Reasons behind the rise of populism

To counter populism, we must counter the reasons that led to the rise of populism. One of the main reasons has been economic inequality – it gives leaders a foundation to base their populist ideals on and comes with a section of the population that is extremely frustrated and can easily subscribe to the aforementioned populist ideals. This is similar to what happened in the United States of America when Donald Trump was elected as President. He used the idea of the political elites ruling the country to garner votes. This idea can be summed up very well through a quote from his inaugural address, “For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.” 

Secondly, populism is characterised by a call for homogenizing societies. This stems from disapproval of pluralism and people with lower educational levels are more susceptible to believing anti-immigration ideas. Populist leaders often pretend to address the whole nation but often are referring solely to their supporters. They refer to their supporters as “we the people” or some variation of this. These leaders can tend to alienate one or more particular groups in order to demonize these groups and portray them as “the other”. Usually, these groups are immigrants, people of colour or gender and sexual minorities. 

Main characteristics of populist leaders

The wide spectrum of populism and the geographical diversity of populist nations can make it difficult to identify who is a populist leader. Every leader who refers to the nation as “we the people” doesn’t automatically become a populist leader. Populist leaders can be characterized by their two things – the first being the alienization of a certain sect of people. As described above, populist leaders can only rise to power if they have a group – either external, but mostly internal to their countries – that they can demonize. Europe has seen an increase of negative portrayals of immigrants in populist advertising.

Secondly, populist leaders will often believe in a radical centralization of power – they use speeches which make them seem God-like. Populist governments have one central figure whose charisma and revolutionary capabilities are presented as the saviour from the continued oppression of political elites.

The Threat and the Solution

Populist rhetoric and the marginalization of communities can pose a serious threat to democracy. Populist rhetoric is often spread through misinformation which undermines the transparent workings of a government. Populism often fuels much more dangerous political mishaps in our societies. Perhaps the most dangerous example of this is Europe in 1930s. Hitler’s populist tendencies included villainizing Jews, the disabled and every “non-Aryan” person, along with charismatic and larger-than-life speeches. Populism fuelled fascism and right now it is fuelling the alternative far-right in western liberal democracies. 

Populists vehemently oppose experts or more specifically scientific professionals. Jan-Werner Müller, a professor of politics at Princeton University writes in The Guardian, “Populists are not by definition liars. They are only committed to one particular empirical falsehood: the notion that they, and only they, represent what populists often call “the real people” – with the implication that other politicians are not only corrupt and “crooked”, but traitors to the people, or, as Trump has often put it, “Un-American”. This is very characteristic of populists – creating “the others” and differentiating themselves form this. Not listening to scientists and the educated strata of the society can have grave consequences – such as the half-baked response of the American government in dealing with the coronavirus.

The solution to populism lies in solving the issues that cause it. Economic inequality and anti-immigration ideas are issues that go beyond the sphere of one country. While domestic attempts to combat these are necessary, they are not always effective when you have a populist government that benefits from these issues. Moreover, these issues are highly affected by events of globalization, international trade and migration. Hence, the nature of these issues makes it such that international cooperation becomes necessary. 

The United Nation Secretary-General, António Guterres said that multilateralism is the key to combating populism.  While this is certainly true, the international community has several more concrete things they can do. Pushing for the elimination of corruption and curbing the spread of misinformation is crucial. Corruption plays a huge role in keeping populist leaders in control. The principles of the United Nations Convention against Corruption can be applied in the discussion surrounding populism. Secondly and perhaps most importantly, populism can be curbed by educating the general public on the ideas of democracy and pluralism. The biggest strength of populist leaders is the insecurity or lack of awareness of citizens that they exploit. In this sense, if people are educated on the principles of democracy and moved way from set ideas of homogeneity, it can make populist leaders a rarer phenomenon.

Conclusion

Populism can cause the eradication of democratic principles. Populists come to power through acting on the weakness of the people and their lack of awareness. If we are to counter populism, we have to make the people aware of the aforementioned democratic principles and promote pluralism. However, while populism is combated, the negative effects or consequences of populism needs to be dealt with. Countries need to include disadvantaged groups in political discussions, such as by changing methods of representation. Calls for radically anti-immigration policies need to be disregarded especially in a time when so many countries are plunged in internal conflicts. 

The post RIGHT-WING POPULISM AND ITS RISE appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Economic Background

Trade

Due to their geographical positioning, these nations are mostly far away from most macroeconomic nations and are isolated from the markets. This increases the cost of transportation of goods and services which is reflected in the price of the final product. With increased prices, the goods become unfavourable in the international markets and are not able to survive the competition, hence exports suffer.

Labor Supply

Moreover, the labour supply market is limited. This leads to labourers having to indulge in multitasking which hinders specialization and productivity as well. The market can not take advantage of specialization and labour segregation. Such factors, along with poor competition and high manufacturing costs, contribute to the micro island nations being “diseconomies of scale”.

With low levels of population and being unable to specialize, these nations are able to obtain little diversification and specialize in one or two goods and services in which they have an advantage over the other economies.

Non-Competitive Market

These economies are generally monopolies owing to a lack of incentives for new producers. When a company gets a monopoly in a market then the prices can be adjusted according to his will and are most of the time. Also, the product does not have close substitutes that do not allow a choice of product to the customer. Hence the power usually lies within the hand of the producer. This leads to poverty and income inequalities within the country.

Poor Government

The per capita Gross National Product (GNP) is also extremely low due to limited production generally for micro island nation economies. Being diseconomies of scale also hinders social and economic infrastructure development. Since the population is low, the number of taxpayers is also low which doesn’t collect as much revenue for the government to ensure infrastructural developments such as highways and roadways, and social infrastructures like hospitals and schools.

Dependence & Vulnerability

One of their major sources of income includes tourism which constitutes an important part of their GDP and also the imports exports too. But this also makes the country vulnerable to events and shocks in the international realm. These economies also dwell on one of the parent economies which is fairly near and most of the trade activities are carried out with them only. Caribbean States depend upon Mexico and the US, the ones in Pacific depend upon Australia and New Zealand. Hence the fate of these economies is also largely dependent on the global market well being of the parent economy.

Natural Challenges

Being island countries they face other natural challenges as well which includes natural disasters and calamities along with global warming. With rising sea levels they are at an increased risk of complete disappearance.

Advantages

However, they also have some advantages as well. Being cluttered and in faraway places, they have exposure to the vast territory of oceans and hence are paid charges by foreign multinational corporations for accessing these territories for fishing and extraction of resources. This is an important part of income. Also, they are seen as very advantageous for other countries to set up military bases on their territories.

Involvement In Money Laundering

Economical & Social Threats

Money laundering is a crucial concern for the world as it interferes with the global economy’s cash flow. Unchecked money laundering increases the demand for money, danger to bank soundness, contamination impact of legitimate financial transactions, enhanced instability of foreign capital movements, and exchange rates due to unexpected cross-border movements of commodities. Besides, it widens the gap between the rich and the poor. It provides the fuel for drug dealers, terrorists, illegal arms dealers, corrupt political officials, and others to operate and expand their criminal enterprises.

Root Cause for the Lucrativity

These economies serve as tax havens for rich billionaires and multinational corporations in other countries as they have very lax or no tax laws. Due of the prevalent tax scenario, in those nations where it stays free, people tend to keep their extra cash or black money away from the trail of their homeland so they don’t get challenged about how the money was received. It may have been possible that the company or person might have been involved in illegal activities to earn the extra money but they are the perfect hotspots for money laundering with the weak security in these micro island nations.

Bahamas

The Bahamas is one such micro island nation that has high levels of money laundering activities in the past. Their positioning near Florida makes them a suitable transit point for drugs heading to the United States. The trafficking is carried out by commercial and private planes and also by blending in with other pleasure crafts which also strengthens the criminal activities. It is “The Bahamas is an international business and financial center with an open economy. The high volume of transactions involving massive, cross-border funds raises the possibility of money laundering by private banks, trust institutions, insurance agencies and corporate service providers. Such methodologies for money laundering may involve purchasing real estate and precious metals and gems.

In a report by the United States Department of State, the Bahamas was listed among major international money laundering jurisdictions in 2018, also highlighting sources of laundered proceeds included firearms trafficking, human smuggling and tax fraud. The US observed that the country had not maintained official records of the business’ beneficial ownership, or required resident paying agents to report payments to domestic tax authorities to non-residents. The findings were detailed in the March 2019 Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs – International Narcotics Control Strategy Report Volume 2 on Money Laundering.

Many of the factors that have been found to be responsible for these practices in these nations are: Bahamas law enforcement agencies lack the capacity to successfully execute operations into money trafficking, such as specialized human resources. The legal proceedings against such activities is not that stringent with no convictions for evasions of international taxes. Because of a poor security system and a comparatively lenient judiciary, many corrupt officials and businessmen are fleeing to these nations in case they have to flee their own country.

Cayman Islands

The Cayman Islands is yet another popular name when it comes to hiding money by rich persons and businesses due to the low tax scenario. It hosts more than 100,000 companies which is a questioning data as it outstrips the local population as well. However, the government of the Cayman islands justify the company listings saying that it meets global standards and cooperates with authorities around the world. It is owned by the British and has been set free to set its own taxes.

The British territory realized that it “faces internal and external money laundering and terrorist financing threats,” making it a probable place for international fraud, tax circumvention, as well as drug trafficking and smuggling.

Broad inquiries and convictions on money laundering are non-existent and the use of the Financial Reporting Agency to conduct investigations is benign; the latest mutual evaluation report by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force has concluded.

The major deficiencies seem to be there in the accounting methodologies, lack of focus on international money laundering and terrorism financing threats.

Conclusion

The economies of micro island nations are at severe disadvantages and need to integrate with the World Economy to grow and prosper as depending on a single country or economy makes them vulnerable and at a disadvantage. However, with the opening of the economies, some have been able to show tremendous growth such as Maldives and Fiji. Other economies can also look into their growth profile, demographics, and take relevant measures. Moreover, due to the tax structure, money laundering has been an extremely frightening problem as it has various social as well as economic impacts. Anti-money laundering laws and regulations, although started, need to be strengthened and properly implemented so as to counter it.

The post MICRO ISLAND NATIONS: HOW ARE THEY MONEY LAUNDERING HAVENS? appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Current Situation

Over time, the process was expected to create a robust global economic powered by the mutual economic and social cooperation. However, this expectation soon became a distant concept as the world’s economy struggled to overcome disturbances caused by a number of political and economic setbacks that permanently disturbed the socio-economic fabric of society. Most recent of these events being the novel Coronavirus. The crises we face today is unlike any other we have experienced earlier, forcing us to question the existing international systems, and with that the concept of globalisation. On the other hand, there are those that have come to coin the present situation as, ‘Globalisation’, signalling a return to globalised world post the pandemic. There exists no doubt about the fact that the Globalisation has connected not only industries and business, but it has done away with social, economic and political borders, that has allowed for the free flow of intellect, capital and resources. While this has acted to the benefit of many nations, a number of people have been extremely vocal about the fact that the process has enhanced the vulnerabilities of nations by making them over-dependent on the global supply chain. Loopholes and drawback of this nature have been further highlighted by the COVID 19 pandemic, as underdeveloped and developing nations have been left struggling to meet the demand of essential items such as masks, sanitisers and medicines. In the past few months itself, we have recorded a 13-32% decline in merchandise trade, a 30-40% reduction in FDI and 44-80% reduction in International air travel. 

Future of Globalisation

Seeing the present situation, that has resulted in a major role back on the gains made by globalisation in the previous two decades and a fundamental collapse of the international market integration, many have come to envision the world in the post-pandemic days. The most obvious answer to these questions seems to be that, leader shave to plan for and shape a world where both globalisation and anti-globalisation pressures remain enduring features of the business environment. 

It is too early to say, if whether the world is done and dusted with the concept of Globalisation. However, recent statistics and forecasts, predict that the concept should be in currency following the end of the pandemic. However, the nature of the same might be different from what we have experienced previously. The pandemic that had a universal impact, left all national economies in shackles, then whether it be the United States or some of the richest European nations. The economic recovery has been the top priority for all countries. However, such robust economic growth can only be pursued once the pandemic has been brought under control. Viewing the economic trends prior to the pandemic, it is clear that globalisation is an important agent in the growth and health of nations. Countries higher up in the DHL Global Connectedness Index tend to record faster economic growth. There is well-founded evidence to the fact that well-connected countries have a more advanced medical system, making them less susceptible to infectious diseases and put them in a better place to deal with the same. This goes to show that the negatives of globalisation, can just as easily be turned into positive contributions, by investing in health, growth and international cooperation. 

Global Growth

The COVID 19 pandemic has added fuel to the fire, by further destabilising an already fractured world. The pandemic introduced new levels of complexity, an example of which is the national restrictions and differing government response policies, which have further highlighted the differing ideological grounds. However, it is but natural to assume from here on forth that the global socio-economic environment will be driven more by factors based on regional competition, domestic self-sufficiency and when it comes to transnational companies and organisations, the country of their origin will decide the nature of policies they will adopt. Even as the lockdown restrictions have begun to ease we have seen that short distance and domestic trade have recorded a stronger comeback than international trade, hence the importance of regions should not be underplayed and the possibility of stronger domestic and regional trade flows should not be completely forgone while envisaging a new world order.

Technological Advancements

As the pandemic disrupted the status quo, forcing us to adapt to and adopt new ways, it invariably led to the creation of new technology and adoption of e-commerce, videoconferencing and robotics. Before we were faced with the challenge of dealing with a world pandemic, it was a commonly held belief that strides in technological development may not lead to an increase in global flows. However, recent times are a complete antithesis to that belief, as the cross border, e-commerce has come to expand export opportunities for smaller companies, and forced experimentation with remote work could spur more service offshoring. In planning ahead, for the post-COVID 19 scenario, business leaders have to think creatively by taking a structured approach to consider both internal and external implication. For most companies, technological trends should lead to more globalisation in some areas and less in others, rather than a uniform shift in one direction or the other.

Public Perception

Public Opinion towards globalisation has taken a hit, calling back the strong support trends as international trade and immigration had received in the last two decades in particular. The fact that international travel has led to the spread of the virus and the increasing economic stress has resulted in trade protectionism, politicians have used this in their favour to consolidate support against globalisation and the evils that it has introduced into our polities. In these uncertain times, citizens and more important customers and employees have turned to corporate leaders to make a statement regarding globalisation. The rise of anti-globalisation and anti-capitalist movements, as the virus spreads globally has further complicated the role of businesses in the public debate about globalisation. The need of hour requires us to focus on the real economic contributions and how they can help support a healthier form of globalisation. 

Conclusion

A tremendous challenge lies ahead of us, to transform the current world order by regulating and weakening the burdens of globalisation. As the days have passed it has become clearer to us that we have to create a mechanism to respond to diseases through effective international cooperation, without retreating back to the evil of ethnocentrism. Covid-19 effect on the globalisation can be seen more as a bend, rather than a permanent break. Attention to the drivers of globalisation, can lead and navigate companies through and even profit from the turbulence. It is now that the value of globalisation in the form of international cooperation can be portrayed to ensure a suitable and stable future.

The post LANDSCAPE OF GLOBALISATION POST-COVID 19 appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Relations Post COVID Pandemic

The ongoing pandemic has created a time of uncertainty, but one certain thing is that once the pandemic ends, there will be an air of distrust in the global market towards China, and their economic, as well as political prowess, will take a hit. This is seen as an advantage for India and a favourable condition for the USA in a cold conflict which has been going on for the better part of the last two years. This has been fueled further by Donald Trump who has continuously referred to COVID as the ‘Chinese Virus’ in his official briefings.  Trump has been asking his allies within Europe to take a similar stance of blaming China for the health and economic distress. India has played the ball with caution and not followed suit by joining America’s call for blaming the situation fully on to China. Rather, India had been in close contact with health officials from both China and the USA during the early stages of the pandemic. This aligned with India’s long-existing value of international cooperation.  Nonetheless, some things need to be kept in mind when India will be forming their policy about the two countries after the pandemic ends, or possibly slows down. First of all, one needs to expect that the relationship between China and the USA will remain sour. This comes from a simple deduction that China has ambitions that go far beyond India, Russia or South Asia for that matter. China is trying to take up the position of a superpower in the international community as is understood by the international community. Further, the USA has already noticed this ambition and has been trying to keep it in check. Whether it is in the form of a trade war or simple political jargon, the USA is trying to retaliate. India, in this scenario, needs to keep its patience. There is no doubt that India has economic interests in both countries, but it will not be hard to argue that India tends to side with America, when it comes to making a choice between the two. An important aspect of post-COVID relations is the economy. For now, we see that China has already started recovering from the pandemic in economic terms as China has started recovering the losses it incurred during the early months of the pandemic. The same cannot be said about India or even the USA. Even though it is clear that the two countries are still going through the pandemic and have not reached their respective peaks, the current signs show that it won’t be soon that they start to recover economically. As Modi has always claimed that the purpose of foreign policy will be to achieve economic prowess, it can be argued that India needs to make use of its foreign policy to economically recover from COVID. A point for worrying is that India will not be able to compete with China in terms of economic recovery on its own because of the simple lack of skill labour capacity. China’s labour socialism has developed labour skill at a level which India, at this point cannot compare with, statistically speaking. Global economists agree that national labour capacity will be the key for recovery post COVID. Even though Modi’s use of the term ‘Atma-Nirbhar’ may be good for showing a certain national self-dependence, on the ground, India cannot compare with China. Similarly, the USA is in a stronger position in terms of labour capital than India, but it is too early to judge that against China. On the other hand, various international politics scholars also believe that India’s bargaining power will increase in a more than likely limited cold war between USA and China, post-COVID. This stems from the simple fact that India has a huge consumer market in which both countries would want to invest in. Therefore, India needs to make use of its market. Lastly, in a post COVID world, India needs to focus on the global flow of labour and capital, with its established strategic partners in Europe, Middle East and South-East Asia. The USA might not be as equally dependent but they too will need to foreign cooperation. A few days back PM Modi invited American investment in India and that is a positive move. Since India has been trying to move away from China, in terms of economic dependence at least, Modi makes the right move by inviting increased cooperation and investment from America.

Defence Alliances Post the Galwan Clash

The ‘Boycott China’ movement of Indians may reflect that Indians might want to move towards self-dependence but such transformation is to be considered as a long term solution. The crux remains that India needs to maintain its economic relation with China as long as it practically can. If things boil beyond control, India needs to think of an economic plan while at the same time it thinks about its border measures.

Conclusion

India, China and the USA will become a much more interesting international dynamic in the coming years with China’s growing ambition. Nonetheless, India’s priority has to be to economically recover from COVID. Improving economic ties with the West is the clear cut answer to that along with an increased focus on entrepreneurial self-dependence. Moving on, a closer defensive relation with the US also seems to be the way ahead, without severing economic ties with China, for as long as possible. India needs to be more vigilant on the border if it doesn’t want to be walked over by China again. Such strategic partnerships will help India to grow economically, as well as maintain its existing influence over South Asia and possibly expand upon it, in the years to come.

The post INDIA, USA AND CHINA: A COMPLICATED TRIAD appeared first on WISER WORLD.

China is a one-party state with power lying mainly in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. Moreover, it is one of the five permanent members of the UN’s Security Council and thus possesses tremendous power and reach.

History of China’s Economy

The trade reforms introduced in 1978 have changed the economic position of the country on a gigantic level. 

After the reforms were introduced, the country began to open and its economy has seen tremendous growth. GDP growth averaged over 10% per year, making it one of the world’s fastest-growing-economies.

Recently, however, due to several imbalances, comparatively low growth rate of institutional development and fast pacing economic development, there have been several reform gaps that have kept the GDP growth rate at 6% per year and it has been decreasing continuously. The country has made Innovation its top priority while working on the strategy for the 2020-25 growth model catering to the current scenario.

China’s Strategic Advantage

China is an upper-middle-income country and a major supplier of raw materials to the rest of the world. It observes major investment from MNCs globally. Most of the products that we use in our daily life are labeled as either made in China or assembled in China.

Apple iPhone, which is considered a revolutionary product, gets its product assembling done in China. Low labour costs were considered the main reason initially but there has been a shift in recent years. Since countries like India, Vietnam, etc. can provide even cheaper labour, hence the question arises, what makes China different?

The answer is the quality of labour and the type of skill provided. As said by Tim Cook “You find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, is very important to our business.”

Thus, comparatively low labour costs, highly skilled labour, the ability to produce big consignment daily due to the strong labour force and a large home market make China an ideal country for product assembly. 

Trade Relations with India

Economic relations between India and China date back to ancient times with the Silk Route being the major trade route then. China is a major exporter of raw materials like pharmaceutical ingredients, steel, electronic devices, fertilizers for India, thus making India as China’s biggest trading partner after the US. India too runs a huge trade deficit with China.

The major inability of Indian companies to produce products at low rates arises because of a lack of research and development facilities, poor infrastructure and incompetent labour policies.

In a survey of about 90 people, it was asked: “What is the main reason that encourages you to buy foreign goods?”

The following were the observations:

Due to this Chinese goods gain an edge and find a huge market in India. Moreover, the Indian population forms a large base for many Chinese apps. These do not mainly contribute to revenue but they help in boosting the reach of the product which is even more beneficial for the companies.

However, with the recent clashes and increasing deficits, the Indian government has banned several Chinese applications and has been constantly focusing on promoting the ‘Made in India’ campaign.

Impact of the Current Situation

With the advent of the current pandemic, almost all economies have come to a standstill. While some of the countries have been able to deal with the situation efficiently and have already observed the peaks, others like the US and India are the worst struck and their economies have faced a major shock. 

China has been accused of hiding information about the virus which eventually led to the pandemic. Markets crashed and the price of crude barrels fell to such an extent that they became negative for the first time in history. Many people have been laid off from their jobs, causing them to fall into debt traps.

However, the current border tensions with China have induced an even greater hatred among Indian citizens towards Chinese goods and services. Many Chinese contracts and tenders have been reworked and the suppliers have been changed. These have vastly affected China’s economy.

Nevertheless, the economic interdependence of the two nations is way too important to be ignored. An all-out boycotting of Chinese goods would force people to buy expensive goods in this period of recession. This would just worsen the situation and the governments would have to further moderate the policies to accommodate the situation.

Conclusion

 It can be rightly said that the expansionist and influential regime of the Chinese government is at an all-time high. China might be taking this course of action to drive the attention of the world away from COVID allegations by having disputes with other nations. However, with this course of action, it is losing a huge consumer base in India. Though low priced quality goods might still prevail in the markets as Indians don’t have good homemade alternatives.

India and China have been embroiled in border disputes since 1962 after the Indo-China talks failed. China has always been intruding in the territorial sovereignty of India, this has been very common but the international community never held China liable because of its veto in UN and structural hegemony in international markets but the advent of COVID-19 has led to an international bias against China. The factual matrix has created a situation in which China might be held liable for the very first time for violating the ceasefire agreement on LAC as it has lost support in the international arena and the CCP is facing extreme criticisms for its violations and misuse of authority.

The first step towards the long turn process of improving the efficiency of production in India should be taken immediately. Trade shouldn’t be stopped but the trade deficit needs to be brought to a balance to prevent other nations from exerting dominance in the future.

China needs to take into account the possible isolation by other countries in the long run which might bring down the already decreasing GDP growth and the scenario before 1978 might come into the picture again. China should acknowledge the need of the hour and help its subordinate countries with the current pandemic, help in building their economies to ensure healthy trade relations, the welfare of mankind and stability. History is evident, Wars cease to create any good, rather are a great way to destroy the global economy, loss of life and property and leave the world in a state of regret and despair. 

The post CHINA’S POSITION IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY: THE IMPACTS OF CURRENT TENSION ON TRADE AND WORLD ECONOMY appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The result is that today we have Al Jazeera English, Telesur and China Global Television Network (CGTN). AJE is funded by the Emir of Qatar, Telesur by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and several other Latin American governments and CGTN is owned by the Communist Chinese government. Even though these media outlets are state-run, they do not merely function as government mouthpieces. Their editorial policies vary according to essentially where they are located. But a common theme amongst three media outlets is that they aim to offer something different than the BBC and CNN, their reasons for the same vary though.

Telesur Editorial Policy

Telesur is based in Caracas and it was launched as a 24/7 in October 2005. It’s stated editorial policy is to offer a different vision of news from the BBC or the CNN. The reason for this is that Telesur believes that these big media outlets for the longest time did not present their side of the story, it was always one-sided and against them. Never did the likes of CNN bothered to cover the local news of Latin American countries. CNN and the likes always seemed to pass America’s foreign policy goals. Telesur policy has been to challenge/critique American imperialism. A simple youtube search result shows the numerous programmes done by Telesur on US imperialism. 

Telesur not only gives an in-depth perspective of the Latin American people but it also to some extent focuses on raising the issues from the Global South. For eg., they did a story on the Indian Army’s Brutality in Kashmir. Telesur took a pro-people stand and an anti-establishment view. 

Al Jazeera Editorial Policy

AJE was launched in November 2006, although there was already AJA (Arabic). The reason to launch an English version was to reach a global audience and present the views of the Arab/Muslim world. After the 9/11 attacks, the coverage of the Middle Eastern countries by the likes of the BBC and CNN had created a negative stereotype about the Arab world. The one-sided coverage of the Iraq war by BBC world and CNN only played a spoilsport in strengthening the stereotype against the Arab population. AJE’s editorial policy, therefore, has been to present both sides of the story. Their aim is to provide a different perspective on the news.

According to Josh Rushing (AJ’s US Defence and Military Correspondent), “I tell people that Al-Jazeera provides a different perspective to CNN but an equally important one. CNN films the launch of a missile, AJ films what happens when it lands”. AJ provide different perspectives in three ways, firstly by covering the same international news in an alternate way to the ‘Western perspective’ of the BBC World and CNN, secondly, they cover the parts of the world which no one covers, which tends not to get reported at all and thirdly by covering the developing countries (Global South) in an original way. So their editorial policy is pretty much like Telesur when it comes to presenting a different world view about the Arab world. 

China’s Global Television Network’s Editorial Policy

CGTN, the Chinese media outlet has a different editorial policy than Telesur and AJE. Since it’s controlled by the government, it mostly acts as an extended arm of the government. CGTN’s policy has been to show the better side of China to the world and debunk many stereotypes that the Western world has of China. China is always perceived with a negative perception in the Western world (America, EU countries etc) because of their being a Communist government and how there’s no press freedom at all. The recent reports of curbing dissent and protests and violation of Human Rights has also led many to have a very bad image of China. 

Chinese government’s aim, therefore, is to change this perception and they use CGTN as their foreign policy arm. CGTN, therefore, channels the interests of the government in a more direct way. CGTN is trying to accomplish certain goals through its editorial policy, firstly it does shows on emphasising on History, culture, Philosophy and civilization of China, secondly, through its programmes it tries to assert that China is emerging as a formidable economic power (eg., their coverage of the celebration of ten years of Beijing Olympics) and lastly it wants to address certain stereotypes about China. So it’s quite evident that the Chinese government wants to change its global image with the help of CGTN. China wants the world to like it and increase its soft power through CGTN. 

As discussed above, China wants the world to like it and it cannot happen unless positive aspects of China are shown to the world. China’s growing military power, its political system along with its growing human rights violations, and it’s economic strength all contribute to its negative image abroad. For this reason, the Chinese government felt the need to invest in global media. The other reason to go global was that the government was not happy with the way they have been covered by the Western media in the past. Hence China invested more in strengthening it’s foreign language channels and expanded its partnership with foreign television organizations. Leading up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics the Western media had increased its coverage of China in a more hostile way, highlighting the Chinese government’s Human Rights violation records. The Western media’s coverage of the pro-Tibetan riots was seen by the Chinese government to be as anti-Chinese.

A CBN  report highlighted the lack of democracy in China (no free journalism and suppression of dissent). It was believed that this would change after the games as post the Olympics China was seen to have graduated as ‘World Power’. But nothing changed and the negative coverage of China by the Western media continued. Hence China could not wait for the Western media to change its critical stance on China and therefore it was needed that China is proactive and “go global” and push for Chinese perspectives into the international arena if it wanted to contest the discursive power of the West. CCTV (now CGTN) China’s premier broadcaster global expansion has risen manifold after the decision to go global was taken. CCTV claims to have achieved global coverage with its. CCTV4. It’s a Mandarin-language channel whose target audience is overseas Chinese-speaking viewers. The channel reaches approx 10 million viewers outside China in 93 countries. There’s another channel which has helped its global reach, CCTV-9, a foreign-language channel (English, French & Spanish). It has some 40 million viewers overseas in 94 countries. 

Conclusion

The editorial policy of a news media outlet varies according to the region, the tensions in the surroundings as well the political environment of the region. Although it would seem that the editorial policies of the above-discussed media outlets are similar, it’d be wrong to make a quick judgement. A quick glance at their websites gives a clear picture of the kind of stories they do and what do they want to tell the world through those stories. 

The post GLOBAL NEWS NETWORKS AND THEIR EDITORIAL POLICIES appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The birth of NATO as an organisation of military cooperation was in the backdrop of the Cold War era, which saw a constant power struggle between the two superpowers, i.e, USA and USSR. The Cold war between these two superpowers had practically divided the entire world (except the NAM countries) into two alliances – Western & Eastern. The Western Alliance which was later formalised into NATO was led by the US and joined by most of the Western European countries, as the name suggests. Since it’s the foundation, the policy of “Collective Defense” has been at the heart of the Alliance, the policy being a declaration by its member states that an armed attack on one of them would be considered an attack on all of the NATO countries and therefore, all these countries would be obliged to retaliate. This policy, therefore, brings about a spirit of solidarity within the member countries.       

The Cold war era continued to witness a major military role played by the Alliance, particularly after the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies united themselves by the Warsaw Pact in 1955, as a counter-power to the rising NATO forces in Europe. The formation of the Warsaw Pact was triggered by the gradual enlargement of NATO which was joined by West Germany in 1955 and now constituted fifteen member states, with the original member states of Belgium, Britain, Canada, Italy, Iceland, France, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United States, later joined by Greece and Turkey in 1952. At its height, the tension between the NATO Alliance and Warsaw Pact countries was symbolized by the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961, which was perhaps the greatest physical representation of the Cold War, as it was seen to be dividing East Germany from West Germany, and their respective Western and Eastern European counterparts.  

However, it was almost apparent during this time that neither party had any desire of engaging in serious conflict. Thus, for the entirety of the Cold War era, the two superpowers never engaged in a real nuclear exchange and although a few armed conflicts probably emerged, there are no shreds of evidence and thus cannot account for any major conflict between the two superpowers. In fact, a major portion of the time period when the Soviet Union was still alive, a ‘Detente’ phase, had existed which basically meant that both the blocs accepted the status quo and did not make any attempts to change it by creating newer sources of conflict among each other and their allies. Therefore, in the 1960’s the conventional role that NATO played as a defence organisation had undergone a major reshuffling that began with this new phase of the relationship which saw the rise of the new strategic concept of ‘Flexible Response’. As now the Alliance had greater avenues of military responses in events of the conflict, moving away from the earlier binary provided by the ‘Massive Retaliation’ strategic concept between, a total nuclear exchange or peace.  

Gradually, the Soviet Union began to disintegrate for economic (heavy defence expenditure, lower standards of living among people), political and ideological reasons. Although NATO continued to hold its ground, in the world sphere of military and defence. While the Warsaw Pact ended in 1991, it was not as if, NATO’s transition was smooth sailing post-1991. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, US was the only superpower left in the world, and therefore, this created a sort of political vacuum (US dominance with no strong power to contend it), which NATO sought to balance out by introducing various measures like the establishment of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, the Mediterranean dialogue, etc. It also lent its support to the United Nations in ending wars such as Yugoslavian Civil War but perhaps in its striving for engaging in legitimate and righteous actions, the NATO has often also engaged in some actions, deemed as illegal.

This can be best illustrated by the case of the Kosovar Albanians, when NATO in June 1999, carried out airstrikes so as to prevent the native Kosovar Albanians from going through ethnic cleansing that was being carried out by the Serbian ruling population. What made these actions illegal, despite their righteous purpose was that it was not backed by the UN Security Council’s authorization and also defied the UN Charter, which had declared that NATO can only be activated in case of one of its member countries being under a threat. 

In modern times, the issue of “burden-sharing” within NATO, has become one of great importance and can be considered as a reason for increasing unpopularity of NATO within some member countries like the US. While some observers had raised this issue even in the earlier times, it was most recently brought up by the US President Donald Trump in the July 2018 Summit of the organization. He has put growing pressure on the Eastern European countries within the alliance and more so on those who have consistently failed to meet the two major goals – spending 2% of the country’s GDP in defence (4% according to the July Summit) and 20% of defence spending on equipment purchases. 

Despite its various shortcomings and controversial actions, it would not be an exaggeration to say that NATO has also undertaken various initiatives for the good of the world. The organization which constitutes about 30 member states in 2020, has undergone significant enlargement since it’s the foundation. Although, enlargement has not only been limited to an increase in the number of members but also on an ideological scale. While it started off primarily as a defence organization, relating to matters of security and peace of its member countries, the conventional definition of “security” has also changed. Therefore stimulating changes in the way NATO works to keep maintaining the security not only of its member countries but also of non-member countries. Peacekeeping and Peacemaking have become its priorities, which is not an easy work in any time period and especially not in the 21^st century, which has seen newer innovations in technology than any other age. In lieu of recent events, NATO countries have also played an equally significant role in helping to tackle the global pandemic of COVID – 19 by primarily sending supplies and equipment, where it was required. For instance, the Czech Republic and Turkey sent medical supplies to Spain and Italy, when they requested for help. 

Therefore, the nature of NATO as an organization has changed quite drastically from its foundation days and describes the evolving role played by NATO in the world, in terms of military power, security, peace, etc. 

The post THE EVOLVING ROLE OF NATO: A BRIEF HISTORY & FUTURE CHALLENGES appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Confinement in homes, and lack of steady incomes, seems to have been fostering tensions and frustration in households and strain due to concerns over health and security. The lockdown is also putting women in isolation with violent partners, with nowhere to turn to for help. In India, the National Commission for Women has reported a 200 per cent increase in the reporting and stress call numbers of domestic violence on their helpline in the month of June alone.

Even before the lockdown was imposed, domestic violence was one of the most prevalent violations of human rights and a key impediment to the implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with one in three women have experienced it at some point in their lives. Economist Amartya Sen has estimated in 1990 that more than 100 million women are ‘missing’ — that includes those that never lived because of sex-selective abortions and infanticide, child neglect and maltreatment. That number was revised in 2015 to 136 million – this just shows how females have been subject to violence, at times even before they are born, at an alarmingly high rate.

Furthermore, it is essential to address that violence against women not only affects individuals, but also households, families and communities. However, the only way to change this stark reality is to hold the aggressors accountable and ensure that the problematic social norms that perpetuate the instances of violence are also tackled in an inclusive manner. The SDGs act as an apt framework to work off of, in order to shape a violence-free world – here’s how:

SDG 1: No Poverty

Women’s work – in agriculture, in communities, and at home, fuels economies and yet, isn’t regarded as ‘economic activity’. The exposure of females to incessant discrimination and mistreatment at the workplace makes them vulnerable and susceptible to gender-based violence. Women and girls are four per cent more likely to live in poverty and poor living conditions, a risk that rises up to twenty-five per cent as we factor-in other inequalities. Financial independence for women creates new opportunities and avenues for them to reject typical gender norms and leverage independence against violent partners. It also helps them to create a mentality of freedom and a sense of self for themselves. As a result, the reduction in poverty proves to be a catalyst towards enabling women in societies.

SDG 4: Quality Education

An estimated 246 million girls and boys experience school-related violence every year and one in four girls say that they never feel comfortable using school washrooms, according to a survey on youth conducted across four regions by the United Nations. Quality education is essential to ending violence against women. Educated girls are more likely to make their decisions towards family planning and managing finances, it is fundamental for the development of aspirations and skills, and children of educated women are more likely to have been safeguarded against malnutrition and illiteracy. Educational exposure also enables women to get access to leadership and decision-making opportunities. Hence, it propels them into a cycle of development that helps them create barriers to economic violence at home or in their communities.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

According to a 2018 report by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in India, 18 per cent of women and girls aged between 15 and 49 years of age have experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner or family member in the past twelve months. Further, someone is known to them – every day kills more than 137 women around the world. These figures represent a fraction of the discrimination against women in terms of opportunities, wealth, inheritance, safe access to public spaces, lack of decent work, and safe and healthy environments of living, learning, working, and engaging with their communities. These inequalities leave them extremely vulnerable to gender-based violence.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

Unsafe and poor working environments affect women regardless of their age, location, income, careers, or social standing. As of 2020, 18 countries have laws that enable husbands in preventing their wives from going to work. UN Women estimates that the economic costs of violence and harassment amount to US$12 trillion every year. As of 2018, 59 countries do not have laws protecting women from sexual harassment in the workplace. Economic growth cannot be achieved without the inclusion of women and their contribution to sustainable development in an empowering work environment.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

In developing countries, concerns of safety and restricted access to public transport reduce the probability of women participating in the labour market by 16.5 per cent. As the processes of urbanization and industrialization catch up to tier two and tier three cities, the UN estimates that more than 5 billion people will reside in cities by 2030. This becomes an essential notion to address in the light of crimes against women that are prevalent in most urban regions. Further, there is widespread human rights abuse in many industries, such as fast fashion, many of which employ women in majorities. Women may be subject to exploitation in such circumstances and need to be safeguarded against such instances.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

In 37 countries, rape perpetrators are exempt from legal prosecution if they are married to, or subsequently marry the victim. Improving access to justice for survivors, and strengthening the legal framework against violators is an essential step towards making justice accessible for women – be it against violence, sexual misconduct at the workplace, or any crime against them. It is further imperative for women to mobilize and advocate support for their personal rights and those of their communities. This can be done digitally, individually, or at any level.  

Conclusion

At this point in time, COVID-19 is already testing humanity in unprecedented capacities. The shadow pandemic that we have had to face additionally is a mirror to the kind of societies we have built for ourselves so far. As we emerge from the pandemic, we must renew the outlooks towards inequalities and factor them into our responses to create a more equitable and sustainably sound world.

The post HOW DO THE SDGS PUSH THE NARRATIVE AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE? appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The G7 or ‘Group of Seven’ was authentically a ‘Group of Six’ initially in 1975, which included France, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and West Germany but later in 1976, Canada became a part of the grouping resulting to the formation of G7. Eventually in 1998 Russia joined in the gathering and was called G8 but post-Crimea’s annexation, the democratic alliance excluded Moscow from the group. It is a grouping of the most industrialized countries all over the world and after UNSC(United Nations Security Council) is the second most important gathering for discussing global issues regarding security, economy, and energy.

As soon as the recent call was taken by POTUS, have created a dilemma that whether G7 is transforming itself by involving developing and middle-income countries together? Along with India POTUS has also invited Australia, South Korea, and astonishingly Russia again analyzing its strategic importance in the changing world order with an intention of keeping it far from Beijing. Considering the importance of India which has its global contributions in sectors like renewable energy, pharmaceutical medicines, steel manufacturing, etc. and its presence in the Indian Ocean has boosted up its strategic relevance in the region as well as over the world.

Is there something else that India holds more value that has brought it in the cynosure? Yes, it is the huge market that it holds and the intentions of the Indian government to invite massive foreign investments have brought a massive opportunity for foreign investors and manufacturing companies. The $3 trillion economy is the 3rd largest economy when calculated on (PPP) basis and the 5th largest economy when ranked by nominal GDP. The country is the fastest growing economy in the world. Ignoring India and other such growing economies have made POTUS rethink the current G7 structure which makes it outdated.

While Russia has accepted the invitation by the US president along with a condition of equal participation and yet has whispered the ignorance of China in the important group which is expanding, despite Beijing previously had been a part of G8+5. China being the second-largest economy and its growing ambitions over the world with respect to its BRI project makes the few, feel optimistic but it’s for sure that Washington is glaring at it with a threat over its hegemony. Re-arrangement of the 1976 grouping is being seen as a result of the expanding Chinese ambitions, its non-transparent behaviour amid a pandemic and it’s naval dominance in the maritime regions.

Though this new bloc being created should not set its agenda as Anti-Chinese but bring back Beijing under the global, institutional-based world order i.e to make China realize the value of discipline-based existence without exploiting the smaller nations to fulfil “CHINA DREAM” or “CPEC” passing from POK and recent activities of intrusion in Ladakh despite New Delhi being holding a claim over the disputed region. Beijing is ought to get over its old strategy of  “DEBT TRAPPING” against small and economically weaker nations.

The current pandemic has definitely brought a new opportunity for each and every country to get back on track and revitalize their circumstances being faced since the past. As regards USA which is moving ahead towards its presidential election in the month of November is uncertain about the re-election of Mr Trump, but no one can forget the unilateral decisions that POTUS has taken every moment keeping ahead the slogan “AMERICA FIRST” or promoting protectionism against globalization is quite similar to Xi administration policies depicting “CHINA FIRST“. The USA will have to rethink over its past decisions and should progress ahead with multilateral dialogues. US administration should consider its allies before taking universally bothered decisions instead of facilitating it unilaterally.

Experiencing from the past actions of the USA like moving out from “Climate Change Mitigation Agreement” or “Withdrawal from JCPOA” would make other countries to think twice before getting allied and these points should be given thought upon by the POTUS with a further expectation demanding global support against China’s unilateralism.

If the vision of new G10 or G11(Indonesia may be invited in the new formation of G7) becomes a reality then it would look like an altered version of G20 yet with great importance. The next summit would be a second time that India under the leadership of PM Modi would show its presence. Last year French President Emanuel Macron had invited PM Modi to the summit. Prior to this PM Manmohan Singh had represented India in five successive G8 summits. Primarily, seat at the ‘high table’ for India would be a great platform to keep its foreign policy and security concerned interests as well as for its backing to confirm a permanent seat in UNSC along with a global consensus for its inclusion in the nuclear club. India’s dominance in the Indian Ocean would also get a global agreement to promote free trade in the region.

The affirmed mouthpiece of Chinese government ‘Global Times’ have lately warned India to refrain from getting into a proposed invitation in the G7 summit claiming it to be a “small circle that perceives China as an imaginary enemy”. Unlike a ping pong ball, being hitten from both the sides, New Delhi should take a pragmatic decision before allying with any of the bodies or nations. It should keep its neighbouring policies under consideration, as we see the ongoing tussle between India and China near LAC may have an undesired repercussions post-pro-G7 resolution, though firm decisions are always welcomed keeping India’s interest ahead.

The post WIDENING G7: ARE DEMOCRACIES ALLYING TOGETHER? appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The US has been importing crude oil from 1915-1932. But the country was still a “net exporter” because the export of refined products exceeded the crude oil imports. But after the second world war, the US consumption outpaced production again and in 1947 they became a “net importer” again. Until 1955 the US produced more than 50% of the world’s entire oil production. And until 1964 they remained the largest oil producer, but then the Middle East took over. At around 1984 the US oil production was about 18% of the total world production.

The oil industry: Recent history & OPEC

In 1950 the Middle East produced around 1.8 million barrels of oil per day (mmbbl/d), that was about 17% of the world’s production. And this increased to 5.2 mmbbl/d in 1960, by then around 24% of the world production. To protect its own oil industry, the US introduced mandatory import quotas which limited the imports of the Middle East crude oil. This kept the oil price in the US sort of constant, but “non-US crude oil” decreased in value since a major part of their market (the US) was inaccessible due to the quotas.

And as an answer to this, the OPEC (Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries) was formed in 1960 by 5 major oil-exporting countries: Venezuela, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq.

In 1970 the US relaxed its import quotas. And after the Yom Kippur war of 1973, in which the price of oil went up significantly, the developments in oil prices were relatively stable after 1974. Oil prices where high and this made it attractive to explore and develop oil areas that were not of economic interest in the past. As a result, major investments were made in new oil areas in Alaska, Mexico and the North Sea. And these areas started to produce oil by the end of the 70s. This resulted again in a large decrease in OPEC production after 1977 as a result of these new areas. Btw, OPEC produced in 1977 the high amount of 31.3 mmbbl/d.

Concerning oil prices, the Iranian Revolution drove the spot price of OPEC oil to 25 USD bbl in 1979. And this resulted in another round of oil price increases to over 40 USD bbl. But these price increases were poorly timed because world demand was falling and many new oil fields outside OPEC were getting more and more operational. Then mild winters in 1982 and 1982 in Western Europe resulted in even more oversupply, and oil-importing countries did not need to buy the expensive OPEC oil anymore. This resulted in that OPEC production was about 15 mmbbl/d in 1985, less than half of its production in 1977 (31.3 mmbbl/d, as mentioned). This had a severe effect on oil prices, and when in 1986 OPEC production went to 18 mmbbl/d the price collapsed to below 10 USD bbl. And since 1986 OPEC attempts to maintain the oil price at the level of the full cost of non-OPEC supply.

The oil companies: Standard Oil

Most of the big oil companies had their origins in the US when the “Drake Oil Field” was found in 1859 in Pennsylvania. The first big company formed was then “Standard Oil” with the financing of John D. Rockefeller. By the end of the 1870s, over 90% of all kerosene was passing through standard oil’s facilities. The company got so big that the whole company “Standard Oil Trust”; consisting out of Standard Oil New Jersey, Standard Oil Ohio etc. etc., needed to be divided. The US supreme court ordered this in 1911.

And the main oil companies as we know (knew) them were formed out of Standard Oil:

• Standard Oil of New Jersey became: Exxon;
• Standard Oil of New York became: Mobil (before merger Exxon);
• Standard Oil of California became: Chevron;
• Standard Oil of Ohio became: Sohio (before taken over by BP);
• Standard Oil of Indiana became: Amoco (before taken over by BP);
• Continental Oil became: Conoco;
• Atlantic Oil became: Sun Oil.

The oil companies: Royal Dutch & Shell Group

Despite early US dominance of the oil industry, there was another major player at the beginning of the 1900s.

The company was Royal Dutch Shell with a background in two companies:

• Royal Dutch;
• Shell Transport & Trading.

Shell Transport & Trading was set up late 1800 by Marcus Samuel, and the company transported kerosene in large quantities to the far eastern market. And Royal Dutch had its origins in the “Dutch East Indies” where for several years oil seepages had been reported. By 1892 Royal Dutch was producing oil with a crazy growth (sixfold increase) in only two years of time. By around 1900 there were takeover attempts of Standard Oil. And in order to resist this Royal Dutch and Shell Transport & Trading merged in 1907. So at the time of this merger in 1907, the oil market was dominated by Standard Oil and Royal Dutch Shell.

In the next blog in this sequence, I will continue by talking about the other companies in the oil industry. And I will discuss oil reserves and production.

And later all the other aspects of valuating these oil companies will be discussed in this sequence of blogs:

• The market for oil;
• Accounting issues for oil companies;
• Valuating “Oil exploration and production companies”;
• Valuating “Integrated oil companies”.

The post VALUATING OIL & GAS COMPANIES: THE OIL INDUSTRY appeared first on WISER WORLD.