Other news and comment

The Guardian has an article reporting from Krasnoyarsk on the environmental risk caused by forest fires in Siberia.

Also in the Guardian, Nick Paton Walsh has written a comment article on the West's oil-induced tolerance of the Uzbek regime.

Finally from the Guardian is a digested (and marginally satirical) version of the EU Constitution, allegedly in the style of the original, and of course, reflecting UK media attitudes...

On the subject of the EU Constitiution, while the UK is now waiting for the outcome of the Dutch vote (Blair must be delighted...), Denmark has said it will go ahead with its referendum, as will Portugal and Ireland.

Denmark has also seen a Lutheran minister who claimed that "there is no heavenly God" reinstated in his parish, following his suspension in June 2004.

Mikhail Khordorkovsky, ex-boss of the Russian oil company Yukos, has been sentenced to 9 years in prison, reports the BBC.

The BBC also reports that Russia will withdraw its troops from Georgia by 2008.

Back on the subject of Uzbekistan (again), a few days ago the FT published a comment article on the economics of Asia's involvement with Uzbekistan and the consequences for Uzbeks should involvement lessen:

The hard rationale for Asia's Uzbek interests
By David Wall
Published: May 26 2005 20:34 Last updated: May 26 2005 20:34

Roh Moo-Hyun, the South Korean president, visited Uzbekistan two weeks ago. Why did Mr Roh think this central Asian country merited a three-day state visit? South Korea is by far the largest foreign investor in Uzbekistan, now accounting for $1.4bn (€1.1bn), about 40 per cent, of foreign investment - more than the European Union and US combined. It is home to about 200,000 ethnic Koreans, and two years ago Islam Karimov, the Uzbek president, appointed a South Korean to a senior government post.

South Korea is not alone; this week the Chinese rolled out the red carpet for Mr Karimov on a two-day state visit to Beijing - even as western governments were condemning reports of last month's massacre of civilians in the eastern Uzbek town of Andizhan. The highlight of Mr Karimov's China visit was the signing of a $600m deal to develop Uzbekistan's oil fields. Indeed, massive Japanese and Chinese financial interests mean that three of Asia's biggest economies are experiencing a strange, collective ignorance over the unrest and violence in Uzbekistan.

By contrast, most western companies are not interested in working amid such a corrupt and oppressive regime. Even usually tolerant aid agencies and institutions such as the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development have halted financial co-operation with the central government, assisting only local, private sector and humanitarian projects.
Asian companies, however, are not so squeamish. The Japanese-dominated Asian Development Bank is quite happy to support the Uzbek regime. Korean companies such as Daewoo, Samsung and LG have heavily invested in the country. South Korea has also offered to help with the development of Uzbekistan's energy reserves, providing technology, training and development funds.

While the South Koreans currently dominate the Uzbek trade and investment scene, other north-east Asian countries are in hot pursuit. Japanese firms, including Mitsui, are deeply involved in the country and their government extends extensive aid to support economic projects of interest to Japan. The Chinese are also committed to Uzbekistan, and this week's oil deal could be the first of many. They are keen to develop the country's oil fields, with an eye to connecting them to the pipeline running from underdeveloped west China to the rich east coast. They are also financing anti-terrorist activities in Tashkent in the hope that this will, among other things, restrict sabotage on the pipeline.

Mr Roh did not say much about the massacres in Uzbekistan after he got back to Seoul. Nor did the Japanese government, which called on both sides to refrain from violence. The Chinese have gone further, congratulating Mr Karimov and his government on their willingness "to strike down the three forces of terrorism, separatism and extremism".

However, this culture of active ignorance - or blatant embrace, in China's case - cannot continue indefinitely and a deterioration in investment and trade is inevitable. Even the ADB may begin to consider imposing human rights conditions on its lending, or at least start worrying about investing in a country so obviously in political and economic decline.

If, as it probably now will, Asian economic co-operation with the Karimov regime finally begins to wane, so will the quality of life, for those Uzbeks with any quality of life left. Already this year, the government has closed the biggest private bank, the Business Bank, an institution in which the EBRD was planning to invest. And the state-owned National Bank, a key facilitator for the country's diminishing elite to transform their wealth into foreign currency, has announced it will not accept any more deposits. It simply cannot process the sheer size of inflows, a sure sign of a likely growth in the already huge capital flight from the country.

Ironically the saviour of this dying autocratic regime could well be the US. The US State Department may be sending critical messages to the Karimov regime but is only likely to be undermined by US military interests, which have recently reaffirmed their support through an increase in funding for the Uzbek government. These actions are not surprising. Independent observers inside Uzbekistan say that US presence in the country is up to twice as large as Washington is willing to admit. The loss of Uzbekistan would therefore have serious strategic implications. It remains to be seen whether this will be enough to save the Karimov regime but many in Asia are watching closely.

The writer is an associate fellow of Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs


Finally, there was an interesting article by Brian Walden on the BBC site yesterday that is worth reading on the topic of is 'the West' a politically meaningless term nowadays:

A Point of View
By Brian Walden

In his weekly opinion column, Brian Walden considers the expression "the West" and if it will soon be politically meaningless.

My father's generation used to talk about Britain and the empire, the United States of America and Europe. They never talked about "the West" because such an idea had no meaning.
The Americans had been isolationists ever since World War I and Europe was an alarming place containing Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. There was nothing that bound "the West" together, so the expression wasn't used.

After the World War II the powerful Soviet Union, surrounded by a buffer of Communist states that extended into the heart of Central Europe, seemed to threaten Western Europe. The NATO alliance was formed - with America as the principal member - to contain this threat.
We spoke of "the West" and the term meant something. All the countries of "the West" were united by a reaction against the possibility of Russian expansion. The latent differences between western countries were kept in check by the Soviet menace. Now the Soviet Union has gone. We still speak of "the West," but I think the expression will soon be politically meaningless.
Whether they had voted yes or no, the French referendum on the European constitution brought to the fore the widening gap between Europe and America, or as the French persist in saying "the Anglo-Saxons."

The French don't like Anglo-American style capitalism. Nor do they share American foreign policy aims. And they aren't alone in their beliefs. There's a kind of European social democracy that's quite separate in its objectives from American capitalism. Britain perches uneasily between these two models.

Years ago when I used to go to Konigswinter for Anglo-German political get-togethers, I remember having dinner with a German politician who's tongue had been loosened by the wine. What he said wasn't foolish, but it was unusually frank.

'Historic destiny'

He said: "Russia and America are both alien influences in Europe and eventually they'll both withdraw from it. Then we can return to our historic destiny." Of course I was intrigued to know what this historic destiny was and eventually he blurted it out.

It wasn't particularly shocking, it was that he wanted European political union to be close and produce a state called Europe. What I hadn't realised was the sheer intensity of this man's desire for it and his near hatred of the superpowers who he thought were preventing it.
Today there's only one superpower - America. Perhaps the US deserves much gratitude for what it's done to preserve European freedom. In practice it doesn't get it. Its influence and culture are resented for reasons very close to those my tipsy German friend gave me all those years ago.

There are deep-seated economic, political and cultural factors that are pushing Europe and America apart. The first is romantic anti-capitalism. That socialism was, for some people, a great romance, tends to be forgotten these days.

But I recall an extraordinary character named Konni Zilliacus. He was always being expelled, or about to be expelled, from the Labour Party. For a time he was the MP for Gorton in Manchester and, though I didn't share his views, I liked him.

He'd met Lenin and was forever wedded to a Socialist Utopia. One evening tears trickled down his cheeks as he explained to me the beautiful vision that American capitalism had destroyed.
"Nobody should want possessions," he said. "Whatever their faults, Lenin and Stalin never had any money. The Socialist dream was to produce a new man who loved society and was loved by society.

Tears

"Capitalism, in general, was no threat. It worked badly. But this Yankee capitalism has corrupted everybody. People want cars, clothes and gadgets. America has destroyed mankind's future."

There can't be many socialist visionaries like Konni Zilliacus left. But there are millions of Europeans who morally reject American materialism and blame it for the faults in their society. That's divisive enough, but there's a second group that doesn't want to belong to any West that includes America.

These are old-fashioned right-wingers who bear an ancient grudge. The reason for their hostility to America is that traditionally the US has disapproved of European imperialism. This was a great problem for Winston Churchill in President Roosevelt's later years, particularly at the Yalta conference with Stalin.

In the 1950's both France and Britain felt they had reason to be aggrieved by lack of American support as they struggled with the last of their imperial problems. The Suez adventure, which was a reckless attempt to combat the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser, by a temporary alliance between Britain, France and Israel was wrecked by the active disapproval of the USA.
The damage this did to relations with America was hastily covered up and a myth was invented to explain the breach. It was said that poor Anthony Eden was physically ill and wasn't thinking straight. The implication was that few other people fully supported the operation. This version of history is most unjust to Eden. Many notables were strongly opposed to Nasser, including Churchill and Labour's former foreign secretary, Herbert Morrison.

America's lack of sympathy towards the imperial problems of its allies has been swept under the carpet as if everybody is somewhat ashamed of the subject. But it's extremely important. Many people on the political right have never forgiven America.

While the Soviet Union was powerful, mostly they kept silent - though of course President de Gaulle didn't. With the Soviet Union gone these right-wing critics see no reason to support America in anything it does. They are, for instance, virulently opposed to the current campaign in Iraq.

Americans aren't noted for their ability to turn the other cheek. Angry at European criticism and, as they see it, ingratitude, they've been hitting back sharply. A friend of mine, a former Senator - and by the way a Democrat, not a Republican supporter of President Bush - said to me "I don't ever again expect to see the French or the Germans pointing their guns in the same direction we're pointing ours. They're petty, they're envious and in their guts they hate us."
This disturbing indication that "the West" is breaking-up is reinforced by a growing cultural difference between America and Europe. Some American commentators note, with something close to contempt, that Western Europeans aren't replenishing themselves because of their low birth-rates. They fasten on to predictions that Holland will become a majority Muslim country within a few decades and they tie this to the general disapproval of American policy in the Middle East.

'Obsolete'

Then another cultural factor is thrown into the mix. Europe is secular and lacking in Christian religious faith compared to the American heartlands. A picture is painted of decadent European societies without religious belief and without purpose. According to some American pundits these societies are selfish pessimistic and cowardly, with most of the dirty jobs being done by vigorous Islamic immigrants, who despise their hosts as much as their hosts secretly fear them.
I don't believe "the West" of the Cold War can be reconstituted. Too much has changed. So I can see that some loosening of the more irksome ties, for instance within NATO, between America and what Mr Rumsfeld calls "old" Europe might be in the best interests of both.

It's harder to see the logic of an open breach. In the first place, there are many Americans closer to the social democratic European view than that of their own government. Similarly, some Europeans are admirers of the dynamic nature of Anglo-American capitalism.

As a political idea "the West" is obsolete. But there's a reason for avoiding a quarrel. We've all got enough on our plate. We have the debt burden, the effects of globalisation and our intellectual uncertainty about what to do for the best. It's not a good time to pick a fight.

BBC NEWS: AUDIO Hear A Point of View in the BBC Radio Player
There's also comments on the article on the site.