Watching history unfold

Burmese monks pray alongside Thai monks at a monastery in Thailand; a small group of monks marched in central Burma in defiance of the junta's bloody crackdown last month, photo from BBC News

EDIT 29, 10/31/07: This article describes the steps that the Burmese junta has taken to try to break up the opposition from the monks. Despite all this, despite the knowledge of what happened a month ago, despite the overwhelming sense of fear and intimidation, the monks have decided to march again. My admiration and respect for their bravery in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds knows no bounds. Let none of us take freedom for granted, for it's something so precious that these monks are willing to spill their blood again and again.

EDIT 28, 10/31/07: We all know what happened a month and a half ago. Monks marched in protest, military junta launched a brutal crackdown, the world was outraged but did nothing except send an envoy. The junta took small steps such as meeting Aung San Suu Kyi but nonetheless slept at night in peace knowing that it had crushed any threat to its power.

Not so fast ... in a heroically brave show of defiance, a group of more than 100 monks marched in the streets of Pakokku on Tuesday, in central Burma near Mandalay. Incidentally, it was the junta's beating of the monks in Pakokku that sparked the nationwide mass protests against the junta by the monks in September. It's too soon to tell if this will be the launch of a series of new protests (since scores of monks are still missing and presumably either dead or in the junta's custody), but with UN Envoy Ibrahim Gambari due to be in Burma all of next week, all eyes are on the junta now.

Meanwhile, ordinary Burmese people themselves continue to show defiance to the junta wherever possible. As one incredibly wise Burmese shopkeeper noted, "If we stop now, we will get the government that we deserve." The Burmese people are fighting hard, it's time for the world to honor our obligations to our fellow humans yearning for freedom.

EDIT 27, 10/23/07: A lot of events have happened over the past few days and unfortunately I didn't have the time to report on them in a timely manner. So in case any of you have not been following the news daily, let me provide an update of what's happening.

The general sense of fear and intimidation by the military is there, though it's clear that Burmese society has been shaken to the core due to the junta's acts of violence against the monks.

Though the Burmese junta has taken a step of two forward by lifting the curfew in Rangoon, allowing the UN's human rights expert to visit after refusing him permission for four years, and meeting once again the UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari, the fact on the ground is that thousands of monks are still missing and presumably being tortured in custody, the manhunt for participants in last months' protests continues, and a climate of fear is all pervasive.

Meanwhile, India seems to be tepidly exploring the possibility of actually stepping forward and doing something. India's response to this whole crisis, to me as an Indian citizen, has been downright shameful and reprehensible. As the only liberal democracy in the region, India has behaved no better than autocratic China and if a government headed by Aung Sang Suu Kyi decides to sell Burma's natural resources only to the E.U. and U.S. rather than to India, a country that abandoned the Burmese people when they needed it most, I will actually be happy.

It's a massive sign of the junta's incompetence that Arakan state in Burma which has one of the natural gas reserves in Asia and with so much potential for development is also so desperately poor. For now, the people are back to their sad routine of being preoccupied with finding food for their next meal, but being the optimist I am, the junta's days are numbered. If only the western world possessed the moral fortitude to place sanctions on Burma's backers, India and China, as well.

EDIT 26, 10/13/07: Despite the UN Security Council's statement and assurances given to the UN that arrests have stopped, three more key democracy activists (the last expected to be still at large) were arrested by the junta. The Burmese junta, encouraged by the fact that their Chinese allies will deflect any real UN pressure, are making a mockery of the UN. Let's see how many photo ops Gambari poses for this time around with the generals.

EDIT 25, 10/11/07: There has been some sobering news from Burma but there has been uplifting news as well. Democracy activist Win Shwe died in custody (murdered would be more appropriate) and he was likely tortured as well before his death. This hero's death needs to galvanize the international spotlight on the thousands of other innocent Burmese citizens still in the junta's clutches and who are likely in equally or more desperate situations.

The UN Security Council adopted a statement today deploring the junta's crackdown on peaceful activists. Though watered down (instead of "condemning", the Security Council "strongly deplored" the use of violence), the statement is somewhat significant since China did not veto it. How much this international pressure will work on a regime known for its insularity is unclear, but UN Envoy Gambari is set to return to Burma next week thankfully much sooner than his earlier stated intent to return by "mid-November".

Meanwhile, here's another article on Burmese society and its struggle to come to terms with what the junta has done to that which is most sacred in junta, the monks that are the living representatives of Buddhism.

EDIT 24, 10/09/07: The steps that the international community can take on restoring peace in Burma are few. The Burmese people, more than democracy, just want food on their table and sanctions would not help their desperate situation. Clearly, Burma's junta gets more than enough patronage from China and India, so sanctions would hurt the ordinary Burmese citizen, not the junta.

A peacekeeping force seems to be the best option for now, but it's likely that Russia and China would veto any UN peacekeeping force. As for NATO, it is stretched far too thin from Kosovo to Afghanistan to be able to secure yet another country. The best option would be to use as much leverage as possible in order to secure a peacekeeping force from ASEAN, China and India to control sensitive cities and prod the junta on a path to political reconciliation. The Olympics can be used as pressure on China to contribute troops and where China goes, India will certainly follow to protect its own interests. But is there political will to do this?

Meanwhile, the junta is trying to deflect tension while appearing to be ready for talks, but with conditions that are so preposterous, the offer is basically meaningless.

EDIT 23, 10/08/07: "I hate government."

That's the message that Burmese citizens are still trying to get across to the international audience, often at great personal risk. As nighttime raids continue and the junta's propaganda machine tries to sell what no one is buying and even if the fires of democracy have been seemingly extinguished, the embers are still very much smoldering, waiting for favorable conditions again and until then, surviving in fear and uncertainty.

Meanwhile, the junta has seemingly appointed a go-between for talks with Aung San Suu Kyi although they are continuing to insist that she admit to offenses she has not committed.

EDIT 22, 10/06/07: This is an interesting article regarding the Burmese junta mindset. It's important that as the international community tries to resolve the situation in Burma, it keeps in mind that the crackpot generals leading the country really do believe in their own propaganda. The highly insular nature of the military ensured that it did not flinch even when ordered to beat and kill Buddhist monks, the moral center of Burmese society. The military itself believes that even these Buddhist monks were being controlled by foreign colonial powers and that it's the military's job to to "protect" Burma.

Thanks to generous sops and pay scales, the Burmese military is detached from the grinding struggle that is life for ordinary Burmese citizens. We have to keep in mind that economic sanctions alone will not affect the Burmese regime. Our action has to be more concrete, such as a total arms embargo that will choke the military itself. If China and India need to be punished to fall in line, then so be it. It's clear that any moral imperative on this issue needs to come from the West, as Burma's neighbors seem only too keen to place economic interests above human rights.

In the meantime, protests continued throughout the world against the Burmese junta. As the lady marching in London said, it's important that we follow Aung Sang Suu Kyi's pleas. We must use our liberty to promote liberty in Burma.

Meanwhile, I managed to catch an interview of UN Envoy Ibrahim Gambari by Matt Frei on yesterday evening's BBC World News. Matt Frei really ripped apart Ibrahim Gambari who continued to parrot the same phrase over and over again: "I have gone to Burma to convey the Security Council's outrage ... blah blah blah." As Matt Frei pointed out, while Mr. Gambari was posing for photo ops with the Burmese generals, soldiers were dragging people out of their homes in the middle of the night and hauling them away to secret, remote prisons. To this Mr. Gambari responded that he was informed that during his visit the raids had stopped. What kind of envoy is this if he doesn't even know what's going on in the country he's supposed to be an envoy to? Now he's planned a visit to Burma earlier than mid-November? It almost seems to me that the UN is taking as much time as possible hoping that this issue disappears off the world radar. That can't be right, can it? Certainly not from an organization that has countries like China and Saudi Arabia on its "human rights council"?

A group of monks listen to the testimony at the UN, Photo from NY Times

EDIT 21, 10/05/07: The UN Envoy Ibrahim Gambari has described before the United Nations Security Council the horrors unfolding inside Burma. The Security Council has heard all it needs to know about the night time raids, arbitrary arrests, mass relocations, and beatings "being committed by security and non-uniformed elements."

Not surprisingly, China seems to be trying to act preemptively to avert any kind of real punitive measures, i.e. anything beyond words and expressions of "concern." The Chinese ambassador to the UN said: “If the situation in Myanmar [Burma] takes a worse turn because of external intervention, it would be the people of Myanmar [Burma] who will bear the brunt.”

Right, as if China, or for that matter any of Burma's neighbors, have an iota of concern for the Burmese people. China and India are trying to pump out as many natural resources from Burma as quickly as possible and if that means propping up an illegitimate regime and condemning a nation to starvation and penury, so be it! It's time for the world to prod Burma's neighbors harder. India is not so closely linked economically with the Burmese junta and there is a real grassroots movement in Indian society vilifying the government's stance on the issue, so the Indian government should cooperate with the West eventually, especially in the face of a threat of decreased investment. For China, it seems that a boycott of the Beijing Olympics is the greatest leverage we have at our disposal and we should actively use it if Beijing refuses to go beyond mere words in helping resolve this situation in Burma.

As for the junta's offer to meet Aung San Suu Kyi, the conditions they have put forward is so ridiculous that it isn't even an offer at all. The junta says Ms. Suu Kyi should drop her "attitude of confrontation" and support for "economic sanctions" on Burma. That's so ridiculous that only the lunatic junta in Burma could possibly conjure it up. First of all, when Ms. Suu Kyi's party was elected in a landslide victory in democratic elections in 1990, it was the junta that nullified those results and has kept her in house arrest since. It was the junta that orchestrated that a gang of thugs attack her entourage when she was briefly let out of house arrest in 2003. It is the junta's illegitimacy in the eyes of the world's civilized nations that is the cause of the economic sanctions on Burma, not Ms. Suu Kyi. The junta is trying to buy time and aided by their masters in Beijing, they're trying to say something, indeed anything, to get some of the international pressure off.

If the junta indeed were serious about reconciliation, then they still wouldn't be conducting night-time raids and hauling thousands of monks away to remote prisons.

EDIT 20, 10/03/07: According to this article, things are desperate and the immediate outlook for those detained by the junta is very bleak. As the businessman looking for his missing 18 year old daughter said, "that [pressure from the outside world on the junta] has to happen now. Not next week or next month." With thousands of citizens missing and regular night-time raids on houses, one would think that there would be a greater sense of urgency on the part of the international community. Anyway, let's see what Gambari has to say in the next day or two and how quickly the Security Council can respond to what he says.

EDIT 19, 10/03/07: According to latest news reports, scores of monks are now trying to escape from Rangoon, presumably in order to avoid the ongoing crackdown by the junta. Reports indicate that night-time police raids are still continuing. The report from UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari is expected later this week. Given that Mr. Gambari seems to be taking his own sweet time and there doesn't seem to be a real sense of urgency, I would hope that his report is thoroughly comprehensive and outlines a plan for reconciliation in Burma. I somehow doubt that because the junta's actions since Mr. Gambari's visit show no indications of reconciliation. The Security Council's response, especially China's response, will be interesting. If China vetoes a Security Council move again, then we are going to have to demand a boycott of the Beijing Olympics.

Also unfortunately, the flow of information out of Burma has been cut. The junta has shut off the internet in the country. While various other repressive regimes have resorted to cutting off the internet, again the junta in Burma is a special case. For a country that is so isolated from the international world, cutting off the internet will have little economic consequences and even if it does, the illogical junta will hardly care. We can only hope that those Burmese citizens still brave enough to risk torture to spread the word will be able to find another way to communicate.

EDIT 18, 10/02/07: The UN Envoy Ibrahim Gambari met with junta leader Than Shwe and subsequently with democracy activist under house arrest Aung San Suu Kyi a second time before leaving Burma. The fact that he met Ms. Suu Kyi a second time gives me hope that there is some scope for political reconciliation, but this is the same junta that fired live ammunition into crowds of peacefully protesting monks last week. Those same monks are being confined in squalid conditions about to be shipped to secret, remote prisons. So maybe the glimmer of hope I have is misplaced. I've said it once before and I'll say it once again. The international community has to respond. If the junta doesn't continue on the path to reconciliation, then the UN Security Council will have to impose sanctions and arms embargoes. If China vetoes this resolution, then the 2008 Olympics must be boycotted. That's the only language the Chinese will understand and that's the only way to bring them around.

Meanwhile, within Burma, things are far from normal. The uprising is far from over, it's just been smothered by the heavy military presence. The underlying grievances which gave rise to these popular protests remains unsolved. In addition, people are outraged but also terrified seeing that the military would not hesitate even to massacre Buddhist monks. Monasteries are still refusing to accept alms from the military, a hugely symbolic gesture in a devoutly Buddhist country. In addition, there are still pockets of resistance in the country, tremendously brave acts considering that these people have seen just to what level of brutality the junta is willing to go to.

EDIT 17, 10/01/07: Thousands of monks currently being detained are about to be shipped by Burma's junta to remote prisons in the country's far north. Meanwhile, the junta is merrily delaying meeting with the UN Envoy, Ibrahim Gambari. The junta has managed by brute force to stamp a picture of normality in Burma and snuff out the protests for now. Thousands of disrobed, shackled, and hungry monks are being shipped to secret, isolated prisons. Everything still depends on the international community. I myself am beginning to fear that, in this instance, the rise of democracy has been crushed by an iron hammer.

Editorial cartoon by Stephane Peray, The Nation, Bangkok, Thailand

EDIT 16, 09/30/07: The above editorial cartoon seems to once again confirm the UN's worthlessness. If the UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari can't deliver results, then perhaps it would be best if the United Nations sticks to humanitarian efforts and ceases to pretend that it is actually worth something.

EDIT 15, 09/28/07: The junta seems to have for now quelled the protests. Rangoon saw intense security cover on Friday and most of the monasteries were sealed off completely. Sporadic groups of protesters took to the streets but the Burmese military were quick to use force in dispersing them. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown believes that the number of dead may be many times that of the official figure of 9. Meanwhile, UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari is due to arrive in Burma on Saturday. While the junta may have succeeded in quelling the protests for now, international condemnation is another matter entirely. Intense pressure will be on the junta to begin inclusive talks of democratic reform, which will include talking to Aung San Suu Kyi and release of all political prisoners. Again, everything rests in how much influence China, mainly, and India as well, can place on the junta.

EDIT 14, 09/27/07: This article describes well the sacrifices that Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has made for her country and her people. She is a lady who is rightfully the elected leader of Burma, but is languishing under house arrest for the past two decades. She had to choose between her husband and her country and as a result was not able to be near him when he died of cancer. She is a lady who for the past few years has been in total isolation under house arrest, with NO visitors allowed. Imagine, no human contact! She is a lady of boundless courage and determination, and as the recent protests have shown us, a tremendous number of the Burmese people share these noble characteristics.

Street littered with sandals left by fleeing protesters after the Burmese military opened fire, Photo

EDIT 13, 09/27/07: The Burmese military opened fire on protesters in Rangoon on Thursday, killing at least nine people. Again, we have seen little but token words come from the international community. China, for the first time, publicly expressed concern and hoped that the authorities would prevent the situation from getting "complicated." With troops firing on unarmed protesters, I think the situation is already complicated. It's time for more than words.

The military in overnight raids arrested and trucked away hundreds of monks, so the monk presence on the streets was lighter. Nonetheless, before troops started firing on the crowds, a crowd of 50,000 comprised mainly of civilians with some monks, gathered in the Sule Pagoda in downtown Rangoon to jeer the soldiers. A crowd of another 10,000, led by monks, protested some distance away. It will be interesting to see what the response to the shootings by the troops will be tomorrow. More interesting will be how the international community handles this situation. Boycott Beijing 2008, anyone?

EDIT 12, 09/26/07: India *finally* seems to be getting into the act, however timidly, even as the junta conducted nighttime raids and arrested scores of monks overnight.

"In the first high level comment by his country, the Indian Foreign Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, said India hoped all Burmese people would be involved in national reconciliation and political reform."

Meanwhile, India's leading newspaper, in its trademark fiery fashion, said the following:

"India should quietly urge Myanmar towards it [seeing another point of view]. We are not like China. We champion democratic values. Do something."

Yes, Manmohan Singh and co., DO SOMETHING!

Monks face off in a peaceful manner against armed forces, Photo from NY Times

EDIT 11, 09/26/07: For all the optimism these protests being, this article is a bone-chilling reminder of what reality in Burma is. I don't think China has to worry about "losing" Burma to India. There cannot exist a scenario where India will stay silent while China speaks out about human rights abuses, not in this world at least. The bigger worry for China is that the protests in Burma may give its own people some ideas. On the one hand at the extreme, China is faced with a boycott of its Olympics. On the other hand at the extreme, the survival of the Chinese Communist Party may be at stake.

EDIT 10, 09/26/07: I've said it before and I'll say it again, yay for technology! Every Burmese citizen who takes a photo, who records a video, who logs onto an unregistered computer, who bypasses government controls and censorship, who gets word to the outside world on what the Burmese people are facing, is committing an act of immense heroism. So here's to their bravery!

"On a broad avenue near the temple, hundreds of people sat facing a row of soldiers, calling out to them: “The people’s armed forces, our armed forces!" and, "The armed forces should not kill their own people!”"

Burmese soldiers, are you listening?

This is all that the monks are asking for

Civilians formed a human shield to protect monks. Contrary to the junta's claim that this uprising involves only young monks, the reality is clearly different. Photo from BBC News.

Red Cross workers tending to injuries on a monk, photo from BBC News

EDIT 9, 09/26/07: Despite the use of tear gas and baton charges by the Burmese military and riot police, 10,000 monks and civilians marched through Rangoon defying the junta's very real threats. One monk was reportedly beaten to death and two others are in critical condition. Another Reuters report says that two monks and one civilian have been killed so far. An emergency meeting of the UN Security Council has been called for 1900 GMT today. It will be interesting to see China's response.

EDIT 8, 09/25/07: Riot police have started beating monks in Rangoon. I'm about to go sleep now. When I wake up in the morning, I really hope the worst will not have transpired.

EDIT 7, 09/25/07: It is now morning, Wednesday September 26 in Burma. Apparently, Burmese troops have surrounded the monasteries in an attempt to prevent a ninth day of protests. They wouldn't be stupid enough to cause bloodshed, not when the entire world is watching, right? Meanwhile, the monks leading this protest are trying to apply as many lessons from the 1988 massacres as possible.

Monks leading a protest on Tuesday, photo from NY Times

EDIT 6, 09/25/07: The junta has now imposed a dusk to dawn curfew and deployed troops along the routes the protesters have taken. A showdown is now imminent. In 1988, the government was able to convince the foot soldiers that the protesters were incited by communist insurgents. But now, I wonder how many soldiers will fire at unarmed Buddhist monks, if given such an order. China and India, the world is watching you as well.

EDIT 5, 09/25/07: On Tuesday, September 25, army trucks went around Burma's cities warning citizens not to take part in these protests, otherwise "action will be taken." It was not a warning to be taken lightly. Burma's military junta is among the most repressive regimes on the planet and the last time that mass protests were cracked down upon, 3,000 civilians were dead. To their immense credit, defying the junta's threats, tens of thousands of brave Burmese monks led tens of thousands of brave Burmese civilians in protests in Rangoon and other cities.

Meanwhile, in New York at the United Nations, U.S. President George Bush denounced the junta's "reign of fear" and announced new sanctions. However, as I said in my last post, it's imperative that Burma's main trading partners, China, India, and Thailand, get involved and defuse this crisis before widespread bloodshed takes place. The junta's time is up. It's time for them to sit down at the table and start the process to real democracy.

Monks marching in a Rangoon suburb, photo from BBC News

EDIT 4, 09/24/07: The U.S. will announce a wave of fresh sanctions on Burma at the UN General Assembly. The E.U. will undoubtedly follow suit. Unfortunately, the impact of the U.S. and E.U. will be very limited, mainly because the we don't do much business with the junta in the first place.

The actions of the U.S. and E.U. have been completely overshadowed by the deafening silence emanating from the nations that the junta does conduct business with, China and India. While China's refusal to speak out in favor of democratic protests is completely understandable, India's silence is inexcusable. India has clearly abandoned the Nehruvian ideals under which it was founded and money seems to be India's only motive these days, which is truly sad. In fact, as the Burmese monks and civilians were trudging along the streets of Burma demanding freedom, India Petroleum Minister Murli Deora was meeting with the junta and penning a new $150 million investment in Burma. This Times of India article explains India's stance well.

India cannot stay silent forever. If the junta responds violently to the protests and India remains silent, then India's motto "Satyameva Jayate" ("Truth Always Triumphs") will prove to be something solely to be printed on the cover of passports.

EDIT 3, 09/24/07: On Monday, between 50,000 to 100,000 protesters marched in Rangoon, with huge columns of monks leading the way. The junta has met with senior clergy and warned them to control the young monks leading this protest and has now warned of "taking action." These protests are going to get larger day by day.

Here are some photos of the latest marches.

I really hope the junta does not resort to violence against these unarmed, peaceful protesters, but if it does, the international community needs to be galvanized into action. For now, let's wait and see what happens. In the above article, scroll down to the comments section. The Burmese people are filled with hatred for the regime and desperately want freedom, but there seems to be a very real fear of retribution from the junta. I can only imagine the conditions under which these brave people have to live their lives. Our prayers are with the Burmese people in their struggles.

EDIT 2, 09/23/07: Here's a New York Times article on the protests. Two significant points of the article are worth noting. First is the comparison between the 1988 protests with those now. In 1988, there was no internet, no blogs, no method for the outside world to follow what was happening in Burma. As they say, out of sight is out of mind. So yay for technology that facilitates the spread of freedom! The eyes of the world as well as Burmese people from all walks of life are now on the military junta.

Secondly, it's fascinating to see how this protest has evolved. Two "sons of Burma" (students and monks) have joined together and when the third son (the military) joins as happened during the Carnation Revolution, the junta's days are over.

EDIT, 09/23/2007: The protests are now the largest in 20 years, with thousands of civilians joining the monks. Let's all take a moment of silence every day and think of the brave people of Burma marching in the streets for freedom, something we take for granted day in and day out. Fyi, this is how this story is being reported in societies living under tyranny. I love how all the related news articles publicize the talking points of the ruling junta.

It's not often in the course of our lifetimes that we can see history unfold. Famous events have of course been the landing of man on the moon, the Carnation Revolution, the fall of the Berlin Wall, or the massacre of pro-democracy activists at Tiananmen Square. At the time all these above events happened, I was either not born yet or was too young to understand what was going on.

This week, we just may be seeing history in the making and it's my fervent hope that the outcome is different from what happened in Tiananmen Square. Angered by a dramatic increase in fuel prices in August, monks in Burma, renamed Myanmar by the ruling military junta, have been marching in protest of the regime. Contrary to everyone's expectations, the protests have picked up in intensity. The monks have publicly staged a showdown with the military junta and have denounced the junta as the "enemy of the people" and have vowed to not rest until they "wiped the military dictatorship from the land."

For some background info on how repressive conditions are in Burma under the junta's rule, these are some nice articles:

Burma: Orwellian state, with teashops

Daily struggle to cope

Burma's public service suffering

Burma's opposition muted but alive

Should tourists go to Burma?

Now that you know the background and are hopefully sufficiently outraged, here are some articles about the ongoing protests. Let's hope they continue to grow in strength and the "three sons" of Burma join forces to liberate this country and its people. It has long been my belief that the winds of democracy may follow a winding path, but they will eventually reach every nook and corner of this planet.

On the run in Burma

Suu Kyi greets Burma protesters

Rumbling protests worry Burma's leaders

Protests bring new hope to Burmese

Burma junta faces monks' challenge

Paul Krugman's Wile E. Coyote Moment

Yesterday, the U.S. dollar reached a new low against the Euro at $1.41 and it reached parity with the Canadian dollar. While we know this makes traveling abroad for Americans very difficult, it causes numerous other problems abroad. If you think of the global economy as a car engine, the United States is the piston & crankshaft assembly. Basically, the U.S. economy dictates the global economy.

Already, reverberations are being felt in Europe. Companies like Airbus are obviously the big losers, due to their sales being in dollars and operating costs being in Euros, they lose big to competitors such as Boeing. The problem could echo across Germany. As the article says, German automakers (as well as Japanese, Korean, British, and pretty much anyone else) depend on U.S. sales heavily. With the slide in value of the dollar, they'll either be forced to raise prices or shift manufacturing facilities to countries outside Europe where the Euro is not in use. Either way, it's going to cost them. Together, the slide of the dollar could very well force Europe into a recession.

So you may ask, why do we care about the Europeans? If Boeing and U.S. automakers benefit, isn't that a good thing? Why can't we let the dollar continue sliding and reap profits? Well, it's more complicated than that.

You probably don't know, but the Chinese own us. The Chinese possess $900 billion in U.S. treasury bonds, thanks to our massive trade deficit. Basically, we're continuously pressuring them to devalue their currency, which desperately needs devaluation, and our own currency is sliding. Since the Chinese renminbi is pegged to the U.S. dollar, their currency slides along with ours and it doesn't make them happy. China has repeatedly threatened to liquidate their entire store of $900 billion in treasury bonds, something referred to as the "nuclear option" in state run media. In addition, we're now hearing rumblings from the Middle East where the Saudis are thinking of decoupling their currency from the U.S. dollar. The above article explains this well.

Basically, even the Chinese "nuclear option" by itself is enough to push the U.S. into a recession. The Bush administration has long been plagued by inaction because of the belief that a weak dollar would stimulate U.S. exports and make the Bush economic record rosier than it actually should be. Well, I think we're close to the breaking point. We need to act before we reach the Wile E. Coyote moment?

Ahmedinejad's Visit to Columbia

So apparently Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is visiting Columbia University and this has ruffled quite a few feathers. I think Mayor Bloomberg is doing the right thing. In this country, universities have the right to invite who they want to speak and individual citizens have the right to attend or not attend, to protest or not protest. That's one of the great things about living in a free society.

A major part of the opposition to Ahmedinejad's visit is his call for the destruction of Israel and his statements in the past denying the Holocaust. So what, the man's clearly a nutcase, but he's entitled to his opinions just like anyone else, isn't he? After all, how different are people that deny evolution compared with those that deny the holocaust? The former are even found in the highest echelons of our current government.

The problem is that the Holocaust is often viewed as a great exception. Free speech is great, EXCEPT when it concerns the Holocaust. After all, so many European countries have anti-Holocaust denial laws and ban Nazi symbols. Perhaps they're right. After all, the Holocaust is probably the single worst thing that has happened in human history. Sure, religious persecution is as old as humanity and religion itself, but never was it carried out with the systematic scheming and planning as during the Holocaust.

And when the anti-Holocaust denial laws were enacted in immediate post-World War II Europe, they probably made a lot of sense in a continent struggling to comprehend what had just happened. But do they make sense now? 60 years later, aren't we mature enough in our modern democracies to allow for unconditional free speech and have people make their own informed, free decisions? Why, even after more than six decades, are we still so touchy regarding the Holocaust that we are willing to make exceptions to the concepts of free speech and expression that we hold so dear?

So I don't think there's anything wrong in Columbia's decision to invite Ahmedinejad. Don't get me wrong, I have problems with the "liberal intellectual crowd" as well. A few years ago, former Iranian President Khatami was speaking somewhere in the U.S. and when pressed on one topic, he said that homosexuals should be given the death penalty. If any Republican or evangelical said that on stage, he would have been booed off stage or worse. But in the case of Khatami, the audience sat silently and listened without so much of a response. I would have expected the crowd to walk out en masse or something of the sort. Surely, our liberal ideas should not be dependent on who's speaking? Similarly with the event involving the leader of the Minutemen who was speaking in Columbia that Bloomberg mentions in the above article. I think the Minutemen are over the top and I do not agree with their vigilante justice methods, but they have a right to speak their opinions. Universities in this country should uphold free speech in all forms, whether in the form of a vigilante, xenophobic cowboy from the southwest or an anti-semitic nut case from the Middle East.

Getting back to Ahmedinejad, yes, he denies the Holocaust and rails for the destruction of Israel. But he's a politician and he does that to get votes. How different is he from our politicians (Giuliani, McCain, et al.) that continue to connect (or attempt to connect) 9/11 with Iraq, and demand that groups like MoveOn.org be "thrown out of the country", notwithstanding constitutional guarantees of free speech in order to get votes? So let's relax, just treat Ahmedinejad as the "McCain of Iran" or "Giuliani of Tehran" and boycott his rants just as we would of those of the Republican nut cases over here.

Final post on the war, for now

I wasn't able to get home and watch Bush's speech last night on Iraq (it was 6 p.m. out here), but I did read about it and the Democratic response by Sen. Reed. I also watched four presidential aspirants (Obama, Giuliani, Edwards, and McCain) give their thoughts on it and the war later on in the evening.

To be honest, I wasn't happy with anyone. I do not support calls for an immediate withdrawal, because we are seeing some progress in Iraq. But I have to agree with Democratic critics when it's stated that 3 out of 17 benchmarks that have been met is pathetic and of that, it has been mainly helped by factors other than the troop surge.

Both Obama and Edwards talked about the need for political reconciliation in Iraq and getting the Shia and Sunni to sit together and work things out, failing which we would pull our troops out. They are both intelligent men, so I am sure they knew that what they were talking about was complete garbage. Most of the people in power, which now belong to the Shia majority, have NO INTEREST in working things out with the Sunnis and political progress will continue to be tortuously slow, if at all. While many Iraqi politicians may act along with the U.S., they are in reality being controlled by hardline clerics such as al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army. al-Sadr can't wait for American troops to leave. He doesn't want to work with the Sunni minority, he wants to ethnically cleanse them from the country. The carrot will not work in Iraq, the various sectarian tribes have to be brought together using the stick. The Sunnis aren't working with us now because they like democracy, they're cooperating because America is their only chance for survival and they know that. Similarly, only with American might behind the Sunni factions will the Shia majority be willing to sit down and talk.

So does that mean that I agreed with Giuliani and McCain? Sadly, no. Giuliani, instead of dissecting this quagmire openly and honestly, reverted to what the Republicans have been harping about for the last six years. He constantly mentioned Islamic terrorism, the dangers Iran "poses", he played the politics of fear and division that Bush & Karl Rove played so insidiously the last six years. He gave a glimpse into the future in that a Giuliani presidency would be little different from a Bush presidency, as far as the Orwellian warnings about impending doom go at least.

As for McCain, well, his boot licking of George Bush continued unabated. He continued to insist that George Bush is right, much as he has for the past year and beyond.

So you might be wondering, who did I agree with? Well, none of them and all of them, in part.

George Bush - George Bush is right about ONE THING. We have made some progress and our troops should "return on success". However, it's clear that this President does not have a plan for success. He refuses to diplomatically engage Iran and Syria, which is critical if they are to stop interfering within Iraq. If anything, he continued to vilify Iran and ensure that our troops in Iraq face a much tougher task than they have to and will have to stay put much longer than is needed. According to his plan, six months from now, we will be at the same troop strength where we were a year ago and even in January 2009, when he will be leaving office, there will still be 100,000 troops in Iraq!!! If that's what's needed after exhausting all the resources at our disposal and ensuring stability, then fine. But, if this President doesn't want to do the tough things that are needed on the diplomatic front, such as engaging Iran, then his plan is UNACCEPTABLE. His ideological stubbornness is unfair to the troops, it's unfair to the Iraqis, it's unfair to America!

Democrats - I cannot agree with calls for an immediate withdrawal. It would be disastrous and it's playing partisan politics with the security of a nation, a nation we illegally invaded. If we get it wrong, then in any genocide or ethnic cleansing that follows, the blood will be on our hands. However, the Democrats are dead right in calling for engaging countries "we don't like too much" such as Iran and Syria. The Democrats need to drop their calls for an immediate withdrawal and ensure that we use all the diplomatic, as well as military, tools at our disposal to ensure Iraq's stability and get the troops home as quickly as possible.

What the Dems need to do: It's clear that this neo-con administration will sooner disappear rather than diplomatically engage Iran. That leaves the Democrats with only one choice. Impeach Bush, impeach Cheney, and let a President Pelosi do the job right. This President cannot leave his mess for the next one. Once he's impeached, let's try him for war crimes as well.

Sadly, the Dems are too scared to do what's right, they just want to do what's politically expedient. So they'll continue with calls for an immediate withdrawal, Bush will continue to ignore them, he will leave office in January 2009 with 100,000 soldiers in Iraq fighting and dying for a half-hearted cause.

Iraqis' views on the occupation

This is another nice article, reflecting ordinary Iraqis' views on the occupation. Let's also remember, this is from the NY Times, whose editorials loudly and frequently call for a start to troop withdrawal. However, the article reflects Iraqis' wishes are anything but for a quick withdrawal.

And before anyone asks why we should invest our money and effort for them, let's remember that George Bush and his wild west cowboy diplomacy caused this mess in the first place. If we really want to punish Bush, let's impeach him, impeach his attack dog (also known as Vice President Cheney) and have a President Nancy Pelosi finish the job in Iraq. But let's finish it.

Let's face it. No Democratic president would ever have embarked on this misadventure, but it has been embarked upon and it is our moral responsibility to not leave a sectarian bloodshed in Iraq.

War Progress Report

With General Petraeus ready to give his status report on the war, I currently agree with most Americans. While I certainly don't trust the Bush administration, I don't trust Congress either in deciding how this war should be waged. I was against the war before it began, against George Bush's 2004 election, and against the troop surge in January. But this summer, the troop surge may have provided modest gains. I think we owe the Iraqis a chance at stability (especially after illegally attacking their country and destroying their infrastructure and society) and if there are signs of improvement (even modest) and General Petraeus thinks things can be improved further, we owe him a fair chance at doing his job.

From another NY Times article, I found this little nugget equally fascinating:

"Mrs. Clinton said that nothing General Petraeus told Congress would persuade her to endorse the Bush administration’s current strategy in Iraq."

Wow, I don't have words to describe this woman. First, she signs a black check for whatever Bush proposed in the aftermath of 9/11, the Patriot Act, the war on Iraq, EVERYTHING! And then, she has the arrogance to refuse to apologize or even admit she was wrong. Instead, she parrots repeatedly "had she known then what she knows now", she would not have acted the same way.

And now, despite the fact that the situation on the ground may be improving and we may be able to control the bloodshed in Iraq and bring about stability before we leave, she insists that she will not listen to a word that anyone else says and will burnish her "anti-war" credentials before the 2008 presidential election!!

Hillary is as much an assault on reason as George Bush. If it's down to Hillary vs. Giuliani or McCain in 2008, vote third party. If it's down to Hillary vs. any of the Republicans that don't believe in evolution, then vote for Hillary, but please perform some penance afterwards.

Run, Al, run!!!

Photos!

Ok, people, the wait is over. Here are photos of my house, neighborhood, and Davis in general.

Looking southeast down the street from my house


Looking northwest up the street from my house


My house


Another view of my house


What you see as soon as you enter through the front door

Looking up the stairs where the bedrooms are. That's my roommate's dog, Tofu, looking on.

The ceiling of the living room

The living room and the dining area

The kitchen

The cooking area in my kitchen

Our backyard

The lawn area in our backyard

My room is straight ahead. And just to make it clear, the pink laundry basket isn't mine.

My room prior to being furnished, prior to anything actually

My furniture

My room, all furnished and ready

A view of my room from another angle

Capitol Corridor at the train station. You can't beat a $19 ticket to the Bay Area!


Area around the train station


Davis train station, quite a bit smaller than Philadelphia 30th Street Station


Train station during the day

Not in my backyard!

That phrase and the idea that accompanies that phrase has to be the bane of America. Everyone wants all these benefits, but no one wants to accept any responsibility or even the slightest inconvenience for these benefits? What's next, free lunches for everyone?

Now, the latest hue and cry coming from these armchair protesters is regarding flight paths.

"The plan by the Federal Aviation Administration, in the works for nearly a decade, would simplify the paths taken by aircraft landing at airports in the New York and Philadelphia areas and provide more routes for takeoffs.

The agency expects the plan to result in delays that are 20 percent lower in 2011 than they would be if there were no change in how the air space was being used.

More direct flight paths and steeper takeoffs, which get jetliners into thinner air more rapidly, would curb fuel usage and save $248 million a year, the F.A.A. said."

Hmm ... less delays, less fuel usage, so far this seems like a great plan to me. Oh, and there's another benefit to steeper takeoffs.

"The F.A.A. contends that fewer people would be subjected to noise, in part because planes taking off more steeply would mean fewer low-flying aircraft near homes. But if takeoff routes were varied, people unaccustomed to such noise would start hearing it. Home values, among other considerations, could be affected as flight paths shifted."

And here's where the ugly truth comes out:

"David Neeleman, chairman of JetBlue Airways, which operates from Kennedy Airport, said neighbors near his Connecticut home are upset about the F.A.A. plan, which they believe would redirect flights over well-to-do suburbs not used to such noise."

Ah ha! So it's better that flights continue on their current flight grades causing great inconvenience to a small number of unfortunate (often also referred to as less-fortunate) citizens rather than adopt steeper and varied flight paths that would cause lesser inconvenience, but affect more people.

Hmm ... so take all these problems and subject them to as small a demographic as possible. That's the American way!

Never mind that people from these well-to-do suburbs in Connecticut not used to such noise are probably the business travelers that created this mess in the first place. The last thing a wealthy businessman needs to hear when he gets home from his trip abroad is the sound of planes flying overhead. It's best that those inconveniences be left to the persons residing in the ghetto who just see and hear planes, rather than fly in them.

And lest you think it's just flight noise that affects these suburbanites, there was an article in the NY Times a few months back as to how New Jersey suburbanites were protesting a windmill one of their neighbors erected in their backyard and the noise it created (which at 60 db was similar to moderate traffic). Clearly for most people in this country, things such as fighting global warming are meant to be preached from their bumper stickers, but not practiced in the course of their lives.

Those Smoky Summer Days!

Today as I got ready to leave the house around 10 a.m. today, I realized something. It wasn't bright and sunny outside as it has been for the past week and as it will most likely be for the next 40 days at least. It was actually cloudy and cooler as a result (it's only 31 degrees outside now, as opposed to the forecast 36 degrees).

Must be a stray summer thunderstorm in the area, I figured since this is the summer thunderstorm season (I am not calling it a monsoon because the "North American monsoon" is not a true monsoon like the Asian monsoon. Ask me for details if you're interested, although I seriously doubt any of you will be) for the intermountain West. Well, apparently, those aren't clouds up there but smoke! It's smoke from forest fires in the Sierra Nevada which is being blown northwards into northern San Joaquin and the Sacramento Valley, where I live.

I love California weather, it's so interesting! I can honestly say this is the first time I've seen the sky blotted out by smoke, not even in Bangalore have I seen that.

Illegal Immigration: A Middle Path?

Up until now, I've largely stayed out of the illegal immigration debate. It's because I find both of the vocal sides in the debate too extreme in their views. On the one hand, you have the xenophobes and outright racists who while pretending to be against illegal immigration are against all immigration and anything that contradicts their image of a native, ethnically homogeneous (read white) America. On the other hand, we have people like Ted Kennedy and his left wing supporters whose amnesty proposals for illegal immigrants trivializes the hoops and mounds of paperwork that legal immigrants have to go through to enter and stay in this country.

I like this opinion article in the New York Times though. It's fair, realizes that the business culture we have nurtured till today is to blame for our illegal immigration problem, and allows any illegal immigrant that is employed a chance to live in the U.S. legally and chase the American dream. More importantly, it urges sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrants. Isn't it convenient how those that vilify illegal immigrants as little more than scum turn a blind eye to the business interests that hire them and fuel this problem? If you ask me, it's these businesses that are the real scum, exploiting human misery to boost their profits.

Anyway, getting back to the time, I wonder if there a realistic hope that our politicians will do what's not politically expedient, but what's actually fair and reasonable?