The Political Economy of Global Warming and Its Changing Strategic Role
To a military strategist of the last century when nation states were eager to retain their sovereign power, weather was a potential weapon. In the 21st century, when the role of the nation states is being redefined, the strategic importance of weather may have changed. This paper has been divided into three sections were the changing importance of climate, in a TNC (transnational corporation) dominated world order has been analyzed. The first section, briefly discusses the genesis of the global warming concept - its scientific basis, economic consequence and political motives. The second section, deals with the major developments in the global warming issue during the period between the Rio Earth Summit and ratification of Kyoto protocol in 2005. This section we also highlights the fact that within a decade of its declaration, the basic objectives of the Rio Earth Summit have been distorted systematically confirming to the suspicion that from its inception, the objectives were not seriously taken up by the leaders. In this new century, the TNCs would play more important role than the sovereign nation states, in developing rules and regulations of different multilateral treaties, pertaining to important issues like climate change, intellectual property rights etc. The power of the nation states is eroding very fast. The TNCs with the help of mainstream global media, on which they have almost total control, are capable to systematically establish or suppress any 'scientific' view, which are important for their strategic planning. Under this changed power structure, old strategies and tactics are bound to change. 'Weather' which had a strategic importance as 'weapon' to a nation state during cold war period, is likely to have a strategic importance of different type (as 'economic good') to a TNC dominated world order of this century. Now the emphasis is more on economics than politics. The paradigm shift is very clear and distinct. The third section discusses the implications of the Kyoto Protocol on the global environment and energy market. By shifting environmentally hazardous activities to the fund-starved poorer countries, pollutions will be 'parceled out' to the Southern states. The responsibility of reducing the 'green house gas' has been shifted already to the less polluting developing countries by promising a few extra dollars. The Kyoto protocol basically has done this through its much-hyped clean development mechanism. However, few civil societies in the North have taken initiatives to correct this practice.The study concludes with the observation that in an integrated global economy, where TNCs have developed alliances with their local partners for further consolidation of their power, an international alliance of consumer and civil societies to safeguard common citizens' interest across the globe is essential. Fortunately few initiatives to this effect have been made. In the absence of such a coordinated effort, Southern countries, as before, will remain at the receiving ends and would be treated as dump yards for Northern wastes and pollutants.
Sustainable and Affordable Energy for the Poor in India: Documenting the Status and Policy Environment with Special Focus on the State of Orissa
Defining the 'energy needs' of the millions of economically challenged persons of India, a densely populated country with diversified socio cultural background, is very difficult. The livelihood options available before them are very limited and are mainly dominated by labor intensive farming practices and micro enterprises. Though the energy inputs in these low-tech 'production process of the masses' are much less compared to the capital intensive 'mass production process' of the affluent west, these limited livelihood options of the poor are not properly utilized due to lack of access to the minimum energy, required to run such economic activities. In addition to meet the basic energy needs for cooking, lighting, entertainment, improved dwelling, transport etc, the minimum energy required for running small and micro enterprises, water pumps for small scale irrigation, health and education facilities provided on a community basis, et al constitute the 'energy needs' of the poor. There was no dearth of fund and schemes to uplift economically challenged population. But these were not properly used due to lack of monitoring. Absence of a strong civil society network could be one of the reasons for the failures of these programs to make major changes in the livelihood of the targeted beneficiaries. Budget allocation does not ensure that services, as intended would be delivered to the targeted persons at the grass root level. Due to various socio political reasons, leakages have taken place. Decentralized model is best for democracy but to ensure that it functions properly, the stakeholders should play an active role. Corrupt politicians and civil servants taking advantage of people's inaction have hijacked the panchayat system. The public sector banks in recent years have reduced their loans to SMEs. This is not in line with the global trend. The PSU banks might have decided not to bear anymore subsidy burden in this competitive era. The shift in the government's policy towards market driven initiatives are clear. As per this model, the government will extend the infrastructural support and rest would be driven by market force. Micro credit mobilized at the local level through self-help groups (SHG) would play a more important role. The government has formed high-level committees to suggest appropriate policies on this. The signals are clear.
Tolerance as an Ideological Category
The Culturalization of Politics Why are so many problems today perceived as problems of intolerance, not as problems of inequality, exploitation, injustice? Why is the proposed remedy tolerance, not emancipation, political struggle, even armed struggle? The immediate answer is the liberal multiculturalist’s basic ideological operation: the culturalization of politics. Political differences, differences conditioned by political inequality, economic exploitation, and so on, are naturalized and neutralized into cultural differences, different ways of life, which are something given, something that cannot be overcome, but must be merely tolerated. To this, of course, one should answer in Benjaminian terms: from culturalization of politics to politicization of culture. The cause of this culturalization is the retreat and failure of direct political solutions (the welfare state, socialist projects, and so on). Tolerance is their postpolitical ersatz.