Fareed Zakaria’s "The Post American World" serves as a sobering disclosure of the Emerging World Order. This notion works in contrast to G.H. Bush’s New World Order- asserting a post-cold war era in which the US acts as the lone superpower. The Emerging World Order however, depicts a multipolar power spectra. "The Post American World" makes clear the fact that the US was “dealt a pretty good hand.” A hand squandered by the missteps of the Bush administration, and an American public who re-elected the regime in 2004. Zakaria recalls how the US, from 2000-2008, “managed to destroy decades of international goodwill, alienate allies, and emboldened enemies while solving few of the international problems we face.” Regardless of the US’s dim-witted behavior exhibit during the Bush-era, Zakaria sculpts a globe of waning American influence not purely on the grounds of incompetence, but as a consequence of the “rise of the rest.” Zakaria navigates the cause and nature of the “rise of the rest,” while asserting that the US has not realized how much the rest has risen.
The “rest,” as Zakaria explains, are the rapidly developing economies spurred by the relatively, recent capitalization of strengths in the service and manufacturing sectors. We’re talking about the economies of India and China. Zakaria spends the fourth and fifth chapters discussing these emerging nations at length.
Zakaria’s unveiling of China is somewhat shocking when taken holistically. Viewing the ‘awakening giant’ on a five thousand year timeline, China is on a gradual, yet tactful path to superpower status. It appears that China is taking it time, and remains somewhat resistant to draw too much attention to itself and stand out too much. This notion is exhibited in China’s non-combative foreign policy. China is inwardly focused and does find reason in evangelizing other nations. China does not feel the need to help others solve their problems. Amid this shyness, Zakaria notes that China cannot help but to be forced to play a larger role in global diplomacy as its economy continues to grow at its thirty year historic rate between seven and ten percent. When discussing the decline of America’s economic influence, it is critical to note that the US should not see China as a threat. China’s rise is simply a statement in fact that as national economies grow, the global economic pie must shift. This shift rebalances economic percentages from the old to the emerging. As Zakaria notes, “China operates on so large a scale that it can’t help changing the nature of the game.”
One of my few complaints of Zakaria when discussing China was the manner in which he glossed over China’s relations in Africa, specifically Darfur. Although, Zakaria was approaching the circumstances objectively, I felt he gave too much credence to the Chinese perspective on its dealings with a regime that is committing genocide. Zakaria, however, was very blunt in stating that China’s greatest weakness is its fear of social unrest.
Zakaria’s discussion of India was honest and insightful. Born in Mumbai, Zakaria does not flinch to speak critically and admirably of his country of origin. Zakaria emphasized India’s diversity. He sees both strengths and weakness in this diversity. The commingling of people with different traditions and ideas obviously breeds a culture that is vibrant and multifaceted. However, Zakaria writes that this diversity creates strong regionalism in India’s political process. The consequence of this is that national politics are defined by the pursuit of regional interests as opposed to national. Zakaria is quite definitive when emphasizing India’s strengths and how they appeal to the business community. India has a stable justice system. There is established rule of law, defined private property rights, and independent courts that enforce contracts. Zakaria makes no mistake in referencing the magnitude and growth of India’s private sector. He also makes firm India’s competitive advantage of a English speaking public who works hard while exhibiting superb business skills.
Zakaria is not necessarily hard on the US, even though he is very matter-of-fact about its recent failures. Zakaria brings light to a previously asserted statistic that “China produces 600,000 engineers a year, India 350,000 and the United States only 70,000.” This, however, is only true if you include auto mechanics and industrial repairman. In fact, Zakaria states, “the US actually trains more engineers per capita than either India or China does.” Zakaria also points out that the US has an extreme competitive advantage in its higher education. He states, “With 5 percent of the world’s population, the United States absolutely dominates higher education, having either 42 or 68 percent of the world’s top 50 universities.” Zakaria is also optimistic when predicting the US’s position in the emerging world order. He still views the US as a preferable director in multilateral affairs to China even if the Chinese economy surpasses that of the US. Zakaria essentially states that the US is not going to be kicked to the curb by the emerging world order; it simply needs to adapt and adjust its worldview. Closing with text from page 44 that reinforces this view, “…that will be possible only if Washington can show that it is willing to allow other countries to become stakeholders in the new order. In today's international order, progress means compromise. No country will get its way entirely.”
Friday, December 11, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Long-term Calamity vs. Short-sighted Denialists
As US politicians on the right stumble over each other to massage themselves with Bush-era glee in response to the ‘Climategate scandal’ erupting from the Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia, the ‘great water tower of Asia’ continues its relatively speedy recession. The glaciers of the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau span across the borders of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and China. Each spring, the glacial thaw births the mightiest river system in the world: the Ganges, the Indus, the Brahmaputra, the Mekong, the Yellow, and the Yangtze. Together, these rivers give material and spiritual sustenance to 3 billion people, nearly half of the world's population (Walsh). Since 1960, the great water tower of Asia has lost nearly 20% of its glacial volume. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the glaciers in the Himalayas are "receding faster than at any other place in the world." Keep in mind that the IPCC assertion that, “the climate has warmed in recent decades and that this warming is likely attributable to human influence” has been endorsed by every national science academy that has issued a statement on climate change, including the science academies of all major industrialized countries( Krosnick).
Recently, China and India have pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in acknowledgment of the long-term risk both countries face with respect to global warming. Days before the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit, India promised to cut the ratio of greenhouse gases pollution to production by 20 to 25 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. China pledged weeks ago to commit to a 40 to 45 percent reduction in carbon intensity from 2005 levels over the next decade (Cappiello). It is important to note that no pledge-enforcement mechanism has been agreed upon at this time.
As expected, pundits from Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal (WSJ) mocked India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s efforts to curb global warming. Shikha Dalmia, in his December 2nd 2009 WSJ article titled, “Emissions Cuts Would Cost India Dearly,” laments the notion of new energy efficiency standards in building codes, new fuel economy standards for vehicles, and the establishment of a national renewable portfolio standard of 20%. Dalmia goes on to write, “The increased expense will put homes, air conditioning and cars out of reach of more Indians—all of which will make them, especially the poor, less able to withstand floods, heat waves and other dire effects of global warming should they ever materialize.”
This year Chinese researchers projected a 43% decrease in glaciated area in the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau by 2070 (Walsh). The loss of Himalayan meltwater places three of the world’s nuclear powers on a collision course for severe resource competition. Following Shika Dalmia’s logic, India would be better served by a substantial increase in its nuclear stockpile and military capability than by taking preemptive steps to slow the loss of Asia’s great water tower.
Works Cited:
Dalmia, Shikha. "Emissions Cuts Would Cost India Dearly." Business News & Financial News - The Wall
Krosnick, Jon A. "Global warming controversy -." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Web. 05 Dec. 2009.
Walsh, Bryan. "Climate Change: The Tragedy of the Himalayas - COP15: Climate-Change Conference –TIME." TIME.com. Web. 05 Dec. 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)