Thursday, June 4, 2009
China and Tiananmen
On the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square, we should remember that despite the glossy glitter, tall buildings and strong economy, China is a dictatorship without a free press, permission to dissent or freedom of movement. Money and prosperity can hide the ugliness, but it does not go away. Just look at Russia.
President Obama in Cairo
Just watched President Obama's address in Cairo. Impressive, particularly in its outreach attempt displaying a deep understanding of Muslim history and its cultural and scientific contributions while during the same period in time Europe was backward, illiterate, intolerant, dirty and fighting baronial wars over scraps of land and peasants. The distinction, of course, between the grand age of Islam, with it broad tolerance, promotion of education and philosophy, massive strides in science, and its current status was obvious.
This may be a game changing speech. It was direct and tough to all - including the Israeli's. He put both the Arabs and Israeli's at the same level. Comparing the status of Palestinians to American slavery was brilliant.
The warning to Iran was also clear.
Great speech. Nice for the US to finally have a literate, intelligent leader - better than anyone in Europe.
This may be a game changing speech. It was direct and tough to all - including the Israeli's. He put both the Arabs and Israeli's at the same level. Comparing the status of Palestinians to American slavery was brilliant.
The warning to Iran was also clear.
Great speech. Nice for the US to finally have a literate, intelligent leader - better than anyone in Europe.
Third Time a Charm in Moldova?
Yesterday, the Moldovan parliament failed to appoint a president for the second time. By one vote. The immediate result of these failures to approve acting Prime Minister Zinaida Greceanii of the Communist Party as president will be a new election 45 days after the compulsory dissolution of parliament.
The last election was immediately followed by opposition protests that quickly turned violent despite OSCE monitors' reports that the election was free and fair. Although the outgoing president Voronin has accused Romania of supporting and funding the opposition and the protests, no proof has been profered.
Russia is keenly interested in the outcome of the power struggle in Moldova as it has a firm hold on what is essentially a criminal regime in the breakaway region of Transdniestria. Transdniester is on the left bank of the Dniester. It proclaimed its status as a republic in September 1990 and declared its independence in August 1991, at the same time as Moldova. It is supported by the present Russian government much as Russia supports South Ossetia and Abkhazia - although unlike the latter two regions, Russia has never recognized the independence of Transdniestria. That may be next.
Russian foreign policy in Europe is to prevent any further rollback of its influence and to extend that influence where possible. If Romania succeeds in pulling Moldova out of Russia's sphere of influence, then Transdniestria becomes untenable; but it is unlikely that it will ever rejoin Moldova and will continue as transit center for illegal arms, human trafficking and drugs.
Despite vast sums of money spent by the EU, World Bank, the Swiss and USAID, Moldova remains outside Europe. As the Czech Ambassador Pyotr Kupr said recently, he is doing his best to bring Moldova closer to Europe. He has been only modestly successful. "People are interested in foreigners when it comes to making a profit. They do not think like Europeans. There is no civil society, no independent mass media... There is only so much one can do on the micro level."
The fact that there is has been little to no success in developing civil society or an independent media in Moldova after so many years and so much money expended by international organizations is evidence that the development community is either doing something terribly wrong or the Moldovan people don't care. Or both. So why are the aid agencies continuing with the very same programs they have funded over the past 15 years?
A new election may end the control of the only democratically elected Communist government in Europe and begin to turn wheels of change. How much capital will Romania and Russia be willing to expend to either fulfill this result or oppose it?
The last election was immediately followed by opposition protests that quickly turned violent despite OSCE monitors' reports that the election was free and fair. Although the outgoing president Voronin has accused Romania of supporting and funding the opposition and the protests, no proof has been profered.
Russia is keenly interested in the outcome of the power struggle in Moldova as it has a firm hold on what is essentially a criminal regime in the breakaway region of Transdniestria. Transdniester is on the left bank of the Dniester. It proclaimed its status as a republic in September 1990 and declared its independence in August 1991, at the same time as Moldova. It is supported by the present Russian government much as Russia supports South Ossetia and Abkhazia - although unlike the latter two regions, Russia has never recognized the independence of Transdniestria. That may be next.
Russian foreign policy in Europe is to prevent any further rollback of its influence and to extend that influence where possible. If Romania succeeds in pulling Moldova out of Russia's sphere of influence, then Transdniestria becomes untenable; but it is unlikely that it will ever rejoin Moldova and will continue as transit center for illegal arms, human trafficking and drugs.
Despite vast sums of money spent by the EU, World Bank, the Swiss and USAID, Moldova remains outside Europe. As the Czech Ambassador Pyotr Kupr said recently, he is doing his best to bring Moldova closer to Europe. He has been only modestly successful. "People are interested in foreigners when it comes to making a profit. They do not think like Europeans. There is no civil society, no independent mass media... There is only so much one can do on the micro level."
The fact that there is has been little to no success in developing civil society or an independent media in Moldova after so many years and so much money expended by international organizations is evidence that the development community is either doing something terribly wrong or the Moldovan people don't care. Or both. So why are the aid agencies continuing with the very same programs they have funded over the past 15 years?
A new election may end the control of the only democratically elected Communist government in Europe and begin to turn wheels of change. How much capital will Romania and Russia be willing to expend to either fulfill this result or oppose it?
Cuba in OAS?
Steve Clemons reports that Cuba is about to rejoin the OAS with US backing. About time.
Ukraine Politics
OK. Ukrainian politics should be the new gordian knot of political analysis. President Yushchenko is now down to 1.9% popularity. Party of the Regions is in the lead and Yulia's gang is in its usual position of #2. The Rada will actually consider Yushchenko's proposals for amending the Constitution, after initially delaying any thought on the subject - except no one is quite sure what those amendments really mean. Yulia is in Poland celebrating the collapse of communism and Putin has turned the screws a little more by saying gas transit to Europe could end in July.
It's more entertaining watching Gordon Brown's struggles in Parliament and the disintegration of the government. So, until someone figures out what is going on here in Ukraine, that's what I intend to do.
It's more entertaining watching Gordon Brown's struggles in Parliament and the disintegration of the government. So, until someone figures out what is going on here in Ukraine, that's what I intend to do.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Ukraine Politics - What Next?
The unfolding story of the potential alliance between Yulia Timoshenko’s party BYuT and Victor Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions may be ending this week as Victor Medvedchuk brokers the deal. If anyone recalls, Medvedchuk was the head of the Presidential Administration under former President Kuchma (who is appearing in the news as well). He is also Chairman of the Social Democratic Party – which supported Yanukovych in 2004 and is ideologically opposed to the West and personally hates Yuschenko. His involvement is barely reported, but in talking to local business executives, they are worried about his role. Whether the two parties will actually form a coalition or simply come to some sort of voting arrangement in the Rada (Parliament), is an open question. For continuous reports go here.
The primary purpose of joining together is to change the Constitution and preventing the direct popular election of the president. Rather, the president would be chosen by the Rada. This would be very convenient for both Tymoshenko and Yanukovych because it would eliminate virtually all other political parties and thus prevent any new faces, such as Arseniy Yatseniuk, the leader of the Front of Changes party, from challenging either. This would install an un-challengeable two party system – and might stabilize the political scene while at the same time enormously pleasing Moscow.
Unlike Russia, with a coalition and change in the constitution it is unlikely that, in the beginning at least, debate and a free press would be suppressed completely. However, given the temperament of both Yulia and Victor, and the fact that people like Medvedchuk are supporting them, makes the future of a Western style democracy in Ukraine highly unlikely.
This alliance may yet be derailed because of several factors. The first is that neither Tymoshenko nor Yanukovych like each other very much. BYuT members of the Rada will also likely all not feel particularly comfortable with such an arrangement. According to a source in Party of the Regions anything less than a coalition is unacceptable because they do not trust all the members of the BYuT to keep promises – a coalition is more or less binding while a unified voting block is not. BYuT are are, after all, the ones who tossed out Kuchma, Medvedchuk and Yanukovych. Working with them in a coalition would strain their patience.
Additionally, there is a rumor that Yuschenko is thinking of resigning. This would force an election in 90 days – precisely what both Tymoshenko and Yanukovych do not want. Finally, the leader of BYuT in the Rada, Ivan Kyrylenko, said that he knew nothing at all about a coalition since he would be the one who would need to sign the agreement – and he has not even seen the draft.
What will happen next is anyone’s guess.
The primary purpose of joining together is to change the Constitution and preventing the direct popular election of the president. Rather, the president would be chosen by the Rada. This would be very convenient for both Tymoshenko and Yanukovych because it would eliminate virtually all other political parties and thus prevent any new faces, such as Arseniy Yatseniuk, the leader of the Front of Changes party, from challenging either. This would install an un-challengeable two party system – and might stabilize the political scene while at the same time enormously pleasing Moscow.
Unlike Russia, with a coalition and change in the constitution it is unlikely that, in the beginning at least, debate and a free press would be suppressed completely. However, given the temperament of both Yulia and Victor, and the fact that people like Medvedchuk are supporting them, makes the future of a Western style democracy in Ukraine highly unlikely.
This alliance may yet be derailed because of several factors. The first is that neither Tymoshenko nor Yanukovych like each other very much. BYuT members of the Rada will also likely all not feel particularly comfortable with such an arrangement. According to a source in Party of the Regions anything less than a coalition is unacceptable because they do not trust all the members of the BYuT to keep promises – a coalition is more or less binding while a unified voting block is not. BYuT are are, after all, the ones who tossed out Kuchma, Medvedchuk and Yanukovych. Working with them in a coalition would strain their patience.
Additionally, there is a rumor that Yuschenko is thinking of resigning. This would force an election in 90 days – precisely what both Tymoshenko and Yanukovych do not want. Finally, the leader of BYuT in the Rada, Ivan Kyrylenko, said that he knew nothing at all about a coalition since he would be the one who would need to sign the agreement – and he has not even seen the draft.
What will happen next is anyone’s guess.
Somalia Pirates
Somalia – or the Puntland part at least – seems to be tiring of pirate glamour, according to the BBC. Two things struck me about the article. The first is that UNICEF actually appears to make a difference by building schools and providing alternative lifestyles to the fading romanticism of piracy. But they are leaving.
The second is the statement by the President of Puntland. He named a price for which his government, and not the one that controls a few square blocks of Mogadishu, could eliminate piracy. It’s a lot less than what the military deployments cost or the ransom payments. So now we know what it will cost to control the pirates – even if paying him is sort of a ransom payment of its own.
The second is the statement by the President of Puntland. He named a price for which his government, and not the one that controls a few square blocks of Mogadishu, could eliminate piracy. It’s a lot less than what the military deployments cost or the ransom payments. So now we know what it will cost to control the pirates – even if paying him is sort of a ransom payment of its own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)