Sunday, July 7, 2024

Britain’s New Government – Which Lane will it be Taking?

Myanmar must have got the most ridiculous driving system in the world. Its cars are mainly the right-hand drive varieties, yet, they have to drive on the right-hand side of the road. Try it out yourself and see how awkward the experience can be for you. I thought the world is also shaping up this way. 

* * * * * * * * *
61-year-old Keir Starmer has become the UK’s new prime minister. His Labour Party commands a solid majority. We all know Labour carried the country not because it was hugely popular but because, like everywhere in the world where hope for the incumbents has fast faded, it is a case of “let’s give the other party a chance to see if they can do better” hope!

Boris Johnson plunged the UK’s stock into deep ravine. His strong advocacy for Brexit was really not a bad idea. But he screwed up his country. On one hand, he pretended to be “professional” (on Huawei as a case in point); on the other, he tried to bootlick Donald Trump, when the latter clearly thought he was not in his league. We can see how the pseudo leaders in the EU are wrecking Europe’s fortune today. By abdicating their sovereignty over trade matters, Germany and France are forced to go along with some of the silliest policies just because Ursula von Leyen wants to please Joe Biden (or the Deep State in the US).

His successor Liz Truss must be the dumbest blonde Britain has ever produced. She had absolutely no idea about economics. Naturally, she could last only a couple of weeks. (Incidentally, she was not able to keep her seat in the recent election.) As if the Tories were determined to be booted out, they voted Rishi Sunak to be her successor.

Sunak personifies the worst or the best of Indian-ness, depending on which side of the fence you are sitting.

(I have often used the term Chineseness in my blog. A friend wrote to ask if it was grammatically correct or even appropriate. I just did not feel necessary to explain, after all, he is also Chinese ethnically. Having said that, I thought I should say something about it here. It is simply my way of stereotyping without wanting to write what is obvious but subtle. I have often used Chineseness to epitomize certain aspects of our ethnic cultures, characteristics, behaviours, and way of life, which can be either good or bad to beholders. The good aspects of our Chineseness are of course, our propensity to slog hard; and the bad aspects are some of our kinsmen’s lack of etiquette in public behaviours.)

Sunak was born in the UK to parents of Indian descent who originally hailed from East Africa, went to Winchester College, and later studied PPE at Oxford. He did his MBA at Stanford. He was certainly an outstanding scholar. He is pretty short and the complex in him must have made him determined to be more “high-nose” than an English “gentleman”. This is borne out in the way he carries himself and speaks. But he forgot that he was not one of them. And he and his wife have also exhibited several self-serving and ethical shortcomings for the British public to notice.

There are already too many non-British people in the UK, thanks chiefly to their sense of guilt developed from their hundreds of years of rule of many parts of Africa, West, South and Southeast Asia, and Hong Kong. (I flew into Birmingham a year or so before the COVID19 pandemic and thought I had landed in an Indian airport!)

There is always some racism in everyone of us. We hide it to be socially correct. If the person performs to our expectations, we are happy to accept him or her as one of “us.” Otherwise, prejudice will soon rear its ugly head again.

This is precisely what has happened to Sunak. He installed several South Asians as his key Cabinet colleagues. And instead of doing the right thing, he got sucked in and acted in manners that predecessors had been accused of, and worse. The cost of living in the country deteriorated further and most British felt miserable financially. On the international front, it is a pathetic shade of its former self.

Starmer’s victory speech was delivered without much pompousness. He appears to be more down-to-earth. Indeed, he lacks the type of charisma that is normally present in political leaders in Britain. However, looks are deceiving. China should not count on him to be more friendly. Starmer has visited Taiwan on two occasions. It is said that as a human rights lawyer, he went there principally to lobby against death penalty. However, I am a little skeptical of his true purpose. (That noble?) Nonetheless, Britain’s economy is in such a dire state now and any attempt to poke China’s eyes will only hurt the country further. (Former prime minister David Cameron was said to be China-friendly when he was in office, but the day he returned to become Britian’s Foreign Secretary, he claimed China had changed and had to be dealt with accordingly. Who has caused China to change in the first place?)

We are going into a very unpredictable time. Joe Biden has vowed to fight on. Short of a miracle, Donald Trump will be the emperor of the United States of America again. India’s Modi has already understood he will no longer have a high pedestal to sit on when he joins any G7 summits. He is now feverishly courting Putin. (And in his typical Indian-ness, he did not see fit to attend the recent SCO Summit at Kazakhstan. How did the Central Asian leaders feel? The reasons? Your guess will be as good as mine!) Ukraine’s Zelensky is likely to be sacrificed. As for Taiwan’s William Lai, South Korea’s Yoon and the Philippines’ Marcos, Jr, Trump is going to ask, “You folks, what’s in it for me to help you?”

Putin has just given Biden the kiss of death in suggesting the latter is a “better” president for America. What is emerging in the world is most confusing. Trump is supposed to personify the Neo-Con Right in America. Much of continental Europe has swerved to the right. And Labour is supposed to be a left-wing party, and it is now tasked with Right Wing mission to curtail immigration and protect its middles class. All very “right wing” in European talk, indeed.

Global South leaders are increasingly aware that the way to navigate in the stormy world ahead is to work with or count on China. It is the only country that does everything with long-term considerations and philosophical thoughts (which may look undemocratic to the shallow lot in many parts of the world). Even Argentina’s “rock-star” President Milei knows that he cannot dollarize his currency without earning dollars (or to be more exact, Chinese Yuan)!!!



7 comments:

  1. It was said when asked on the effect of the French Revolution, Zhou replied 'too early to tell'. Perhaps, likewise, the fate of the Tories today from what they had done to other countries during the heydays of Victoria who remains best known for being history's biggest drug peddler.

    Meanwhile, their Labour's Starmer may have won on his mantra of 'change'. However, as the new PM, he is already stammering it will take some time. As management consultants will vouch, change management is not that easy to execute and volatile UK today is beset by a legacy of intractable problems.

    Suffice to say, the land of Newton, Maxwell, Shakespeare, Byron, Hargreaves, Brunel, Savery, Thuring, Smith, Keynes, More, Denning, Blyton, Doyle, Rowling, McCartney, Lennon, Wren, Constable, Turner, and Advanced Risc Machines and DeepMind has perturbed its own equanimity built on the foundations of mass industrialization and viralized colonization. How else did those imposing victorian buildings in London come about as tourist attractions today in a city better known as the world's laundromat of foreign money?

    Like coffee dripping at the hands of a sleepy barista, the decline of the UK took time. Losing its manufacturing mojo and thus export heft, it turned to services - banking, tourism and education. These are however soft multipliers which means to maintain its standards of living, they have to be constantly competitive along two axes - value and price. They weren't, and Brexit only succeeded in jettisoning what's attractive of them by expanding alternative suppliers, furthermore exiting the requisite human capital of experts and investors to propel the next curve of progress.

    Cameron's mistake with Brexit was that he didn't definitively present a pros-and-cons case for or against it before letting the masses decide based on his call for the referendum.

    Rankling against the EU's parcelled and compulsory intake of immigrants and refugees for each member country, those masses in the UK alarmingly saw their erstwhile tea-and-scones social-welfared world being disfigured; as a result many clamoured to leave the EU but fatally without the benefit of a precise Pacioli accounting of future gains versus losses. So much for a defocused nation obsessed with its beer-binging tribal football pastime.

    With Brexit, the UK weakened its EU markethold to which its umbilical cord had been attached despite an earlier French opposition to its membership.

    In losing that market, it did not have a ready substitute in place since its assumption that it could depend on some special relationship with a MAGA and pro-Ireland US was at best only its own poodlish presumption while it has nothing to offer the rest of the world for its diminishing exports, what more increasing dependence on fuel imports.

    Even its Lea & Perrins worchestershire sauce has increased in price by 40% over one year, price-gougedly diluted with less anchovies and spices, the ringgit's weakened exchange rate notwithstanding.


    ReplyDelete
  2. 2/2

    Inhouse, Starmer faces the big problem of running a party of union teamsters which has to immediately tackle the problem of lack of funds, drop in productivity and failure of real progress while facing a disgruntled mass polity cynical about their political leaders in a world where other G7 leaders are now also seeing their confidence rattled.

    He has to find the funds to reengineer the UK's NHS, Education, Rails and Roads, and Green and Immigration transitions while re-enthusing investors to save its financial services, scientific research, startup and manufacturing ecosystems. But why would anyone care to invest in a trending decliner and self-doubter in all aspects?

    He cannot depend for ideas and pointers from the likes of Johnson, a world stage court jester, or Truss, at best a von der Leyen or Annalen Baerbock who are inveterate mischief mouth'ers. He should certainly bury the UK Parliament's China Research Group which includes Ian Duncan-Smith and some english lordships, at the least for their caving in to the US' Sullivan who ranted bullyingly without cause or proof against the UK buying Huawei, as was admitted by one Tory ex-minister.

    In fact, there're only two ways to get funds: sell some of his UK's gold bullion (310 metric tonnes at USD76 million/mt), and/or make China the UK's most favored nation. The US may gripe but would it sanction his UK? He may well want to consider two referenda: one to UK citizens to exit Brexit, and two to UK's business, industrial and research communities to partner with China's same for mutual developments across the globe.

    Only then would the UK still have some saving grace of its greatest asset still intact to some extent - its lingua franca english language as foundation of western knowhow - but in a world of fast AI translators.


    ReplyDelete
  3. 3/3

    As for Sunak, the clincher was he taking a politically motivated photo-opp to be seen looking sheepishly at a pothole, thereby reflecting how disconnected and elitist he was from what should have been solved without fanfare by any reasonably proactive and competent government.

    After going nowhere with the proposal for refugee resettlement in Ghana, and a proposal to call for military conscription when his UK treasury is under political storm and economic stress, and some talk about prioritizing math in schools when the whole UK university system is underfunded because fees for citizens won't be increased, he should have saved the day by jumping into that pothole, thereby saving the costs in running the election.

    It may well turn up that whichever the political party, the UK of today is a has-been much ado about nothing. And that's the biggest pothole it has to dig itself out from.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Brittania not only does not rule the waves, it reportedly could not afford to equip its new aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth with a full length deck for electromagnetically propelled jet fighter take offs, so settled for a shortened ramp deck, also ended up with multiple function failures during its sea trials requiring sailing back to port for repairs, a few such occasions. To add insult to injury to the Queen,
    there was insufficient funding to equip the carrier
    with the design quota of F35s, so reportedly borrowed some from USAF
    .

    Then the Admiralty decided to build a second aircraft carrier, the Prince of Wales.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Queen E sailed to the South China Sea as part of the armada to show China its prowess, together with USN and Royal Aust N, maybe also the Indian Navy

    ReplyDelete
  6. And the UK is helping to build Aukus nuclear subs for Canberra. Those lobsters which Albanese wants to export may be inedible if one leaks uranium-235. Whose half-life is 700 million years.

    ReplyDelete