Formosa Foundation Kicks Off 8th Annual Ambassador Program

Students Learn the Art of Advocacy at Congressional Boot Camp
WASHINGTON–(Business Wire)–
Twenty-seven students from across the globe who were selected for the highly
competitive Ambassador Program will spend 12 days on Capitol Hill at a
congressional “boot camp” presented by the Los Angeles based Formosa Foundation
to learn the art of public advocacy.

The eighth annual Formosa Foundation Ambassador Program runs from June 14-25.
During the unique two-week program young leaders are drilled how to operate as
an insider, inside the beltway. With more than 50 years combined legislative and
executive experience the Formosa Foundation is exclusively positioned to provide
“hands-on” training on how to be effective in Washington. The Ambassadors
Program combines both advocacy and education and brings supporters of democracy
and human rights into direct contact with experts who know the issues and more
importantly with elected leaders in Congress who create policies that affect
U.S. – Taiwan relations. The Program offers participants an opportunity to
develop the grassroots activism and campaign skills necessary to further
cultivate their leadership potential.

During the first week, Ambassadors meet with U.S. officials, scholars and policy
experts. The speakers include officials from the National Security Council and
the State Department, as well as the Managing Director of the American Institute
in Taiwan, Barbara Schrage, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Randall
Shriver, Congressional Research Service policy analyst Shirley Kan, and
U.S.-Taiwan Business Council President Rupert Hammond Chambers. The participants
will also meet with: Richard Bush, Brookings Institution; Daniel Blumenthal,
American Enterprise Institute; Louisa Greve, the National Endowment for
Democracy; Tamara Luzzatto, Pew Charitable Trusts; Sarah Cook, Freedom House;
Laura Quinn, Catalist; Lane Bailey, Golin Harris; Stephan Yates, DC Asia
Advisors; June Teufel Dryer, University of Miami; and many other notable
scholars and experts. Ambassadors spend their second week meeting with members
of Congress and their staff. Last year, participants held meetings in 175
congressional offices.

Based in Los Angeles, the Formosa Foundation is a nonprofit organization
dedicated to promoting greater understanding of the relationship between Taiwan
and the United States and preserving and enhancing democracy, human rights and
freedom for the people of Taiwan.

PRESS CONFERENCE:

Friday, June 25, 2010. 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM

2325 Rayburn House Office Building

The Formosa Foundation
Terri Giles, 304-741-2632
tgiles@formosafoundation.org

Copyright Business Wire 2010

US to go ahead with ‘essential’ drone attacks in Pak despite UN call to stop

Washington, Jun.4 (ANI): Notwithstanding a report by a top UN official, which called for the discontinuation of unmanned Predator drone attacks in Pakistan’s troubled tribal areas along the Afghan border, the United States has defended the missile strikes, which many believe have killed more civilians than extremists.

Bruce Riedel, a former Central Investigation Agency (CIA) officials and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution Saban Center described the CIA operated attacks as ‘essential’, which were needed to pressurise terror groups like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

“Drone operations are essential. The drones are part of a much broader effort to put pressure on Al-Qaida through the war in Afghanistan. They”re the cutting edge of the pressure, but they”re not the only pressure,” The Christian Science Monitor quoted Riedel, as saying.

Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, also argued that the drone attacks were an “essential tool for killing terrorists even if their use should be more carefully scrutinized.”

Zenko, however, pointed out that militants were fast adopting to these strikes, and that their ‘usefulness may be waning.’

A top United Nation (UN) official had criticised the Obama administration for continuing drone attacks in the semi-autonomous tribal areas of Pakistan, as they have resulted in countless civilian deaths.

While US officials have presented an impressive figure of over 500 terrorists being killed in missile hits and only 30 civilians in the past couple of years, UN’s special rapporteur on extra judicial, summary or arbitrary executions Phillip Alston argues that drone strikes amount to a “license to kill” without being held accountable, a license the U.S. would not want any other country to have.

Alston, in his report, said that by carrying out the drone attacks, Washington is just setting a bad example.

“The rules we’re setting for ourselves now are the rules that we”re also setting for others later,” Alston’s report said.

Alston criticized the secrecy of the CIA”s drone attacks, saying they have resulted in “the creation of a major accountability vacuum.”

“Remote attacks also led to a risk of developing a ‘Playstation’ mentality to killing,” he wrote in his report. (ANI)

Next big terrorist attack on US will be postmarked ‘Pakistan’: CIA analyst

Washington, May 15 (IANS) A former CIA analyst, who helped President Barack Obama formulate his Pakistan-Afghanistan policy, sees ‘a very serious possibility that the next mass casualty terrorist attack on the United States will be postmarked ‘Pakistan.”

‘What we’re seeing going on in Pakistan now is a very dangerous phenomenon,’ says Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution, in an interview with the Council on Foreign Relations, a Washington think tank.

‘The ideology of Al Qaeda, the ideology of global Islamic jihad that all jihadists should focus on the United States as the ultimate enemy, is gaining ground with groups beyond Al Qaeda,’ said Riedel, who chaired a special interagency committee last year to develop Obama’s Af-Pak policy.

Obama and previous Bush administrations have been pressuring Pakistan for years to shut down completely the jihadist Frankenstein that was created over three decades in Pakistan, Riedel said. But ‘no Pakistani government has yet been willing to take on the entire network of terrorist groups.’

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also raised questions about some in the Pakistani government still retaining links to Al Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba and a host of other groups.

‘We saw this in 2008 in Mumbai, when Lashkar-e-Taiba attacked Mumbai and attacked American and Israeli targets,’ Riedel said noting ‘Those are the targets of Al Qaeda and the global Islamic jihad.’

‘We’ve now seen the Pakistani Taliban try to launch an attack on the United States of America for the first time,’ he said referring to the arrest of Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad in connection to the failed car bombing in New York’s Times Square.

‘This spreading of the idea of global Islamic jihad is very dangerous and as it gets deeper and deeper into the extremist groups in Pakistan it means we can expect more attacks like the one we saw at Times Square, and we can expect them to become increasingly sophisticated and more capable,’ Riedel said.

Clinton has warned of ‘severe consequences’ for Pakistan in the event of a successful Pakistan-based terrorist attack in the United States.

But US options to act against Pakistan are ‘severely limited,’ Riedel said arguing the best option is ‘to get Pakistan to do more now’ in its fight against extremism, he says, by providing more weapons and technological aid.

Nuke cooperation with Pak completely ‘peaceful’: China

China has reassured the international community that its nuclear cooperation with Pakistan is completely ‘peaceful’ in nature, and in accordance with the safeguards set up by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

“The cooperation is subject to safeguards and the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It is in compliance with respective international obligations of the two countries,” The Daily Times quoted Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said while responding to a statement by US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg.

Stressing that countries must respect their individual non-proliferation commitments, the United States had said that it was closely observing China’s offer to build two nuclear power plants in Pakistan.

Speaking during a forum at the Brookings Institution, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said Washington is concerned about proliferation issues and is studying China’s offer to assist Pakistan with nuclear reactors, adding that Washington has not taken any final decision in this regard.

Steinberg had said that the United States is keeping a close watch on Beijing’s offer to build two new nuclear power plants in Pakistan.

“The United States has not reached a final conclusion. But it’s something we’re obviously looking at very carefully,” Steinberg had said.

“I think it’s important to scrupulously honour these non-proliferation commitments. We’ll want to continue to engage on the question, about whether this is permitted under the understandings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),” he added.

China had earlier built two reactors for Pakistan. But in 2004 Beijing entered the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an association of nuclear energy states that forbids exports to nations lacking strict safeguards set up by the IAEA.

China began building a nuclear reactor in Chashma in Pakistan’s Punjab province in 1991 and work on a second reactor began in 2005, which is expected to be completed next year. Under the new agreement, Chinese companies will build at least two new 650-MW reactors at Chashma, a media report had said last month.

Nuke cooperation with Pak completely ‘peaceful’: China

Islamabad, May 13 (ANI): China has reassured the international community that its nuclear cooperation with Pakistan is completely ‘peaceful’ in nature, and in accordance with the safeguards set up by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

“The cooperation is subject to safeguards and the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It is in compliance with respective international obligations of the two countries,” The Daily Times quoted Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said while responding to a statement by US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg.

Stressing that countries must respect their individual non-proliferation commitments, the United States had said that it was closely observing China’s offer to build two nuclear power plants in Pakistan.

Speaking during a forum at the Brookings Institution, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said Washington is concerned about proliferation issues and is studying China’s offer to assist Pakistan with nuclear reactors, adding that Washington has not taken any final decision in this regard.

Steinberg had said that the United States is keeping a close watch on Beijing’s offer to build two new nuclear power plants in Pakistan.

“The United States has not reached a final conclusion. But it’s something we’re obviously looking at very carefully,” Steinberg had said.

“I think it’s important to scrupulously honour these non-proliferation commitments. We””ll want to continue to engage on the question, about whether this is permitted under the understandings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),” he added.

China had earlier built two reactors for Pakistan. But in 2004 Beijing entered the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an association of nuclear energy states that forbids exports to nations lacking strict safeguards set up by the IAEA.

China began building a nuclear reactor in Chashma in Pakistan’s Punjab province in 1991 and work on a second reactor began in 2005, which is expected to be completed next year. Under the new agreement, Chinese companies will build at least two new 650-MW reactors at Chashma, a media report had said last month. (ANI)

US keeping close watch on China’s offer to build nuke power plants in Pak

Washington, May 11 (ANI): Stressing that countries must respect their individual non-proliferation commitments, the United States has said that it is closely observing China’s offer to build two nuclear power plants in Pakistan.

Speaking during a forum at the Brookings Institution, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said Washington is concerned about proliferation issues and is studying China’s offer to assist Pakistan with nuclear reactors, adding that Washington has not taken any final decision in this regard.

“The United States has not reached a final conclusion. But it”s something we”re obviously looking at very carefully,” The News quoted Steinberg, as saying.

“I think it”s important to scrupulously honour these non-proliferation commitments. We”ll want to continue to engage on the question, about whether this is permitted under the understandings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),” he said in reply to a question.

China had earlier built two reactors for Pakistan. But in 2004 Beijing entered the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an association of nuclear energy states that forbids exports to nations lacking strict safeguards set up by the IAEA.

China began building a nuclear reactor in Chashma in Pakistan”s Punjab province in 1991 and work on a second reactor began in 2005, which is expected to be completed next year. Under the new agreement, Chinese companies will build at least two new 650-MW reactors at Chashma, a media report had said last month. (ANI)

Israel to focus on key Iran nuclear targets in any strike

Should Israel attack Iranian nuclear facilities, it would probably carry out precision strikes while making every effort not to hit the oil sector or other civilian sites.

Past Israeli operations, such as the 1981 bombing of Iraq’s Osirak atomic reactor and a similar sortie against Syria in 2007, suggest a strategy of one-off pinpoint raids, due both to military limitations and a desire to avoid wider war.

A simulation at the Brookings Institution in Washington last December theorised that Israel, intent on halting what the West suspects is Tehran’s covert quest for atomic arms, would launch a sneak attack against half a dozen nuclear facilities in Iran.

Israel might then argue the mission “had created a terrific opportunity for the West to pressure Iran, weaken it, and possibly even undermine the regime,” Brookings expert Kenneth Pollack wrote in a summary of the wargame, though he saw little chance of the Obama administration looking kindly on this tack.

Israel’s advanced F-15 and F-16 warplanes have the range to bomb western Iran and strike further inland with air-to-air refuelling and using stealth technology to pass through the air space of intermediate hostile Arab nations.

Israel could also launch Jericho ballistic missiles with conventional warheads, according to a 2009 report by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Israel’s three German-built Dolphin submarines are believed to be capable of carrying conventional and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. They would have to transit through Egypt’s Suez Canal — as one did last year — to reach the Gulf.

Special forces might be deployed to spot targets and possibly launch sabotage attacks. Israel has also been developing “cyber warfare” capabilities and could use this together with other activities by Mossad secret service agents on the ground, security sources say.

Israel would not want to risk drawing in Iranian allies like Hezbollah, Hamas or Syria. Israel also does not want to damage ties with neutral Arab powers or the United States. And finally – speaking in favour of a short, sharp assault – its conventional forces are designed for brief border wars, not prolonged action.

STRATEGIC FOCUS

“If there were to be an Israeli attack, the only thing that might be contemplated by Israel would be a precision strike focused on nuclear facilities alone,” said Emily Landau, senior research associate at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies.

“Israel has no issue with Iran beyond the fact that it is developing a military nuclear capability, coupled with the harsh rhetoric coming out of Iran,” she said.

Israel would be loath to attack Iranian energy assets, like oil production and shipping facilities. This could stoke the inevitable spike in oil prices, turning international opinion against Israel, while alienating the Iranian dissident movement.

Still, Israel could be forced to broaden its target book.

Should Iran retaliate for a sneak Israeli strike with Shehab missile launches against Tel Aviv, for example, the Netanyahu government would find it hard not to escalate. It would need outside assurances that the Shehab salvoes would stop — say, through a U.S. military enlistment against Iran, or a truce.

“It would obviously not be in Israel’s interest to enter into any wider conflict with Iran, because there is always a wider danger of escalation. When conflict spirals, it is hard to say how it will end,” Landau said.

After losing the tactical edge of any initial sneak ambush, Israeli forces would find it hard to keep up precision attacks.

Iran would be on alert for hostile warplanes, submarines and commandos. Iraq, Turkey or Saudi Arabia — which a 2006 study by the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology saw Israeli warplanes overflying en route to Iran — would shut down their air space.

The Israeli public, meanwhile, would chafe at living in shelters and the loss of troops.

In such a situation, Israel might rely increasingly on “stand-off” weaponry such as the Jerichos, which Jane’s missile experts believe are accurate only to around 1,000 yards (metres). This could mean more damage to Iran’s civilian infrastructure, including the lifeblood energy sector.

(Editing by Samia Nakhoul/Janet McBridre)

Health vote gives Obama much-needed boost

The passage of historic healthcare reform legislation in the US has not only extended insurance coverage to 32 million Americans but also given a much-needed shot in the arm to president Barack Obama.

After more than a year of political combat, Mr Obama says the legislation passed by the House of Representatives is “a victory for the American people” and “a victory for common sense”.

Healthcare reform has been a century-long quest, a goal sought by presidents both Democrat and Republican.

“Tonight’s vote is not a victory for any one party. It’s a victory for them. It’s a victory for the American people and it’s a victory for common sense,” Mr Obama said.

The president had staked his effectiveness and political legacy on the vote.

“This isn’t radical reform, but it is major reform. This legislation will not fix everything that ails our healthcare system but it moves us decisively in the right direction,” he said.

“This is what change looks like.”

The White House is now planning a public relations blitz from the president to turn around public opinion about the legislation, although officials say Mr Obama will not make healthcare reform a daily topic.

Just a couple of months ago, Mr Obama’s quest to overhaul America’s healthcare system seemed to have hit a dead end.

“Had health reform died, the take of the American people on government and on Obama and the Democrats, in particular, [would be] that they just can’t govern,” said Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

“The gang that couldn’t shoot straight would have miniaturised President Obama’s agenda, not prevented perhaps his re-election, but certainly put him in a position of being able to achieve little of what he wants.”

Despite the political triumph, Mr Obama expects the criticism to continue and he is already countering it.

“At a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics,” Mr Obama said.

“We pushed back on the undue influence of special interest. We didn’t give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear.

“Instead we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges.”

Fight not over

Mr Mann says Republicans will not easily abandon their attempts to capitalise on the vote.

“Republicans are convinced that this victory will in fact be the undoing of the Democratic Party, but we’ll see,” he said.

“What’s important is this is a statement for the first time in our history that we, as a country, believe all the people here should be covered by health insurance.

“We are en route to figuring out a way to extend that coverage and to begin to get control of costs so that we, as a country, as a government and as individual citizens and companies, can afford it.

“That’s a huge step. We haven’t taken anything like that in decades.”

And that means Mr Obama has managed something that other presidents yearned for but none could achieve.

Bitter struggle

The road to healthcare reform has been long and rocky. For hours today, politicians slugged it out on the floor of the House.

“There are those who’ve told us to start over. There are those that have told us to wait. They have told us to be patient,” Democrat John Lewis said.

“We cannot wait. We cannot be patient. The American people need health care and they need it now.”

David Nunes summed up the Republicans’ views of the bill.

“For most of the 20th century, people fled the ghost of communist dictators and now you are bringing the ghosts back into this chamber,” he said.

“Today, Democrats in this House will finally lay the cornerstone of their socialist utopia on the backs of the American people.

“Say no to socialism. Say no to totalitarianism. Say no to this bill.”

Shame

The closing arguments were made by Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Republican leader John Boehner.

“We have come to this historic moment. Today we have the opportunity to complete the great unfinished business of our society,” Ms Pelosi said.

“Shame on this body. Shame on each and every one of you who substitutes your will and your desires above those of your fellow countrymen,” Mr Boehner said.

Every Republican voted against the legislation and they will use the unpopular law to batter Democrats in the lead-up to the November mid-term congressional elections.

Under the legislation, most Americans would be required to buy insurance and there will be subsidies to help them.

The insurance industry would be prevented from dropping people once they became sick or denying them coverage because of a pre-existing condition.

A Q Khan’s nukes to Iran claims hold no ‘official status’: Pak diplomat

Washington, Sep.10 (ANI): Hours after disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr AQ Khan claimed that Pakistan had helped Iran acquire the nuclear technology with the aim to jointly emerge as a ‘strong bloc’ in the region, a Pakistani diplomat has out rightly rejected Khan’s claims.

Spokesman of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, Nadeem Kiyani, said Khan’s statement has no ‘official status’.These are the views of a person who has been rendered ineffective, and his network has been completely shut up,” The Nation quoted Kiyani, as saying.

Kiyani said Islamabad does not want proliferation of nuclear technology in the region and is doing everything to keep a tab on such activities.

Meanwhile, a proliferation expert has said that Dr. Khan has many secrets regarding the transfer of nuclear know-how’s to other countries, but is not willing to disclose the details.

“Khan has ‘always threatened to tell more, perhaps who authorised the transfer of designs and samples of technology, if not more, to several states,” said Stephen Cohen, a proliferation expert at the Brookings Institution.

Referring to the television interview in which Khan had disclosed that he provided nuclear details to countries like Libya and Iran with an aim to counter international pressure and ‘neutralize’ Israeli power, Cohen said: “Khan appeared to hold back a lot in the interview.” (ANI)

US in delicate spot over Afghan vote fraud claims: NYT

Washington, Sep.9 (ANI): Though Obama administration officials are reluctant to confirm that there has been wholesale fraud in the presidential elections in Afghanistan, they have recognised that with President Hamid Karzai getting a slim majority, that they will have to keep dealing with him for another five years.

While there are clearly numerous egregious instances of fraud or vote-rigging, these officials said, it would take further investigation to judge whether, as one put it, “this whole thing is rotten, top to bottom.”

According to the New York Times, their caution reflects the fact that while the initial vote-counting has reached its conclusion, the Electoral Complaints Commission, an Afghan and international panel that will certify the final count, is still in the early stages of an investigation that could take several weeks.

They know that raising too many doubts about Karzai’s legitimacy could make it impossible to work with him later.

“Even if we get a second round of voting, the odds are still high that Karzai will win. We have a fundamental interest in building up the legitimacy of the Karzai government,” said Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who advised the administration on its Afghan policy.

European diplomats have also expressed a similar frustration that they were powerless to do much now except wait.

“There’s a great perception out there that Karzai has stolen this,” one diplomat said.

“I’m realistic enough to know that there’s not much we can do about that right now,” he adds.

The American ambassador in Kabul, Karl W. Eikenberry, has briefed US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and has also delivered a blunt message to Karzai: “Don’t declare victory.”

The slim majority tentatively awarded to Karzai, has put the Obama administration in an awkward spot: trying to balance its professed determination to investigate mounting allegations of corruption and vote-rigging while not utterly alienating the man who seems likely to remain the country’s leader for another five years.

“We realize that the allegations have reached such a level that we need to be very careful to allow the process to breathe,” said an administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“The message was, Let’s make sure that the electoral bodies do their work, and do it rigorously,” he added.

On Tuesday, the United Nations-backed commission that is the ultimate arbiter of the vote said it found “clear and convincing evidence of fraud” at several polling stations and ordered a partial recount.

Election officials said Karzai won 54.1 percent of the vote, a percentage that, if certified, would spare him a runoff against his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, who received 28.3 percent. (ANI)

‘Awakened’ Hizbullah can unleash greater terror on America than Al-Qaeda: US expert

Jerusalem, June 26 (ANI): A top US counter-terrorism official has claimed that Hizbullah is capable of inflicting greater damage on the United States than the Al-Queda, and direct US military operations against Iran or the Hizbullah leadership may trigger exactly that.

“Hizbullah at the strategic level, with its state sponsors, more or less decided not to attack the United States interests directly in the continental United States at all. But our assessment is, if they ever change their minds, they have the capacity to inflict terrible damage on the United States,” The Jerusalem Post quoted Deputy Commissioner for Counter terrorism Richard Falkenrath of the New York Police Department, as saying.

“We haven’t seen it yet, but I don’t like to be in a position where our defense lies in the strategic decision of a terrorist organization,” he added.

Speaking at the Washington Institute for Near East Affairs this week, Falkenrath said he had seen various intelligence assessments on what would cause Hizbullah to change that strategic decision and that “direct US military operations against the Hizbullah leadership are regarded as one,” as well as attacks against its state sponsor, Iran.

So long the Hizbullah has remained “dormant,” Al-Qaida remained the most serious external terrorist threat to America, Falkenrath said, adding that Obama administration was not sufficiently emphasizing terrorism prevention in their budget priorities.

“We’ve seen these budgets slowly trickle down. The levels are shrinking; the competition for grant funding is becoming more fierce; and, frankly, the bureaucracy and the bureaucratic process that we have to go through to actually get the monies dispersed and spend them is becoming ever more onerous,” he said

Another terrorism expert, Daniel Byman of the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center, said Hizbullah had so far calculated that it wouldn’t be worth the blowback from the United States when its main agenda focuses on Israel.

“From their point of view, the United States is a place you raise money and can use for propaganda,” the paper quoted Byman, as saying. (ANI)

Experts: US, China democracy different

Washington, May 25 (ANI): Experts from both the United States and China are in agreement that the democratic systems followed in both countries are different, and therefore, neither country should tell the other what to do.

“The US should not tell China what to do,” the China Daily quoted Yawei Liu, director of the China Program of the Carter Center, as saying.

Bruce Dickson, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, stated that outside pressure would not affect the pace of change in China.

They were speaking on Friday at the congressional-executive hearing on China’s democracy over the past three decades and its implications for the US.

China has experimented with elections for villages, townships, counties and even high levels of government and the Communist Party of China (CPC).

During the past decade, grassroots elections, or more precisely village elections, have regularly taken place in China’s 680,000 villages, said Cheng Li, director of research and a senior fellow at John L. Thornton China Center of the Brookings Institution.

“It takes vision, courage and time to make these elections meaningful. Making these elections open does not mean introducing Western style democracy,” Liu said.

Li found that the CPC has adopted or consolidated some electoral methods to choose members of the CPC Central Committee and other high-ranking leaders.

Scholars at the hearing also highlighted what they thought were shortfalls in China at present.

Its political system still dictates that the State operates as the executor of decisions made by the CPC, Li said.

Liu said China’s village elections are becoming less relevant to the lives of Chinese farmers, he said.

The young, educated and informed are working in the cities. They are unable to run for village committee seats and to participate in these elections.

Land reform allows farmers to enter into joint ventures. They use their land rights as shares. It seems a new kind of election is emerging in areas that are moving fast on land reform, namely the election of board members of the joint venture.

“If democracy is an event, China has not made breakthroughs. If it is a process, it is happening in China,” Li said. (ANI)

India has to exercise regional, global leadership expected of a rising power: NYT

New York, May 20 (ANI): Given the overwhelming mandate received in the 2009 general elections, the Indian National Congress-led coalition government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will now have to exercise the kind of regional and global leadership that is expected of a rising power, says a New York Times editorial.

According to the NYT, New Delhi can start off with Pakistan, arguably the most dangerous country on earth.

A key challenge would be to convince and maybe prevent Islamabad from expanding its nuclear stockpile. Washington is already legitimately asking whether billions of dollars in proposed new assistance might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program. Both countries, therefore, should demand assurances from Islamabad that it will not be.

Tensions between the two South Asian neighbours remains high, as the Pakistani Army continues to view India as its main adversary. India, therefore, should take the lead in initiating arms control talks with Pakistan and China.

According to the NYT, it should also declare its intention to stop producing nuclear weapons fuel, even before a proposed multinational treaty is negotiated. That would provide leverage for Washington and others to exhort Pakistan to do the same.

Tensions with Pakistan over Kashmir, a festering sore of over six decades standing, is another challenge that New Delhi would have to address directly.

Stephen P. Cohen, a South Asia expert at the Brookings Institution, suggests – broader regional talks on environmental and water issues might be an interim way to find common ground. Ignoring Kashmir is no longer an option, he adds.

A third challenge is Afghanistan. India has played a constructive role in helping rebuild Afghanistan, but it must take steps to allay Islamabad’s concerns that this is not a plan to encircle Pakistan.

It should foster regional trade with Pakistan and Afghanistan. More broadly, India must help to revive world trade talks by opening its markets. It could use its considerable trade clout with Iran, Sudan and Myanmar to curb Tehran’s nuclear program, end the genocide in Darfur and press Myanmar’s junta to expand human rights.

India is the dominant power in South Asia, but it has been hesitant to assume its responsibilities. The Congress Party has to do better – starting with Pakistan, the editorial in the paper concludes. (ANI)

Obama lives up to `biggest celebrity’ billing in the world

Washington, Apr.28 (ANI): President Barack Obama has apparently had a full schedule in the week gone by at the Oval Office.

If last Monday, golf great Tiger Woods dropped by the Oval Office to promote June’s AT and T National, Tuesday brought country singer Toby Keith. On Wednesday, while Barack Obama was in Iowa, R and B singer Usher swung by the premises to talk with administration staff about fighting malaria. Thursday was quieter – maybe just the lull before actor Forest Whitaker’s visit Friday.

The president, once derisively deemed “the biggest celebrity in the world,” is living up to the billing, with celebrities lining up to see him.

The celebrity-politician dynamic has changed since Bush exited. It’s not just fun and games and snoozes in the Lincoln Bedroom anymore, says Brookings Institution Vice President Darrell West, author of the book “Celebrity Politics.”

“Celebrities used to be considered vacuous people who didn’t know anything,” says West. “And I think in response to that, the celebrities who are getting involved politically are actually boning up on the issues and developing expertise.”

“The celebrity engagement under Clinton centered on fundraising, while “Obama seems more open to using celebrities for policy formulation and getting ideas,”Politico quotes West, as saying.

Ann Stock, who served as the White House social secretary for Clinton, concurs, saying that “a lot of celebrities actually now have issues they care about. Stock points to U2 singer and New York Times contributor Bono as the beau ideal.

She adds that the first six months of an administration are usually a time when people with the clout to make one attempt a pilgrimage to the White House.

George Clooney’s credentials as a celebrity activist won him meetings with both Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. After discussing Darfur with both men, Clooney held a press conference where he announced he had received White House assurances that the issue “is high on their agenda.”

Brad Pitt, also stopped by the presidential complex in early March to talk about the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. The actor, whose “Make it Right” foundation builds sustainable housing for Hurricane Katrina victims, met with both the president and White House Climate Czar Carol Browner. (ANI)

Obama shares Bush’s instinct to convert a calamity into an opportunity

Washington, Mar.10 (ANI): President Barack Obama could do what his predecessor George Bush did to get America back on track as the only superpower of the world.

According to Fox News, though Obama is ideologically worlds apart from Bush, both have the political instinct to convert a calamity into an opportunity.he Bush administration demonstrated this in the wide-ranging policy changes sought and implemented after the Sept. 11 attacks, and the Obama administration is attempting to do the same through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

“We’re not facing these economic challenges because of one thing. We’re not going to get out by solving one thing,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said.fter the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush re-evaluated what the country should consider a threat to security, famously declaring the U.S. couldn’t wait to find a “smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”

Fast forward two terms, and Obama is proposing what could be a trillion dollar health care reform, in addition to the 787 billion dollar stimulus package, to address the economic crisis on all fronts.

Analysts and historians say the two presidents’ reasoning is the same.

“They really are trying to push their own policies to the max,” said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who has worked in several administrations.

Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also suggested an even broader agenda, quoting White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as saying, “never waste a good crisis.”

“When it comes to the economic crisis, don’t waste it, when it can have a very positive impact on climate change and energy security,” Clinton said Friday.

Going back further, political analysts note that after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Roosevelt ignored public opinion and aimed most of the country’s military might at Germany.

“While each president is dealt a different hand, we expect that each president will use the powers of the office to take advantage of that,” Hess said.

Likewise, a fight over health care could cost Obama the political support he needs to help the country weather an economy he’s warned will get worse before it gets better.

But Obama’s aides say the country’s economic house is on fire, and broad action is necessary. (ANI)

Bruce Riedel says terrorism, a cancer in Pakistan

Washington, Jan 17 (ANI): US political analyst Bruce Riedel has termed the Mumbai attacks, a vintage of Al Qaeda’s global jehad mission targeting Americans, Indians and Israelis.

Speaking at a function in Washington, Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution, said, “The attack in Mumbai by Al Qaeda ally Lashkar-e-Taiba was a vintage Al Qaeda global jehad mission. It had the targets of the global jehad, Americans, Israelis and Indians.”

He said, the crisis emanating from the attacks was still unfolding as it created a prospect of conflict between India and Pakistan to the designs of the militants.

“This crisis from their perspective is also very useful because it is still unfolding. There remains the prospect of conflict between India and Pakistan something that Al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba and others would love to see actually occur,” said Reidel.

The Mumbai attacks have cast a shadow over the relations between the two countries. The peace process, which had started between India and Pakistan in 2004, has been strained and tension is mounting between the two countries.

Commenting on Pakistan President Zardari’s statement over several months, Reidel said, finally Zardari understood that the global jehad, the Frankenstein, which Pakistan helped nourish, was threatening to hijack his country.

“I think Zardari understands that global jehad, the Frankenstein which Pakistan helped to nourish and create is indeed now a Frankenstein that threatens to hijack the Pakistani state,” Reidel said.

He said terrorism is a cancer in Pakistan.

He said that India is not our immortal enemy and on the eve of the Mumbai bombings, he even said that Pakistan should move to adopt a policy of no first use of nuclear weapons, which is a dramatic change in Pakistani policy.
Urging for US action against Al Qaeda, Reidel said that America would have to make use of all its resources and also of its allies to put an end to Al Qaeda’s jehad mission.

“US should try to bring together all the parts of American power and those who are allies, not just military, not just intelligence, not just law enforcement, but military, economic, political and diplomatic power in order to under cut the narrative and message of Al Qaeda,” said Reidel.

Pakistan, after initial hesitation, said on Thursday that its security forces had closed five training camps run by Lashkar-e-Taiba, and arrested 124 of its leaders and those of a related charity organisations. (ANI)