 |
| https://rayalaseema360.wordpress.com/2016/02/15/s-korea-divided-over-u-s-thaad-deployment-for-diplomacy-plausibility/ |
Furthermore, in the author’s opinion, presence of THAAD on the Korean Peninsula would sooner contribute to the escalation of tension than to its reduction. The strategic question, which should be asked in this respect, is how the presence of such ABM system would affect the global standoff. The current system of nuclear parity is built upon two principles. The first principle postulates that a missile-nuclear attack launched by another country inflicts an unacceptable harm regardless of whether this country wins or loses in the end. What is clear, though, is that the war would definitely be harmful for the world. The second principle states that, given the speed of a fired missile, the defending party will, most probably, be unable to evacuate its population, but will have enough time to launch a missile in response, thus, rendering both countries vulnerable to destruction from a nuclear attack. Would it make sense to start a no-win war then? Thus far, understanding of meaninglessness and brutality of war helped to maintain peace. But from time to time some countries fall into an illusion that they can (at least hypothetical) overplay the opponent and be quick enough to both launch a missile and counter the opponent’s response, i.e. they believe that they could start war and actually win it.
And in terms of tactics, THAAD presence would exacerbate tension, since if there is a conflict between the United States and China or Russia, the likelihood of the Republic of Korea becoming a target for Chinese or Russian missiles increases manifold. In case of a conflict, the parties will be acting pursuant to tactical reasoning and not humanism. Thus, if there are THAAD ABM systems deployed on the territory of some country, it will be shelled during a conflict. As we see, if THAAD ABM systems are deployed in South Korea, it, being a hostage of somebody’s political games, will automatically become a target of a missile attack.
Choices for India in offering aid to Afghanistan should be married directly to national interest:
A healthier approach toward developmental aid might acknowledge India’s core interests in the region – namely, a diverse and competitive market for energy supplies and the destruction of safe havens for terrorist groups – and proceed from those. Such an approach would offer exchange caution for romantic claims about India’s “organic” relationship to Afghanistan, whether because of the shared Mughal heritage, Indian Sufi shrines near the Salma Dam or the long history of Afghans who have lived in India. Outmaneuvering Pakistan may offer short-term pride and prestige, but New Delhi could learn from its erstwhile ally in Moscow. What starts off as victories of development politics often becomes entangled in issues of inter-ethnic and inter-Pashtun conflicts that (alas) only Pakistan has the long-term energy or interest to engage in.
Better, then, to debate India’s long-term interests in what remains (alas, again) a poor country that accounts for less than 1% of India’s trade balance. Do Indian investments into Afghan iron mines merit Indian security commitments? How will New Delhi’s partnership with Iran and Afghanistan square with the expanding Chinese and legacy Russian presence in the region? Given the modest scales of trade involved, these questions should be answered from the point of view of what Afghanistan can do for India, not the other way around.
The Bank of Japan may dismiss helicopter money now, but post-Brexit inflation will continue to pump up the Yen:
Mr. Abe’s solid win in elections to Japan’s upper house of parliament last Sunday has ignited hopes the government will soon announce a big spending package. Many also expect the Bank of Japan to ease policy further at its next meeting, scheduled for later this month.
Former Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke met last week with BOJ Governor Haruhiko Kuroda, which some took as a sign Japan could soon introduce a radical program of money-printing known as “helicopter money,” an option Mr. Bernanke has publicly discussed in the past.
Still, there is little consensus among market participants as to what stimulus will actually emerge. Already, officials have poured cold water on the helicopter money idea, at least on a version that involves the BOJ directly financing government debt.
Takuji Aida, chief Japan economist at Société Générale, said he expects a government fiscal stimulus package of at least Y10 trillion ($94 billion), which could include increased public investment, or tax reliefs to spur consumer spending. He also said he expects the BOJ to cut the rate charged on some bank excess reserves to minus 0.2%.“If the Bank of Japan doesn’t cut this month, then dollar-yen could go back to 100,” Mr. Aida said.
New Zealand, Indonesia, look together to wean themselves off of China trade:
Key said the Government had "always recognised that Indonesia is full of potential", with a free trade agreement between New Zealand, Australia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) signed in 2009. "The thing that makes Indonesia interesting is it's got a young population, so it's 250 million and 150 million under 25."
The country's growing middle class could also prove a boon for New Zealand exporters, particularly in the food and beverage sector, Key said. "As people get wealthier, they consume more protein and their protein numbers are quite low, certainly relative to a developed country like New Zealand. So there's huge potential as they get wealthier to buy a lot more of what New Zealand produces."
"I've long been of the view that while China represents enormous opportunities for New Zealand and it's plain to see how successful we've been in China, the risk to New Zealand will always be to replicate the concentration threat that we had when we solely exported to the UK, and reverse that by solely having all our eggs in the Chinese basket. "It's not that we should be worried about the level of trade with China - in fact, it's something to celebrate, but you wouldn't want to get to the point where it's solely China."
No comments:
Post a Comment