I have spent the last week traveling through two similar, yet very different countries. After leaving southern Sudan, I traveled to Bhutan and India. Bhutan is a kingdom that has just transitioned into a democracy. It is a small country of 750,000 people, about the size of Switzerland. India is the sub-continent that will most likely surpass China in population. Currently, about 1.3 billion people live in India. I travel to understand the world better and to get other cultures’ perspectives on the United States.

Bhutan was a closed community, and until fairly recently the only way to see it was by invitation. It is slowly joining the modern world. In 2000, its government began allowing television to be broadcast in the country. The fourth king of Bhutan abdicated in favor of his son so that the country could transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is a member of the United Nations, but, in an attempt to keep from angering China, it has chosen not to have ambassadorial exchange with any of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.

My junior high school geography teacher was way ahead of the author of “Guns, Germs and Steel,” as he was a firm believer that geography was destiny. He was certainly right when it comes to India and Bhutan. As our guide led us to a beautiful view of exquisite mountains, he pointed out that the tallest of the mountains was what separated Bhutan from Tibet. Tibet was taken over by China in the late 1940s and the Dalai Lama escaped from Tibet in 1959. One glimpse of the beautiful mountains and it is clear that Bhutan could be overrun in a nanosecond.

Bhutan rests between China and India. It is to India’s advantage to protect Bhutan, which is why the Indian army patrols the border between China and Bhutan. America does a ton of business with China, but between its human rights record, its Taiwan issue and its refusal to let the Tibetan people rule their own country, the Chinese are not exactly the most popular people in Bhutan and India.

Most of the folks I spoke with in both countries have the same views as people in the United States. They watch American television on their satellite dishes, and they see the same news we see at the same time we see it. When news broke last week of the shootings at Fort Hood, the people in Bhutan and India got the news as people in the U.S. did. Even the Indian language stations were showing video instantaneously. Same view, same pictures, but very different views on what needs to happen for the world to improve.

Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, does not concern them. India trades with Russia and has a good relationship with them. China, on the other hand, is a different story. Most people who engaged in conversation with me had dire warnings for the United States, and they all said roughly the same thing:

1) Get your debt down. All were aware that the sizable debt that the United States has taken on has compromised our policy objectives. It is hard to take on China on Tibet or human rights when America is owned by China to the tune of at least $1 trillion. The Federal Reserve chairman’s advice for healing the U.S. economy is to make more consumers out of the Chinese. If that is the solution for solving our job crisis, then maybe I should teach economics. It is scary to me that this is what our leadership thinks will pull us out of the current mess. Moreover, it is not going to happen at a fast enough rate to change our balance of trade and reverse our economy.

2) Stop your consumption of oil. India gets hydropower from Bhutan and is looking to solar and other alternatives. Oil makes the U.S. dependent on Middle East countries, and the people I talked to view such dependency as fueling not just Americans’ cars, but terrorism in their region of the world. One Indian businessman I spoke with said our reliance on foreign oil was the reason for us getting involved in “silly wars that kill American young people.”

3) Conserve your resources. With the burgeoning world population needing food and water as well as energy, America is viewed as being wasteful. With manufacturing jobs leaving the United States for poorer countries, most people I talked with saw the U.S. as a nation of spendthrifts who will use up more than our fair share of the world’s resources, in the process going bankrupt.

4) Don’t rely on one country to do your manufacturing. China has the United States’ head in a vise, but if American companies spread manufacturing to 20 or more countries around the globe, China would not have the power to control currency and the economic future of the United States.

The bottom line, as one businessman said to me, is America is expecting to live the lifestyle we have grown accustomed to by writing IOUs. But, he added, such a lifestyle will prove to be unsustainable.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D- Ohio) says the Waxman-Markey bill is a good starting ground, but the level of presidential discretion in the bill needs more work.

:26

 

 Standard Podcast [0:26m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Jonathan Bronstein, Talk Radio News Service

If America is to remain an international superpower, it must control the world’s oceans, according to U.S. military and policy experts.

“The United States quite simply is a maritime nation,” said Michael Auslin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “Our future is possibly more tied up in the Pacific than with Europe.”

“The more power diffuses to the international system and Asia, the harder it will be to protect the global commons and the more difficult it will be to protect maritime security,” said Ashley Tellis, senior associate at with the Carnegie Endowment for Peace. Tellis said that the interests between rising nations, like India and China, are not all shared by the U.S. and would be unreliable partners who would almost certainly take advantage of any global cooperation.

Tellis is skeptical of the concept that international maritime cooperation “is essentially an idea that is pivoted on the notion of cooperation, and it works best in a world where all nations have common interests.”

Historically, the domination of the seas has been vital to the continuing strength and viability of powerful countries. But America’s role as a global hegemony is in jeopardy as Asian nations, like China and India, are taking militaristic actions to control large bodies of oceans.

In 1994, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was officially enforced, which defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans. But before China signed the treaty, they extended their territorial waters to the continental shelf, which was much farther than the 12 miles stated in the original treaty.

America did not sign the agreement, which creates a global system of signals to aid in communication in order to prevent any misunderstandings.

According to Bernard Cole, a professor at the National War College, the Chinese view the situation as: America must “stay 200 miles off our coastline at all times and we won’t have any conflict.”

Japan is another major player within the Asian-Pacific region because of the strength of their economy and relations with America. But Japan itself is at a “crossroads toward rising or falling as a nation,” said retired Vice Admiral Hideaki Kaneda of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force. “It is very critical in the long term to maintain this important maritime alliance for Japan and the United States.”

“Power does not work, it only creates more violence so what needs to be done is diplomacy, good will and justice.” said Dr. Agha Saeed, founder of the Pakistan American National Alliance (PANA).

A press conference held today by PANA in Washington, D.C. addressed the need for economic, cultural, social and political aid from the Obama administration and the U.S. They indicated that the ultimate goal is to propose a partnership for peace, utilizing smart power (combination of hard and soft power) rather than coercive power, and to fight against international terrorism.

According to the document titled “Pakistani-American Initiative for Peace in South Asia” given to press conference attendees, the extremism of terrorist attacks continue to worsen after the events of 9/11. The fight against terrorism in Pakistan resulted in the deaths of more than 1200 military personnel not including numbers of innocent victims. The document also indicated specific reasons for India witnessing so many terrorist acts which was due to methods of understanding and dealing with terrorist groups.

The Pakistani-Americans expressed that Pakistan has supported the American agenda in favor of U.S. policy and they are hopeful that the U.S. will do the same in return. New Hampshire State Representative Saghir Tahir said that educating Americans is a good way to get their support. “The American people are the best, most caring, loving, sharing people and if you talk to them just like now 79% of Americans they oppose war and they realize that war is not a solution.” he said.

 

 Mr. Saghir Tahir: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

 

 Dr. Agha Saeed: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution, says if the unraveling of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty continues, it may be because of the Indian exception to the NPT and could lead to the development of 25 nuclear states. He notes that five countries with nuclear weapons were grandfathered into the treaty. (0:58)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:58m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns says the US-India Nuclear Agreement sends in important message to Iran, showing that countries who choose to invest in the international system and negotiate differences benefit while those who don’t experience sanctions. He suggests that India’s role in the agreement can serve as a role model for other countries. (0:56)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:56m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The Brookings Institution held a panel discussion on the U.S.-India Nuclear Agreement. Former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said the agreement is a victory for the strategic partnership pursued by Presidents Clinton and Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Burns noted Singh’s survival of a confidence vote in the Indian Parliament last week brought forth by opponents of strengthened Indian relations with the United States.

Burns, who voiced his support for the agreement, said the deal pulls India out of 35 years of nuclear isolation. He emphasized that the agreement gives India, soon-to-be largest most populous country, increased access to nuclear fuel and technology and does not recognize India as a nuclear power. Burns also said the agreement promotes non-proliferation, saying counties like Iran that try to cheat the international community will see the benefits of adhering to international agreements.

Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution, said he is not entirely supportive of the nuclear deal between the world’s two largest democracies. He said the agreement creates a moral hazard that has the potential of causing other states to question their non-proliferation. He reminded the panel that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty made exceptions for five countries with nuclear weapons prior to 1970. He suggested an acceptance of India’s nuclear status unravels the NPT since India became nuclear in 1975. He also noted that the NPT’s intention was to prevent additional states from gaining arms and to bring forth an eventual abolition of nuclear weapons.

Somnath Chatterji of the World Health Organization describes the extent to which the Chinese and Indian populations are aging at a hearing held by the policy journal “Health Affairs.” He says that in the next four decades, almost 40 percent of the world’s old will live in China and India. He adds that the two countries are growing older before growing richer, creating huge implications in policy decisions. (1:07)

 

 Standard Podcast [1:07m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

At a “Health Affairs” briefing on health in China and India, Kees Kostermans of the World Bank lists some lessons learned from India’s successful attack on its AIDS epidemic. He says that comprehensive data collection, condom marketing, and expansions of testing services for high-risk groups helped India decrease the prevalence of AIDS. (1:17)

 

 Standard Podcast [1:17m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

“Health Affairs: The Policy Journal of the Health Sphere” held a briefing on health in India and China. China faces a massive obesity epidemic and problems with insurance coverage. India is confronting AIDS. And, both China and India have aging populations. (more…)