by the meltingpot: Another front:Where the US ambassador to Libya was the first casualty.

Now Reading!

Indeed, what is at work in the recent return of realism is the revenge of geography in the most old-fashioned sense. In the 18th and 19th centuries, before the arrival of political science as an academic specialty, geography was an honored, if not always formalized, discipline in which politics, culture, and economics were often conceived of in reference to the relief map. Thus, in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, mountains and the men who grow out of them were the first order of reality; ideas, however uplifting, were only the second.
And yet, to embrace geography is not to accept it as an implacable force against which humankind is powerless. Rather, it serves to qualify human freedom and choice with a modest acceptance of fate. This is all the more important today, because rather than eliminating the relevance of geography, globalization is reinforcing it. Mass communications and economic integration are weakening many states, exposing a Hobbesian world of small, fractious regions. Within them, local, ethnic, and religious sources of identity are reasserting themselves, and because they are anchored to specific terrains, they are best explained by reference to geography. Like the faults that determine earthquakes, the political future will be defined by conflict and instability with a similar geographic logic. The upheaval spawned by the ongoing economic crisis is increasing the relevance of geography even further, by weakening social orders and other creations of humankind, leaving the natural frontiers of the globe as the only restraint.
So we, too, need to return to the map, and particularly to what I call the “shatter zones” of Eurasia. We need to reclaim those thinkers who knew the landscape best. And we need to update their theories for the revenge of geography in our time.
Here is the link for the whole write up.

Now at 2nd place

My view is that relations between countries in the coming decades are most likely to reflect their cultural commitments, their cultural ties and antagonism with other countries rather than other factors. Quite obviously, power will continue to play a central role in global politics, as it always does. But usually there is something else behind conflicts. In the 18th century in Europe, the issues to a large extent involved questions of monarchy versus the emerging republican movements, first in America and then in France. In the 19th century, it involved states identifying themselves through nationalism. In the 20th century, ideology came to the fore, largely, but not exclusively, as a result of the Russian Revolution. We had fascism, communism and liberal democracy competing with each other. Well, that’s pretty much over. Liberal democracy has come to be accepted, in theory at least, around the world, if not always in practice. So the question really is what will be the central focus of global politics in the coming decades? My argument remains that cultural identities, antagonisms and affiliations will not only play a role, but play a major role in relations between states. The full interview is here.

This is the 3rd

Every citizen in the City of Richardson will be able to access 756 Kbps of internet connectivity for free, from anywhere in the city. They will be able to access the internet from their homes, schools, restaurants and parks using standard wi-fi connections which are now installed on almost every notebook computer. That is almost as fast as many so-called high speed broadband connections that one pays dearly for today, and several times faster than the various hotspots at your local coffee shops. And I should note that the tax-payers of the City of Richardson are not paying one penny for this, and in fact are going to see additional revenues as a benefit. ... At the beginning of this letter, I suggested that this would be one of the fastest worldwide rollouts of a technology ever seen. It was just 20 years ago that the first cellular systems were being built. The rollout for mesh wireless systems is going to make that look slow. There are several reasons I make this assertion. But they all center on the facts that installing mesh systems will be cheaper and easier than any previous system and the economics in both the developed and especially the developing world will be so radically compelling. Throw in the fact the any astute politician will want to be at the front of this parade (They will all want to say, "I was the man who helped bring free internet to everyone!") and the groundwork is laid for rapid deployment. In Richardson and elsewhere, MeshLinx is offering the basic infrastructure for free. This avoids all the time consuming, political budget battles in the cities. When a service is offered for free, much of the mandated competitive process is eliminated. Next is the low cost of installation of the system. As noted above, Richardson is a city of roughly 100,000 people living in 27.4 square miles. It will "only" cost about $2,000,000 today to lay the wireless blanket I mentioned above. It will cost a great deal less in the future, as MeshLinx is building the pods at a pace of 100 a month today. The maximum output of the US pilot assembly line is 500 a month. When the demand exceeds this (and it will in a very short time) discussions have been held to move volume production to China. Of course, the world will need tens of millions of pods. The cost for a pod will be a fraction of today's cost, with that installation number for a city like Richardson soon being half (or less) the cost of today. What does that $1 or 2 million get you? The infrastructure to be an internet connection, telephone, security, entertainment provider and a whole lot more company. As noted, it will get cheaper as the number of pods being made each month rises, thus lowering their costs dramatically. This technology does have scale. The cost of physically putting up a pod is not a large part of the equation, as you simply need to run a power line, attach a few bolts to a mount on the side of a building or light pole and then off to the next point. Think about the 40,000 homes and businesses in Richardson. If and (hopefully) over time when 10% decide to pay $50 a month for 10-20 Mbps high speed internet access you could see a revenue of $2.5 million a year just from internet access. Now add in all the other income possibilities (phone, entertainment, security and don't forget advertising revenue on the free service!). Think about your town or country. What would service like this be worth? If you are a small city that does not have high speed connections available, how many businesses that could bring jobs do not come your way because they need reliable communications for their work and their employees? If you are in a developing country, where internet access is difficult and expensive, it will open whole new vistas. Couple that with the various programs which want to give cheap laptops to kids in poor countries, and you could see significant social progress in a generation. Here is the link.

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Another front:Where the US ambassador to Libya was the first casualty.

The Grand Coalition against Nazism has just opened a brand-new front in what the Western World called the Middle East.

The brand-new front,as a continuation of the ongoing moves(as detailed in my past several posts),is meant to act as a counterpoise to the India-proposed front in the South China Sea.

The moment the brand-new front was formed,we saw the amazing alacrity with which the various players moved in to take their respective positions.The US ambassador to Libya was killed.There were massive demonstration in all capitals of the Muslim countries.Iran openly calls fof the elimination of the Jewish State.Nearer home,Pakistan even declared a national holiday on a Friday for the purpose of staging protest,in which 29 people were killed.

Evidently,US was completely taken by surprise.

How can I say that a brand-new front was formed in the Middle East by the Grand Coalition against Nazism? I will list the following indicators.

1)The strongest indicator,of course,emanated from Beijing.

Mr Xi Jinping,who is going to take over the President of China in a few weeks time,suddenly disappeared from public from around 1st of September 2012.When his disappearance entered 2nd week,there were speculations in all the capitals of the countries in the world that there was power struggle in Beijing and there might not be smooth transfer of power from the incumbent,Mr Hu Jintao to the presumptive candidate in line,Mr Xi Jinping.

That would be a development of huge significance for the world politics.

But Mr Xi Jinping did reappear in public when his disappearance was about to enter the 3rd week.What is most significant is that he timed his reappearance with the emergence of the obscure video film called "The Innocence of Islam" and the first glimpses of protest in Arab streets.

Mr Xi Jinping let it be known to all concerned that China,together with the Grand Coalition against Nazism,had just opened a brand-new front in what the Western World called the Middle East.

2)There followed moves by various interested parties with amazing speeds.The most significant and the most condemn-able move was the violation of the sanctity of an embassy(in this case,consulate)and killing of the US ambassador to Libya,Mr Chris Stevens.

The immediate response from the US President was the declaration that 'justice will be done' and the quick despatch of 2 destroyers and 50 marines to the Libyan waters.When they reached the Libyan coast,they sent out drones to look for the suspects.As the central authority is still weak(aftermath to the depose of Gaddafi),several militia groups are still controlling the periphery( like Bengazhi,where the ambassador was killed).These militia groups had had field days at firing anti-aircraft guns to take down those US drones.So much so that the authority in Tripoli had to close the Libyan airspace.

Then,suddenly,an amazing thing happened.

Ms Susan Rice,the US ambassador to the UN,brushing aside the destroyers,the marines and the drones,announced that the ambassador Stevens was killed in the course of a spontaneous protest in Benghazhi.She personally appeared at FOX news and NBC to announce this.While she was in those networks,the Libyan Prsident.Mr Mohmad el-Megarif,himself was on ABC and CBC to apologize to the American public for the killing of the ambassador Stevens,which,according to him,was the handiwork of a particular militia group.Ambassador Rice was openly and publicly contradicting the Libyan president himself--that too,live on air!That borders on hilarity!

My point:US needs not less the person of its ambassador to the UN to kick in the damage control exercise(meaning deploying the marines and the drones would certainly enlarge the just formed front,which would certainly make US look foolish to the world).

3)This is the weakest indicator because I'm trying to find the source by first sizing up the efffect.

It's usual for the US to immediately jump into the middle whenever there were verbal or otherwise,spat between China and Vietnam or between China and Japan.

But this past week,when China literally tested the water by sending marine boats within the territorial waters of the disputed islands,there were marked silence from the US side.

This clearly shows that US was currently busy in sizing up the just formed front in the Middle East.

The Achilles heels for the US foreign policy has always been what they called the Middle East.The emergence of the new front is changing the already volatile space with new insurmountable equation for the US.We are currently witnessing Iran's ongoing efforts to channelize the simmering volatility into a Zionism vs Islam paradigm.This paradigm is totally and completely unacceptable not only to US but also to the whole Western World because that would be tantamount to officially accepting that the Western Civilization is at war with Islam.

The US and the entire Western World,would deploy all its resources and time to avert the emergence of this paradigm.

But as soon as the US tries to stretch its already thin resources in trying to open the India-proposed front in the South China Sea,Iran,with all the Hezbollahs and Salafis of the world,would relentlessly try to arrive at the paradigm.

The most likely scenario that would follow is that US would be able to find lesser and lesser time and resources for India and India-proposed front in the South China Sea.

With this newly formed front,in my humble opinion,all the pieces are finally in their places in the Chessboard.What we are waiting for is the first move.

Personally,I will welcome,not one but several initial moves,which will mark the beginning of the destruction of the Nazism from our neighbourhood.

I hate Nazism with all my heart.

by the meltingpot

Now Reading!

Now at 2nd place

This is the 3rd