Nadia Murad escaped ISIS and witnessed the Yazidi genocide. After escaping sex slavery by ISIS, the brave survivor turned activist became a voice for the thousands of Yazidi women who are still suffering under the Islamic State.
The primary use of an army has always been to give an opportunity to protect innocent people from the worst fate imaginable. Death was not even the worst option for many of these victims. Torture, rape, humiliation and targeting of children would be the catalyst for societies to decide to defend themselves from barbaric acts that would lead to their eventual extinction.
In 2016, these actions are occurring on a daily basis, and the media gives non-stop 24 hour coverage of the most mundane of first world problems. To focus on the absurd rather than give even a few seconds to the victims of what could be argued are the worst crimes to ever be committed against human beings is simply wrong, and goes against every fibre of any society. It is not unreasonable to think that all minorities will be wiped out of the Middle East very soon, simply because of our lack of interest.
America as a modern entity was forged out of the actions they took in the first half of the 20th century, helping what they saw as other moral democracies achieve goals that were for the betterment of humanity as a whole. They did not do this perfectly, sometimes taking on shadowy actions themselves against their enemies, claiming it was for the greater good. Often it was, but with the end of the Second World War and liberation of millions of enslaved peoples, America was not perfect, but it did show a moment of greatness in the epic of human civilization.
In 2016, genocide of the type never accepted before is being placated by our barons of information. The gross language of word play on the issue of genocide is nothing new for governments. I recall the regret of many world leaders in our modern era when discussing their actions during the genocide in the Balkans and especially Rwanda.
To speak away ones obligation as a powerful nation for political expediency requires a new label for a new type of crime. Anyone who studies law knows this will never occur, but the moral outrage should be there just the same. Earning political capital off the backs of those who perished for the sake of a few votes and a reduction of first world problems should be the number one reason a politician loses their employment and credibility. It is the first thing wrong in any society, and those individuals who make games of the embarrassments of humanity will never contribute anything positive to it.
In an article published last month “What Yazidi Refugees Fleeing ISIS Want Americans to Know”, the author documents what is occurring in what is likely the lowest point in our history of human civilization. The narrative begs American citizens, and to infer as well, their President, election candidates and the rest of the civilized world to not let them perish in the most horrible of ways, to stop their extinction and to remind us all that we are of the same human family. The end of those people will become a blight on the souls of all sensible individuals for the rest of human existence. While allowing their extinction to occur is not in violation of any law for those ignoring one of the worst genocides to have ever occurred, the eradication of one of the oldest societies is a tragedy.
This is the only issue that really matters, and if a candidate is willing to address it and end this holocaust then they deserve their mark on humanity. The statement: That occurred in the generation that occupied the era of 2016, is not yet written, but it is our contribution to our ancestors and our future children. That will be our legacy, and it has already begun.
The post At the Brink of Extinction, They are Asking for America’s Help appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
Printing money: our only idea?
The recent G-20 summit occurred just a few weeks after a symposium of global central bankers, which put questions of the global economy in the spotlight. However, as only a few voices note, the discourse largely glosses over the extraordinarily distorted shape of global finance and the perils that raises.
In short, the global economy has been leaning on monetary policy—the printing of money by central banks —to avoid decline. The evidence is in an unprecedented incidence of negative interest rates, particularly for trillions of dollars worth of sovereign bonds.
As national authorities have limited their fiscal spending, out of political or budgetary constraints, central banks, which create money, have pumped it in to stimulate their economies. They have bought bonds for years, and in the process they have lowered the benchmark rates on financial instruments. As economies revive, they would normally be expected to raise rates, and sell the bonds back into the markets, but that hasn’t happened.
Thus, rates go to zero—and beyond, most notoriously in the EU but also in Japan. Even in the U.S., the Federal Reserve has signaled an intention to raise its rates for years, but has only announced one hike of the Fed Funds target rate, from zero to a quarter percent. The ECB has apparently bought bonds directly from corporate issuers, essentially making loans directly to those companies, for lack of bonds to buy elsewhere.
The knock-on effects distort economies further. Pension funds’ earnings on their assets do not cover payments they will owe future retirees. To find yield, they invest in increasingly risky bonds and stocks, apparently raising the market risks to pensioners’ savings to defray the risk of benefit-payment shortfalls. Meanwhile, firms are loading up on debt, which raises their risk profiles, a notable one being the now-defaulted Hanjin Shipping, which had a debt to equity ratio of about 6 to 1.
The image that emerges is one of stagnant economies burdened by debt, as the last tool for stimulus taps out. The prospects for growth remain bleak, while the dangers of debt increase every month that borrowers’ cash flows fail to grow. The picture is global: the EU is constrained by its economic crisis, plus Brexit, plus the questions around refugee flows; the U.S., despite its mild optimism, is still jittery; China is in a deep economic adjustment; the oil economies are subject to both the competitive effect of fracking and the weakness of global demand; and export-driven economies are left with no buyers.
Even were there a general disposition to acknowledge these risks, solutions would be difficult to craft. But both the central bankers and the G-20 leaders seem inclined to talk around this scenario, though it seems implicitly understood.
Fear that was known but unaddressed while old practices continued marked the geopolitics of 1914 and the financial markets in 2007-8. Anyone in finance during the latter period may remember risk assessments that concluded with “… if that scenario happens, this deal will be the least of our problems.” On top of the risks in place and the disinclination to fix them, we now also know that nightmares can come true.
There are those who say that one never knows where growth originates, and all we can do is muddle along. Certainly the known tools for stimulating growth seem to have been exhausted, and no one can see brilliant new policy or market methods. It would seem that there is a basic problem of somehow restoring what Keynes called the ‘animal spirits’ of at least a few of the major economies. But, in any economy one can name, the social, political, and/or psychological scene is mired in negativity. Perhaps muddling through will eventually lead to stabilization and a return of confidence. For that or for quicker answers, we might start praying.
The post See No Evil? Distorted Finance and Economic Risk appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Vietnamese counterpart Nguyen Xuan Phuc witness the two countries’ officials signing a military cooperation agreement at the Government office in Hanoi, September 3, 2016. (Reuters)
New evidence appears to show Beijing restarting large-scale land reclamation in the disputed South China Sea, despite an international court ruling rejecting most of China’s claims. It suggests China had ordered barges to Scarborough Shoal and begun construction, according to a statement by Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte last Friday. In the face of Beijing’s continued actions to assert its territorial claims, other nations are partnering up to increase their military ties and defense cooperation, including Vietnam and India.
Last Saturday’s visit to Vietnam by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the first by any Indian prime minister in 15 years, resulted in Modi offering his Vietnamese counterpart Nguyen Xuan Phuc a credit line of $500 million for defense cooperation.
The two countries are already cooperating on numerous defensive fronts, with New Delhi having earlier supplied Hanoi with another credit line of $100 million to purchase offshore patrol boats. Through the purchase of the patrol boats, Vietnam hopes to stop attacks on its fishermen—some 200 Vietnamese fishermen were attacked by Chinese boats in 2015, according to local Vietnamese government officials. India is also training Vietnamese military personnel in the operation of the Russian Kilo-class submarine. New Delhi also spent $23 million this year to set up a satellite monitoring station in Ho Chi Minh City, which will be activated soon and linked to an existing station in Indonesia.
More significantly, Hanoi has requested to purchase the supersonic Indo-Russian BrahMos missile from India, reputed to be the world’s fastest cruise missile at speeds up to three times the speed of sound. The unit cost of the BrahMos missile is $3 million, with a range of 290 kilometers (180 miles), and can be fired from land, sea and submarine. Negotiations on the purchase are expected to conclude by the end of the year. New Delhi is also considering a proposal to offer Hanoi a battleship armed with configurations of eight or 16 BrahMos missiles each. Vietnam sits at the top of the list of countries for Indian export of the missiles, followed by the Philippines. The other 9 nations expected to purchase the missiles from India include Malaysia, Thailand and United Arab Emirates.
So why is India, which sits far from the South China Sea, involving itself in this particular maritime dispute? New Delhi has no territorial claims in the area, and defense cooperation by New Delhi with those nations who are party to territorial disputes can only anger Beijing. Jeff M. Smith, Director of Asian Security Programs at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, argues, “Policymakers in Delhi were long constrained by the belief that advanced defense cooperation with Washington or Hanoi could provoke aggressive and undesirable responses from Beijing.”
Perhaps India’s greater involvement comes as New Delhi is growing more concerned that Beijing’s increased assertiveness in the South China Sea may extend to territory close to India. India shares a border with China, to which India deployed 100 tanks in July following an “increase in force levels” from China. China has also been busy building key infrastructure such as power stations, highways and seaports for the small island nations surrounding India. While Beijing rails against a perceived “containment” by the U.S., New Delhi may be feeling the same, as Beijing funds arch-rival Pakistan’s military and docks its submarines in Sri Lanka.
This latest offering of military assistance by New Delhi to Hanoi is a continuation of Modi’s foreign policy of reaching out to neighbors, in an effort to contain Beijing’s aspirations to geopolitical control and military presence in the region. Last March, Modi announced the provision of military and civilian assistance to the island nations of Maldives, Mauritius, the Seychelles and Sri Lanka, including the supply of patrol vessels, surveillance radars and ocean mapping services.
Most likely, Modi no longer considers New Delhi’s restraint as effective, having seen Beijing’s threats to freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea, and the illegal construction of an artificial islands. When dealing in future with Beijing, Modi’s latest overtures toward Hanoi make it clear New Delhi has finally traded its carrot of non-interference for a stick of dynamite.
The post New Delhi Offers $500 million Credit Line to Hanoi for Defense appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.