The Power and the Money

I don’t think “existential” means what the FT writers think it means

 The on-line headline on this editorial is “Modi’s existential challenge to Obama.”

That confused me. Did Mr. Modi personally threaten the President? Or is it that India threatens to conquer and destroy the United States? Say what?

Actually, as far as I can tell the article boils down to this: Mr. Modi is still miffed that the United States sanctioned him after the Gujarat riots, which might affect relationships. Plus, India’s new leader intends to visit other countries before the United States. So this proves that President Obama has been unable to do anything ever with respect to foreign policy. And that threatens to kill the President!

Or something. The whole thing is a bit of a headscratcher. Can somebody explain what Mr. Luce is trying to say? He’s a smart guy, usually not so obfuscatory, and so I’m not immediately dismissive. Help, please?

Reshaping geopolitics

 Two days ago, in a Financial Times column that was bullish on the long-term potential of the Indian economy, Martin Wolf said something very sensible:

“Exhausted by the burden of its pretensions, the U.K. should soon offer its seat on the Security Council of the United Nations to its former colony. Its condition would be that France does the same in favor of the European Union.”

Yes, indeed. Too bad that Mr. Wolf and myself are in agreement that it won’t happen. But still. What does Britain get out of its seat on the Security Council? Countries with rotating seats, like Mexico, have often found it more of a pain than a benefit. (It makes neutrality difficult.) Small countries get a monetary benefit as the U.S. bought their votes (joined in the old days by the USSR, and probably the PRC in future ones.) And I can imagine that France likes the insurance policy of a veto; after all, it does have a penchant for randomly invading African countries. But the U.K.? Why bother? Sell it to India.

Nice buildings in London, I must say. Even the new ones.

This goes out to James and Randy

  I am told that it can be difficult to get the Daily Show in Canada.  So, under the assumption that you might not regularly tune it in on the internets, I present to my Canadian friends the following very insightful group of talking heads:

 

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Provinces in Peril

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

 

 

Want to know more?  The preceeding story, “Provinces in Peril” is below the fold.

Betting (on) the (wind) farm

I get into the office this morning, ready to do some reading (on Chinese and Russian energy policy) and writing (on American intervention in the Dominican Republic) when I spot two new hits from India, both for "Blowin' in the wind."

And so, I think, it behooves me to write a bit about Indian wind energy.  Thankfully, Dick Vietor, right down the hall, has done a lot of work on the topic.  Much of what follows comes from him ... wind power in India makes a great story.

McCainiacs

How Others See Us:  "Obama wins Grammy and whitest US state," Times of India.  The Grammy does not, I should point out, refer to the "Yes We Can" video.

Of course, one great video begats another.  Go click the link.  Then watch the following.

Which brings me to an admission and an admonition.  The admission is that back in 2000 my journal tells me that I was a McCainiac.  I even gave my first ever recorded campaign contribution to the guy, a full $500.  What seems to have excited me was that he was against reducing federal taxes even one penny until the national debt was paid off, and in an election where nobody was talking about health care (Gore hadn't yet proposed to add a pharmaceutical benefit to Medicare) and war seemed far away, that seemed like the big issue.  Pay down that debt, baby!  Andrew Jackson's one good idea.  Plus, he didn't seem to, like, hate the environment. 

That McCain, well, I wouldn't vote for him now.  Times change, other issues take on salience.  But the new McCain?  Even less. 

The admonition is that anybody who is trying to decide between John McCain and whichever of the Democrats gets the nomination is simply not paying attention.  That is a decision that makes no sense.  One guy has pledged to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, keep us in Iraq for a century, confront Iran, and keep our insane health care system.  The others will do none of the above.  If McCain's platform seems reasonable, even desirable, then there is no way in hell that you should be even thinking of voting for the Democrat.  And vice versa. 

Will, I promise to get around to the Latino question that you posed, but c'mon man.  His choice of veep could sway you?