Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Ahmad Khan Niazi (Official Portrait)
When
Imran Khan was appointed Pakistan’s prime minister by the masses on August 18,
2018, some Pakistanis saw him as the best option, but others saw Khan as a
saviour, and followed him like rigid members of a populist cult.
Khan’s victory was the feat of Pakistan’s self-righteous and self-serving and well-off urban middle class. They were supported internationally by a well-meaning but naive diaspora, and domestically by the leadership of the politically dominating and psychologically impatient judiciary and military.
Khan’s
supporters agreed on his remedy for treating the problems of Pakistan’s
economy and polity: i.e. moral answers to material questions and
administrative solutions to structural problems.
Both have
failed to work. Rather than providing relief to common citizens as promised,
the past year has added to their gloom.
In 2018,
the narrative that was sold to the public for a “Naya Pakistan”
could be summarized as a corruption-free economy and a righteously
governed country. This narrative was realized through Khan’s rise to
power, along the rise of his political party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf
(PTI), in national and provincial general elections.
The 2018 general elections were tainted by accusations of pre-poll manipulation and rigging. But those who understood that an emerging democracy controlled by a colonial structure would stagger before finding its feet were willing to give Pakistan’s new democratic journey a serious chance. Even the main opposition parties were careful and fearful that their non-cooperation could have brought an end to the democratic order altogether.
Therefore,
Khan’s government began with even better support than two of his predecessors —
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1972, and Nawaz Sharif in 1990. All powerful
institutions of the state were on his side, opposition was reluctant to agitate
and a large part of the affluent middle class — having sway over both
market and media at that time — saw him as a savior.
One year into this government, not only do we find all the promises made for improving the economy and governance unfulfilled, the path forward seems to have been lost as well.
Capitalism
works in a certain way in a developing country, and the PTI claims it can
fix the system without knowing how it works.
The PTI’s
narrative about decreasing corruption and ending financial debt was turned
upside down sooner than imagined. The cluelessness, and therefore poor
performance of PTI’s economic leaders appointed at the beginning, brought about
their abrupt expulsion within months.
A late
agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) not only put more pressure
on Khan’s government, it also meant the IMF could exercise more control over
Pakistan’s financial decision-making.
In the name of bringing macroeconomic stability, growth has been subdued, the currency is majorly devalued and markets have lost their trust. Hyper-inflation and unprecedented power and energy price hikes coupled with sharp decline in incomes of middle, lower middle and working class have brought extraordinary hardships on common people. Poverty indicators soar and under- and unemployment rise as a consequence of this economic slowdown.
Budget at a Glance
On top of
this, there have been major financial cuts introduced in spending on health and
education directly hitting the underprivileged. As far as public debt is
concerned, a recent report in a Pakistani newspaper revealed that more than
two-thirds of what the previous Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) government
had borrowed in five years has already been acquired by Khan’s
government in less than one year.
In terms
of foreign relations, Khan’s government is finding it hard to create a balance
between the US and China for its own advantage. The pace of investments and development
under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is caught up in ambiguity,
while the US seems to be reluctant in offering any substantial support unless
Pakistan fulfils the role Washington envisages for it in the ongoing Afghan
peace process.
Bending
over backwards to flatter Saudi Arabia and the UAE over the past year has
brought limited dividends to Khan in every quarter, including support to
Pakistan’s economic stability.
The Arab countries’ response was icy when Pakistan expected them to denounce India’s annexation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, where constitutional safeguards were withdrawn, compounded with stark military aggression against civilians.
What Khan’s government have successfully done over the past year is to systematically check political opposition and restrain freedom of the mainstream media according to Amnesty International.
But those
who can recall Pakistan’s political history —however chequered it may have
been — know full well that muffling of voices eventually leads to
unmanageable disagreement in the state that in turn erodes the very base of the
government.
At the
end of its first year in power, what Khan’s government needs is a critical
introspection in order to fundamentally alter its economic policies to realize
the economic rights of Pakistani citizens. This includes alleviating poverty
and increasing productivity.
The
government also needs to better manage the country’s foreign relations with a
long-term vision that helps strike a balance between global powers to
Pakistan’s advantage.
Finally, the government needs to appreciate the importance of civil and political rights and respect for the freedom of expression, which are prerequisites to creating a healthy society and sustainable polity.
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any queries or suggestions.
For over half a century, much of modern international law has been based on this fundamental rule: states must not acquire territory through the use of force. With the crisis in Kashmir following on the heels of annexations in Europe and the Middle East, we should examine: are we doing enough to prevent populist strongmen from acquiring what territory they want?
Although the rule against annexation and conquest of territory is clear, states seeking to justify their rights against invasions and annexations oppose with insufficient settlement mechanisms. Stuck in questions of jurisdiction and admissibility, states may find it hard to sufficiently hold annexing states to justification.
Photo Credit: Encyclopedia Britannica
Take for
instance Russia’s annexation of Crimea. In 2014, Russia passed a law claiming
to incorporate Crimea, an area in Ukraine, into the Russian Federation.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea came after a local Crimean referendum indicated a
preference for Russia over Ukraine. International observers and rights bodies
questioned the results of that referendum.
The
Council of Europe called the referendum illegal, noting that it was held in the
presence of “soldiers under conditions of intimidation of civic activists and
journalists, blacking out of Ukrainian television channels and obstruction of
civilian traffic in and out of Crimea.” The UN General Assembly and most states
refused to recognize Russia’s annexation. The US, European Union and other
countries imposed sanctions on Russia as a result.
Ukraine
had to carefully consider its jurisdictional approach when taking Russia to the
ICJ. Put simply, for combative disputes, the ICJ generally has jurisdiction
where states: (i) accept compulsory jurisdiction in relation to other states
that also accept it; (ii) accept jurisdiction by special agreement; (iii)
accept jurisdiction after one state’s unilateral application; and (iv)
jurisdiction arises for matters specially provided for in the Charter of the UN
or in treaties or conventions in force.
Many states do not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Some states accept its jurisdiction with objections. Ukraine and Russia do not accept its compulsory jurisdiction. So as part of its pleadings approach, Ukraine had to rely on relevant treaties giving rise to jurisdiction. It brought proceedings based on the Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of all forms of Terrorism and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial Discrimination (CERD). Its case is underway, but Ukraine must make a case under those treaties, not one based on annexation, and that may not necessarily directly give Ukraine the result it seeks: a clear ruling on the annexation of Crimea.
Photo Credit: The Economist
Georgia
faced similar jurisdictional issues when challenging Russia’s invasion of
Georgia’s boundaries. It had to rely on the CERD. Georgia sought to apply the
treaty’s compromissory clause to establish the ICJ’s jurisdiction following
Russia’s invasion. What it wanted was an international decision reinforcing its
rights against invading Russian forces. But in its pleadings, it had to make
specific reference to racial discrimination matters and indirectly approach the
issue of territorial violation.
Considering
Kashmir, Pakistan’s foreign minister recently announced Pakistan’s decision to
take India to the ICJ. Jurisdictional issues are likely to feature in
Pakistan’s pleadings strategy. Pakistan and India accept the ICJ’s compulsory
jurisdiction with reservations. Given India’s reservations, when Pakistan takes
the Kashmir issue to the ICJ, jurisdictional issues will first turn on whether
India accepts jurisdiction. India is unlikely to do so because it insists that
Kashmir is an internal matter. So Pakistan may have to consider treaty-based
jurisdiction, rely on a relevant human rights treaty that affords ICJ
jurisdiction and jump through other admissibility circles.
But as terrible as India’s documented human rights violations and recent communications blockade are, India has not merely violated human rights: Pakistan argues that India has annexed Kashmir. And that needs to be the main subject of legal proceedings – but might not be because of jurisdictional issues.
Beyond
the realm of binding decisions on the merits of a dispute, the ICJ can issue
advisory opinions. Such opinions are issued at the request of the UN Security
Council (eg Namibia opinion), UN General Assembly (eg Wall Advisory Opinion) or
other UN organs. Considering annexation, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion on
Israel’s Wall in response to a question from the UN General Assembly. In its
Wall Advisory Opinion, the ICJ noted that Israel’s Wall and associated exercise
of authority amounted to ‘de facto annexation.’ But its opinion was not binding
on Israel and Israel’s Wall still stands. For Kashmir, it’s unclear whether an
advisory opinion will be in the offing or enough.
While modern international law affords us the language to question territorial transgressions of populist regimes, it should also afford states greater opportunity to fully vindicate their rights. Modi and his RSS crew, well-known admirers of Hitler sympathizing Golwalkar, must be kept from their worst excesses. The international community must work on bolstering mechanisms for challenging annexations lest we find ourselves dealing with another Hitler invading Poland.
The writer is Masters in
International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly
like my Facebook page “The Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter
@Journalbasement for any queries or suggestions.
A detailed map of the Kashmir region with its current stakeholders
There are no doubts about the immorality of India’s annexation of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. It is a violation of the Indian Constitution as it is expressed by many experts. However, we need to understand why it infringes the Fourth Geneva Convention. During World War II, there was the “Law of Geneva”, which only applied to soldiers that were no longer fighting. It was divided into three Geneva Conventions. The First Geneva Convention applied to the sick and wounded soldiers of the armed forces. The Second Geneva Convention applied to the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked members of the naval forces. The Third Geneva Convention was for prisoners of war. Then the world realized that about 70 million civilians were killed in the War. The Fourth Geneva Convention was established for the protection of civilians in two situations: armed conflict and military occupation.
There are over 700,000 Indian soldiers occupying Kashmir, making it the world’s most heavily militarized zone. Life there has always bear a resemblance to living in an open air prison, similar to Gaza. Article 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949 prohibits torture against civilians in the occupied territory. It reads as follows, “The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from taking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments … but also to any other measures of brutality by civilian or military agents.”
According to a report by Kashmiri activists released in May this year,
thousands of civilians in Kashmir have been summarily arrested and abused by
Indian soldiers. The report documents 432 victims of Indian torture. Civilian
deaths rose over 200% between 2013 and 2018. A New York Times story
says, “Nazir Ahmad Sheikh, 61, a farmer who was featured in the report on
torture, said soldiers accused him of being a militant and detained him in
1994. He said they crushed his legs with a heavy roller and then poured
scalding hot water on them.”
The Indian soldiers forced him to open the lid of a coal heater with his bare hands. Nazir said, “The moment I touched it, some of my tortured and numb fingers fell to the ground.” Does that count as torture? For those who may still not fathom the gravity of this, Nazir’s following words might come in handy, “A torture chamber is like a dark well where you cry out loud and no one hears your voice.”
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949 states that, “Protected
persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their
honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and
their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and
shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof
and against insults and public curiosity.” India denied locals’ access to the
Jamia Masjid, the main masjid in Srinagar, for Eid prayers. Is this violation
of the stipulation of respecting “religious convictions and practices” not
blatant enough for the global community to see?
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949 says, “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” After revoking Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, India has not only stripped the Kashmiris of their autonomy, but also paved the way for Indians to buy property and make investments in Kashmir. Business tycoon, Mukesh Ambani announced that his group will invest in the region soon. I can go on about violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention by India, but the limited space allows me to pen down only so much.
Modi and Netanyahu: Two Bodies, Same Mindset
India must not complain about terrorism, the seeds of which it is actively
sowing with its aggression as Kashmiris will soon retaliate for their autonomy
and freedom. The global community has a limited time to act. Failing to do so
is the victory of Indian antagonism and the terrorism it breeds. The hesitation
of the World Powers will breed another Palestine in the middle of the most populous
area of the world and India will become the dagger in the heart of South Asia.
India’s surprise pronouncement this week to revoke the autonomy of its uneasy state of Jammu and Kashmir is an important test for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Without a change of course, he will probably fail.
Indian Soldiers beating up a Kashmiri Youth
Kashmir is questionably the worst legacy of the hasty partition of British India in 1947. One of more than 500 princely states in the subcontinent at the time, its Hindu ruler allied with India after tribal fighters from Pakistan attempted his overthrow. The two nations have since fought three wars over the Muslim majority territory. India controls the majority of the state; Pakistan administers about a third and China claims a portion of its Himalayan plateau called Aksai Chin.
A map of Kashmir with respect of territorial control (not to scale)
How India treats its portion of Kashmir matters for two reasons. One is that
the state is the primary crossroads for the world’s most dangerous nuclear
rivalry; terrorist attacks there have repeatedly brought India and Pakistan to the
edge of conflicts. It is also the only Muslim-majority state within
Hindu-majority India, and thus an essential test of the country’s diversity and
tolerance.
Given these understandings, Modi’s government might have approached the matter with carefulness. But sadly, that was not the case. With no warning, it revoked Article 370 of the Constitution of India, which granted Kashmir a “degree of autonomy”, while breaking up the state into two “union territories” largely controlled from New Delhi. Authorities placed hundreds of local leaders under house arrest, dispatched thousands of troops to the already heavily militarized state, evacuated tourists, imposed a curfew, and cut off communications links. The parliamentary debates Indian government used to ram through its decision were so dubious that they have already landed before the Indian Supreme Court.
Article 370: An overview
All of this was hardly needed to be done by New Delhi. Most of the special
privileges afforded to the state on paper had long been removed in practice.
Nor is anyone challenging the unique rights enjoyed by some other states in
India. The clear implication is that Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata
Party was intent on eliminating rather than celebrating a Muslim-majority
state.
Changing Kashmir’s status won’t do anything to ease tensions with Pakistan.
To the contrary, it will further empower the Pakistani military. India
desperately needs a real policy to engage with Pakistan, commercially as well
as diplomatically. Instead Modi’s government seems convinced it can continue to
ignore, isolate and deter its rival. One result is that trade between the two
countries has now wrecked entirely.
Perhaps most frustrating, though, is that Modi neglected to bring on board
those people with the greatest effect from his decision: Kashmiris. BJP
officials insist that closer amalgamation will improve the lives of Kashmiris
by opening the floodgates to jobs and investment, but this is disputed. Private
investment in India hit a 14-year low earlier this year, while unemployment
stands at a 45-year high. In any case, a sudden influx of outside businesses
would fuel distrust and bitterness among locals, as it has wherever else such
policies have been tried.
The issue India ultimately needs to address in Kashmir is not a lack of jobs. It is the lack of agency felt by too many Kashmiris, intensified by a suffocating security presence that they view as an occupation. Forcibly imposing the central government does will over the state will only intensify those criticisms.
Democracies as large and heterogeneous as India cannot escape internal
tensions. But the way to relieve such pressure is to decentralize power and give
citizens a greater share in their governance, as well as more control over
local resources.
Modi’s government is heading in the opposite direction in Kashmir. Until India finds some way to make Kashmiris feel like full citizens, in control of their lives and their destinies, their land will remain what it has been for far too long: a troubled place, and a threat to peace and prosperity.
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National
Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The
Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any
queries or suggestions.
Over a month ago, Facebook has announced its own hugely controversial digital currency called “Libra” as well as a wallet to keep that currency in called “Calibra” everyone from banks to financial regulators and privacy advocates are very concerned about this project. So let’s talk about what exactly Libra is and why it is so controversial. It is easiest to explain Libra by walking you through what it would be like for you to use Libra and then explaining what happens in the background as we go. So, let us do that.
Let us say, in a year or two from now, when Libra is out, you want to get some Libra, how do you do it? You have two options: you buy from a random person who already has some Libra that is just a currency that anyone can theoretically trade with or you go to an officially appointed Libra exchange, of which Facebook says there will be many around the world. If you pay them regular money (let’s say US dollars), this exchange will start the whole process. First, they will create new Libra that they will give to you. They are the only ones who will be authorized to do that by the way, and second they’ll take your money and invest it into something that is known to hold its price, probably government bonds, gold or stocks from Multinational Companies. Basically, they throw your money on to a big pile with all of the other money they have collected and promised to keep it safe somewhere and so you end up with some Libra.
Selling
it would work in the exact same way as well: you could either sell it to
someone privately or go to an exchange which Facebook promises will give you
real money for it they will take your Libra and destroy it and they will take a
part of their big pile of money and give it back to you in form of regular
money. So, that is how you buy and sell Libra.
Now notice some important implications. The Libra Association has complete control over how much Libra there is unlike with Bitcoin, where they have to be created by mining. The Libra Association is basically like a central bank that can just print and destroy Libra whenever it wants to. The association controls also control how much Libra is worth. They will use their exchanges to literally set a buying and selling price for it worldwide and the Association will have a reserve to make sure that they have enough money to pay back anyone who wants to take their money out of the system giving the currency a sort of trust and stability that most cryptocurrencies don’t have.
Now that
you know how to buy Libra you probably want to store it somewhere and that is
what a Libra account is for. An account of Libra is basically just a Public and
a Private Key which are just two very long strings of characters. Think of them
as a login and a password.
Essentially, Facebook says that these accounts would be “Pseudonymous”, which means that they’re not directly tied to your name, and you can have theoretically as many of them as you want so that’s an account.
For the next step which is starting to pay for goods with it, your transactions of course have to go through the system and somebody has to process and validate them, unlike in so-called permission-less systems like with Bitcoin. So theoretically, anyone in the world with a computer can validate your transactions. In this system, your transactions are validated by “trusted” authorities, only who are of course, the members of the Libra Association. Facebook says that they eventually want to move to permission-less morale as well meaning that anyone can join the network and do validations as well.
Apparently, they don’t know how to do that at scale yet efficiently and quickly enough so at least for the next five years they say that the Association will have to do all of the validations. May be, they’ve never want to move to permission-less model and it’s just a fake promise, but at least for now that’s what we know.
Basically that is how Libra at its core works you have a simple account and then the Libra association takes care of everything else including creating and destroying Libra as well as processing all of the transactions it’s really a hybrid between cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and regular currencies like US Dollar as it uses cryptographic technologies similar to those Bitcoin but it’s currently managed much like a regular currency with a strong central authority, taking all the decisions.
I would like to focus on the implications of Libra and I’ll start with the positive aspect. If Libra really comes to the market as envisioned, which is a huge if, there is no guarantee that government regulators will let it pass or that Facebook will even be able to build all the things that it says it will be able to build but if it happens Libra could make payments go across borders basically instantly at very low cost reliably and securely for anyone who has access to the Internet without a need for a bank, which would be huge. Just imagine! A worker from Philippines, earning money in Europe and being able to send it back home from their phone safely without any significant fees. Facebook estimates the average cost of remittances at 7% globally.
Libra could also be a safe way for people to store money in countries were walking around with a lot of cash is dangerous or where the local currency is going through hyperinflation for example like what’s happening in Venezuela right now people could put their savings into Libra freely and not have to worry about it losing much value or getting stolen and finally Libra will be built into every conceivable Facebook product ever allowing for easy peer-to-peer transactions. They will be accepted by eBay, Uber and Lyft all of which are Libra Association Members, as well as many other vendors and users will be able to convert Libra to local currency at an exchange easily without having to worry about getting ripped off. In other words, if everything goes according to plan, Libra could theoretically become functionally far superior to our current payment methods.
Photo Credit: Cointelgraph
While that is true I think basically everything else about Libra is incredibly worrisome. For a start the management structure of Libra is in my opinion pretty insane. One of the core promises of cryptocurrency, especially the original ones like Bitcoin, is that there is no management there is no governance anyone can join the network and make payments. On Bitcoin anyone can verify every transaction that has ever been made on Bitcoin, which is true personal freedom. But that creates new problems like how do you block people from paying for things like guns and other contraband items.
Even though Libra is very much a managed and centralized currency, but unlike traditional currencies, the authority managing it is not a central bank which is a government agency that citizens have some level of control over, which is at least theoretically appointed to serve the people of a country. Rather, an association of self-appointed big private companies that regulate themselves only. This Association is headquartered in Switzerland, which makes it extra difficult for any national law enforcement to target it and it is actually even more powerful than a typical central bank as it cannot only create and destroy currency at will as well as manipulate its value, but it’s also the sole payment processor in the system, at least for now. In other words, an organization that has zero accountability to anyone has absolute control over all major functions of the currency.
Let us
actually explore this association a bit. Its current twenty eight members are mostly
large US based private companies which were literally handpicked by Facebook.
It is an invite-only system, so Facebook and the other members decide who gets
to join later and the entry criteria appears to be that members for the most
part have to be extremely large and rich companies. Facebook (ironically) calls
this a “diverse set of organizations” because they’ve thrown in a token charity
or two to look good.
I guess
there currently no clear answers given to many of the most important questions like
why these companies are uniquely well-suited to run the world economy in the
first place? What happens to these companies if one of them is behaves
unfairly? How the public can hold them accountable if anything bad happens? But
that is by design.
Now there are two more aspects that experts seem to worry about. How much control Facebook has over the system and privacy because the default assumption would be that Facebook wants to have all of the control and the norm of the privacy so it is kind of surprising them that according to the currently released plans Facebook seems to be voluntarily relinquish the control over Libra see if they could have done all of the payment processing themselves but they chose to share that responsibility with other companies and they chose to make Libra relatively private by using pseudonymous keys for accounts of course they do have a plan for controlling the system and for gathering as much data as possible but to understand how that would work we have to take a look at Calibra their newly announced wallet a cryptowallet is basically an app that lets users access cryptocurrencies think of it like a specialized banking app showing users a balance and enabling transactions developers can play around with Libra using the command-line interface but 99% of the population will use a wallet and while Libra is technically an open system that anyone could build competing wallets on Facebook is betting big on Calibra becoming the dominant one. For one, Calibra has a head start of at least one or two years so it will likely be more feature-rich than competitors, plus it will be built into every conceivable Facebook product ever likely making it the default solution for peer-to-peer transactions over Whatsapp and Messenger as well as purchases over Instagram new commerce platform or Facebook Marketplace.
Long story short, Facebook is perfectly positioned to make Calibra the default way most users around the world access their Libra of currency and that’s really all it needs, because Calibra of course is everything but private. They have openly declared that they will follow standard banking procedures including verifying the identity of every Calibra user with identity checks as well as learning where they live. That information is mandatory for banks to collect to avoid money laundering and stuff and you can bet that Calibra will also closely monitor your payments to learn about your habits to offer you loans and insurance or just show you helpful tips around what you spend your money on.
In other
words, Calibra is a company that is owned 100% by Facebook can have all of the
payment data once the Facebook has promised that they are not going to mix Calibra
payment information with Facebook, Whatsapp and Instagram. But then again, they
have made similar promises like that in the past before and they broke them.
So should you care about that promise, probably no. They promised that they would never mix Whatsapp and Facebook data after the acquisition but then they changed their minds and started merging the two together and even add Instagram into the mix as well. Despite regulators suing them multiple times for it, and Whatsapp founders leaving the company over it promises are easy to make but typically do not last very long within Facebook when breaking them appears to make them massive amounts of money and I think that is a pretty good place to wrap it up.
Photo Credit: The Verge
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any queries or suggestions.
The US China rift is widening day after day. One of the largest tech companies in the world is getting blacklisted by the United States. On May 16th, Huawei was added to the US Commerce Department’s Entity List, which restricts it from doing business with any US company without explicit government approval. There is a small price to pay for maintaining phones that have already in the circuit, but essentially, it means a de facto ban on US companies selling to Huawei.
Google has already revoked the company’s Android license, switching
it to open source software and Intel and Qualcomm are considering similar
moves. It is part of a much bigger fight between the US and China, and it goes
a lot deeper than what you’ve probably think.
Most of your cell-phone, your laptop, your air conditioner,
your light bulbs, all of it was probably made in China. But to realize why all
that is happening, you have to look at the bigger picture here.
If you wanted to put a date on the beginning of the modern
electronics industry, 1980 would be a pretty good choice. It was the year of
Apple’s Initial Public Offering, or IPO, the year that the personal computer
evolved from a personal pastime commodity into a mass-market consumer product.
But, more importantly, it was the year China created the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, where Chinese companies could trade in a free market backed up by the power of central planning of the Chinese Communist Party, the CCP. If the government wanted experts’ services to be cheaper, it could effectively lower the exchange rate. If a housing colony was getting in the way of factory construction, they could just tear the houses down.
Shenzhen, the Silicon Valley of China.
Over the next 40 years, the CCP built Shenzhen into the
greatest manufacturing hub the world has ever seen, at the same time that the
tech industry was coming to life. Those forty years gave us the personal
computer, the smartphone, and the quad-copter drone, with each generation of
tech relying a little bit more on the “Trans-Pacific trade”. It is not that we
would not have smartphones without China’s technical workforce, but they might
look completely different and cost a lot more.
Now, that system’s starting to break down, and it’s not just
because of Huawei. We’re in the middle of a really ugly trade war. In May,
Trump announced a plan to raise import taxes as high as 25% on laptops and
smartphones from China. Each new tariff from the US is met with more tariffs
from China, which then triggers more retaliation from the US.
So far, the most damaging move from China has been a new tax on soybean imports, which has left the prices plummeting and costs US farmers billions of dollars. We’re seeing executives arrested and jailed on both sides, risking an unprecedented collapse in trade.
At first, Huawei’s problems were more about security than
economics. Given how much Chinese spying happens in the US, a lot of people in
the intelligence community are nervous about a Chinese company operating
American cell towers. But this latest move goes further, putting Huawei’s
entire cell phone business in jeopardy. Even the CEO admits it’s really hard to
build a phone without US microchips.
The big picture problem is that building US goods in China just doesn’t seem like that great of a deal anymore. In the ’80s and ’90s, leaders in both countries saw outsourcing as a win-win deal. American consumers got cheaper goods, and Chinese workers got lifted out of poverty by a huge influx of labor jobs. In the US, it was great for microchip designers and tech shareholders but bad for factory jobs, and it contributed a lot to the cratering of the middle class. On the Chinese side, those same factory jobs have made the country a lot richer.
China has undone a lot of the currency manipulation that made exports so cheap to begin with. As a result, manufacturers have started looking to India and Vietnam for cheap factory labor which made Chinese tech companies want to design phones instead of just assembling them.as a result, they are less reliant on the US market than ever.
So what does all that mean for Huawei? If the commerce order holds up and the US doesn’t grant any licenses, it means the company may have to make a phone without any US components. That means no Gorilla Glass and no Micron flash memory, among other parts. But all those parts have foreign competitors, even if they’re more expensive and not quite as good. Huawei doesn’t want to build a phone without US parts, but they possibly can if they have to.
You can’t say the same thing for US companies. If Apple had to build an iPhone without China, or even just stop selling iPhone in the Chinese market, it would be a disaster for the company. Moving factories takes years, and it would plunge the entire industry into chaos. There’s still time to avoid that, but there’s no sign of either side backing down. And if we keep going, the US may have a lot more to lose than China.
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National
Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The
Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any
queries or suggestions.
In the first blog post of this series, I discussed how you would use YouTube as means of enjoyment as well as earning a quick buck. However, if you are shy in front of the camera or don’t like to carry heavy photography equipment and you hate the outdoors then there are other methods to earn money as well.
In this post, we’re going to discuss how to generate passive income with successful affiliate marketing. If you’re brand new to it, this post will help you get started. If you’re already into affiliate marketing, you’ll probably still find something in here you haven’t thought of before.
The basic Affiliate Marketing model.
Before we get in too deep, let’s start with a very brief definition. Affiliate marketing is when an online retailer pays you a commission for traffic or sales generated from your referrals. In simple English, you get paid for promoting the product of a client online through social media or other online means.
Affiliate marketing is a simple process. You recommend a product or service to your followers, who purchase the product or service using your affiliate link. The client, in turn, pay a commission for the sales made using your affiliate link. The plus point is that you get paid the moment you pick a product and start your work.
You can find a number of Websites to search and start your work like Clickbank.com, Shareasale.com, and Jvzoo.com. However, I would like to stress the fact that please do not bite more than you can chew. Do not sign for all the Affiliate Marketing program that you lay over eyes on without getting the hang of it first, as often people select products that are difficult to market. However, you can choose a product that gives you the maximum commission possible.
Different companies that run Affiliate Marketing Programs
Almost all brands that you know or use in daily life run their Affiliate Marketing Services as it is cheaper and strictly commission based. There are however a number of ways to put you on the Fast Track. You can promote your chosen product through your blogs, social media accounts or building and promoting a Website. But in order to succeed, you must have online marketing skills as well as quality content so that the people not only show interest in your product, but they would recommend their friends and family members to use your product.
Where do you get ideas for products to promote? Its actually quite easy. Promote Products you Already Use. What do you already use and love? There’s probably an affiliate program for that. Make a list of all of the products and services that you use and Google it to find their affiliate programs. Then, write reviews and plug in the affiliate links and start earning!
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any queries or suggestions.
As the recent debate about the Presidential and Parliamentary System rages on, and the debate of the eligibility of many world’s leaders is in question, many do not realize that maybe the fault lies in the system that makes the people like Donald Trump and Narrandera Modi rise to power. Let us therefore discuss the system of Democracy on philosophical grounds.
(From Left to Right) US President Donald J. Trump and Indian PM Narendra Modi. Photo Credit: qz.com
We’re used to thinking very highly of democracy and by extension of ancient Athens the civilization that gave rise to it. The Parthenon has become almost a personification for democratic values, which is why so many leaders of democracies like to be photographed there. It’s therefore very unusual to discover that one of ancient Greece’s greatest achievements, Philosophy, was highly suspicious of its other achievement, Democracy.
Ex US President Barack H. Obama in front of the Parthenon in Greece. Photo Credit: Chicago Tribune.
The founding father of Greek philosophy, Socrates is portrayed in the dialogues of Plato as enormously pessimistic about the whole concept and standings of democracy in Book Six of “The Republic”, Plato describes Socrates falling into conversation with a person called Adeimantus of Collytus, and trying to get him to see the imperfections of democracy by comparing a society to a ship. If you were heading out on a journey by sea, asked Socrates who would you, if at all possible, want deciding who was in charge of the vessel, just anyone or people educated in the rules and difficulties of maritime affairs. “The latter of course”, says Adeimantus. “So why then”, response Socrates, “do we keep thinking that any old person should be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country”, Socrates pointed out.
The main point to be noted that voting in an election is a skill, not a random intuition and like any skill it needs to be taught systematically to people letting the public vote. Without an education of the trade, voting can be as irresponsible as putting a novice in Maritime Affairs in charge of a ship sailing in a storm. Socrates was to have firsthand catastrophic experience of the foolishness of voters, much like what we have seen in US and India very recently. In 399 BC, the philosopher was put on trial on made-up charges of corrupting and misleading the youth of Athens. The jury of 500 Athenians was invited to hear the case and decided by a narrow margin that the philosopher was guilty. He was put to death by hemlock.
David: The Death of Socrates
In a process which is for thinking, people every
bit as ignorant as they would be, were handed the reign of Socrates’ life.
Here, it should be noted that Socrates was not elitist in the normal sense. He didn’t
believe that a small group of people should only ever vote. He did however
insist that only those who’d thought about issues rationally and deeply should
be let near a ballot box.
We have forgotten this distinction between an “Intellectual
Democracy” and a “Democracy by Birth-right”. We have given the vote to all,
without connecting it to wisdom and Socrates knew exactly where that would lead
to, a system the Greeks feared above all, Demagoguery. Ancient Athens had
painful experience of demagogues. For example, the immoral figure of Alcibiades,
a rich, enigmatic, smooth-talking wealthy man who usurped basic freedoms and
helped to push Athens to his unsuccessful military adventures in Sicily.
Socrates knew how easily people seeking election could exploit our desire for easy answers. He asked us to imagine an election debate between two candidates, a Doctor and a Sweet Shop Owner. The Sweet Shop Owner would say of his rival, “Look this person here has worked many evils on you. He hurts you, gives you bitter medicine, and tells you not to eat and drink whatever you like. He’ll never serve you feasts of many and varied pleasant things like I will”. Socrates asks us to consider the audience’s response.
Do you think the Doctor would be able to reply effectively the true answer, that he caused you trouble and goes against your desires in order to help you would cause an uproar among the voters? Don’t you think we have forgotten all about Socrates’ dire warnings against democracy? We have preferred to think of democracy as an unambiguous good, rather than as something that is only ever as effective as the education system that surrounds it. As a result, we have elected many sweet shop owners and very few doctors, as we seek comforting lies rather than bitter truths.
(From Left to Right) Pakistan’s PM Imran Khan Niazi and his confidants Jahangir Khan Tareen and Asad Umer. The Picture is Self-Explanatory.
In the previous blog, I promised that I will explain the tips and tricks that are required to monetize and expand the reach and influence of your YouTube channel.
Monetizing
your YouTube channel is a piece of cake. I will be explaining how the program
works and how to set-up your account to begin earning income from your YouTube
videos. However we first need to Understand
How YouTube Monetization Works.
YouTube places ads inside or at the start of your videos. After you’ve enabled monetization on your YouTube channel, your videos can be submitted and approved for monetization. In order to earn part of the profits that is generated from these ads, you will need to attach an Ad Sense account with your YouTube account.
For a video to be eligible, you must own worldwide commercial rights to everything in the video. For example, a video that features a song that you do not own the copyright for (e.g. a song you purchased on iTunes) would not be eligible. For more information about copyright and fair use, visit YouTube’s Copyright Center. In addition to complying with YouTube’s copyright policies, videos must abide by YouTube’s Terms of Service and Community Guidelines.
The two key factors for earnings are the type of ads and the pricing of the ads appearing with your videos. Pre-roll ads, which are placed in the beginning of a video, make more money per thousand views than less flashy banners. You will make money per ad click and a smaller amount per view. The rates are different for different countries, the highest being in Australia, a whooping $56 per thousand views.
YouTube Ad Rates as per thousand views (abbreviated CPM)
Ads that are
shown with your videos are determined automatically based on a number of
factors, including how you categorize your video and video content. Make sure
that video titles, tags and descriptions are SEO friendly for best results. It
is important to note that you cannot control all of the ads that may appear on
your channel.
Getting Started: Step-By-Step
To begin, log-in to your YouTube channel account.
In the Channel Settings tab, select “Enable monetization.”
Follow the steps to accept the YouTube monetization agreement.
In the Uploads tab, you will see a green box with a dollar sign next to the videos that are immediately eligible for monetization. Videos that are not eligible to be monetized due to copyright will be appearing under the Copyright Notices tab.
Next, you’ll need to associate an Ad Sense account to your YouTube channel. It is free to set up a new Ad Sense account. You will need a valid mailing address in order to have your account verified. Ad Sense will update you by mail once your account has been approved. You can also associate an existing, approved Ad Sense account to your channel. The money can be withdrawn by Western Union in Pakistan.
For further instructions on how to associate your YouTube and Ad Sense accounts, visit the Google support page.
In the next blogs to come, I will be discussing additional ways to earn money, especially if you are shy to appear in front of the camera or lack different skills required to operate a YouTube Channel, as discussed in my previous blog. Just keep reading my blog.
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Kindly like my Facebook page “The Basement Journal” and follow me on Twitter @Journalbasement for any queries or suggestions.
Economy can be unpredictable. Having a reliable job or an established business can both have their downs in a bad economy. But when you face an unexpected turn of events, there is always a way to earn money through a second source. Then there are scenarios where you can’t afford a steady and strong financial life with a single job. In an economy like today’s, especially in Pakistan, having a part time income resource or making money online from the comfort of your home is a great proposition.
Whether
you don’t have a job these days, or you’re a housewife who isn’t able to go out
and earn for her family or you can be a graduate looking for an internship or
just a student who wants to pay for an education. For some, earning money
online can be equal to filling the financial gaps or for someone like me having
an online job is the career to be in.
Pakistan is rated among the cheapest labor available globally with a population who can speak English. India is in that list too. Businesses in US, UK, Australia and Canada outsource fresh graduates for call center jobs and look for experienced professionals who are willing to set up a small business.
As all we know, now a days many people use internet, and most of them use internet only for social media like Facebook and Twitter. But why not we make money from internet?. Here i m going to tell you a 60 ways to make money online or how to make money from home or easy ways to make money from internet. This is what you need to get started.
A lot of patience. Earning income online is easy, but earning good amount of money can be challenging sometimes. Some months can be really good and some can be just fine.
You must have some know-how about computer and internet. You can’t have a stable online earning source if you don’t have the basic knowledge to operate a computer or how the internet works.
You must understand English at least at a basic level. Having proficiency in English communication is always a plus.
Consistency and hard work. Earning online can be easy, but maintaining the financial flow requires consistency in work and an attitude that shouts hard work.
Today, I will be discussing the most common and easiest way to make money by staring a YouTube channel, which require no investment. YouTube gets almost 5 billion video views per day which proves its power on the internet.
Felix Kjellberg, the owner of PewDiePie. (Photo Credit: ART+ Marketing)
The biggest YouTuber of 2019 is Felix Kjellberg, the owner of PewDiePie (a YouTube account). He has earned $15.5 million in 2018 (Forbes) by running a single YouTube channel.
This career is suitable for people who love to create videos, like to talk in front of a camera, shoot documentaries or short films. They must also the ability to create a video using software tools or record a video using your mobile phone or camcorder.
The general rule for monetization in YouTube is very simple. More views your videos get, more money you’ll earn. You’ll just have to enable the monetize option in your YouTube channel settings. I will be discussing how to setup and monetize your own channel in my next blog. Just keep reading and supporting.
The writer is Masters in International Relations from National Defense University, Islamabad. Follow us on Facebook at The Basement Journal for daily updates.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/64727962/VRG_ILLO_3512_001.0.jpg)
Basement Journal 