Type: Policy Alerts

Policy Alerts inform U.S. policymakers and media professionals of the ongoing debates in Brazil, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and Russia on current issues and events relevant to American foreign policy.

Asian Powers Discuss Their Foreign Policies Post Regional Summits

Policy Alert #88 | November 25, 2014

Following the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Beijing two weeks ago, world leaders participated in a number of multilateral forums, including the East Asia Summit in Naypyidaw, Myanmar and the G-20 in Brisbane, Australia, as well as bilateral and trilateral meetings with allies and partners. The leaders sought to expand their interests and influence in the region as they discussed issues ranging from regional economic integration to international security. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from Russia, China, India, and Japan on the implications of this summit diplomacy for the regional order.

RUSSIA

Russian President Vladimir Putin left the G20 meeting early in response to repeated criticism from Western leaders over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine. Putin said his decision to fly home had nothing to do with tensions over Ukraine and cited a need to catch up on sleep before returning to work. The majority of Russian media was supportive of Putin, praising him for defending Russia’s national interests.

  • At a forum of the All-Russia Peoples’ Front in Moscow, Putin reflected on the outcomes of the G20, stating that the U.S. has no plans to humiliate Russia, but instead wants to subdue it. Put added that “throughout history no one has ever managed to [subdue] Russia-and no one ever will.”
  • Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev responded to the West’s criticism of Russia at the G20, calling U.S. President Barack Obama a “lame duck…who decided to throw accusations at Russia…I thought better of him.”
  • Political commentator Georgy Satarov, a former political adviser to the late Russian President Boris Yeltson, said Putin had deliberately snubbed the West by leaving the G20 summit early. “I think that in this case the sign was that Putin plans to behave in Ukraine as he thinks is necessary, not as the G20 leaders expect him to.”
  • “Whether or not Obama or Putin emerged on top from the G20 summit in Brisbane and an Asia-Pacific summit the week before, one thing seems clear: anyone who thought the Russian leader would soon blink over Ukraine was wrong,” wrote the Moscow Times.
  • Dmitry Areshkin, a Moscow political scientist and member of Putin’s Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights, wrote that it is becoming “ever more obvious that Russia lacks the resources to confront the West.” Moreover, Areshkin noted that Putin has thus far followed a strategy of “raising the stakes and constant bluff” in order to get his way with the West. But “now the West has given him to understand that it sees his bluff and does not intend to fall for it.”

CHINA

Chinese media credited the success of the APEC forum held early November in Beijing, as setting the stage for what it deemed a successful G20 summit. China will host the 2016 G20 summit.

  • “The success of the 2014 APEC forum…in Beijing has laid a solid foundation for greater achievements in Brisbane. The development of a new type of great power relations between China and the U.S. has also created a favorable scenario for the accomplishments at the G20 summit this year,” wrote Liu Zongyi, research fellow at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies.
  • “Some Western media hold a negative attitude towards the ongoing G20 summit. But a simple glance back at the just-concluded Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Beijing, which achieved huge success with the joint efforts of China and its partners, shows how absurd such pessimism is. By promoting the spirit of cooperation and solving some disputes, the Beijing APEC brings hope and sets a brilliant example to the G20 summit,” said the China Daily.
  • The Global Times characterized the G20 summit as having “run off the rails” due to the public’s focus on the rivalry between the West and Russia. The editorial claimed that the China-hosted APEC meetings were much more successful because, “First, China has the determination and responsibility to hold successful international conferences. Second, it is powerful enough to exert an influence on all parties. It will not act as a stage for any of these countries to play out their rivalries. Third, China is a powerful mediator. It has maintained robust relations with both developing and developed countries; therein lies its advantage.”

Following the G20 summit, Chinese president Xi Jinping embarked on a state visit to Australia, where the two countries completed negotiations on a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) and raised their relationship to a comprehensive strategic partnership.

  • The FTA, due to be formally signed next year, will mean that 95 per cent of Australian exports to China will be tariff-free. Australia, in return, will eliminate tariffs on imports from China.
  • State-run news agency Xinhua noted that President Xi’s just-concluded trip to Australia demonstrates a “new pattern of diplomacy that features increasing soft elements and a down-to-earth manner” and praised the two countries for entering “a new era of mutually beneficial interaction.”
  • Addressing the Australian Federal Parliament, President Xi likened his country to a “big guy in the crowd.” “Others will naturally wonder how the big guy will move and act, and be concerned that the big guy may push them around, stand in their way or take up their space,” he said. The Chinese president dismissed those concerns, vowing that China remains “unshakable in its resolve to pursue peaceful and common development, and to promote cooperation and development in the Asia-Pacific.”

INDIA

Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a series of summits with leaders from ASEAN, Australia, and Fiji to make progress on a variety of issues from free trade negotiations to visa liberalization to security cooperation. Indian commentators discussed the successes of India’s new Asia policy called “Act East,” focusing particularly on the India-Australia relationship.

  • The Hindustan Times succinctly posited the reasons for strengthening the India-Australia ties: “New Delhi is interested in Australia’s natural resource exports while Canberra is alert to the promise of India’s vast market for its services. Both countries see themselves as Indian Ocean powers, they are interested in the emerging power-balance in the Asia-Pacific and watch the rise of China with a measure of fascinated ambivalence.”
  • The Pioneer hailed that India-Australia security cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, including regular ministerial meetings and maritime exercises, “can be a game changer” in the region where tensions and conflicts are emerging due to China’s rise.
  • While the previous administration “had set voluntary limits to India’s defense diplomacy in the East by deferring to presumed Chinese sensitivities…Modi’s Delhi is willing to do what it thinks is right for India without second-guessing Beijing’s reaction,” explained C. Raja Mohan, a distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.
  • The Hindustan Times took a more benign view that India-Australia security ties are “by no means a zero-sum arrangement” since Australia has just signed a free trade deal worth of $131 billion with China. “[B]ut it does show a willingness by Canberra and New Delhi to be clearheaded and unapologetic about exploring strategic convergences with like-minded powers.”
  •  In an op-ed titled “Not So Easy to Act East,” Mohan argued that “Delhi has much to do before its Act East policy gains credibility in Asia.” He noted that “it is by no means clear if the ministry of defense is really prepared for a significant intensification of India’s military partnerships in Asia” as Delhi has not yet agreed on trilateral security cooperation with Australia and Japan.

JAPAN

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held a trilateral summit with Australian counterpart Tony Abbott and American counterpart President Barack Obama on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Brisbane.

Japanese newspapers discussed the strengthening of the trilateral security cooperation in light of China’s rise.

  • “This is serious,” a Japanese government official in charge of national security said in reaction to the Japan-Australia submarine agreement. “It lays all the cards on the table and ties the fate of our security situations as a group.”
  •  “Considering the high-level of secrecy surrounding submarines, providing technologies implies Japan and the U.S. place full trust in Australia, and are ready to become its closest allies,” posited the Nikkei Shimbun.
  •  “Following technical cooperation in submarines, Japan, the U.S. and Australia will likely start working together in the operational arena,” said Satoshi Morimoto a former defense minister under the Yoshihiko Noda administration. “Australia will be in charge of the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, [while] Japan will mainly handle the East China Sea. With the U.S. participating in and leading trilateral cooperation, it will be possible to effectively respond to movements of Chinese submarines.”
  •  The Yomiuri Shimbun argued that Japan-Australia defense cooperation, as part of President Obama’s “rebalance” policy, “will be effective in checking China’s self-righteous advances in the East and South China seas and North Korea’s military provocations.”
  • The Sankei Shimbun agreed, claiming that trilateral security cooperation “should be at the center” of the “rebalance” policy, as President Obama reiterated his commitment to that policy in Brisbane, saying that “American leadership in the Asia Pacific will always be a fundamental focus of my foreign policy.”

Asian Powers Comment on the 2014 APEC Summit

Policy Alert #87 | November 13, 2014

Over the past several days, world leaders gathered in Beijing to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, where they discussed regional economic integration, including China’s proposal of the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). On the sidelines, many bilateral summits were held among the participating nations, including a much-awaited meeting between China and Japan. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and India on the outcomes of these diplomatic meetings.

CHINA

China played an active role at APEC summit, proposing a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), pledging $40 billion USD to set up a Silk Road Fund to strengthen connectivity and improve cooperation in China’s neighborhood, launching the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) designed to fund infrastructure projects in underdeveloped Asian countries, and Chinese president Xi Jinping holding bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the summit with U.S. president Barack Obama and Russian president Vladimir Putin. Chinese media responded positively to outcomes of the APEC meeting, defending China’s activities at the summit as part of its “peaceful rise” strategy.

  • The state-run Xinhua lauded Beijing’s role in the summit, stating “Beijing’s endeavor to reshape the APEC initiative at a time of staggering world economic recovery -by expanding free trade and improving connectivity -will no doubt leave an indelible imprint in the course of regional cooperation and global economic development.”
  • The “rich harvest” from the APEC meeting, which “Xi fittingly described as fruitful, indicates that the now 25-year-old APEC is a lot more than just a showpiece,” declared China Daily.
  • Another China Daily editorial praised China for its work on APEC, which underlies China’s “peaceful rise” strategy. It noted that this strategy “underlies the global strategy for China’s development, which necessitates its stance of seeking win-win cooperation with as many countries as possible.”
  • Xinhua writer Li Li wrote, “The TFAAP is by no means a ‘solo show’ of China. Rather, it is the shared aspiration of all APEC members that will bring them a wealth of benefits. In addition, the FTAAP is not aimed at forcing out other free trade arrangements in the region, but at integrating them and making regional movements of goods and services more efficient.”
  • “Washington still cherishes the wishful thinking that it is able to hammer out a US and Japan-led free trade system by means of the TPP as the framework, by which they canbend China’s will to their wishes so that it will follow their lead after joining the system,” wrote People’s Daily senior editor Ding Gang. “The facts have shown that rules which are made without China’s participation will not end up well.”
  • “Some have rushed to interpret the aim of the China proposed AIIB as a challenge to Western backed institutions such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank,” wrote Huang Yinjiazi in Xinhua. “It is high time that the developed countries, which have been benefitting from the growth of the developing world and its expanding market, allow their developing counterparts to have a say in global economic governance…shaking off suspicion to welcome an organization like the AIIB might be a good start.”

RUSSIA

Russian analysts and media focused on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s skillful maneuvering of Presidents Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin at the APEC summit, questioning whether China will benefit the most from tense relations between the US and Russia.

  • Noting that “the shifting trend of economic power towards the Asia-Pacific region is obvious,” Dr. Alexander Yakovenko, former Russian deputy foreign minister (2005-2011) wrote that “Russia is planning to expand its cooperation with Asian countries in many spheres.”
  • Moscow Times writer Ivan Nechepurenko observed that “in the ongoing crisis between Russia and the West over the fate of Ukraine, China so far appears to be the victor. Beijing has become a strategic imperative in recent months, as both Moscow and Washington have decisively pivoted toward Asia.“
  • Sergei Lukonin, head of the Chinese Economics and Politics program at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, expanded on the current state of relations between China, Russia, and the US. “If you imagine a triangle connecting Russia, the US and China, tensions between two angles are beneficial to the third. The current situation could mark the culmination of a new multipolarity in the modern international community.”
  • Russia Times noted that President Putin’s act of placing a shawl around the shoulders of China’s First Lady Peng Liyuan during a chilly fireworks display -which sparked animated headlines by Western commentators -was quickly erased by Chinese media censors.

JAPAN

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held at a much-awaited summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, which was made possible by a prior bilateral agreement that recognized the existence of “different views” on the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute and promised to overcome the “political difficulties” surrounding history issues.

  • Prime Minister Abe said that he believes the summit “marked the first step to improve relations, with Japan and China returning to the starting point of a mutually beneficial relationship based on common strategic interests.”
  • The summit itself did not directly address maritime disputes and the controversial Yasukuni Shrine issue, but both sides agreed to “start administrative work to implement the maritime liaison mechanism” aimed at preventing potential clashes in the East China Sea.

Japanese newspapers in general welcomed the summit, urging both governments to make further efforts to improve bilateral relations.

  • The Mainichi Shimbun appraised the summit as “an end to the unusual situation” of no dialogue between the two leaders for two-and-a-half years and the implementation of the maritime liaison mechanism as “significant in that it prompts a move by the Chinese military.”
  • Admitting that the summit “alone does not resolve” any of the differences between China and Japan, The Japan Times still lauded the two leaders’ efforts “to match their words with deeds to manage their divergent views.”
  • The Asahi Shimbun also remained optimistic, arguing that “it is still possible to seek coexistence and co-prosperity even when issues of contention remain” and urged “both sides to focus on common ground and make steady efforts to promote mutual interests.”
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun viewed the meeting as an opportunity to change the bilateral relationship “from one of confrontation to cooperation,” but still argued that Beijing should “correct its stance of changing by force the status quo in the East and South China seas” and “refrain from the anti-Japan propaganda campaigns” to make progress on history issues.
  • The Sankei Shimbun cautioned against Japan’s further concessions on the maritime dispute and history issues, suggesting that Beijing may claim the existence of a territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands based on the joint agreement that acknowledged “different views” on the East China Sea.

SOUTH KOREA

On the sidelines of the APEC summit, Korean President Park Geun-hye held a meeting with President Xi, reaching an “effective conclusion” on a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA). She also expressed her “strong support” for China’s FTAAP roadmap, which counters the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Korean newspapers discussed the opportunities and challenges of these economic initiatives.

  • The Chosun Ilbo posited that while the FTA deal with Korea’s biggest trading partner, China,  presents a great opportunity for Korean exports, it may fall short of expectations as it shields a 10 percent of all good exchange from tariff abolition,compared to just 0.1 percent with the U.S. and 0.4 percent with Europe. With the tariffs in place, Korea manages to protect its agriculture industry, including rice, but China can keep its trade barriers on Korean manufactured goods.
  • The newspaper also argued that the FTA has security implications because stronger economic ties will strengthen political and diplomatic relations between the two countries. But it also warned that the Korean government “will have a difficult balancing act to perform so strengthened ties with China do not undermine the vital alliance with the U.S.”
  • Deepened Sino-Korean cooperation “requires Seoul officials to be more careful to keep the country’s key security alliance with the U.S. intact,” warned The Korea Herald. “Korea will also have to make a difficult decision on how to respond to China’s initiatives to restructure the global economic and financial system, currently dominated by the U.S. and its allies in the West.”
  • Kim Han-kwon, director of the Center for Regional Studies at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, argued the FTA offers “an opportunity to enhance the two countries’ strategic cooperative partnership.” But he admitted, “Amid heightened strategic competition between the U.S. and China in Northeast Asia, Korea is currently in a difficult position pressured to choose sides on several issues between the U.S. and China.”
  • Yun Duk-min, chancellor of the Korea National Diplomatic Academy, expressed a contrasting view. “Until now, Korean diplomacy has been conducted within the larger frame of the United States, but a sense of balance has been reached through the conclusion of the FTA with China.”

INDIA

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not attend the APEC summit, although he received an unprecedented, personal invitation from President Xi despite India’s non-member status. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Modi is heading to other multilateral forums in the coming days, including the India-Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summit and the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Nay Pyi Daw, Myanmar, the G20 meeting in Brisbane, and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit in Kathmandu. Against this backdrop, Indian commentators discussed the future of India’s multilateral diplomacy.

  • C. Raja Mohan, a distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, argued that faced with other great powers attempting to shape the international order in their favors-the United States with the TPP and China with the FTAAP-it is time for India to abandon its “defensive multilateralism” and consequent international isolation. India must implement “pragmatic multilateralism” showing that the country is prepared to make reasonable compromises in multilateral economic negotiations and to become a “rule-maker” in the region and in the world.
  • Ambassador Neelam Deo claimed that the upcoming multilateral summits offer India “an opportunity to enhance regional position and economic links.” While Beijing has a greater economic influence on ASEAN and SAARC countries than New Delhi, China’s thorny relationships with these countries over the maritime disputes in the South China Sea will give India “the strategic space to balance Beijing’s influence” in the region.
  • Prime Minister Modi “can transform India’s multilateral diplomacy” in the upcoming summits, argued the Business Standard. “For too long have Indian politicians and diplomats imagined that their primary duty at such multilateral forums is to block agreements out of fear. A more assertive India will perhaps see that there is an opportunity to be proactive at such forums instead, and to lead the search for a solution to various outstanding issues.”

Brazil’s Presidential Elections and Reactions from Rising Powers

Policy Alert #86 | October 28, 2014

On Sunday, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff won her second term in a hotly contested runoff election against the center-right Social Democratic Party’s candidate Aecio Neves. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from Brazil, China, Russia, India, and Japan on one of the tightest races in Brazil’s politics in recent years.

BRAZIL

Brazilian media focused on the unusually heated and polarizing campaign, the apparent regional divide between the poorer north and richer south, and the negative reaction of international markets to Dilma Rousseff’s victory over Aécio Neves in Sunday’s second round.

  • The unusually harsh campaign run by both Rousseff and Neves seemed to coalesce into a harder opposition by the defeated Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB) with Neves’s vice-presidential candidate Aloysio Nunes Ferreira declaring that Rousseff “doesn’t deserve a honeymoon period” while promising a firm opposition.
  • Many Brazilians also worry that a political fault line is emerging between the poorer northern states-all but one won by Rousseff -and the more prosperous southern states where Aécio won all but two states. The newspaper Estadão ran a piece seeking to refute that and other myths from the election, showing that while Rousseff was dominant in the north and northeast, she was extremely competitive in the south, a fact belied by the state level maps.
  • Markets initially reacted negatively to President Rousseff’s victory. The Bovespa-Brazil’s main stock market-fell sharply on Monday after rising and falling in opposition to the polls through the election while the Brazilian real dropped against the U.S. dollar. However, a growing consensus that Rousseff will appoint a more market-friendly Finance Minister has begun to reverse that trend.
  • For her part, President Rousseff called for unity while expressing a willingness to reach out to work with the opposition in her belief that “that the clash of ideas can create room for consensus,” and promised to be “a much better president than I have been until now.”

CHINA

Chinese officials congratulated President Rousseff on her reelection and emphasized the importance of growing Sino-Brazilian relations.

  • Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday congratulated Dilma Rousseff on her reelection, pledging to further promote relations between China and the South American nation. “I attachgreat importance to developing China-Brazil relations, and am willing to make concerted efforts with you to strive for sustained and rapid development of the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Brazil,” he added.
  • China vowed to “advance its all-round strategic partnership with Brazil,” according to Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying. Hua said that “China has always attached great importance to and perceived its relationship with Brazil from a long-term, strategic height” and that “China is ready to further deepen mutual trust, increase multi-dimensional cooperation and lift its level of practical cooperation with Brazil.”
  • In an interview with China Daily, Lourdes Casanova, lecturer at Cornell’s Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management stated that Brazil needs its own version of the ‘China Dream.’ “The ‘Chinese dream’ is to say, Chinese citizens aspire to something bigger than themselves” to fight for a better world, a better China and a better future for their children,” Casanova said. “As of now, we see the Brazil dream as a combination of things: The inspirational attitude of the American dream, aspects of the welfare state from the European dream, and of course, a bit of the China dream.”
  • Government- run Xinhua warned that “a priority that the new government needs to give to economic revival is to calibrate its economic policies, win back market confidence and realize sustainable development of the national economy.”

RUSSIA

Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated President Rousseff on her reelection and expressed hopes to continue furthering Russian-Brazilian relations.

  • According to the Kremlin’s website, “Mr. Putin said he values highly the attention Ms. Rousseff gives to the strategic partnership between the two countries and confirmed his readiness to continue constructive dialogue, active joint work to take bilateral cooperation in different areas even further, and continue cooperation within the UN, G20, BRICS group and other multilateral organizations.”
  • In the state-run RIA Novosti, Daria Chernyshova wrote that the election results reveal Brazil has “two groups with two ideologies regarding the development and social situation in the country… and the others, who are in favor of the not so liberal, who want the state to have an important position in pushing for development, but the kind of development with social inclusion.”

INDIA

While Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered a personal congratulatory message to President Rousseff, Indian newspapers predicted many challenges ahead for the new president.

  • Prime Minister Modi congratulated Rousseff on her re-election via Twitter, saying “I look forward to continuing to work with @dilmabr to strengthen India-Brazil relations in the years to come.”
  • The Hindu called Sunday’s election “a replay of the political script in Latin America“-the victories of leftist parties despite their poor economic performances. “The term anti-incumbency seems almost alien to the Latin American lexicon.”
  • The Pioneer offered a different view, saying that “Brazil has voted for continuity overall, but…also for a change in the ways of governance.” In forming a coalition government, President Rousseff now faces a difficult task of keeping her promise of social welfare expansion to the poor while working with the center-right opposition parties backed by the middle class who favors free markets and free enterprise.
  • The Indian Express argued that President Rousseff must “forge alliances” with opposition parties to “infuse new energy into Brazil’s deteriorating economy, which slid into recession in August, while attempting to reunite a country divided by a noxious campaign.”

JAPAN

Japanese news outlets remained pessimistic about President Rousseff’s second term.

  • The Sankei Shimbun offered dim predictions for President Rousseff, who not only wonSunday’s election merely by a slim margin but also faces numerous challenges ahead, including economic recovery, public welfare expansion, and the Rio 2016 Olympics.
  • The newspaper argued that unless President Rousseff offers concrete plans to address those challenges, her promises in the victory speech-becoming a “much better president” and uniting the country-will be empty words.

Hong Kong Protests Spark Reactions from Rising Powers

Policy Alert #85 | October 20, 2014

Tens of thousands of pro-democracy protesters marched on the streets in Hong Kong last week in response to the Chinese leadership’s decision to essentially screen candidates for the city’s 2017 election of its chief executive. While the demonstrations have subdued after protesters agreed with the local government to start formal talks later this week, the future of Hong Kong remains uncertain. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, India, Japan, and South Korea on the ongoing protests in Hong Kong.

CHINA

The Chinese government clamped down on images and information of the pro-democracy protests reaching mainland China, with only a few select commentaries in state-run media blasting the gatherings as illegal, disruptive of social order, and harmful to the economy.

  • “If the oppositionists continue their Occupy campaign, they will bring more inconvenience to local people, the investment environment will be harmed, and the stock market and foreign exchange market will slip…the central government will not step back just because of the chaos created by the oppositionists,” stated an editorial published in the state-run Global Times.
  • China Daily wrote, “By now it should have been clear to citizens that what the political extremists really want is to advance their agenda by seizing power to rule Hong Kong by any means, rather than by promoting democracy.”
  • The People’s Daily estimated investors’ aggregate losses at no less than $350 billion HKD ($4.5 billion USD) as a result of “working hours and business transactions lost due to the disruptions in the city,” and referred to the Occupy movement as an illustration of “the tyranny of the minority in politics.”

In contrast, media in semiautonomous Hong Kong broadcasted nonstop commentary about the Occupy crowds and Hong Kong’s future.

  • “Hong Kong is torn between rival visions about its identity and future. On one side is the need for our little city to find its place in vast China- integration. On the other side is the counterclaim that we must preserve and protect what is unique and different about us against mainland contamination- exceptionalism. ‘One country, two systems’ under the Basic Law allows and encourages both conflicting tendencies- hence it is the constitutional root of our current malaise,” said journalist Alex Lo in the Hong Kong based South China Morning Post.
  • Lijia Zhang, a journalist and social commentator for SCMP noted that, “as Hongkongers experience a political awakening, mainlanders are becoming less interested in politics.” She remarked that few on the mainland appear to be interested in finding out about Hong Kong’s democracy protest, much less sympathizing with it, “clearly a reflection of their political apathy.”
  • Tammy Tam, predicted in the SCMP that “there is no doubt Beijing’s policies on Hong Kong will become tougher than ever…Hongkongers may like, dislike or even hate the ruling Communist Party. But like it or not, Hong Kong is part of China. And learning how to deal with Beijing in a more effective and skillful way would be the pragmatic way forward.”
  • Another op-ed written by SCMP writer Kelly Yang argued that Hong Kong’s economy “is our biggest asset, and the one thing China is eager to safeguard. It’s the only reason Beijing has to listen to what we want…If Hongkongers really want a democratic election system, we …need to leverage our economy and play this card to our advantage instead of trying to ruin it.”

INDIA

Indian newspapers and commentators criticized both Chinese and Western governments’ handling of the demonstrations.

  • The Indian Express critiqued that the new electoral system in Hong Kong would make only a “mockery of democracy…where every adult citizen can vote for local legislators-so long as the party approves.”
  • The Business Standard argued that Hong Kong people are “mature enough to carry out a free election.” Given the remote possibility of the city’s demand for independence, the unrest in Hong Kong shows that “Communist China remains unable to stomach protests of any kind, even if those assembled are armed with little more than umbrellas.”
  • Upendra Nath Sharma, a sociology professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, criticized Western countries, especially the Great Britain, for their lack of support for the demonstrations. “Having delivered their former subjects into the hands of a communist dictatorship, Britain has a moral duty to ensure their basic rights, safety and autonomy are protected.”
  • He stated that “International opinion should pressure Beijing to stop dictating the outcome of Hong Kong’s elections…not least so that China itself can advance with Hong Kong as its model.”

JAPAN

Japanese media outlets remained critical of the Chinese government and showed support for the Hong Kong protestors.

  • “The ability to impose Beijing-orchestrated governance appears to be reaching its limit,” argued the Yomiuri Shimbun. The Chinese central government “should show serious consideration for Hong Kong’s autonomy, and resolve this situation through dialogue.”
  • The Sankei Shimbun demanded that the Xi administration honor the “one-country, two-systems” principle and remove the selection committee designed to screen candidates, warning that any undoing of Hong Kong’s democracy will undermine the city’s trust and value as Asia’s “most matured” financial center.
  • The newspaper also questioned the lack of pro-democracy support from Western countries, especially the United Kingdom, the former colonizer who was a party to the “one country, two systems” agreement during the process of Hong Kong’s reversion to the mainland.

SOUTH KOREA

Korean newspapers urged the Chinese leadership to respect Hong Kong’s autonomy.

  • The JoongAng Ilbo posited that the demonstrations show that China’s experiment with the unique arrangement of “one-country, two-systems” is “at crossroad.”

Rising Powers React to U.S. Fight against Islamic State

Policy Alert #84 | September 20, 2014

As President Barack Obama unveiled his plan to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State (IS) in Syria, U.S. military and its Arab allies yesterday launched airstrikes against the extremist group in Syria. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, Russia, India, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil on the ongoing fight against IS.

CHINA

Commentary in China was divided: some advocated for China’s involvement in the Middle East due to economic considerations and China’s status as a global power, while others cautioned against aligning with the United States.

  • Li Xiaoshian, a senior researcher on Middle East Studies at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, warned that “if China does not join the endeavor to defeat the IS, it might suffer in the reconstruction process and its interests might lack protection.” However, Li expressed concern that the current alliance is “dominated by the United States and its Western allies.”
  • Noting that “China is the largest importer of Iraqi oil,” Jin Baisong, deputy director of the Department of Chinese Trade Studies at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation stated, “China needs to take preemptive measures to protect its economic interests in the region.” Jin added that the international community should “take steps to guarantee that oil production in Iraq continues smoothly.”
  • Han Dongping, a guest professor at Hebei University disagreed with others, asserting, “It is best to leave the IS problem for the people of Middle East to deal with. Other countries’ involvement in the Middle East will only complicate the situation further and make things worse.”
  • Zhao Jinglun, a columnist for China.org, stated that Obama has committed the United States to “a ‘pivot’ to Asia, a muscular presence in Europe and a new battle against Islamic extremists…so the common impression that the United States is in an era of retrenchmentmay not be true after all.”
  • “Obama is supposed to have offered a plan for degrading and ultimately destroying IS. But what he has presented looks like a plan for an open-ended war without well-defined conditions for victory,” said Zhao Jinglun in another China.org editorial.

RUSSIA

Russia viewed the U.S. airstrikes on ISIS as a violation of sovereignty.

  • U.S. airstrikes on Islamic State militants in Syria violate Syria’s sovereignty and are destabilizing to the region, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. “Attempts to pursue own geopolitical goals through violating the sovereignty of other states only escalates tensions and aggravates the situation even further,” the statement read. “Moscow has repeatedly warned that those who initiate one-sided military scenarios bear full international legal responsibility for the consequences.”
  • President Vladimir Putin discussed with his Security Council on Monday potential cooperation with other countries on fighting against IS, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
  • “If the United States was serious about tackling ISIS in Syria and Iraq, it would be seeking an alliance between both governments, along with the Iranians, in order to do so. Instead, the most powerful nation on earth is behaving like a drunken giant staggering around a china shop causing mayhem as he goes,” criticized an op-ed in the Russia Times.

INDIA

Indian commentators voiced skepticism toward President Obama’s war plan against IS.

  • The fight against IS marks the “return” of the U.S. to the Middle East, says D. Suba Chandran, Director at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi. Bridging the “trust deficit” in the region regarding America’s intervention approach, however, will be the “biggest challenge” to the strategy against the extremist group.
  • Rajendra Abhyankar, a former Indian ambassador to Syria and Turkey, argued that India “should stay out” of the fight against IS. He bashed the U.S.-led military campaign as “an invasion of a sovereign country,” for it did not seek any coordination with the Syrian government and bypassed the U.N. Security Council.
  • He also expressed concern that the military action “will exacerbate the dangerous situation in the Middle East rather than provide a resolution to the crisis…It is not possible to ‘degrade and ultimately destroy’ a stream of thought by military means; indeed, it might be granted a fresh lease of life.”
  • The deep root of the problem is the “deep-seated sectarian and regional power rivalries” in the Middle East, claimed Sreeram Sundar Chaulia, Dean at the Jindal School of International Affairs. “IS could gradually wither after a coordinated assault, but as long as the sectarian zealotry it represents thrives via the patronage of Arab rulers, new monsters will periodically pop up and embroil the region in permanent crisis.”

JAPAN

The Japanese government pledged $25.5 million in humanitarian aid for refugees from IS, but denied any military support. Japanese newspapers supported this action.

  • “While Japan cannot make military contributions, it will provide humanitarian aid and implement measures against terrorism,” Kentaro Sonoura, a parliamentary vice foreign minister, said at a U.N. Security Council meeting in New York last week.
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun warned that the United States and its allies “must be prepared for a long battle,” urging the Japanese government to “actively provide financial and other support to the Middle East, a region on which the nation depends for much of its energy sources.”
  • The Sankei Shimbun agreed, calling for U.S. greater leadership on and Japan’s humanitarian assistance for what it called the “new war on terror.”
  • “The world…is responding viscerally and emotionally” to IS’ savagery, cautioned The Japan Times, arguing for nonmilitary approaches such as tighter border control to prevent sympathizers from joining the fight, religious leaders’ disavowing the extremist group, and a halt of regional governments’ patronage.

SOUTH KOREA

The Korean government remained open to providing additional humanitarian support while remaining silent on any military involvement.

  • The government will “act within the scope of what is possible” in joining the fight against IS said Blue House Office of National Security chief Kim Kwan-jin. “I believe it could be something within the scope of humanitarian aid.”
  • “As long as the U.S. is only carrying out air strikes, there wouldn’t be any kind of military assistance for the South Korean government to provide,” said a diplomatic source in Washington D.C.

BRAZIL

Until Tuesday, Brazil had said little officially about the situation with ISIS in Iraq in Syria, before President Dilma Rousseff spoke at the United Nations.

  • President Rousseff criticized the U.S. strikes against ISIS in Syria during a speech at the UN Climate Change Summit in New York on Tuesday. She argued that the attacks could prove more destabilizing in the long term and declared that Brazil repudiates aggressions by both sides and used the opportunity to call for a more representative Security Council.
  • In a blog post for Estadão, international politics commentator Guga Chacra criticized the willingness of Brazilians to support the U.S. sacrificing its money and soldiers in conflicts where they wouldn’t tolerate Brazilian casualties or spending, commenting that “it’s simple when it’s Americans are the ones who pay the taxes.”

India-Japan New Strategic Partnership Prompts Reactions from Asian Powers

Policy Alert #83 | September 17, 2014

During Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s five-day trip to Japan last week, the two governments declared “the opening of a new age” in bilateral relations, signing a “Special Strategic and Global Partnership” aimed at strengthening their strategic and economic ties. The agreement delivered some promises, including Japan’s $35 billion investment in India over the next five years, but not others, including civil nuclear energy cooperation and “two-plus-two” security ministerial talks. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from India, Japan, and China on the India-Japan partnership.

INDIA

The Indian government and newspapers emphasized the importance of India-Japan relations.

Indian commentators remained at odds with the implications of the India-Japan partnership for India-China relations.

  • Modi’s visit showed India’s commitment “to revamp its ‘Look East’ policy…efforts to strengthen strategic and economic ties with Southeast Asian countries in a bid to counter the increasing regional influence of China-strategically, militarily and economically,” explained The Economic Times.
  • Kanwal Sibal, a former foreign secretary, cautioned against such anti-China rhetoric, saying that “India does not have to choose sides. It can work with Japan in areas of shared concern about China, while working with China in areas that yield mutual benefits and preserving space for ‘strategic’ cooperation.”
  • C Raja Mohan, a distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, shared a similar view. India “should strengthen partnerships with Tokyo and Beijing, each on its own merit, and in the process, build up India’s comprehensive national power and make Delhi an indispensable actor in shaping Asia’s future.”
  • “India’s trade with China…is four times of that with Japan. So ties with Japan cannot be advanced at the cost of China, especially because Modi’s gestures to Japan are likely to be misread in Beijing as anti-Chinese,” argued Swaran Singh, a professor of International Relations at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
  • Pramit Pal Chaudhuri, foreign editor of the Hindustan Times, dismissed concerns over India-China relations, saying that “however close India may get to Japan, it will not matter that much to China,” because Beijing is only worried about a potential strategic threat from U.S.-India relations.

Meanwhile, Indian experts expressed a great deal of disappointment over the failure to reach an agreement on civil nuclear energy cooperation due to Japan’s demand for additional safeguard mechanisms and a “no nuclear weapon testing” pledge.

  • Kanwan Sibal called the failure “a notable disappointment.” “A genuine ‘special and global’ strategic India-Japan partnership sits ill with Japanese hesitations to resolve this outstanding strategic issue, which gives advantage to China.”
  • Pramit Pal Chaudhuri claimed that the lack of a nuclear deal demonstrates that the India-Japan partnership is still “a work in progress and there is no guarantee of success.”

JAPAN

The Japanese government and newspapers stressed the significance of the new strategic partnership for Japan’s national security.

  • Prime Minister Shinzo Abe emphasized the importance of Japan-India relations, saying that “They have the greatest potential in the world. Bilateral ties will be improved dramatically in all sectors.”
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun argued that deepened security cooperation between Japan and India is “vital” for curbing Chinese maritime assertiveness in the East and South China Seas and the Indian Ocean and securing the sea lanes that go through those waters.
  • The Sankei Shimbun called the Japan-India partnership a de facto “quasi-alliance” designed to support Prime Minister Abe’s “Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond,” a concept in which Japan, the Unites States, Australia, and India “form a diamond to safeguard the maritime commons stretching from the Indian Ocean region to the western Pacific.”
  • “The recent approval of the exercise of the right to collective self-defense means that it could become possible, depending on the situation, for the MSDF and the Indian Navy to jointly patrol the sea lanes,” a high-ranking Defense Ministry official said. “In exchange for such cooperation, Japan will export the US-2 (short takeoff and landing, search-and-rescue amphibian aircraft).”

Given such expectations for bilateral security cooperation, no progress on a “two-plus-two” ministerial dialogue was a disappointment to Japanese officials and commentators.

  • “There was no exchange of views on such things as the timing (of creating the dialogue) at the summit talks,” commented a Japanese government official.
  • Japan’s Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroshige Seko downplayed the significance of the failure to set up ministerial security talks. “There’s no special reason for it. It’s how things turned out during talks between the leaders of the two countries.”
  • “India may have worried that if it had already set up a minister-level two-plus-two framework with Japan, it would provoke China,” said a Japanese government insider source.
  • The Asahi Shimbun agreed. “In the background to putting off a decision [on the “two-plus-two” talks] was India’s desire to not unnecessarily antagonize China.”

CHINA

Chinese media raised concerns of an India-Japan containment strategy against China following Modi’s visit to Japan.

  • The Chinese Foreign Ministry responded coolly to media reports in Japan that Tokyo and New Delhi plan to align with each other closely with the aim of containing China. Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told a news conference, “I want to emphasize that both China and India are major countries that advocate for and follow the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and both nations pursue independent foreign affairs policies.”
  • “Abe woos Modi in a bid to contain China,” read a China Daily headline. Cai Hong, China Daily‘s Tokyo bureau chief observed, “Modi and Abe are both assertive nationalists who came to power on platforms pledging economic revival and bolstering their countries’ defenses and strategic partnerships with like-minded states.”
  • The Global Times dismissed claims of an India-Japan alignment against China. It acknowledged that while mutual trust between Beijing and New Delhi is “difficult to build,” “India has proved it is a rational country, displaying an independent foreign policy and loathing being an appendix of any particular power. Plus, India cherishes peace.”

Rising Powers Respond to Israel-Palestine Conflict

Policy Alert #82 | August 27, 2014

Fighting between Israel and the Palestinians ensued over the past month in response to the kidnappings and murders of three Israeli teens in the West Bank. Israel and Hamas have both drawn international condemnation for the ongoing violence, which has worsened the grave humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from India, China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil on the recent events of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

INDIA

Despite closer ties with Israel in recent years, Indian commentary was by and large critical of Israel’s  treatment of Palestinians.

  • Harsh Pant, professor of international relations at King’s College London, observed that over the years, the Indian government has toned down its reactions to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. “This re-evaluation has been based on a realization that India’s largely pro-Arab stance in the Middle East has not been adequately rewarded by the Arab world. India has received no worthwhile backing from Arab countries in the resolution of problems it faces in its neighborhood, especially Kashmir.”
  • Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, lamented in the India Express, “Gaza, at the moment, seems to be a spectacle, not just of dead bodies but also of dead ends. There are no narratives of liberation, no solutions in sight, and no fundamental transformations that can break this vicious cycle of violence.” He also cautioned that “being a friend of Israel cannot mean condoning actions that cannot be justified on any measure.”
  • Manu Joseph, a Hindustan Times journalist commented, “So far, the current conflict in Gaza has unfolded, with minor changes, exactly the way it has on previous occasions. This repeating history is beyond the farce stage.”
  • The Times of India applauded India’s support of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) resolution condemning the disproportionate use of force by Israeli Defense Forces, stating that “it is welcome that the Indian government has sought to adopt an even-handed approach to the issue. Another editorial added that “principle must trump expediency. Israel is an ally but that does not give it a carte blanche to violate human rights.”
  • Rudroneel Ghosh, a Times of India journalist, wrote, “Unless and until Washington is forced to drop its duplicitous policy on Palestine, the root of the conflict cannot be solved. Such duplicity will only breed resentment towards both Israel and the U.S. in the Arab world, hurting everyone’s interests in the long run.”

CHINA

Chinese government officials continuously stressed the need for a ceasefire and actively supported efforts undertaken by other countries to end the fighting in Gaza, including Cairo’s ceasefire proposal.

  • Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated that China is a firm supporter and sincere mediator for peace between Palestinians and Israel. He urged Israel to “lift its seven-year-long blockade of the Gaza Strip and release the Palestinians.”
  • Liu Jieyi, China’s permanent representative to the United Nations, pledged, “China will continue…to play an active and constructive role for an early end to the Israel-Palestine conflict, for the comprehensive and just resolution of the Palestinian issue, and for lasting peace in the Middle East region.”
  • Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei expressed “worry and grief” concerning the ongoing conflict and stated that “China will continue to work for a cease-fire, regional peace and stability.”

RUSSIA

Despite President Vladimir Putin’s personal support for Israel, Russian newspapers and government officials remained neutral in the Arab-Israeli conflict because of Russia’s other interests  in the region.

  • The Russian Foreign Ministry said that that Moscow is “deeply troubled by the growing number of victims among the civilian population in Gaza” and urged both sides to “conduct a humanitarian cease-fire without delay, and stop the bloodshed and suffering of peaceful civilians.”
  • Despite President Vladimir Putin’s personal sympathy for Israel, Russia cannot openly support Israel “because of Russia’s stakes in the ongoing civil war in Syria and in nuclear talks in Iran,” according to Alexei  Malashenko of the Moscow Carnegie Center.
  • Yelena Suponina, head of the Asia and Middle East Center at the Russia Institute of Strategic Studies, observed that Russia has been trying to refrain from embracing one side of the conflict in order to boost its influence in world affairs. “This is Russia’s turf in world politics-talking to all sides, engaging in dialogue. While U.S. foreign policy is determined by ideology and values, Russia’s is much more flexible.”

JAPAN

Japanese newspapers avoided siding with either Israel or Palestine, instead pondering the cyclical nature of the ongoing violence.

  • The Asahi Shimbun quoted a passage from an article it published in January 2009: “The Palestinian death toll has topped 500 amid the continued Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip, and the militant Islamist group Hamas is putting up do-or-die resistance. But the United Nations, which supposedly represents the ‘conscience of the world,’ remains silent as usual. The people’s cries of anguish are rising from the blazing and smoking rubble.” The Asahi noted that this passage could be recycled today, word-for-word, and asked, “why does all this bloodshed have to go on?“
  • Demonstrators gathered in Tokyo on August 3 to encourage opposition to Japan’s ongoing support of the Israeli administration’s actions in Gaza. Participants -who organizers estimated numbered around 600- carried placard and banners featuring messages such as “Free Gaza” and “Save Gaza’s Children.”
  • An editorial in the Japan Times observed, “As ever, the bottom line is the zero-sum mentality of Israel and Hamas. Both refuse to acknowledge the other’s legitimacy or existence, except as an entity to be extinguished. That may meet political needs, but it is unrealistic and unfeasible.”

SOUTH KOREA

South Korean media focused on the humanitarian aspect of the Israel-Palestine conflict, likening the “slaughter in Gaza” to a modern Holocaust in multiple articles.

  • The Korea Times referred to Palestine as “another name for a large concentration campunder the tight supervision of Israel.” Referring to South Korea’s abstention from a UNHRC resolution denouncing Israel’s abuses of human rights of Gazans, the editorial asked, “How can Seoul ask other members to join its drive to improve human rights in North Korea?”
  • The Joongang Daily observed that “the blame game will never end between Israel and the Palestinians. But the extremists are most blamed for making matters worse. Common sense appears to be drowned by militant voices once the mood turns ugly.”
  • Another article in the Joongang worriedly reported that North Korea is allegedly innegotiations for a new arms deal with Hamas militants to provide missiles and communications equipment to the militant Palestinian group for its offensive against Israel.

BRAZIL

Brazil’s reaction to the most recent outbreak of violence mirrored the reactions of other Latin American countries and focused on the “disproportionate response” by Israel.

  • On July 24, Brazil recalled its ambassador in Israel for consultation in protest of the “disproportionate use of force by Israel.” This sparked a diplomatic row that included Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor calling the decision an “unfortunate demonstration of why Brazil, an economic and cultural giant, remains a diplomatic dwarf.”
  • Several days later, on July 28, President Dilma Rousseff commented on Israel’s actions in Gaza, saying: “it is not a genocide, but I think it is a massacre and a disproportional action.” She also emphasized Brazil’s desire for a two-state solution that allows for peaceful coexistence.

Ebola Outbreak Spurs Reactions from Rising Powers

Policy Alert #80 | August 27, 2014

As the death toll by the Ebola virus continues to rise in West Africa, the World Health Organization (WHO) recently declared an “international emergency,” calling for global efforts to combat the deadly disease. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, Russia, India, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil on the Ebola outbreak.

CHINA

While an Ebola outbreak is unlikely in China, public health officials have implemented a prevention and treatment plan for Ebola.

  • Hospitals and health agencies in Beijing have mobilized to take precautions in the event that the virus reaches China. Ma Yanming, an official at the Beijing Health Bureau, stated that after the SARS epidemic in 2003 which resulted in over 500 Chinese deaths and put Beijing in the spotlight for its slow response, the capital “has a much more complete system in place to supervise and deal with an epidemic should it occur.”
  • Yu Tao, a member of Songshuhui Association of Science Communicators and whose research is in the field of virology, cautioned that the WHO’s designation of the Ebola virus as an international public health emergency signals the possibility that it could become a public health risk to other countries.
  • Dong Xiaoping, research fellow with the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, stated that the spread of Ebola in China is unlikely, even if the virus enters China. “Even if human cases are reported, we can control families, communities, and hospitals so that the virus cannot spread further,” he said at a press briefing for the National Health and Family Planning Commission (NHFPC).
  • According to a WHO report, the Reston ebolavirus strain, one of the five known strains of Ebola, has been found in the Philippines and China. Although it can infect humans, there have been no reported illnesses or deaths in humans from this species to date.
  • “All medical institutes must report suspected or confirmed cases within two hours,” reported Song Shuli, spokesperson of the NHFPC.
  • Earlier this month, China sent three expert teams composed of epidemiologists and specialists in disinfection and protection as well as medical supplies to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. Wang Chen, an official with the NHFPC, claimed that it will not be long before China can produce antibodies for Ebola, since researchers now have a good knowledge of the genetic structure of the virus.

RUSSIA

Russian scientists are currently in Guinea, conducting research for an Ebola vaccine and providing medical assistance in the field.

  • Several Russian medical brigades are ready to substitute a team sent to Guinea to fight Ebola, or if necessary, start working in other West African countries, said Anna Popova, head of Russian consumer rights watchdog Rospotrebnadzor. Last Thursday, a group of Russian virologists, epidemiologists and bacteriologists left Russia to help curb the Ebola epidemic in Guinea. The team is expected to spend five months there.
  • An experimental Russian Ebola vaccine showed positive initial results in preclinical trials, Russian Healthcare Minister Veronika Skvortsova told RIA Novosti on Tuesday. “Our advance team, employees of the Russian Health Ministry’s Ivanovsky Institute and an employee of one of the Rospotrebnadzor centers, returned from Guinea. We know the pathogen and its characteristics, and currently we have an experimental vaccine that has undergone preclinical trials with good results,” the Health Minister said.
  • “The Russians have nothing to worry about,” said Aleksander Semyonov, head of immunology and virology at the Pasteur St. Petersburg Scientific Research Institute. Semyonov explained that the Ebola outbreak has not reached an uncontrollable stage yet, which suggests there is no need to introduce any special quarantine measures in Russia. “There is no threat to Russian citizens. This is not a highly contagious disease, like, for instance, influenza.”

INDIA

The Indian government responded to the outbreak by implementing a precautionary screening of passengers from Ebola-hit countries at the country’s international airports.

  • Six passengers who arrived at Indira Gandhi International airport on Tuesday morning wereisolated over Ebola fears. After further testing, all six passengers tested negative for the Ebola virus. Another 85 Indians from Ebola-hit countries reached Mumbai on Tuesday and were later cleared by the Airport Health Organisation as none had any symptoms of the deadly disease.
  • Union Health Minister Harsh Vardhan emphasized that “to this moment there is no case of Ebola in India and I think there is no need for anybody to panic.”
  • However, Union Health Secretary Lov Verma admitted that “India being a densely populated country with an overburdened health service, the chances of such an infection spreading fast is very real.” Even the WHO urged India to further strengthen its infection control measures to prevent a potential Ebola outbreak in the country.
  • The government last week had to cancel a parliamentary delegation to South Africa after some members of the parliament reportedly expressed fears of Ebola virus infection.

JAPAN

The Japanese government has extended a total of $2.7 million in humanitarian aid to Ebola-affected countries in West Africa.

  • The government also announced that it was prepared to supply an unapproved drug made by a Japanese company if requested by the WHO or West African countries. “If requested, we will provide it in cooperation with the company. In cases of emergency, we are ready to respond to an individual demand even before WHO makes a decision.”
  • Health Ministry officials assured that “the disease is unlikely to spread (in Japan) even if an infected person appears,” adding that the government is taking precautionary measures at international airports and other entry points in case of the possible arrival of Ebola-infected patients.
  • “Ebola epidemic should come as no surprise given modern mobility…Wherever there is the movement of people or goods, virulent viruses will travel, and we should not be surprised,” commented the Asahi Shimbun.

SOUTH KOERA

Koreans debated what seems to be “overreactions” to the Ebola outbreak in the country.

  • Duksung Women’s University, host of the 2014 World Congress Global Partnership for Young Women in Seoul, came under criticism after it was reported that the University cancelled the invitations to students from Nigeria, one of the Ebola-hit countries.
  • The recent decision by Korean Air to suspend direct flights to Nairobi, Kenya-which has not been affected by the Ebola virus-was critiqued as an “irrational response” by Kenyan Ambassador to South Korea, Ngovi Kitau.
  • The JoongAng Ilbo argued that these overreactions to the epidemic are “insensible and panicked actions that could taint Koreans’ image and the country’s reputation.”

BRAZIL

Despite Brazil’s growing economic and political ties with West Africa, Brazil’s response to the crisis has been inward looking.

  • At the beginning of August, the Ministry of Health announced that it would be reinforcing border entries to ensure that anyone showing symptoms could be identified. However, health experts doubt that the disease could become an epidemic even if it did reach Brazil.
  • On several occasions since the outbreak began, Brazilian officials have had to dispel rumors that patients had been diagnosed with Ebola in Brazilian hospitals.

Rising Powers Respond to Winning and Losing at the World Cup

Policy Alert #79 | July 27, 2014

The 2014 World Cup games came to a close on Sunday, July 13 after an exciting final match between Germany and Argentina. In our latest Policy Alert, we examine commentary on how the games played out for Brazil, China, Russia, India, South Korea, and Japan.

BRAZIL

Host nation Brazil finished a disappointing fourth in the tournament, punctuated by a humiliating 7-1 defeat to eventual champion Germany in the semi-finals. Concerns about overtaxed infrastructure, unfinished stadiums and massive protests leading up to the games proved unfounded, as the tournament proceeded with relatively few setbacks.

  • O Globo qualified the World Cup as a success for Brazil, commenting that the quality of play in the tournament was high and the games were entertaining while the Brazilian people showed their best face to the world. However, while acknowledging that the infrastructure proved adequate for the World Cup, the paper noted this was due to jeitinho- or improvisation- and reflected that, “a large part of the legacy for the Brazilian people is still to come.”
  • Looking toward October’s election, Raquel Landim of Folha de São Paulo observed that markets rose after Brazil’s 7-1 defeat to Germany, reflecting a sentiment that it will hurt Dilma’s reelection. However she noted that while Aécio Neves could stand to benefit if it contributes to a general negative feeling about the direction of the country, attacking her for it could backfire.
  • João Bosco Rabello argued in Estadão that in the unlikely event that Brazil’s loss affects the election it will be only because it “ended the truce the Cup represented for the government and accelerated the people’s return to reality.”
  • In an interview with BBC Radio 5Live’s Sportsweek, Gilberto Silva, a member of Brazil’s victorious 2002 side, said that Brazilian soccer’s problems run deeper than just the national team. He argued that the entire development system is in need of reform and linked the problems to Brazil as a whole: “There is something also with the country’s problems — at some point that is nothing to do with football but at times they come together.”
  • President Dilma Rousseff wrote a letter to the Brazilian national team congratulating them for their efforts in helping Brazil host the “Cup of Cups” and promising that Brazil can “use the lessons learned today to make our football even better – inside and outside the stadiums.”

CHINA

While China’s national soccer team failed to make the cut for the 2014 World Cup, Chinese netizens watched the games with enthusiasm and noted the large presence of Chinese products and technology at the Cup.

  • An article in the China Daily highlighted the presence of Chinese high-tech companies at the World Cup, including renewable-energy company Yingli Solar and telecommunications giants Huawei Technologies and Comba Telecom Systems. Judy Tzeng, vice-president of global marketing for Yingli Solar described Yingli’s presence at the World Cup as a launching pad to “penetrate the uncharted South American market.”
  • China’s passion for the World Cup “astounded” Valdemar Carneiro Leao, Brazilian ambassador to China, who stated that “the growing bond between the countries will be further strengthened by President Xi Jinping’s upcoming visit to Brazil” during the BRICS summit later this week. China and Brazil will also team up on a deal to strengthen sports cooperation during President Xi’s visit, Brazil’s ambassador to China said.
  • Beijing police seized around 9.6 million U.S. dollars on illegal soccer betting during the World Cup, reported state-run Xinhua. A total of 108 suspects were arrested, according to the Ministry of Public Security.

RUSSIA

Russia’s national team crashed out of the World Cup in the early group stages, failing to record a win in a pool that included Algeria, South Korea, and Belgium. The team’s early exit prompted calls for improved performance in 2018, when Russia will host the next World Cup.

  • Observers expressed concern that the 2018 World Cup will bankrupt Russia.
    • “Our football is like murky water, a gateway for corruption. This is not going to go away in the run-up to the 2018 World Cup,” said Alisher Aminov, president of Russia’s National Fund for the Development of Football.
    • Boris Nemtsov, an opposition leader, said the costs of the 2018 World Cup could be “unsustainable for a country already on the verge of recession, with capital flight of $75 billion in the first half of 2014 and possibly facing more Western sanctions over the Ukraine crisis.”
  • Russian sports minister Vitaly Mutko said conflict in Ukraine “will not influence preparations for the World Cup at all,” at a briefing on the next World Cup. If Ukraine qualifies for the next World Cup, it could be drawn in a group with Russia, which is automatically seeded as host. Mutko also vowed that the Russian national team will improve its game by 2018.
  • Russian President Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Angela Merkel met briefly before World Cup final to discuss the Ukraine crisis. Both Putin and Merkel called for a “stepping up of peace efforts in Ukraine,” according to Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov. Following Germany’s victory, President Putin congratulated Chancellor Merkel on her country’s win.

INDIA

Media coverage on the World Cup in India was reserved, commenting mainly on the direction of the sport at large.

  • The Times of India criticized the leniency of referees throughout the World Cup and called for a revision of the process through which referees are selected for the World Cup.
  • The Pioneer tracked the growing popularity of soccer across the globe, comparing the sport’s growth trajectory with that of cricket. Unlike cricket, which requires expensive equipment which renders it inaccessible to many, the main expense in soccer is a pair of shoes and a soccer ball.
  • Viju Cherian compared Golden Ball winner Lionel Messi with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the Hindustan Times: “Both are leaders of their sides and have won the hearts of their people…Messi’s genius at league football and Modi’s success story of the much-talked about ‘Gujarat model’ have soared expectations to such a dizzying height that each time both are/[were] expected to not just win but win in a thumping manner.” Because the bar is set so high, Cherian warned that if Modi falls short of “anything but spectacular,” the people will feel let down.
  • The Business Standard criticized the cost of mega sporting events, asserting that “the only real reasons to host such events are non-economic. They are showpieces, meant to demonstrate national pride and achievement…if India ever is blinded enough by national ambition to demand to host, say, the Olympics, the recollection of Brazil 2014 should be enough to deter it.”

SOUTH KOREA

South Korea was eliminated from the World Cup by finishing last in the four-team Group H.

  • South Korea soccer coach Hong Myung-bo resigned on July 10, accepting responsibility for his team’s disappointing performance at the World Cup. Looking back on the World Cup, Hong acknowledged he’d made “tactical” errors in preparation for matches and also took the blame for failing to get his players in shape.
  • An editorial in Donga Ilbo argued, “Korea lacked everything, including experience, personal skills and performance, and time for preparation for the event… the Korean team was far inferior to the rival teams not only in teamwork but also in individual performance and skills.”
  • After a video surfaced on the Internet showing Korean players partying at a Brazilian club following their exit from the tournament, angry fans pelted the team with candy upon their return to South Korea. “Yeot,” a traditional candy, is also a common synonym for a Korean expletive.
  • The Korea Times found a positive angle in Korea’s defeat: “The tournament was taken as something to change the somber mood of the nation still under the sorrowful and angry spell of the sinking of the ferry Sewol…to call Korea’s World Cup Brazil campaign a complete failure would be a mistake. Rather, it was a partial success, as it provided us with a great opportunity to see the waves of fans chanting ‘Go Korea’ together.”
  • Donga-Ilbo debated the merits of hiring a “native” coach if your country seeks to win the World Cup, pointing out that a “foreign coach has never led a country to win a World Cup title thus far.”

JAPAN

Japan was eliminated early on in the World Cup, losing to Ivory Coast and Columbia and drawing with Greece.

  • Alberto Zaccheroni resigned as Japan’s manager after the team’s humbling first-round exit. Mexican Javier Aguirre has agreed to become Japan’s new coach following Zaccheroni’s resignation.

 

Rising Powers Comment on 6th BRICS Summit

Policy Alert #78 | July 27, 2014

The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) held its sixth summit on July 15-16 in the Brazilian cities of Fortaleza and Brasilia, where agreements were signed for creating a Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) worth $100 billion and establishing a $50-billion New Development Bank (NBD), to be headquartered in Shanghai. In this Policy Alert, we examine reactions to the outcomes of the BRICS summit from China, Russia, India, Brazil, and Japan. The RPI’s coverage of previous BRICS summits can be found here and here.

CHINA

Numerous commentators and media outlets in China hailed the BRICS summit as a milestone, praising the BRICS for positioning the group for a bigger role in both the political and economic spheres.

  • Chinese President Xi Jinping expressed full confidence in the future of the BRICS over the course of the summit and in the days that followed. “(The BRICS nations) should both serve as an anchor for the stability of the world economy and a shield to ensure global peace,” Xi said.
  • “If BRICS countries succeed in their ongoing economic structural adjustment and maintain momentum in growth, the group will play a bigger role in the global economy and have a more solid foundation from which to build political momentum on the global stage,” argued Wu Jiao, a writer for the China Daily.
  • Another China Daily editorial wrote, “If the BRICS countries pool their thoughts and efforts in a common direction, they will spread their wings and fly further and faster.”
  • Jin Canron, deputy dean of the School of International Studies, Renmin University, noted that the new BRICS bank “isn’t targeted at knocking down the West.”
  • China’s Bank of Communications chief economist Lian Ping predicted that headquartering the NDB in China will “reinforce China’s central role” in the BRICS group, while the Global Timesquipped, “equality is the political foundation of this grouping and the development bank. That’s what differentiates the BRICS bank from the World Bank.”

RUSSIA

In Russia, commentators saw the BRICS summit as a means to end the existing U.S.-led world order.

  • In an interview with Russian news agency Itar-Tass, Russian president Vladimir Putin stated that the BRICS countries want to “challenge the international financial system’s dependency on U.S. policies and strengthen the rule of international law.” He stressed, however, that there are no plans for a military or political alliance.
  • In an interview with state-run RIA Novosti, Russian Deputy Security Council Secretary Evgeny Lukyanov predicted an end to U.S. hegemony. “New power centers have appeared on the international arena, including the BRICS nations, and Russia itself has managed to regain its stance,” he stated.
  • An editorial in the Moscow Times justified Russia’s seat at the BRICS table and its role in the new BRICS development bank: “the country is the world’s biggest energy exporter…neither China nor India could sustain their current high pace of growth without either direct materials imports from Russia or, indirectly, from the global marketplace. That alone justifies a seat at the BRICS table.”
  • Alexander Morozov, chief economist for Russia at HSBC Bank, said there is “no reason to think that the BRICS newbies must clash with their older cousins,” regarding the NDB. “The more good development banks, the better,” he concluded.

INDIA

Indian commentators and media responded positively to the NDB’s establishment and deemed Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s first major multilateral visit to a foreign country a success. The first rotational presidency of the NDB will likely go to India.

  • Prime Minister Modi stated that the establishment of the NDB “opens up newer opportunities of cooperation with nations of South America.” Addressing concerns that the BRICS countries share little in common, he added that “distance is not a barrier to opportunities. It also does not insulate us from challenges in other parts of the world.”
  • Financial journalist K.T. Jagannathan praised the NDB for its ‘one-nation one-vote‘ plan, which stands in stark contrast to the Bretton-Woods institutions- the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund- which “have structures that aren’t equitable, to say the least.” Former finance minister P Chidambaram also expressed enthusiasm for the NDB’s establishment. The Pioneer referred to the equally shared structure of the NDB as a “major victory for India.”
  • Amitav Acharya, RPI author and professor of international relations at American University wrote in The Hindu that the NDB’s establishment serves as a reminder that “the era of Western and American dominance of the world is ending, giving way to a more complex and diversified world order: the multiplex world. The move by BRICS, though outwardly economic in nature, has serious geopolitical undertones.” An editorial in the Indian Express also shared this view.
  • C. Raja Mohan, a fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, cautioned in the Indian Expressthat India’s partnership with Russia at the BRICS summit may be challenged by mounting international pressure on Russia by the West regarding the Ukrainian crisis. “India now confronts a new phase of international relations where the great powers are no longer at peace with each other.”

BRAZIL

The response in Brazil was generally positive, with the majority of coverage focusing on the foundation of the New Development Bank and the growing importance of the BRICS group.

  • Dilma Rousseff said that the NDB won’t affect Brazil’s position relative to the IMF, but emphasized that the IMF no longer accurately reflects the world’s economic composition.
  • Writing in Folha de São Paulo, the co-director of Columbia University’s BRICLab, Marcos Troyjo argued that the Fortaleza Summit and the formation of the New Development Bank would serve as a “trial by fire” for “BRICS 2.0”. He expressed skepticism about the NDB, declaring that, “in Fortaleza they did not lay the cornerstone of a new economic paradigm… despite its symbolic importance and potential. “
  • O Globo qualified the establishment of the NDB as “creating new tools, inspired by the IMF and World Bank, but with more adequate resources for dealing with new challenges.”
  • Estadão expressed optimism at the NDB and noted that the Summit was a success for Vladimir Putin in that none of the leaders criticized Russia’s involvement in the violence in Ukraine. Similarly, it lamented that two of the BRICS leaders are openly authoritarian while India’s new prime minister may have been responsible for a massacre in his home state, concluding, “one shouldn’t want everything.”

JAPAN

Commentary in Japan questioned the NBD’s reach, given its limited budget and the diverse interests of contributing countries.

  • The Japan Times remained skeptical about what the NDB can accomplish, pointing out that “With $50 billion in capital, the NDB will be able to lend about $3.4 billion annually in a decade. The World Bank, in contrast, lends more than $60 billion each year. China provides more aid by itself…In truth, the NDB, like the BRICS concept itself, is more symbol than substance.”
  • “Global governance just got a lot more interesting,” remarked another Japan Times editorial.
  • The Yomiuri Shumbun questioned whether the NBD will be able to deal with financial crises, given the diverse nature of participating countries. It added, “It would be troublesome if the new development bank were to attach importance solely to expanding the natural resource interests or corporate profits of contributing countries, and to extend financial assistance without careful consideration.”

Rising Powers Respond to Corruption and Kickoff of 2014 World Cup

Policy Alert #77 | June 27, 2014

The 2014 World Cup games kicked off on Thursday amidst protests of poor public services, corruption, and the high cost of staging the World Cup in host country Brazil. In addition to the ongoing protests, soccer federation FIFA is under scrutiny for its decision to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar due to recent allegations that the nation handed out bribes in exchange for votes to win the bid. This Policy Alert examines reactions from Brazil, India, China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia on the corruption charges and predictions for the World Cup.

BRAZIL

The 2014 World Cup is Brazil’s second time hosting the games. Ongoing protests and debate regarding spending and corruption have resulted in dampened enthusiasm for the games in comparison to the past several World Cups, according to Folha de São Paulo,

 

Regarding the long term effects of the World Cup on the quality of life in Brazil, newspaper Estadão de Paulo quipped, “Is there anything more important than football?”

  • Comparing research from the OECD on the effects of the 2012 London Olympics on improving the quality of life in economically-challenged East London, the newspaper questioned how well the 2014 World Cup will improve life of normal citizens in Brazil. It concluded that regardless of the end results, enjoyment from watching the games during the next weeks will improve quality of life, if only temporarily.

INDIA

Several outlets remarked on controversies surrounding FIFA’s leadership and hefty spending by Brazil’s government as the host country:

  • The Hindustan Times lamented the “biggest spectacle in world sport begins in the backdrop of two controversies”: FIFA’s suspicious decision to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar and “unpleasant questions” on the construction of Brazil’s expensive stadium in São Paulo. If Brazil fails to hoist the Cup, the newspaper feared people rioting in the streets.
  • The Business Standard editorialized that the “business of football” had “become quite ugly” with corruption charges at the highest level of FIFA leadership as well as Brazilian citizens’ disdain for their government’s lavish spending on the games. The newspaper also noted FIFA head Sepp Blatter failed in recent decades to “spread football as much as he should have in the three largest countries – China, India, and even the U.S.”
  • Boria Majumdar, a sports historian writing in The Times of India, reflected on the history of the World Cup in Latin America, which has often involved violent local protests, major construction delays, and expensive budgets.

Despite these concerns and the India national team – nicknamed “Warriors of Hind” – failing to qualify, the Indian public appears to fully embrace the World Cup, though for surprising reasons:

  • Majumdar noted how globalization has India “gripped by Cup fever” despite the Indian football team’s poor showing in recent decades. John Cherian, a journalist with The Times of India, predicted “India will never play in a World Cup” in the years to come.
  • While there is a “fever pitch” of “manufactured” excitement in the Indian media, Cherian sensed the average Indian football fan was more interested following celebrity player gossip than rooting for and building a strong national team.
  • The Hindu’s Parshathy J. Nath explored how “passion for the game continues unabated” in Indian cities both big and small as young players seek out adequate pitches to practice their skills. The Hindustan Timesand The Pioneer echoed this grassroots enthusiasm for the World Cup. For citizens in the Muslim-majority Malappuram district of Kerala, “their first game still is football” rather than cricket.
  • In The Hindu, sports writer Sidin Vadukut revealed how he became interested in the game and expected the “World Cup will find a way to make a football fan” out of everyone in India.Frontline published exposés on the impact the tournament leaves on its fans and hosts.
  • In an editorial, The Times of India expected the World Cup to shake off protests and international concerns and instead offer some “cracking football” with a potential for some shocking upsets.

CHINA

Brazil will be the third consecutive World Cup without China’s participation. China made its World Cup debut in 2002 and finished last among 32 teams, losing all three matches and failing to score a goal. Nonetheless, China has no shortage of football fans and will be watching the World Cup with keen interest.

  • UC, a leading mobile Internet browser maker in Guangzhou, has allowed each employeethree days off during the World Cup.
  • On Chinese microblogging website Weibo, users posted guidelines for women whose husbands or significant others will be watching the World Cup late at night including advice such as, “Do study some football basics if you still want to talk to me. Otherwise, stay away from the TV.”
  • In an attempt to build up China’s soccer prowess, a new youth football academy- reputedly the largest in the world- opened in Guangzhou in 2012 with the specific aim of identifying and training promising footballers at an early age. Moreover, the Diplomat reported that “if Qatar’s 2022 bid is annulled and a re-vote is held, China may consider making a run for the ’22 Cup, or the subsequent two Cups.“
  • While Chinese players will be absent from the field, the country’s stamp is on most of the soccer fan apparel and souvenirs that are available. The People’s Daily listed the top 10 Chinese products at the World Cup, which included, among others, the official match ball, live scoreboards at several stadiums in Brazil, and solar panels that power all stadium lighting masts.

JAPAN

Though Japan enters the tournament as the Asian champion and has now qualified for five consecutive World Cups, Japan’s national team – nicknamed “Samurai Blue – faces tough competition. Keisuka Honda, one of Japans best players who also plays for AC Milan, remains confident the team can “surprise the world.”

As the host of the 2020 Summer Olympics, media outlets in Japan hosted debates over what it takes to host a major international sporting event:

  • Chikako Nakayama, professor of economic thought at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, argued in The Japan Times that protests in Brazil over the World Cup’s cost and distractions from other economic priorities demonstrate “international sports events have become a severe burden on host countries.”
  • In response, Brazil’s Ambassador to Japan countered that his country’s growing economy could easily absorb the cost and the protests were an example of Brazil’s “transparent” and vibrant democracy.

Other commentators paralleled Japan’s broader economic and demographic challenges to its football’s team efforts in Brazil:

  • Kathy Matsui, the chief Japan strategist at Goldman Sachs, compared the team’s demographics to the island nation as a whole – “old.” Japan hopes the team’s experience playing in clubs abroad and its “Zacchermonics” – named after the team’s new manager, Alberto Zaccheroni – will make up for its lack of youth and athleticism.
  • Matsui writes that “Just as [Japanese Prime Minister] Abe declared ‘the time has come to fight deflation,’ it is apt that Team Japan has chosen as its World Cup slogan: ‘Samurai, the Time Has Come to Fight.'”

Aside from its national team’s participation, Japan will have other impacts on the World Cup and upcoming international sporting events:

  • The Asahi Shimbun reported Japanese police officials are working with Brazil to implement Japan’s ubiquitous “koban” system of police boxes for use in the FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Summer Olympic Games.
  • The former national football training center located 20 kilometers from the damaged Fukushima nuclear plant will soon be turned into a practice facility for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

SOUTH KOREA

The South Korea national team – nicknamed the “Taeguk Warriors” – qualified for the World Cup and plays in Group H with Belgium and Russia. While many sports analysts predict better results for South Korea in the 2018 World Cup, head coach Hong Myung-bo wants his players ready for the difficult road ahead in Brazil.

As South Korea tries to advance to the quarterfinals for the first time at a World Cup event overseas, media outlets discussed allegations of corruption at FIFA and the role of sports in international affairs:

  • The Korean Times explored why critics have targeted controversial FIFA president, Sepp Blatter, for accusations of bribery and mismanagement.
  • Lee Joo-yoon, an student at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies interning in Brazil, wrote in the Korean Times on her culture shock in Brazil – contrasting the initial “energetic, passionate, and sociable nature of Brazilians” with the more recent “disinterest and negative attitude towards the World Cup.”
  • Observing how South Korea jointly hosted the 2002 World Cup with Japan, Cho Hyun-jin, an executive director at Kookmin University, chastised the Park Geun-hye administration forwasting opportunities to promote her country abroad. If Qatar was to be disqualified from hosting the 2022 World Cup, an official at the Korea Football Association suggested South Korea may bid to host the tournament.

RUSSIA

The Russian national squad, which currently ranks 19th in FIFA ratings, will be seeking redemption after years of disappointing international play. Russia failed to qualify for the last two World Cups, and the squad was eliminated at the group stage in its last two appearances in the tournament in 1994 and 2002. Commentators remained realistic about their expectations for Russia’s performance.

  • “Getting beyond the group stage won’t be a walk in the park for Team Russia,” said Ilya Leonov, captain of Russia’s beach soccer national team. “I would want them to play Brazil in the final but this is not realistic. I think they will make it beyond the group stage and at least to the quarter finals.”
  • Responding to allegations that FIFA vice-president Mohamed Bin Hammam met Vladimir Putin weeks before the vote for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups to discuss “bilateral sporting relations,” Alexey Sorokin, leader of Russia’s successful 2018 World Cup bid insists his country acted with integrity throughout the process. “We had a particular emphasis on making it transparent, and making it clean and open,” Sorokin stated. Russia plans on spending over $8 billion to host the World Cup 2018 games, according to state-run Ria Novosti.

Asian Powers Respond to Crisis in Iraq

Policy Alert #76 | June 27, 2014

Sectarian conflict erupted earlier this month as Sunni militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, swept through northern Iraq, inflicting violence against the Shiite majority and Shiite-ruled government. In this Policy Alert, we examine reactions to the ongoing Iraqi crisis from India, China, South Korea, and Japan.

INDIA

The crisis in Iraq touched India in a personal way after 40 Indian construction workers in Mosul were abducted by ISIS aligned forces, prompting strong reactions from Indian leaders and the Indian public; thousands of Shiite Muslims living in India have pledged to defend Iraq’s holy shrines and join the fight against ISIS.

Several media outlets in India were intensely focused on how to free its citizens and mitigate the spillover risks for India:

  • The Business Standard called the insurgency the “first foreign policy test” for the new Modi government, which the newspaper felt “has been again taken by surprise by developments, and is uncertain about how to respond. This is not reassuring.” This perspective was also raised by The Hindu.
  • The Hindustan Times suggested India use its “clout with Baghdad and the neighboring countries to secure the safe exit of Indians from Iraq.” The Hindu suggested collaborating with Bangladesh on plans to “evacuate overseas workers” in case of future crises.
  • The Times of India worried India was “in the crosshairs of global jihadi groups,” especially after ISIS published a map claiming parts of Kashmir in their territory of influence. This was also noted by The Pioneer, a paper with long standing ties to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.
  • The chaos in Iraq prompted Dr. Sushil Aaron, Director of Projects at the Centre for PolicyResearch, New Delhi, to wonder in the Hindustan Times whether Afghanistan would see “asimilar turn of events after U.S. forces withdraw in December.” He said Indian officials were concerned Afghanistan “does not emerge as a radical space for anti-Indian jihadi groups to operate from.” This concern was also raised by The Times of India.
  • In early January, Vijay Prashad in Frontline warned that ISIS was gaining ground and traced its origins to the ongoing civil war in Syria. He pointed out the group’s “brutality” in another piece.

Several observers commented on how the crisis would impact broader democracy movements and sectarian strife in the region:

  • In an editorial, The Economic Times concluded non-organic democracy efforts in the Middle East have so far “resulted in chaos rather than in triumph of the people’s will.” The Pioneershared similar criticisms, questioning whether “foreign occupation, rather than the reconfiguration of political power or the deepening of sectarian divide is the real Casus belli for the collapse” of Iraq.
  • In an op-ed for The Pioneer, Abhijit Iyer-Mitra contended Washington held responsibility for the violence in Iraq by supporting ISIS in Syria and harming Indian security interests elsewhere. The author warned the Modi government against adopting similar tactics.
  • Culture critic Shajahan Madampat argued in an op-ed for The Hindu that gains by ISIS are an “ominous reflection of the deepening of sectarian animosities within contemporary Islam.”
  • The Hindu explored whether the now “serious humanitarian crisis” and war crimes by ISIS will lead the United States and the United Kingdom to seek help from Iran, which the newspaper claimed could “be an immense contribution to regional peace.” In an op-ed for The Indian Express, C. Raja Mohan seconded this perspective and added the West and Iran needed to move quickly since neither party “can accept an ISIS victory in Iraq.”

Other commentators have explored how events in Iraq could impact economic growth and domestic politics at home:

CHINA

Chinese media expressed concern for the large number of Chinese citizens living in Iraq while simultaneously placing partial blame of the current situation on the United States.

  • The Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed concern for the 15,000 Chinese living in Iraq, many working for energy companies such as Petro China and Sinopec. “China urged Iraq to reinforce security to protect Chinese citizens and businesses, and citizens were advised to take precautions,” said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying at a news conference.
  • The state-run China Daily advised the Obama administration to “be as prudent and realisticas they can when they weigh options, especially military ones, to help Baghdad end the crisis, which they are partially responsible for.”  It also encouraged the international community to “rally behind the government as it clamps down on the growing terrorism and religious extremism inside Iraq, and help the Iraqis rebuild their country.”
  • Another China Daily editorial described the Iraqi War as “The worst reflection of U.S. might.”
  • Zhao Minghao, research fellow at the Charhar Institute, a Chinese foreign policy think tank, emphasized the importance of the Middle East in China’s “march west” strategic framework. “This [framework] reflects China’s broader goal- established partly in response to the United States’ ‘pivot’ toward Asia – of rebalancing its strategic focus westward, with emphasis on the Arab world.”
  • “The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 has broken the once delicate balance of the country’s political structure, and further amplified the hostility between the sectarian groups, making it even harder for the ensuing Iraqi governments to achieve national reconciliation,” said Xinhuawriter Liu Chang.

JAPAN

After the United States announced it was sending 300 military advisors to support the Iraqi government against ISIS, several media outlets questioned whether this strategy would succeed:

  • The Japan Times predicted that “a token U.S. force will not turn the tide in Iraq; only sweeping changes, and perhaps even radical options, will stop the disintegration of that country.”
  • Questioning whether the United States had “taken sufficient measures to maintain law and order in Iraq following its withdrawal,” The Yomiuri Shimbun wrote,”it is necessary for the international community to support and cooperate with the Maliki administration to avoid further turmoil.”
  • In another editorial, The Japan Times highlighted the “humanitarian catastrophe” that could develop as hundreds of thousands of refugees join people already fleeing violence in Syria.

Other commentators examined how ISIS could have possibly taken control over so much Iraqi territory and who is to blame for letting it happen:

  • Ikeuchi Satoshi, associate professor of Islamic Political Thought at the University of Tokyo, called ISIS a “terrorist organization” which has taken advantage of political instability in Iraq.
  • The Japan Times placed blame on the al-Maliki government for exacerbating the deep sectarian divide, refusing to “share power in a meaningful way,” and creating a “sense of disenfranchisement and discrimination” that “has robbed the government of legitimacy and set the stage for its unraveling in the face of the ISIS advance.” The Yomiuri Shimbun echoed this view.

SOUTH KOREA

Media outlets explored the direct threat posed to South Korean citizens and economic interests in Iraq:

  • In an editorial, The Korea Times saw the violence “escalating into a religious war” that could risk the “already moribund Korean economy” and “the safety of Korean companies and residents in the war-torn country.” In the aftermath of the recent Sewol ferry disaster, the newspaper urged companies on the need to “hammer out more realistic evacuation plans.”
  • While Iraq is not a major oil supplier to South Korea,  JoongAng Daily reported that turmoil in the region could mean higher oil prices and a drain on Seoul’s economic recovery efforts. “The Korean economy belongs to the bloc that is sensitive to oil price fluctuations,” argued Park Sang-hyun, a researcher at HI Investment & Securities.

Asian Powers Voice Concerns over Heightened Tensions in South China Sea

Policy Alert #75 | May 27, 2014

Tensions in the South China Sea have significantly increased over the last several days, following a standoff between Vietnamese and Chinese coast guards over a Chinese oil rig and the Philippine maritime police’s arrest of Chinese fishermen for alleged poaching in the disputed waters. This has led ASEAN leaders to jointly express “serious concerns” and call for restraint over territorial disputes in the region. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, Japan, India, and South Korea on the recent development in the South China Sea.

CHINA

Chinese newspapers slammed Vietnam and the Philippines for infringing on China’s territorial integrity, while simultaneously criticizing ASEAN for its involvement in the conflict.

  • Jia Xiu Dong, research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, criticized the ASEAN statement, arguing that “the issue of the South China Sea is not one between China and ASEAN. It is a territorial dispute between China and specific ASEAN countries…It should therefore be addressed directly by the parties involved through peaceful negotiations. The ASEAN meeting is not an appropriate occasion to discuss the South China Sea issue.”
  • “The islands disputes in the South China Sea and East China Sea are a battle for national interests. They have led to a strategic game between China and the U.S.,” said an op-ed in the Global Times.

JAPAN

Japanese officials and newspapers unanimously condemned China’s behavior.

  •  “If things don’t improve, the seas in East Asia will become theaters of conflict among regional powers,” warned the Asahi Shimbun. “China, which is responsible for this situation, should back down first. We also urge Vietnam to keep calm in responding to the situation.”
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun claimed “boosting the relationships of alliance between the United States and Asia, along with Pacific nations including the Japan-U.S., U.S.-Australia and U.S.-Philippine alliances, will be the most effective deterrent against China.”
  •  “The United States…should play a key role in deterring any armed conflict and ensuring stability in the region,” argued the Mainichi Shimbun, urging Japan to work closely with the U.S. and ASEAN to strengthen international security rules through regional forums.
  • The Sankei Shimbun agreed, calling on the Japanese government to back ASEAN’s efforts to unite against China through the East Asian Summit and security cooperation.

INDIA

India’s response to the territorial disputes received differing reactions from China and Vietnam.

  • A spokesman in the India External Affairs Ministry said “We have been following with concernrecent developments in the South China Sea. We believe that maintenance of peace, stability, growth and prosperity in the region is of vital interest to the international community.”
  • Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying downplayed India’s concern. “I have stated China’s position on the South China Sea so many times. I wish to tell the Indian people that they should not worry too much about the current situation in the South China Sea.”
  • Ambassador Dang Dinh Quy, president of Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, welcomed India’s interests in the region. Expressing “deep concerns” with Chinese assertiveness and the lack of clarity in the Obama administration’s Asia policy, Quy emphasized “we want India [to] rise quickly. We have great expectations from India.”
  • In response to Quy’s comment, Australia-India Institute inaugural director Amitabh Mattoo argued that although “Beijing believes that its time has come and it wants to exercise hegemony over the whole region…this behavior is shortsighted and counterproductive.”

SOUTH KOREA

Korean media expressed concerns over China’s behavior in the South China Sea.

  • The South China Sea is turning into a “powder keg” due to Chinese assertiveness, argued the JoongAng Ilbo, adding that Korea “is also involved in the situation” because Chinese fishing boats are operating illegally in the West Sea between the two countries.
  •  The newspaper also raised concerns over the future of China’s rise. “China could overtake the United States and become the No. 1 economy in the world. But a giant that is not respected by its neighbors is nothing but a threat.”

 

Asian Powers Respond to India’s Election Results

Policy Alert #74 | May 27, 2014

Results from India’s elections culminated in a victory for India’s main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), lead by Narendra Modi. The polls showed that Modi and his party won the most decisive election victory India has seen in three decades, sweeping the long-dominant Congress party from power. This Policy Alert examines commentary from India, China, Japan, and South Korea on Modi’s electoral victory.

INDIA

Indian media outlets and commentators discussed the “shock and awe” of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s electoral victory, which rode the “Modi wave” to win a majority of seats without the need to form a coalition government:

Business leaders and stock market investors appeared to welcome the new BJP-led government with open arms:

  • Shankar Sharma, a global strategist for First Global, wrote in an op-ed for The Economic Times that he will give the Modi government “plenty of slack” – 60 months – to reverse India’s economic downturn and prioritize growth over secular quarrels.
  • Noting the Indian stock exchange’s record breaking highs immediately after election results were announced, The Hindu sensed “unbridled optimism” “rooted in the belief that a politically stable government free from troublesome allies and capable of taking strong economic decisions” will soon take office.
  • While The Hindu predicted “a wave of economic reforms” and revived infrastructure projects, one of its columnist, C.R.L. Narasimhan, cautioned “the reality is likely to be very different” when ambitious “political promises” take time to translate into policy and overcome state-level gridlock. The Business Standard expressed similar views and called for civil service reform to get antiquated institutions ready for action.

Several observers wondered whether the Modi government would embrace secularism and govern for the whole country rather than just the Hindu majority:

  • For Modi to achieve his promise of economic and social development for all Indians, The Times of India insisted “ideas which polarize society and bait minorities must be dropped.”
  • The Hindu warned the incoming administration against reveling too much in their impressive victory since “any triumphalism can only further alienate one important population segment — Muslims, who will want to be reassured that they too will matter to the new regime at the Centre.”
  • In an interview with The Times of India, the President of the Indian Islamic Cultural Centre wanted Modi to reach out to Muslim communities since they “in large numbers came out and voted for BJP” in pursuit his goals of better governance and economic reforms. This idea was supported by the Hindustan Times as well as Ali Khan Mahudabad in an open letter to Modi.
  • Claude Arpi, in an op-ed for The Daily Pioneer, dismissed these concerns as political attacks against Modi with a “pathologic obsession with caste and religion.”

Several observers remarked on the future direction of Indian foreign policy under Modi:

  • C Raja Mohan, a columnist with Indian Express, discerned “New Delhi’s partners across Asia are cheering the arrival of an Indian government that they can productively engage with” instead of a “hesitant defense partner” unwilling to take on China.
  • The Hindu gave outgoing Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh “fair marks” for his supervision of Indian geo-strategic challenges despite a “mixed record of significant achievements” on the one hand and “lapsing into policy paralysis, scams and the loss of the will to govern on the other.”
  • In his Hindustan Times column, Pramit Pal Chaudhuri thought Modi has “minimal interest in being a global leader” so he will “put a strong emphasis on economics” as a prerequisite for any Indian foreign policy agenda. Furthermore, Chaudhuri predicted Modi’s foreign affairs strategy will be “severely pragmatic,” eschew multilateralism, and focus on a few “key countries, the neighborhood and a few great powers.”
  • The Hindustan Times ran an op-ed by Brookings scholar Bruce Riedel counseling Modi “the Pakistani proxy war in Afghanistan will be one of the most immediate and difficult.”

Other opinion leaders examined what the elections mean for the broader Indian society and electoral process:

  • A.S. Panneerselvan, Executive Director, Panos South Asia, urged the media in an op-ed for The Hindu to avoid cheerleading the new BJP government and instead serve its watchdog role.
  • Kalpana Sharma, in her column for The Hindu, hoped for continued momentum on a national dialogue addressing growing violence against women in India. The author mentions Obama Administration initiatives to tackle the issue and hopes that after the polls close in India, “this is a conversation that must not stop.”
  • The Hindu questioned the Congress Party’s continued reliance on the Nehru-Gandhi family for its legitimacy. This view was echoed by The Times of India, the Hindustan Times, and two op-eds in The Economic Times.

CHINA

The Chinese media congratulated Modi for the victory and expressed hopes for continuity and growth in Sino-Indian relations.

  • Chinese spokeswoman Hua Chunying congratulated the BJP on its victory and voiced hope to work with the new government. “China-India relations are facing new opportunities of development,” she said, adding that China is willing to work with India’s new government to maintain high-level visits, strengthen cooperation in all fields and upgrade their partnership to a higher level.
  • Xie Chao, a visiting scholar at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford, predicted “more continuities than changes in the shift of power,” adding that “as a mature power, India will take a pragmatic combination of idealism and realism, to match specific foreign policy goals with corresponding means.”
  • Observing scant coverage of Modi’s victory in the Chinese media, Minxin Pei wrote, “In dealing with a Modi government in New Delhi, Beijing will most likely adopt a short-term policy of ‘listening to what he says and watching what he does,’” and pointed out that “China’s current foreign policy focus is its maritime disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.”

JAPAN

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe invited Modi to visit his country and asserted they have “the largest potential for development of any bilateral relationship anywhere in the world.” Commentators in Japan delved into the implications of the BJP victory:

  • The Japan Times suggested the BJP’s ability to govern without forming a coalition government with smaller parties could either be a boon to efficient policymaking or a concern if Modi proves to be “a Hindu nationalist who will ratchet up tensions in South Asia.”
  • The Asahi Shimbun insisted the BJP use their strong mandate to “put the Indian economy on a steady upward trajectory and ensure that the entire nation will enjoy the benefits of economic growth.”
  • The Japan Times said the “dark cloud hanging” over Modi after the 2002 sectarian riots during his time as chief minister of Gujarat raise questions about his governing style. The Yomiuri Shimbun expressed similar views.

Several outlets in Japan explored the new government’s foreign policy agenda:

  • The Japan Times believed U.S.-Indian relations would survive but doubted Modi would be “a willing partner in a policy to contain or confront China.”
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun pressed Modi to improve bilateral ties with Japan, including further security and nuclear energy cooperation.
  • The Asahi Shimbun directed Abe against “rushing to strike a nuclear deal” as the BJP “pledged to ‘revise and update’ India’s nuclear doctrine” and the unresolved conflict with Pakistan continues to loom over South Asia. Instead, the newspaper urged Tokyo to persuade Modi to first join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

SOUTH KOREA

Korean media outlets focused primarily on the uneasy economic realities facing the incoming government:

  • An op-ed in Korea Times worried that “replicating Modi’s success in Gujarat at the national level and confronting other development challenges will require cooperation from state governments, which is uncertain at best.”
  • While The Dong-A-Ilbo also expected some initial setbacks, the newspaper said India clearly advocated for “Modinomics” by electing “the rightist politician with a humble background who stressed growth and jobs instead of populism.”

Rising Powers React to Nuclear Security Summit

Policy Alert #73 | April 28, 2014

Last week, world leaders from over 50 countries attended the third Nuclear Security Summit (NSS) in The Hague, Netherlands to discuss nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism while holding side meetings over the Ukraine crisis and other issues. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from Russia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil on the outcomes of these diplomatic meetings.

RUSSIA

While Russia and the United States agreed to strengthen international cooperation to address nuclear terrorist threats, the Ukraine crisis still loomed large at the summit.

  • Moscow “is concerned about the unjustified accumulation of weapons-grade fissile materials in some countries that possess no nuclear weapons” and hopes the United States will play a “more active role” in solving this issue, said Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
  • Despite such concerns, Russia, along with China and sixteen other countries, rejected a separate initiative of the U.S., the Netherlands, and South Korea at the summit to incorporate the International Atomic Energy Agency’s security guidelines into national rules.
  • In response to the claims of a Ukrainian delegate at the summit that Russia is allegedly threatening the security of nuclear sites in Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the accusations “a pure and simple attempt to shift the blame.”
  • The Ministry further criticized Ukraine for pushing forward a domestic legislative initiative of its secession from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and putting the treaty in “serious danger.”

CHINA

Chinese officials and commentators unanimously called for further international cooperation on nuclear security.

  • Foreign Minister Wang Yi, explaining that nuclear security is linked with the “Chinese dream” that calls for “universal security,” emphasized that China is committed to addressing the issue through multi-layered international cooperation.
  • China and the U.S. have “common interests” in strengthening nuclear security, argued Liu Rui, a research fellow at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. “[I]t’s time for the two great powers to do their utmost to understand each other, dissolve mutual mistrust, and cooperate on world peace.”
  • Xinhua editor Zhu Dongyang argued that developed countries with mature experience in nuclear security “need to be more generous and forthcoming in sharing their expertise.”

INDIA

The Indian government showed support for the international nuclear security initiative.

  • Nuclear terrorism and clandestine proliferation poses “a serious threat to international security,” warned External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid. “We should together deny terrorists what they seek and eliminate the risks of sensitive materials and technologies falling into their hands.”
  • Reshmi Kazi, associate fellow at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, argued that the “renaissance of civil nuclear energy” in Asia has increased the threat of nuclear terrorism, and urged India to cooperate with China and Pakistan to improve nuclear security in the region.

In The Hague, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh joined the rest of BRICS leaders in opposing a ban on Russia’s attendance at the G20 meeting in Australia later this year.

  • The Times of India explained that the move reflected India’s stance that “[a]ll attempts to isolate Russia over Ukraine will be counterproductive.”
  • The Hindu questioned the G7’s decision at The Hague to suspend Russia’s G8 membership, arguing that the move was “less principled than it might look, and Western legislatures must scrutinize their respective executives closely over their handling of the Ukraine crisis.”

JAPAN

At the summit, Japan announced a bilateral agreement to hand over several hundred kilograms of its highly enriched uranium and plutonium to the United States.

  • Prime Minister Shinzo Abe pledged to enhance domestic and international nuclear measures, saying “Japan has a responsibility to lead efforts to strengthen nuclear security” in light of the nuclear incident in Fukushima.
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun expressed concerns with the little progress made thus far in the reduction of nuclear arms, adding that “China must stop its military buildup with nuclear arms…and reduce its nuclear arms together with other nuclear powers.”

Japanese media also focused on the U.S.-Korea-Japan trilateral talks at the summit, a meeting arranged by Washington to bring together Seoul and Tokyo despite their history disputes.

  • The Mainichi Shimbun called the meeting “a step in the right direction,” urging the three countries to further cooperate to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and to make sure that “China’s growing power and push into the Pacific does not lead to attempts to redraw the map in East Asia in the way that Russia has done in Ukraine.”
  • The talks were a “message” for China’s military adventurism, said the Yomiuri Shimbun. “Japan, South Korea and the United States hold a common view that any attempt to change the status quo by force will not be tolerated.”

SOUTH KOREA

Korean newspapers discussed the implications of the Nuclear Security Summit and the U.S.-Korea-Japan three-way meeting for Seoul-Tokyo relations and security cooperation in the region.

  • During the trilateral talks in The Hague, President Park Geun-hye warned that North Korean nuclear materials “could end up in the hands of terrorists” and pledged to strengthen cooperation with the United States and Japan to deal with the issue.
  • The Korean Herald argued that whether Korea-Japan relations will improve “depends entirely on Japan’s future actions,” expressing its hope that “Abe and the Japanese leaders show ‘sincerity’ by refraining from provocative activities.”
  • South Korea must separate nuclear and security issues from other grievances in the bilateral relations to deal with North Korea, argued the JoongAng Ilbo. The newspaper, however, warned that Seoul must carefully manage U.S.-Korea-Japan security cooperation because of Beijing’s efforts “to counter Japan as a part of a battle for hegemony between the United States and China.”

BRAZIL

Brazilian Vice President Michel Temer declared that The Nuclear Security Summit is building ‘awareness’ for both participating and non-participating countries in achieving policy goals.

  • Vice President Michel Temer attended the summit and highlighted the importance of people understanding the “necessity of increased security for nuclear material,” Exame reported. The Vice President added that the IAEA has the “capacity and competency to do this.”

 

03/2014- Policy Alert #72: Rising Powers Respond to Crimea Crisis

Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the annexation of Crimea, two days after a referendum that declared the region’s separation from Ukraine. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from Russia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil on the Crimea crisis.

RUSSIA

On Thursday March 20, Russia’s lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a treaty to annex Crimea from Ukraine. Numerous officials and other public figures have voiced support for Crimea’s annexation, while others have remained cautious.

  • Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of Russia in Global Affairs, wrote, “If Russia loses the Ukraine gamble, it would be a shock of unpredictable proportions…the risk of loss is considerable, but the prize is undeniably attractive.” Regarding economic sanctions on Russia, he noted, “There is no experience of enacting effective sanctions against a nuclear superpower that occupies a large part of Eurasia, retains influence all over the world and has an enormous wealth of resources.”
  • Vladimir Ryzhov, a State Duma deputy from 1993 to 2007, was critical of Crimea’s annexation. “Moscow has violated the principle of the inviolability of its neighbor’s borders. This will prompt other former Soviet republics to revise their own military and strategic policies and to seek additional security guarantees from countries other than Russia.”
  • Terming the Ukrainian crisis a potential “geopolitical Cold War,” Sergei Markov, director of the Institute of Political Studies in Moscow explained the Kremlin’s thought process: “Moscow does not see the revolution in Ukraine as an attempt to create a more democratic or law-based society. Instead, it sees the events in Kiev as an attempt to make Ukraine as anti-Russian as possible.”

CHINA

Chinese officials and media outlets urged outside countries to remain impartial and encouraged resolution of the Crimean issue through dialogue.

  • Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in a press briefing, “China has always respected the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries. The issue of Crimea should be solved politically under a framework of laws and regulations.”
  • An editorial in the People’s Daily deemed Ukraine the “final battlefield in the ‘cold war'” and concluded that “a geostrategic conflict leads to the tragedy of big-power politics.”
  • Another editorial in the Global Times predicted that “once the confrontation between the West and Russia goes out of control, it is China that will suffer. Many countries will change their strategies, which will lead to changes to China’s external strategic surroundings.”

INDIA

The Indian government remained distant from the West in condemning Russia, making it clear that it will not support any “unilateral measures” against Moscow. Indian newspapers offered differing assessments of the crisis and the government’s response.

  •  The Hindustan Times supported the government’s response in light of India’s traditional stance of non-interference in the affairs of other countries. “[T]he wisest course for India, for now at least, would be not to involve itself in the geopolitics of the region and maintain a distance from both Mr. Putin and the West.”
  • The Hindu questioned the effectiveness of the Western sanctions against Russia, saying that “no Western bloc may be able to stop the dismemberment of Ukraine and prevent the start of a new Cold War.”
  • The Economic Times agreed that these sanctions may be “toothless,” warning that the Crimea crisis could mark the “dawn of a new Cold War era.”
  • Sreeram Sundar Chaulia, Dean of Jindal School of International Affairs, Jindal Global University, argued that the West “cannot claim to be on a moral high ground” to condemn Russia, since the West has repeatedly used military means and bypassed international laws in countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

JAPAN

Japan imposed somewhat modest sanctions on Russia, which reflected Tokyo’s difficult position in improving its bilateral relations with Moscow despite an international crisis.

  • Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida stated that Japan does not recognize the outcome of Crimea’s referendum to split from Ukraine, and that “we cannot overlook Russia’s attempt to change the status quo by force.”

Japanese newspapers unanimously criticized Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

  • The Yomiuri Shimbun condemned the referendum under Russia’s de facto military control as “unacceptable,” urging the United States and the EU to maintain pressure through sanctions while searching for a peaceful diplomatic solution.

SOUTH KOREA

South Korean media discussed the implications of the Crimea crisis for the Korean Peninsula.

  • The JoongAng Ilbo warned that the crisis will encourage North Korea to further develop its nuclear weapons, as Russia invaded Crimea despite the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which was supposed to protect Ukraine’s sovereignty in return for the abandonment of its nuclear program.
  •  The newspaper also argued that what Ukraine will do in the future has implications for a potential unification between two Koreas, questioning whether a unified Korea would be able to maintain relations with the United States and China amidst their geostrategic rivalry.

BRAZIL

History and East-West tensions figured prominently in Brazilian reactions to the crisis.

  • Assessing the conflict culminating between the former rivals of the East and West over Russia’s occupation of Crimea, the Estadao de Sao Paulo believes Putin is attempting to instigate further reactions from the West and thus offer an opening for broader military actions to reclaim lands formerly controlled by Russia. Estadao termed these actions as “fraught with risks,” calling it “a minefield.”
  • The history of wars dating back to the 1850s including disastrous conflicts between the U.K, France, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire weighed heavily in the interpretation of events made by Folha de Sao Paulo. The paper described the current encounter between Obama and Putin as “a new battle of wills…resonant [of] very old and very unhappy precedents.

 

 

Viewing Message: 1 of 1.
 Notice

This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Visit GW’s Website Privacy Notice to learn more about how GW uses cookies.