Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘Amine Maaluf

33 years ago: Lebanon reports progress in negotiation with Israel?

Amine Maaluf was spokesman for the Lebanese delegation and reported from Israel town of Netanya.

The agreement was Not signed: Syria put on the pressure of Amine Gemmayel.

Israel ended up withdrawing its troops from south Lebanon, in 2000, without preconditions

Asad Ghsoub shared this link
Pierre Abi Saab

‫#‏أمين_معلوف‬ في الـ 1983
شكراً Asad Abukhalil

Pierre Abi Saab's photo.

Robert Fisk: The immortality of a great, if flawed, historian

August 13, 2011 (Note the date)

Note: A couple of days ago, Amine Maaluf gave an interview to an insignificant Israeli channel i24. I still couldn’t get hold of a transcript in English, French or Arabic in order to write about it. However, there was an uproar in Lebanon over this interview: The gist of it is that Amine is wooing the Zionist lobbies and Israel with an eye for the purpose of snatching a Nobel for literature. More often than not, Nobel awards for Peace or Literature are highly politicized.

How many of the Nato admirals fighting the beast of Tripoli realise the origin of their title?

“Admiral” comes from the French amiral, which comes from the Arabic amir al-bahr which means “Master of the Sea”.

Our own “First Sea Lord” captures the original rather well. Then there’s the Spanish hero El Cid which comes from the Arabic el-sayed (“the Lord”). We eat lemon sorbet which comes from the Arabic charbat. We lie down on a mattress which originates with the Arabic matrah. And so on.

Amin Maalouf is promising an extensive study of etymology when, as a new member of the “Immortals” – he has just been elected to the Académie Française in Paris – he puts his Arab-European culture to good use at its Thursday meetings.

If the French have banned the burka, they might as well know that matraque (truncheon) comes from the Arabic matraq. Maalouf is better known in France than Britain, although many will have admired his wonderful novels, among them The Rock of Tanios, a grim, painfully accurate account of sectarian life in Lebanon’s Chouf mountains and colonial interference in the Levant.

However, I believe his finest work is The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, a non-fiction account of the first “war of civilisation” drawn mostly from Arab rather than European documents. It revealed how the starving knights of Christendom ate their dead Muslim victims near the Syrian city of Homs. Even Assad’s lads haven’t quite resorted to this.

Now Maalouf returns with more non-fiction, Disordered World, Setting a Course for the 21st Century, and I fear for his reputation.

The New York Times puffed him as “the clear, calm, cogent and persuasive voice from the Arab world that the West has been waiting for”.

Well, not quite. Maalouf, a Maronite Christian who has spent the past 30 years in self-imposed exile in Paris, admits that “I am not a specialist on the Muslim world, still less an Islamic scholar”.

Perhaps for this reason, his view of the Middle East-Western world is dizzying yet deeply flawed. When he says that “the end of the balance of terror has created a world obsessed with terror”, I can only agree. Yet when he tells us that “rich or poor, arrogant or downtrodden, occupiers or occupied, they are – we are – all aboard the same fragile raft and we are all going down together”, I can only say that this is nonsense.

The Palestinians who are occupied by the Israelis and the Israelis who are occupying the West Bank are not in the “same fragile raft”.

One lot have won (for now). The other lot have lost.

The real question – in the case of Palestine – is whether the Israelis will stop stealing Palestinian land that does not belong to them, upon which they are building colonies for Israelis, and Israelis only, against all international law.

It is worth reflecting – as Maalouf does not – that back in 1983, he was part of a Lebanese delegation which visited Israel for Amin Gemayel, when the Lebanese president was going along with America’s hopeless desire for an Israeli-Lebanese peace agreement. Maalouf inspected the damage caused by Palestinian Katyusha rockets to the Jewish town of Kiryat Shmona.

I can see why he has buried himself in the idea of “both sides losing“, but there is a moral, ethical side to this which seems to be missing from Maalouf’s writing. In 1982, the Israelis in Lebanon had inflicted infinitely more suffering (17,500 dead, mostly Lebanese civilians) than the Palestinians had caused in Israel.

(And Israel continued to occupy South Lebanon till 2000, with hundreds more casualties, when they had to withdraw without any negotiations or conditions)

(There is a difference between the right of “Know your existential enemy” and cooperating with the enemy at any level)

When it comes to democracies, Maalouf tells us that he doesn’t “know many which function better” than America’s. Really?

And when he asks himself whether “in the course of the past few decades have the Americans and Israelis not borne a more specific responsibility” for the world’s decline, the answer “probably” is not good enough.

But he is a friendly soul. I met him many years ago, just after the publication of The Rock of Tanios, at a Maronite monastery high in the fog-covered early summer hills of the Metn, where monks offered the most devastating arak with breakfast.

A slightly chubby, humorous man, Maalouf looked like what he was and is: a great author.

As a political animal, however, he sometimes sounds like a boring prelate.

“My profound [sic] conviction,” he tells us, “is that too much weight is placed on the influence of religion on people, and too little on the influence of people on religion.” This may impress “Immortals” but not, I suspect, us ordinary folk. But let’s not be too hard on the great man.

“No serious observer,” he writes, “who has combed through the accounts of meetings at which the decision to go to war [in Iraq in 2003] was taken has reported the slightest evidence to suggest the real motive was to install democracy in Iraq.”

Instead, the US created a system of political representation based on religious or ethnic origin. “That the great US democracy brought the Iraqi people this poisoned gift of sacrosanct communitarianism is a shame and an indignity.”

And then the Maalouf “coup”. He is astonished to find “the leader of the Western democracies wondering at the dawn of the 21st century if it might not be a good idea after all to support the emergence of democratic regimes in Egypt, Arabia, Pakistan… But this fine idea was soon forgotten… the country of Abraham Lincoln reached the conclusion that all this was much too risky… free elections would bring the most radical elements to power… Democracy would have to wait.”

Let’s hope the other “Immortals” listen to that.

Note: I read all of Maaluf works, except the latest one Sitting on the banks of the River Seine, and wrote extensive reviews on them. When it comes to offering opinions, like in Disordered World and  Setting a Course for the 21st Century, Maaluf blackens half the book with lame excuses on the ground that he is Not an expert on the subject matter.

No!  Rich and poor are Not in the same boat. The thousands of migrants fleeing war-torn countries and drowning in seas are Not in the same leisure boats of the rich and powerful.

Discredited certitude?

Unregulated capitalism (liberal capitalism) is plainly discredited; communism was discredited way before 1989; the doctrine of the Christian religion was discredited since the French Revolution in 1787 ; Islam was discredited less than a century after the Prophet’s death,  but can religion be eradicated from the spirit of the masses?

The power of current religions is that you don’t need to apply to any religious sect for fear of being  ex-communicated, whether you are a believer or not, or whether your opinions are not compatible with the predominant ideology. (Radical sects still kill those who change religions)

Religion exercises its legitimacy once it combines the doctrines of “communism or socialism” for equal opportunities and the aspiration for independence against a usurper of our wishes.  That is how extremist Islam has managed to package its ideology: an ideology targeting the poor and the disinherited who were deprived of dignity and were humiliated by the western powers.

The progress in Europe was established indirectly by a centralized Papal spiritual authority.   Ironically, this spiritual centralization was acquired when the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine supposedly converted to Christianity.

Christianity could have evolved without any serious centralization if it was not ordered by the Roman ideological system of centralized power.

Hundreds of Christian sects existed in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Greece, and throughout the Roman Empire before the year 325:  They were persecuted as “heretics” after the conclave of Nicaea (current Turkey) in 325 and several other conclaves within the century.

Papal Rome vigorously hindered progress and any changes  for nine centuries, but once society expressed its willingness for change then it followed suit and even staunchly maintained the changes and supported them against any refracting bishops or religious Christian sects.

Centralized Papal Rome was a counterbalance to the tyranny of temporary authorities who had to compromise and rectify policies that challenged the dignity and well-being of the poor citizens.

Islam had no such centralized spiritual authority:  Islam viewed with suspicion any kinds of religious centralization: Islam didn’t appreciate mediators between the believer and his God.

Thus, the political sultans and sovereigns dominated the religious spiritual power.  In most instances the monarch grabbed the legitimacy of caliph. The counterbalance to tyranny lacked in the Moslem world:  Any recognized cleric, ordered by a sultan, could proclaim a “fatwa” (an injunction for the people to obey) as a religious obligation.  You could have several “fatwas” concurrently expressing injunction of opposite orders.

The problem in Islam is not in the source or the Koran, but the free interpretations of any monarch or leader at any period.  There are no stable and steady spiritual legitimacy in any interpretations that can be changed or neglected at other periods.

The author Amine Maaluf recounts this story.  A Moslem woman applies in Amsterdam (The Netherlands) for a private club that would allow Moslem women to meet and maybe share common hot baths along with sauna and Jacuzzi (hammam).

A week later, the municipality rejected the application on ground that the local Moslem cleric (Imam) had an objection to the club”.   If the woman was European would the municipality ask the opinion of a Christian cleric? It would certainly not.

What this story proves is that, under the good intentions of respecting ethnic minorities, the European are exercising covert apartheid: They are sending the message that minority rights are not covered by the UN declarations which are supposed to be valid for all human kinds.  The human rights approved by all States within the UN convention are applicable to all regardless of color, religion, sex, or origin.

What is fundamentally needed is that all States feel that the United Nation is a credible institution that is not dominated by veto power of Super Nations and that it has effective executive power to enforce its human rights proclamations to all world citizens and political concepts.

Let me resume my previous article on “Misleading Legitimacies“.

Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt managed to capture legitimacy in the emotions and spirit of the Arab populations as the leader of the Arab World by politically defeating the joint military attack by Britain, France, and Israel in 1956 to recapture the Suez Canal.  The Arab populations were satisfied that their crushed dignity for over 5 centuries was re-emerging among the nations (the western nations).

Even the crushing military defeat by tiny Zionist Israel in 1967 maintained Gamal Abdel Nasser as the legitimate leader, and most of the Arab State leaders converged to him to help resolve their conflicts with their neighbors or within their State.

Abdel Nasser resurrected the spirit but failed in his social promises, and of freeing the Arabic minds from oppression and dominant central government doctrines.

After the death of Gamal Abdel Nasser (The Raiyess) in 1970, the goal of Arab leaders was to re-capture Arab legitimacy.  The successor of the (Raiyess) in Egypt was Sadat who needed to rely on the legitimacy of the “Moslem Brotherhood” to strengthen his power and thus proclaimed to be “The First of the Believers (among Moslems)”.

All the Arab leaders realized that legitimacy reside in convincing victories against common enemies to the “Arabs”, or mainly any western nation and Israel as the closest geographically.  The initial victory in 1973 on the Sinai front against Israel was cancelled out by bedding with the USA and “My Dear Friend Henry (Kissinger)”.   Sadat was hated by most Arabs and no one shed a tear when he was assassinated.

Dictator Saddam Hussein enjoyed many potentials in Iraq: literate population, large army, and natural resources. He jumped at the occasion when the USA encouraged him to invade Iran of Khomeini in 1980.

This time, the enemy was the Persians who had re-captured lands that the Arab and Ottoman Empires had secured centuries ago and was called “Arabstan” or Khuzistan. After 8 years of mutual slaughtering in the battle field that resulted in over one million of victims, Saddam Hussein reverted to its neighboring “Arab” State of Kuwait and invaded it in 1990.  Saddam was vanquished by the USA (the arch-enemy of the Arab spirit) and a coalition of European and Arab armies.  Saddam lost his legitimacy.

Saudi Arabia’s successive monarchs endeavored to gain legitimacy in the Arab World through building thousands of mosques, appointing clerics who favored the Wahhabi sect, and lavishing petro-dollars for settling conflicts among the Arab States.  Saudi Arabia has been working for the long-term by proselytizing their conservative extremist Wahhabi sect among the Sunni Moslems and gaining legitimacy by proclaiming that they are the “Servitors or Guardians of the Holy Kaaba and Medina (al Haramine)”.

Imaginary Certitudes (May 6, 2009)

 

 

The US republican notion of capitalism is plainly discredited; communism was discredited since 1989; the doctrine of the Christian religion was discredited since the French Revolution in 1787 and a century before that but religion cannot be eradicated from the spirit of the masses.  The power of religion is that you don’t need to apply or fear to be ex-communicated whether you are a believer or not or whether your opinions are not compatible with the predominant ideology.  Religion exercises its legitimacy once it combines the doctrines of “communism” for equal opportunities and the aspiration for independence against a usurper.  That is what extremist Islam has managed to package its ideology; an ideology targeting the poor and disinherited who were deprived of dignity and were humiliated by the western powers.

Let me resume my previous article on “Misleading Legitimacies“.  Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt managed to capture legitimacy in the emotions and spirit of the Arab populations as the leader of the Arab World by politically defeating the joint military attack by Britain, France, and Israel in 1956 to recapture the Suez Canal.  The Arab populations were satisfied that their crushed dignity for over 5 centuries was re-emerging among the nations (the western nations).  Even the crushing military defeat by tiny Zionist Israel in 1967 maintained Gamal Abdel Nasser as the legitimate leader and most of the Arab State leaders converged to him to resolving their conflicts with their neighbors or within their State.

After the death of Gamal Abdel Nasser (The Raiyess) in 1970 the goal of Arab leaders was to re-capture Arab legitimacy.  The successor of the (Raiyess) in Egypt was Sadate who needed to rely on the legitimacy of the “Moslem Brotherhood” to strengthen his power and thus proclaimed to be “The First of the Believers (among Moslems)”.  All the Arab leaders realized that legitimacy reside in convincing victories against common enemies to the “Arabs”, or mainly any western nation and Israel the closest geographically.  The initial victory in 1973 on the Sinai front against Israel was cancelled out by bedding with the USA and “My Dear Friend Henry (Kissinger)” Sadate was hated by most Arabs and no one shed a tear when he was assassinated.

Dictator Saddam Hussein enjoyed potentials in literate population, large army, and natural resources; he jumped at the occasion when the USA encouraged him to invade Iran of Khomeini.  This time, the enemy was the Persians who had re-captured lands that the Arab and Ottoman Empires had secured centuries ago and called “Arabstan” or Khuzestan. After 8 years of mutual slaughtering in the battle field Saddam Hussein reverted to its neighboring “Arab” State of Kuwait and was vanquished by the USA, the arch enemy of the Arabs.  Saddam lost his legitimacy. 

Saudi Arabia’s successive monarchs endeavored to gain legitimacy in the Arab World through building thousands of mosques, appointing clerics who favored the Wahhabit sect, and lavishing petro-dollars for settling conflicts among the Arab States.  Saudi Arabia has been working for the long term by proselytizing their conservative extremist Wahhabit sect among the Sunni Moslems and gaining legitimacy by proclaiming that they are the “Servitors or Guardians of the Holy Kaaba and Medina (al Haramine)”

 

The progress in Europe was established indirectly by a centralized Papal spiritual authority.   Ironically, this spiritual centralization was acquired when the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine supposedly converted to Christianity.  Christianity could have evolved without any serious centralization if it was not ordered by the Roman ideological system of centralized power.  Hundreds of Christian sects existed in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Greece, and throughout the Roman Empire before the year 325; they were persecuted as “heretics” after the conclave of Nicee in 325.  Papal Rome hindered progress and change vigorously for long period but once society expressed its willingness for change then it followed suit and even staunchly maintained the changes and supported them against any refracting bishop or religious Christian sects.  Centralized Papal Rome was a counterbalance to the tyranny of temporary authorities who had to compromise and rectify policies that challenged the dignity and well being of the poor citizens.  

Islam had no such centralized spiritual authority; it viewed with suspicion any kinds of religious centralization; it didn’t appreciate mediators between the believer and his God.  Thus, the political sultans and sovereigns dominated the religious spiritual power; in most instances the monarch grabbed the legitimacy of caliph. Thus, the counterbalance to tyranny lacked in the Moslem world and any recognized cleric, ordered by a sultan, could proclaim a “fatwa” or an injunction for the people to obey as a religious obligation.  You could have several “fatwas” concurrently injuncting opposing orders.

The problem in Islam is not in the source or the Koran but the free interpretations of any monarch or leader at any period.  There are no stable and steady spiritual legitimacy in any interpretations that can be changed or neglected at other periods.

 

The author Amine Maaluf recounts this story” A Moslem woman applies in Amsterdam (The Netherlands) for a private club that would allow Moslem women to meet and maybe share common hot baths with sauna and Jacuzzi (hammam). A week later the municipality rejected the application on ground that the local Moslem cleric (Imam) had an objection to the club” If the woman was European would the municipality ask the opinion of a Christian cleric? It would certainly not. 

What this story proves is that, under the good intentions of respecting ethnic minorities, the European are exercising covert apartheid; they are sending the message that minority rights are not covered by the UN declarations which are supposed to be valid for all human kinds.  The human rights approved by all States within the UN convention are applicable to all regardless of color, religion, sex, or origin.  What is fundamentally needed is that all States feel that the United Nation is a credible institution that is not dominated by veto power super nations and that it has effective executive power to enforce its human rights proclamations to all world citizens and political concepts.

Lebanon and Palestine: Same and Different (April 28, 2009, Part 1)

 

Brief ancient history:

Lebanon is a recognized State by the UN, in 1946 (2 years before Israel). Palestine was partitioned in 1947 between Palestinians and the minority Jews. Currently, all of Palestine is under occupation by this Zionist State called Israel.

Lebanon and Palestine were throughout antiquity under the domination of neighboring Empires such as in Egypt, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq (Mesopotamia).  The people in the two tiny stretches of coastal lands on the Eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea were mainly mariners, traders, middlemen among Empires, and skilled artisans.

Under the nominal or explicit domination of Empires, Lebanon and Palestine had autonomous administration of their society as City-States that were highly democratic within the city limits as Athens emulated in the 7th century BC. 

The famous City-States from north to south are Ugarite, Tripoli, Jubail (Byblos), Saida, Sour (Tyr), Akka (Acre and Haifa), and Askelan. 

The City-State of Jubeil (inventors of the alphabet) built Saida; Saida built Sour and dominated the sea routes; and Sour built Akka and relayed Saida in sea domination and expanding the trading posts to Spain.  These City-States were the masters of the sea and traded with all Empires and build trading towns; they have resisted many overwhelming sieges, sometimes for years, and occasionally managed not to be entered and devastated.

Every empire that conquered Syria resumed its drive by dominating Lebanon and Palestine.  In general, when more than one empire co-existed at the same period and when the empire in Egypt was powerful enough then it governed the southern half of Palestine while the other empire governed the upper half, including Lebanon.  The strip of Gaza to Yafa was mostly under Egyptian cultural influence.

The coastal strip from north actual Syria to the Sinai was called Canaan. Then, the upper stretch to Akka was called Phoenicia or even Saida (in reference for the main City-State). The Sea People, called Philistines and probably coming from the Adriatic Sea, destroyed Greece fleet, devastated many coastal cities, and conquered Egypt before they were driven out and settle in Gaza and the southern part of Canaan, called Palestine ever since.

Moses (this mythical story) arrived with an amalgam of nomadic tribes and his successors attempted to occupy part of south Palestine.  These tribes worshiped Yahwa, thus, yahoud and Jews for the Latin people.  These tribes under Moses reverted to worshiping the all encompassing God of the Land called El., except a few tribes such as Judea and Benjamin.  During the Roman Empire, Tyr administered the upper half of Palestine.

 

Modern History:

            In the beginning of the 20th century, the military in Turkey deposed the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire and started policies focused on Turk Nationhood.  Many in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine immigrated to Egypt. 

During the First World War famine fell on Lebanon along with a devastating wave of locust; they immigrated to the USA, Brazil, Latin America, and many were dropped in Africa by unethical ship captains. After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War, Britain had mandate over Palestine and Iraq; France had mandate over Lebanon and Syria.

Consequently, the bilingual Palestinians spoke English, and their counterpart in Lebanon spoke French. In 1930, Haifa grabbed the center of trades and many Lebanese flocked to Haifa and Palestine.  The reverse wave occurred when the State of Israel was recognized by a majority of one vote at the UN in 1948.  Lebanon received Palestinian refugees who were installed in camps on the ground that their stay is temporary!

 

In one chapter of “World Adrift” Amine Maaluf said “The western powers are now paying the price for failing to apply their values in the colonies”  The European colonial powers of Britain, France, Germany, and the  Netherlands had no intentions of spreading their moral values to those they considered not worthy of their pearls and gems.

The indigents were to be enslaved, exploited, and humiliated; the indigents who adopted the western values of equality, liberty, and democracy were persecuted and harassed and imprisoned; the colonial administrators negotiated with the conservative conformists who were ready to strike deals and cohabit with lesser human rights.  Dictators in Europe are abhorred but readily accepted in under-developed States.

Human values had different quality and flavors according to the whims and interest of the exploiting colonial powers.  Britain used astute diplomatic policies to subjugate their colonies more frequently than France did; France of the French Revolution had no patience negotiating and communicating with their colonial people and never skipped an occasion to stating its true purpose for domination.and exhibiting arrogant military posturing.

            The colonial powers installed infrastructures that were appropriate for exploitation of the colonies; they established the required administrations for smooth and efficient exploitation.  The other administrative offices for legislation and justices were carbon copies of the ones in their homeland but these codes could be disposed off and trampled at the first occasion that short sighted interest called for swift and immediate actions.

 

Contemporary history:

Current Lebanon was created by France during its mandate period and cut out from Syria; it is now a recognized State by the UN since 1943.  Palestine was divided but the Zionist movement conquered the allocated portion for the Palestinians by the UN in 1948. 

The Palestinians are now located in the West Bank of the Jordan River and in Gaza where Israel has built 150 Jewish-only colonies and increasing every year. 

The Palestinians who fled their towns and villages in the State of Israel are refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.  The UN resolution 193 demands the repatriation of these Palestinians to their hometowns but Israel has been rebuffing that resolution since 1948.

Lebanon suffered many civil wars and calamities for not being capable or unwilling of absorbing the Palestinian refugees; Israel has waged four devastating wars against the State of Lebanon on flimsy pretexts based on the Palestinian resistance trying to regain their rights for a homeland.

China and India Empires: Same and Different (April 28, 2009)

Since antiquity, China and India formed vast empires.  They were the wealthiest, the most populous, and the most creative in almost all fields of industries such porcelain, gun powder, paper, vaccines, compass, rudder, the zero, philosophy, art of war and you name it. 

Europe relied on the silk, spices, perfume, and luxury items imported from China and India through Persia, Turkey and Egypt. The Great Wall of China is the only human made construction that can be seen from space.  Three centuries before Portugal put to sea its galleons to circumnavigate oceans, China had fleet of ships 3 times bigger than the biggest that Spain constructed. 

           

Every society has gone through the same historical development and experienced with feudal systems, caste systems, monarchies, and oligarchies.  The difference between China and India are:

First, China had gone through the harrowing communist period but it managed to crush the priesthood or sacerdotal castes.  In India the priesthood castes are as powerful as ever.  There are millions of this “untouchables” caste, the lowest caste of the five structured by the Brahma and Hinduism religions.  The “untouchables” are consecrated by religion to remain untouchables. 

Gandhi confronted that humiliating condition head on, but no other modern Indian government or political parties dared to revisit this abomination.  In fact, the caste system prevalent in the Middle East was imported from India by the Ottoman Empire. 

For over two centuries, Europe was closed to the Ottoman Empire as Turkey was militarily expanding in Europe.  The Ottoman Empire had to rely almost exclusively on India for administrative organization, culture, and trades. 

Among the good things, we also received the worst that India could export; it is so enduring that the Middle East societies cannot shake off the plight of caste system that is exacerbated by close nit community structure.

Second, China has the mentality of becoming a superpower at par with the USA.  Everything that China is doing is at a gigantic measure such as the biggest dam with all the subsequent mass transfer of people, traditions, and customs.  The focus on urban centers and industrialization is diverting water from agriculture, the source of its initial prosperity and social stability.  A 7-month dry season in the northern part, the wheat basket region, is sending shivers of forthcoming famine. 

The rivers in China are heavily polluted and the western diseases from water and land pollution are harvesting thousands of young lives. Over 25, millions were forced to vacate the urban centers to their remote villages after this financial crisis. 

India is progressing at a steadier and less drastic strategy and linking the country with new route infrastructures.  The cheaper car produced by India are supposedly to be sold in India for only $2,000.

Third, China is investing heavily on energy resources and lands oversea, particularly in Africa.  India prefers to cajole the USA and signed a less favorable deal for importing light nuclear rods from the USA and satellites from Israel, though it could produce these advanced technological items.

Fact is that the British Empire held on to India, for 3 centuries, because it realized that the vast Indian population is the hardest working and was adding all the values to the wealth of the British Empire.

During the Soviet Union period of 1917 to 1989, China and India followed the precepts of communism and tight control over private ownership and enterprises.  These two nations experienced famine on large scales, and suffered all kinds of miseries and humiliation. 

As soon as the Berlin Wall fell and the capitalist system dominated world economy and finance. And China and India transformed their development accordingly.

In China, tiny Deng Xiaoping ordered restitution of collectivity lands to private cultivators and authorized selling part of the production.  Then the private agriculturists were permitted to select what they wanted to plant and production tripled.  Small enterprises and private shops were granted to be formed and in no time 22 millions small industries were hiring 135 millions employees. In China, small modifications in freedom of choice, and small increases in production mean gigantic increases in internal production.

In India of 1991, the finance minister Manmohan Singh relaxed certain restrictions on doing business. There were no needs for previous permit for each transaction, for importation, for investment, and for increase in production. The Indian economy took off at great strides.

Currently, the GDP of China has surpassed France and Germany and closing up with Japan.  Shanghai alone has more high rises than New York and Los Angeles combined or 5,000 high-rises.  It is no secret that ten years after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, China and India were viewed as the main enemies to the USA and Europe. 

China and India are two powers that had the technologies, the know-how, and the resources in raw materials and human potential to rival the economies of western nations.  It is no secret that the hurried frenzy of Bush Junior to invading Iraq unilaterally had the main purpose of dominating oil reserves and blackmailing China and India.

Amine Maaluf wrote in “A World Adrift” that Colin Powel told ex-President Bush Junior “You break it; you own it.  You invade Iraq then you will end up with the responsibility of caring for 25 million Iraqis”  Bush Junior didn’t own it alone; the whole world is sharing the price of a financial and economic meltdown. 

In the mean times, China expanded its oil exploration in Africa and built a major pipeline to Russia and Central Asia States.

India built many nuclear reactors and pipelines and are not as affected by energy shortages as Europe that relies on Russia, Algeria, and Libya for gas.

One of the major problems that the world is facing is that in addition to the 50 millions middle class families in the USA and Europe, over 150 millions middle class families in China and India can now afford and demand the same consumer items that the USA and European middle classes enjoyed for a century.   

They want their cars, their washing machines, their refrigerators and all the commodities that any human desire to own when he can afford it; it is their right and no one can obstruct or make these new middle class desist from their hard earned rights.

If just 50 million families in the USA and Europe almost exhausted earth minerals and energies. then how humanity is going to satisfy the demands of 200 millions families?


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

December 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,442,156 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 784 other followers

%d bloggers like this: