technologies, and increased energy efficiency". (The US is entering the European market as a big exporter of shale gas, which competes with Russia's natural gas.)
# The US's aim is to encourage Europe to develop a "balanced and diverse energy strategy with multiple energy sources with multiple routes to market". (Read reduce the dependence on Russia which is supplying one-third of Europe's energy needs currently).
# The US will encourage and help Central Asian and Caspian countries to "find new routes to the market". (Read bypassing Russian territory and pipelines).
# The US will push for the energy sector to be privatized, and to this end, will "create the political framework" in the post-Soviet space within which "businesses and commercial projects can thrive".
# The Obama administration's commitment to the so-called Southern Corridor - to bring natural gas to Europe via Turkey from the Caspian and "potentially other sources beyond Europe's southeastern frontiers" - is no less than that of the previous US administrations of Bill Clinton and Bush. The US will actively promote the three separate European pipeline consortia - the Nabucco, ITGI and TPA groups - and is "confident that a commercially viable Southern Corridor will be realized. The investment decisions to make that possible should occur by the end of this year."
# Washington pays particular attention to promoting Turkmenistan as a major supplier of gas for Europe via the Southern Corridor.
# The US will pitch for the integration of the Baltic states into the European energy market so they do not remain vulnerable to Russian supplies and/or political pressure.
# The US will challenge Russia's efforts to get a monopoly hold over Ukraine's energy sector.
# Europe should develop a single market for energy so that the kind of bilateral relationships that are developing between Germany and Russia or Italy and Russia or France and Russia do not happen.
# Europe should have more focus on shale gas development, which can be a substitute for Russian gas.
# Europe should take initiatives for "unbundling the distribution and supply functions of energy firms" so that Russia's leviathan company Gazprom's efforts to penetrate downstream activities can be stalled.

It's the Eurasian heartland, stupid
The US's Eurasian energy strategy almost entirely aims at “containing” Russia's pre-eminent role as Europe's energy supplier and its vast influence over the Central Asian and Caspian energy-producing countries. Cohen spoke of a future role for NATO as provider of security for the non-Russian pipelines, but unsurprisingly, Morningstar didn't visit the controversial idea, which was first mooted by the Bush administration. What is of utmost interest is that Morningstar didn't say a word about the feasibility of Turkmenistan or the Central Asian region providing energy for the South Asian region, although US diplomats traveling to Delhi unfailingly profess a keen interest in TAPI. What emerges is that the US's one hundred percent focus is on Europe's energy security - how supplies can be developed from the Caspian, Central Asian and Middle Eastern regions for Europe - and it pays lip-service to the TAPI.

Clearly, the SCO summit meeting scheduled to be held in Kazakhstan next week becomes an historic occasion for the geopolitics of energy. The US congressional hearing in Washington last week was well-timed. The US apprehends a paradigm shift in the Asian power dynamic. The odds are heavily stacked against the US insofar as Russia and China are recrafting their South Asia polices that aim at harmonizing their ties with Pakistan and India respectively within the umbrella of the SCO.

A leading Chinese scholar, Yan Xuetong, director of the Institute of International Studies at Tsinghua University, stated at a recent seminar of the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, a branch of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences:

If we can establish relations with neighboring countries like what we are doing with members of the SCO, we will also succeed in moving fast. The establishment of SCO in the 1990s was widely recognized as one of China's most successful diplomatic moves. The purpose of establishing the SCO is to challenge the American strategic intention of extending its military breach to Central Asia.

It destroyed America's intention of making Central Asia its sphere of military influence. With the SCO, China's relations with countries in the region have been greatly improved. In order to establish SCO-style relations with surrounding countries, China must ... establish all-weather strategic partnerships with them. Or it will be impossible for China to have more and better friendly international relationships than America.

Indeed, the Afghan endgame is inspiring the several tracks in the geopolitics of Eurasia and Central Asia and South Asia, some running tracks, some dormant, some visible, some others nor so visible, to begin to converge. But the focal point is Eurasia.

Indeed, Sir Halford John Mackinder (1861-1947), the great English geographer and scholar-diplomat, who is considered one of the founding fathers of the esoteric subjects of geopolitics and geostrategy, based his famous Heartland Theory on the basis that Eurasia remains the heartland of international politics. Curiously, when Prometheus had his liver eaten out daily by Jupiter's eagle - only to be regenerated at night - he was also chained to a rock in the Caucasus.

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
 
Asian Alliance Supplants US Empire
While Official Washington grapples with how slowly to draw down troops in Afghanistan – and debates whether to complete the pullout from Iraq by year’s end – a new alliance of Asian states is expanding into the vacuum left by America’s decaying empire. By mid-June, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization may represent more than half the world’s people, Nicolas J S Davies writes.

By Nicolas J S Davies

June 7, 2011

On May 15, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced that an important expansion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) will be on the agenda at its upcoming summit in Astana in Kazakhstan on June 15.

If the expansion is approved, India and Pakistan will join China, Russia and the Central Asian republics as full SCO members, and Afghanistan will join Iran and Mongolia as a new SCO “observer.” The U.S. media seem to have missed this news, but future historians will be unlikely to ignore it as an important turning point in the history of Afghanistan, the United States and the world.

The original Shanghai Five (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan), who met in 1996 to sign a “Treaty on Deepening Trust in Border Regions,” formed the SCO in 2001 with the addition of Uzbekistan and a commitment to greater cooperation in military and economic affairs.

In 2005, President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan hailed the historic nature of that year’s SCO summit, the first time that the original members were joined by India, Pakistan and Iran. He noted that half the human race was now represented around the SCO negotiating table.

The SCO combines some of the military aspects of an alliance like NATO with the economic benefits of a community like the European Union or UNASUR in South America.

The emergence and growth of the SCO, both as a defensive military alliance and as an economic community, have been driven by the common need of all these countries to respond to U.S. aggression and military expansion as well as by their own region’s economic rise. The United States also applied for “observer” status in the SCO in 2005, but its application was rejected.

The Afghans have decided to join the SCO despite longstanding opposition from Washington. Afghan Foreign Minister Rassoul spent four days meeting with Chinese officials in Beijing before Lavrov’s announcement on May 15.

This is a significant move in the “great game” in Central Asia, and an indication of where the future lies for Afghanistan after the end of NATO occupation, whenever that occurs.

Retired Indian diplomat M K Bhadrakumar noted in Asia Times that, with this move, China and Russia have succeeded in turning U.S. policy in Central Asia on its head.

American policymakers had hoped to turn Afghanistan into a “hub” from which the U.S. could dominate the strategic space and trade routes between Russia, China, Iran, India and Pakistan. Instead the Russians and Chinese are positioning Afghanistan as the future hub of an overland trade and pipeline network that will bypass the U.S. Navy’s control of ocean trade routes and permit all the countries in the region to develop their relations with each other without American interference.

This heralds a new phase in the historical competition between the land-locked empires of Europe and Asia and the maritime European and American empires. Overland trade routes and continental alliances were always critical to Russia, China, Germany, Austria, Turkey and Persia, while Spain, Portugal, Holland, Britain, France and the United States have always based their quest for competitive advantage on naval power and the control of distant colonies or neo-colonies.

The strategic weakness in the resurgence of China lies in its dependence on massive imports and exports carried over maritime trade routes. It is committed to providing no conceivable pretext for a naval clash with the United States, but this remains its most critical vulnerability.

China has been working hard to develop alternatives to maritime trade. It has built oil and gas pipelines from Russia and Kazakhstan and improved relations with India and other Asian neighbors – even as it expands its navy to protect its ocean trade routes and builds new port facilities in countries around the Indian Ocean – not least the largest port in the region at Hambantuta on the southern coast of Sri Lanka.

Indian ex-diplomat Bhadrakumar sees the expansion of the SCO as a move by China and Russia to build “a rival to NATO as a provider of security for the Central Asian states” and he cites a Russian news agency’s description of “tight cooperation” between Russia and China extending to the Middle East and North Africa as well.

In 2009, most of the world was prepared to give the Obama administration a year or two to make its intentions clear. The verdict is now in, and NATO’s newest bombing campaign against Libya is final confirmation that the “change” ushered in by Obama is only one of tactics and public relations and a very far cry from a U.S. recommitment to peace or international law.

Obama’s expansion of “special forces” operations to at least 75 countries and the more active role of NATO in global war-making have only raised the stakes for the whole world.

All the current and new members of the SCO now see their best hope for the future in a position of unity and mutual support as they confront a wounded and dangerous military power that shows no sign of scaling back its global military presence or its aggressive and illegal doctrine of military force.

But the failure of the U.S. and NATO’s occupation of Afghanistan is an opportunity as well as a problem for its neighbors. In Iraq, since the U.S. wound down the violence of its occupation, it is Iraq’s neighbors that are selling Iraqi local governments, homeowners and businesses the goods they need to start rebuilding their country and their lives.

The occupation provided a huge but short-lived bonanza for U.S. defense contractors, but the end-result is that nobody in Iraq wants to do business with American firms or buy American products. The bulk of Iraq’s imports in 2009 were from Turkey, Iran, Syria, China and the European Union.

A similar pattern can be predicted in Afghanistan. China already operates large mines and safely trucks out iron and copper through the same mountain passes to Pakistan where NATO supply convoys are routinely attacked and burned.

But the greatest economic and strategic value of Afghanistan to its neighbors lies not so much in its own resources and domestic economy as in its role as a hub for overland trade between all of them, notably for Iranian oil on its way to China and for Russian oil and gas headed for the ports of Pakistan.

As they have done in the past, different ethnic groups in Afghanistan will trade with their natural allies in neighboring countries, Pashtuns with Pakistan, others with Iran and so on.

A light-handed central government in Kabul will hopefully balance their interests and those of their foreign partners with a wisdom that earns respect and ensures stability. This is how Afghanistan has found peace in the past, and will surely do so again.

India’s application for full membership in the SCO may surprise Americans even more than Afghanistan’s decision to seek SCO observer status. For India, the relative benefits of a close relationship with the declining United States have diminished, as the advantages of friendship with China have increased.

As India looks ahead, it has every reason to cast its lot more decisively with the SCO. The U.S. has made great efforts to woo India as an ally, exploiting its long-standing tensions with China and Pakistan, but whenever NATO finally packs its bags in Afghanistan, India cannot afford to be left out of the new regional order.

So SCO membership has become essential, despite U.S. support for India’s nuclear programs and recent negotiations for arms deals.


U.S. officials believed they were on track to win a contract for Boeing and Lockheed Martin to sell India 126 warplanes for $11 billion, but India decided to buy planes from Europe instead.

Even as the United States has lost its technological edge in other areas, its arms trade has been an exception in an otherwise bleak picture for American manufacturing and a key component of U.S. foreign policy.

Following the First Gulf War in 1991, the superiority of American weapons was hyped by the Pentagon and its partners in the Western media to produce a bonanza for U.S. weapons sales. American pilots were ordered to fly their planes straight from Kuwait to the Paris Air Show without even cleaning them, to show them off to potential customers in all their grime and glory.

The post-Cold war period produced record sales for U.S. arms merchants. By 2008, U.S. arms sales accounted for 68 percent of global arms sales, leading analyst Frida Berrigan to conclude that the “global arms trade” was a misnomer for what had become an American monopoly on the tools of death and destruction.

But not long before he died in 2010, Chalmers Johnson explained in his book Dismantling the Empire that the corrupt U.S. military-industrial complex had squandered the technological edge in weapons production that it had inherited from the Cold War.

Cost inflation, bureaucracy, complacency, corruption and cronyism now produce absurdly expensive weapons that are ill-suited to fighting real wars.

The F-22 can fly higher and faster than the F-16 (launched in 1976) or the A-10 ($8 million each vs. $350 million for the F-22), but it was designed for high altitude dog-fights with imaginary fighters that the Russians had the good sense to never even build, not for flying ground support in real wars.

It is “too fast for a pilot to be able to spot tactical targets” and “too delicate and flammable to withstand ground fire.” The even newer F-35 was designed to counter a Russian plane that was cancelled in 1991, three years before its own research and development even began.

The real “next generation” fighter-planes are the European Typhoons and Rafales that India chose to buy instead. They outperformed F-16s and F-18s in Indian tests and experts told Al Jazeera that the U.S. planes’ technology was “ten years behind the European ones.” Despite matching the military spending of the rest of the world combined, the United States makes nothing comparable.

In his passionate call to dismantle the U.S. military-industrial complex, Johnson concluded, “we are destined to go bankrupt in the name of national defense.” The supreme irony is that all our money is not even buying effective weapons.

And for this, as Chalmers Johnson made clear, we are paying extraordinary “opportunity costs” – or most of us are. We live in the only industrialized country that denies medical care to millions of its people and the only country that controls an underprivileged minority population by imprisoning millions of its young males and employing millions of its otherwise unemployed rural population to guard them.

When we think about Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, we don’t judge them on the standard of living that they provided to their privileged middle classes but on the way they treated their enemies and their minorities. If we ever summon the objectivity to look at our own society the way we look at others, we find one that is much closer to Sheldon Wolin’s “inverted totalitarianism” than to the self-serving euphemisms of our politicians and propaganda networks.

Pakistan’s decision to ally itself with Russia and China is less surprising than India’s. Pakistan’s role in America’s so-called “war on terror” has provided it with funds to build new nuclear weapons and to line the pockets of senior officials like “Mr. Ten Percent,” President Zardari.

But expanding the U.S. war in Afghanistan into Pakistan is seriously destabilizing the country and turning its people solidly against any present or future partnership with the United States.

Recently, Imran Khan, the widely respected former captain of Pakistan’s national cricket team, led a sit-in of tens of thousands of people on a highway near Peshawar, blocking NATO military supply convoys to Afghanistan to protest U.S. drone attacks. Khan and his Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party is probably the brightest hope for the political future of Pakistan, but he won’t be a U.S. ally or puppet.

In the 20th century, the United States deftly picked up pieces of Britain’s dying empire to stealthily build one of its own. People in ports all over the world have grown used to the sight of American flags and uniforms just as their grandparents got used to seeing British ones.

The unanswered question of our time is what flags and uniforms their grandchildren will see. Let’s hope the SCO can play a constructive role in a peaceful transition to a world where people will see only the flags and uniforms of their own countries – or none at all…

As Afghan Foreign Minister Rassouf returned from Beijing to meet Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Kabul, President Zardari of Pakistan headed off to meet Russian officials in Moscow.

One thing we can be sure they all agreed on is that they want the United States out of Afghanistan, and the rub for the United States is that the SCO and its member states will be waiting in the wings to pick up the pieces whether we get out this year, next year or in ten years’ time.

Nicolas J S Davies is the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.
 
Just imagine the new world order that could be built with the Asian nations at the centre. No more condescension, no high-handed pressure tactics, the unification of the real economics engines of the world. If only we can learn to trust each other and I'm saying that about Pakistan and India in particular.
 
Just imagine the new world order that could be built with the Asian nations at the centre. No more condescension, no high-handed pressure tactics, the unification of the real economics engines of the world. If only we can learn to trust each other and I'm saying that about Pakistan and India in particular.

why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states
 
why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states

Are you actually American? What you wrote was incoherent and a grammatical mess.
 
why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states

You talk like a high school drop out. Actually, more like someone who's been knocked on the head.
 
why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states

u r seriously kidding me right??? seriously you are comparing pakistan to africa, or you are wanting to make pakistan one by frequent terrorist drone attacks??pakistan is the member of N11, the most potential future economies of the world

pakistan has one of the best agricultures in the world much ahead of US and canada, and it has loads of minerals deposits, one of the most irrigated countries in the world and 6th biggest population

seriously i dont think americans are foolish, but in ODF americans are not only illeterate foolish but paranoid as hell and full of hate and stupidity
 
why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states

How about you go back to wherever your ancestors came from and leave the US to its original owners ? -- dumb racist.
 
Recently, Imran Khan, the widely respected former captain of Pakistan’s national cricket team, led a sit-in of tens of thousands of people on a highway near Peshawar, blocking NATO military supply convoys to Afghanistan to protest U.S.
drone attacks. Khan and his Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party is probably the brightest hope for the political future of Pakistan, but he won’t be a U.S. ally or puppet.

Nicolas J S Davies

Indeed !!!
 
why dont u go back to china you live in the west, but you bad talk us. the us and canada have the most resorces in the world , china is the worlds sweatshop its economic bubble is poping ( google news it) or use bing) pk means nothing on the wold scale african countrys are above it, india is way overpopulated, us Eu canada and aus , maby brazil 46% white the rest black latino and native and a democracy will be number 2 eventualy thenindia 3 china wil crack into small states

Oh that's original, why don ye go back to where yer from. Instead of address whatever the hell you mashed out on your keyboard, let me just say a few words.


I love Canada and I love Canadians, they are my best friends (I actually haven't made many Chinese friends here) and they are some of most earnest and friendliest people on earth, but this doesn't mean that I shouldn't be allowed to express my opinion... I hate the place where Canada has followed the US, we went from winning every UNSC election we bid for to losing the 2010 seat to Portugal. I hate that the Canadian intelligence agency is complicit in the torture of a Canadian Gitmo prisoner of 15 because they thought under the new atmosphere of islamophobia, the Canadian public would be ok with it. "hey he's a Muslim, so it's ok...'' I hate the fact that when the US says jump, our PM asks how high. 60 Stealth fighters bought behind closed doors and with a transparent contest? sure! Growing lifetime service payment, no problem.

Canada is a staunchedly multi-cultural nation, at a time when the US is greenlighting racial profiling, and when the UK and Ger leaders say multi-cultulism is dead. and even though I didn't choose it, I feel fortunate to have been allowed to become part of it. I am not calling for the downfall of the west, all I am doing here is calling for the rise of a confident Asia.
 
Come on. This guy is not representative of Americans. He can't even write a coherent sentence in the English language.

Well that would actually make him representative of Americans but I appreciate what you are trying to do.
 
What else can you say? He's your fellow countryman and there are millions like him in your evil empire, people like bush are their godfathers.

Where's your proof he's my countryman? Even the less educated Americans can write a more coherent sentence than that. Anyone can masquerade as someone from another country on this forum. For all I know, he's a troll trying to give Americans on this forum a bad name.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom