United States and Japan began on Thursday the revision of defense cooperation guidelines

We hope that this revision does not fall onto the 'Law of Unintended Consequences' and exacerbates rather than alleviates the current high tensions.

Reuters: "The United States and Japan began on Thursday the revision of defense cooperation guidelines for the first time in 15 years as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe faces a territorial dispute with China and North Korea's missile and nuclear programmes.

The revision to the guidelines, which set rules on how Japanese and U.S. forces work together in or near Japan, comes after a hawkish Abe led his Liberal Democratic Party to power in an election last month.

"We would like to discuss Japanese Self Defence Forces' role and U.S. forces role with eyes on the next five, 10, 15 years and on the security environment during those periods," a Defence Ministry official told reporters, without elaborating.

The revision is due because of drastic changes in the security environment over the past 15 years including China's maritime expansion and North Korea's missile development, the Japanese government has said.

North Korea has also twice tested nuclear devices.

Japan is locked in a territorial dispute with China over a group of tiny East China Sea islets called Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China, with both countries sending patrol ships and planes to areas near the isles.

The review started with a working-level meeting in Tokyo between U.S. and Japanese officials. It will likely take a year or more to complete and coincides with a U.S. "pivot" in diplomatic and security focus to Asia.

"One issue that's prevalent is whether the Abe government will reinterpret the constitution to exercise the right of collective self defence," said Nicholas Szechenyi, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"Should that policy decision be taken, it will obviously have an impact on the way the Self Defence Forces and U.S. military coordinate."

Japan recognizes it has what is known as the right of collective self-defence, meaning a right to defend with force allies under attack even when Japan itself is not being attacked.

But Japanese governments have traditionally interpreted the pacifist constitution as banning the actual exercise of the right, creating a sore spot in Tokyo's security ties with Washington. Abe wants to change the interpretation to allow Japan to exercise the right.

via U.S., Japan review defense guidelines amid tension with China | Reuters.

See also: http://chindia-alert.org/2012/08/12/beijing-reasserts-its-claims-in-south-china-sea-nytimes-com/

United States, China, and India: Unintended consequences of great power politics

Author: Franz-Stefan Gady is a Senior Fellow at the EastWest Institute.

Source: China US Focus “The United States, China, and India: Unintended Consequences of Great Power Politics”

October 2012 marked the 50th anniversary of the 1962 Sino-Indian War. Communist China launched a surprise attack across the Himalayas to “teach India a lesson”, according to the Chinese Premier, Zhou Enlai. 

After 32 days of fighting and embarrassing Indian defeats, the Chinese announced a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew behind the McMahon Line (the de-facto boundary between China and India, although legally disputed by the People’s Republic of China).

To this day, the 1962 war is seen as a national humiliation in India

Scanning the Op-Ed sections of newspapers while I was in New Delhi in October this year, the general consensus of commentators and political analysts appeared to be that the war, like no other event in post-colonial Indian history, was a unifying force in bringing the country together. It led to the modernization of the Indian Army, and made India temporarily abandon its isolationist, non-aligned foreign policy outlook, and forced it to accept military aid from Western Powers and the Soviet Union, ultimately setting the stage for a more assertive Indian foreign policy.

India’s slow ascent to great power status

Diplomatic historians may mark the 1962 war as the beginning of India’s slow ascent to great power status and a force to be reckoned with in 21st century Asian power politics. Yet, to this day, India’s foreign policy is – more than most other emerging titans – constrained by a quest for internal security and a deep introspection – making it a reluctant power and conducting a more or less “introverted foreign policy”.

Checking the growth of Chinese power in the region

The United States is trying to change India’s reluctant stance and is attempting to forge closer ties with New Delhi. During his visit in June 2012, U.S. Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, called India a “lynchpin” in the United States’ strategic pivot to Asia.

Behind all of this is the United States’ desire to check the growth of Chinese power in the region.  As the former US Envoy to India, Robert D. Blackwill, pointed out in a speech in New Delhi in 2009: “President George W. Bush based his transformation of US-India Relations on the core strategic principle of democratic India as a key reason in balancing the rise of Chinese power.” Also he noted that: “[W]ithout this China factor at the fore in Washington, in my view the Bush Administration would not have negotiated the Civil Nuclear Agreement and the Congress would not have approved it.”

“Be careful what you wish for”

Yet, the United States should heed the maxim “be careful what you wish for.” For closer military and diplomatic ties between India and the United States may embolden India’s foreign policy, which could potentially destabilize the entire region of South Asia. As history teaches us, multi-cultural great powers often have a need to define their national identities by overarching national ‘exertions’ such as a war.

The current Indian National Security Advisor Menon referred to India as a ‘bridging power’ during an interview with Robert D. Kaplan  for his book, Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future of American Power.

Kaplan describes Menon’s rationale behind this statement: “[India]…is something between America and China, between a global power and a regional power, between a hard and soft power, between the emerging power of its economy and navy, and the poverty of its people and its weak borders.” Substitute India for Austria in the early 20th century and you have a historical case study of what the unintentional consequences of closer diplomatic ties with the supreme military of its time could entail.

India as ‘bridging power’?

The Austrian Empire, like India, was considered to be a bridging power between East and West for much of its existence. It was a multi-national empire, more concerned with its internal security and stability than with great power politics, and after humiliating defeats in 1859 and 1866, reluctant to use military power to meet its political goals (for most of the late 19th century-early 20th period it spent comparatively little on military defense).

As in the Sino-Indian war of 1962, these defeats lead to various military and political reforms culminating in the Austro-Hungarian compromise of 1867 and the establishment of a dual monarchy. Also, like India, Austria-Hungary was held together by an omnipotent, if slightly inefficient, bureaucracy.

Austria’s “Pakistan” in the 20th century was Serbia

Serbia, a small state in the Balkans trying to lure the South Slavic subjects of the empire to revolt through subversive means (as with Pakistan there was a clandestine connection between government circles and radical elements in the Serbian intelligence community).

Most importantly, Austria’s stance vis-à-vis Serbia was emboldened by its dual alliance with the German Empire, which in 1914 , after the assassination, gave Austria a diplomatic “Carte Blanche”, to deal once and for all with the “Serbian problem”.

Before this dual alliance, Austria always had to play a rather careful diplomatic game between East and West. The great protector power of Serbia was Russia, Austria’s powerful eastern neighbor threatening Austria’s exposed eastern borders. As the years progressed and tensions between the great powers mounted and the dual alliance solidified, Austria took an increasingly more aggressive stance against Serbia’s agitations.

In 1914, after the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, Austria’s Chief of Staff, Conrad von Hoetzendorf’s, repeated requests for preventive war with Serbia was finally granted.  Not before Austria, however, thought it had secured Germany’s guarantee to help defend its eastern borders, plunging all of Europe in the First World War.

India with similar problems?

India today faces many similar problems as Austria did in the early 20th century. A powerful peer competitor in the East (China) is conducting a relatively subtle anti-Indian South Asian policy and a smaller, but the more real subversive threat is coming from Pakistan and from continuing internal unrest in India.

Add the world’s strongest military power to this mix and the results could be explosive. According to various foreign policy experts in New Delhi, India is very aware of the delicate situation it occupies.

The United States would do well not to foster too close of a tie with India in the next few years of its strategic re-alignment to Asia. India has cautiously positioned herself between both parties in US-China competition. China has made it clear in many statements that it is not a threat to India, where India’s defense ministry clearly stated that India is not interested in containing China.

India’s diplomacy of peace and non-alignment is deeply felt and comes more naturally to it than war.  In the near term the bigger danger of an emboldened India may well be an increase in crypto-nationalism and inter-communal extremism.

The Obama Administration should nevertheless carefully evaluate its relationship with India in the next four years and beware of the unintentional but often hazardous consequences of Great Power politics.

Reduced overtime at Foxconn upsets migant workers

An unintended consequence of enforcing 'fair' worker treatment - reduced income for migrant workers more than willing to work excessive overtime!

From Wall Street Journal - via Foxconn Workers Say, 'Keep Our Overtime' - WSJ.com.

 "Nets to catch would-be jumpers still sag ominously from Hon Hai Precision Industry Co.'s  buildings.

But two years after a spate of suicides at the Apple Inc.  supplier's campus here, workers are more concerned about another measure designed to protect them: limits on overtime.

Hon Hai in March said it would change its workplace practices after an audit by a U.S.-based nonprofit worker-safety group found widespread breaches of Chinese law and Apple policies at three plants, including the excessive use of overtime. Hon Hai responded by pledging that it would bring its overtime policies into alignment with Chinese law by next year, allowing workers to work no more than nine hours of overtime a week. 

The Taiwan-based company, also known as Foxconn, pledged to improve health and safety conditions at its campuses across China as well.

But more than 15 workers on the Shenzhen campus said in interviews that they work more than the legal limit of nine overtime hours a week. A majority said they work 10 to 15 overtime hours and would prefer more, having left their distant homes to make money in this southern Chinese boomtown on the border of Hong Kong.

"I think a lot of the more experienced people from the technology production lines will leave" if the policy to limit overtime goes into effect, said a worker who asked to be identified only by his surname, Ma. "We don't know how much our salary will go up. But after being here three years, I don't have much incentive to stay, since my wage probably won't rise much."

Mr. Ma, who earned roughly 3,400 yuan ($540) a month including overtime when he arrived three years ago, said he now earns about 5,000 yuan. To make extra money, the 26-year-old buys used car parts cheaply on an e-commerce website and then resells them.

Basic pay at the Shenzhen Longhua plant is 2,200 yuan, before overtime.

Keeping Mr. Ma and its 1.5 million other Chinese workers satisfied, while manufacturing complex, time-sensitive consumer electronics profitably is becoming more challenging for Hon Hai. The company's labor costs will rise by roughly $1.4 billion when the new labor policies roll out next year, according to a Bernstein Research estimate. Hon Hai's operating profit margin had declined since the second quarter of 2010 because of rising wages. The figure rose to 3.4% in this year's third quarter from 2.2% a year earlier as the company raised what it charged customers, analysts said.

Hon Hai isn't alone in facing such challenges. Employee protests over working conditions and the willingness of staff to change employer for more pay have forced electronics manufacturers to raise wages throughout China. Hon Hai and other companies have moved some operations to countries such as Vietnam and Mexico, where costs for labor or transportation to end markets are lower."

Starbucks cuts staff benefits to fund avoided tax!

The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again!

From the Guardian   - http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/dec/03/starbucks-slash-lunch-breaks

"Starbucks is cutting paid lunch breaks, sick leave and maternity benefits for thousands of British workers, sparking fresh anger over its business practices.

On the day the House of Commons' public accounts committee branded the US coffee chain's tax avoidance practices "immoral", baristas arriving for work were told to sign revised employment terms, which include the removal of paid 30-minute lunch breaks and paid sick leave for the first day of illness. Some will also see pay increases frozen.

The changes affecting about 7,000 coffee shop staff emerged as thecompany tried to quell public and political outrage at its use of secretive company structures that has seen it pay just £8.6m in UK tax over the past 13 years on sales of £3.1bn.

On Saturday Starbucks announced it would open talks with the UK government that could lead to it paying more tax in future and on Monday it was reported that such an announcement could come on Wednesday. But at the same time it was telling workers it was removing benefits and changing employment arrangements.

The new contractual terms being circulated to staff across 750 stores include the removal of cash incentives for becoming manager or partner of the year in favour of the award of a plaque and the removal of a bonus scheme for women returning after they have had a baby because "it is not considered a valued benefit".

A worker who claimed he was told to sign the new contract last week or leave, told the Guardian colleagues were "really upset" at the changes and said it appeared relatively low-paid staff were being forced to help bear the cost of the company's potentially increased tax bill.

"It's really convenient for them to say we're going to pay more taxes, when they're going to save money with us, the staff," said the coffee shop worker on condition of anonymity. "It's convenient saying we'll pay more because they're going to save more – and the perfect excuse for them is to say to staff 'We're going to pay more taxes, so…'."

He said his manager explained Starbucks "is losing a lot of money in Europe, so they said they needed to make these changes to save the company money".

Even apparently minor benefits are being cut. Starbucks is ending the practice of giving hampers to new mothers in favour of "a card and Starbucks baby grow and bib". The new policy on staff birthdays orders: "Removal of birthday cards. Bakery good code to be issued in store for free birthday treat." Congratulations cards on the anniversary of the first four years of service are being withdrawn."

Mao's "Great Leap Forward" resulted in great famine

From - 

‘Tombstone’ by Yang Jisheng, translated from the Chinese by Stacy Mosher and Guo Jian - http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/books/2012/11/03/review-tombstone-the-great-chinese-famine-yang-jisheng-translated-from-chinese-stacy-mosher-and-guo-jian/yuFFCEmLIxORRuesm3LjXI/story.html

"Mao’s Great Leap Forward, designed to make China the world’s leading communist state, generated the worst famine in history. Until recently, the West knew little about the causes and magnitude of the disaster, which killed tens of millions in four years.

As a veteran Chinese journalist, Yang Jisheng recounts in his book “Tombstone” how for decades officials blamed “natural calamity” for the massive population loss; references were made to epidemics, “and no mention of starvation was allowed.” Yang has conducted a sweeping investigation and amassed information from dozens of archives to produce a comprehensive history of the Great Chinese Famine. He intended his book as a monument to the millions of victims, including his own father.

The original two-volume version of “Tombstone,’’ double the size of the English edition, appeared in 2008 in Hong Kong and has already run to eight printings. The book is banned in mainland China where no full famine account has ever been published, “an offense to the memories of tens of millions,” writes Yang.

Frank Dikötter, a Hong Kong-based historian, was the first to disclose to the West the true dimensions of this man-made tragedy. In his 2010 award-winning “Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62’’ Dikötter holds Mao responsible for the deaths of 45 million people, who were starved and beaten to death in pursuit of a utopian paradise.

“The masses are slaves,” a party cadre was quoted as saying, “and they won’t do anything unless beaten, berated, or deprived of food.” Local cadres had unlimited power to rape, ransack homes, deny food, beat and kill those who stole out of hunger or those not blindly obeying. The draconian system generated waste and destruction. Peasants received inflexible commands about plowing depth for seeding and planting density, directives that lead to crop failure.An admirer of Stalin, Mao imposed collectivization and industrialization on backward China, emphasizing high production targets and speed. But unlike Stalin, he mobilized peasants to work in both agriculture and industry, turning the entire country into a vast gulag. Millions of private farms across China were forcibly consolidated into gigantic communes, the state seizing private land and assets without compensation; opponents were beaten and killed. Private property was seen as an impediment to communism; about 40 percent of all housing was destroyed. The regime sanctioned an unprecedented persecution of peasants across China, their lives sacrificed to unworkable goals dictated by the supreme leader.

Mao promoted people’s communes, which allowed for an extraordinary concentration of state power. By putting every aspect of peasant lives under the party’s control the system created conditions for the famine. By the end of 1958, 90 percent of the rural population was forced to take meals in communal canteens; cooking implements were confiscated. When supplies ran out and kitchens closed, peasants were left without the means to survive.

Unrealistically high production targets and procurement quotas were the key elements that generated the famine. Faced with political pressure, the cadres exaggerated crop yields. When the myth of peasants hiding grain was created, army detachments were sent to extort every kernel.

At the Lushan Conference of 1959 Mao was made aware that his economic policies had “descended into chaos,” causing starvation. Instead of changing direction, Mao defeated “the anti-party clique” and purged his prominent critic, China’s defense minister Peng Duhai. After the conference Mao’s policies were intensified, extending the impact of the Great Famine.

Party secretaries never traveled to the countryside where desperation was total and cannibalism rampant. To cover up evidence of the famine local cadres had mass graves stomped flat and crops planted on top. With millions dying, the cadres entertained at lavish feasts and had meals delivered to luxury hotels. Survivors remember: “We were swollen with starvation, while the cadres were swollen with overeating.” Officials responsible for millions of deaths were merely transferred to other bureaucracies — unfairly, as some of them judged, since they merely acted on party orders.

Yang’s book can be compared with Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago,” since its evidence was also bravely collected under Communism with the goal of helping dismantle the totalitarian system that had sanctioned mass killings. This system has outlived itself, writes Yang, who believes China should disavow its Communist ideals and erect memorials to the victims of the Great Famine."

Nurse who took a prank phone call at hospital is found dead in suspected suicide

Some of my posts are about funny unintended consequences, others are about negative unintended consequences; but none - so far - are about tragic unintended consequences; until this one.

From The Independent - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nurse-jacintha-saldanha-who-took-a-prank-phone-call-at-duchess-of-cambridges-hospital-is-found-dead-in-suspected-suicide-8393289.html

"A nurse who was duped into transferring a prank call from two Australian radio presenters at the hospital treating the Duchess of Cambridge for severe morning sickness was found dead yesterday in a suspected suicide.

Jacintha Saldanha, 46, a nurse at the King Edward VII's Hospital in central London, answered the call at 5.30am on Tuesday from the Sydney-based 2Day FM station, whose DJs pretended to be the Queen and Prince Charles. Ms Saldanha put them through to a colleague who provided details of the Duchess's condition.

Ms Saldanha was found unconscious at a nurses' residence close to the private hospital in Marylebone at about 9.35am and despite the efforts of paramedics could not be revived. Police said the death was not being treated as suspicious, and a source said officers were investigating whether she had taken her own life. Mental health experts cautioned against any assumptions about factors contributing to her death. The nurse, a mother of two children, who started working at the hospital in 2008, is the first member of staff heard to answer on a recording of the hoax call from presenters Mel Greig and Michael Christian."

Chinese divorce epidemic triggered by change in local land regulation

From:  - London Times - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/asia/article3620054.ece

"The registry office of a district in southwestern China has been forced to hire a platoon of extra security guards and commandeer the use of a large wedding hall to cope with a catastrophic surge in divorces.

Within the last fortnight, in a surprise blur of mass marital discord, the District Civil Affairs Bureau in Yunyan has been overwhelmed by a 500 per cent increase in apparent marriage breakdowns.

Many couples, citing “constant bickering” or “lack of mutual communication” on their divorce application forms, have been arriving at the registry office holding hands, laughing together and as visibly devoted to one another as the day they tied the knot. Without exception, the newly divorced couples return home together.

The 120 divorces now being processed every day in Yunyan included a 90-year-old couple who had been married for decades but were suddenly so eager to split that they went to the Civil Affairs Bureau in a pair of wheelchairs and joined the snaking queue for a divorce. Another elderly couple watched as their two sons and two daughters all got divorced on the same day.

The Qianling divorce epidemic is the unintended consequence of a recent change in local land regulation that makes it exceptionally disadvantageous to be married.

The new rule, imposed by the Guiyang municipal government, means that farming families from that region cannot have a home larger than 240sq m. For many farming families in Qianling, the new rule was a source of immediate panic — over the years, they have invested in their properties and built larger houses.

But the rule has a loophole whereby unmarried couples count as two families and the home and property rights can be twice that size. Because the regulation applies to some 1,300 other villages in the region, fears are mounting that local bureaucracies will be inundated with divorce requests as farmers abandon their marriage vows to retain their properties.

Once the loophole was discovered by the villagers of Qianling and the queues started forming, it was immediately clear that the existing facilities for handling divorces were not big enough. Some complained that they had had been thwarted on four consecutive days in their efforts to secure a divorce."