Global Warring -- The Book

Emerging Economies Conference at SIIB

2012-01-22T05:26:00.000-08:00

Cleo just attended (and chaired a session, and presented, and was a discussant, and was on the advisory committee -- busy time!) the Symbiosis Institute of International Business' conference on emerging economies. Interesting event -- with the students contributing pertinent thoughts on the future of the world economy. Complicated times ahead....

Article: Harvard Punishes Free Speech in India (Huffington Post)

2011-12-20T23:42:00.000-08:00

By Cleo Paskal

It's going from bad to worse to farce for free speech in India. In fact, by the time you reach the end of this blog, its contents might be illegal on the subcontinent.

First, a few months ago, India's Communication and IT Minister Kapil Sibal decided that Indians were texting too much -- the fact that texting played a role in coalescing and coordination of the unprecedented anti-corruption movement was, of course, simply coincidence. So he declared he was going to cap texts to 100 messages per day per SIM card (phone number).

Businesses that rely on texts for bookings and confirmations, like cab companies, were thrown into disarray. The uproar was so great, Sibal relented. Sort of. The cap is now 200 messages per day per SIM, forcing some businesses to buy multiple phone numbers to meet their texting demands, and leaving many Indian teenagers practically incommunicado.

Then Sibal (or, more likely, his political bosses) took offence at the way some in government were being portrayed in social media. Now, smart political operators would have used the sites and tweets to gauge public sentiment and put together a counter-strategy. Or, if the impact was relatively minor, just ignored them as a small price to pay for the good fortune of living in a democracy.

Instead, Sibal summoned Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo, Google and others into the principal's office for a little chat. He reportedly demanded that they use real humans to prescreen and censor social media for objectionable content.

While not being explicit about what would be considered objectionable, it doesn't take a genius to make an educated guess -- a quick look at the government's track record will do. According to Google, between January and June 2011, Indian officials asked for 358 items to be removed from sites like YouTube and Blogger. Eight were for hate speech, three were for pornography, one was on national security grounds, and 255 were for "government criticism."

As any 12-year-old could have told him, Sibal's move resulted in a predictable pushback from a now decidedly unsocial media. #idiotkapilsibal started trending and Facebook users began to put 'Kapil Sibal is an idiot' as their status (at this point, this blog is now probably illegal in India).

Ironically, even when Indians manage to publish something politically controversial in India, they might still be censored, or at least censured, by those outside the country who don't like their message.

In response to the triple bombing in Mumbai on July 13, 2011 that left 26 people dead, Former Indian Law Minister Dr. Subramanian Swamy published an op-ed in a mainstream Indian daily called 'How To Wipe Out Islamic Terror'. Dr. Swamy is not much loved by the current Indian government as it was through his anti-corruption campaigning efforts that the previous Telecoms Minister ended up in jail on corruptioncharges, and he is actively pursuing other high ranking members of the government on similar charges.

Dr. Swamy's article was complex and controversial, involving layers of presupposed knowledge. For example, he wrote, to counter the terrorists "goal" to "blast temples, kill Hindu devotees," Dr Swamy proposed a strategy to "remove" masjids that were built over the sites of Hindu temples (this itself being against the background of the widespread destruction of Hindu temples by Muslim conquerors in India and, more recently, in Kashmir).

The article was unquestionably provocative, but what it provoked was debate -- a good thing for any democracy, especially on a difficult topic.

However, it seems, it was too much free speech for Harvard University. For years Dr. Swamy, a Harvard Ph.D. and former Commerce and Industry Minister of India, has taught summer courses in economics at Harvard. This year, in an unprecedented move, his courses were taken away based on the article. TheHarvard Crimson justified the move by saying, in part, "there is the further concern that his publications may incite religious violence."

The fact that the article appeared five months ago and so far it has only spurred healthy debate is one issue (indeed, judged by their own standards, one could argue that by whipping up this fever around the piece theCrimson is itself stirring things up ).

However, even more problematic is the idea that one should censor publications out of fear. Will theHarvard Crimson also write editorials against inviting Danish cartoonists onto campus?

Who knows? In April 2010, in an editorial about the South Park episode that was censored by Comedy Central for showing a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad, the Crimson wrote: "The repression of free speech due to threats of violence is regrettable and unjustified."

But the same piece also said: "Although we agree that Comedy Central made the right choice in censoring itself, we hope that the media continues to fight for free speech." I hope so too. And the media includes you,Harvard Crimson.

India is a remarkable place, one that has produced remarkable, and controversial thought. From Buddha, to Gandhi, to Kautilya, to Akbar the Great, to Tagore, to C.V Raman, Indian thinkers have engaged, enraged, and ultimately enlightened the world.

It's hard to know what will spark the next great thought -- an article to disagree with, a blog post, a tweet. Whatever it is, India is strong enough, and mature enough, to handle it. Even if its politicians and Harvard are not.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cleo-paskal/harvard-punishes-free-spe_b_1152525.html

New Chatham House video

2011-12-17T21:55:00.000-08:00

Cleo is one of the Chatham House experts featured in a new video explaining what the House does:

Australian Strategic Policy Institute report on the Pacific quotes Cleo's research

2011-12-05T22:02:00.000-08:00

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has published an interesting report on Australia's relationship with with Pacific called Our near abroad: Australia and Pacific islands regionalism. Cleo, referred to as a "sympathetic analyst", is one of the regional experts quoted in the paper. The paper can be found here. The New Zealand Herald article about the paper, which also refers to Cleo, can be found here.

Review of Global Warring in Environmental Politics

2011-12-01T20:39:00.000-08:00

Michel Gueldry from the Monterey Institute of International Studies reviewed Global Warring for Environmental Politics. A short excerpt: "this is a rich book, well worth reading." Thanks Michel!

Article: U.S. Military Undermined By Environmental Change (Huffington Post)

2011-11-26T16:54:00.000-08:00

By Cleo Paskal

Across the US, critical military installations are being put at risk by environmental change. According to the US Department of Defense's (DoD) 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report:

In 2008, the National Intelligence Council [NIC] judged that more than 30 US military installations were already facing elevated levels of risk from rising sea levels. DoD's operational readiness hinges on continued access to land, air, and sea training and test space. Consequently, the Department must complete a comprehensive assessment of all installations to assess the potential impacts of climate change on its missions and adapt as required.

Sounds logical, and forward thinking, and the US military certainly has the expertise to do a proper job of it. However, there are multiple systemic barriers standing in the way 'climate proofing' those critical installations.

The first issue is technical. The new variability caused by environmental change is making risk calculations more complicated. Does one plan coastal infrastructure for a 15cm or 50cm total sea level rise by 2050? 2050 may seem far in the future, but it is well within the lifetime of new infrastructure builds. (Stimulus package funding that went for new infrastructure should have included a rider necessitating that an 'environmental change proof' assessment be made).

Also, we tend to look at environmental factors in silos. The NIC's 2008 focus was primarily sea level rise. However, considering flooding threats alone, coastal sites may be affected by sea level rise, but also subsidence, river flooding, unusually heavy rainfall, and dam bursts. As seen with the recent Mississippi floods, affected areas may be hundreds of miles for the initial impact site, making the catchment area of a true risk assessment much larger than normally used.

This highly focused approach is endemic, and often a result of the limited scope of the orders given. For example, after 9/11, expert teams were sent around US nuclear installations to assess their vulnerability to terrorist threats. That would have been an ideal opportunity to also assess their vulnerability to environmental threats. An opportunity missed, not because the experts weren't qualified to do the assessment, but because it wasn't the remit of the operation.

However, assuming all variables have been taken in to account, and a true assessment of risk is made, adaptation may still be blocked for purely political reasons.

This is not hypothetical. In 1992 Florida's Homestead Air Force Base was virtually destroyed by Hurricane Andrew. In 2005, Mississippi's Keesler Air Force Base was hit by Katrina, smashing around 95 percent of the base, and triggering an evacuation of equipment and people that one would have hoped would have been available to help a region in peril.

Destruction caused by Katrina at Keesler Air For Base, 2005

What has since happened to those bases is instructive. Over 100 million dollars (in 1993 dollars) was poured into the reconstruction of Homestead, in the politically important state of Florida. And that was in spite of a 1995 recommendation by the Base Realignment and Closure Committee to close the base. However, state and federal level politicians fought for the base, and it stayed open. Keesler suffered 950 million dollars in damages, and was quickly rebuilt, in the same location.

Homestead and Keesler demonstrate why it will be extremely difficult for the US military to engage in real adaptation. Bases are key regional economic anchors, bringing in jobs, infrastructure and investment. No elected official will let one move out of their district without an enormous fight. Even nearly destroyed bases in known vulnerable locations are being rebuilt. It would be difficult to muster the political will necessary to move bases preemptively. The result is narrow regional (the revenue from the bases won't be lost, just moved) political and economic interests are potentially undermining national security.

Another issue is potential government liability. If somehow the military managed to move a base due to concerns over flooding causing by environmental change factors, would that give neighbouring communities the right to ask for similar relocation funds?

Similarly, say a base moves, yet the federal government still provides flood insurance to the region through the National Flood Insurance Program. Then a flood hits and there is loss of life. Would the government be liable for the deaths because one branch, the military, has said this location is too dangerous to stay in, while another branch is subsidizing people through federally backed insurance to stay there? Dismantling, or even limiting, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) would be even more politically difficult than moving a base because it is a key generator of political funding through property taxes and developers.

Ultimately, when it comes to moving US bases out of harm's way, the very real risk to national security caused by the potential loss of critical installations is likely to be repeatedly outweighed by the seemingly more immediate political and economic risk of losing a key regional economic driver.

All throughout the systems, real risk is being distorted, discounted and disguised. If even the well funded, and trained, US military can't get it right at home, imagine the level of the challenge globally. Potential market-based safety mechanisms, like insurance, are being subverted by politically motivated initiatives like the bankrupt NFIP, and caps on liability, which essentially offset the risk from the individual region or sector on to the population as a whole.

This was adapted from Cleo Paskal's 'Rebuilding Sandcastles' feature for Chatham House's The World Today.

Article: Weeding Out Corruption in India (Huffington Post)

2011-11-04T20:07:00.000-07:00

By Cleo Paskal

This is Part Two of a two part series on the roots of corruption in India, and some of what is being done to weed it out. This first part looked at causes of corruption in modern India. The second part looks at how the battle against corruption in India is being waged, and why winning that fight is critical not just for India, but also for global security.

Why Now?

Indians from all walks of life have been the real heroes of the modern anti-corruption movement in India. However, for a long time there was virtually no national-level civil society in India -- most activity was regional, language or religion-based. Much of the media, which could have acted as a national unifier, is owned by some of the same large companies that have benefitted from the existing system. As a result, there was no real challenge to the arbitrary misuse of power.

But several things have changed since the time of Nehru. And key among them are:

Economic liberalization
Positive effects of globalization (including a growing awareness of other ways of doing things)
Increased use of English
Social Media

Economic liberalization.

Until the end of the 1980s, most of the big companies in India were run by the public sector. This large economic turnover offered equally large opportunities for the misuse of funds by the 'corporate' sector and their political overseers. (As a side note, this is the current situation in Iran, where the Revolutionary Guard runs large sectors of the economy.)

Things began to change in 1992, with the economic liberalization policy of Indian Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao. Public control of the 'commanding heights' of the economy was diluted. At the beginning, those personally closer to key government officials developed faster.

During this period of 'influence-based capitalism', many well-connected companies expanded quickly. Naturally, they also used their influence to get changes in policy that favored their businesses. The result was that the growth was often based not on business efficiencies, but on favorable policies.

Devesh Kapur, director of the Center for the Advanced Study of India at the University of Pennsylvania, describes how that affects the Indian middle class by saying: "This middle class is less about 'what the state can do for me' than 'the state is preventing me from doing what I want to do.'"

In the mid-1990s, there was a growth breakthrough in sectors unconstrained by regulations. For example, the vast regulatory system was slow to catch on to the IT sector and service industries. As a result of this blind spot, both sectors grew exponentially, and quickly became global players.

This has resulted in the creation of a new class of business people who have succeeded not through corruption, but in spite of it. While previously, industry grew through influence/corruption, the new private sector finds corruption not an asset, but a hindrance.

Positive Effects of Globalization.

This new globally competitive business sector is largely fluent in English and social media savvy. They see how things are being done elsewhere and want the same efficiencies and freedom from corruption at home.

And it's not just the business sector. The number of people with a vested interest in an honest system has exploded. From the newly educated middle class to those in rural areas, people are becoming aware that the local corrupt officials are part of a larger system that is smothering the country and stealing the future from their children.

Through the common use of English and technological innovations like cheap mobile phones and Internet access, a truly national Indian civil society is coming of age. It has seen that corruption is not necessary. For example, not long ago, something as simple as booking a rail ticket or flight could require a bribe. Now it can be done cleanly online. Before, getting a phone line put into a home or office took months and a pay-off. Now you can get a mobile phone and SIM card at the corner shop.

Times have changed. And, when it comes to corruption, the Indian public isn't going to take it anymore.

What now?

As understanding grows that corruption isn't fixable in a one-off solution, those who have been tracking and analyzing these issues for decades are stepping forward. On October 14th, India's newly formed Action Committee Against Corruption in India (ACACI) held its first official meeting. The Committee's core team consists of many key members of the brain trust who have been guiding the movement since the early days, and is a who's who of the anti-corruption wars.

Some of the members:

The Committee is chaired by Dr. Subramanian Swamy, a Harvard professor and former Indian government Law Minister. Firebrand Dr. Swamy has a track record of bringing to book some of the biggest political players so far caught up in the corruption scandals, including a government minister.

Prof R. Vaidyanathan, from the Indian Institute for Management Bangalore, has been systematically looking at the issue since the mid-1990s, producing groundbreaking research on the causes and reach of the challenge.

Journalist M. D. Nalapat wrote a series of columns in the 1970s condemning public sector illegalities and was forced to quit as editor of Mathrubhumi newspaper as long back as 1984 because of his anti-corruption coverage. When he was finally hired by the Times of India in 1989, his first story was about how the Chief Minister of Karnataka was giving away expensive land on the cheap to favorites. Another series on corruption in 1995 finally got him pushed out from the Times, as well. Nalapat turned to academics and column writing. In a sign of the changing times, Nalapat recently returned to a staff position in journalism, becoming a columnist for the Sunday Guardian.

The Committee's objectives include analyzing, and proposing counters to, the root causes of corruption in India. A main goal is to give information to Indian civil society.

For many, social activist Anna Hazare, recently arrested and released in connection with his anti-corruption fast, has become an important symbol of the anti-corruption movement. However, there is growing concern that, in spite of his best intension, and those of his followers, his single shot solution (an anti-corruption superagency that itself, despite the best of efforts, risks becoming corrupt) may not be enough to inoculate the system from the debilitating parasite of corruption. The challenges are too complex and embedded. There is a growing need and demand for systemic solutions. Which is where the new Committee comes in.

While many brave individuals have been fighting the anti-corruption battles for a long time, they have been largely voices in the wilderness, until recently.

However, as these experts combine forces with the new wave of courageous, aware and engaged Indian civil society, there is a chance that the hold corruption has over India may start to weaken. Through the efforts of Indian civil society, India as a nation is truly coming of age.

This is something that will benefit not only India, but also those who are her partners. It's crucial for the West to understand and appreciate the monumental struggle now unfolding in India -- a critical ally in the fight for worldwide democracy, prosperity and secularism.

Article: Roots of Corruption in India (Huffington Post)

2011-11-02T20:00:00.000-07:00

By Cleo Paskal

There is a revolution in India.

Individual by individual, an anti-corruption wave is growing within Indian civil society. In recent months, people from all sectors of Indian society have said 'enough is enough' and, each in their own way, are doing something about it. Some are taking to the streets, others are online, some are using the courts, others have turned to the media. The swelling wave has already washed away one government minister and is lapping at the ankles of some of the country's biggest players.

The implications are global. As the West and India work more closely together, corruption in India risks spilling over into partner systems. By cleaning up India, Indians are not only reclaiming their own country, they are making the world a more stable place. For anyone interested in lasting global security, it's important to understand how India has ended up where it is today, and what Indian civil society is fighting for.

Origins of Corruption in Modern India include:

Public sector pay and powers
The tax collecting system
Campaign financing

1. Public Sector Pay and Powers.
When the British took over large sections of what is now India from the East India Company, the British government acknowledged that, given the vast discretionary powers of the administrators, there could be the temptation to skim from the booty. So, they put in place a system that ensured that British officials posted to India would be very well paid -- and punished for dishonesty -- in order to mitigate the urge to dip into the coffers.

When India gained Independence in 1947, Prime Minister Nehru retained the extensive powers of the British colonial administration -- including laws that gave officials the right to intervene in almost any aspect of daily life. However, at the same time, he also dramatically reduced salaries in the public sector.

The result was a system in which an enormous number of poorly paid public employees had wide-ranging opportunities to 'make a bit on the side' through administrative coercion. It was almost inevitable that corruption would start to infect the system.

For example, the average Indian policeman is paid so poorly that taking bribes is almost part of the salary structure. In 2009, the housing allowance for the head of a police station in Mumbai, one of the most expensive cities in the world, was $45 a month. To be able to afford to house themselves and their family, it is not surprising if some have resorted to taking bribes. Usually the informal 'income supplement' is limited to relatively minor cases, like a small pay-off to get out of a traffic stop, but once the rot sets in, it can spread fast and deep.

Similarly, the Indian legal system is staffed by underpaid law clerks, prosecutors and lawyers, and moves at the lethargic, erratic pace of a drunken slug. Wealthy accused can give bribes for bail or for stay orders that can last for decades or a lifetime, if necessary. As a result, the Indian legal system is a weak deterrent to crime.

The problems with the system were so obvious that when Lee Kwan Yew set up his administration in Singapore, he was careful not to replicate India's mistakes. He ensured that officials were well paid (and harshly punished for indiscretions). Currently, in Singapore, the Prime Minister earns over five times the salary of President Obama and top ministers are paid around $1million a year. Corruption is extremely low.

2. Taxation.
In India, the situation grew even worse with Nehru's introduction of a tax scheme designed in large part by Hungarian Nicholas Kaldor. By the 1970s, the highest earners were required to pay 93.5 percent in tax. And, in some cases, the combined wealth and income taxes exceeded actual income. In many cases, it was simply not possible to survive if you paid the tax that was legally required. Combine this with the enormous discretionary powers of the tax collectors and, again, it was inevitable that tax evasion through corruption began on a massive scale.

3. Campaign financing.
Simultaneously, a range of profitable sectors were heavily restricted by the government, including some foreign trade and the sale of liquor. The result was that by the 1960s, as in the United States during prohibition, mafia elements took control of the sectors, generating huge amounts of black money.

That illegal money started to slosh around the system, contaminating all it touched, including campaign financing. While the cost of running for office in India is astronomically high, legal spending limits for campaigns are unrealistically low. This means that many potential candidates start their political careers by having to engage in illegal activities such as forging campaign documents, securing funding from dodgy sources and owing debts to various mafias.

Once elected, this has the twin effect of leaving the newly elected politicians open to blackmail and also of having to repay the money borrowed to get into office. Through blackmail, they may be pressured into enacting legislation that favors the illegal sectors. In order to repay debts, they may use their position to extract bribes and provide favors.

Additionally, officially, politics pays very poorly and, as the politicians might only be in office for a single term, they only have those 4 years or so to secure their family's fortune and set up connections that will serve them well out of office or ensure their reelection.

If so inclined, and they use their position to generate cash, they might also use hawala networks and the like to stash their illegal money in safe havens, which then makes the politicians vulnerable not only to domestic blackmail but to the influence of international terrorist networks, as well (for more on this clickhere).

As a result of all these factors and more, India is now caught in a situation where many sectors are steeped in endemic corruption, including those charged with controlling the corruption itself: from the politicians who write the laws to the police charged with enforcing it. Recently the amount of Indian black money in offshore accounts was estimated to be about $1.4 trillion.

This is Part One of a two part series on the roots of corruption in India, and what is being done to weed it out. This first part looks at causes of corruption in modern India. The second part looks at how the battle against corruption in India is being waged, and why winning that fight is critical not just for India, but also for global security. Part Two will look at the growing role of Indian civil society in fighting corruption, and why it's crucial for the West to understand the importance of the monumental struggle now unfolding in India -- a critical ally in the fight for worldwide democracy, prosperity and secularism.

Cleo speaks at Sauvé House

2011-10-18T16:36:00.000-07:00

Cleo gave a talk at Sauvé House. For more on the event, click here.

Interview: Cleo Paskal talks to Ian Masters on Background Briefing

2011-09-07T21:00:00.000-07:00

For more, and to hear the show on the Background Briefing site, click here.

Article: Why Indian Corruption Is a Global Security Concern (Huffington Post)

2011-08-25T21:22:00.000-07:00

By Cleo Paskal

India is in the throes of what some are calling a "second freedom struggle." Across the country, citizens are on thestreets, in the courts and on the internet, fighting to break corruption's chokehold on the nation. It is a critically important battle, not only for the future of India, but for global security -- corruption in India enables some of the world's most dangerous terrorist networks.

The reason is, illegal money needs illegal methods to move it around. And the amount of corruption-generated money flowing through India is vast. According toInterpol: "In South Asia, the 'black' or parallel economy is 30 percent-50 percent of the 'white' or documented economy."

In terms of Indian political corruption, the 2011 2G-spectrum scandal alone is estimated to have lost Indian taxpayers close to $40 billion. And, as soon as the money needs to cross borders, say to get to a Swiss bank account where it can be washed clean, an Indian politician on the take goes from being a national security concern to a global security concern.

Hawala Networks

That is because a preferred method of transferring illegal money is called hawala. A very simplified version of how the hawala system works is shown below in a graphic from INTERPOL. Say Abdul in New York wants to transfer $5000 to his brother Mohammed in Pakistan. Abdul would go to a local New York hawala trader and give her $5000 cash. The New York trader would then call her colleague in Pakistan and instruct him to pay $5000 cash (in local currency) to Mohammad. And that's it.

The Pakistan trader might get the money back from the New York trader through money transfers the other way, by doctoring invoices using participating import/export companies or other methods. In the meantime, Abdul sent the to money to Mohammad in hours and there is no official trace of the transaction.

From a criminal perspective the advantages of hawala are:

No paper trail.
No taxation.
No customs declarations.
Often preferential exchange rates.
Money laundering.
Due to the illegal nature of the process, the people transferring money (in this example Abdul and Mohammad) are now open to blackmail, giving the hawala traders and their associates leverage over their clients if needed.

For hawala to work, there has to be a high level of what Interpol calls 'trust' between the hawala traders. With hawala, that 'trust' is often guaranteed by brutal enforcement. If the money disappears en route, the hawala trader involved is likely to be 'disappeared' as a result, possibly along with his or her family.

The need for this high level of enforced 'trust' is why many hawala networks are controlled by terrorist and related criminal groups. The terrorists are not only willing to be brutal, but also require the quiet transfer of large amounts of untraceable cash. In a coordinated attack, in Mumbai on July 11, 2006, terrorist bombings on trains killed over 200 people. $10,000 that was used to carry out the attacks came from Saudi Arabia to India via halawa networks. The material recovered from Abbottabad shows Osama Bin Laden spent much of his time going through the "corporate" account books, tracking money generation (often through decidedly unspiritual means such as drug dealing) and cash flows.

Like a criminal Western Union, terrorism financiers use vast international hawala networks to move money around the world quickly and quietly. Due to their effectiveness, those same hawala channels also attract cash flows from other illegal sources, including arms traders, prostitution, narco-traffickers and human traffickers.

The problem is compounded when these same networks are used by those whose job it is to shut down criminal networks, such as (corrupt) politicians and law enforcement.

As all these money streams combine and flow through the same channels, each participant, from terrorist to politician, needs to protect the whole system in order to protect their own money flow. Very broadly, those common interests result in a division of labour.

The terrorists and associated criminal groups provide the system 'hardware,' such as physical money transfer, enforcement, etc.

Meanwhile the corrupt politicians and associated 'legitimate' groups such as (compromised) police, bureaucrats, media, etc., provide the system 'software' by keeping cases out of court, losing files, ensuring no coverage of embarrassing incidents, etc.

Recently J. Dey, one of Mumbai's top investigative journalists was shot dead. On the list of suspects are politicians, terrorists, gangsters, industrialists and policemen. It pretty much sums up what has happened to India. As dirty money flows between politics, extremist groups, narco-traffickers, business, media houses, and police, it mixes together forming a torrent of intermingled corruption that is drowning the security of the nation, and pouring over the border, carrying terror and crime with it.

Hassan Ali Khan Case

Those dynamics have been on display in the case of Hassan Ali Khan. Khan is sitting in jail in India awaiting trial on charges of running a massive, high value hawala network for an astoundingly varied cast of top-level players, from narcotics dealers to industrialists to politicians. Even Saudi arms broker Adnan Khashoggi's name has come up.

In the case of Hassan Ali Khan and his associates, the sums were too large to be moved around invisibly like Abdul's $5000. As a result vast amounts, sometimes up to $8 billion, periodically popped up in tax haven bank accounts, creating a brazen paper and e-trail.

For example, according to investigators, when millions were transferred to a Khan-linked bank account for the purchase of a hotel in Switzerland, it came with an unusual note attached.

According to the letter rogatory from the Indian government to the government of Singapore on criminal case no. ECIR/MZO/02/2006-07 (the case involving Khan):

Deal for purchase of property i.e. Chateu Gutsch [sic] in Lucerne was finalized and during payment, USB [bank] informed that USD 300,000,000 the fund have arrived tagged with comment "Funds from Weapon Sales.

The note shows just how sure Khan and others involved were that they were protected from prosecution. And, until now, people like Khan had good reason to feel safe.

Among Khan's known associates were three Indian Chief Ministers and a top member of the ruling Congress Party. To protect themselves, they have to protect him, and the system he represents. And so, the case against Khan languished. Interrogations were cursory, files were sloppy, deadlines were missed.

But then, in an echo of what is happening all over India, someone said "enough is enough." In the case of Khan, it was the Supreme Court of India. In a remarkable order issued on July 4, 2011, the court explained why vast flows of illegal money are a national security concern:

the issue of unaccounted monies held by nationals, and other legal entities, in foreign banks, is of primordial importance to the welfare of the citizens. The quantum of such monies may be rough indicators of the weakness of the State, in terms of both crime prevention, and also of tax collection. Depending on the volume of such monies, and the number of incidents through which such monies are generated and secreted away, it may very well reveal the degree of 'softness of the State.' [...] If the State is soft to a large extent, especially in terms of the unholy nexus between the law makers, the law keepers, and the law breakers, the moral authority, and also the moral incentives, to exercise suitable control over the economy and the society would vanish. Large unaccounted monies are generally an indication of that.

The court instructed: "Follow the money." It ordered that the Khan case be taken out of the hands of existing (failing) investigative units, and be given to a special investigate team composed of top officials comprising, among others, two former Supreme Court Justices and the Director of the Research and Analysis Wing.

If properly investigated, the case has the potential not only to bring down governments, but it could also be a huge blow to global terror, drugs, child prostitution, and human trafficking networks.

Anti-Corruption Campaigns

Needless to say, those networks are fighting back. At midnight on June 5th, tens of thousands of fasting, sleeping anti-corruption demonstrators were stormed by the police and cleared from their demonstration site in central Delhi. Reportedly orders for the action came from the very top. But the anti-corruption elements of the system are standing firm. The Supreme Court has ordered the Government to explain its actions on the night of June 5th. Point, counter-point.

Similarly, this week, anti-corruption demonstrator Anna Hazare and hundreds of his supporters werearrested. Subsequently, tens of thousands took to the street to protest the arrests. India is not new to demonstrations, but this fight back mood is different. It will not go away. And it's spreading. Sympathy protests have taken place in the U.S., Singapore and Hong Kong. And there are more to come.

It is fitting that the protests are going global. Political corruption in India, facilitated by hawala networks, has not only undermined India, it has compromised global security. For years some, like journalist and strategist M.D. Nalapat, have been warning about the deepening and spreading security vulnerabilities resulting from Indian corruption. Now, the Cassandras are being proved right.

Luckily for those around the world concerned about terror, drugs, human trafficking and other multinational criminal organization, the Indian people, from the streets to the courts, are working hard to make India, and by extension the world, a more secure place. This fight concerns us all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cleo-paskal/indian-corruption_b_931981.html

Video: Cleo Paskal on Al Jazeera' Inside Story panel on Food Security

2011-08-14T20:23:00.000-07:00

Video: Cleo Paskal on Al Jazeera panel about climate change and security

2011-07-31T12:58:00.000-07:00

Article: Rebuilding Sandcastles (The World Today)

2011-07-30T18:44:00.000-07:00

Environment: Rebuilding Sandcastles

Cleo Paskal, July 2011

The World Today, Volume 67, Number 6

Risk assessments are supposed to lead to decisions that provide more security. However, after a series of tragic failures such as the meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant, the deadly blowout on BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig, and the destruction caused to New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, it is becoming increasingly clear that there are serious problems with our ability, or willingness, to accurately evaluate and mitigate risk. The question is, why? And what can be done about it?

An area that encapsulates many of the myriad facets of the challenge is the issue of what to do about United States (US) military installations put at risk by environmental change. The US Department of Defense’s (DoD) 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report explained that: “In 2008, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) judged that more than thirty US military installations were already facing elevated levels of risk from rising sea levels. DoD’s operational readiness hinges on continued access to land, air, and sea training and test space. Consequently, the Department must complete a comprehensive assessment of all installations to assess the potential impacts of climate change on its missions and adapt as required.”

Sounds logical, and forward thinking, and the US military certainly has the expertise and funding to do a proper job of it. However, there are multiple systemic barriers standing in the way of accomplishing the essential goal of ‘climate proofing’ those critical installations.

The first issue is technical. Predicting the behaviour of the physical world is an increasingly complex challenge. The science is good, and getting better, but already it is often marginalised in calculations. Add in the new variables caused by environmental change and it gets even more complicated. Does one plan coastal infrastructure for a 15cm or 50m total sea level rise by 2050? It depends not only on how local hydrology affects sea level rise, but also if there is regional subsidence, seismic uplift, siltation, and other factors. Then there is the question of how that rise could affect storm surges and other forms of flooding. With environmental change, past indices are no longer reliable guideposts for future events.

The year 2050 may seem far in the future, but it is well within the lifetime of new infrastructure builds. And what happens after then? Additionally, there is a tendency to look at environmental factors in isolation; in this case, the NIC looked mostly just at sea level rise. This highly focused approach is endemic, and often the result of the limited scope of the orders given. For example, after 9/11, expert teams were sent around US nuclear installations to assess their vulnerability to terrorist threats. That would have been an ideal opportunity to also assess their vulnerability to environmental threats. An opportunity missed, not because the experts weren’t qualified to do the assessment, but because it was remit of the operation.

The NIC’s 2008 focus was sea level rise. However, considering water-related threats alone, coastal sites may be affected by sea level rise, but also subsidence, river flooding, unusually heavy rainfall, and dam bursts. Also, as seen with the recent Mississippi floods, affected areas may be hundreds of miles from the initial impact site, making the catchment area of a true risk assessment much larger than normally used. Of course, this approach also leaves out problems caused by other environmental variables, such as the sort of heat waves recently experienced in the US. Heat waves can affect infrastructure, but also energy usage and manpower, which in turn can have an impact on readiness.

However, even if we were to assume that all the environmental variables had been taken into account, and a true assessment of risk to readiness had been made - something completely within the technical scope of the US military - adaptation could prove even more difficult.

Say, for example, a base is deemed to be in a highly vulnerable location. There are concerns that in a hurricane, for example, its critical installations could be damaged. Additionally, due to the need to evacuate personnel and safeguard strategic assets, it is likely that rather than being of assistance to the local region, the crisis at the base would draw away key personnel and gear and put pressure on unaffected regional bases as evacuees are relocated there. And so a risk assessment finds that, from the point of view of US national security, it would be logical to move the base to a more secure location.

This is not completely hypothetical. In 1992, Florida’s Homestead Air Force Base was virtually destroyed by Hurricane Andrew. In 2005, Mississippi’s Keesler Air Force Base was hit by Katrina, flooding around 50 percent of the base, and triggering an evacuation operation of the same men and women one would have hoped would have been available to help a region in peril. The base’s Hurricane Hunter airplanes had already been flown to safety.

What has since happened to those bases is instructive. Over 100 million dollars was poured into the reconstruction of Homestead, in the politically important state of Florida. In spite of the regional, political and economic importance of the base, in 1995 the Base Realignment and Closure Committee recommended closing the base. State and federal level politicians successfully fought for it to stay open. Keesler, for its part, suffered 950 million dollars in damages, and was quickly rebuilt in the same location.

Homestead and Keesler demonstrate why it will be extremely difficult for the US military to engage in real adaptation. Bases are key regional economic anchors, bringing in jobs, infrastructure and investment. No elected official or influential local lobby will let one move out of their district without an enormous fight. As seen above, even nearly destroyed bases in vulnerable locations are being rebuilt. It would be difficult to muster the political will necessary to move one preemptively, especially as one of the two main political parties is already officially skeptical of the impacts of a changing environment.

Similarly, say a base moves, yet the federal government still provides flood insurance to the region through the National Flood Insurance Program. Then a flood hits and there is loss of life. Would the government be liable for the deaths because one branch, the military, has said this location is too dangerous to stay in, while another branch is subsidising people through federally backed insurance to stay there? Dismantling, or even limiting, the National Flood Insurance Program would be even more politically difficult than moving a base because it is a key generator of political funding through property taxes and developers.

when it comes to moving US bases out of harm’s way, the very real risk to national security caused by the potential loss of critical installations is likely to be repeatedly outweighed by the seemingly more immediate political and economic risk of losing a key regional economic driver. Given the political and economic realities, for national security to win out, it might be necessary to pit the interests that would gain from the new location against those who would be losing from the decampment.

As this relatively limited case study shows, there are challenges in assessing the real physical risk to an installation in a time of environmental change. However, those challenges can be overcome. The real problems come when political and economic risk assessments take precedence over the physical realities.

Building a nuclear power plant in an earthquake and tsunami zone makes no sense from a physical reality perspective. In fact, the recent quake in Japan was even predicted in advance by a team of mathematical geophysicists working with Dr. Vladimir Keilis-Borok. However, that risk assessment was trumped by Japan’s perceived domestic, economic and political imperatives. Similarly, draining swampland in a hurricane zone like New Orleans to put up housing might make sense to developers and to the city officials that approve the plans for reasons of their own, but from a physical reality perspective, it is nonsensical. As was allowing BP to self-insure the Deepwater Horizon when insurance companies - some of the best in the world at assessing real physical risk - would not insure it, as well as approving the building of houses on flood plains in Britain.

All throughout our systems, real risk is being distorted, discounted and disguised. Potential market-based safety mechanisms, like insurance, are being subverted by politically motivated initiatives like the bankrupt National Flood Insurance Program, and caps on liability, which essentially offset the risk from the individual region or sector onto the population as a whole.

The problem is, those costs are adding up, and the public purse is increasingly light. As the environment changes, it will seem like we are building, and rebuilding, and rerebuilding, sandcastles below the high tide mark. Already, some houses in Alabama have been hit six times by hurricanes and rebuilt each time in part with federal money. Given the system in place now, there is no incentive for them to move, as they know they will be at least partially bailed out.

Truly addressing the real challenges to our national security and economic stability will take political will, long term economic planning and sound science. It won’t be easy, but it is a risk we have to take.

Download article here

Original: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/twt/archive/view/176511

Quote: Cleo on Russian Arctic shipping for Bloomberg

2011-06-28T12:50:00.000-07:00

In a widely pick-up article originally for Bloomberg, Ilya Khrennikov quotes Cleo on the Russian shipping in the Arctic. An excerpt:

“The thinning and retreat of Arctic ice is combining with the thawing of the permafrost in northern Russia to make shipping via the Northeast Sea Route increasingly attractive and active during the lengthening summer season,” said Cleo Paskal, associate fellow at Chatham House, a policy adviser in London. “This raises a series of urgent security, political and economic issues, and has the potential to turn the Bering Strait into a critical strategic chokepoint.”

For more click here.

Article: World's #9 Most Powerful Person Now Accused of Corruption -- Will She Fall? (Huffington Post)

2011-04-26T22:01:00.000-07:00

Cleo's latest Huffington Post column looks at the global importance of recent anti-corruption activity in India:

New Delhi. Some of India's biggest fish are getting caught up in the country's fast-growing wave of anti-corruption activity. In what could be India's equivalent of a judicial jasmine revolution, previously invulnerable politicians, business icons, and pillars of the community are all nervously keeping their lawyers on speed-dial.

The anti-corruption push is an unprecedented coming together of myriad facets of Indian society. Religious leaders are concerned about the effects on morality and spiritual growth. NGOs speak of the effects on the poor. The middle class is angry about its future being stifled by a smothering blanket of day-to-day corruption. The intelligence services see corruption a clear threat to national security. And the business community, thanks to globalization, has seen how efficiently things can operate without having to constantly pay bribes or be tangled in red tape, and they want the same thing at home.

Even the Supreme Court is fed up, with Justice B. Sudarshan Reddy saying about the vast sums of Indian money being illegally hidden away in Liechtenstein Bank:

We are talking about the huge money. It is a plunder of the nation. It is a pure and simple theft of the national money. We are talking about mind-boggling crime.

The scandals are bursting on to the front pages fast and thick. Suresh Kalmadi, a Congress Party politician and the former head of the corruption-plagued Commonwealth Games, was arrested April 25. According to a report by the Indian Comptroller and Auditor General, the 2G spectrum scam alone, in which 2G licenses were sold off in a manner that was, to say the least, less than transparent, cost close to $40 billion in lost revenue.

All across India, people are saying enough is enough. And suddenly the unthinkable is starting to happen. People considered above reproach, or at least untouchable, are coming under the judicial cross-hairs. 2G alone has seen charges laid against one former government minister and several captains of industry.

And the latest high profile target is one of the biggest fish of all, Congress Party President Sonia Gandhi, currently #9 on Forbes list of the World's Most Powerful People.

Sonia Gandhi has one of the most remarkable life stories in international politics. Born Edvige Antonia Albina Maino into a family of modest means in rural Italy, she didn't even get a chance to complete high school before heading to the UK for work. There she met Rajiv Gandhi, son of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. She eventually married him and the young family moved in to Indira Gandhi's New Delhi's home, putting her literally in the heart of Indian politics.

After Indira Gandhi's assassination in 1984, Sonia's husband Rajiv became Prime Minister. Following Rajiv's 1991 assassination by Tamil terrorists, there were rumors that Sonia was going to put herself forward as Prime Minister.

As she herself later said, she "could not walk past the portraits of my husband, my mother-in-law and her father and not feel that I had some responsibility to try and save the party they had given their lives to."

Given her focus on the party, it was fitting that instead of becoming Prime Minister, she ended up as President of the powerful Congress Party. Politically, it proved to be a smart move as it gave her power without direct responsibility -- while she is #9 on Forbes list of power people, the actual Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, is only #18. According to Forbes, "Gandhi remains the real power behind the nuclear-tipped throne [...] she has cemented her status as true heiress to the Nehru-Gandhi political dynasty."

Her image is of a dutiful, submissive Indian wife, now widow. When her husband was alive, she would walk behind him. In public she wears saris. Although a devout Catholic, she is often photographed at Hindu Temples. And like a good Indian mother, though she has decorously pulled herself out of the race for Prime Minister, she is happy to encourage her son, Rahul, to take the job.

However there have been growing, persistent murmurs about questionable business deals and inexplicable exponential jumps in the personal wealth of her and her family.

The allegations came out in the open in 1995 when M. D. Nalapat, then Resident Editor (Delhi) of the world's largest English language newspaper, the Times of India, began a groundbreaking series of articles about Sonia.

The articles made the controversial (at the time) claim that the public docility was just a ploy, and that Sonia actually had serious political ambitions (later confirmed by her role in Congress). Also, crucially, the series said that her desire for power wasn't simply altruistic and that the wealth not only of her, but of her Italian relatives, rose stratospherically after Rajiv Gandhi became Prime Minister in 1984.

Nalapat's articles could not be ignored as he was one of India's most respected journalists and had, throughout his career, taken on corrupt politicians, social inequity and institutionalized discrimination.

This however was a 'topic too far'. While the facts in the article were never refuted, Nalapat was forced out of journalism in 1998 and moved into academics.

Next came public questions from another highly reputed source, Sten Lindstrom, Sweden's special prosecutor investigating the pay-offs associated with the sale of weapons by Bofors to the government of India. His investigation showed that a close friend of Sonia's, Ottavio Quattrocchi, has received kickbacks in the millions.

In 1998 Lindstrom gave an interview in which he said:

the Gandhis, particularly now Sonia, should explain how Quattrocchi-owned companies got such fat sums as payoffs from the Bofors deal. After all, what is the connection of Sonia and the Gandhi family to Quattrocchi? Who introduced Quattrocchi and his AE Services to Bofors? At least one thing is certainly known now. A part of the payoffs definitely went to Quattrocchi. [...] the papers all pointed to the Gandhi family.

Not only have the questions not been answered by Sonia, but in spite of substantial evidence against him, Quattrocchi has managed to evade prosecution in India, and has even had his kickback funds unfrozenfrom overseas accounts.

Part of the genius of Sonia Gandhi is her ability to present herself as a helpless victim, convincing even her political rivals not to fear her as she is fatally flawed. In 1998, India was being led by BJP Prime Minister Vajpayee. When Nalapat spoke with him about Sonia, he was bluntly told to lay off, as, "so long as a white Christian lady is head of the Congress Party, I [Vajpayee] and my party will always be in power". Vajpayee and his party lost power to Sonia's Congress in 2004.

But the most serious threat to Sonia -- and, as she is at the apex of the Congress Party, and so to Congress itself -- is now lying on the desk of #18, the Prime Minister of India.

On April 15, former Law and Justice Minister and Harvard Professor Dr. Subramanian Swamy asked Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for leave to lay corruption charges against Sonia Gandhi. In a meticulously researched 200+ page submission Dr Swamy alleges Sonia Gandhi has been involved in corruption in India since 1972 and personally benefited from the Bofors scam (1986), has held billions in non-Indian bank accounts since at least 1991, illegally profited from the Iraqi oil-for-food deals (2002), and even accessed KGB payoffs during the Cold War.

The Prime Minister has three months to decide whether or not to grant sanction to prosecute. If he doesn't, Dr. Swamy can take the case directly to the Supreme Court, which under Chief Justice Kapadia is showing a definite proclivity towards facilitating corruption cases.

While, so far, the corruption cases in India have caught up some pretty big fish, if charges are laid against Sonia Gandhi, it won't just be part of a wave, it will be a sea change.

Sonia Gandhi is not just an individual, she is the steely core of a pillar of Indian politics. If she crumbles, it will shake the foundations of the venerable Congress Party, and possibly leave a gaping hole in the political scene. Meanwhile, a range of polarizing and regional parties are ready to rush in and stake their claim. Given the growing importance of India in our heavily globalized world, this is not just an Indian story, this is one all should be following very closely indeed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cleo-paskal/worlds-9-most-powerful-pe_b_853132.html

Article: US-Pacific Relations: Pacific-Minded (The World Today)

2011-03-27T08:44:00.000-07:00

Cleo has just published an analysis of geopolitics in the Pacific for in Chatham House's magazine The World Today. You can see it online here. And below:

In early March, United States (US) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made unusually direct comments to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about America's position in the Pacific. "Let's just talk straight real politik. We are in competition with China," she said. All over the Pacific, China is trying to "come in behind us and come in under us."And it is working. China's influence in the island nations of the Pacific is growing dramatically, and the repercussions are global.

But the fault does not lie completely with the US, and the win is not completely China's. The door for China's dramatic increase in influence in the island nations of the Pacific was opened by decades of mismanagement of Pacific affairs by western allies Australia and New Zealand. And if the US and the west want to regain ground, the two Pacific partners are going to have to rethink how they engage with the region.

It should not have come to this.

As Clinton noted, the island nations of the Pacific are natural Western allies. "We have a lot of support in the Pacific Ocean region. A lot of those small countries have voted with us in the United Nations (UN), they are stalwart American allies, they embrace our values." The tiny Kingdom of Tonga, population of 100,000, for example, has just sent troops to Afghanistan.

Also, from a real politik point of view, the region has quite a bit to offer. Far from being a bottomless pit of development aid, the Pacific is important economically, politically, and strategically.

Economically, while landmass and population may be small, maritime exclusive economic zones (EEZ) are enormous. The Republic of Kiribati, for example, only has a population of around 100,000, but its EEZ is the size of India. That is a lot of increasingly valuable fisheries and seabed resources. Exploration in Tonga's EEZ is showing high-grade deposits of gold and silver. And Exxon Mobil has begun drilling for natural gas in Papua New Guinea.

Politically, the region represents around a dozen votes in international fora. The importance of those votes was recently on show. Discontent in the region is currently running so high, not only is China making quick political gains, so is the Arab League. It was the votes from the Pacific that ensured the headquarters for the new International Renewable Energy Agency would be in Abu Dhabi, not in Germany. And the UN votes of Fiji, among other Pacific nations, may have played a critical role in scuppering Canada's chances at a Security Council seat.

Strategically, this vast area is the front line between Asia and the Americas. It is crisscrossed by increasingly important trade routes linking Asia and South America, as well as vitally important transpacific fiber optic cables. It hosts geostrategic military bases. It has safe harbours in allied hands.Especially as China moves down through the South China Sea, keeping the countries of the Pacific safe, stable and friendly is going to be crucial for Western security.

The importance of the Pacific is starting to be widely understood. Ina two-week period last September, eightmilitary delegations visited Tonga alone, including ones from the US, Britain, New Zealand, Australia, France and India. China sent two warships for a multiday visit. In November, Admiral Michael Mullen, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, dropped by.

Unfortunately for the west, the challenges to the Pacific partnership are too deep to be solved with a flying visit. The current crop of problems mostly dates back to the end of the Cold War. As the Soviet sphere contracted and imploded, the Pacific seemed to lose its strategic value. The diplomatic and strategic forward bases of the 'Big Boys', the US and Britain, were scaled back, or shut down, and the security of the region was essentially outsourced to Australia and New Zealand. Around five years ago, Britain closed its High Commissions in Kiribati, Vanuatu and Tonga. The then British Prime Minister Tony Blair made the strategic handover more or less official by describing New Zealand as "a friend in this region who can help and advise us on the regional issues."

On paper, Australia and New Zealand seem up to the job. Their influence is seemingly pervasive. Currently in Tonga for example, it is hard to find a government ministry with no Australian or New Zealand advisors in it. The Commissioner of Police is aNew Zealander, as was main the economic advisor to the recently replaced Prime Minster.

The upcoming batch of around a dozen Australian Youth Ambassadors are scheduled to be placed in positions that will give them access to highly sensitive government information, including in the Ministries of Justice, Health, Finance and National Planning. The banks are branches of Australian and New Zealand companies. Most flights to and fromthe country go via Auckland or Sydney. There are large Tongan communities in both counties, and they are the default locations for medical treatment and higher education.

At the same time, there is a deep ambivalence in the general Tongan population towards China. There are an estimated one thousand Chinese in Tonga. Most have arrived in the last decade (under Australia and New Zealand's watch), and now run the vast majority of the corner shops. There are frequent run-ins with the local population and, in February, the Commerce and Industries Minister called the Chinese business community in for a chat inwhich he said "Whether rightly or wrongly, many Tongan businesses perceive the Chinese as being corrupt[…]I have to ask you to stop it. It doesn't help any of us." And yet still the West is losing influence and China is gaining traction. Why?

Part of the problem lies in Australia and New Zealand's confused approach to the Pacific. Since the end of the Cold War, there was an assumption that the Pacific was their backyard, and would stay that way. So themain focus seems to have been economics, not security. Tonga, for example, signed on to the WTO under conditions that Oxfam called "appalling". New Zealand was a member of the working group that negotiated the terms. With the Tongan inability to put in place effective tariffs, New Zealand products flooded in. Meanwhile New Zealand biohazard standards keep out Tongan produce. Tongan agriculture crashed. New Zealand helped its neighbour by bringing in Tongan migrant labour as seasonal workers for New Zealand farms.

While these policiesmay have brought newmarkets to New Zealand products and cheap workers to New Zealand farms, the detrimental effect on the Pacific was hard to ignore, even by its own architects. In December, the New Zealand government released its Inquiry into New Zealand's relationship with South Pacific countries. It begins by noting that: "New Zealand's development efforts have yielded disappointing results. In the twenty years since relationships with Pacific countries were last reviewed, conditions inmany Pacific islands have deteriorated."

Similarly, Australia and New Zealand's political engagement in the region has been problematic, with American Samoa's member of the US Congress, Eni Faleomavaega, describing it as "inept policies and heavy-handed actions".Their handling of the Fiji coup pushed Fiji firmly into the China camp. In Tonga they backed a 'pro-democracy'movement that burned down around eighty percent of the capital in 2006. To compound the problem, they then watched as China jumped in with soft loans for the reconstruction. When I subsequently asked a Tongan negotiator for the Copenhagen climate talks how they would vote, I was bluntly told, "Whatever China says, we owe them hundreds of millions".

In our multipolar world, when one weakens one's friends, one weakens oneself. And it seems as though for the last little while, Australian and New Zealand policies have weakened the Pacific. The narrow focus on primarily short-term economic benefits to certain nations has to stop. The Pacific is no longer their backyard; it is the new front line.

The US, Britain and maybe even Five Eyes ally Canada, need to join Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific nations themselves in re-evaluating how the west can effectively engage in the Pacific, and so transform the island states from geopolitical and economic pawns into secure castles of stability and prosperity.

This is entirely possible, but the discussions between friends needs to be open and direct about starting points and desired outcomes. For example, while the US may be concerned about competition with China, Australia may see things differently. In her speech to the US Congress in March, Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard said: "there is no reason for Chinese prosperity to detract from prosperity in Australia, the United States or anywhere in the world."

China's rise has indeed been good for resource rich Australia, with China now accounting for around 25 percent of Australian exports. Australia exports substantially more to China than it imports. The opposite is true for theUS. Similarly, for Australia it may be that economics are still given more weight in Pacific affairs than strategic concerns, while for the US that may not be the case. These discussions need to be had so that, moving forward, friends are walking in step through the coming geopolitical minefield, not tripping over each other's feet. And the pace needs to be set by the Pacific nations themselves.

The nations of the Pacific really do not need much to be secure, stable partners of the west. Secretary Clinton commented that China flew leaders of Pacific nations to Beijing and "wined themand dined them." Perhaps it is time for theUS (and Britain) to treat leaders of these independent nationswith the same respect, rather than handle themthrough proxieswho carry their own baggage into any exchange. If the US offered Tonga fair access to its markets for Tongan agricultural products, low interest loans, a few academic scholarships, and direct flights to Los Angeles or San Francisco, the costs to the US would be minor and Tonga would not need China.

The Pacific is the west's to lose. And we have been doing a good job of it. It is up to us to say "no more".

Article: Why We Build Nuclear Power Plants in Earthquake Zones (HuffPo)

2011-03-27T08:37:00.000-07:00

Cleo's latest HuffPo blog entry has been published here. You can also read it below:

The nuclear tragedy currently unfolding in Japan started decades ago on a piece of paper. Before any infrastructure project that size is approved, a risk assessment needs to be done. Hazards are identified and a cost/benefit analysis is made about how to approach those risks.

If constructing in a seismic zone that hasn't seen an earthquake above a magnitude of M6.5 in 100 years, do you build to withstand a magnitude of 7? Or put in extra the millions upfront to protect against a magnitude of 8 that may never come? Or do you simply choose not to build a nuclear power station in an earthquake zone at all?

Every critical energy installation (and much of all infrastructure) is built on the basis of such risk assessments. In the case of the energy sector, getting it right is crucial not only for the ability to generate power, but also for site integrity. However, there are increasingly problems, both physical and economic, with the way the risk assessments are done.

Risks Caused By a Changing Environment

First, due to changing environmental conditions (sea level rise, subsidence, changing storm activity, etc.), historical records may no longer be reliable predictors for future risks.

For example, the summer of 2003 was unusually hot. Many of the French nuclear power stations are cooled by river water. But, in 2003, the rivers were so warm, they couldn't be used to cool as normal. That caused the powering down or shutting off of 17 French nuclear reactors. It cost the French utilities hundreds of millions of dollars to buy power from neighboring countries.

This 'anomaly' happened again in the summers of 2006 and 2009, again causing powering downs at French nuclear facilities. According to the Hadley Center, by 2040, it will be 'commonplace' for European summer temperatures to reach 2003 levels.

This new environmental change variable is often left out of risk assessments for all manner of new infrastructure builds. Dams in India are seeing reduced generation capacity as a result of shifting monsoons. Sections of oil and gas infrastructure along the U.S. Gulf Coast are suffering repeated shutdowns due to flooding, hurricanes and subsidence. Homes in the US and UK are already being built on actual floodplains, let alone areas that are likely to become floodplains.

Risks Caused by Economics

The second problem is economic. Some of the best risk assessors are in the insurance industry. However in some places, and cases, that safeguard against risk -- no insurance, no building permit -- is being short-circuited.

For example, the US lobbied India to impose a cap on liability for nuclear accidents in order to protect American firms seeking to sell reactors to India. There is already a cap in the US on what the nuclear industry would have to pay in case of a disaster.

This distorts real risk assessment and can lead to situations in which corners are cut because the cost of building safely exceeds the liability and so, from a financial perspective, it makes sense to build less safely.

Similarly, in the US, the $75 million liability cap on oil spill clean-ups came up when it became clear that the BP Deepwater Horizon blow-out caused rather a bit more damage than that.

An extension of this is financial structures that allow for the creation of front companies that are designed to be 'cut loose' and fail and take the loss with them, without affecting the parent company.

The economic miscalculation of risk is also exacerbated by an environment in which 'externalities', such as costs to other industries, health impacts, and security implications, are not factored into the risk assessment at all.

Economic systems that are designed to offload risk produce particularly inaccurate risk analyses and particularly vulnerable or dangerous installations. This is the infrastructure equivalent of credit default swaps, in which the risk is ignored or passed around, to the point where it can seem to make sense to build a nuclear plant in a highly active seismic zone.

The result is that in many key components of our critical infrastructure, long before the first share is issued, the first shovelful of earth is dug, the first brick is laid, the risk is much higher than anyone knows. Or, in some cases it seems, wants to know. If more Fukushimas are to be avoided, we have to start by understanding the real risk of risk.

Article: Tonga leading in the fight for Energy Security (Tonga Chronicle)

2011-03-27T08:30:00.000-07:00

Cleo Paskal's article on energy security in Tonga appeared in the Tonga Chronicle. It starts:

THE earthquake in Japan is a heartbreaking human tragedy. It is also a clear indicator of the interconnectedness of global energy infrastructure, and could affect energy prices here in the Kingdom of Tonga. Luckily, Tonga has a plan in place that could lead the world in finding solutions.

But first the problem. Once the damage to the Fukushima nuclear plant was obvious, global oil prices reacted quickly. While price is also affected by events in the Middle East, speculators seem to be assuming that, with its nuclear power generation impaired, Japan will have to import more oil and gas. And so prices looked up.

If the disaster causes a global rethink of nuclear power (already Germany seems to be moving away from nuclear and China is cautious), this could cause a long-term rise in oil and gas prices – something that is not good for a country like Tonga where close to 100% of the electricity is currently diesel generated.

Additionally, around the world we are seeing energy infrastructure increasingly being disrupted by environmental change (sea level rise, subsidence, lowering river levels, changing storm activity, etc.).

For example, in Europe, the summer of 2003 was unusually hot. Many of the French nuclear power stations are cooled by river water.

But, in 2003, the rivers were so warm, they couldn’t be used to cool as normal. That caused the powering down or shutting off of 17 French nuclear reactors. It cost the French utilities hundreds of millions of dollars to buy (fossil fuel generated) power from neighbouring countries.

This ‘anomaly’ happened again in the summers of 2006 and 2009, again causing powering downs at French nuclear facilities. According to the UK government research, due to climate change, by 2040, it will be ‘commonplace’ for European summer temperatures to reach 2003 levels.

Environmental change is affecting other energy generation sectors as well. Some dams in India are producing less power as a result of shifting monsoons. And sections of oil and gas infrastructure along the U.S. Gulf Coast are suffering repeated shutdowns due to flooding, hurricanes and subsidence (hurricane Katrina alone destroyed over 100 oil and gas platforms in the U.S. Gulf).

When a large component of energy production is knocked out (a nuclear plant, a major dam, a critical oil platform, etc), that loss needs to be made up somewhere else, and the current default is by buying more fossil fuels on the global market.

And that can drive up prices.

These physical disruptions are compounded by speculation in the market. The result has potential to fluctuating global oil and gas prices wildly, making economic policy development in a heavily diesel-dependent nation like Tonga very difficult.

So what the government of Tonga is doing is implementing the Tonga Energy Road Map (TERM), which has as its initial main goal to reduce diesel imports by 50%. This will be done through efficiency calibrating and shifts to renewable energy. But its real innovation is the way it manages the relationship with donor partners.

It used to be that energy projects would enter the Kingdom piecemeal – a solar array in a village, some panels on a school, etc. But what the Kingdom needed was a comprehensive rethink of its entire energy system (from generation, to distribution, to use), and the funding to implement the resulting recommendations.

The TERM spent a long time with experts doing the analysis. Now it is due to work with donors in an innovative coordinated fashion to provide the on-the-ground solutions. Rather than dealing with each donor separately, all donors will coordinate through the World Bank to avoid duplication and ensure coordinated action.

It may seem like nothing is happening in the energy sector in Tonga, but it may just need a little more patience. The groundwork is being laid. The next two years may produce some exciting results.

The approach of sector-wide rethink, coupled with donor coordination on a large scale, caught the eye of major partners, and has made the TERM a template for others to follow.

It has also catapulted Tonga into the heart of innovative thinking around renewable energy. The new International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), based in Abu Dhabi, has recognized Tonga’s contributions by making it a member of all working groups and Chair of the Legal Committee.

The importance of the TERM to domestic economic development and stability, and Tonga’s growing international role in renewable energy policy will be evident next week when a high level delegation from Tonga, including the Lord Prime Minister, Lord Ma’afu, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, and the Crown Prince, attends the first General Assembly of IRENA.

In a world where volatile energy prices can wreck economies, the Kingdom of Tonga seemed to be working hard to create an environment where stable economic growth is possible. The next couple years will show whether the plan will succeed. If it does, Tonga may soon become just as well known for energy

Video: Grantham Award

2011-03-04T21:47:00.000-08:00

Global Warring won the $5000 Grantham Award of Special Merit. This is the video produced for the award ceremony:

Review of Global Warring by Bill Hinchberger

2011-03-04T21:46:00.000-08:00

Bill Hinchberg reviewed Global Warring, interestingly pairing it with James G. Workman's book Heart of Dryness: How the Last Bushmen Can Help Us Endure the Coming Age of Permanent Drought.It makes sense as, as Hinchberg puts it, both books look at people (Sumerians in the case of Global Warring, Bushmen in the case of Workman) who "demonstrate how human beings have coped, and failed to cope, with localized water scarcity." To read the thoughtful review, click here.

Global Warring mention in Forbes.com

2011-03-04T21:37:00.001-08:00

Gordon G. Chang mentions Global Warring in his interesting column on global food wars. You can read it here.

Cleo Paskal wins NATJA Award

2011-03-04T21:29:00.000-08:00

Cleo Paskal's feature on Haniteli and Lucy Fa'anunu's garden in the Kingdom of Tonga, written for the Toronto Star, won silver at the North American Travel Journalists Association annual awards :) You can see the article here.

Video: Cleo Paskal speaking at the New America Foundation

2011-03-04T21:28:00.000-08:00

Global Warring In Grand Forks

2011-03-04T21:16:00.000-08:00

Global Warring is the Current Affairs book club book of the month in April at the Grand Forks Public Library. Grand Forks is a city that knows better than most the cost of environmental change -- and so it the sort of place likely to help find solutions to the challenge. Take care, Grand Forks, and thanks for inviting in Global Warring.

Review of Global Warring by Dick Bennett

2011-03-04T21:06:00.000-08:00

On his blog, Dick Bennett called Global Warring and a letter by Mike Tidwell: "comprehensive, scholarly and a personal response to climate warming and consequent extreme weather. They help us here in NWA be wiser and braver in preparing for the warmer future." Aw shucks, thanks! For more, click here.

Profile Q&A with Cleo by the American Society of Journalists and Authors

2011-03-04T21:01:00.000-08:00

The American Society of Journalists and Authors profiled Cleo in the ASJA Monthly, asking her about career highlights, low points, and where to get a good pickle sandwich (or something). You can read it here.

Video: Cleo Paskal speaks at IdeaCity

2011-02-28T14:39:00.000-08:00

Review of Global Warring by Smart Energy Cycle

2011-02-07T12:52:00.000-08:00

Smart Energy Cycle reviewed Global Warring and seemed to like it. An excerpt (for more click here):

Books about the environment are more often than not filled with exaggerations or filled with self-righteousness, but Cleo Paskal has provided one of the more comprehensive and balanced views on the real significance of environmental change.
Global Warring is a thought-provoking account into the future of international politics. We really need to wake up to the signs of impending change instead of taking our ecosystem for granted. It is important to note that Paskal frequently uses the phrase “environmental change,” presumably to convey an appropriately broader term than the oft-used “climate change” or “global warming.”
The reader gets a crash-course in geopolitics and views problems at both the micro- and macro- levels.

[...]
Paskal urges us to be proactive rather than reactive when dealing with environmental change. When detailing the effects of melting permafrost and how it has already damaged existing infrastructure like rail lines, she stresses the need to build smart, forward-thinking infrastructure in the future. It seems like such an obvious concept, but not one generally thought of when thinking of the Arctic. Melting permafrost will also create wider sea-lanes, which will result in geopolitical strategy and posturing by the major powers.
Like most books about geopolitics, Paskal focuses on China and the threats its actions pose. She echoes a lot of what is coined by scholars as “the post-American world” and the age of multi-polarity, arguing that if states don’t act quickly, China will advance to the top of the geopolitical hierarchy. China practices what Paskal calls “nationalistic capitalism” (93), where Chinese companies promote national strategic interests abroad. This is a rising trend, especially in the energy sector – Russia, Bolivia, and Venezuela have nationalized their natural resources. Oil is a huge political tool and countries that practice this form of capitalism are influential on the global stage. To American strategists, China’s actions are troubling, and this gets to the heart of the book – international security and environmental change are closely associated. China’s rise is mostly discussed through the scope of economics and trade, but it must also be more frequently discussed through an energy and environmental lens.
[...]
Paskal ventures into the unexplored arena of how climate change affects national security, and quite shrewdly tries to fill the knowledge gap. She details impending battles for previously untapped resources, which will affect not only states’ borders but also their status quo. The read is an easy one, but will leave a lingering worrisome feeling – not like fear mongering, but rather an urge to provide practical, comprehensive solutions to weather the future environmental storms. Climate change is more significant than just polar bears floating away on melting ice caps (not to say that is not important). The book truly forces the reader to understand and prepare for the consequences of environmental change.