World Politics

[auscyclefan94]

Yes, there is something ridiculous about the way it has been handled. The only sense I can make of it is that Labor is afraid of losing votes on this issue. Silly them. IMO they'd be better off standing up proudly to pronounce the importance of the principle of non-discrimination for Australian citizens. AFAIK the issue has the support of the majority of the Australian population anyway (though not the majority of Herald Sun readers, whose comments on the issue yesterday were terribly depressing).

Seriously? The efforts of the governing party to end a form of state-based discrimination against some Australian citizens is something you don't think is important?

1. Other larger polls I have read have indicated that the people against Gay marriage were in the majority. Even though it was a slight majority I guess it indicates that it is a split decision.
2. I am not saying that it shouldn't be changed but yes I don't think it is an important issue in Australia or the world considering other things going on.
3. Ferminal, the politics inside the parties and in Parliament have an influence on the otucomes so if you are going to care about the issue or outcome then you have an obligation to care about the Politics. On a moral or ethical issue such as Gay marriage, Political allegiances matter little. Just because the majority of the ALP delegates support Gay marriage doesn't mean the people who don't will endorse it will come to endorse it when a conscience vote comes to Parliament because the word conscience is about what one sees as right or wrong and many in the ALP will vote against it anyway. It is different to the CO2 tax. There are people in the ALP who don't believe in Anthropogenic Global warming yet will still support a CO2 tax because it is what the Party as a whole has endorsed.

 

[Ferminal]

.
3. Ferminal, the politics inside the parties and in Parliament have an influence on the otucomes so if you are going to care about the issue or outcome then you have an obligation to care about the Politics.

On a moral or ethical issue such as Gay marriage, Political allegiances matter little. Just because the majority of the ALP delegates support Gay marriage doesn't mean the people who don't will endorse it will come to endorse it when a conscience vote comes to Parliament because the word conscience is about what one sees as right or wrong and many in the ALP will vote against it anyway. It is different to the CO2 tax. There are people in the ALP who don't believe in Anthropogenic Global warming yet will still support a CO2 tax because it is what the Party as a whole has endorsed.

What are you saying? Of course I know (a) what a conscience vote means and (b) what it means for any bill on gay marriage, hence my opposition to the move as expressed in my above posts.

What I mean is that I don't care that "people who vote ALP don't support gay marriage, those people vote Greens". I'm more interested in the inconsistent attitude and dodging of mainly the PM on the issue which means that despite there being a decision to support the change, the ideal outcome will not be achieved and the whole thing is effectively a "non-story".

 

[auscyclefan94]

What are you saying? Of course I know (a) what a conscience vote means and (b) what it means for any bill on gay marriage, hence my opposition to the move as expressed in my above posts.

What I mean is that I don't care that "people who vote ALP don't support gay marriage, those people vote Greens". I'm more interested in the inconsistent attitude and dodging of mainly the PM on the issue which means that despite there being a decision to support the change, the ideal outcome will not be achieved and the whole thing is effectively a "non-story".

Fair enough but you didn't really say that or make it clear in the post I quoted. Based on how you now explained it, I agree with you. All this conference has shown is that how divided the ALP is. Over the past year I have thought that the general unpopularity of the CO2 tax and in general the Greens part (& independents) in the Gillard Governments policy making will result in a decline in their support at the 2013 election. Personally, I think this ALP conference has shown how divided the party is and is a Party which has totally forgotten its supporters by backflipping on traditional Labor values ornot knowing what it stands for. Due to this I think many Labor supporters will turn to the Greens at the next election and they will grow as a party because Labor has forgotten it's core platforms and it's core supporters. What do they as a Party stand for?

 

[Ferminal]

What do they as a Party stand for?

Centrism/winning elections like all major political parties.

e.g. Ripper telling the conference to stick its mining tax, for purely political reasons (which he wasn't afraid to admit).

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

just watched the amazingly candid interview with the former head of pak--istani intelligence.

he expanded on my earlier projections that we are likely witnessing some fundamental geopolitical events due to the closure of supply routes.

Can anyone point out those supply routes on a map? I've actually been to that part of the world (on the Chinese/Soviet side) and I'm a bit baffled how there are "routes" going from China to Pakistan other than the Karakoram Highway (very rough, busy trade route) or perhaps from Ngari, through India, but that's a huge way around, and you basically have to go through and around the Himalaya, Hindu Kush and Kunlun mountains. Whatever roads in here would be mostly dirt and rocks.

Is the NATO/US heading through Tajikistan? Turkmenistan? Uzbekistan? The Pamir mountains go through there, and they are almost as high as the Himalaya. This area is extremely wild, and nomadic. Their political systems unstable. Outside of the cities, very few roads are paved, and those that are, are very dilapidated. At least that's how it was a decade ago when I went into the area. I mean, here's what it looked like, this is the Pamir "highway". Not what I would think of is a supply route.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Centrism/winning elections like all major political parties.

e.g. Ripper telling the conference to stick its mining tax, for purely political reasons (which he wasn't afraid to admit).

I hate the use of 'centre' or 'centrism' in politics. I disagree that you can be centre. You will always have preferences of one sid over the other. ALP are suppose to be a left wing party. They don't seem to be representing what their core supporters believe in and are continuing to be come more right wing. It is not good for Australian Politics when parties are becoming similar and people don't know what parties stand for. This is what is happening to the ALP. As many of you know I seem to dislike much of left wing politics but see the overall importance those left wing parties play and the groups of people they represent. It is not good when they abandon sch things with parties. In the final year of the Howard Government, the LNP abandoned its voters and core groups with IR laws. Same thing seems to be happening to the ALP atm. To their benefit they have two years to try to win back some of the general public.

 

[ramjambunath]

just watched the amazingly candid interview with the former head of pak--istani intelligence.

if i understood him correctly, the general’s opinion of the conditions were - accept pak--istans primary role in the area, reduce american embassy, set forth conditions for a resolution of kashmir, balance out india’s and israel’s role in afghanistan with pak-istan’s…

i can’t see the only superpower caving in. but i don’t exclude a secret compromise where the us will agree to some conditions as it essentially has no cute choices (besides the ineffective threats and rhetoric).

nato cornered themselves ?

You mean the Hamid Gul to Alex Jones show right?

I agree with his comments about China and what is happening on our borders. They have always been close allies and the reasons why they have been political bed buddies are also pretty clear.

I'll make it clear that I'm not trying to defend my country blindly here. I do have a problem in what he says about India, as he clearly would have an anti India agenda because of the various accusations against the ISI (some gravely real and some ludicrous). India is most definitely not backed by the USA and to compare it to Israel is outrageous. The furore in the recent Foreign direct investment in retail bill being repealed because of the parliament wide opposition to a fool hardy move is testament to that. Further confirmation to the fact that India isn't backed by the USA would be the civilian nuclear treaty that was also backed by Russia. India would be one of the few nations whose nuclear programme Russia has supported despite there being no 'confrontational' stance with the USA, unlike that of Iran. India was also critical of the Libyan air strikes and similar military interventions around the middle east.

He made a comment about India not wanting troops to leave Afghanistan, I have always said that India has been one of the few countries that has played a positive role in Afghanistan (which the govt seem to have forgotten to do in many places domestically)m yet due to Kashmir it has an anti-muslim stigma associated to it by extremist forces (not the rational ones) and has been a target of terrorism domestically and in Afghanistan as well (Indian embassy was attacked by a suicide bomber).

Finally, I don't think Russia would go out of its way to support Pakistan militarily as the repercussions of a growing economic relationship and existing political relationship with India could be serious for them. After all, investment is more likely to go from India than from the ailing Pakistan.

Here is a map of the route

 

[Ferminal]

I hate the use of 'centre' or 'centrism' in politics. I disagree that you can be centre.

Hotelling's Spatial Model... the centre is the most competitive spot.

Of course the "Left" party will always be "left of centre" and the "Right" party "right of centre" (at least on a whole), but their fight is to push the opponent back to the right/left. In politics this is a constant process as the centre (voting public) is always moving, and no focus groups or sampling will be able to tell you exactly where it is. Even better than knowing where the centre is being able to manipulate it.

 

[ramjambunath]

I just can't see the new NATO route through Iran. It is in the extremely sensitive region of Sistan Baluchistan where there are serious threats of terror.

Here's the northern distribution network
http://www.silkroadgroup.net/photo/map1.jpg

 

[python]

Can anyone point out those supply routes on a map? I've actually been to that part of the world (on the Chinese/Soviet side) and I'm a bit baffled how there are "routes" going from China to Pakistan...

alp, the supply route through china, as far as i know has never been seriously considered for the very reasons you described. below are the two current supply routes - (i) via the vastness of russia and it's 2 vassal states and (ii) via pak--istan. the potential alternative routes via iran or india (shown by ramjambunath above) are not currently on the table.

ramjambunath, it was the general's interview to rt.

he did not speak extensively about india's role. i agree with you, india, unlike russia that clearly is phishing, is one of the very few countries who attempted a constructive role.

the point i stressed from his interview related to india only in passing. rather the difficulty of the the us position.

to complicate the matters, nato, in anticipation of the very pak--istani threats has been gradually shifting the burden of supply to the northern russian route. 2-3 years ago pak--istan was transiting 70-80%, it now is no more than 50-55%.

now with russia up in arms against the missile shield in europe, it recently issued a warning to nato of the potential closure of the vital route via the words of russia's rep to nato mr. ragosin.

 

[ramjambunath]

Ah, we saw different interviews. In the one I saw, he made serious insinuations against Israel and India as being the future causal agents of war among other points like security consultants' corruption. Coming from a former head of an institution that funded the Taliban in its infancy and is suspected of seeding many terrorist activities made me fume a bit.

 

[rhubroma]

Can anyone point out those supply routes on a map? I've actually been to that part of the world (on the Chinese/Soviet side) and I'm a bit baffled how there are "routes" going from China to Pakistan other than the Karakoram Highway (very rough, busy trade route) or perhaps from Ngari, through India, but that's a huge way around, and you basically have to go through and around the Himalaya, Hindu Kush and Kunlun mountains. Whatever roads in here would be mostly dirt and rocks.

Is the NATO/US heading through Tajikistan? Turkmenistan? Uzbekistan? The Pamir mountains go through there, and they are almost as high as the Himalaya. This area is extremely wild, and nomadic. Their political systems unstable. Outside of the cities, very few roads are paved, and those that are, are very dilapidated. At least that's how it was a decade ago when I went into the area. I mean, here's what it looked like, this is the Pamir "highway". Not what I would think of is a supply route.

What about the Khyber Pass?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khyber_Pass

 

[ramjambunath]

Khyber Pass has been closed for NATO supplies by Pakistan after the attacks.

 

[python]

<snip>

Finally, I don't think Russia would go out of its way to support Pakistan militarily as the repercussions of a growing economic relationship and existing political relationship with India could be serious for them. After all, investment is more likely to go from India than from the ailing Pakistan.

this point you made is important as it goes to the core of my earlier projections of the coming geopolitical shifts...

no, i am not predicting that india and the us will become strategic allies as a result of pak--istan's closer eventual alignment to mainly china and to much smaller degree to russia.

i was pointing to a GENERAL re-balancing of the region's alliances and partnerships resulting from the vacuum left by america's withdrawal from afghanistan.

extended or permanent closure of the pak--istani routes is bound to greatly hasten these new alliances. with india, china, russia and iran strengthening their positions in their own directions -- but all at the expense of america.

for example, here is one simplified scenario - it's my own projection.

china and pak--istan conclude a new comprehensive strategic alliance and pak--istan having received russia's agreement will become a full member of the shanghai treaty. this in turn, will hasten pak-istan's military detachment from the us dependance. fortunately for america, this detachment can not be done overnight as almost all pak-istani military hardware and training are american-made. so, it will take time, perhaps 5-10 years.

in the mean time, both russia and india will continue to forge ahead with INDEPENDENT agendas with india becoming more and more independent of russia's military hardware. i'll dare to say, that at this moment russia and india are no longer allies as it was during the soviets but rather equal partners. this process will continue with india becoming closer to the west w/o losing it's independent focus...

then, we have china. the chinese have always been patient and wise. they will continue to raise their industrial, financial and military weight w/o making too many waves. my expectation is that china will eventually turn its strategic gaze north, away from india and the us as that's where they can find both population expansion and economic migration. thus china and russia are heading to new confrontation at some point...

iran, i see iran gaining a lot from the us departure. the new round of sanction is foolish as it will cement the population against the west whilst it's rather clear that china will NEVER allow iran's demise b/c it supplies it with oil and gas....

 

[ramjambunath]

I agree with your post, my ire was directed at Hamid Gul's statements and definitely the points that you make have significance. The main question for Pakistan to become completely be independent of the alliance with the US is whether China could help alleviate the economic situation in Pakistan. If China plays a role in Pakistan similar to what they do in Africa at the moment and promote economic independence while benefiting the Chinese govt, it can definitely happen. Of course, this would need rich mineral wealth and I'm not aware of the resources available in Pakistan.

About China, Pakistan and India, there are disputed territories in Kashmir (between China and India and India and Pak) and Arunachal Pradesh (India and China) and till that issue is well and truly resolved, Pakistan will continue to benefit from China's alliance. The border issues won't be resolved in the near future.

Russia is still the main provider of defence supplies for India but in the recent past there has been a shift from exclusively Russian to the best available arms/planes etc.

I don't know what will happen with regards to Iran if US/NATO pull out as their economy at the moment is in the doldrums and the current round of sanctions isn't going to help that. Of course, a US pullout could help in the Sistan Baluchistan region but I don't see much of a change in western Iran.

 

[fatandfast]

I agree with your post, my ire was directed at Hamid Gul's statements and definitely the points that you make have significance. The main question for Pakistan to become completely be independent of the alliance with the US is whether China could help alleviate the economic situation in Pakistan. If China plays a role in Pakistan similar to what they do in Africa at the moment and promote economic independence while benefiting the Chinese govt, it can definitely happen. Of course, this would need rich mineral wealth and I'm not aware of the resources available in Pakistan.

About China, Pakistan and India, there are disputed territories in Kashmir (between China and India and India and Pak) and Arunachal Pradesh (India and China) and till that issue is well and truly resolved, Pakistan will continue to benefit from China's alliance. The border issues won't be resolved in the near future.

Russia is still the main provider of defence supplies for India but in the recent past there has been a shift from exclusively Russian to the best available arms/planes etc.

I don't know what will happen with regards to Iran if US/NATO pull out as their economy at the moment is in the doldrums and the current round of sanctions isn't going to help that. Of course, a US pullout could help in the Sistan Baluchistan region but I don't see much of a change in western Iran.

I have a close friend that has spent his last 4 years working in Africa, most recently Angola. His stories and photos all show an all Chinese work force working at most of the African projects where he was assigned.

Most things I have seen and read have portrayed China as doing everything that they are doing in Africa for China's interests. If any African economies benefit that is just and afterthought.
I will ask if it possible, but I would love to post time lapsed pictures of a small hospital being built, it takes 125 days from ground break to 1st patient. It looks pretty nice by any standard.
What I found strange in the pictures was not only crews working under generator powered work lights in order to extend the work day, but the work force in all the pictures was 100% Chinese people doing the labor

 

[ramjambunath]

There's a mistake in my post, it should be 'what they were supposed to do in Africa' and I stand corrected (a mistake made by doing more than one thing at a time). What has happened in the past couple of years has been sad. Africareview and Allafrica are sites where it's easy to see the misdemeanours.

I can't say much about the all-Chinese labour but there have been instances of shooting labourers in Zambia (I think and not 100% sure, it happened around a year ago). There was a problem in Mozambique between a local governor and a Chinese contractor. Both about the cheap issue of labour payments.

My original point was about Pakistan's dire economic situation and the affinity to China, there's a reason to believe that investment could come from them if the current hostility towards US/NATO remains in the long run.

 

[ramjambunath]

RT exit polls show that the United Russia party has only 48.5% support. These are the State Duma elections.

Polls are done by All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion.
The Communist Party (19.8 percent), the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (11.42 percent) and the social-democratic party, Fair Russia (12.8 percent), will also enter the Duma, reports RIA Novosti according to exit polls.

 

[Tank Engine]

RT exit polls show that the United Russia party has only 48.5% support. These are the State Duma elections.

Polls are done by All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion.
The Communist Party (19.8 percent), the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (11.42 percent) and the social-democratic party, Fair Russia (12.8 percent), will also enter the Duma, reports RIA Novosti according to exit polls.

The turn out seems to be pretty low. The Russians seemed to be tired of the Putin led United Russia party and its seemingly all embracing grip. The thought of Putin becoming President again has raised the spectre of presidency for life. However, no real alternative has appeared.

Some news of election tampering (the United Russia party offering food for votes and banners in polling stations, economic threats).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/01/putin-support-russian-unease

There have been threatening gestures from players/groups associated with the Kremlin. The following sentence struck me

Pro-Kremlin youth groups are part of the strategy. Nashi has promised to bus in 30,000 activists to Moscow to counter any opposition.

Nashi means Our/Ours.

 

[ramjambunath]

Well there is no real opposition in Russia. If it was less corrupt, there would have been a chance of a strong opposition by now but let's see how it is in 10 or 20 years time. Putin was what they desperately needed in '99 after a few years of clueless Yeltsin rule but now, I'm not dead set certain.

Yes, the nashi movement. If you've heard of it before, it was during the protests in Estonia, which later turned into what could easily be termed as riots, about the moving of the Bronze statue of Talinn. 2007 was a very interesting time in the region.

What I can say is, with him at the helm, the NATO route through Russia seems in complete jeopardy.

One more thing to add, corruption is a huge issue electorally in Russia.

Official numbers after 15% of the vote has counted says that URP has 45.83%, Communist Party 20.27%, Fair party 13.3, Lib Dems 14.42.

Elections watchdog Golos said that Sosnovy Bor in the Leningrad region refused to register voters between the ages of 18 and 23.

Coalition govt in Russia. United Russia with 46-48% will get around 220 seats out of 450 in the Duma.

 

[rhubroma]

Well Putin was publicly booed at Olimpiski Stadium, Moscow, not long ago.

 

[craig1985]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16024316

So will this actually work?

 

[Ferminal]

It will give markets something to cheer about for a few days, but work, no.

 

[craig1985]

The turn out seems to be pretty low. The Russians seemed to be tired of the Putin led United Russia party and its seemingly all embracing grip. The thought of Putin becoming President again has raised the spectre of presidency for life. However, no real alternative has appeared.

Some news of election tampering (the United Russia party offering food for votes and banners in polling stations, economic threats).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/01/putin-support-russian-unease

There have been threatening gestures from players/groups associated with the Kremlin. The following sentence struck me

Pro-Kremlin youth groups are part of the strategy. Nashi has promised to bus in 30,000 activists to Moscow to counter any opposition.

Nashi means Our/Ours.

That's a pretty bad system the Russians have. Putin can be President and when his term ends, get's a puppet to act as President and when his term ends, Putin can run to be President again with no real opposition.

 

[ramjambunath]

More than anything the system was abused by the dominance of a party for quite a few years. Though Putin's rule wasn't ideal, he's far better than what they had in the '90s in Yeltsin, clueless being a polite way to describe his last years.

The problems are not dissimilar to what many large, yet young, democracies face. The two obvious parallels that can be drawn are India and South Africa. It took around 25 years and an emergency (for no reason in '75) for India's first non Congress govt and it took nearly fifty year for the first non Congress govt that would last its full term to be sworn in. In South Africa, the last elections were supposed to be one of the weakest for the ANC (which would have meant around 55-60%) after it was assumed that the Congress of the People would have a strong showing in the election (as it was a breakaway of the ANC) and as it turned the ANC received 65% of the vote. South Africa faces similar problems of corruption, an extremely high crime rate and drugs. What they don't face is the alcohol problem. I truly believe that if Juleus Malema had become the Presidential candidate of ANC instead of Zuma (want a laugh, read Zuma's quotes), the media would have a rhetoric against him as well after the songs he sang like 'kill the boer'.

The problem that Russia's having now that we in India don't face is the quashing, or attempts to quash, of independent election observers- I'm aware of electoral fraud in India as well, that's similar in such countries. At the moment, the only independent electoral observers are Golos and there have been many attempts to sabotage them as well. Trying to quash political opposition is actually going to hurt the major party (India '75 emergency) in the long run and as we see the vote share has dropped significantly.

I would definitely not call Medvedev a dummy president. He was a time filler but in the foreign policy aspects, there was clearly a sign of mellowing down rhetoric on the Russian side, which was also evident in the US side and resulted in the Nuclear START treaty being signed between the two countries. I'd have liked to have seen him in a second term. 2007 was the year that US Russia relations plummeted to near Cold War lows, he's had a clear stamp of authority there. Also, the tech city in Skolkovo was one of his pet projects domestically.

Finally, we'll have to see how URP form the govt. Will there be some 'horse trading' ie will they buy out a few Duma representatives from other parties, or will they form a legitimate coalition govt. I believe there will be some 'horse trading' but for the stability of the govt they will need to form a coalition with one of the other parties (which most definitely will not be the communist party).