Ukraine: a fight to the death!

As we head closer to the six month mark of the Ukraine war, the military confrontation is locked in a virtual stalemate. Despite Russia controlling about twenty percent of pre-war Ukraine there is little likelihood of a military victory by either side anytime soon.

NATO / US will fight until the last Ukrainian and the Russians are in no mood to talk either. The implications of this stubborn desire to fight are severe.

 Source: Pexels

1. Ukraine will suffer more widespread and intense destruction while Ukrainians will continue to be displaced as internal and external refugees (at least the Ukrainians can move freely to other countries!).

2. In a stalemate, NATO is tempted to escalate the war to achieve its aim of weakening Russia, i.e. more advanced weaponry in larger quantities will be sent to Ukraine. In turn, this will increase the likelihood of Russians attacking NATO supply lines within Ukraine but possibly also in Poland. Whether NATO starts protecting these vital supply routes inside Ukraine with 'disguised' NATO personnel (say as foreign mercenaries from the Ukrainian Foreign Legion) or contractors is an open question? Another potential flashpoint.

3. For its part, if Russia believes the war is shifting decisively away it will fall back to a long standing Cold War strategic doctrine, i.e. threaten to go nuclear. Subsequently, NATO will have to play 'nuclear' chicken over Ukraine and call Russia's bluff or threaten escalation itself.

4. Militarily the war can only get more dangerous. Both sides will feel the need to escalate if the balance tips to the other party. NATO and Russia have backed themselves into political corners domestically with little flexibility for a face saving climb down.

5. Oil, gas and food inflation will not subside while Western sanctions remain in force. Poorer nations will suffer disproportionately. Sri Lanka and Ecuador are examples of possible outcomes in many other states. Europe will also suffer due to disruptions in its energy supplies. Hence, European domestic discontent over the war will increase the longer the war lasts.

6. Post war (we'll have to think about a post-war world sometime!), the world will be left with roaming hordes of trained and weaponized far right extremists. These extremists, currently extolled as war heroes fighting for freedom and democracy, will pose an immediate threat to Europe's internal security as they transition from loose, individually driven anti-state movements to battle hardened entities with a chain of command (remember the origins of the Taliban?).

Source: Pexels

To be sure, in the current situation an early end to the war is unlikely. Thus, one wonders who benefits more from a protracted conflict, Russia or NATO?

In Russia war fatigue, especially as sanctions start to bite, will grow with time. Russia will also face problems recruiting soldiers as it runs out of able bodied people due to mounting casualties as well as war fatigue.

Similarly, Ukrainians too will run out of people. Perhaps that may precipitate soldiers from friendly countries like Poland, etc. be given 'leave of absence' to join the Ukrainian Foriegn Legion (of their own volition of course!) to supplement diminishing personnel in the Ukrainian army.

Moreover, as the cost of the war starts to hit US / European budgets, support for Ukraine will cool and feed an anti-war movement, especially as inflation hits people's wallets. This will ultimately force political leaders to shift focus from a military to a diplomatic solution. However, that may be many months away.

The Ukraine war has made the world a messy and dangerous place. Many countries will pay the price for what is essentially another European war (great power politics of the nineteenth century come to mind). One can only hope sanity prevails and efforts shift towards a political solution sooner rather than later. Only after peace is restored can the world can begin the difficult process of rebuilding.

______________________

Imran is an adventurer, blogger, consultant, guide, photographer, speaker, traveler and a banker in his previous life. Imran lives in Singapore. He is available on Instagram (@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

The Good Shepherd by C.S. Forester: a book review

“For in war the character and personality of the leader is decisive in events much more than questions of material.”

The Good Shepherd is a naval military classic - perhaps slightly dated for contemporary readers as it revolves around a group of naval vessels protecting numerous merchant ships in convoy transporting cargo from the US to its World War Two allies in Europe. Ships from several allied navies under the command of a young US naval officer, George Krause, are assigned to guard a convoy from marauding German submarine predators.

Forester’s novel is about character and leadership. The fast paced action and naval duelling are simply the containers through which the author reveals his insights.

Forester does an amazing job getting the reader inside Krause’s head. We know Krause loves black coffee and can guzzle an entire jug – hot or cold - without flinching. We also know he is a religious man whose decision making is influenced by his notion of Christian ethics.

Lives hang in the balance as the captain makes life and death decisions instantaneously, sometimes literally as whether to pick up enemy survivors drifting in the open sea. In these split second decisions, Krause must reach urgent compromises between husbanding convoy resources, cultural / political factors given the presence of ships from navies like Poland, etc., attack versus defence, maintaining moral leadership over his crew and inspiring the other crews.

Sometimes his decisions are explained while at other times these choices seem almost random flips of a coin. (Luck as a crucial element in leadership?)

More often than not, war literature is associated with armies and land based warfare. The Good Shepherd by C.S. Forester is a pleasant change. It brings to life the hopes, fears and desperations of a generation of seafarers who fought on earth’s vast oceans. The work is not only an adventure novel but also wanders into the realms of psychology. Though first published in 1955, Forester’s work has not lost any of its allure during the ensuing six decades.

__________________

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries during his past career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is available on Instagram (@imranahmedsg); twitter (@grandmoofti) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

Corona Covid-19 pandemic: death knell for the post-war world order?

Once upon a time the world – or at least the Free World - was led by Reagan, Thatcher and Mitterand. Leaders with presence, standing and most important of all, respect. They were even respected by opponents.

British Prime Minister Thatcher, US President Reagan, French President Mitterrand and
West German Chancellor Schmidt at an international summit meeting (L to R)

During those times the US and its likeminded 'friends,' e.g. Britain and France, ran the world using a combination of bribery and force. They lorded over other lesser nations through a series of interlocking multilateral security arrangements and an economic institutional framework comprising of entities like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.  

In a nutshell, that was the post World War Two world order.

But those were different times. The developed world had money and delivered on promises. Other countries believed them.

The US, as the undisputed leader of the 'Free World,' provided a security blanket for its satellite states. In return for ceding a part of their national sovereignty to the US, the US provided clear leadership, especially in times of crisis.  

That was the 1980s. Much has changed in the ensuing four decades.

The Berlin Wall - the symbolic Iron Curtain dividing the world's two Superpowers (the US and the Soviet Union) - came down in 1991. That same year the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) morphed – nay collapsed – and became the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). (The CIS structure was a graceful way for the USSR to exit the Russian Empire's historic obligations and focus on saving Russia itself.)

Socialism all but died with the Soviet Union. Today all countries engage in private enterprise and global trade. Meanwhile Socialism has been discredited though significant parts of socialist philosophy have made their way into mainstream thought, e.g. public healthcare and social safety nets.

China's Belt and Road Initiative reflects China's aspirations as a global trading power

As for the global economy, the US is no longer the undisputed master. To be sure, the US Dollar remains king but its throne is a little shaky.

In the past it was said, "If the US sneezes then the world catches a cold." Today, if the US sneezes, the rest of the world simply says, "Bless You" and moves on. The risk of catching a cold is remote – at least not an intense life threatening cold resulting in mass unemployment.

In 2020 the communist party managed People's Republic of China (PRC) has the world's largest economy. Based on data released by the IMF, World Bank and the CIA, China's economy is significantly larger than its closest rival. Indeed, China's gross domestic product (GDP) surpasses the GDP of the combined European Union (EU) nations.

The deterioration in the US position has not been only in the economic domain.

Extraordinary leaders create and husband prestige. Prestige is an invisible halo which adds to the 'je ne sais quoi' aura of rulers. It is built up over decades but can be lost quickly. 

American prestige reached its peak during the first Iraq war with Operation Desert Storm in 1991 and Powell's 'Shock and Awe' tactics of overwhelming force. Since 1991 a series of events have diminished US global standing.

Militarily, the downtrend started with the 1993 failed US intervention in Somalia, Operation Restore Hope and the casualties suffered in the Battle of Mogadishu. Then came the 9/11 attack, which taking place on US domestic soil was a watershed moment. The subsequent War on Terror, especially the Iraq war and the present scramble to exit Afghanistan, did little to help stem the dissipation of US prestige.

Simultaneously a succession of other minor events, though not as individually significant as the 9/11 attack, cumulatively resulted in tarnishing America's sheen. These include the US federal government shutdown in 2018 – 2019 (35 days) and 1995 – 1996 (26 days) and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.

Despite the signs of decay, many still placed the mantle of leadership squarely on the US and its small coterie of European friends. However, with recent events surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic it has become increasingly clear the US and its 'friends' no longer rule the roost.

In its management of the Covid-19 pandemic, the world has seen the US's dysfunctional soul. While state governors are at loggerheads with the federal government over steps to contain the crisis the US Covid-19 death toll and infection numbers rise uncontrollably. As of April 2, 2020 US deaths attributed to Covid-19 have surpassed China, the original epicentre of the virus.

Through an unending sea of social media content, the world has witnessed the complete disarray in the US (and most of Western Europe) caused by the pandemic. Most revealing are not the lack of resources available to these governments' in tackling the virus but more so the lack of national leadership and policy implementation through state bureaucracies.

The world is used to headlines decrying poor governance, weak infrastructure; limited resources, etc. Such news headlines are common across large swathes of the world. However, they are more normally reserved for parts of Africa or developing Asia than for the US or Europe.

The Covid-19 pandemic has hastened post war global structural changes. The US and Europe, though still powerful, are less relevant international players. 

Following a steady erosion of economic and military power the irreparable loss of reputational prestige due to the management of the Covid-19 pandemic, neither the US nor Europe are able to provide global leadership. For example, there will be no Group of Seven summit resulting in a Baker Plan or issuance of Brady Bonds to save the world's economy from the ravages of the Covid-19 catastrophe. It's every nation for herself.

Until further notice, the world suffers a leadership vacuum.

China may vie to fill the position but it's not ready yet - perhaps in a few decades. More likely, second tier regional powers like India, Russia and Turkey will temporarily fill the void in their respective neighborhoods until a more stable arrangement is reached. 

No matter what the coming new world order looks like, one fact is clear: Trump, Boris and Macron cannot fill the shoes of Reagan, Thatcher or Mitterrand.

__________________

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries during his past career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is available on Instagram (@imranahmedsg); twitter (@grandmoofti) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

Burning Country: Syrians in Revolution and War - a book review

Think your life is complicated? Try figuring out the Syrian war. Only then can one really know what complicated means.

Burning Country: Syrians in Revolution and War, coauthored by Robin Yassin-Kassab and Leila Al-Shami, tries to lucidly dissect the state of the nation as at 2016. Sure, it's hard for academic works to keep pace with the fast changing ground realities of the country. However, Burning Country does provide a summary of events which led to Syria becoming a playground for opposing forces, including Assad, Islamic State (ISIS) and Kurdish Leftist groups.

Both authors suggest the present state of affairs is a byproduct of a home grown revolution designed only to overthrow the Assad patriarchal state. Due to the Assad regime's brutally violent counterrevolutionary response a power vacuum ensued. It's this power vacuum which has been filled by opposing domestic forces as well as the (none too invisible) hands of foreign influences.

The Gulf monarchies, Iran, Russia, Turkey and the US exercise varying degrees of influence to protect their interests. The authors' are cynical of virtually all foreign countries indicating no nation recognizes the Revolution as indigenous and none does much to address the humanitarian crisis tearing Syria apart. Indeed, the book suggests foreigners play a dirty, selfish game by maintaining a balance of power between several domestic players – as long as ISIS is kept in check.

Burning Country underscores the complexities of modern Middle Eastern politics. It's a sad book to read as the reader clearly sees the train wreck arising out of the many missteps and gradual militarization of an erstwhile civil disobedience movement. The slow destruction of a state with the consequent impact on millions of lives is apparent for all to see (refugee crisis anyone?).

Undoubtedly, Syria has now gone the way of Afghanistan (Iraq?). It ceases to be a 'normal' nation state and will be difficult, if not impossible, to fix in the coming decades. Not least because of the substantial depopulation and sectarian hatred besetting today's Syria.

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries during his career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is available on twitter (@grandmoofti); Instagram(@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

The 'Post 9/11' era and periods in history

World history is conveniently divided into periods. It is likely September 11, 2001 marked the end of the post-war period and the beginning of a new era. The events of 9/11 are a handy reference point for a 'before' and 'after' comparison.

'Before' included a relatively stable economic order buttressed by the Bretton Woods Agreement; a political structure based on clear demarcations between the Communist bloc led by the Soviet Union (remember the USSR?) and the Free World led by the US.

Developing nations joined either the American or Soviet camp. In return for supporting either the capitalist or communist systems these countries were given economic and military aid, a form of clientelism. Ostensibly, the aid delivered by the patron Superpower was meant for development. To be sure, much of the aid did trickle down to the masses, positively affecting the lives of millions. However, a large part of the aid money was recycled back into Western economies. Corrupt politicians pocketed aid money and deposited these funds into bank accounts say in London and Geneva. Once in the international banking system, the money returned to the developed economies.

While the 'Eastern bloc – Western bloc' system may not have worked for all, it worked for some. Certainly it worked for those at the top who managed it.

Then came the demise of the USSR. And the evolution of 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics' in Deng Xiaoping's China. The Communist bloc disappeared almost overnight. If that weren't enough, 9/11 happened.

Suddenly, the world was reeling from violence underpinned by a so-called Islamic ideology (even if the ideology is decidedly un-Islamic to most Muslims). One thing led to another and before sane people could blink, the US and its Coalition of the Willing implemented Operation Enduring Freedom and invaded Iraq in 2003.

US soldiers enter a palace in Baghdad, Iraq in 2003 (Source: Wikipedia)

The Iraq invasion precipitated a chain of events which continue in motion until today. Already a tinderbox due to the Palestinian question, the Middle East erupted into a cacophony of wars, revolutions and ever changing political alliances.

Shia Persia – contemporary Iran – viewing itself as a historic regional power adeptly filled political vacuums in Iraq and Syria thereby adding to its already strong foothold in Lebanon via Hezbollah. Simultaneously, Sunni Islam's Al-Qaeeda virus transformed into a more deadly disease called Islamic State (IS). IS, mainly through its involvement in Syria and Iraq, fueled the symbiotic relationship between extreme versions of Sunni and Shia Islam. Ultimately influential state actors were sucked into the conflict.

Saudi Arabia, along with its new best friend the United Arab Emirates (UAE), initiated a military expedition in Yemen with sideshows in Bahrain and Qatar. All three operations avowedly designed to block Shia Iran's expanding influence in the Arab world. Indeed, it now appears a tacit alliance between Saudi Arabia and the Arab world's historic 'Mother of All Enemies' i.e. Zionist Israel, is in the works to counter Iran's regional strength.

Throw in a hot-headed 32 year old ruler – Saudi Arabia's new Crown Prince – and a fiery anti-Western Turkish Islamist politician – President Erdogan – and the ingredients for prolonged instability are truly in place.

An Al-Qaeeda affiliated fighter in the Sahel region of Africa (Source: Wikipedia)

On the bigger global stage, a reprise of the 1970s Cold War is taking place in the form of renewed conflict between the US and Russia (and China). Meanwhile, 'Red' China has transformed itself into an economic and political powerhouse. Indeed, the health of the global economy hinges on Chinese growth rates. If China sneezes the world catches a cold. Buttressed by its new found economic clout, China now employs a more muscular foreign policy in order to project its strength. The South China Sea dispute is evidence of China's new approach.

The world is in a new 'Post 9/11' phase. It is doubtful there were many certainties in the past. Now there are even fewer certainties – simply many questions which only time can answer.

It is in this context that I enrolled for the online course, “Understanding 9/11: Why 9/11 Happened and How Terrorism Affects Our World Today” offered by Duke University. The course should provide me with information about recent changes. Undoubtedly, like any humanities course, there are biases in the material and its presentation. However, I intend to soak in the knowledge in order to make better personal judgments about the subject (isn't that the purpose of learning?).

To complete the course I am required to submit two papers. The first assignment – a maximum of 1,000 words – is about 'Radical Islamic Fundamentalism.' Through the document I must explain key elements of Al-Qaeeda's philosophy, its origins and the radicalization process to my local police chief.

Below is my paper in its entirety.

____________________________________

To: The Commissioner,

Singapore Police Force,

Republic of Singapore.

From: Imran Ahmed,

Policy Consultant,

Radical Islamic Fundamentalism Expert.

Subject: Origins and key elements of radical Islamic fundamentalism and the radicalization process

Date: November 18, 2017

'Radical Islamic Fundamentalism' has the potential to drive individuals towards violence. One dangerous strand of radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology is provided by Osama Bin Laden's (OBL) Al-Qaeeda and its offshoots such as ISIS and Jemaah Islamia (JI). These fringe Islamic ideologies form a critical part of any individual's radicalization process and must be understood as they potentially pose a threat to Singapore as a plural multicultural society.

Origins of Radical Islamic Fundamentalism

Radical Islamic fundamentalism relies on specific interpretations of historical and contemporary conditions found in the Islamic world. These conditions can be categorized into three broad headings: political and economic decline; 'un-Islamic' religious practices; and Westernization of Muslim societies.

Firstly, radicals believe the political and economic decline of the Islamic world is directly attributed to non-Muslim Western nations, e.g. the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and related Islamic Caliphate. Western colonialism is also blamed for the demise of Islamic nations and dividing the Islamic Ummah into arbitrarily defined nation states.

Secondly, radical Islamists consider contemporary Islamic beliefs and practices to be tainted by centuries of influence from 'un-Islamic' ideas. Consequently, present day Islamic society and religion is believed be fundamentally 'corrupt.'

Lastly, these radicals believe Islamic societies have been 'Westernized' through centuries of contact with 'un-Islamic' Western nations. That is, Islamic societies are diffused with un-Islamic cultural and social practices. In recent years, this belief has been compounded by the forces of globalization.

Al-Qaeeda Ideology: Some Key Elements

Al-Qaeeda believes there is a war taking place between Islam and the West, including the US. It is therefore a religious duty of all Muslims to wage war – a lesser Jihad – against Americans and Westerners in order to protect the Islamic world and avenge its mistreatment by the West. Moreover, any Muslims not participating in this war are deemed un-Islamic and, hence, legitimate targets under OBL's call for jihad. The ideology makes no distinction between civilian and military combatants, all are potential targets in this holy war.

In OBL's 1996 Declaration of Jihad, he built on ideas expounded by an Egyptian Islamist thinker named Sayyid Qutb in a book titled Milestones (1964). In Milestones Qutb wrote, “Our whole environment, people's beliefs and ideas, their habits and art, rules and laws - is Jahiliyyah [an age of barbarity or darkness predating Islam].”

In the Declaration, OBL appeals to economic, social and political grievances within the Muslim world to advance his argument. He states Muslims and Islamic nations have been humiliated by Western nations in many ways, e.g. through war, occupation and plunder.

In 1998, in a bid to gain more credibility, OBL joined forces with several known religious figures and issued a statement under the World Islamic Front banner. In this 1998 call to action, Al-Qaeeda focuses more openly on America. He refers to the US 'occupation' of Holy Lands in Saudi Arabia – a reference to US soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia. Further, the statement speaks of ongoing injustices such as United Nations and US sanctions against Iraq following the 1991 war. In a final bid to convince his audience, Bin Laden attempts to associate the US with Israel, using Israel's general unpopularity within the Islamic world.

Al-Qaeeda's radical Islamic ideology urges violence against American and Western persons and interests. Indeed, the ideology goes further by exhorting Muslims to fulfill their religious duty by undertaking such violence, even against other Muslims who are seen as passive bystanders in this holy war against the US. The 9/11 attacks are the most poignant examples of such violence.

Radicalizing Individuals to Violence

Radicalizing individuals to commit acts of violence is a complex process. There is no predetermined, rigid or formulaic path by which an individual moves from being a non-violent individual to one ready to commit violence in the name of Islam, even if the person is sympathetic to radical Islamic fundamentalist causes.

There are multiple routes towards radicalization and many use forms of social media. Likewise, there appears to be no one type of individual who tends to radicalize.

A review of known radical Islamic terrorists demonstrates diversity across national, ethnic, linguistic, educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. Hence, it is difficult for law enforcers to detect potential terrorists based on a specific racial profile. Nevertheless, evidence indicates that most terrorists tend to be young males.

Some individuals radicalize because they experienced a traumatic event, e.g. death of an acquaintance or family member. Consequently, they may wish to avenge the death and turn to terrorism. Alternately, the individual may identify with a larger group (e.g. Iraqi Sunni Muslims) which he somehow seeks to defend from an 'enemy.'

There are several other known theoretical tracks to radicalization discussed by radicalization expert Clark McCauley. These include thrill seeking by young persons. Another is based on Group Dynamics. Here individuals within a group tend to move towards extremes and ultimately all members of the group are radicalized. Group isolation, where a group is isolated from society and hence strengthens bonds to such an extent where violence becomes acceptable is another possibility. Mass politics is another method. Here if a group is attacked then it may respond in ways – i.e. violence – which otherwise it may otherwise have considered inappropriate.

It is important to state that most sympathizers of radical Islam seem not to take the final step towards violence.

Conclusion

As has been seen by the capture and detention of several Jemaah Islamia (JI) terrorists and radicalized individuals, Al-Qaeeda's extreme radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology has the ability to influence Muslims in Singapore towards extreme violent behavior. (JI is the Al-Qaeeda offshoot active in Southeast Asia.) Radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology espouses violence against open societies such as Singapore and even against Muslims who have integrated into a pluralistic, tolerant society. While there is no single route to radicalization, it is known that the largest group of potential terrorists are young males. Hence, It is important Singapore curbs their ability to seek out and imbibe radical Islamic ideological thought and the individuals / groups which espouse such thought.

Imran is an adventurer, blogger, consultant, guide, photographer, speaker, traveler and a banker in his previous life. At the time of writing, Imran is living in Rashidabad, Pakistan as a volunteer teacher at the SST Public School. He is available on twitter (@grandmoofti); Instagram (@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide: a book review

A good book to learn more about an under-researched war: the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war which led to the creation of Bangladesh. 

The author puts the war /crisis in the context of global politics and the US - Soviet Cold War which was raging in the 1970s. He also attempts to provide a balanced view though he often fails. Indeed, the book focuses more on the crisis as it plays out on US domestic politics. 

The books adds to the academic literature on the short war but is aimed more at the student of US politics rather than those interested in the minutae of South Asian politics. 

Only for the very interested.

Imran is an adventurer, blogger, consultant, guide, photographer, speaker, traveler and a banker in his previous life. He is available on twitter (@grandmoofti); instagram (@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

Trump is good for Islam - no joke!

No, the title is not an error. Yes, the man who wishes to ban all non-resident Muslims from entering the United States is good for the Islamic world![i]

Why is it good for America's Republican party's presidential frontrunner to treat Muslims like a sub-human species? The answer is quite simple: disruption. Trump will give significantly disrupt the status quo, hopefully ushering in a new, better era.   

Trump - you the man! (Photo: Wikipedia)

Disruption is a concept more familiar to entrepreneurs and start-up entities: disruption. Disruption may be defined as a "disturbance or problems which interrupt an event, activity, or process." Industries ripe for disruptions are generally bloated, stagnant and slowly heading into oblivion.

Alright, no one argues Islam is heading towards extinction. Nonetheless, there is little doubt Islam requires a radical rethink about its place in the world and the religion's relevance to a globalized 'Digital Age' population.

Islam's traditional prism for viewing the world no longer works. By most measures, the Islamic world is isolated and backwards. The post-colonial Islamic world has desperately clung onto linkages, economic and military, with former colonial masters to maintain power and preserve the status quo. Hence, peacefully (yes, peacefully!) disrupting the present state of affairs will be no bad thing; peaceful disruption, not regime change engendered by American bombs and NATO soldiers.

The 2003 US led invasion of Iraq transformed one of the Islamic world's most secular and well integrated multi-religious societies into a war zone and crucible for Islamic extremists.
(Map: Wikipedia)

Theoretically, peaceful disruption provides more time for nations to adapt and modify – not creating vacuums for extremists like Daesh to conveniently step into. 

A Trump presidency will prompt some soul searching among political elites in most Islamic countries. Some might even be forced to dispense with the crutches of Western economic and military dependencies provided by Western nations.

In poorer Muslim nations such as Egypt and Pakistan, politicians will realize leadership comprises of more than receiving and dispensing financial aid from bilateral and multilateral agencies. For wealthier oil rich nations the choices will be more difficult. Oil riches and the lifestyle it engenders are predicated upon a dependency on Western nations. In fact, in several oil exporting Gulf states it is the US Federal Reserve Bank which dictates local monetary policy!

So the question vexing the Kings of oil rich Arab nations will be, "Shall we continue to sell oil to countries like the US in the face of ongoing humiliation and being treated as second class citizens of the world? We may have oodles of money and even property in the right zip codes but we pray in the wrong direction and to the crescent and not the cross."

It's not an easy question to answer when trillions of Dollars are at stake.

This is not the first wake-up call heeded by Islamic intellectuals. In the early post-colonial period, a group of left leaning secularists Muslim modernizers arose. People like Syria's Assad senior, Egypt's Nasser and Iraq's Saddam were ready to shun religion for socialist ideology. In the new millennium that era has been relegated to the annals of history.

The current environment appears ripe for a new wave of Muslim modernizers; for Islam's reinvigorated intelligentsia to address the problems faced by Muslims in the Internet Era. The new paradigm must emerge following meaningful debates about governance, transparency and civil rights.

Muslim faithful pray at the main mosque in snowbound Pristina, Kosovo. (Photo: Wikipedia)

1960s Westernizing secularists demonstrated that blindly aping Western liberal democratic societies is not an ideal solution for Muslim societies. Seamlessly synthesizing modernity and Islam will only work if the new structure respects the unique cultural traditions of different Muslim cultures and geographies.

A Trump presidency will call into question many of the assumptions about civil relations between many predominantly Muslim countries and the US dominated Western world. This reset may act as a catalyst for Islamic political and social elites to redraw their own social contract within their own nations.  

Many analysts argue the present status quo is sustainable due to inequitable wealth distribution and poor state delivered social services. The violence perpetrated by extremists, e.g. Daesh, Taliban and Al-Qaeeda, outside the established political structure suggests most Muslim countries are crying out for some form of change.  

A divided era reminiscent of the historic Crusades? (Illustration: Wikipedia) 

So, Mr Trump, your insensitive and racist rhetoric may actually be helping those against which you spew your hatred. The possible earthquake to the established 'business as usual' modus-operandi may force the Islamic world to stand on its own feet. For that, Mr Trump, the entire Muslim world thanks you and your multitudes of supporters disgorging your regular obscenities.

Now if I were an American Muslim living and working in America I may have a very different opinion of Trump's popularity!

---

[i] How such a blanket ban will work in practice is difficult to imagine. For example, will all Muslim crew members of a Singapore Airlines flight landing in the US be made to stay on the aircraft overnight? How will Muslim foreign diplomats and functionaries dealing with Washington go about their business? Ultimately, there may be so many exemptions that the ban becomes a mockery ... that is, of course, if any Muslims wish to visit the country voluntarily simply to be humiliated and possibly put themselves in harm's way. But that's a topic for another day.

__________________

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries in his career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. Imran can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com. Follow Imran on twitter at @grandmoofti and Instragram at imranahmedsg. 

The World’s newest ‘Banana Republic:’ the United States?

The United States is bankrupt. The government refuses to pay its bills. The US currency is no longer the 'be-all and end-all' of international currencies. Notwithstanding Apple, Microsoft and other entrepreneurial start-up companies, US economic clout is on the wane.

Ok, so the US is not really bankrupt – it can keep printing (and debasing?) more paper currency notes which the rest of the world happily purchases in ever growing amounts. Economic stability equals a free trade environment predicated on trust in the USD.

The rest of the world includes Singapore.

Singapore's foreign currency reserves, one of the largest pools of capital in the world are biased towards the US Dollar (USD). From Temasek Holdings to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC), Singapore's stake in international economic stability is great. Singapore is not alone. China – the largest single owner of US government debt – has a lot riding on USD stability.

The day China stops buying US debt, the USD may collapse.

Result: China becomes much less wealthier, on paper at least. Moreover, the US will be unable to keep importing goods from China because it cannot pay for them in the 'new, debased' USD. In turn, this leads to social problems within China as Chinese factories reduce production and lay off workers. Consequently, Chinese consumers, including travellers, decrease consumption and the world suffers more ... and the vicious cycle continues.

Of course, global politics are not so simple. Despite a gradual shift away from US dependencies, the world needs the US to behave responsibly. International stability continues to rest on the US, economically and politically. Shutting down government because of domestic political squabbles is not responsible. It smacks of 'Banana Republic' politics and politicians. The US looks more and more like the Third World countries it chooses to lecture (and bomb when they don't listen) about governance on a regular basis.

The world entered a new socioeconomic era some years ago. The post World War Two Bretton Woods and Cold War orders have wasted away. However, the replacement paradigm has yet to be defined. At least for the next several decades the world will continue to watch US domestic politics as if it were their own.

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com. 

China plays the ‘Russia Card’

During the Cold War in the 1970s, United States President Nixon played the 'China Card' against Soviet Union. The 'China Card' was powerful enough to trump most anything played by America's Soviet opponents. The US won that hand. That was several decades ago.

In 2013, Red China is adeptly playing its own game of global diplomacy. China watchers have replaced yesterday's Cold War Kremlin watchers.

Modern China holds several strong cards. Global financial markets analyze each and every statistic – no matter how trivial – released by the People's Republic of China (PRC). Every move of influential members of the Communist Party of China is analyzed. Hence, when the new Chinese president makes Russia the destination of his first foreign trip, theories about the tour's significance abound. However, the reason for the visit is simple.

China is playing the 'Russia Card,' directed against the US. China is signalling to the US that the world is not completely unipolar; that public hacking allegations against the Chinese military may have consequences.

The US may be the only nation with the ability to intervene militarily in countries far from its own borders, like Iraq, but even the US has constraints. Those restraints come partially in the form of Russia and China.

To be sure, Russia and China are neighbours with shared interests. Close relations between the two erstwhile communist neighbours makes sense. Nonetheless, Russia and the US clearly feel the need to form a loose alliance against the current dominant world power. Neither country wishes to grant the US a license to ride roughshod over the world – something the US did spectacularly unsuccessfully in Iraq.

History is destined to repeat itself, often only with changed names and dates. Surely that is the case with the present Sino-Russian relationship? The American-Chinese relationship of the 1970–80s was something similar: a marriage of convenience built on a mutual mistrust of the Soviet Union. In the new millennium, a 'China-Russia' axis has been partly catalyzed by shared suspicions about US foreign policy actions.  

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com.