Harvard professor´s cosy relationship with Gaddafi

                                              Nye: "Tall and handsome"

Harvard professor Joseph S. Nye Jr. (of "soft power" fame) had this to say about Libya´s dictator in 2007:

How serious was Qaddafi about exercising soft power? And just how different was this new Qaddafi--with his preference for diplomacy over weapons--from the old? On a cool February morning, a car whisked me to a compound in the middle of Tripoli that was fortified with multiple layers of green metal gates. Inside the gates stood several large tents. Qaddafi greeted me at the entrance to one. He wore his trademark hat as well as two cloaks--an outer black embroidered one, and a plain tan one underneath. He was both tall and handsome in a craggy sort of way. He moved with ease and spoke softly. Occasionally, he used English, but he was clearly more comfortable speaking Arabic with an interpreter. We sat in plastic chairs by a table on which five of my books were spread out--including Soft Power. Sure enough, a half hour into our conversation, he asked how Libya might increase its soft power on the world stage.

Read the entire 2007 article published in The New Republic in here.

What is interesting is that when Nye wrote the article, he did not disclose that he had travelled to Libya as a paid consultant of the Monitor Group, a firm working for the Gaddafi regime:

In February 2007 Harvard professor Joseph Nye Jr., who developed the concept of "soft power," visited Libya and sipped tea for three hours with Muammar Qaddafi. Months later, he penned an elegant description of the chat for The New Republic, reporting that Qaddafi had been interested in discussing "direct democracy." Nye noted that "there is no doubt that" the Libyan autocrat "acts differently on the world stage today than he did in decades past. And the fact that he took so much time to discuss ideas—including soft power—with a visiting professor suggests that he is actively seeking a new strategy." The article struck a hopeful tone: that there was a new Qaddafi. It also noted that Nye had gone to Libya "at the invitation of the Monitor Group, a consulting company that is helping Libya open itself to the global economy."

Nye did not disclose all. He had actually traveled to Tripoli as a paid consultant of the Monitor Group (a relationship he disclosed in an email to Mother Jones), and the firm was working under a $3 million-per-year contract with Libya. Monitor, a Boston-based consulting firm with ties to the Harvard Business School, had been retained, according to internal documents obtained by a Libyan dissident group, not to promote economic development, but "to enhance the profile of Libya and Muammar Qadhafi." So The New Republic published an article sympathetic to Qaddafi that had been written by a prominent American intellectual paid by a firm that was being compensated by Libya to burnish the dictator's image.

Read the entire article in the Mother Jones magazine here.

PS

Harvard professors - or at least one of them -  apparently are not anymore the kind of intellectual giants that they have been perceived to be.

Putin´s dream of controlling Europe´s energy future is over (2)

German Der Spiegel focuses on the coming shale gas revolution in Europe, which will put an end to Putin´s dream of controlling Europe´s energy future:

Bad news for Russia:
With each new project, more and more gas floods into the market, which is already saturated today, as evidenced by price trends in the United States. Almost every other commodity has become more expensive in the last year, while the price of natural gas has dropped by 27 percent. And the pricing pressure could continue if the gas supply keeps growing, says John Corben of the International Energy Agency in Paris. "It will help keep prices down."
This is bad news for Russia. The Kremlin derives a large share of its national budget from the exploitation of mineral resources. The Russians have invested billions in the infrastructure needed to develop key markets in Europe for the long term. That infrastructure includes the Nord Stream pipeline through the Baltic Sea, which is slated to go into operation later this year.
The final preparations are now underway at the construction site in Lubmin on Germany's Baltic Sea coast. This is where the pipes emerge from the waters of the Bay of Greifswald, marking the end of the two 1,224-kilometer (765-mile) pipelines that were installed on the sea floor using special ships. Just past the beach in Lubmin, workers are building giant valves, each as tall as a two-story building. The valves will regulate the flow of gas in the future. Nord Stream is expected to supply about 26 million households with electricity and heat.
But whether the investment will pay off is still unclear. The old calculations, from the days when the gas-oil price link was still fully applicable, are now obsolete. Even less clear is the outlook for the two other major European projects: South Stream, which will link Russia with Europe farther south, and, most of all, for Nabucco, the European Union alternative, which will transport gas from non-Russian suppliers and is intended to make Europe less dependent on Russia. Companies within the Nabucco consortium are already in exploratory talks with the EU, with the goal of bringing together segments of the Nabucco and South Stream projects, currently competitors.
Will Poland Become Next Norway?
In addition to changing worldwide energy markets, the emergence of new gas sources is leading to shifts in the global balance of power. Indeed, the dominant position of classic production countries, especially Russia, could soon erode strongly. Poland, on the other hand, could become a relevant player in the global market. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslav Sikorski already envisions transforming his country into the "next Norway" -- rich, important and independent -- particularly of its giant neighbor Russia.

Read the entire article here.

More information about shale gas in Europe here.
PS
The Spiegel journalists are cautiously writing that "whether the investment will pay off is still unclear". Unless German and other European greens - with the support of Gazprom - succeed in seriously delaying the shale gas revolution in Europe, there is no uncertainty - the Nord Stream will never be a sound investment. This bad news for Russia is excellent news for consumers in Europe. And when the easy profits dry out in Russia, the end of the Putin era is in sight. THEN there will be an excellent chance of  building a real strategic partnership between the European Union and a new, more democratic Russia.

The paranoia of China´s commmunist rulers: Clampdown on St. Patrick´s Day parade

"Revolutionary" celebration in Shanghai
(image by flickr)


China´s communist rulers are increasingly worried about the possibility of popular uprisings against their authoritarian regime. The latest sign of growing paranoia is the clampdown on the Shanghai Irish community´s St. Patrick´s day parade:

The Chinese authorities have begun a clampdown on activities by foreigners, including the Shanghai's St. Patrick's Day parade, as they are deemed threatening to political stability.
The authorities' decision to initiate the clampdown stemmed from an anonymous Internet campaign urging the people of China to emulate the protests and revolutions that have taken place across the Middle East in recent weeks.
Shanghai authorities have objected to the location of the annual St. Patrick's Day parade which was set to take place on March 12. Over 2,000 people were expected to congregate which pressurized the Irish organizations involved to cancel the event.  
The St. Patrick's Day parade was set to take place on a major street near a cinema which had been mentioned in the anonymous Internet campaign. The campaign urged people to gather every Sunday to show their displeasure with the Chinese government.
The Irish consul general in Shanghai, Conor O’Riordan, said concerns over the parade came to a boil on Monday. The Chinese officials had agreed to allow the parade if they found a "more modest" route.
Unable to change the route at such short notice, they canceled the event. A volunteer-run organization will hold an invitation-only, indoor event instead.

Read the entire story here.

PS

Happy St. Patrick´s day to you, comrade Hu Jintao and to all your government colleagues! No parade this year, but you can at least listen to this message.

Medvedev - no more Mr. nice guy?

The person at Russia´s RIA Novosti news service, who wrote this piece of news, seems to have a sense of humour:
Medvedev orders Putin to tighten Russia´s anti-gaming laws

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has instructed the government to improve legislation outlawing gambling, which has been widely flouted since it was introduced almost two years ago, the Kremlin press service said on Saturday.
Medvedev has given Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Justice Minister Yury Chaika and Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin two weeks to propose legal changes that would support the country's fight against the illegal gambling business.

Read the entire piece here.

PS
Or maybe this is a sign that the real Medvedev is much tougher than anybody could have imagined. What happens, if Putin does not make the deadline set by the president? Maybe Medvedev will immediately take action and order him fired? Putin must be scared stiff. In two weeks, we will find out ...

A no-fly zone should urgently be imposed in Libya

It now is becoming increasingly clear a no-fly zone is urgently needed in order to stop Gaddafi from using his army and security forces to slaughter even more civivilians. Michael Singh, writing in Foreign Policy, explains the case for a no-fly zone:

But for others, especially those closest to Qaddafi, the sanctions and threats of international prosecution, combined with the advance of opposition forces, may convince them that they have little choice but to hunker down in Tripoli and Sirte and fight.
To deal with this possibility that Qaddafi and his loyalists will use all of the force at their disposal before giving in, and that the violence in Libya may therefore get considerably worse, further international action is needed. The United States and EU should seek U.N. Security Council authorization for the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya.
We have heard much from U.S. officials in recent days about the risks of imposing a no-fly zone, but inaction also has its consequences.
Qaddafi has used warplanes against the opposition in recent days, and there is little indication that he will cease doing so as long as it is an option. This not only increases the chances of mass casualties, but it will extend the conflict as the relatively lightly-armed and poorly-trained rebels worry about advancing while Qaddafi has such armaments at his disposal. As the fighting drags on and the violence deepens, the risk that extremist groups will enter the fray as they have in other conflicts in the region increases as well, which has serious implications for our future relations with whatever Libya that emerges from the fighting.
Inaction also strikes a blow to U.S. credibility. On Capitol Hill March 2, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the "stakes are high" in Libya, which she warned could become a "giant Somalia." The United States has "joined the Libyan people in demanding that Colonel Qaddafi must go now, without further violence or delay," she asserted. Yet it is not clear to the world that we have joined the Libyan people in doing anything about it. Our sanctions will work indirectly and over the long term. Our warships are standing off the coast of Libya, but taking no part in the struggle there. This perception -- that we can help but have chosen not to, despite calls from the Libyan opposition to impose a no-fly zone --is one we may rue for years to come.
The reasons provided by senior U.S. officials for not imposing a no-fly zone in Libya seem pale in comparison to their descriptions of the stakes in Libya. They have said that imposing a no-fly zone would be complicated and would not account for fighting on the ground. These are prudent points, but they make better arguments for a smartly-crafted intervention than for doing nothing. There are well-grounded fears that a no-fly zone could turn into a long-term commitment (like the one over Iraq in the 1990s) if a stalemate develops. But this risk must be weighed against the potential of a no-fly zone to bring the conflict to an earlier end, keeping in mind that a protracted conflict will carry costs for U.S. national security regardless of whether we are directly involved. U.S. officials have also questioned whether aircraft are being used by Qaddafi against civilians, or whether the Libyan opposition wants a no-fly zone. Recent news reports undermine both points. Likewise, fears that Russia and China would veto a no-fly zone in the Security Council should not deter us from putting the question to them.

Read the entire article here.

PS
If the UN Security Council is unable to agree on the no-fly zone, then the US and NATO should act on their own. The killing of civilians bust be stopped in Libya!

China´s defense build-up worries Taiwan and other neighbouring countries

Communist China continues to increase its defense budget in a way that worries its neighbours, particularly Taiwan and Japan:

China will beef up its military budget by 12.7 percent this year, the government said yesterday, a return to double-digit spending increases that will stir regional unease.
The country’s growing military clout has coincided with a more assertive diplomatic tone, evident in spats last year with Japan and Southeast Asia over disputed islands and in rows with Washington over trade, the yuan and human rights.
National People’s Congress (NPC) spokesman Li Zhaoxing (李肇星) said the defense budget would increase from 532.1 billion (US$81 billion) yuan last year to 601.1 billion yuan this year. The budget went up by just 7.5 percent last year, after a long period of double-digit hikes.
Many experts believe China’s actual spending on the 2.3 million-strong People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is far higher than the figures the government reports.
“It’s widely accepted that these figures bear only a marginal relationship with the actual overall spending. Overall, it means the Chinese are saying we are going to [boost] our defense budget, whatever the real numbers are,” said Dean Cheng, a China security expert at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.
---
“The PLA is an important and powerful force in decision-making and there is obviously a desire to signal to the Chinese public and Chinese nationalists that China is going to continue to get stronger,” said Rory Medcalf of Australian think tank the Lowy Institute.
---
Some officials in Taiwan are especially alarmed. China has about 1,400 missiles aimed at the island, according to the government.
“China’s military power is now growing quickly,” said Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator Lin Yu-Fang (林郁方), who is also a member of the Legislative Yuan’s defense committee, in response to the Chinese budget number.
“The United States should help us turn the situation around, and we hope European countries will also sell us advanced weapons,” he said
       
Read the entire article in the Taipei Times here.
Also Japan is worried about China´s defense build-up:

Japanese Foreign Minsiter Seiji Maehara on Friday expressed fresh concern over China's ballooning defense spending, after Beijing announced a double-digit increase in its secretive military budget.
---
Li said the figure represented six percent of the total national budget in the world's second-largest economy.
"It is an extremely high ratio for defense spending," Maehara told reporters during a press conference. "We cannot help worrying about what all the money is used for."
"We have great concerns," he said, adding Tokyo will "continue encouraging China to increase transparency."
Tokyo has repeatedly questioned Beijing's military intentions.
In December Japan called China's military rise a source of international "concern" in its 10-year defense guidelines, following Beijing's increased assertiveness in territorial disputes in the East China and South China seas.

Read the entire piece here.

Ten frightening facts about the Chinese defense build-up:

• China has the world's largest military, with 2.3 million active personnel and 1.2 million in reserve. By comparison America has under 3 million in total active and reserve personnel.

• CHINA'S GROUND FORCE: 1.9 million personnel, 14,000 tanks, 14,500 artillery units, 453 helicopters.

• CHINA'S AIR FORCE: 470,000 personnel, 2,556 jet fighters, 400 ground attack jets

• CHINA'S NAVY: 250,000 personnel, 66 submarines, 27 destroyers, 52 frigates

• CHINA'S MISSILE ARSENAL: 100,000 personnel, 140 nuclear missiles, 1,000 conventional theater missiles

• NEW WEAPON: The Dong Feng 21D is a land-based missile capable of striking an aircraft carrier as far as 2,000 miles offshore

• China bought the rights to license and reproduce the Sukhoi-27 fighter jet from the Soviet Union, after its collapse

• By 2020 China is expected to have a fleet of carriers, fitting of a 'great naval power'. It will have its first this year

• Pentagon officials believe that China has secretly built a base, capable of housing up to 20 nuclear submarines, on Hainan Island.

• China has now developed and tested its first stealth fighter jet, the J-20. The U.S. is the only other country in the world to have a stealth fighter.

Read the entire article here.

PS

One can only wonder, why China chooses this expensive defense build-up instead of focusing on improving the lot of hundreds of millions of poor Chinese people.

Smart grids not so smart

Like so much else in the politically correct "green" dream world, "smart grid" is just a beautiful catchword, that makes no sense economically. Lawrence Solomon reveals the reality behind the not so smart grids:

Power companies around the world are planning to spend trillions of dollars building smart grids — next-generation marvels likened to the transcontinental railroad and the Internet because they are seen as revolutionizing society.
It won’t happen. The smart grid is nothing more than a politically driven fantasy that has no economic rationale other than to support politically favoured technologies that themselves have no economic rationale other than to save the world from global warming. And on global warming the public in most developed countries, public opinion polls show, has already spoken: Global warming is a non-problem.
---
The one smart grid that was completed — a small smart grid in Boulder, Colo., called Smart Grid City — came in at $100-million, three times the original cost estimates, and at a cost of $2,000 per billpayer, it has little value to show for itself. Politicians still push the smart grid, but at some point they will need to face reality — the renewable technologies that the smart grid is intended to support, along with the global warming ideology that underpins them, is all but dead.
The world’s electricity systems will remain predominantly fossil fuelled, and because fossil fuels are both flexible and cheap, they won’t require a smart grid to manage them. The politician-driven smart grid will disappear, and with it the trillions of dollars in needless investment now on the drawing boards.

Read the entire article here.