Recession in US Economy!

Penblunt & Hogwash

Television that people deserve

Pinaki has threatened to suspend my column from his blog because I am not taking care to keep in mind that a blog is a universal platform.

He accuses that I am indulging in too much of Indianness… Indian idioms, phrases, characters, analogies, situations… none of which have any universal context and hence is so much gibberish for the international reader.

As a failed author, I had never thought, or realised that I would have an international readership when readers back home have shunned me… rather my publisher has decided that I am not good enough for them, so I may be excused for forgetting that.

But I can only write the way I can, which is poor, but nevertheless can’t help that, can I? So the only recourse left is to provide contextual information as footnotes, as stopping midway and doing that in parenthesis disturbs the thought flow of a puerile intellect.

I have been dwelling (duelling, as well) on the issue of the (Indian) Broadcast Bill, with Gabbar Singh*¹ the Indian minister for information & broadcasting facing off with the broadcasters, who insist that they are mature enough not to breach laws on privacy, obscenity and so forth….

… and in the same breath, do so by showing a former starlet bathing in the nude in a jail bathroom…. What a scoop it was my countrymen! What a mature piece of journalism.

So what was the news in that show? Well,: a jailer had used a spycam to shoot this starlet while she was in jail for terrorism-related charges, and while she was bathing, and this jailer had been suspended.

The justification was that by showing the footage, the news channel would be Breaking News as to well this is the footage for which the jailer had been suspended.

The channel can even go the extent of claiming it was trying to help the criminal justice procedure by showing the footage before the jailer, or a bribed police official did not damage the tape or destroy it!

Well, Gabbar Singh and the broadcasters met last week and well, Gabbar hid his famous pistol under his belt over his pot belly and said: Well, we are with the media and for the media but the media must not maximise profit in the name of freedom of expression.

That is what the media has been doing here in India, the budding ‘soft’ super power, the rising intellectual Sphinx straddling the world from measly BPO units and calling that a knowledge-based economy!

The point is what can you expect when the basis of India’s new found pride is standing on loose gravel? That loose gravel has been created by the political class, which has fostered caste politics, communal partisanism, mythical economic rise, raising hoodlums and murderers to the pedestal of parliamentarians!

Gabbar Singh can shout now, but the media of a country, like its rulers, is what the country deserves.

There are these channels, you know, which pretend to be holier than some others because they also show ‘meaningful’ programmes sometimes, as against those who show ghosts, humans becoming snakes, women beating their husbands in courts with rubber slippers, and so forth.

They say that ‘those other channels’ are ruining business and are fretting and fearing that popular choice swinging the way of ‘those other channels’ the big spenders in the ad world may swing that way too.

These holy channels say that the claims of ‘those other channels’ that the latter are giving what the people are demanding is not true, that the people are being fed rubbish as news and are getting sucked into an environment where rubbish becomes news.

I have been asking these holy channels, why don’t you go for a survey, and find out really how many such people actually watch this as news and how many flip through as a matter of curiosity.

They have not been forthcoming in taking up the offer, so what is the way out?

The only way out for them is now to side with the government and bring in a Code of Conduct for the news channels which would restrict such ghost-rape-human as snake-cow-eating-dog bits as news. Not to speak of starlets bathing in the nude inside jails.

That is where the holy channels face a dilemma, or what is called in one of the Indian languages, Hindi, as a dharamsankat, a crisis of conscience.

What is that dharamsankat?

First, it would amount to dog eat dog meat, because, after all, those other channels are also news channels, so what will the world say?

Secondly, if you gave the government an inch and it started taking miles, and someday impose such severe restrictions that stifles democracy?

Rubbish.

It was only once, during the reign of late Indira Gandhi, former prime minister that for a short period of two years, the government of India had imposed severe press curbs. Once in 60 years of independent India.

India being now the cynosure of world eyes, with the second largest democratic economy, as against the much larger but fettered economy of China, Indian governments in ages to come would not dare to do any such thing.

It is not the decade old Indian news TV industry that is mature, it is the Indian polity that more mature.

The simple truth is, Indian news TV guys are not clear which way to take their content so as to maximise profit, so each one wants to keep all doors open.

For them democracy and rights means, we shall do what we want on TV screens, and we shall fight within ourselves… the government will only be allowed to sit in the gallery and watch a country being taken down a colossal content sewerage pipe!

Footnote:

*¹ Gabbar Singh is a film character from what is called an evergreen Indian film, Sholay, in which he is a bandit and goes about terrorising common people. The reference is to the Indian information and broadcasting minister (legitimately; but in a roughshod manner) brining one cricket channel and several others to their knees in the recent year.

In My View

More things change…

More things change, the more people feel that it would remain the same. Listening recently to Ralph A Cossa of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Pacific Forum brief a group of American journalists, one could not fail to have that sentiment. He made life in the years ahead seem so easy: “In all likelihood the GOP (for the uninitiated, that’s the Republican Party) would return to power in 2008.” China would show its fangs soon to Taiwan and they would fall in line. North Korea is about finding the right price. The list of good times ahead is endless.

But what took the cake was this: Imagine Chinese economy losing momentum causing deep social crisis in the country, “And you would have 100 million Chinese boat-people crossing over,” he said. Visions of ‘Yellow Peril’ and 1890s USA could not have been very comfortable for the assembled American, so one of them asked a rather pertinent question, ‘why should there be 100 million Chinese boat-people.’ Pat came the reply, “When I talk about China, I multiply the normal by the magnitude of 10.”

Let us take each of these statements about North East Asia individually and examine them for their validity. China can and has shown its fangs to Taiwan earlier. But this is also a China that is becoming conscious about its heightened international image, with or without the Beijing Olympics. It has shown that in its new African endeavour.

A little aside could better reflect the position of Taiwan on its rocky relations with China and its dependence on the USA for its ‘independent’ existence. In a discussion on the ‘US as Empire’ at the East West Centre, Hawai’i the other week, when everyone from the South East Asia region and South Asia had reached a consensus that the world was worse off with America as an imperial power, the ball had reached a young girl from Taiwan who also happened to be an official of the international department of the ruling Democratic Progress Party.

With her usual Asian humility, but speaking firmly, she had talked about the failures of the USA as an ally in upholding the interests of Taiwan. While her frustration at Washington’s failure to look after a World War ally was clearly evident, she was told in public rather abruptly the next day that there was only one China. Taiwan’s predicament was evident even then. So when the Pacific Forum chief of the CSIS tells American journalists that Beijing would show its gritted teeth soon across the Straits, it takes an all the more different meaning. But do all dramas need to follow the script?

On the North Korean nuclear issue, for example, the Chinese have shown a high degree of pragmatism. They have successfully acted in ways that have pleased all parties. The deal with the US that Beijing facilitated got Kim Jong Ill the cash he desired; but kept him away from substantive contacts with Washington; and helped George W Bush Administration to put out a nuclear proliferation brush fire, thus leaving it hanging from a thin thread tied to the nuclear non-proliferation rod.

The confusion in American mind about China’s economic growth rate is evident in Dr Cossa’s statements. Because the neo-liberal economists cannot fathom how a country can grow at ten per cent for more than a decade. For them growths come in spurts as every high growth period is followed by a demand recession as prices rise and supplies reach over capacity. That may well be the case with smaller populations with high degrees of inequality.

But China – as India could be – is different. The first key to that lies in the depth of the country’s population. And the second, the wider diffusion of income amongst the lower strata that continuously fuels demand, possibly lies at the root of the Chinese success.

Of course, inequality is rising in China. That is the reason Hu Jintao, the Chinese leader had to talk about building a ‘harmonious society,’ during a one of the party plenums. But for that inequality to cause a severe overheating – because of too much of money in too few hands – of the Chinese economy would take a while. But yes, a good insurance against such an eventuality would be to free up the socio-political space as in allowing the labour to negotiate their employment conditions.

But being outside – even if for a short period - looking in, does help one to understand one’s own country better. So when fellow Indian colleagues talk apolitically about what they cherish about the country, one realises how much we complain about our own. For example, it may soon be a case in India when out-station cheques would be credited into a bank account in a couple of days if the Reserve Bank of India decides to implement its pilot projects nationwide. In the USA, it takes six days for the same to happen!

Another tailpiece, an exposition on Indo-US relations delivered by an Indian foreign office official posted here began with how India was the first country in the world where a communist party was elected to government! One almost thought, are times changing even in South Block?

Pinaki Bhattacharya, currently located in Kolkata, is a Special Correspondent with the Mathrubhum, Kerala. He writes on Strategic Security issues. He can be contacted at pinaki63@dataone.in . He is presently in Hawai’i, the USA at the East West Centre as a Student Fellow of the Asia Pacific Leadership Programme of the Centre.

A Conversation with Tomo from Mongolia

BatUlzii Molomjamts (Tomo) is a truly globalist citizen of a country that has, for most part, remained on the wrong side of a news blackout. People of the world know so little of Mongolia that Ulan Bator (the capital of Mongolia) remains a lost city on many maps. Much of that stems from its geographical dice rolling in a curious way and placing it, almost askance, between Russia and China! When I met Tomo about a month ago during his and my sabbatical from our jobs to the Eact West Centre, Hawai'i, the USA, I found in him a sharp, educated mind wedded to the fortunes of his country. In his short life of 29 years, he has served at the President's office in Mongolia and at Moscow as a Foreign Exchange trader. I really had a tough time deciding which was a more risky high trapeze game. So I chose, instead, the easier route of interviewing him for this blog. Here goes the same:

Tomo: My name is Tomo BatUlzii

Pinaki: Give us a primer on the history of Mongolia since you were born in '80s

Tomo: During the 1980s, Mongolia was under the direct rule of the Soviet Union, although the country itself was an independent; and a member of the UN. After Gorbachev's Perestroika, we experienced the same as other former Soviet allies, a velvet revolution in 1991, which brought down the Communist regime. In 1992 we had our first free election and 1996 Democratic Coaltion came to power which once again completely brought down the Communists. However in 2000, unfortunately, the Communist party came to power.

PB: Go on pls...

TB: That is all about politics. When it comes to economics then it is a bit another story. Many people - those who visited Mongolia in the mid 1990s - argue that Mongolia was a such poor country...... However what should we expect from a country that has experienced severe economic crisis in the mid 1990s, when the inflation was 67% per year and the GDP per person was about 500 USD. However since 1996 the economic condition in the country, slowly but surely, is improving due to the effective economic reforms conducted by the Mongolian Government and partly due to the high prices of copper which is the main source of Mongolian export revenue. Since 2000 the country is experiencing 7-8% of Economic growth, now GDP per person according to the World Bank database is about 2000 USD which is not much but much better than it was 1990s. What else?

PB: What do young people like you and your friend's think about the Communist days?

TB: It is a kind of difficult question however young people like myself in my country we often call ourselves Pepsi generation generally have positive thinking and attitude towards our Communist past. For example personally i believe that the Soviet Union did a lot to improve the economic situation in our country ranging from the construction of the main Mongolian Industries to the improvement of ordinary people's life like massive education (99% of the Mongolian population is literate). In terms of security the Soviet did a lot also for the country first of all securing the most volatile part of our border with China and provided military munitions. It is believed that the Soviet Union generally spent about 11 billion USD in Mongolia.

PB: But Tomo, you did not have national sovereignty at the time of Soviet domination; lacked civil liberties, and had to act as the buffer nation between two giant neighbours, the Soviet Union and China...That could not have helped your national interests?

TB: That is true. Ok.. however let me be clear we did not have civil liberties, we did not have enough sovereignty to act on the global stage and we were a buffer zone between Soviets and Chinese. But what we did have was an independence from brutal China and most importantly economic development, gradual rise of the population (our population declined severely because of the Chinese ethnic cleansing) and demarcated border. That was the most important thing for our country and for our leadership at that time.

PB: What do you mean by Chinese 'ethnic cleansing?' How have the Chinese treated your country?

TB: when I say ethnic cleansing I mean deliberate physical execution of the Mongolian people by Chinese occupiers and subsequent attempt to Chinaise the entire population of Mongolia. It was estimated that before the brutal, military-led and illegal occupation of our country by China our population was about 6-8 million people. However when we gained our independence in 1921 a subsequent census revealed that our population was merely 1.5 million people. I can just describe Chinese treatment of the Mongolian People in one word- Brutality.

PB: That was pre-Communist, imperial China, Tomo, imbued with the sense of Middle Kingdom. Isn't it?

TB: Not sure what do you mean?

PB: What i mean is that the leaders of the "brutal" Chinese occupation you referred to were imperialists of the pre-communist times. Weren't they?

BM: Yes they were however we should not forget that history repeats itself. Current Chinese Leaders are not very different from their ancestors. The founding father of the Mongolian nation Chinggis Khaan once said that Mongolia will never have a normal relationship with China and always beware of it whatever nice things it does. Thus it is in our blood to be extremely suspicious of China whatever it tries to be.

PB: Yes...but the Mongols themselves did not exactly treat the rest of the world with great compassion when they were marauders...isn't it? How do you view your own history? Do you share the sense of greatness that Chengiz Khan had created?

TB: I do not agree with you and it seems it is highly inappropriate to use the word and meaning of marauders. Because we should not forget that there are not any substantial evidences that would support the claim that Mongols killed millions and were marauders. Lets be honest Mongolian Empire which lasted 200 years did a lot of good things for the World History. Mongolian empire united Russian Principles which laid the foundation of the Russian Empire and Mongols for the first time in History united Chinese as a one state. Mongolian empire for the first time introduced the paper money and secured the trading roads between East and West. I do share the greatness created by our founding father. What he did was tremendous and completely altered not just Mongolian history, but the history of the Eurasia.

PB: Well, from an Indian perpective, we at the receiving end of repeated Mongol invasions did no really have the happy experience that you enunciate. So in modern perspectives, how do you expect the Mongolians to prove as worthy ancestors of Chengiz Khan?

TB: I think in India there was a state known as MOGUL whose founder was closely related to Chinghis Khaan. What do you mean worthy? Could you clarify the question?

PB: In India, a great Muslim empire was formed in 1400s that was called the Mughal empire, which was really of Central Asian orgin with strains of Mongol ancestry...What I mean by the question whether the new generation of Mongolians have a belief that they need to live up to the greatness that Chengiz Khan had achieved in his lifetime? How does that shape their worldview?

TB: In modern Mongolia... and the younger generation no doubt worship Chinggis Khaan and it is also a part of the Mongolian Government strategy that younger people should not forget its history. For example in our country we have products known as Chinggis Khan, airports, restaraunts, casinos to baby names as Temuujin (real name of Chinggis Khaan). Also if you visit Mongolia you would find our Government Palace surrounded by 9 Great Mongolian Khan's monuments from Chinggis to Khubilai. Without Chinggis Khan we can not imagine ourselves as a nation. Because he was the founder of Mongolia. However we also do understand that it would be wrong to be very much obsessed with our History and more focus on the economic development of the nation because without economic development and prosperity at the end of the day - how great the Mongolian Empire was - does not make much difference in an age of Globalization.

PB: From that perspective, you had earlier described the return of the Communists to power as "unfortunate." Considering that you worked in the office of one such President, what do you feel about the ideology?

TB: When I mentioned about the unfortunate return of the communists in 2000 I was thinking about my perspective. what I am trying to argue is that at that time I belonged to one financial group within the Communist party, however in 2000 another financial group from the same party came to power. Thus i said unfortunate. To be honest it is difficult to say it was a communist party it looks more like a party of the financial oligarchs where ideology does not make any difference.. In Mongolian Politics there is no ideology at all. As long as you share the common business interests.

Pinaki Bhattacharya[3:20:37 PM]: So is the public sector totally dominated by these oligarchs?

TB: Yes, There are 3 and 4 Huge Financial Oligarchs in my country which totally control the Mongolian Politics and completely marginalized not only public sector but most importantly made public very reluctant to participate in politics

PB: And they call themselves Communists? So where do you see your country going in the next couple of decades or so? I know you want transformation for your country. What kind of transformation should that be?

TB: They actually call themselves social democrats. In my perspective Mongolia is in a right direction in terms of its economic and political developments. The interesting thing about these oligarchs is that they are not only interested in their own well beings but also bring economic development, good governance and more or less economic prosperity. As a result we are witnessing stable economic development and political stability, which encourages MNCs to invest into Mongolian Mining sector and processing industries. As of my personal point of view than i would like to see my country not a country with parliamentary system but more with the unlimited power of the president and managed democracy the same as we have currently in Russia

PB: And how do you foresee the region...Do you expect that a regional formation involving Russia-China-India would help Central Asia and Eurasia to stabilise, curbing individual interests to a more a accomodative approach?

TB: That is not going to happen. Triple alliance between Russia-China- India is complete nonsense and impossible. Too many vested interests, too much suspicion between them. Russia has an excellent relationship with China because it wants to contain US in the world and increase its profile, while China has more economic interests with Russia in particular energy. About Russia and India, then let's be honest; Russia has difficulties with Pakistan and India is a huge military market for Russia. As of China and India then there is a huge gap of mutual trust between these countries. As of my perspective about Asia Pacific then i am very much convinced that the US presence in the region is the only stabilizing force whatever other countries say about it. In my opinion in 30 years time there will be NATO like military alliance in the region consisting of Japan, US, Mongolia, Australia, Taiwan and other countries which primary goal will be to contain increasing China and possible oil fired, Russia. Finally we should be bear in mind the fact that nation states whatever happens always would push forward their national interests.

PB: Tomo, you are a student of economics and a foreign exchange trader. How long do you think the USA can continue to appropriate the savings of other nations for its own current expenditure, thus artificially retaining the value of the dollar all because it was the victorious power of the WW II and thus could create an economic structure that served its and its Western allies' interests? Also, is dollar truly as valuable and solid as Gold as Charles Morrison of the East West Centre said the other day?

TB: Last week during our BRIC Discussion Group we discussed about this issue. Why so many countries heavily invest into the US and thus artificially retain the value of the USD. The answer was rather simple because despite all of its problems the US economy and US Treasury bonds remain the safe haven for the Global Investors. As a matter of fact I could not help thinking the same because as a man who works in the Investment Bank I think there is not any other way in the short term to invest into the US economy. The recent problems in the US sub prime problems (mortgage loans) once again substantiated that point. In other words many investors when they felt the uncertainty in the global financial market the first thing what they did was to start buying the US Treasury bonds and heavily sell the bonds of other countries. As for your second question then I do not think that in the foreseeable future there will be another alternative currency that would completely reshape the global finance. You may argue how about EURO, GBP however despite their significance they still remain regional currencies. Since we can not predict what will happen in future however it seems to me that we can not rule out the possbility of the gradual decline of the USD in the global transactions. Finally I am not sure about whether the USD retains the same value as gold. To some extent it is 'no' (as it was after the 2ww)

PB: Don't you feel that the US economy is inherently weak because of its huge current account deficit, its trillion dollar fiscal deficit, low economic growth levels? Can this kind of an economy maintain an international economic architecture for very long? After all, isn't there a limit to its ability to exploit the resources of other economies for its own financial/capitalist gains

TB: I have to stress your questions are highly provocative. Anyway, yes, indeed the US economy is rather weak, however in the short term i mean in the next 20-30 years we should not worry much about it, however in the long term the current US economic development is highly unsustainable. I wonder what would happen if China, Russia, Brazil, India, EU states stop buying the UST bonds and thus subsidising the US economy on the one hand. However on the other hand once again in the short term many countries simply have no choice rather than maintain US economy because heavy expenditure of the FOREX reserves would simply ignite hyperinflation and possible collapse of their economies.

PB: Tell us the secret of your success? I know your father is a small merchant in Mongolia. You obviously belong to a normal middle class family. How did you end up at the President's office?

TB: May be my family background helped me much. In particular my grandmother (she is a Japanese) and my father always pushed me hard to succeed when I was young. Generally speaking there is no magic formula which pushed me up. However I believe that the route to your success is the non stop working and learning as much as you can and respect your seniors. As of the of the Office of the president than I was just lucky enough to know the person who belonged to the inner circle of the previous president and he asked me to join the office as an intern at first (after passing exams) and than get a full time job there.

PB: Thank you very much for sparing your time to do this interview, Tomo.

Seed of Creation

Penblunt & Hogwash

Cup of Excesses Runneth over

Penblunt

Monica Bedi… sexy woman…. Don’s moll... sexy doll….

The broadcasters have done themselves in this time… the field is open for Gabbar The Great, our venerable I&B minister PRDM to shoot them down.

Monica Bedi… had I had her! Just one first but long time…. God! God! Where art… not Thou, but She!

I had been swinging like a pendulum in favour of and against the TV news Content Code, which the government has been pushing for and the broadcasters resisting.

Running with the hare, I felt often that broadcasters were right: this is an infringement of rights to freedom of expression. And yet, hunting with the hound, I also saw the government’s point of view that regulation was needed.

Monica Bedi… fantastic fantasy….

The Great Gabbar, I have been saying over the said past two weeks, would swoop down on the channels if they did not behave, but then, the channels felt that with crucial polls around, the government would not dare to annoy them.

1975… Emergency has been forgotten, obviously.

And so did it happen. The government first said: “Well children, if you do not want our Content Code, tell us about your Content Code.”

The media said: Seek and Thou Shalt Find! But wait… we are thinking of our Code.

Just imagine Monica Bedi in a swim suit, just a teat-illating thready thing…

The media sensed blood, that the government was scared!

Then PRDM alias Gabbar Singh in Shastri, who has been threatening to meet the broadcasters one last time over the broadcast Bill and Code, dropped the idea, and the channel guys felt, well… there goes the coward bully.

Monica Bedi in the nude?

Could you imagine?

The channels told the government that they were preparing their own Code, which would be based on self-regulation… decency, morality, culture, privacy would be maintained… the crass the crude and the ugly would be out.

Are you still trying to imagine Monica Bedi in the nude, hey?

You don’t need to… she was there, and if you have missed the show, ask for the archives of Zee News and she will be there, bathing but not like Mandakini in Ram Teri Ganga Mailee Ho Gayee song and dance of Satyam Shivam Sundaram film… with at least a white wet saree wrapped around her hot wet breasts.

Here was Monica Bedi, a Don’s moll and object of desire for lakhs, giving excitement to millions over the Zee News channel show, bathing, inside a jail, fully naked, no scope for imagination, Boss.

Don’t believe this? Her nude movie was shot in a Maharashtra jail and the jailer suspended, but Zee News bought the tape and ran it all day on August 23, and the next day, the Supreme Court of the country had to clamp down, restricting all channels especially Zee News, as the Court said, from going on air with the piece of ‘sting-king’ journalism.

What a shame!

I really did not believe it, but when I asked a friend who works for a media-related portal, he said, “F**k man, my office has been calling me every minute for a reaction from Zee… it is true boss!”

Honestly, I never felt I missed the show. Imagination and fantasy is still personal, but the nude pictures of a woman trapped inside a jail, a voyeur’s victim… it was nauseating.

And Zee felt it was news.

“So what did Zee tell you? Did they defend their show?” I asked the scribe.

“Nope, they ran… they said that there are certain things on which comments may not be given, and this was one such case.”

I wonder what the TV news channels will now say.

This is self-regulation? This is being aware of Indian cultural context?

The channels had said that they do not want a copy of Ofcom, the famously strict regulations of the British broadcasting media, because, of course, one cultural context was different from another, and the matrix was variant, and the paradigms were not the same and hence, Ofcom would not be of use in India.

So what would they have instead?

“We are working, we told you, can’t you wait? Is it a child’s play to bring about a Code in a market that has 130 news TV channels?” they may turn around and say.

But no, they did not say anything. Neither the editors, nor the body called News Broadcasters Association once condemned the channel that had crossed over to breaking all laws, not just norms of decency, and calling this a Breaking News.

I am not longer with the hare, sorry.

I have finally made up my mind. I am with the hound and chasing the hare. I want to bark and catch the hare at the first false step it takes and throw him to the hound.

This is Indian news TV world, where people want licence in the name of freedom, considers illegal activity as being anti-establishment, demands rights for themselves as an instrument for destroying the rights of others and says it is mature enough to regulate itself!

I spit on the graves of such channels!