U.S.-Japan Trade Deal: A Blueprint for U.S.-India Negotiations?

About That Japan Deal Arithmetic has a well-known globalist bias ........ 1. It will increase, not reduce, the U.S. trade deficit 2. It will accelerate America’s descent into crony capitalism 3. U.S. consumers are still facing a major price shock ............ a tariff of “only” 15 percent on imports from Japan, mainly in return for a promise by the Japanese government to invest $550 billion in the United States. It appears that Japan will create a sovereign wealth fund for that purpose, and that Trump will have a say in how it invests. .......... U.S. trade deficit = Net foreign investment in the United States ......... This isn’t a theory, it’s just accounting. So if the deal leads to more investment in the U.S., it must, necessarily, lead to a bigger trade deficit. ............ capital inflow from Japan will lead to a stronger dollar than we would have had otherwise, making U.S. goods less competitive across the board. ........... It has been clear for a while that Trump and co. don’t understand or believe in balance of payments accounting, that they want both a smaller trade deficit and more foreign investment in America. Now their basic lack of understanding is embodied in a specific deal. ......... it appears that Trump will get to influence how Japan invests. We’re already well on the way toward an economy in which success in business depends not on how good your product is but on your political influence (and also an economy in which Trump tells Coca-Cola what ingredients it should use.) .......... a 15 percent tariff is still really, really high — much higher than the 1.6 percent tariff Japanese non-agricultural exports faced before Trump began his trade war. ........... for the moment U.S. businesses are absorbing much of the cost rather than passing it on to consumers. They’ve been able to do that partly because many companies rushed to bring imports in before the tariffs hit, and are still selling out of that inventory. They’ve been willing to do that because they don’t want to alienate customers and lose market share, and have been hoping that the tariffs will mostly go away.........

But if Japan still faces a 15 percent tariff after making a deal, that hope will soon fade. (Winter) Inflation is coming.

---

U.S.-Japan Trade Deal: A Blueprint for U.S.-India Negotiations?

On July 22, 2025, President Donald Trump announced a new “historic” trade deal with Japan, signaling a major step forward in U.S. trade diplomacy. Building upon the foundations of the 2019 U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement (USJTA) and the U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement, the 2025 deal addresses longstanding tariff disputes and injects fresh momentum into a rules-based Indo-Pacific trade architecture.

As U.S.-India trade talks continue under the framework of the U.S.-India COMPACT, launched in February 2025, observers are asking: can this U.S.-Japan deal serve as a template for progress with India—or are the two countries still too far apart? This blog unpacks the new U.S.-Japan trade agreement and analyzes what it means for U.S.-India negotiations.

---

What’s New in the U.S.-Japan Trade Deal (2025)?

The U.S.-Japan trade relationship has long been foundational, but tensions escalated recently due to the United States’ $69.4 billion trade deficit with Japan (2024 figures), and President Trump’s push for “fair and reciprocal” trade. In April 2025, Washington imposed a sweeping 10% universal tariff, plus a 24% country-specific tariff on Japanese goods—including a 25% levy on autos and auto parts. Japan, a top U.S. creditor holding $1.2 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds, resisted pressure on currency management and defense cost-sharing.

The July 22, 2025 deal, as reported across official sources and corroborated by posts on X, outlines the following provisions:

• ✅ $550 Billion in Japanese Investment in U.S. industries and infrastructure, focused on semiconductors, energy, and manufacturing.

• ✅ Expanded Market Access for U.S. Exports, especially in agriculture (beef, soybeans, rice) and autos.

• ✅ Tariff Reduction: A rollback of the 24% Japan-specific tariff to a 15% reciprocal tariff, easing trade frictions.

• ✅ Agricultural Gains: U.S. rice exports, which reached $354.7 million from May 2024–April 2025, are expected to grow further, despite Japan’s persistent protection of its domestic rice producers.

This agreement builds on the 2019 USJTA, which reduced or eliminated tariffs on $7.2 billion worth of U.S. agricultural exports and industrial goods. It also echoes the high-standard U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement, which prohibits data localization, protects source code, and ensures free cross-border data flows—elements increasingly relevant in digital-age trade diplomacy.

Though not a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the 2025 accord illustrates how targeted, sector-specific agreements can yield tangible results even amidst political and economic differences.

---

U.S.-India Trade Talks: Can the Japan Model Work?

The U.S.-India trade relationship is both strategic and complex, with a shared vision of reaching $500 billion in bilateral trade by 2030. However, talks have stumbled in recent years. Under President Trump’s tariff regime, India faced a 26% reciprocal tariff (suspended through July 9, 2025) and pressure to dismantle high protective duties.

The U.S.-Japan deal offers insights that could shape the U.S.-India Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) currently under discussion:

Similarities and Strategic Lessons:

1. Phased and Modular Approach: The Japan deal’s incremental structure mirrors India’s current BTA discussions. India has reportedly offered tariff reductions on pharmaceuticals and autos—akin to Japan’s limited but strategic concessions.

2. Investment as a Bargaining Tool: Japan’s $550 billion commitment secured U.S. tariff relief. India could offer greater energy and defense imports to offset its $45.7 billion trade deficit with the U.S. (2024 data).

3. Tariff Flexibility: The U.S. cut Japan’s tariff rate from 24% to 15%. A similar compromise with India could be achieved by prioritizing win-win sectors—such as clean energy, critical minerals, or high-end machinery.

4. Digital Economy Synergies: While India and the U.S. differ on data localization, the U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement presents a model for dialogue on data protection and e-commerce rules, which India is beginning to codify in its draft Digital India Act.

Critical Differences That Limit Comparability:

• Economic Development Gap: Unlike Japan, India is a developing country with deep structural reliance on agriculture and small-scale industries. U.S. demands for opening Indian dairy and farm markets meet strong domestic resistance.

• Geopolitical Alignment: Japan is a treaty ally with the U.S. under the U.S.-Japan Security Alliance. India, by contrast, remains non-aligned and continues to balance its defense and trade relations with both the U.S. and China—creating hesitation in locking into agreements seen as U.S.-centric.

• Regulatory Barriers: India imposes high non-tariff barriers (NTBs), such as quality certifications and import quotas—especially on genetically modified (GM) agricultural goods, which are common in U.S. exports.

---

Are the U.S. and India Too Far Apart?

Despite friction, the U.S. and India are not fundamentally misaligned. Both countries share strategic goals in the Indo-Pacific, maintain robust defense cooperation, and are expanding people-to-people ties. However, four core disputes continue to stall negotiations:

1. Agriculture and Dairy Access: The U.S. wants greater access, especially for poultry, almonds, and dairy products. India’s refusal is rooted in protecting the livelihoods of over 100 million farmers.

2. Intellectual Property Rights (IPR): The U.S. pushes for stronger patent protections, but India defends its generics industry, especially in public health. The WTO’s TRIPS flexibility remains a point of divergence.

3. Digital Trade and Data Localization: The U.S. champions free data flow; India insists on data localization and sovereignty, especially after the 2019 Personal Data Protection Bill and ongoing consultations for a new Digital India Act.

4. Geostrategic Balancing: The U.S. has quietly pressured India to reduce dependence on China (especially in electronics and telecom). India has taken steps (e.g., PLI schemes, Huawei restrictions), but full alignment remains elusive.

---

The Path Forward: Realism, Not Idealism

While a comprehensive FTA may not be imminent, a limited-scope U.S.-India BTA covering sectors like pharmaceuticals, energy, defense, and select industrial goods remains viable. India’s offer to cut tariffs on electric vehicles and pharmaceutical ingredients is a promising start.

India’s inclusion of U.S. firms in strategic sectors like semiconductor manufacturing (e.g., Micron’s investment in Gujarat) and green energy could unlock broader concessions. Similarly, a U.S. commitment to ease visa norms for Indian tech workers and professionals would help build goodwill.

As the July 9, 2025, tariff suspension deadline approaches, the next 60 days are crucial. A phased, “mini-deal” approach—akin to U.S.-Japan—could bridge current gaps and lay the foundation for deeper cooperation under the broader U.S.-India COMPACT.

---

Conclusion: A Blueprint, Not a Copy-Paste

The U.S.-Japan 2025 deal exemplifies how even strained trade relationships can be recalibrated through pragmatic, sectoral agreements. For India, the lesson isn’t to replicate Japan’s concessions—but to chart a path grounded in mutual benefit, strategic patience, and creative diplomacy.

While structural differences remain, both India and the U.S. recognize the strategic importance of their partnership in the emerging multipolar world. A win-win trade agreement may not resolve all disputes—but it can set the tone for a deeper, more resilient economic relationship.

---

📌 For real-time updates on U.S.-India trade negotiations, visit:

• https://ustr.gov

---

---

अमेरिका-जापान व्यापार समझौता: क्या यह अमेरिका-भारत वार्ता के लिए मार्गदर्शक बन सकता है?

22 जुलाई 2025 को, राष्ट्रपति डोनाल्ड ट्रंप ने जापान के साथ एक “ऐतिहासिक” व्यापार समझौते की घोषणा की, जो अमेरिका की व्यापार नीति में एक महत्वपूर्ण कदम है। यह समझौता 2019 के अमेरिका-जापान व्यापार समझौते (USJTA) और डिजिटल व्यापार समझौते पर आधारित है, और हाल के टैरिफ तनावों को भी संबोधित करता है।

जैसे-जैसे अमेरिका और भारत के बीच U.S.-India COMPACT के अंतर्गत व्यापार वार्ताएं आगे बढ़ रही हैं—जिसका लक्ष्य 2030 तक द्विपक्षीय व्यापार को $500 अरब तक पहुंचाना है—विशेषज्ञ यह सवाल उठा रहे हैं: क्या जापान वाला समझौता भारत के साथ भी सफलता का मार्ग दिखा सकता है, या दोनों देश बहुत अधिक दूर हैं? आइए इस नए समझौते के मुख्य बिंदुओं और भारत-अमेरिका वार्ता पर इसके प्रभावों को समझें।

---

2025 का नया अमेरिका-जापान व्यापार समझौता: क्या है खास?

हालांकि अमेरिका-जापान व्यापार संबंध लंबे समय से मजबूत रहे हैं, लेकिन हाल के वर्षों में $69.4 अरब (2024) के व्यापार घाटे और राष्ट्रपति ट्रंप की “न्यायसंगत और पारस्परिक” योजना के कारण तनाव बढ़ा है। अप्रैल 2025 में, अमेरिका ने जापान पर 24% विशेष टैरिफ, 25% ऑटो और ऑटो पार्ट्स पर शुल्क, और 10% सार्वभौमिक टैरिफ लागू कर दिए। जापान, जो अमेरिका का $1.2 ट्रिलियन का कर्जदाता है, ने मुद्रा और रक्षा मामलों पर दबाव का विरोध किया।

22 जुलाई 2025 को घोषित नया समझौता इन बाधाओं को दूर करता है। रिपोर्ट और X पोस्टों के अनुसार, इसके मुख्य बिंदु हैं:

• ✅ $550 अरब जापानी निवेश अमेरिका में—मुख्य रूप से अर्धचालक (सेमीकंडक्टर), ऊर्जा और निर्माण क्षेत्रों में।

• ✅ अमेरिकी उत्पादों को बाजार पहुंच—खासकर कृषि (चावल, बीफ़, सोयाबीन) और ऑटोमोबाइल क्षेत्रों में।

• ✅ टैरिफ में कमी—24% से घटाकर 15% किया गया, जिससे व्यापार तनाव घटेगा।

• ✅ कृषि लाभ—अमेरिका से चावल निर्यात मई 2024 से अप्रैल 2025 तक $354.7 मिलियन तक पहुंच गया और इसमें और वृद्धि की संभावना है, हालांकि जापान घरेलू किसानों की सुरक्षा जारी रखेगा।

यह समझौता 2019 USJTA पर आधारित है, जिसने अमेरिकी कृषि और औद्योगिक उत्पादों पर $7.2 अरब की टैरिफ कटौती सुनिश्चित की थी। साथ ही, अमेरिका-जापान डिजिटल व्यापार समझौता भी मॉडल के रूप में उभरा है—जिसमें डेटा स्वतंत्रता, सोर्स कोड सुरक्षा और उपभोक्ता गोपनीयता जैसे उच्च मानक शामिल हैं।

---

भारत-अमेरिका व्यापार वार्ता: क्या जापान मॉडल उपयोगी हो सकता है?

हालांकि अमेरिका-भारत व्यापार संबंध रणनीतिक रूप से अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण हैं, लेकिन यह बहुत जटिल भी हैं। भारत वर्तमान में 26% पारस्परिक टैरिफ (9 जुलाई 2025 तक निलंबित) और उच्च शुल्क दरों को लेकर अमेरिकी दबाव का सामना कर रहा है।

जापान समझौता भारत-अमेरिका वार्ता के लिए कई संकेत देता है:

समानताएं और सीख:

1. चरणबद्ध दृष्टिकोण: जापान की तरह, भारत भी सीमित क्षेत्र वाले द्विपक्षीय व्यापार समझौते (BTA) पर ध्यान केंद्रित कर रहा है, खासकर फार्मास्यूटिकल्स और ऑटो क्षेत्रों में।

2. निवेश को सौदेबाजी का उपकरण बनाना: जापान ने $550 अरब का निवेश वादा कर अमेरिकी रियायतें हासिल कीं। भारत भी अमेरिकी ऊर्जा और रक्षा उत्पादों की खरीद बढ़ाकर अपनी स्थिति मजबूत कर सकता है।

3. टैरिफ वार्ता में लचीलापन: जापान के साथ 24% से 15% टैरिफ कटौती यह दर्शाती है कि अमेरिका समझौते के लिए तैयार है। भारत भी चुने हुए क्षेत्रों में बाज़ार खोलकर लाभ उठा सकता है।

4. डिजिटल व्यापार की संभावना: अमेरिका-जापान डिजिटल समझौता भारत के लिए प्रेरणा हो सकता है, हालांकि भारत की डेटा स्थानीयकरण नीतियां बाधा बन सकती हैं।

मुख्य अंतर जो समझौते को कठिन बनाते हैं:

• आर्थिक स्तर का अंतर: जापान एक विकसित देश है, जबकि भारत एक विकासशील अर्थव्यवस्था है जो कृषि और लघु उद्योगों पर अत्यधिक निर्भर है।

• भू-राजनीतिक परिप्रेक्ष्य: जापान अमेरिका का रक्षा सहयोगी है, जबकि भारत एक गैर-संलग्न नीति अपनाता है और चीन के साथ भी व्यापारिक संबंध रखता है।

• विनियामक बाधाएं: भारत में गैर-टैरिफ बाधाएं अधिक हैं—जैसे कि गैर-GMO प्रमाणपत्र—जो अमेरिकी उत्पादों के प्रवेश में रुकावट डालती हैं।

---

क्या अमेरिका और भारत के बीच बहुत अधिक दूरी है?

हालांकि कई विवादित मुद्दे हैं, लेकिन दोनों देश रणनीतिक रूप से एक-दूसरे को महत्व देते हैं। फिर भी, चार मुख्य विषय वार्ता में बाधा डालते हैं:

1. कृषि और डेयरी बाज़ार की पहुंच: अमेरिका चाहता है कि भारत इन क्षेत्रों को खोले, जबकि भारत अपने करोड़ों किसानों की आजीविका की सुरक्षा के लिए मना करता है।

2. बौद्धिक संपदा अधिकार (IPR): अमेरिका फार्मा पेटेंट सुरक्षा बढ़ाना चाहता है, लेकिन भारत सस्ती दवाओं के उत्पादन में वैश्विक नेता है और इसका विरोध करता है।

3. डिजिटल व्यापार और डेटा स्थानीयकरण: अमेरिका डेटा स्वतंत्रता चाहता है, जबकि भारत डेटा संप्रभुता और गोपनीयता पर ज़ोर देता है।

4. भू-राजनीतिक संतुलन: अमेरिका चाहता है कि भारत चीन पर अपनी निर्भरता कम करे, लेकिन भारत की बहु-ध्रुवीय कूटनीति उसे पूरी तरह से अमेरिका के साथ संरेखित नहीं होने देती।

---

आगे का रास्ता: आदर्शवाद नहीं, व्यावहारिकता

पूर्ण मुक्त व्यापार समझौता (FTA) शायद अभी संभव न हो, लेकिन सीमित दायरे वाले BTA की संभावना बनी हुई है—जैसे कि ऊर्जा, फार्मा, रक्षा और कुछ औद्योगिक क्षेत्रों में।

भारत ने फार्मास्यूटिकल इनपुट्स और इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों पर टैरिफ कटौती की पेशकश की है। साथ ही, अमेरिका में माइक्रोन जैसी कंपनियों का भारत में निवेश (जैसे गुजरात में सेमीकंडक्टर प्लांट) सहयोग को और मजबूत कर रहा है।

9 जुलाई 2025 को टैरिफ निलंबन की समाप्ति के साथ, अगले 60 दिन निर्णायक होंगे। अमेरिका-जापान के “मिनी डील” मॉडल की तरह, भारत भी रचनात्मक समझौतों से आगे बढ़ सकता है।

---

निष्कर्ष: यह ब्लूप्रिंट है, न कि नकल

2025 का अमेरिका-जापान व्यापार समझौता दर्शाता है कि जब दोनों पक्ष रणनीतिक दृष्टिकोण अपनाते हैं, तो तनावपूर्ण व्यापार संबंधों को भी सुधारा जा सकता है।

भारत को जापान जैसा बनने की ज़रूरत नहीं है—बल्कि उसे अपने आर्थिक हितों और राजनीतिक प्राथमिकताओं के अनुसार आपसी लाभ, रणनीतिक धैर्य और रचनात्मक कूटनीति का रास्ता चुनना होगा।

संरचनात्मक मतभेदों के बावजूद, अमेरिका और भारत दोनों जानते हैं कि उनका भविष्य एक स्थिर, खुली और नियम-आधारित वैश्विक व्यवस्था पर निर्भर करता है। व्यापार समझौता इन साझेदारियों को नई ऊंचाई तक ले जा सकता है।

---

📌 भारत-अमेरिका व्यापार वार्ताओं पर नवीनतम अपडेट के लिए देखें:

• https://ustr.gov

---

🇺🇸 🤝 🇯🇵 pic.twitter.com/qGT5DYqlrx

— House Republicans (@HouseGOP) July 22, 2025

The $500 Billion Pivot: How the India-US Alliance Can Reshape Global Trade https://t.co/twyC7GaxWV

— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) July 23, 2025

Underrated aspect of Comet: better memory management than Chrome https://t.co/yteO7YHFpW

— Aravind Srinivas (@AravSrinivas) July 23, 2025

Never before in the Nation’s almost 250 year history has America’s present and future depended more on the free press than it does today.

— @judgeluttig (@judgeluttig) July 22, 2025

🇨🇳 BREAKING | Chinese Foreign Minister:

"The United States has lost its legitimacy to lead the world in the eyes of nations. It is no longer morally qualified to speak of values or peace while supporting genocide in Gaza." pic.twitter.com/OIOSDoK6WK

— China in English (@ChinainEnglis) July 22, 2025

If the UN Can’t Reform, It Must Be Replaced: Time for a New United Nations That Reflects Today’s World

The WTO Is Broken — Let’s Reform the UN and Rethink Global Trade from the Ground Up
A New United Nations, A New Partnership: How Reform Can Unite the U.S. and India as Equals
The Small Country Coalition: How Nations with Fewer than 30 Votes Could Shape a New United Nations
Imagining A New United Nations
A G30 (Or G40) For A New Global Trade Architecture

If the UN Can’t Reform, It Must Be Replaced: Time for a New United Nations That Reflects Today’s World

---

The United Nations, born in the aftermath of World War II, is no longer equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century. While crises multiply—climate collapse, AI disruption, forced migration, and rising inequality—the UN remains trapped in a system designed for a bygone era. The five permanent members (P5) of the Security Council—U.S., China, Russia, U.K., and France—continue to wield veto power, blocking meaningful change.

Yet here’s the core problem: reforming the UN requires the consent of the P5, and they have no incentive to give up their privileged position. It’s a Catch-22. Reform is necessary—but impossible from within.

The solution? If the UN cannot be reformed, it must be peacefully dissolved and rebuilt from the ground up.

---

🌍 A New United Nations: Democratic, Decentralized, Decisive

We call on all 195 nations to come together and establish a New United Nations, grounded in legitimacy, equity, and action. This new institution would:

• Abolish the veto

• Use a weighted voting formula based on:

  • 40% GDP share

  • 40% Population share

  • 20% Equal vote share (1/195 per country)

• Replace archaic power structures with functional councils and democratic mechanisms

• Serve as the platform for rethinking global security, trade, climate action, and AI governance

---

🔁 A New Security Council Reflecting Today’s Realities

The New Security Council should be composed not of WWII victors, but of the top five vote-holding nations under the 40-40-20 system:

1. China

2. United States

3. India

4. Japan

5. Germany

These countries reflect current economic and demographic realities. However, they would not have veto power. Instead, they would rotate leadership responsibilities and serve as coordinating anchors in a more agile, equitable, and responsive council.

---

🧹 From Bureaucracy to Bold Action

Today’s UN suffers from institutional bloat. Endless summits, countless reports, and minimal impact. The new organization must flip the script.

We need:

• Lean governance

• Clear mandates

• Direct implementation

• Annual action scorecards

• Problem solvers—not just policy scholars

---

🗳️ Electing a Real Secretary-General: Transparent and Fair

The office of the Secretary-General should no longer be decided behind closed doors. In the New UN, the Secretary-General would be elected through a transparent, democratic process using the same 40-40-20 voting formula applied across all decision-making:

• A candidate must be nominated by one country and seconded by another

• Each candidate must present a public platform and policy vision

• There will be a one-month global campaign period

• If no candidate secures over 50% in the first round, a runoff will occur between the top two

The Secretary-General would serve a five-year term, renewable once only.

This system would ensure that the world’s top diplomat has legitimacy, vision, and public accountability.

---

🔧 New Global Councils for 21st Century Challenges

The reformed UN must create specialized, empowered councils to address the world’s most urgent issues head-on.

1. Council on Climate Action

Enforce global emissions limits, manage carbon finance, and coordinate disaster response.

2. Council on AI Safety

Set global standards for AI development, risk audits, and algorithmic transparency.

3. Council on Global Trade

Architect a new multilateral trade system—one that includes migrant labor, digital goods, supply chain justice, and climate safeguards—guided by the blueprint in Rethinking Trade.

Each of these councils would operate under the 40-40-20 voting framework, ensuring fairness, representation, and actionability.

---

⚖️ Toward a World That Governs Itself Fairly

The old UN represents a world that no longer exists.

The New UN would be:

• Democratic: No veto, weighted votes

• Representative: GDP + Population + Equal Voice

• Action-Oriented: From paralysis to performance

• Future-Ready: Equipped to deal with AI, climate, digital economies, and human displacement

• Accountable: Elected leadership, transparent reporting, and people-centered progress

---

✊ Final Thought: It’s Time to Rebuild, Not Patch

The international community cannot afford to keep patching an outdated institution. We must do what previous generations did after global upheaval: build anew.

Let the next United Nations reflect the world as it is—and guide us to the world we aspire to become.

It’s time to dissolve with dignity—and rebuild with purpose.

---

Author: Paramendra Bhagat
Global democracy advocate and author of “Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy”
#NewUN #UNReform #GlobalGovernance #SecretaryGeneralElection #TradeJustice #ClimateAction #AISafety

यदि संयुक्त राष्ट्र में सुधार संभव नहीं, तो उसे भंग कर एक नया वैश्विक संगठन बनाया जाए

---

संयुक्त राष्ट्र (UN) की स्थापना द्वितीय विश्व युद्ध के बाद शांति और सहयोग सुनिश्चित करने के लिए की गई थी। लेकिन आज, जब जलवायु संकट गहरा रहा है, AI बेकाबू गति से आगे बढ़ रहा है, प्रवास और असमानता चरम पर हैं—UN एक ऐसे ढांचे में जकड़ा हुआ है जो बीते युग का अवशेष बन चुका है।

संयुक्त राष्ट्र सुरक्षा परिषद के पाँच स्थायी सदस्य (P5)—अमेरिका, चीन, रूस, ब्रिटेन और फ्रांस—वीटो शक्ति के ज़रिए किसी भी बदलाव को रोक सकते हैं। और यही सबसे बड़ी विडंबना है:
UN में सुधार करने के लिए उन्हीं देशों की सहमति चाहिए जिन्हें सुधार से अपना विशेषाधिकार खोने का डर है।

यह एक कैच-22 स्थिति है। सुधार ज़रूरी है, लेकिन मौजूदा प्रणाली में असंभव है।

समाधान? अगर संयुक्त राष्ट्र सुधर नहीं सकता, तो उसे भंग कर एक नया, न्यायसंगत, लोकतांत्रिक वैश्विक संगठन बनाया जाए।

---

🌍 एक नया संयुक्त राष्ट्र: लोकतांत्रिक, विकेंद्रीकृत और प्रभावी

हम आह्वान करते हैं कि सभी 195 देश मिलकर वर्तमान UN को भंग करें और एक नया वैश्विक संगठन बनाएं, जिसकी नींव निम्नलिखित सिद्धांतों पर हो:

• वीटो का पूर्ण अंत

• वोटिंग प्रणाली इस सूत्र पर आधारित हो:

  • 40% GDP के अनुसार

  • 40% जनसंख्या के अनुसार

  • 20% समान वोट (प्रत्येक देश को 1/195 हिस्सा)

• पुरानी ताकतों की बजाय कार्यशील परिषदें और लोकतांत्रिक निर्णय प्रणाली

• वैश्विक सुरक्षा, व्यापार, जलवायु और AI से जुड़े मुद्दों पर स्पष्ट और त्वरित कार्रवाई

---

🔁 आज की वास्तविकताओं को दर्शाने वाली नई सुरक्षा परिषद

वर्तमान सुरक्षा परिषद WWII के विजेताओं पर आधारित है, न कि आज की वैश्विक शक्ति संरचना पर।
नई सुरक्षा परिषद में वे पाँच देश शामिल हों जिनके पास 40-40-20 वोटिंग प्रणाली के अनुसार सबसे अधिक मत हों:

1. चीन

2. संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका

3. भारत

4. जापान

5. जर्मनी

इन देशों को कोई वीटो शक्ति नहीं होगी। वे घूमते हुए नेतृत्वकर्ता बनेंगे और वैश्विक समन्वय को गति देंगे—आज की बहुध्रुवीय दुनिया के अनुरूप।

---

🧹 रिपोर्टों से निकलकर ज़मीनी कार्यवाही तक

वर्तमान UN अत्यधिक नौकरशाही से ग्रसित है। सम्मेलन पर सम्मेलन, रिपोर्ट पर रिपोर्ट—लेकिन ज़मीनी कार्य बहुत कम।

नए संगठन में चाहिए:

• सरल, परिणामोन्मुखी शासन

• सटीक लक्ष्य, स्पष्ट ज़िम्मेदारियाँ

• तकनीकी और फील्ड विशेषज्ञों की भागीदारी

• वार्षिक कार्यप्रदर्शन रिपोर्टिंग

---

🗳️ महासचिव का सीधा, पारदर्शी चुनाव

अब समय आ गया है कि महासचिव का चुनाव बंद कमरों में नहीं, बल्कि पारदर्शी प्रणाली से हो।

नए संयुक्त राष्ट्र में महासचिव का चुनाव उसी 40-40-20 वोटिंग फॉर्मूले के तहत हो, जो अन्य निर्णयों पर लागू होता है:

• कोई भी देश प्रत्याशी नामांकित कर सकता है, जिसे किसी दूसरे देश द्वारा समर्थन दिया जाना चाहिए

• प्रत्येक उम्मीदवार को सार्वजनिक घोषणापत्र और एजेंडा प्रस्तुत करना होगा

• एक एक महीने का वैश्विक प्रचार अभियान चलेगा

• अगर पहले चरण में कोई 50% से अधिक वोट नहीं पाता, तो शीर्ष दो के बीच दूसरे दौर का चुनाव होगा

• कार्यकाल पाँच वर्ष का, अधिकतम दो बार ही अनुमेय होगा

यह व्यवस्था सुनिश्चित करेगी कि महासचिव में हो दृष्टि, जनसंपर्क, और वैश्विक वैधता।

---

🔧 21वीं सदी की चुनौतियों के लिए विशेष परिषदें

नए संयुक्त राष्ट्र को चाहिए तीव्र, विशेषज्ञ और ज़िम्मेदार परिषदें, जो आज की ज़रूरतों के अनुरूप काम करें:

1. जलवायु कार्रवाई परिषद (Council on Climate Action)

• उत्सर्जन नियंत्रण, आपदा प्रतिक्रिया, ग्रीन फाइनेंस और जवाबदेही

2. AI सुरक्षा परिषद (Council on AI Safety)

• वैश्विक मानक तय करना, जोखिम मूल्यांकन, और नैतिक विकास सुनिश्चित करना

3. वैश्विक व्यापार परिषद (Council on Global Trade)

• नए व्यापार ढांचे का निर्माण, जिसमें प्रवासी श्रम, डिजिटल उत्पाद, आपूर्ति श्रृंखला न्याय और जलवायु मानक शामिल हों
  (इस विषय पर विस्तृत मार्गदर्शन पुस्तक Rethinking Trade में उपलब्ध है)

इन सभी परिषदों में निर्णय 40-40-20 प्रणाली के अंतर्गत होंगे—जिससे निर्णय न केवल निष्पक्ष बल्कि प्रभावशाली भी होंगे।

---

⚖️ एक ऐसी संस्था जो आज की दुनिया को दर्शाए

पुराना संयुक्त राष्ट्र अब हमारे युग के अनुकूल नहीं है।

नया संयुक्त राष्ट्र होगा:

• लोकतांत्रिक: वीटो नहीं, वास्तविक वोटिंग

• प्रतिनिधित्वशील: GDP + जनसंख्या + समानता

• प्रभावशाली: रिपोर्ट नहीं, वास्तविक कार्य

• आधुनिक: AI, जलवायु, डिजिटल अर्थव्यवस्था के लिए तैयार

• उत्तरदायी: चुनाव, पारदर्शिता और नागरिकों के प्रति जवाबदेही

---

✊ अंतिम विचार: अब मरम्मत नहीं, पुनर्निर्माण की ज़रूरत है

दुनिया को अब पैबंदों वाला संयुक्त राष्ट्र नहीं चाहिए।

हमें वही करना चाहिए जो पिछली पीढ़ियों ने वैश्विक संकटों के बाद किया:
नया संस्थान बनाना।

नया संयुक्त राष्ट्र हमारी हकीकत को दर्शाए, और हमारे साझा भविष्य की दिशा तय करे।

अब समय है कि हम पुरानी संस्था को सम्मानपूर्वक विदा करें—और एक नई, प्रभावशाली वैश्विक संस्था साहस और उद्देश्य के साथ खड़ी करें।

---

लेखक: परमेंद्र भगत
“Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy” के लेखक, और वैश्विक लोकतांत्रिक शासन के पैरोकार
#NewUN #UNReform #GlobalGovernance #SecretaryGeneralElection #TradeJustice #ClimateAction #AISafety

Fixing Education in America: Lessons from the Best School Systems Around the World

Fixing Education in America: Lessons from the Best School Systems Around the World

America is a global leader in innovation, higher education, and creativity—but when it comes to K–12 education, the United States lags behind. Despite spending more per student than most countries, U.S. students rank in the middle of the pack on international assessments like PISA (Program for International Student Assessment). The problems are systemic, but not unsolvable. Across the globe, countries with fewer resources are achieving more by doing things differently—and smarter.

So, how can the U.S. fix its education system? Here are key reforms America needs, inspired by some of the most effective education systems in the world:

---

1. Elevate the Teaching Profession — Like Finland

In Finland, teaching is as prestigious as medicine or law. All teachers hold a master’s degree, and only the top university graduates are accepted into teacher-training programs. Once in the classroom, they’re given professional autonomy, trust, and high pay.

What America Can Do:

• Raise salaries to attract top talent.

• Require more rigorous and consistent teacher training.

• Treat teachers as nation-builders, not just public employees.

• Eliminate over-reliance on standardized testing and give educators more autonomy in the classroom.

---

2. Make Education Equitable — Like Canada

Canada’s decentralized system achieves world-class results without extreme inequality. Public schools in wealthy and poor areas deliver similar outcomes because funding is more equitable, and support for immigrant and indigenous students is prioritized.

What America Can Do:

• Reform school funding so that it doesn’t depend so heavily on local property taxes.

• Invest more in underserved schools, not less.

• Provide holistic support for low-income students—nutrition, counseling, and family outreach.

---

3. Reduce Testing, Focus on Learning — Like Finland and the Netherlands

Excessive standardized testing in the U.S. often narrows the curriculum and increases student anxiety. Countries like Finland and the Netherlands have shown that you can achieve better outcomes with fewer tests and more project-based, exploratory learning.

What America Can Do:

• End the over-dependence on standardized tests to measure student and school success.

• Replace teaching-to-the-test with deeper learning through collaborative projects, problem-solving, and creativity.

• Encourage student agency and critical thinking, not rote memorization.

---

4. Invest Early — Like Japan and Singapore

Top-performing countries don’t wait until middle or high school to start academic rigor. They invest heavily in early childhood education, laying a strong foundation for later success. In Singapore, for instance, early years are seen as critical for building character, curiosity, and core skills.

What America Can Do:

• Expand access to high-quality preschool for all children, regardless of income.

• Prioritize social-emotional learning alongside early literacy and numeracy.

• Support parents with education and child development resources starting at birth.

---

5. Modernize Curriculum for the 21st Century — Like Estonia

Estonia, a small Baltic country, has made major strides by embracing digital learning, coding, and entrepreneurship from a young age. Their curriculum prepares students for a changing world, not one that existed decades ago.

What America Can Do:

• Introduce digital skills, financial literacy, climate science, and ethics into the curriculum.

• Partner with the private sector to bring modern tools and mentorship into classrooms.

• Emphasize adaptability, not just academic content—students need to learn how to learn.

---

6. Rethink College-Readiness and Vocational Tracks — Like Germany

In Germany, students can choose from multiple respected paths—academic or vocational—based on their interests and strengths. There’s no stigma around apprenticeships or technical education.

What America Can Do:

• Expand vocational and career-technical education (CTE) options in high schools.

• Partner with businesses and unions to provide apprenticeships and on-the-job training.

• Value diverse post-secondary outcomes—college, trade schools, the arts, and entrepreneurship.

---

7. Cultivate Whole-Child Education — Like South Korea (But Less Stressful)

While South Korea is often known for academic rigor, it’s beginning to shift toward less pressure and more creativity, acknowledging the toll that extreme testing takes on mental health. Holistic development—emotional, physical, ethical—is becoming more central in top systems.

What America Can Do:

• Incorporate mental health education, physical wellness, and character building into every school.

• Reduce homework and start school later to match adolescent sleep patterns.

• Focus on engagement and joy in learning, not just academic achievement.

---

Conclusion: America Needs Bold, Not Cosmetic, Reforms

The American education system doesn’t need minor tweaks—it needs a deep structural rethinking. The U.S. must stop chasing short-term metrics and start investing in long-term human development. The solutions are already out there—proven by countries that spend less but achieve more. What’s missing is the political will, public consensus, and cultural shift toward treating education as a national priority on par with defense or the economy.

Education should be the ladder of opportunity. But in its current form, American public education too often reinforces inequality rather than reversing it.

The good news? With vision and courage, it can be fixed. And the world has already written the playbook.

World-Class Learning: The Rich Countries with the Best Education Systems

World-Class Learning: The Rich Countries with the Best Education Systems

When it comes to the best education systems globally, many of the top performers are high-income nations that have long invested in building robust, equitable, and future-ready schools. These countries don’t just throw money at education—they design systems that cultivate curiosity, reward excellence in teaching, and prioritize the holistic development of each child.

Below are some of the richest countries in the world that also happen to have the best education systems, along with the key features that set them apart:

---

1. Finland: The Gold Standard of Equitable Learning

Finland’s education system has become a global benchmark—not for being the most high-tech or the most competitive, but for being the most humane and effective.

Key Features:

• No standardized testing—except one national exam at the end of high school.

• Highly qualified teachers—all must hold master’s degrees, and teaching is among the most prestigious professions.

• Equal opportunity—funding is allocated to ensure all students, regardless of region or background, get the same quality of education.

• Late start, strong finish—formal schooling begins at age 7, but early childhood emphasizes play and emotional intelligence.

• Short school days, no homework culture—with more emphasis on learning how to learn.

---

2. Singapore: Small Country, Big Results

From struggling in the 1960s to topping global rankings today, Singapore's education system is a model of intentional, data-driven excellence.

Key Features:

• Rigorous curriculum, especially in math and science—Singapore math is used in many U.S. schools.

• High-stakes exams, used to track students into academic or technical pathways.

• Continuous teacher development, with mentorship, regular training, and competitive salaries.

• Bilingual education—students must learn both English and their mother tongue.

• Strong parental involvement, reflecting a national culture that prizes educational achievement.

---

3. South Korea: High Achievement, High Pressure

South Korea’s education system is intense and results-driven. It boasts near-universal literacy and top rankings in reading and math.

Key Features:

• Massive societal investment in education, including a $20 billion private tutoring (hagwon) industry.

• National obsession with university entrance, centered around the CSAT (College Scholastic Ability Test).

• Highly respected teachers, with government-set standards and good pay.

• Digital classrooms, with tech-integrated instruction across subjects.

• Moral education included in curriculum, promoting civic values alongside academics.

---

4. Canada: Quiet Excellence

Canada often flies under the radar, but it consistently performs among the top in reading, science, and math—with less inequality than most other rich nations.

Key Features:

• Decentralized system, with each province managing its own schools yet achieving high standards.

• Diversity-friendly policies, ensuring that immigrant and indigenous students are included and supported.

• Bilingual education (English and French), with a strong emphasis on language proficiency.

• Low dropout rates, high college enrollment, and excellent public school options.

• Teachers are unionized, well-paid, and professionally respected.

---

5. Japan: Blending Tradition and Innovation

Japan is known for its disciplined and structured education system, which is rooted in values like respect, perseverance, and group harmony.

Key Features:

• Long school hours and after-school programs, creating a full-day learning experience.

• Standardized curriculum, set nationally but delivered with local flexibility.

• Classroom cleanliness and student responsibility—children clean their classrooms themselves.

• High literacy and numeracy rates, with world-leading results on global assessments.

• Moral and character education, emphasizing social responsibility.

---

6. Netherlands: Choice and Autonomy

The Dutch system is known for school choice, inclusive policies, and student happiness—a rare combination of freedom and structure.

Key Features:

• Publicly funded school choice, allowing parents to choose among public, religious, or alternative schools.

• Focus on student well-being, with policies against stress and over-testing.

• Early identification of learning needs, including support for students with disabilities or language barriers.

• Short school hours but high effectiveness, especially in early childhood education.

• High English proficiency, taught from a young age.

---

Conclusion: What Makes These Systems Great?

Across all these high-income nations, a few common threads emerge:

• Professionalization of teaching: Great education systems treat teachers like experts.

• Equity as a foundation: Top systems ensure that excellence is for everyone, not just the privileged.

• Balance between academic rigor and well-being: Learning environments are designed to challenge without crushing.

• Commitment to continuous innovation, adapting systems to meet future needs—whether that’s digital skills, climate literacy, or emotional intelligence.

Wealth can help build a strong education system—but it’s how a country uses its wealth that truly determines whether its students will thrive. These nations prove that the right policies, values, and priorities can make all the difference.

1: Japan

Trade War: US, EU, China, Japan

The trade war is a proven recipe for a global recession or worse and possible political mayhem. Trump's trade war with the EU bores ill for global trade because the EU has none of the China issues, supposedly. Bilateral trade is a primitive concept. It is like ditching digital money and going back to silver coins.

A global depression would create a new wave of fascism across the planet. Irrationality will come to rule.

The only hope is that all this saber-rattling is posturing and will soon give way to common sense. But there are no such signs yet on the horizon.

The idea that every country and every group of countries have been unfair to the US on trade ...... the whole idea of "fair trade" has been that the US has been unfair to the rest of the world, especially to the poorest countries. Racist white nationalism will also have you believe that you feel sorry for the whites because they have suffered so much from racism.

Brexit? Aexit?

The sensible thing to do would be to attempt WTO reform. Killing the WTO takes us back to the 1930s. So far the global economy's resilience built through trade has held. But that resilience can stretch only so much.

Trump's trade temper tantrums are insanely destructive. And his traditionally pro-trade party is going all the way with him. It is strange. This might not be the first time politics trumps sound economic theory.

A trade war with Europe would be larger and more damaging than Washington’s dispute with China Data from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative shows that in 2018, the U.S. imported $683.9 billion of EU goods and $557.9 billion from China. ..... There have already been tariffs on European steel and aluminum — which led the bloc to impose duties of 25% on $2.8 billion of U.S. products in June 2018, and, there’s an ongoing dispute regarding Airbus and Boeing — but experts believe a wider spat with Europe would be much more damaging than the current tit-for-tat with China. ....... “In 2018, the U.S. exported more than three times more to the EU than to China,” Hense said, adding that the region could therefore hit back hard against Washington. ..... “The rules of international trade, which we have developed over the years hand-in-hand with our American partners, cannot be violated without a reaction from our side” ...... Both economies are slowing down, and the cyclical effect of the tariffs is likely to be pretty strong ..... Speaking at the U.S. Senate in mid-July, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said that “crosscurrents, such as trade tensions and concerns about global growth, have been weighing on economic activity and the outlook.” .......

the business models of multinational firms is in danger as a result of a potential U.S.- EU trade war

...... “Much of the (EU-U.S.) trade takes place within firms rather than between them … (as a result) when you impose tariffs between the U.S. and Europe, you end up raising the prices for consumers and complicating the way goods are assembled in both places, as in the U.S.-China case, but you also end up disrupting the profitability of the business models for large multinationals,” he said. ...... “Since many, if not most of those large multinationals are American, this is going to put a further drag on the U.S. economy” ....... “A trade war between the U.S. and Europe would be more challenging than a trade war between the U.S. and China because it would weaken U.S. multinationals, reduce the size of the markets U.S. firms can access, and create incentives for U.S. firms to divest from their foreign assets and so unleash further foreign competition”.....“In other words, it would undo all the structural advantages that successive U.S. administrations created since the end of the Second World War”

How Trump May Finally Kill the WTO

The Beauty Of The Shorebreak! pic.twitter.com/yjCLfXcA4d

— Farbod Saraf (@farbodsaraf) December 15, 2019

Trade War: US, EU, China, Japan https://t.co/XE6zTQBP33 #TradeWar #Trump #recession #depression #globaltrade #worldtrade #wto #wtoreform #UnitedStates #eu #China #Japan #tariffs #protectionism #worldtradeorganization

— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) December 15, 2019

Dubai: Videos (5)

An Intelligent Conversation On Trade

I am not a big fan of Donald Trump. The guy is asinine. But you do deal with the office.

There is a need for an intelligent conversation on trade. Donald Trump is a hammer looking for a nail. He is arguing against sound economic theory. At some level, his moves can be seen as a fascist's fantasy for a Great Depression. Come, Depression, come!

He has beef with China, but he also has beef with India. He has beef with India, but he also has beef with Germany.

The WTO has prevented many wars. Countries that trade seldom go to war. Instead of saying China lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, Donald Trump says China stole hundreds of billions of dollars. Minus China, the US was looking at a Great Depression in 2008. It is good to have some large economies in the world.

Trade talk has to be forward-looking. The pre-WTO world had much strife.

Giving every human being on earth a biometric ID that rests on the Blockchain, and giving everybody access to credit and financial services, in general, is what would be forward-looking. The next generation of trade talks will be about allowing human beings to move from anywhere to anywhere else on earth. That would immediately add trillions of dollars to the global GDP.

Intellectual property laws written in the US Congress can not be imposed upon the world. That truth is no clearer than with medicine. What we need is a world government, a global parliament.

WTO Reform: A New Round Of Trade Talks Are Necessary

Bilateral will do no good. This is like India and Pakistan going bilateral on Kashmir. No progress has been made in 70 years. If the US and China insist on resolving this on their own, there might be no progress.

This is not about saying the US is right about China, or China has a point. This is about the very mechanism of talks, the very framework. The issues come later.

China might not be a western-style democracy. But Germany is. France is. The UK is. Italy is. India is a democracy. You want all of them at the table.

Infographic: Here’s How the Global GDP Is Divvied Up

The US seems to be 25% of the global economy, but that is very far from 100% or even 51%. The European Union, Japan, India, and China are important players. By now the supply chains in the global economy are so complex, it makes little sense to not give the major trade powers seats at the table. China and the US can not do this alone.

There is economic theory around trade. Much of it supports trade. But then there is the politics of trade. And that can sometimes decouple from the economic theory. If your goal is to fill up the streets of Hong Kong with protesters, maybe the trade war is a good idea. But that does not seem to be the stated goal. The US trade deficit might be more to do with the US dollar's position in the global economy.

A prolonged trade war might cost Donald Trump the 2020 election. He might lose even without it. The polls show him at 42% and trailing Joe Biden in every battleground state. The dude might get impeached. Maybe there is no firewall for him in the US Senate. Maybe it will be Pence versus Harris in 2020. Who knows?

There is political peril for both sides. The Chinese army out in the streets of Hong Kong will seriously undermine the Chinese Communist Party. This is not 1989. You can not cover it up.

The biggest political peril is that the two powers drag the global economy into a major recession, and that gives rise to all sorts of fascists around the world.

North Korea: A Permanent Peace Treaty Is Worth Denuclearization

I think North Korea has been clear that it wants a permanent peace treaty with the US with China and Russia as witnesses, and then it will agree to denuclearize. It basically wants an ironclad guarantee that the US will not invade. I don't understand why that offer cannot be taken.

Take the offer, halt the joint military exercises for a halt in North Korean missile tests. China and Russia being witnesses would be great. They are two relevant powers in the region.

And top it off by withdrawing all economic sanctions. Maximize trade and travel between the two Koreas. Offer to blanket the whole country in 5G for free.

It will begin with a trickle. But North Korea will be East Germany sooner rather than later. The two Koreas will unite. Because people will soon enough begin marching with their feet. One just hopes South Korea can integrate North Korea with as few hiccups as possible.

Trump And Kim Ought To Meet

Trump's attitude can not be that unless North Korea utterly capitulates, he sees no point in meeting. The hot air both have been blowing is not empty bluster. There are more dangerous things than nuclear war. They are called nuclear bluster, nuclear stupidity, and nuclear miscalculation.

This is not about regime change in North Korea. This is about walking away from the nuclear brink.

It is wise to involve third parties like China and Russia, not to say South Korea and Japan. Both the North and the South need that participation. Unless China is on the table American troops can not meaningfully leave the peninsula. And Trump desperately wants to leave. It is costing America too much to stay there.

You tone down the nuclear rhetoric. You formally end the war. You pull out the troops, and open up the border. And then good things start happening.

China is not the Soviet Union. It has a thriving private sector. There is no China collapse in the offing. But a Korean unification will be good for the free, open world.

The American political system is pretty good, but it is not the final word on political systems.

Trump and Kim meeting will be reassuring for the world, even if there is no progress made. But likely some progress will be made, and they will then have a second summit. A botched effort will ring alarm bells in too many of the world's capitals.



Trump says North Korea summit talks continue: 'Could even be the 12th': "We'll see what happens. It could even be the 12th. We're talking to them now," he said. "They very much want to do it. We'd like to do it." ...... Asked whether the North Koreans were playing games, Trump acknowledged they were -- and suggested he was too....... Kim Kye Gwan, a top official at North Korea's Foreign Ministry, said Trump's decision to cancel the talks, which were scheduled for June 12 in Singapore, ran counter to the global community's wishes for peace on the Korean Peninsula.

President Trump Says North Korea Summit Still Possible
How Trump Got Outplayed on North Korea: Over the past year, the president has repeatedly underestimated the importance of making real trade-offs in diplomacy. These choices appear to be anathema to his “go big or go home” style of deal-making. The Trump administration has been eager to jettison the “weak,” “terrible” deals negotiated by previous presidents — including the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Paris climate agreement, and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran. With North Korea, he was seeking something bigger and better, “a very special moment for World Peace.” ........ While it’s true that deals like the Iran nuclear agreement had inherent shortcomings, they also effectively advanced America’s national security. In fact, their limitations reflect a hard-nosed assessment of the risk of the alternatives, the broader geostrategic interests in play and the constraints on America’s leverage. In diplomacy, every deal is an imperfect deal. The question is, how imperfect? And at what cost? Unless you can produce a better alternative, tossing out a less-than-perfect agreement that does advance some concrete goals is an exercise in peril. “Repeal” is almost always simpler than “replace.” ...... a deal that constrains, even if it does not immediately eliminate, North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs without offering unacceptable concessions in return. Whether such a deal is possible depends on Mr. Trump’s ability to embrace the art of the imperfect deal...... The United States has less leverage than it thinks in this negotiation. ...... If the past six weeks of diplomatic speed-dating over North Korea have made one thing clear, it’s that all the other people at this dance have a clear strategy and are playing their limited hands to full effect. The Trump administration, meanwhile, has attitude, swagger, and now a breakup letter for the ages. What it doesn’t yet have is a viable strategy.

Trump's nuclear failures from Iran to North Korea: In just over a year, Donald Trump has managed to nudge the world closer to conflict on both ends of the Asian continent. ....... The Trump administration simply lacks the basic strategic understanding and diplomatic finesse to cope with perplexing foreign policy challenges. When confronted with difficult geopolitical realities, Trump seems to prefer turning things into reality show episodes....... Trump's announcement was met by a melange of puzzlement, outrage and profound anxiety across the world. South Korea responded in total confusion, struggling to find a way out of the latest plot twist in the Trump-Kim saga. ....... Back in April, the South Korean leader held a crucial summit with Kim Jung-un at the Panmunjom demilitarised zone. There, for the first time in history, both sides seriously discussed the prospect of full denuclearisation on the Korean Peninsula. ....... Moon staked his presidency on unlocking the Korean conflict. In an event of actual war, Seoul, which lies within the range of North Korean artilleries, would likely be the first and biggest victim. ...... In recent days, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the de facto leader of the "free world", went so far as stating that Europe can no longer rely on the US as a source of protection. ...... One by one, the US' most important allies have openly questioned the Trump administration's capacity for global leadership. For them, Washington is an increasingly unreliable superpower, which is beginning to threaten the existing international order with "Trump-style" leadership....... Interestingly, North Korea responded with uncharacteristic restraint, expressing its continued "willingness to sit at any time, in any way to resolve issues". All of a sudden, Pyongyang looked like the adult in the room....... the Trump administration insisted on unilateral, comprehensive, and immediate nuclear disarmament........ For anyone familiar with North Korea's strategic calculus, however, this was an outrageous non-starter. After all, what Pyongyang prefers is a step-by-step approach, whereby both sides de-escalate their confrontation on a gradual and reciprocal basis over time. ...... More fundamentally, countries around the world, both friends and foes, are wondering whether the US is a country that can be negotiated with at all.

The US-India-Japan-Australia Alternative To OBOR Should Focus on Broadband And Hyperloop And Drones

Talk of four-nation-led ‘alternative’ to Belt and Road picks up steam https://t.co/tRbAmRaIag via @asiatimesonline

— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) February 21, 2018

Talk of four-nation-led ‘alternative’ to Belt and Road picks up steam

Planning is under way to establish a joint regional infrastructure scheme led by the US, India, Japan and Australia, as the four countries continue efforts to balance China’s growing regional influence. ....... The official played down the idea that the plan would be a “rival” to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, saying he preferred the word “alternative.” ....... “No one is saying China should not build infrastructure” ........ “China might build a port which on its own is not economically viable. We could make it economically viable by building a road or rail line linking that port.” ......... The planning comes as the Trump administration embraces Japan’s articulation of a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” ....... the China hawk nominated to be the US ambassador to Australia, Harry Harris, was expressing concerns about China’s “predatory economic behavior in the Indo-Pacific.”

There is no need for a Cold War mentality. This is not war. This is trade. But competition is good. Let US-India-Japan-Australia compete with China. The peoples of Asia and Africa will benefit.

The primary focus ought be to take broadband to every community across the region. Then there has to be a major push for clean energy. Energy is the number one bottleneck to prosperity. And the bullet train perhaps should be bypassed for hyperloop technology. The biggest cities should connect to satellite cities and to each other. But if broadband gets there first, education will improve fast, and many people will get to telecommute, there will be ecommerce proliferation.

Ports, and rails, and roads have not gone out of fashion.

But infrastructure is not only physical. It can be argued, the number one item is identity infrastructure, the biometric kind that India has managed to build. The number two item is credit infrastructure so as to make loands available to everyone. What has been done in India should be replicated across the region, across Africa.

And just like Indians skipped landlines and went straight to mobile phones, the drone technology allows one to not wait until roads and bridges are built in remote, sparsely populated regions. Drones are the new "wireless."

Both camps - China and the alternate - ought to get the interest rate right. The work has to feel more like a Marshall Plan than usury.