by the meltingpot: I'm edgy.

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.

Friday, July 21, 2006

I'm edgy.

Just read the news headline that there is credible intelligence of another terrorist attack on Mumbai. Even the Assam police are looking into the possibility of a terrorist attack on its busy and crowded Paltan Bazar area. Even in Imphal, I can feel the uneasiness hanging palpably in the air.

I should not fail to note today’s another news item stating that the 13 Muslim youths from Thane district of Maharastra were let off as they happened to be true tablighis ie, the preachers of Islamic ideals in remote areas of the country.

I’m edgy because a lot also are happening here.

It was only on the 18th that Poknapham carried the news story about the arms shipments from the Indian side to the Burmese military. Then, at around midnight of the 18th itself there was a mortar attack on one of the AR posts manning the international border in Moreh. It was reported to be an hour long exchange of mortar and machine guns fires. Five girls living in the vicinity of the AR post were hurt, some of them seriously.

What the Burmese military is saying is that they would accept the freebies as they come along but also ready to let their territories be used to launch attack on the Indian army post along the border. I know there is no morality in international diplomacy but this is definitely sickening.

But this is not the end of the story.

The mortar attack happened at around some half an hour past midnight of the 18th. That means that happened on the early morning of the 19th. Then, on the 20th itself there was a protest by Kuki students against the attack, saying that it was the handiworks of a Meetei insurgent group in connivance with the Burmese military.

I saw a photograph of the protest in Imphal Free Press but the paper in its brief report did not say where the protest took place. From the photograph I can say with certainty that the protest was in Delhi. If that’s the case, see the speed with which the protest was organized. Some very interested parties seem to be in high alert to seize any available opportunity to protest. Very interesting indeed.

The name of the students’ body is Kuki Students’ Democratic Front. This is the first time I’ve ever heard of this body. Note the word ‘democratic’. Because in the banner they were holding it was written that they condemned the attack by UNLF and SLORC. The latter denotes the Burmese military junta and so by associating with a military junta UNLF is not democratic or do not believe in democratic values. They are essentially saying they are a democratic student body but UNLF is not a democratic organization. Isn’t it interesting? It is not definitely just another student protest. A lot is happening here.

UNLF is a rebel group which was accused of carrying the mortar attack.

I think I should say something about what happened some days earlier prior to the mortar attack just to put things in perspective.

I can’t remember it exactly but it must be on the 14th. An AR patrol party in Chingmeirong area shot dead two young men, who, they said, were UNLF cadres. They said that they were shot dead because they were fleeing when asked to stop. But people in the neighborhood said they were executed.

Two days later, the AR post commander at Gate no 2 in Moreh was gunned down in broad daylight.

UNLF said they did the killing but they also said that the youths shot dead some days earlier by AR patrol were not their cadres.

Two days later AR personnel ran amok in Moreh bazaar, beating up innocent people and shutting down shops.

A day or two later another personnel of AR stepped on a bomb planted by the said rebel group and got one of his legs blown off.

Then came the mortar attack and it was not claimed by the rebel group as their attack.

So, did the mortar attack came as an answer to the arms shipment or to the series attacks and counter-attacks? Confusing, isn’t it?

by the meltingpot

Now Reading!

Now at 2nd place

This is the 3rd