A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Sunday, January 1, 2017
The Era of American Global Leadership Is Over. Here’s What Comes Next
Ian Bremmer @ianbremmer-Dec. 19, 2016
As in the past, the day will be cold. Melania will hold the Bible. The kids will stand by proudly. The new President will recite his lines carefully, smile broadly and change history. And American international leadership, a constant since 1945, will end with the presidential inauguration of Donald J. Trump on Jan. 20, 2017.
That’s not because Trump is bound to fail where his predecessors have
succeeded. Given the rise of other countries with enough power to shrug
off U.S. pressure–and other factors, like the ability of smaller powers
to punch above their weight in cyberspace–this moment was inevitable.
America will remain the sole superpower for the foreseeable future–only
the U.S. can project military muscle, economic clout and cultural
influence into every region of the world. But Trump’s election marks an
irreversible break with the past, one with global implications.
For at least the next four years, America’s interactions with other
nations will be guided not by the conviction that U.S. leadership is
good for America and the world but by Trump’s transactional approach.
This will force friends and foes alike to question every assumption
they’ve made about what Washington will and will not do. Add a more
assertive China and Russia to the greater willingness of traditional
U.S. allies to hedge their bets on American plans and it’s clear that
we’ve reached a turning point. Trump is not an isolationist, but he’s
certainly a unilateralist, and a proudly selfish one. Even if he wanted
to engage the G-7 or G-8 or G-20 to get things done–and he doesn’t–it
has become unavoidably obvious that the transition toward a leaderless
world is now complete. The G-zero era I first predicted nearly six years
ago is now fully upon us. No matter how long Trump remains in the White
House, a crucial line has been crossed. The fallout will outlive his
presidency, because Trump has proved that tens of millions of Americans
like this idea.
Trump’s “America first” approach fundamentally changes the U.S. role in
the world. Trump agrees with leaders of both political parties that the
U.S. is an exceptional nation, but he insists that the country can’t
remain exceptional if it keeps stumbling down the path that former
Presidents, including Republicans and Democrats, have followed since the
end of World War II. Washington’s ambition to play the role of
indispensable power allows both allies and rivals to treat U.S.
taxpayers like chumps, he argues. Better to build a “What’s in it for
us?” approach to the rest of the world. This is a complete break with a
foreign policy establishment that Trump has worked hard to
delegitimize–and which he continues to ostracize by waving off charges
of Russian interference in the election and by refusing the daily
intelligence briefings offered to all Presidents-elect. American power,
once a trump card, is now a wild card. Instead of a superpower that
wants to impose stability and values on a fractious and valueless global
order, the U.S. has become the single biggest source of international
uncertainty.
And don’t expect lawmakers to provide the traditional set of checks and
balances. It’s not just that the Constitution gives the President great
power to conduct foreign policy. It’s also that Trump has succeeded
politically where his party’s establishment has continually failed, and
as long as he remains popular with the party’s voters, many junior
Republican lawmakers will answer to their President rather than to their
leaders on Capitol Hill. Expect Trump to use the bully pulpit with a
vengeance, often at 140 characters or less, to try to set new rules and
rally the faithful to follow his lead.
As for special interests, Trump isn’t much beholden to Wall Street,
Silicon Valley or Big Business, since most didn’t support him. Those in
the tech class, in particular, are the most liberal of the U.S. business
elite, and Trump’s intense criticism of Apple for
resisting FBI efforts to hack into the cell phones used by the
attackers in San Bernardino, Calif., previews plenty of fights to come
between the Trump White House and Silicon Valley. Trump has essentially
charged Big Business with treason and threatens to
punish–individually–those companies that ship jobs overseas.
He hasn’t yet taken the oath of office, but Trump (and Trumpism) have
already begun to create turmoil abroad. In Europe, the new President’s
full embrace of Brexit sets teeth on edge in many capitals, and his
friendly approach to Russia leaves European governments scrambling for
security alternatives to NATO. Transatlantic relations have reached
their lowest point since the 1930s. In Asia, his confrontational
attitude toward China will bolster U.S. ties with allies like Japan and
India that have long-term reasons to resist China’s rise, but it has
already made it that much harder to manage Washington’s relations with
Beijing, the most important relationship for the future of the global
economy. It will also complicate any bid by the U.S. and China to work
together, or at least in parallel, when North Korea finally becomes a
red-alert-level emergency–which it almost certainly will.
But the election of Donald Trump is just the latest source of G-zero
uncertainty and turmoil. Few leaders in today’s world, particularly in
Europe, have enough popularity to get anything done, and the current
wave of populism sweeping through many E.U. countries calls into
question the legitimacy of institutions and governing principles in the
world’s most advanced industrial democracies. France will head to the
polls in 2017, led by a President too weak to stand in an election in
which a leading contender wants to pull the country out of the E.U. In
Britain, with European negotiators and members of her own party intent
on driving exceptionally hard bargains, it’s far from clear that Prime
Minister Theresa May can navigate her divided country through (at least)
two years of Brexit negotiations.
In Germany, the lack of any appealing alternative will probably keep
Angela Merkel as Chancellor, but domestic backlash against her open-door
policy for Middle East migrants will leave her much weakened. In Italy,
the failure of Matteo Renzi’s political-reform referendum has upended
politics, dooming the country’s 64th government in 70 years. Greece’s
financial problems are far from finished. The E.U. is in for a rough
ride in 2017, even if its deal with Turkey to sharply limit the surge of
Syrian refugees into Europe holds, helping avoid a repeat of the tidal
wave of desperate people that roiled E.U. politics.
While there are places where the risk is overblown, the outlook isn’t
much brighter in the developing world. The latest round of tensions
between India and Pakistan over Kashmir has made headlines, but both
governments want to avoid an escalation of violence that might hurt them
at home. In Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, the capital
city’s Christian governor has aroused Muslim fury, but President Joko
Widodo continues to promote economic reform and much-needed investment
in the country’s infrastructure.
China’s top leaders have become increasingly confident in their ability
to maintain their monopoly on domestic political power and to develop
stronger international relationships with willing partners. But a
scheduled leadership transition next fall might create much higher
levels of stress in Beijing and a more belligerent attitude from its
leaders–particularly if China’s economy begins to show unexpected
vulnerability. With that backdrop, Trump’s hostile approach, including
treating U.S. policy on Taiwan as a card to play, will generate anxiety.
Vladimir Putin remains firmly in charge in Moscow, and Trump’s win
provides an unexpected bonus in better relations with the White House.
We might even see an easing, if not an end, of Western sanctions in
2017. But oil prices won’t reach the heights that boosted the Russian
economy a decade ago, which exposes a longer-term vulnerability for
which Putin has no credible answer. He has more than enough political
and financial capital to avoid serious trouble in 2017, but the
long-term erosion of Russia’s power and financial reserves will
eventually give Putin good reasons to create international distractions.
In Mexico, hostility toward (and from) Trump is already stirring up
trouble. And economic crisis and political confrontation are headed
toward a potentially violent climax in Venezuela.
Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a would-be Putin bent on expanding his
authority, has expressed growing hostility toward E.U. leaders who
depend on his goodwill to limit migrant flows. South Africa’s
scandal-plagued President continues to ignite partisan passions.
Protests, a staple of the country’s political culture, have again turned
violent.
No region feels the G-zero pressure more acutely than the Middle East.
In Saudi Arabia, low oil prices, Iran’s release from sanctions, a lack
of reliable friends and rivalries within the royal family are creating
ever higher levels of stress. The killing continues in Yemen and in
Syria, where Bashar Assad has all but conquered Aleppo. Finally, the
military defeat of ISIS will scatter surviving fighters across the
Middle East, North Africa, East Africa, Southeast Asia, Europe, Russia
and elsewhere in search of opportunities to wage jihad on new
battlefields.
While America’s withdrawal will create uncertainty, no one is rushing in
to fill the vacuum. China’s investments in Asia, Africa and Latin
America boost Beijing’s influence in dozens of countries, and Trump’s
renunciation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an enormous trade deal,
gives China an excellent opportunity to expand its web of regional trade
ties. But Beijing can’t match Washington’s military reach or cultural
appeal. It’s not a major producer of energy, food or the latest advanced
technology. And China’s leaders have their hands full at home. They
must ensure that the nation’s economy continues to develop and modernize
to maintain their monopoly of domestic political power. The reality is
that there is no emerging power ready, willing and able to take the
leadership role the U.S. will no longer play.
Around the world, populism will decentralize power away from central
state actors toward local officials, at the expense of international
cooperation. This anger undermines the authority of supranational
organizations–the E.U., NATO, the U.N. The pace of technological change
threatens the ability of governments to govern. An ever growing number
of major decisions are taken by nonstate actors–data-hungry companies,
hackers, political interest groups and terrorists.
The international order itself is unraveling. In the past eight years
alone, the world has seen the worst financial crisis in decades, a
global recession, a historic debt crisis in the euro zone, a wave of
unrest across North Africa and the Middle East, civil war in Syria, a
migrant crisis that calls into question the future of Europe’s open
borders, war between Russia and Ukraine, Brexit, an explosion of cyber
aggression and the election as U.S. President of one Donald Trump. Call
it geopolitical creative destruction or just the sound of things falling
apart, but the grinding of G-zero gears has become too loud to ignore.
In the short term, 2017 will have more than its share of decisive
political moments. France will stage the most anticipated presidential
election in years this spring, with the country’s future as a European
pillar at stake. Marine Le Pen of the far-right National Front hopes to
ride Europe’s populist wave toward victory–and sound the death knell for
the entire E.U. project. In the fall, Merkel, the last-standing
champion of Western liberal values, seeks re-election as Germany’s
Chancellor. Both countries fear that Russian hackers will try to disrupt
their elections, just as Moscow is suspected of having done in the U.S.
There will also be a presidential election in Iran that might well bring
tensions between reformers and hard-liners in that country to a head.
Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and others will continue to seek
solutions to the existential threat posed to their economies by
persistently low oil prices. Angry words between Europe and Turkey will
threaten a new surge of migrants across E.U. borders. China’s leadership
transition will make Beijing a more unpredictable player in regional
and international politics.
And President Donald Trump will lead the United States of America into uncharted waters.
This appears in the December 26, 2016 issue of TIME.