More booze for your buck
By Karen Tina Harrison
Special to amNewYork
These take-no-prisoners cocktails let you know halfway through the glass that you’re getting the most bang for your booze. And our choices are poured at joints you’ll actually like being seen in.
Murray Hill: Barbes
21 E. 36th St., between Madison and Fifth avenues
212-684-0215
Barbes crams tons of atmosphere and terrific Moroccan food into a little side-street storefront space. Silk pillows and cooing service make it comfy, and the intoxicating Barbes Special ($10) — the love child of a gimlet and a mojito — will take your bar experience to the next level.
Madison Square: Ilili
236 Fifth Ave., between 27th and 28th streets
212-683-2929
You wouldn’t expect such strong drinks from such a stylish place. But this spot serves a super- stiff cocktail. The marquee ingredient in “From Beirut with Passion” ($14) is vodka infused with basil, cilantro and mint.
Village: Elettaria
33 W. Eighth St., between Fifth and Sixth avenues
212-677-3833
Elettaria is a right-now hot spot with a past. In the ’60s, the space was the 8th Wonder, a club where Jimi Hendrix played. Elettaria’s notorious drink is the Zombie Punch ($14), created in 1934. It truly contains more than four ounces of hooch.
Chelsea: Trailer Park Lounge
271 W. 23rd St. near Eighth Avenue
212-463-8000
Trailer Park Lounge revels in its campy trashiness. If you don’t like its kitschy decor and high-test margarita, you’re a hopeless square. So get down and dirty with a feisty frozen marg, jammed with fresh mango or strawberry puree. They’re $7 to $8 during most hours, and $5 from 4 to 7 p.m.
Upper West Side: Madaleine Mae
461 Columbus Ave. at 82nd Street
212-496-3000
Madaleine Mae’s bar chef, Doug Quinn, studied voodoo remedies in Guadeloupe. His Rhum Cures ($10) are made of French West Indian rum infused with secret spices and fruits. The cures are said to lighten your load and attract riches and romance.
Midtown: Jour et Nuit
8 W. 58th St. at Fifth Avenue
212-752-6200
At this Euro-style bistro-bar, you can play it safe with wine, or you can live dangerously and splurge on a White Orchid ($19). It looks angelic, but it conceals two ounces of Ketel One vodka and more than an ounce of Domaine de Canton ginger cognac.
Midtown: The Volstead
125 E. 54th St., between Park and Lexington avenues
212-583-0411
If you work in a tense midtown office, you require an intense afterwork tipple. Meet your new drinking buddy, the mostly gin Eastsider ($13). This speakeasy-dark bar is playfully named for the congressman who pushed Prohibition. Show that dude the meaning of “spirits.”
East Harlem: Amor Cubano
2018 Third Ave. at 111th Street
212-996-1220
To get to Havana, you have to detour through Canada or the Bahamas. Or you could take the No. 6 to Amor Cubano, a sexy spot with a knockout house drink. The gingery Amor contains three ounces of Zacapa rum, a cult brand that’s hard to find.
Williamsburg, Brooklyn: Pete’s Candy Store
709 Lorimer St., between Frost and Richardson streets
718-302-3770
Quite a few hoodies consider Pete’s their communal living room. Check out the locals over a Dark & Stormy ($8) fierce with Jamaican ginger beer and a “five-count” pour of Gosling’s rum. As in one-two-three-four-five.
Forest Hills, Queens: Jade Eatery & Lounge
1 Station Sq. at Continental Avenue
718-793-2203
You could move into Jade Eatery; it’s got a dining room, a private club, an art gallery, a garden and a vintage bar where mixology is respected. The Tokyo Rose ($12) looks, smells and tastes divine. It also packs a punch, thanks to two ounces of Grey Goose and a dose of fortified sake.
Friday, April 25, 2008
NFL Cheerleaders, $1 Million Pay Shake Cricket: Andy Mukherjee
NFL Cheerleaders, $1 Million Pay Shake Cricket: Andy Mukherjee
Bloomberg, 23-Apr-08 By Andy Mukherjee
If you think ``getting Bangalored'' is still a metaphor for the loss of Western computer-software and network-maintenance jobs to cheaper workers in India, then you aren't following the Washington Redskins cheerleaders.
Twelve of the ``First Ladies of Football,'' as they like to call themselves, are in India's code-writing capital on work.
Yes, this is outsourcing in reverse; and no, India hasn't taken to playing American football. The National Football League in India refers to a domestic soccer competition; and even that has recently undergone a name change. The cheerleaders are supporting Royal Challengers Bangalore, one of the teams participating in India's newly born cricket league.
The Indian Premier League, a 44-day, 59-match annual fixture, has already emerged as one of the largest and most- promising new business opportunities in India in recent years.
Commentators have mostly focused on how lucrative the league is for the players and the Indian cricket board; cricket enthusiasts have considered the pros and cons of the game's condensed format: It finishes within three hours; a Test match, the classical version, can take five days.
More financially oriented analysts have wondered if it would make a profit for the owners of the teams, including billionaire industrialist Mukesh Ambani, spirits tycoon Vijay Mallya and Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan.
To me, what's striking about the Indian Premier League is just how global it is. That openness of the teams -- rather than the short-term economics of what they pay the players or earn from ticket sales -- will determine the competition's success.
Different Ethos
The international character isn't limited to having Redskins cheerleaders in a stadium in Bangalore. Cricketers from Australia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Zimbabwe, South Africa and New Zealand have already signed up for the Indian league, while those from the U.K. are disappointed with the England and Wales Cricket Board, which isn't allowing them to play.
In most other businesses, it's usually India that's erecting walls to keep foreigners out. For instance, overseas companies can't own more than a 26 percent stake in Indian insurance, defense-production or newspaper-publication companies.
Similarly, the Indian central bank is rather stingy about letting foreign banks open new branches.
The premier league is just the opposite.
Every team is allowed to have as many as four overseas players in the 11-member contingent that it fields in any match.
Contrast this with a heavily regulated industry such as telecommunications where the Indian government prohibits any foreigner from holding a key position in a local company.
To be sure, the Indian cricket league, too, has a ``mandate.'' One of the goals behind starting a domestic competition is to discover new, domestic talent.
Lure of Lucre
But the planners have been astute enough to keep reserved slots for local lads to a minimum and to allow operational flexibility to the owners of the teams. They're free to do what they need to do to make the league successful.
And this is undoubtedly the better approach. A thriving franchise that's open to the world will do more to unearth globally competitive local talent than a moribund domestic league that's open only to sons of the soil.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India, which governs the sport, has already earned about $2 billion from selling media rights for 10 years and from franchise fees.
The eight teams -- or franchises -- have, in turn, contracted players at huge salaries. Ishant Sharma, a 19-year-old from New Delhi, will earn $1 million a year, or $2,500 for every ball that he may end up bowling at a batsman.
How good is the money, really? Ask Paul Collingwood, the captain of the English cricket team for one-day matches who can't play because of the England Board's restrictions.
Parker's Equation
``I'd be lying if I said I hadn't thought about the IPL,'' Collingwood told the Sun newspaper. ``If you had the chance to earn four times your normal money in the next six weeks, would you take it?''
Collingwood is perhaps being forced to pass up as much as $640,000, according to a report by David Parker, an analyst at Frontier Economics. Parker has worked out a regression equation, which he claims predicts as much as 72 percent of the amount that players ultimately commanded at the Indian auction.
Among the variables that can't be modeled is ``marketing value,'' which probably explains why Australian cricketer Andrew Symonds, who recently made headlines after accusing an Indian player of racism, got a $1.35 million bid, more than double the amount predicted by Parker's equation.
Whether teams end up making a profit will depend partly on sustaining the initial enthusiasm shown by television audiences.
Google Trends
The other determinant will be the price at which a young, unproven player, bought on the cheap, can be flipped over to another team. That market will take time to develop.
We don't yet have a measure of the Indian Premier League's potential as a business. There is, however, a rough gauge of its popularity. I took the help of Google Trends to rank the Web searches globally in the past 30 days on four words: ``IPL,'' ``Obama,'' ``Clinton'' and ``Tibet.''
The Indian league was trailing the others until last week; and now -- after the start of the series -- it's a very close second to Barack Obama, the Democratic U.S. presidential hopeful. The Redskin cheerleaders, who are auditioning girls in India to set up a permanent local presence, may be on to a good thing.
Bloomberg, 23-Apr-08 By Andy Mukherjee
If you think ``getting Bangalored'' is still a metaphor for the loss of Western computer-software and network-maintenance jobs to cheaper workers in India, then you aren't following the Washington Redskins cheerleaders.
Twelve of the ``First Ladies of Football,'' as they like to call themselves, are in India's code-writing capital on work.
Yes, this is outsourcing in reverse; and no, India hasn't taken to playing American football. The National Football League in India refers to a domestic soccer competition; and even that has recently undergone a name change. The cheerleaders are supporting Royal Challengers Bangalore, one of the teams participating in India's newly born cricket league.
The Indian Premier League, a 44-day, 59-match annual fixture, has already emerged as one of the largest and most- promising new business opportunities in India in recent years.
Commentators have mostly focused on how lucrative the league is for the players and the Indian cricket board; cricket enthusiasts have considered the pros and cons of the game's condensed format: It finishes within three hours; a Test match, the classical version, can take five days.
More financially oriented analysts have wondered if it would make a profit for the owners of the teams, including billionaire industrialist Mukesh Ambani, spirits tycoon Vijay Mallya and Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan.
To me, what's striking about the Indian Premier League is just how global it is. That openness of the teams -- rather than the short-term economics of what they pay the players or earn from ticket sales -- will determine the competition's success.
Different Ethos
The international character isn't limited to having Redskins cheerleaders in a stadium in Bangalore. Cricketers from Australia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Zimbabwe, South Africa and New Zealand have already signed up for the Indian league, while those from the U.K. are disappointed with the England and Wales Cricket Board, which isn't allowing them to play.
In most other businesses, it's usually India that's erecting walls to keep foreigners out. For instance, overseas companies can't own more than a 26 percent stake in Indian insurance, defense-production or newspaper-publication companies.
Similarly, the Indian central bank is rather stingy about letting foreign banks open new branches.
The premier league is just the opposite.
Every team is allowed to have as many as four overseas players in the 11-member contingent that it fields in any match.
Contrast this with a heavily regulated industry such as telecommunications where the Indian government prohibits any foreigner from holding a key position in a local company.
To be sure, the Indian cricket league, too, has a ``mandate.'' One of the goals behind starting a domestic competition is to discover new, domestic talent.
Lure of Lucre
But the planners have been astute enough to keep reserved slots for local lads to a minimum and to allow operational flexibility to the owners of the teams. They're free to do what they need to do to make the league successful.
And this is undoubtedly the better approach. A thriving franchise that's open to the world will do more to unearth globally competitive local talent than a moribund domestic league that's open only to sons of the soil.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India, which governs the sport, has already earned about $2 billion from selling media rights for 10 years and from franchise fees.
The eight teams -- or franchises -- have, in turn, contracted players at huge salaries. Ishant Sharma, a 19-year-old from New Delhi, will earn $1 million a year, or $2,500 for every ball that he may end up bowling at a batsman.
How good is the money, really? Ask Paul Collingwood, the captain of the English cricket team for one-day matches who can't play because of the England Board's restrictions.
Parker's Equation
``I'd be lying if I said I hadn't thought about the IPL,'' Collingwood told the Sun newspaper. ``If you had the chance to earn four times your normal money in the next six weeks, would you take it?''
Collingwood is perhaps being forced to pass up as much as $640,000, according to a report by David Parker, an analyst at Frontier Economics. Parker has worked out a regression equation, which he claims predicts as much as 72 percent of the amount that players ultimately commanded at the Indian auction.
Among the variables that can't be modeled is ``marketing value,'' which probably explains why Australian cricketer Andrew Symonds, who recently made headlines after accusing an Indian player of racism, got a $1.35 million bid, more than double the amount predicted by Parker's equation.
Whether teams end up making a profit will depend partly on sustaining the initial enthusiasm shown by television audiences.
Google Trends
The other determinant will be the price at which a young, unproven player, bought on the cheap, can be flipped over to another team. That market will take time to develop.
We don't yet have a measure of the Indian Premier League's potential as a business. There is, however, a rough gauge of its popularity. I took the help of Google Trends to rank the Web searches globally in the past 30 days on four words: ``IPL,'' ``Obama,'' ``Clinton'' and ``Tibet.''
The Indian league was trailing the others until last week; and now -- after the start of the series -- it's a very close second to Barack Obama, the Democratic U.S. presidential hopeful. The Redskin cheerleaders, who are auditioning girls in India to set up a permanent local presence, may be on to a good thing.
Pimco's El-Erian Sues U.S. Government Over Citizenship Delay
Pimco's El-Erian Sues U.S. Government Over Citizenship Delay
Bloomberg, 25-Apr-08 By Miles Weiss
Mohamed El-Erian, the global bond manager who helps run Pacific Investment Management Co., is taking an increasingly common path to U.S. citizenship -- suing the federal government.
El-Erian, co-chief executive officer of Newport, California-based Pimco, sued last month to get his request to become a citizen approved after a two-year delay, according to a complaint filed in a California federal court on March 5. His application has been hung up while the government runs standard security checks.
The complaint shows how the federal government's effort to prevent terrorists from entering the U.S. is slowing down the naturalization process, immigration lawyers said. El-Erian previously ran Harvard University's $34.9 billion endowment, worked as a deputy director at the International Monetary Fund and now serves on the U.S. Treasury Department's borrowing advisory committee.
``It can rise to the level of absurdity,'' David Leopold, an attorney at Cleveland-based Leopold & Associates Co. who specializes in immigration law. ``I have seen people who are distinguished professors, physicians and those who have been working in quasi-public roles get bogged down.''
El-Erian declined to comment. He is also co-chief investment officer of Pimco, a unit of Munich-based Allianz SE that has $746 billion of assets under management.
FBI, Homeland Security
According to the complaint, El-Erian, 49, was born to an Egyptian diplomat and his French wife in the U.S. and is currently a citizen of France; an IMF publication said in 2004 that he is a citizen of Egypt as well. The complaint, filed against five government officials, including FBI director Robert Mueller and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, alleges that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and other agencies have ``improperly delayed'' El-Erian's application, which was filed in September 2005.
Under federal law, if the immigration service fails to decide on citizenship within 120 days of interviewing the applicant, that person can ask a court to either rule on the naturalization request or to compel the government to take action. Since October 2005, about 6,550 of these ``mandamus'' cases have been filed, according to William Wright, a spokesman for the citizenship and immigration services in Washington.
El-Erian interviewed for his naturalization application on Jan. 31, 2006, according to his complaint, and successfully passed his English language, U.S. history and civics tests. El- Erian's attorney was told that the bond manager had yet to clear the FBI's ``name check,'' one of three mechanisms used by the government for investigating an applicant's background, the complaint said.
`Positive Proof' Required
The FBI asks government agencies such as the U.S. State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency to check an applicant's name against lists they maintain of suspected terrorists, said Elise Healy, an attorney who has practiced immigration law since 1991. The government several years ago began requiring ``positive proof'' than a naturalization applicant is not a security or terrorism risk, Healy said.
``This led to enormous backlogs of approvable cases who are waiting for the government databases that have to be checked,'' said Healy, a partner at the newly formed Dallas law firm Spencer Crain Cubbage Healy & McNamara PLLC.
About 72,000 name checks were outstanding for more than six months as of March 2008, said Wright, the citizenship and immigration services spokesman. His agency and the FBI have drawn up a plan to ensure that, by June 2009, 98 percent of all name checks are processed within 30 days; as an interim step, they are aiming to complete all checks that have been outstanding for more than three years by the end of May.
Neither Thomas Vanasse of Wildes & Weinberg PC in New York nor attorney Douglas Kuber in Los Angeles, who are both representing El-Erian, returned telephone calls seeking comment.
The case is Mohamed Aly El-Erian v. Jane Arellano, 08cv247, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Santa Ana).
Bloomberg, 25-Apr-08 By Miles Weiss
Mohamed El-Erian, the global bond manager who helps run Pacific Investment Management Co., is taking an increasingly common path to U.S. citizenship -- suing the federal government.
El-Erian, co-chief executive officer of Newport, California-based Pimco, sued last month to get his request to become a citizen approved after a two-year delay, according to a complaint filed in a California federal court on March 5. His application has been hung up while the government runs standard security checks.
The complaint shows how the federal government's effort to prevent terrorists from entering the U.S. is slowing down the naturalization process, immigration lawyers said. El-Erian previously ran Harvard University's $34.9 billion endowment, worked as a deputy director at the International Monetary Fund and now serves on the U.S. Treasury Department's borrowing advisory committee.
``It can rise to the level of absurdity,'' David Leopold, an attorney at Cleveland-based Leopold & Associates Co. who specializes in immigration law. ``I have seen people who are distinguished professors, physicians and those who have been working in quasi-public roles get bogged down.''
El-Erian declined to comment. He is also co-chief investment officer of Pimco, a unit of Munich-based Allianz SE that has $746 billion of assets under management.
FBI, Homeland Security
According to the complaint, El-Erian, 49, was born to an Egyptian diplomat and his French wife in the U.S. and is currently a citizen of France; an IMF publication said in 2004 that he is a citizen of Egypt as well. The complaint, filed against five government officials, including FBI director Robert Mueller and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, alleges that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and other agencies have ``improperly delayed'' El-Erian's application, which was filed in September 2005.
Under federal law, if the immigration service fails to decide on citizenship within 120 days of interviewing the applicant, that person can ask a court to either rule on the naturalization request or to compel the government to take action. Since October 2005, about 6,550 of these ``mandamus'' cases have been filed, according to William Wright, a spokesman for the citizenship and immigration services in Washington.
El-Erian interviewed for his naturalization application on Jan. 31, 2006, according to his complaint, and successfully passed his English language, U.S. history and civics tests. El- Erian's attorney was told that the bond manager had yet to clear the FBI's ``name check,'' one of three mechanisms used by the government for investigating an applicant's background, the complaint said.
`Positive Proof' Required
The FBI asks government agencies such as the U.S. State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency to check an applicant's name against lists they maintain of suspected terrorists, said Elise Healy, an attorney who has practiced immigration law since 1991. The government several years ago began requiring ``positive proof'' than a naturalization applicant is not a security or terrorism risk, Healy said.
``This led to enormous backlogs of approvable cases who are waiting for the government databases that have to be checked,'' said Healy, a partner at the newly formed Dallas law firm Spencer Crain Cubbage Healy & McNamara PLLC.
About 72,000 name checks were outstanding for more than six months as of March 2008, said Wright, the citizenship and immigration services spokesman. His agency and the FBI have drawn up a plan to ensure that, by June 2009, 98 percent of all name checks are processed within 30 days; as an interim step, they are aiming to complete all checks that have been outstanding for more than three years by the end of May.
Neither Thomas Vanasse of Wildes & Weinberg PC in New York nor attorney Douglas Kuber in Los Angeles, who are both representing El-Erian, returned telephone calls seeking comment.
The case is Mohamed Aly El-Erian v. Jane Arellano, 08cv247, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Santa Ana).
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Nepal triggers Himalayan avalanche
Nepal triggers Himalayan avalanche
Asia Times Online, 14-Apr-08
By M K Bhadrakumar
M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).
The South Asian political landscape will never be the same again following the Maoist victory march in Nepal's elections to a new 601-seat constituent Assembly last Thursday. It may take several days before the election results are fully known, but available trends indicate that the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is surging ahead. By Monday, the Maoists had secured 89 of the total declared 162 seats for which results were declared.
The established mainstream parties, such as the Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist) are trailing far behind. The royalists, who rooted for the perpetuation of the 240-year-old Hindu monarchy, have been routed. A distinct possibility arises that the Maoists will secure a simple majority and lead the next government - an extraordinary feat for the former rebels who gave up a decade-long armed struggle and took to the democratic path hardly two years ago.
The impact is bound to be far-reaching on Nepal's political economy, South Asia's political landscape and the geopolitics of the region. Thursday's elections are primarily aimed at forming a constituent assembly to determine the contours of Nepal's political system. The results signify that the country is irrevocably set on the path of republicanism. Even the limited role of a constitutional monarchy seems out of the question.
The results signify pervasive popular disenchantment with the established political parties. Most expert commentators have to explain their lapse in not foreseeing such an outburst of popular opinion. Clearly, the people have voted for change. The groundswell of support for Maoists is fairly widespread, cutting across regions. Claiming victory, Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal (popularly called Prachanda) said his party's victory was a mandate for lasting peace, implementation of the democratic republic and rapid economic development. He frontally addressed the intriguing question: "People are asking, 'What is this Maoist party?' And the international community is asking, 'What will happen after the Maoists win?' All these fears are unnecessary."
Prachanda held out the assurance that his party's agenda would be to work with other political parties during the transition period. "We will establish greater national unity with all political parties after the election," he added. The Maoists received commendation from an unexpected quarter when former US president Jimmy Carter, who led a team of foreign observers, stated at a press conference in Kathmandu on Saturday his conviction that the former rebels were every bit wedded to the democratic path.
The poorest country in South Asia has suddenly catapulted itself to the vanguard of democratic reform and political transformation in the region. India, which basks in the glory of its democratic way of life, at once looks a little bit archaic and tired in comparison. After 60 years of uninterrupted democratic pluralism, vast sections of Indian society are yet to realize the potentials of political empowerment. The Nepalese people have come from behind and overtaken the Indians in expanding the frontiers of "bourgeois" politics.
Politics in India still meander through alleys of caste and parochialism and eddies of religious obscurantism and Hindu nationalism. The upper-caste Hindu elites in Nepal used to share social kinships with the Indian political elites. The Maoists have upturned Nepal's entrenched caste politics. The Indian electorate is yet to explore in full measure ideology-based secular political empowerment, which is the bedrock of democratic self-rule. Unsurprisingly, India's main opposition party, the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party, which thrives on Hindu fundamentalism, has been stunned into silence. It feels let down that a country that it dearly cherished as the world's only "Hindu kingdom" has taken to secular democracy with such panache.
The Maoist government will proceed to dismantle the pillars of Nepal's feudal structure and will take recourse to radical economic and political reforms based on distributive justice and egalitarian principles. That is bound to catch the attention of impoverished Indians in the sub-Himalayan belt sooner or later. The Indian states (provinces) bordering Nepal are notorious for their misgovernance.
The Maoist victory in Nepal poses a challenge to the Indian establishment as well. Delhi is distinctly lukewarm about the prospect of an outright Maoist victory. The Indian establishment traditionally works with the Nepali Congress. Some elements within the establishment view with disquiet the prospect of the Maoists galvanizing revolutionary movements within India. Conceivably, Delhi didn't anticipate a tidal wave of popular will favoring the Maoists in Nepal.
All the same, Delhi allowed the democratic process in Nepal to take its course. It could not but take a keen interest in Nepalese politics and a completely "hands-off" approach was unrealistic to expect, but the real question was of not being intrusive to the point of interfering in Nepal's internal affairs. In the event, Delhi kept cool and maintained a delicate balance - watching developments closely while keeping a decent distance and reserving options to adapt to circumstances. However, a period of adjustment to the new political realities in Kathmandu becomes necessary and a thorough revamping of policy directions is inevitable. Nepal is far too important a neighbor for India. Its rapidly growing relations with China add to Delhi's policy calculus.
China's policy towards Nepal is not ideology driven insofar as Beijing kept in view the imperatives of inter-state relations almost until the end of King Gyanendra's direct rule. But Beijing swiftly adapted to the emergent democratic forces in Nepal with great pragmatism and forged working relations with all political parties, including the Maoists. China's interest in Nepal has increased almost exponentially. The overarching geopolitical reality is that the United States has become hyperactive in Nepalese politics. The developments in Tibet have added a further dimension. Tibetan activists in Nepal have been particularly strident.
Much depends on Prachanda's priorities. The Maoist leader has time and again shown he is not a dogmatist wedded to textbook Marxism and will give primacy to the implementation of his reform agenda. He has proved to be a brilliant tactician. He will tap into all available goodwill in Delhi and Beijing to the extent that his agenda of Nepal's rapid economic development benefits.
In his first post-election comments, Prachanda said Nepal will develop "new relations" with the Indian leadership. He stressed the close cultural and historical links between the two countries and pointed out it is "quite important" to have good neighborly relations with India. "A good understanding with Delhi can create a new basis of unity with India," he said.
But he clarified that Nepal will maintain equidistance between India and China in political terms. Beijing is certain to respond to him, given the criticality of Nepal to Tibet's security and stability. If China's Central Asia policy is anything to go by, it will put big money on the table in Nepal in the coming period so as to keep at bay the three "evils" - terrorism, religious extremism and separatism.
Besides, Nepal is resource-rich. There are any number of areas such as development of infrastructure, hydroelectric power or the manufacturing industry, where Nepal offers attractive business opportunities for enterprising Chinese firms. Nepal can also be a gateway to the Indian market.
The advent of the Maoists to power in Kathmandu, therefore, confronts Delhi with a creative challenge. The old days are gone when Delhi could take a complacent view that come what may, Kathmandu would remain wedded to cultivating Indian goodwill. The need arises now for Delhi to be proactive, efficient and competitive. China's "soft power" in Nepal is already very considerable, while Nepal is no exception to the latent "anti-Indianism" common to India's neighboring countries.
Any Indian assumption that Nepal is its security backyard or that it should be within India's "sphere of influence" will be untenable. If Delhi resorts to pressure tactics, sensing that the Maoists have a long way to go to consolidate their grip on political power, it might prove counterproductive.
On the other hand, the lengthening shadow of Chinese influence in Nepal should act as a spur goading India into creative diplomacy. Having said that, India is still left with vast leverage over Nepal spread over several inter-locking planes - geography, culture and common ethos, shared history, economic and social linkages, etc - and there is no real need to panic.
Almost certainly, the Maoists will want to jettison the 1950 treaty of peace and friendship with India, which they consistently viewed as an unequal framework. Equally, Delhi is conscious of the treaty's growing irrelevance, even though the treaty provides significant trade and transit advantages to landlocked Nepal and the Maoists, once in power, may come to better appreciate that. No doubt, the renegotiation of the treaty will bring to the fore the new impulses of the three-way equations involving India, Nepal and China.
Nepal has proved to be an unhappy experience for the United States and India in their newfound interest to coordinate and harmonize their regional policies. While India managed to keep its options open in a developing situation, the US policy finds itself in a cul-de-sac. It was predicated on the naive belief that Nepal could be made a geopolitical pressure point on China's soft underbelly. Nepal becomes the latest link in the chain of the George W Bush administration's foreign policy misadventures. The Maoists of Nepal still figure in the US State Department's list of terrorist organizations.
But Prachanda may offer Washington an exit strategy without loss of face. Responding to the media on Sunday, he said, "Yesterday, I had a very serious discussion with former US president Jimmy Carter, and I raised this question [of Washington regarding the Maoists as terrorists] ... It seems ridiculous to me."
Asia Times Online, 14-Apr-08
By M K Bhadrakumar
M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).
The South Asian political landscape will never be the same again following the Maoist victory march in Nepal's elections to a new 601-seat constituent Assembly last Thursday. It may take several days before the election results are fully known, but available trends indicate that the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is surging ahead. By Monday, the Maoists had secured 89 of the total declared 162 seats for which results were declared.
The established mainstream parties, such as the Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist) are trailing far behind. The royalists, who rooted for the perpetuation of the 240-year-old Hindu monarchy, have been routed. A distinct possibility arises that the Maoists will secure a simple majority and lead the next government - an extraordinary feat for the former rebels who gave up a decade-long armed struggle and took to the democratic path hardly two years ago.
The impact is bound to be far-reaching on Nepal's political economy, South Asia's political landscape and the geopolitics of the region. Thursday's elections are primarily aimed at forming a constituent assembly to determine the contours of Nepal's political system. The results signify that the country is irrevocably set on the path of republicanism. Even the limited role of a constitutional monarchy seems out of the question.
The results signify pervasive popular disenchantment with the established political parties. Most expert commentators have to explain their lapse in not foreseeing such an outburst of popular opinion. Clearly, the people have voted for change. The groundswell of support for Maoists is fairly widespread, cutting across regions. Claiming victory, Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal (popularly called Prachanda) said his party's victory was a mandate for lasting peace, implementation of the democratic republic and rapid economic development. He frontally addressed the intriguing question: "People are asking, 'What is this Maoist party?' And the international community is asking, 'What will happen after the Maoists win?' All these fears are unnecessary."
Prachanda held out the assurance that his party's agenda would be to work with other political parties during the transition period. "We will establish greater national unity with all political parties after the election," he added. The Maoists received commendation from an unexpected quarter when former US president Jimmy Carter, who led a team of foreign observers, stated at a press conference in Kathmandu on Saturday his conviction that the former rebels were every bit wedded to the democratic path.
The poorest country in South Asia has suddenly catapulted itself to the vanguard of democratic reform and political transformation in the region. India, which basks in the glory of its democratic way of life, at once looks a little bit archaic and tired in comparison. After 60 years of uninterrupted democratic pluralism, vast sections of Indian society are yet to realize the potentials of political empowerment. The Nepalese people have come from behind and overtaken the Indians in expanding the frontiers of "bourgeois" politics.
Politics in India still meander through alleys of caste and parochialism and eddies of religious obscurantism and Hindu nationalism. The upper-caste Hindu elites in Nepal used to share social kinships with the Indian political elites. The Maoists have upturned Nepal's entrenched caste politics. The Indian electorate is yet to explore in full measure ideology-based secular political empowerment, which is the bedrock of democratic self-rule. Unsurprisingly, India's main opposition party, the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party, which thrives on Hindu fundamentalism, has been stunned into silence. It feels let down that a country that it dearly cherished as the world's only "Hindu kingdom" has taken to secular democracy with such panache.
The Maoist government will proceed to dismantle the pillars of Nepal's feudal structure and will take recourse to radical economic and political reforms based on distributive justice and egalitarian principles. That is bound to catch the attention of impoverished Indians in the sub-Himalayan belt sooner or later. The Indian states (provinces) bordering Nepal are notorious for their misgovernance.
The Maoist victory in Nepal poses a challenge to the Indian establishment as well. Delhi is distinctly lukewarm about the prospect of an outright Maoist victory. The Indian establishment traditionally works with the Nepali Congress. Some elements within the establishment view with disquiet the prospect of the Maoists galvanizing revolutionary movements within India. Conceivably, Delhi didn't anticipate a tidal wave of popular will favoring the Maoists in Nepal.
All the same, Delhi allowed the democratic process in Nepal to take its course. It could not but take a keen interest in Nepalese politics and a completely "hands-off" approach was unrealistic to expect, but the real question was of not being intrusive to the point of interfering in Nepal's internal affairs. In the event, Delhi kept cool and maintained a delicate balance - watching developments closely while keeping a decent distance and reserving options to adapt to circumstances. However, a period of adjustment to the new political realities in Kathmandu becomes necessary and a thorough revamping of policy directions is inevitable. Nepal is far too important a neighbor for India. Its rapidly growing relations with China add to Delhi's policy calculus.
China's policy towards Nepal is not ideology driven insofar as Beijing kept in view the imperatives of inter-state relations almost until the end of King Gyanendra's direct rule. But Beijing swiftly adapted to the emergent democratic forces in Nepal with great pragmatism and forged working relations with all political parties, including the Maoists. China's interest in Nepal has increased almost exponentially. The overarching geopolitical reality is that the United States has become hyperactive in Nepalese politics. The developments in Tibet have added a further dimension. Tibetan activists in Nepal have been particularly strident.
Much depends on Prachanda's priorities. The Maoist leader has time and again shown he is not a dogmatist wedded to textbook Marxism and will give primacy to the implementation of his reform agenda. He has proved to be a brilliant tactician. He will tap into all available goodwill in Delhi and Beijing to the extent that his agenda of Nepal's rapid economic development benefits.
In his first post-election comments, Prachanda said Nepal will develop "new relations" with the Indian leadership. He stressed the close cultural and historical links between the two countries and pointed out it is "quite important" to have good neighborly relations with India. "A good understanding with Delhi can create a new basis of unity with India," he said.
But he clarified that Nepal will maintain equidistance between India and China in political terms. Beijing is certain to respond to him, given the criticality of Nepal to Tibet's security and stability. If China's Central Asia policy is anything to go by, it will put big money on the table in Nepal in the coming period so as to keep at bay the three "evils" - terrorism, religious extremism and separatism.
Besides, Nepal is resource-rich. There are any number of areas such as development of infrastructure, hydroelectric power or the manufacturing industry, where Nepal offers attractive business opportunities for enterprising Chinese firms. Nepal can also be a gateway to the Indian market.
The advent of the Maoists to power in Kathmandu, therefore, confronts Delhi with a creative challenge. The old days are gone when Delhi could take a complacent view that come what may, Kathmandu would remain wedded to cultivating Indian goodwill. The need arises now for Delhi to be proactive, efficient and competitive. China's "soft power" in Nepal is already very considerable, while Nepal is no exception to the latent "anti-Indianism" common to India's neighboring countries.
Any Indian assumption that Nepal is its security backyard or that it should be within India's "sphere of influence" will be untenable. If Delhi resorts to pressure tactics, sensing that the Maoists have a long way to go to consolidate their grip on political power, it might prove counterproductive.
On the other hand, the lengthening shadow of Chinese influence in Nepal should act as a spur goading India into creative diplomacy. Having said that, India is still left with vast leverage over Nepal spread over several inter-locking planes - geography, culture and common ethos, shared history, economic and social linkages, etc - and there is no real need to panic.
Almost certainly, the Maoists will want to jettison the 1950 treaty of peace and friendship with India, which they consistently viewed as an unequal framework. Equally, Delhi is conscious of the treaty's growing irrelevance, even though the treaty provides significant trade and transit advantages to landlocked Nepal and the Maoists, once in power, may come to better appreciate that. No doubt, the renegotiation of the treaty will bring to the fore the new impulses of the three-way equations involving India, Nepal and China.
Nepal has proved to be an unhappy experience for the United States and India in their newfound interest to coordinate and harmonize their regional policies. While India managed to keep its options open in a developing situation, the US policy finds itself in a cul-de-sac. It was predicated on the naive belief that Nepal could be made a geopolitical pressure point on China's soft underbelly. Nepal becomes the latest link in the chain of the George W Bush administration's foreign policy misadventures. The Maoists of Nepal still figure in the US State Department's list of terrorist organizations.
But Prachanda may offer Washington an exit strategy without loss of face. Responding to the media on Sunday, he said, "Yesterday, I had a very serious discussion with former US president Jimmy Carter, and I raised this question [of Washington regarding the Maoists as terrorists] ... It seems ridiculous to me."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)