International Political Economy Zone

Yay, the IPE Zone Turns 3!

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Service Announcement at 2/16/2010 12:53:00 AM

It's somewhat hard to believe but this blog turns three today. At the start, I was just a PhD student at the University of Birmingham who sought to add course materials online for my students. Despite some lulls, I've pretty much stuck with the programme. For something with such modest beginnings, I was rather astounded that this blog has managed to do well for itself in a world crowded with economics and political science sites. But, don't take my word for it. Perhaps because it is my third year of blogging here, my love/hate relationship with the blog directory Technorati is temporarily on the upswing: it currently ranks me #3,902 out of 1,181,017 blogs. As I am sure this won't last given the funky and undisclosed way Technorati determines these authority figures (and thus reverts to being Techno-ratty to yours truly), I figured I'd PrtSc the moment for posterity. I'll be able to tell my grandchildren, "Y'now, kids, grandpa was a pretty dab hand at blogging back in the day..."[I can hear it now: "grandpa, what is 'blaggin'?"]

It's also fairly surprising to me that I've managed to become the second-highest ranking Google search result after the Wikipedia entry for "international political economy" while still a PhD student. Even now, this holds. It's due either to (1) some people actually liking my stuff; (2) IPE being so little known that a minnow like yours truly can make it; or (3) bigger names not bothering to blog. While I like to think that the first factor is at play here, I highly suspect it's the second and third that deserve mention. I recently commiserated with our friends at IPE@UNC over the sad state of IPE awareness in the blogosphere, and I am not one to disagree that the public's knowledge of IPE is minimal to negligible. Such, of course, is a shame since IPE possesses far more analytical tools to understand today's global governance problems than economics--political economy's sterilized offspring. Revisit my first two posts [1, 2] on this point that are as valid--if not more valid--today than they were in those pre-global financial crisis times.

At any rate, I enjoin all comers to blog about IPE so together we can raise public awareness of the discipline in the blogosphere and beyond. And, of course, it's good if others can keep me on my toes--like I do to others who aren't quick enough on theirs. Make no mistake: blogging is an ephemeral medium and I don't want to be caught sleeping on the blog. I firmly believe that competition improves the breed.

Finally, I wish to thank all my visitors, RSS feed readers, fellow bloggers, and other supporters in the wider digital realm. It's a cliche but I wouldn't have gotten here without your continued support over the years. Don't worry; there's always more in store as I can only post so much that comes to mind on a daily basis.

A Milestone in Consumer Electronics Fakery

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in China,Underground Economy at 2/16/2010 12:46:00 AM

It may be of no surprise to regular readers that I am something of an audiophile or someone who enjoys high-fidelity stereo equipment. I've even made references before. F'rinstance, I've alluded to WTO head honcho Pascal Lamy playing lead the role in Handel's Messiah via Christopher Hogwood's groundbreaking recording featuring a young Emma Kirkby which kick-started the entire historically-informed performance (HIP) movement. Even my current title image is of a symphony hall--send a note if you can guess what it is. So yes, I'm one of those people who use a dedicated headphone amplifier instead of plugging headphones directly into a laptop or iPod and cringe at listening to MP3s or other lossless formats that reduce the size of CD-quality music files by throwing away musical information.

At any rate, I recently bought a pair of in-ear headphones on eBay UK, the Sennheiser IE8s. Although a bit plain looking, these are among the finest in-ear monitors (IEMs) money can buy. While there are even fancier models from manufacturers like Ultimate Ears and Westone, those are even pricier custom-built models with ear molds specifically cast to fit the user's ears. Still, my IE8s aren't exactly being given away for free: on Amazon.com, their list price is $449.95. I was thus rather surprised to find this model on sale for so much less here in the UK and successfully bid for them at a price closer to $164 after conversion.

"What a deal!" I thought. However, a visit to the popular BBS site Head-Fi brought alarmed me to no end as there's a very long thread about, er, nearly indistinguishable Sennheiser IE8 fakeries being sold on auction sites. Had I just succumbed to the worst possible form of the winner's curse? Although the specific details are now lost to me, I once encountered a chap whose opinion of trafficked Chinese goods was that it's not "copyright" but "copy-it-right." Heaven knows, the US has long cited and pursued cases against China. Given the relaxed nature of intellectual property protection in the PRC, Western firms like Sennheiser have also been hot on China's trail. Like most every consumer product nowadays, the IE8s are proudly Made in China. I suspect that figures into why the fakes that have been spotted of the IE8s look so much like them since product specifications are more readily exchanged. Let's begin with the packaging:

You can click to enlarge the image and the ones that follow but this much is certain: a casual glance won't give the fakery away. And then there's the product itself:

As with the box, the details are almost indistinguishable. I had to look really hard to identify mine as...thankfully, real [huge sigh of relief]. Physical details aside, the real proof was in the listening: my new IE8s sounded even better than the hand-me-down Etymotic ER-4S my uncle gave me (I'm a cheap guy): the former had a more expansive soundstage that allowed individual performers to be heard more clearly; more extended but not bloated bass; and a warmer, more lifelike tonal balance. Nevertheless, I am astounded by the lengths to which the fakers have gone to create such a similar-looking "product." Even the brushed metal case of the knock-off resembles the finely-made original:

As with all purchases, then, caveat emptor. I am 100% certain that constructing knock-offs this good cost some serious money. All the same, selling such fakeries at prices approaching even a quarter that of the original would net the counterfeiters a tidy profit. Unsurprisingly, the firm takes no responsibility for Sennheiser-branded equipment sold on eBay or Amazon Marketplace:

You wouldn't think anyone would bother to make fake headphones because the originals are so (relatively) cheap to begin with. But as you know, some people will do anything to make a quick buck. You may also be surprised at the number of fake microphones that are turning up.

Fake microphones and headphones have now proliferated throughout the marketplace; we therefore want to inform you of steps that can help prevent purchasing a counterfeit product.

Why should you care?

* Inferior quality – you're not getting what you thought you had paid for. Sennheiser has always been proud of the quality and workmanship that goes into its products. Don’t be fooled into thinking that you’ll get Sennheiser performance just because it has a fake Sennheiser logo on it.
* No warranty – It may not be immediately apparent when you first plug it in, but the fake will undoubtedly be of inferior quality. And you can be sure that its life expectancy will be a fraction of the real thing. When the product fails and it is returned to Sennheiser under warranty, we will spot it immediately. We will not be able to service the product, and unfortunately you will be out of pocket.
* Damage to other equipment – The technology used in counterfeit products will differ from that used in genuine Sennheiser products. There is therefore a danger that counterfeit products can damage other products that they are plugged into. If your equipment is damaged by the use of counterfeit products, their warranty may well be invalidated.
* Personal Safety – In the case of products that require a battery, there is a risk to your personal safety if it does not comply to current standards (overheating and fire).

At least in my experience, it's a milestone in consumer electronics fakery. While online auction sites feature some great deals, I guess buyer vigilance is always required. If you do buy something, inspect it carefully--especially costlier goods like the IE8s. Those knock-offs are getting better and better by the day as to almost escape casual visual inspection.

UK's Mandy On Yankee Treachery, Dubai Haircuts

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Credit Crisis,Europe at 2/15/2010 12:15:00 AM

When we last heard tales in these parts about Baron Mandelson of Foy in the County of Herefordshire and of Hartlepool in the County of Durham; First Secretary of State; Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, and Skills; President of the Board of Trade; and Lord President of the Council--more commonly known as "Lord Mandelson" to us commoners or "Mandy" to the British press--he was busy waging war on militant postal workers, downsizing and rightsizing British higher education, and making noises about how unworthy Kraft is of taking over Cadbury. Once more, the latter concerns us--and Peter Mandelson, of course.

When Kraft's takeover bid was approved by Cadbury management, our old cyber-buddy Andrew Leonard at How the World Works poked fun at yours truly for being a protectionist in disguise. Hey, if I can dish it out, I guess I should take it, too! The only quibble I have with his otherwise informative and entertaining post--you don't become one of the world's top globalization bloggers for nothing--is that he didn't mention our Mandy as he is so little known Stateside. This, of course, despite him effectively running the British government as demonstrated by seemingly having an imprint on every major policy decision in what are likely the dying days of New Labour. If you are still unfamiliar with the most powerful unelected official on the face of the Earth, I beseech thee to read up [1, 2] on the canniest British politician extant.

At any rate, it seems His Lordship is becoming increasingly miffed with Kraft's CEO, Irene Rosenfeld. In a BBC interview, he expresses annoyance with Rosenfeld not disclosing her intention to shut down Cadbury's factory in Bristol. Meanwhile, the Evening Standard dutifully chips in:

Mandelson's rage at Kraft's apparent volte face over the closure of the Cadbury factory at Somerdale is something to behold. He's taken to the airwaves to denounce the behaviour of Kraft boss Irene Rosenfeld, after he met her. “It would have been more honest, more straightforward and straight dealing with the company and its workforce and also with the government, if she had told me what their intentions were,” he fumes.

Bless. What did Mandelson seriously expect? Firstly, did he ask her to specify what she was planning? City Spy suspects not. And when did he actually see her? Only when the takeover was effectively a done deal. All the cards belonged to Rosenfeld when she saw Mandelson. The Cadbury shareholders were in the bag. She did not need to make any meaningful promises, not least because she wasn't requiring anything from the government.

Lord Mandelson says he will remind Rosenfeld of what she said - that decisions on factories and the workforce would be made over a three to six month timeframe - “and bring her back to the undertaking of consultation that she gave when I met her”. But what, exactly, can Mandelson do about it? Er, apart from give her a piece of his mind he can do precisely nothing. In Kraft's Illinois headquarters, they must be having a right old laugh.

So His Lordship will have to suffer these double-talking Yanks gladly, eh? Well, perhaps not. Surely at Mandelson's instigation, Somerdale is being hauled to appear in the House of Commons in the coming month:

Before its bid was accepted, Kraft told the BBC: "We believe we would be in a position to keep the Somerdale plant operating and we are sincere about that." However it now says that it only become aware of how advanced plans for the new Poland factory were after the takeover deal had been agreed.

[Business select committee chairman] Peter Luff said the committee would look at "everything to do with the takeover bid, including its dealings with the government. The government opposed the bid, then embraced it and then Lord Mandelson criticised Kraft for closing the factory," he said. "I think it's time for Kraft to give the assurances they've been giving in private to politicians in Parliament. It's been a very controversial bid. I think we would be failing in our duties if we didn't get Kraft to clarify their position."

It will certainly be interesting to see if these MPs are sufficiently angered with these Yankee interlopers to break up the deal even if it's rather unlikely. My best guess is that Kraft will make some labour concessions to just be done with it and move on.

And speaking of moving on, Lord Mandelson (surprise!) finds himself in the centre of yet another imbroglio of international dimensions. Although hotly denied by the Emiratis, Dow Jones newswires launched a bombshell a few hours ago suggesting the powers-that-be in Dubai are preparing to give foreign creditors a haircut on their lendings, which may be set at 60% of face value (or a 40% haircut in trader lingo). Ever the jet-setter, a certain someone has been shuttling back and forth between London and Dubai to salvage a workable deal on the latter's defaults:

Dubai World may offer creditors 60% of the money they're owed backed by the sheikdom's government as part of a deal to reschedule $22 billion of debt, people familiar with the matter told Zawya Dow Jones. The offer, which pays no coupon, will come with a sovereign guarantee when eventually presented to creditors by April, the persons said.

Under the terms of the deal, banks including HSBC Holding PLC, Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and Standard Chartered PLC, could recover 60 cents for every U.S. dollar loaned to the troubled conglomerate after seven years, the persons, who declined to be identified because of confidentiality agreements, said. Dubai World roiled international markets in November when it unexpectedly announced that it would seek a six-month standstill on its debts. The company met in December with 90 creditors in Dubai but little detail on restructuring has emerged until now.

As if the UK banking industry needed any more trouble, the FT reports that plentiful loans from the aforementioned British banks are at stake:

The lack of agreement between Dubai World and banks over $22bn (£14bn, €16bn) in debts could not go on indefinitely, said Lord Mandelson, Britain’s business secretary, imploring the Dubai government to be as open as possible in engaging with its creditors.

“Dubai has to be conscious of the fact that how it resolves its problems will mean a good deal for its reputation and how it secures investment from overseas...” he told UK business leaders in Dubai. “It has to tread carefully, openly, not too slowly – it has to reach an agreement with creditors that is fair.”

Lord Mandelson has visited the United Arab Emirates three times in 18 months as the UK government lobbies for British banks and trade contractors owed billions of dollars by overleveraged Dubai-related institutions affected by the city’s property crash and ensuing recession. Nick Anstee, lord mayor of London, held talks last week with the government and bank creditors, warning of an unsavoury investment climate if talks failed...

Once more, it's Mandy in the Middle of everything. Whatever happened to what's-his-name Gordon Brown? They say that when the going gets tough, the tough get going. So who you gonna call? When it comes to butting heads with perfidious Yanks or safeguarding British lending to wayward real-estate moguls of the desert lands, I guess there's only one man left to brave it all.

Lectures @ LSE: Economics 0, Reality 1 and More

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Service Announcement at 2/15/2010 12:04:00 AM

I have been remiss in not mentioning this before: I must once again voice my amazement at the depth of talent my current institution attracts. A few days ago, I brought you news of the just-launched Global Policy journal here at the LSE featuring a virtual who's who of mostly centre-left academics. In the spirit of academic openness, remember that that fine academic publication is open to all for now. Today, though, I bring more good news that should be suitable to an even wider audience. Whenever American academics cross the pond, the natural place to present their work is the United Kingdom for linguistic reasons. And, when it comes to presenting social science research in particular, it often happens in the capital. Even more specifically, A-list academics inevitably show up at the LSE.

But don't take my word for it. European, American, and (sometimes) Asian academics and policymakers, whatever their political orientation, do make their way here. Indeed, I am often astounded by the sheer number of renowned speakers who come to this University of London institution. Best of all, you too can glimpse what's going here by way of podcasts and, oftentimes, video clips as well. In the past few months, for example, we've hosted the likes of (DfID honcho) Douglas Alexander, Joseph Stiglitz, Jonathon Porritt, Vince Cable, John Bercow, Dambisa Moyo, Amartya Sen, Ed Miliband, Saskia Sassen, Martin Jacques, George Soros, Chris Patten, Will Hutton, (former Spanism PM) Jose Maria Aznar, Steves Dubner and Levitt (of Freakonomics fame), John Kay, (DHS Secretary) Janet Napolitano, Noam Chomsky, (Ecuadorean PM) Rafael Correa , Andrew Gamble, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita (rat choice notable), (World Bank head of Research) Justin Yifu Lin , Robert Skidelsky, Tim Harford, RK Pachauri, Esther Duflo...the list goes on and on.

I'd be lying if I said I've attended even a quarter of these events as those who come a-calling are truly spectacular in quality and quantity--and I have not even bothered mentioning our own experts like Lord Stern and David Held.

Aside from the big name social scientists and politicians, however, I have also enjoyed commentary from those on the outside looking in on how they perceive the social sciences to be like, especially after the credit crisis rolled around. For instance, I attended the talk of Whitbread Book Award winner John Lanchester--Reality 1, Economics 0--who made several cogent points about how once-in-a-jillion lifetime events as predicted by those dabbling with fancy risk management models seem to have convulsed at the same time during the credit crunch. Instead of (rightly) further pillorying economics, though, he made a call for better financial awareness among the civilian population a rallying cry to ensure that future crisis-fuelled boom and busts are kept in check by an informed citizenry. Elsewhere, Jaron Lanier makes the argument that the Internet has not really empowered us but has reduced us to gadgets--mere simulacra of our offline selves made to fit prepackaged corporate conceptions of "online presence." Though I am more optimistic than Lanier, he does make some good points.

Whatever your interests, I am sure that there will be something for you as the speakers touch upon nearly every topic and take nearly every viewpoint imaginable. If you're in London or the UK, all events are free to attend although the more popular ones require a ticket for entry. The main events site is here; a catalogue of current events is also online. Meanwhile, you can check the Twitter feed as well for upcoming events.

It's all fascinating, and I'd be absolutely gobsmacked if there's another institution that puts more effort into making such a wealth of knowledge free of charge to anyone with an Internet connection. It guarantees that I will take a bit of Houghton Street with me when the time comes to move on. Enjoy!

Gender Imbalances and the PRC's Material Girls

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in China,Gender Equality at 2/12/2010 12:01:00 AM

Gender imbalances in China resulting from sex-selective abortion due to the so-called one child policy are posing troubling questions for the future of the country. Dubious Freakonomics-style explanations of this phenomenon having been debunked, there are real policy implications here: How will lopsided gender ratios affect the PRC's fertility rate going forward? Also, how will millions and millions of young men with limited chances of finding companionship vent their frustrations? Development economist du jour Esther Duflo suggests "violence":

Boys are having trouble getting married. And young men, particularly single ones, have more behavioural problems and commit more crimes than young women...To what extent is the rise in the number of young men responsible for the increase in crime? A recent study by Chinese and American researchers: “Sex ratio and crime: Evidence from China’s one-Child Policy” (by Edlund, Li, Yi, and Zhang) answers this question by comparing the increase in the number of crimes between 1998 and 2004 in regions where the one-child policy was strictly enforced with the same increase in regions where parents were allowed a second child if the first were a girl (where the boy-girl ratio is much closer to normal). They conclude that the one-child policy explains one-seventh of the increase in crime.

It will be interesting but somewhat frightening to monitor what will become of this unwitting social experiment the Chinese have unleashed. Human trafficking may rise. Certainly, there is a possibility of jingoism that can result in military adventurism--remove trouble at home (criminality) and export it abroad. With PRC leadership becoming increasingly confident and the Chinese military becoming increasingly bellicose, plentiful recruits may be close at hand.

Meanwhile, however, there are some enterprising Chinese making matchmaking a business that can only become more important in the future as matters worsen due to "Little Emperors" (pampered male offspring born during the height of the one-child policy era) coming of age. As with many things in life, however, being well-off pays off in this respect:

Xu Tianli is the founder of Golden Bachelor, an online dating site catering to an expanding class of super-wealthy Chinese singletons who have it all except for one thing: a bride. So they pay, a lot, to find one. The Golden Bachelor "Diamond Love" membership goes for 300,000 Yuan ($44,000). The Web site states in Chinese the qualifications for joining: a personal or family wealth of at least 2 million yuan ($292,000); a background that is extremely superior, wealthy and aristocratic; very good personal qualities or young, talented and beautiful.

"More and more Chinese people are finding love from Web sites," said Xu, 36. "The difference between us from other dating sites is we only focus on high-level clients -- those with a high social status or superior physical condition. We don't focus on the mass general public." Golden Bachelor says it has 5 million registered members and employs psychologists and special matchmaking consultants to personally assist multi-millionaires in their pursuit of romance.

Then there are sociological quandaries that the Chinese government is aware of but has yet to address:

In a society where 24 million Chinese men will find themselves lacking wives by 2020 because of the country's gender imbalance, according to a recent study by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, it could get highly competitive.

"Men at the bottom of the social hierarchy are going to have very few chances to meet women," said James Farrer, author of "Opening Up: Youth Sex Culture and Market Reform in Shanghai. This is going to be very apparent in the future as poor men with few economic resources just won't find women," Farrer said. "Women won't benefit from this imbalance either. These are the women who are highly educated and have high career ambitions. They will be competing for men at the top of the social hierarchy."

I wouldn't want to be Taiwan if the PRC doesn't get around to addressing this problem. In the meantime, what Madonna once sang may hold for many Chinese ladies in an increasingly competitive meet market--'cause the boy with the cold hard cash is always Mr. Right.

Niall Ferguson: America's Next After Greece

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Hegemony at 2/11/2010 05:23:00 PM

If you haven't noticed, I am generally receptive to those who like to point out America's fiscal depravity as its well-deserved comeuppance is long overdue. In the FT, we now have Niall Ferguson reiterating this now-standard view. In his book Colossus, Ferguson made the commonsense argument that if the United States could not get its finances under control, grave implications would follow. Six years on, Ferguson seems to be hammering in this point which can be traced to Paul Kennedy's "overstretch" argument that fiscal ruin precedes that in the security realm. Let us revisit Paul Kennedy himself revisiting the thessis he put forward in The Rise and Fall of Great Powers:

Moreover, no three or four of those countries -- and perhaps not a dozen of them combined -- have anywhere like the staggering array of overseas military commitments and deployments that weigh upon Uncle Sam's shoulders. That brings us back, I'm sorry to say, to the "imperial overstretch" remarks I made some 20 years ago.

As I suggested at that time, a strong person, balanced and muscular, can carry an impressively heavy backpack uphill for a long while. But if that person is losing strength (economic problems), and the weight of the burden remains heavy or even increases (the Bush doctrine), and the terrain becomes more difficult (rise of new Great Powers, international terrorism, failed states), then the once-strong hiker begins to slow and stumble. That is precisely when nimbler, less heavily burdened walkers get closer, draw abreast, and perhaps move ahead.

If the above is even half-true, the conclusions are not pleasant: that the economic and political travails of the next several years will badly crimp many of the visions offered in Mr. Obama's election campaign; that this nation will have to swallow, domestically, some very hard choices; and that we should not expect, even despite a surge in international goodwill towards America, any increase in our relative capacity to act abroad decisively or in any sustained way.

Now back to Ferguson:

Yet even a casual look at the fiscal position of the federal government (not to mention the states) makes a nonsense of the phrase “safe haven”. US government debt is a safe haven the way Pearl Harbor was a safe haven in 1941. Even according to the White House’s new budget projections, the gross federal debt in public hands will exceed 100 per cent of GDP in just two years’ time. This year, like last year, the federal deficit will be around 10 per cent of GDP. The long-run projections of the Congressional Budget Office suggest that the US will never again run a balanced budget. That’s right, never...

Although the US household savings rate has risen since the Great Recession began, it has not risen enough to absorb a trillion dollars of net Treasury issuance a year. Only two things have thus far stood between the US and higher bond yields: purchases of Treasuries (and mortgage-backed securities, which many sellers essentially swapped for Treasuries) by the Federal Reserve and reserve accumulation by the Chinese monetary authorities. [The latter point is somewhat of an oversimplification but the former is dead on.]

But now the Fed is phasing out such purchases and is expected to wind up quantitative easing. Meanwhile, the Chinese have sharply reduced their purchases of Treasuries from around 47 per cent of new issuance in 2006 to 20 per cent in 2008 to an estimated 5 per cent last year. Small wonder Morgan Stanley assumes that 10-year yields will rise from around 3.5 per cent to 5.5 per cent this year. On a gross federal debt fast approaching $1,500bn, that implies up to $300bn of extra interest payments – and you get up there pretty quickly with the average maturity of the debt now below 50 months.

The Obama administration’s new budget blithely assumes real GDP growth of 3.6 per cent over the next five years, with inflation averaging 1.4 per cent. But with rising real rates, growth might well be lower. Under those circumstances, interest payments could soar as a share of federal revenue – from a tenth to a fifth to a quarter.

Even with fantasyland GDP projections, the enormity of America's fiscal hole is striking. The key for the rest of the world is to collectively act to ensure that they aren't screwed by the inevitable dollar debasement/money for nothing tactics emanating from Washington. Unlike in the EU where they do tighten the screws on repeat offenders (eventually), American politicians are still under the delusion that soak the rich policies (Democrats) or tax cuts (Republicans) can magically solve any problem. Well guess again--America, you're next!

Ratko Hunt 2010: Help Serbia Join the EU

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Europe,Security at 2/11/2010 12:13:00 AM

Lest you think you've accidentally stumbled upon the Soldier of Fortune website, let me explain what's going on here. In my time here in Britain, I've ended up with some funky flatmates. (Heck, maybe I am one myself.) A current Italian flatmate, for instance, is a hedge fund manager in nearby Knightsbridge. While exchanging the usual pleasantries--how was your day and so forth--he told me a day or two ago that he had, just recently, bought Greek government bonds maturing in 2012 as a punt on the EU bailing out Greece if push comes to shove. Like him, I too regard the fuss over Greece as overrated, though that's a post for another day. Still, I have to admire his rather more aggressive risk profile. Anyway, while completing my degree in Birmingham, a conversation I had then with a Greek flatmate turned to Serbian war criminals for one reason or another. I asked him, "Where are Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić (appropriate name, that) hiding?" While Slobodan Milošević was already caught and would soon die in captivity, the other two prominent war criminals were still at large. (Radovan Karadžić was caught in 2008 and made to face the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia or ICTY.) He rolled his eyes and told me ever-so-matter-of-factly, "Oh, Emmanuel, everybody knows Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić are being sheltered in the Greek hinterlands by Orthodox monks sympathetic to them."

I swear; I can't make this stuff up. Ever the melodramatist, my mock response was, "Dammit man, let's get some Heckler & Koch UMPs and hunt them down for ransom money!" Authorities were offering a cool EUR1M then. Unsurprisingly, of course, my roommate's hunch as to Radovan's whereabouts were far off the mark.

So we move to calendar year 2010 and the only one of the evil troika still at large is Ratko Mladić. For the mercenarial sort, the news is even better as the bounty on this not-so-fine fellow has been upped by the United States to $5 million (in addition to the aforementioned sum). From Der Spiegel:

Former Yugoslav Lieutenant Colonel Srboljub Nikolic has confirmed that high-ranking Serb politicians and army officers constantly knew the fugitive's location at least until 2002.

It wasn't until May of that year -- fully six years after his arrest warrant was issued -- that then Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic ordered Mladic to leave the military barracks in Belgrade. A former bodyguard testified that before 2002, the general enjoyed the protection of 50 soldiers at the barracks, men officially put at his disposal by the Serb government. However, the bodyguard added that this was not to shield him from state prosecutors, but from bounty hunters attracted by the $5 million reward offered by the United States for his arrest.

Even after his bodyguards had been withdrawn in May 2002, Mladic continued to move freely around the country. The closest he came to being in real danger was in March 2003, when Serb leader Zoran Djindjic -- frustrated by failed mediation to convince Mladic to give himself up -- promised then-chief UN war crimes prosecutor Carla Del Ponte that Mladic would soon be arrested. Although Djindjic's move was unpopular at home, he hoped it would secure Serbia's future within the EU.

In an interview back in 1996, Mladic had warned potential pursuers they would "pay dearly" if they tried to bring him to justice. A few days after making his promise to Del Ponte, Djindjic was murdered. At the time of the assassination, Mladic was hiding in the house of a friend, a general who lived near the airport in a suburb of Belgrade.

Therein lies the rub: For those wishing to capture Ratko Mladić, note that support for him in Serbia is still strong--especially among armed forces veterans. In a manner of speaking, he may be a nasty character, but he's their nasty character--not to be paraded in The Hague alike Slobodan and Radovan before him. The Der Spiegel article also makes references to unwelcome truths he may spill as the reason why his pursuers have been none to eager to capture him even if he's hidden in plain sight. All the same, the important implication is that Serbia's path to EU membership is prominently hampered by Brussels' demand that Ratko be promptly handed over. It certainly can be argued that the EU still feels remorse over its handling of Yugoslavia's breakup and would not dare admit Serbia without achieving closure on this matter. From the London Times:

The toughest hurdle will be Serbian co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague, which is still looking to bring war criminals to justice a decade after the collapse of Slobodan Milosevic’s Yugoslav regime.

While the former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic was arrested last year, the tribunal is still pressing Serbia to hand over his military commander, General Ratko Mladic. International prosecutors want to charge him with genocide over the 1995 massacre of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica and the 43-month siege of Sarajevo.

The tribunal is also seeking Goran Hadzic, the former Serb leader in Croatia, who is wanted for war crimes in Croatia. The EU had previously blocked closer links with Serbia, demanding that the country co-operate fully with the war crimes tribunal. But it recently unfroze an interim trade agreement and last week lifted visa restrictions for Serbian citizens in EU member states. However, several EU countries, notably the Netherlands, still oppose closer co-operation with Serbia until General Mladic is handed over to The Hague tribunal.

If this subject matter interests you in an eerie way, I also suggest that you read "What It’s Like to Chill Out With: Ratko Mladic, Goran Hadzic and Radovan Karadzic." As with most writing out there on Ratko, a certain amount of conjecture and hyperbole are in evidence, but the fact remains that a $5M reward is there to be won. In the meantime, if you believe that your bounty hunting skills are on par with the Fett clan, well, off you should go to Serbia (not the Greek hinterlands) to claim the greatest prize on offer this side of Osama bin Laden and Mullah Muhammad Omar. There will certainly be champions for EU integration within the country willing you onward--even if they know that there's a far better chance of you winding up dead as a doorknob than receiving $5M.

In the meantime, Ratko's shadow looms large as ever on prospects for Serbian EU membership.

Fire Your Guns 2: PLA Urges Economic Punch v US

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in China,Hegemony,Security at 2/10/2010 12:30:00 AM

When we last entitled a post "Fire Your Guns," China was investigating economic sanctions against the United States after the latter supported the sale of billions' worth of weapon systems to Taiwan. Although the US took pains to characterize these sales as defensive in nature, PRC bellyaching was pronounced nevertheless. Now, it seems, military matters are becoming once again entangled with economic ones. A few days ago, I also mentioned how a scholar from the Central Party School, Shaobang Kang, urged ASEAN not to let America screw Southeast Asia over the way the Yanks are doing to China at present via large dollar holdings that are inevitably bound to depreciate. Like many, I tend to think the Chinese are biding their time with the United States. China is still formulating how a world more disinvested of American hegemony would look like--particularly in the economic realm. Among others, its efforts include clamouring for greater LDC participation in Bretton Woods institutions; opposing strict caps on LDC emissions during climate change negotiations; and, of course, resurrecting talk of alternatives to the dollar for global reserve accumulation.

Conflicts between the two are plentiful; there is no denying this fact. At the same time, however, the PRC believes that it did not reclaim authority on the world stage by making rash moves. Slowly but surely, the Chinese are building up their capacity to withstand American pressure and, in time, launch devastating counteroffensives of their own on various fronts. Of course, China will never be America's equal in terms of conventional weapons and it does not try to be. Still, its largesse due to export earnings is helping win (or buy depending on your perspective) friends elsewhere with the basic line of "Look, we're LDCs just like you who know what it's like to have been under the white man's thumb. Follow our example and you can maintain sovereignty and spur economic growth." When the time comes that China calculates support for it exceeds that for America, expect genuine fireworks. In the meantime, however, China will still countenance slights from America while biding for the inevitable payback.

Or maybe not. While the Central Party School line echoes that of PRC leadership at the current time, discourse emanating from the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been more aggressive for a very long time now. For instance, we've had Unrestricted Warfare, the widely cited work of Generals Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui on how alternative means of combat can compensate for China's relative lack of military sophistication vis-a-vis the US. There, they mention the potential for financial weapons to trigger "a near collapse of the social and political order" as "a form of non-military warfare which is just as terribly destructive as a bloody war." Except for Lee Greenwood fans and other diehard America #1 boosters (plus maybe the WSJ op-ed section thrown in for good measure), few doubt that the US with its gargantuan debts now and into the future is vulnerable on this front.

So we have news courtesy of Reuters that PLA generals are calling for China to unleash its economic might on a certain once-proud but now debt-addled North American country. In so many words, the PLA's equivalent of the Central Party School, the National Defence University and Academy of Military Sciences, is calling for China to give America a taste of "unrestricted warfare" right here, right now:

Senior Chinese military officers have proposed that their country boost defense spending, adjust PLA deployments, and possibly sell some U.S. bonds to punish Washington for its latest round of arms sales to Taiwan.

The calls for broad retaliation over the planned U.S. weapons sales to the disputed island came from officers at China's National Defence University and Academy of Military Sciences, interviewed by Outlook Weekly, a Chinese-language magazine published by the official Xinhua news agency.

The interviews with Major Generals Zhu Chenghu and Luo Yuan and Senior Colonel Ke Chunqiao appeared in the issue published on Monday. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) plays no role in setting policy for China's foreign exchange holdings. Officials in charge of that area have given no sign of any moves to sell U.S. Treasury bonds over the weapons sales, a move that could alarm markets and damage the value of China's own holdings.

While far from representing fixed government policy, the open demands for retaliation by the PLA officers underscored the domestic pressures on Beijing to deliver on its threats to punish the Obama administration over the arms sales. "Our retaliation should not be restricted to merely military matters, and we should adopt a strategic package of counter-punches covering politics, military affairs, diplomacy and economics to treat both the symptoms and root cause of this disease," said Luo Yuan, a researcher at the Academy of Military Sciences.

"Just like two people rowing a boat, if the United States first throws the strokes into chaos, then so must we." Luo said Beijing could "attack by oblique means and stealthy feints" to make its point in Washington. "For example, we could sanction them using economic means, such as dumping some U.S. government bonds," Luo said.

The warnings from the PLA come after weeks of strains between Washington and Beijing, who have also been at odds over Internet controls and hacking, trade and currency quarrels, and President Barack Obama's planned meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader reviled by China as a "separatist."

There is no surer-fire way of curing America's debt "disease" (their term, not mine, and it's a doozy IMHO) by refusing to stop footing the bill. I have long called for this sort of action to show America who calls the shots nowadays and I believe that doing so should have salutary effects on the world economy, too. After all, it would also force China to think about developing its internal markets more carefully and eliminate the main impetus for currency intervention. Global rebalancing won't result from a continuation of subprime globalization but a short, sharp, shock like that outlined by the PLA.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter if cooler heads prevail; the deficit-swilling nation will receive its comeuppance sooner or later. China has had to wait two centuries to regain prominence and a few decades more before reasserting its regained moxie shouldn't be too much of a stretch. By comparison, America's leaders cannot look past a lousy election cycle. Smart money suggests those who plan ahead stay ahead.

Sex and Summitry: An IPE Valentine's Day

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Economic Diplomacy at 2/10/2010 12:00:00 AM

I was scrummaging for an appropriate post for today when my encyclopedic knowledge of useless political science factoids kicked in. The Evening Standard, one of the many tabloids you find here in London, was never one of my top reads--and still isn't. However, it has become one of the things I do read simply because it has changed its business model. It is now being distributed for free. The newspaper now relies purely on advertising-based as opposed to subscription- and newsstand sales-based revenue generation. Either at Victoria station (near home) or Holborn station (near work) at midday onwards during weekdays, there's sure to be a guy or gal handing out free copies of the aforementioned publication to us weary, ripped-off commuters. Circulation matters more now, obviously.

Unlike many other tabloids, though, the Evening Standard has designs on a higher-level demographic than your average Page 3 browsers. Aside from a pretty decent business section IMHO, you get the following article that had me chortling on the train home after work. Somewhat ingeniously, these scribes managed to combine salacious lowbrow fare (sexual infidelity) with high politics (international summitry) in Sex and summitry: the rise of the raunchy summit [!] As with most tabloid fare, the n=1 sample of Niall Ferguson--America basher, with Ayaan Hirsi Ali--glamorous "fatwa sex seducer" (just love these tabloid phrases) occasions a full-length article with the catchy graphic depicted here.

Now on to the beginning of this priceless article:

So now we know what it takes to remove leading public intellectuals from their studies and source-notes. Niall Ferguson, TV historian, neo-Conservative and heart-throb of the conference circuit, has left his wife for the terrifyingly glamorous feminist writer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Hirsi Ali is hot property in every sense. Her campaigning against female circumcision, criticism of Islam and script for a film with Dutch director Theo van Gogh led to death threats. Van Gogh was assassinated in 2004, since when Somali-born Hirsi Ali has lived under police protection in the US. It is said that, in the manner of Salman Rushdie, she has a far better social life under the fatwah than most of us manage without one. She was pictured recently with Ferguson wearing a dress slinky enough to make the Imams faint. As the New York Magazine put it: "Sneaking around under the threat of jihadist militants is undoubtedly way hotter, especially if you're as awash with self-regard as Niall Ferguson. Right now theirs is the most important and thrilling sex life ever."

Anyone who still adheres to the outdated notion that the Left have all the fun in bed and the Right turn in monogamously with a copy of The Wealth of Nations take note - you clearly haven't spent any time on the international Conservative circuit in the past few years. Hirsi Ali is an esteemed fellow of the American Enterprise Institute - the robustly Right-wing think-tank, sceptical of climate change - who regularly accuses the West of appeasing radical Muslims in the wake of 9/11.

Ferguson is at the heart of a network of high-rolling Conservative historians which includes Henry Kissinger. The father of realpolitik was not averse to romantic liaisons and once asked Anatoly Dobrynin, the Soviet ambassador, to call off his KGB observers overnight as they disconcerted his girlfriends.

Many of us remember 45-year-old Ferguson, incidentally Kissinger's biographer, as an attractive young Oxford don who lectured on the economic background of the First World War in tweed suits. He dwelt at the intellectual end of the fogey vogue, with a shoal of Sloanes sighing over his Scottish lilt. But his transition to international Casanova of the conference is still incredible.

His estranged wife, the former newspaper editor, Sue Douglas, puts some of this down to the pressure of the move to America in 2002 - to lecture in financial history at New York University (he's now at Harvard), a lifestyle in which intellectual ambition is combined with social networking.

And it concludes by listing the "seven sexiest summits" even if I wouldn't have thought of calling many of these as such:

Davos Snow, ski suits and so much power and money in one small place. Who to flirt with: American CEOs, Bill Gates, Gordon Brown (maybe).

International literary festivals Where authors go to lose their writer's block and other inhibitions - the Hay Festival is visiting Mexico, Lebanon and the Maldives this year. Try to snare Martin Amis.

Copenhagen/ Make Poverty History/ Next worthy cause There was plenty of copping off at Copenhagen. "We were stuck outside the ring of steel with nothing to do." Conference heart-throb: Ed Miliband.

Tory Spring conference, Brighton A-list candidates and FOCs (Friends of Cameron) mingle among the Lanes and trendy bars. Political bounty hunter's paradise. Aim to become Joanne Cash's new best friend.

Labour Progress summits If you're the other way inclined this is where twentysomethings go to plot life after Gordon. Nice-looking young men. Women in short supply. Top catch: next Labour leader but one.

Intelligence Squared Now established as the place where people with degrees go to exchange serious ideas and phone numbers on their voting cards. Top catch: Jemima Khan.

Lucerne Music Festival More relaxed, younger crowd than Salzburg in a romantic setting. Ideal for Hotel du Lac-style encounters, to the strains of Mahler. Top catch: latest brooding Russian pianist.

I'll bet you don't get this in the National Enquirer! Alas, even tabloids here in Britain are social climbers.

The Slow Death of French Language

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in Europe at 2/09/2010 01:13:00 AM

In bygone years, French was the language of diplomacy--especially so during the heyday of balance of power politics in Europe. Ebbing use of French in commerce is understandable: how many countries in the former Indochina use French, for instance? However, the more recent decline of French in diplomatic discourse has caused some alarm for the French. To use a trade analogy, I think of the French as the ultimate "language protectionists." If their language were all that, then they wouldn't have to maintain an Academie francaise (see some of its reps in the picture) or try and prop up the language by government intervention. In contrast, English only increases in popularity even if the British Empire is long gone due to its willingness to embrace new words and terms from predominantly English-speaking countries, and increasingly, those that are not. One is stuffy and old; the other is receptive to, ah, linguistic innovation.

Perhaps appropriately, the FT pours barely disguised scorn on this latest French attempt to shore up a language losing market share. From castigating international organizations for not accommodating French speakers to criticizing Baroness Ashton (the first EU foreign secretary) for her poor command of French, it reeks of fighting a losing battle:

Senior French officials are mounting a rearguard action to defend the use of French at the UN and other international institutions as a language of diplomacy, in the face of the inexorable rise of English. Paris has renewed its efforts to secure the future of French in international circles, partly prompted by the appointment of Britain’s Lady Ashton to head the European Union’s foreign policy in November.

Her faltering French, once unthinkable in a senior EU official, has been seized upon by the French media, reflecting concerns in Paris that the diplomatic machinery she is building will be Anglophone. Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the former prime minister who is President Nicolas Sarkozy’s special envoy to promote French, was in New York at the end of last week to insist that its status as one of the two working languages at the UN must be respected.

The French démarche is the latest attempt to halt the rising tide of English as the dominant medium of diplomatic discourse. Mr Raffarin told journalists at a French-only briefing at his country’s New York mission: “President Sarkozy has asked me to approach international organisations to ensure the presence of French and to express, positively but firmly, a certain intransigeance francophone that the rules must be respected,”

Mr Raffarin’s visit obliged Ban Ki-moon, UN secretary-general, to summon up his knowledge of a language he has been working hard to master since he took up his post three years ago. “The secretary-general insisted on having the conversation in French, with the aid of notes,” said Mr Raffarin, “and he proved he could speak French”.

French sensitivities about the declining role of the language were emphasised mid-week when Gérard Araud, France’s multilingual ambassador to the UN, declined to outline the programme for his country’s presidency of the UN Security Council in English, even as aides scurried to set up translation facilities. “I don’t speak English. Point [full stop]!” Mr Araud told the UN’s mostly English-speaking press corps. “It’s unacceptable,” he said. He said the UN had six official languages: English, French, Russian, Chinese, Spanish and Arabic.

Mr Raffarin last month delivered a similar message to Brussels, where in the past decade the European Union has evolved from being a bastion of French-speaking diplomacy to adopting English as its de facto working language...About half the EU’s citizens speak at least some English, about double the figure for French or German, according to the Commission statistics.

Deal with it, mon ami. It's time to get with the programme. Like for the rest of us, learning English as a second language is both easier and more practical than learning French. The writing is on the wall: this world will not take foreign language imperialism from a bunch of old guys who dress funny, monsieur!