Fabian Society: an idea to change the world
Let’s say you work at the Foreign Office. The minister for Foreign Affairs comes in and tells you they need a fresh new idea to revolutionise British relations with South Asian countries. What can we do about our relations with India, Pakistan and the rest? Hit me! After you mistakenly punch the minister in the face, he/she informs you that they were talking about hitting them with ideas, not fists. This one idea better be good or your ass is grass. What do you say?
So anyway, it’s the annual Fabian Society conference this Saturday – a must for political junkies and schmoozers. The topic is foreign policy this year because exactly one year from this weekend, the new president of the United States gets sworn in (hallelujah!). They asked me to come to one of the sessions, set up like Dragon’s Den, and pitch one idea on our foreign policy regarding South Asia. I already know what I’m going to say but I’m not allowed to reveal it before this Saturday.
So what would you say if you were asked to pitch? Don’t worry, they already know my idea so I can’t nick a new one. But I’d be interested to see what readers come up with. I’ll be at the conference for the whole day so if you’re going to be there, get in touch. You can also buy a ticket and register from the Fabian Society website.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Current affairs, South Asia
Tell the foreign ministers of these countries that we’d support them in looking for EU membership. Subject, of course, to them meeting the entry standards.
did we have a policy regarding South Asia? funny that…I don’t see it? apart from outsourcing jobs to india because it’s cheap, touting for firms to come here courtesy of Gordon Brown and Ken Livingstone..
helping Mr. Mittal get even more obnoxiously richer, invading afghanistan and thinking we’re actually going to “win”, “secretly” backing a corrupt ex leader who then winds up dead…etc etc etc…
I don’t see how you can have one policy fits all for the whole of south asia..surely they’ve allowed for more than one idea..but if they haven’t, pretty much sums up “our” attitude
oh and the big white elephant..kashmir…
heh good point sofia.
the problem is thinking of #’foreign’ in the first place. nothing is ‘foreign’ any more in this interconnected globe.
the real problem is the policy of doing what Big Brother i.e. the US wants because we know we are interconnected to their future thanks to throwing our lot in with them and not with europe. Monetarily this is clearly now causing a big problem. we only have to look at the US policy of supporting non-democratic players in Pakistan and Bangladesh and there you see it. what’s quietly happening in Bangladesh while no one is looking or commenting? WB and IMF reforms are being pushed through -yes in the midst of floods, and cyclones, and with the approval of an interim government whose business it should be to organise elections, not push through significant ‘reforms’ which no one now obviously gets to have a say in. Having just returned from Dhaka, it is pretty clear that there is a significantly suprising Jamaat influence within the interim govt. ( surprising given everybody else is in Jail) and what is very strange is the US going on about ‘Islamists’ everywhere and happily promoting Jamaat’s influence in B’desh. Why? Because of economics that’s why. And the UK obviously thinks of its economic interests and how its linked to the US and thinks ‘what are we going to do’? and who cares really about all the instability in the region? it seems to suit all sorts of players all around.
oh and the big white elephant..kashmir
How is it a white elephant? Hari Singh ceded to India therefore, according to international law, it belongs to India. Very simple really.
Well said, although calling it the Ministry of Interdependent Global Relations would be a bit of a mouthful!
Establish an independent foreign policy, and do it before the next president takes control.
Encourage other countries to do the same. No more ganging up, just because you can.
A nuclear free zone in the middle east – remove all nuclear arsenal from there including of course the undeclared ones.
Make serious steps towards nuclear disarmament as per NPT.
Put pressure on US to join the ICC.
Publicy declare support for 1967 borders for I/P; reject Bush/Olmert’s 1967Plus plan.
Reparations to all victims of adventurism.
Force changes in the WTO to establish fair trade and not ‘free-trade’.
And there’s lots more
Go on then Refreshbhai, let it all out
Dhanush wrote;
“oh and the big white elephant..kashmir
How is it a white elephant? Hari Singh ceded to India therefore, according to international law, it belongs to India. Very simple really.”
I agree with you Dhanush, what has Kashmir got to do with the thread.
6 leon
of course nomenclature is by the by.
my point i guess really applies to the kind of ‘box-like’ thinking we exhibit, that’s not systemic enough. and looking at the failure of different govt departments with different designated responsibilities – to communicate with each other, to carry out their connected remits in a ‘joined up way’ – heh. that’s the main problem really.
‘Go on then Refreshbhai, let it all out’
I wish I had the time – better I accompany Sunny to the meet, might need to give them a ‘joint up story’.
heh
Put pressure on US to join the ICC.
YEah but the US has such a crappy cricket team! Heh.
Refresh – c’mon, something original would be nice.
Sunny, that was original. When did you last hear of the UK putting pressure on the US?
Put pressure on US to join the ICC.
Now that would be revolutionary indeed – but why? To counter balance Indian money in Cricket with American money? Or do you mean the other ICC that is largely irrelavant. OOps – both ICCs are irrelavant.
Anyway seriously – can’t we just adopt the Belgium policy towards SE Asia, and just throw in a bit of subsidised British Council elocution lessons for self intersets sake .. just to ensure spoken English is vaguely understandable over the phone in our soon to be glorious interconnected world
.
Not having a policy is perfectly OK you know…. and in its self will be revolutionary for Britain.
And perhaps all the money we save in not having think tanks and sending delegations etc etc and employing anyone in the FCO can be put into a trust fund and used towards partially paying these countries expenses for their educational programmes to train nurse and doctors for us.
Sometimes doing things only makes things worse. Lets do nothing for a change. You know what they say when you find yourself in a hole – stop digging. Lets have a moratorium on junket meddling.
Justforfun
Like that approach Justforfun. But I guess you would need to say you were doing nothing for it to be of any use. Or are you suggesting we do nothing and don’t tell anyone?
Here is another one. Freeze the personal assets of everyone who has been complicit in deaths of civilians at home or overseas, without recognising any Presidential Pardons.
Sofia – I agree with you – there is no one policy, as the region is so diverse – but to us here in Britain to our ‘policy movers and shakers’ it’s just all a talking shop. “There must be a magic policy somewhere if only we talk think hard enough and talk for long enough!”
RIP Robin Cook’s ‘ethical foreign’ policy – it stood no chance, because we as a country are not basically ethical, even if we like to think we are. Lets just face that uncomfortable truth when we look in the mirror. And once we have improved our own ethics, then re-visit our foreign policy. Not the other way around – promise an ethical policy when we have not changed ourselves. We can’t fake it – we will get found out in the end – oops we have been found out … at least by Tony Blair’s confessor, but Thank God for the rest of us he can’t divulge what has been said.
Justforfun
Heh and watch the world economy collapse due to the sheer number of frozen accounts.
Refresh – perhaps we just leave the phone off the hook.
Actually – its up to us as a population not to let our selves be swayed by foreign affairs and think we can actually do anything and gain a moral glow of self congratulation buy pandering to this meddling. It just gives false hope to those out there battling the injustices in their countries. So while we might not actively meddle, we can passively help by just stop being the safe haven for all the klepotomaniacs in the world. Leave that to Dubai
Next time Zimbabwe appears on the news – switch channels.
Next time Kashmir appears on the news – switch channels.
Next time IP appears on the news – switch channels
etc etc
Justforfun
19 good one leon
‘Heh and watch the world economy collapse due to the sheer number of frozen accounts.’
I was being ethical.
‘So while we might not actively meddle, we can passively help by just stop being the safe haven for all the klepotomaniacs in the world. Leave that to Dubai’
And watch our economy collapse?
Have an increased, more formalised political and military alliance with India.
Have an increased two-way cultural interchange with both India and Pakistan.
Increase the amount of two-way academic interchange with universities in both countries (“visiting professors” etc).
Increase the amount of foreign investment and business dealings with both countries (already underway with India, in both directions).
Eject any residual colonial-era baggage in one’s mindset and diplomatic/economic/business/cultural dealings with the subcontinent.
Promote and support the activities of (and ties with) any Sufi groups in both India and Pakistan, to counteract the growing Arabisation of the interpretation of Islam in some British Asian Muslim quarters (and in some quarters of the subcontinent, especially Pakistan), and to counteract the Wahhabhi influence from Saudi Arabia here in the UK.
Put Angelina Jolie in a room with Aishwarya Rai to see if they both disappear in a puff of smoke by cancelling each other out.
Move to renewable energy as fast as possible, freeing up oil which can be used by the developing nations.
Or build solar power stations in the southern hemishere so they can move to an hydrogen economy, reducing pressure on the oil producers.
You guys are way too idealistic. And I thought I was bad… hehe!
Step at a time Sunny. When it comes to foreign policy (or policy in general), my rule is to think in 50 year chunks.
That is what Chavez said.
Ravi,
Glad to see someone else has worked out the pattern.
Wasn’t it Blair who talked about a thousand years?
Dhanush and pounce..Kashmir is still an issue whether india likes it or not.
“Promote and support the activities of (and ties with) any Sufi groups in both India and Pakistan, to counteract the growing Arabisation of the interpretation of Islam in some British Asian Muslim quarters (and in some quarters of the subcontinent, especially Pakistan), and to counteract the Wahhabhi influence from Saudi Arabia here in the UK.”
Jai, although I understand your reasoning for this, to limit this to sufi groups is already a non starter, as they have very little influence in mainstream muslim communities. It would rather be to encourage education for Indian/pakistani/bangladeshi muslim children and pride in their cultural heritage instead of leaving religious instruction to madrassah style schools. Poverty is still a huge problem ( there’s a recent lancet report on malnourishment in children, highlighting Pakistan and India, to varying degrees amongst other countries)..so any policies need to taking into account the rural majority and not just focus on industry centres.
Encouraging the education of girls past the age of 11..and real drive to end nepotistic political structures, especially at local level.
Here’s one for the FO people you meet at the Fabian:
Stop paying lipservice to democratic process while giving tacit support to military dictatorships, including the nascent junta in Bangladesh and Musharraf in Pakistan. We all understand the tarditional FO policy of supporting stability over democracy but if they are going to do that, let them express real-politik in such terms rather than making us play along with the hypocrisy of virtual/apparent support of democratic institutions as a façade for real support of autocratic dictatorships. It’ll end in tears but the FO will never accept responsibility, as usual.
sofia
Not if you want the UK to go by international law it’s not. If one refers to the partition of India by the British – which both Congress, the Muslim League and the UN signed up to and recognised – it clearly stipulated that princely states had the option to chose India or Pakistan.
Hari Singh ceded to India.
From a British perspective, considering it was their partition on their terms, they cannot say or do anything about Kashmir because they will be politely pointed to their own partition legislation.
refresh, you’ll be glad to hear solar is increasingly becoming an option in remote areas of bangladesh. (i went to a lovely coral reef island – st. martin’s – on my trip this year, and there is no mains electricity there, and a few places are using this solar-wind hybrid thingie. very exciting stuff
yes of course we’re idealistic sunny, we’d be hanging out at parliament licking politicians’ asses otherwise, wouldn’t we?
well dhanush, that is a matter of opinion..and has been contested..
and also if this indeed did take place it was done on the condition that there would be a referendum anyway..which hasn’t happened…
oh and as for your rather simplistic version of events regarding partition…no one wanted the splitting up of punjab..so contrary to your version, they did not agree to this.
that is a matter of opinion..and has been contested
No, it’s a matter of historical fact I’m afraid. I don’t particularly care for Kashmir, I’m just spelling out the legal realities and the problems for anyone, in particular Britain, getting embroiled in the affair.
and also if this indeed did take place it was done on the condition that there would be a referendum anyway
There was no referendum on offer. It was a simple case of ceding to either India or Pakistan. In fact, if Pathan tribesmen under the auspices of the Muslim Leauge had not invaded and pillaged the Kashmiri populace, Hari Singh could well have been persuaded to cede to Pakistan.
Shiekh Abdullah, the darling ‘Sheri-i-Kashmir’ who carried the Kashmiri people with him, was also so disgusted by the Pathan invasion that he and his dynastic family have sworn allegiance to India ever since.
But I digress.
no one wanted the splitting up of punjab..
Maybe so, but the Sikhs were forced to ask for it as they did not wish to live under the Muslim scimitar.
They appear to have been vindicated if one glances at the plight of non-Muslims in Pakistan, and the Muslim world genrally, today – well, what’s left of them.
To my understanding, the proposed referendum was conditional upon Pakistani forces leaving the part of Kashmir that they were occupying.
Jai (and Sofia),
With regards policy in Pakistan, I would encourage the FO to look in the mirror and remind themselves how they have been complicit in the loss of numerous lives and generations, the heroin trade, and so-called extremism.
Remind them that they were partners with the extremists (and for all we know may be seeking new partnerships) and that now to pillory everyone who is a muslim and the religion of Islam will not stand. And they should put together a budget in reparation. For what they have done along with the US is unforgiveable.
And also tell them that getting ideas and nods from Israel, and money from the Arabs is a dead-end.
You should work towards getting money from Israel and ideas and nods from the Arabs, for once.
Dhanush,
It is debated and I’ll quote you several books, articles saying as much. As for punjab, this was not done after a discussion made with any of the “sides”
and jai you are right, but there were other reasons why india did not honour the plebiscite
Give them all nuclear weapons. If every country had nuclear weapons there’d be no more threat of any country being stronger for having nuclear power. You’ve got nukes, we’d say, ha ha, so have we. Let’s hug. We shall all live by the bomb. It’s the only way.
‘Give them all nuclear weapons…..We shall all live by the bomb. It’s the only way.’
Until George Bush III comes along to avenge the humiliation of his father that is.
i thought bush junior only had daughters?
‘i thought bush junior only had daughters?’
As far as we know or it could be Georgina Bush III, or it could skip to Jeb’s line.
Unfortunately that’s only going to be effective until some enterprising scientist somewhere comes up with a more technologically advanced and more destructive form of weaponry.
How very Bollywood…..
Hell, how very Asian.
The best way to avenge the humiliation that was Bush II would be to pay attention at school to avoid similar humiliation as an adult
Jai
‘Unfortunately that’s only going to be effective until some enterprising scientist somewhere comes up with a more technologically advanced and more destructive form of weaponry.’
Fair point. Hence Russia’s opposition to the siting of US anti-missile stations across Europe. No point in having a deterrent if someone can counter it.
Refresh,
Well that’s one way of looking at it, but I was referring to the “next generation of weaponry”, whatever that may be.
You know, energy weapons, lasers, warheads with even more destructive power than nukes, that sort of thing.
***********
Kismet, I wonder what Jon Stewart will do when Dubya isn’t in the Oval Office anymore. I can’t imagine him ridiculing Obama if he wins the Presidency (Hillary, maybe, Obama – no), considering the level of high hopes everyone has for him. Unless/until he does something which seriously undermines his idealistic and decent image (God, I hope not).
Jai,
I agree, and its part of the Full Spectrum Dominance plan.
Hari Singh ceded to India therefore, according to international law, it belongs to India. Very simple really.
Britain may well be the worst possible herald for this message, but it remains true: Kashmir is not a possesion, an object, something that can be owned.
1. It is a geographical region within which people live.
2. Those people have natural, inherent and inalienable human rights.
3. there is a natural, inherent and unavoidable obligation on the elected Indian government to work to set up a state structure that minimises violations of those rights.
4. that goverment has no source of legitimate interest or claim on the inhabitants of that geographical region other than the degree to which they accept its ability to defend and enforce those rights
5. if the optimal solution to point 3 turns out to not be a sub-division of the Indian central government, so be it.
If India doesn’t hold to those precepts, it should abandon the label ‘democracy’, and market itself as Empire V2.0.
What would I recommend?
How about not failing basic South Asian geography.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sdEkNhYkNI
Not evading a question about the crisis in Pakistan by talking about Pakistani illegal immigration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aI3y86y0Bs
And finally not using stupid gimmicks to get elected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDUQW8LUMs8
Ah the Huckster, another Bushie fundo-freak in waiting.
“Promote and support the activities of (and ties with) any Sufi groups in both India and Pakistan, to counteract the growing Arabisation of the interpretation of Islam in some British Asian Muslim quarters (and in some quarters of the subcontinent, especially Pakistan), and to counteract the Wahhabhi influence from Saudi Arabia here in the UK.”
What the heck does counteracting the “Arabization” of subcontinental Islam have to do with forging a better South Asia and improving foreign policy? There are plenty of other places where relations are tense, volatile, and contentious which are nowhere near South Asia, nor do they have significant Muslim countries (We just don’t hear about them as often as we do re: Muslim countries because the GWOT is currently not staged there). And Islamic fundamentalism is certainly not the only impetus that has caused problems in South Asia- so has Hindu fundamentalism, and yes, also Sikh fundamentalism. We can argue why there are so many fundamentalisms in South Asia, but to reduce it to Islam and Wahabism is unbelievably myopic.
Sofia:
“It would rather be to encourage education for Indian/pakistani/bangladeshi muslim children and pride in their cultural heritage instead of leaving religious instruction to madrassah style schools.”
Out of curiosity, I’m wondering what the “cultural heritage” of Indian/Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslim children would be; and if Desi Muslim children have a “cultural heritage,” is it really that radically different from their other Desi Sikh, Hindu, Jain, Parsi, etc counterparts?
My suggestions:
1. Quit looking at South Asia as some big chessboard that can be played.
2. Quit looking at all problems through the lens of the now yawningly redundant terms of “terrorism,” “extremists,” and “Islamicists.” Not every single fucking thing that happens in, say Pakistan, can be reduced to “Islamic extremists” and “jihadis.” Sepoy over at Chapati Mystery pointed out that there has been very little understanding of what is actually going on in places like Swat (and based on my research, I would add Balochistan): they have their own histories which have resulted in complex dynamics, but you don’t 1) understand that and as such 2) you cannot address those problems because we continue to talk about it as simply a “hotbed” of “fundamentalism”. I will say that this vision also plagues how we talk about Kashmir. Kashmir is not only about Lashkar-e-Toiba (sp?); it’s also about a large civilian population that is at the mercy of a state army.
3. Quit feeding an arms race between India and Pakistan (though this might be tricky, because many nations might not want to give up their arms so as to avoid US invasions– ie not end up a la Iraq
Cont’d:
i.e. not end up a la Iraq which didn’t have WMD, and no way in hell the US or another power would invade a country with a huge nuclear arsenal
4. Make it a priority to remedy, rectify, and/or eliminate the problems that stem from economic globalization. There needs to be something done about this, as the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen, and everyone in between and on the lower end continue to live precariously. This also feeds into issues that we don’t hear about as often as we hear about farmers committing suicide: labor migration both within S. Asia and outside of it, human trafficking, sexual exploitation, etc.
5. Related to #4, ensure that SAFTA does not turn into an incredible disaster like NAFTA; that it promotes social and economic justice and a more symbiotic relationship between S. Asian countries and not turn into a smaller version of the larger global free marketization.
That’s all I can think up of for now.
6. Urge South Asian ministers/dictators/ to stop pumping money into Defense, and dedicate that money to social and economic projects.
7. Do something about the internally displaced peoples in India due to ridiculously pricey, yet completely ineffective, if not dangerous, projects.
Sofia,
I agree with the rest of your points in comment #30, but I was mainly referring to the Asian Muslim population here in the UK. A lot of people (plenty of exceptions, obviously) do seem to have moved away from some of their original cultural reference points in terms of religious identity etc and have moved towards the Arab/Middle-Eastern version of such things, so I was thinking that it may be a good idea for a stronger focus on subcontinental history and Islam (which, to some extent, has obviously evolved independently of the Arab version during the past 1000 years) to help counteract the more extreme ideas such people are taking on-board and put them back in touch with their real roots. The last point obviously overlaps with what you said too.
Also, since all our respective ancestral roots lie in the subcontinent, we do all have a lot of shared history and culture regardless of our religious affiliations, at least those of us who are from the northern half of the region.
I don’t know how much influence Sufi groups in the subcontinent have on Asian Muslims here in the UK, but somehow encouraging this would presumably help to counteract the corrosive influence of the austere Wahabbi/HuT types.
In terms of Pakistan, someone originating from that country (directly or via parents etc) would obviously be in a better position than I am to have an informed opinion on the issue, but my point was that perhaps encouraging Sufi groups there (either directly or via familial/social connections between British Pakistanis and their counterparts over there) would help to mitigate the radicalisation in some quarters of Pakistan too. There’s been a lot of talk about the attempted “Talibanisation” of some parts of Pakistani society and the growing infiltration of such elements; I even read recently somewhere that, to some extent, Pakistan is (in a manner of speaking) now being “invaded” by Afghanistan in this way.
*********
Refresh,
I believe you’re of Pakistani origin aren’t you ? What do you think of the above, is it a good idea or even feasible ?
Jai
To be fair, given all the tripe we’ve been hearing and been subjected to by this TWAT and the armies of filth ridden commentators happy to provide the mortar for the neocon bricks, neatly hides the truth.
The primary focus has to be on how we got here and who benefitted, before we can even begin to rebalance our relationships.
For us to sit here and pass judgement on people who were nothing more than cannon fodder in the cold war, as others had been in other parts of the world at different times, expecting them to fall in line and keep delivering only now to a different tune is not going to deliver any stability.
Its a red herring to suggest that we should dismiss an arbitrary section of muslims to strenghten another, it is after all playing the same old game. Only this time it is intended to ignite a civil war amongst muslims – and would there not be a blowback from that, which we will debate ad infinitum?
I say that we will conclude, in the final analysis, that the US lost the cold war. They lost it AFTER we all thought it was over. And all those minor nations it used to destroy the Soviet Union have not benefitted and consequentially will remain opposed to US hegemony. Those it has used it has broken. Those it continues to use remain anti-democratic or fall in line out of fear.
So I would say its not about muslims, its about supremacy and TWAT was lovely wheeze to get everyone to fall in line home and abroad. It worked – for a while.
By the way El Cid says I am white, others think I am jewish, some sikh and some hindu.
I am delighted to say culturally I am all these things and more.
Re post 55, Desi that is exactly my point…their cultural heritage may well not be so radically different as they would already in many cases share the same language and cultural customs…yet many are being told that their culture is not important..it’s all islamic doctrine this and blah blah…i’m not saying that religion should not be a focus but that differences based on where you come from should also be celebrated.
Sofia:
Oh, I see. Thanks for clarifying that, and I agree with you!