http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/all-tsne2.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/all-tsne2.txt 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/all-tsne2.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e4fb507
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/all-tsne2.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1051 @@
+<text id="syndicate/bmw-s-and-chinese-justice">
+BMW 's and Chinese Justice * * * * * In most places , the name " BMW " implies 
luxury and exclusivity . But in China , the brand has unwittingly found itself 
enmeshed in tales that illustrate the powerlessness of ordinary Chinese against 
the powerful and corrupt . The first scandal occurred last year , after a 
tractor filled with green onions scraped the side of a BMW in Harbin . The 
drivers of both the tractor and the metallic-silver luxury car were 45-year-old 
women , but any similarity between them ended there : the former was a peasant 
, the latter the wife of a wealthy businessman . After a confrontation between 
the two , the wealthy wife drove her BMW into the growing crowd of spectators 
on the roadside , killing the peasant woman and injuring 12 others . The case 
went to the local court , where the judge ruled it an " accidental traffic 
disturbance " and gave the driver a two-year suspended sentence . The judge 's 
ruling spurred rumors that he went easy on her because her hus
 band was related to senior provincial officials . It quickly became a story of 
" rich versus poor , " widely cited as an example of high-level corruption . 
Over the next few months , newspapers and television stations ran with the 
story as it snowballed into a national obsession . Alarmed by the public 
reaction , the Harbin magistrate ordered the case reopened , only to have the 
suspended sentence confirmed when the case was closed this March . The big BMW 
story of late 2003 resurfaced quietly , before being buried again forever . 
That same month , a lottery scandal threw the BMW brand into the limelight once 
again . Lottery officials in Shaanxi province rejected a winning ticket , 
calling it a fake and denying its bearer , a 17-year-old security guard named 
Liu Liang , the grand prize of a $58,000 BMW and 120,000 yuan ( $14,510 ) in 
cash . Liu became so angry about being accused of fraud and denied the car that 
he climbed atop a high advertising billboard and threatened to jump as 
 a show of innocence . But the story did n't end when police officers managed 
to talk him down . News broadcasts covered his continued insistence that he did 
not forge his ticket , along with the lottery center 's claims that their 
rejection of the ticket was legitimate . The police finally stepped in and , 
after a careful investigation , announced that they had found the true criminal 
: Yang Yongming , a private businessman whom the local lottery administration 
had contracted to organize ticket sales . Yang had conspired with the 
government officials directing the lottery , who were arrested for malfeasance 
, to fraudulently obtain the top prizes . In June Liu Liang finally got what he 
deserved - a BMW-325i sedan and a sincere apology from the lottery center . If 
the first scandal was a tragedy , the second was more like a farce . But both 
offer keys to understanding contemporary Chinese psychology . The outcry after 
the first BMW case was not really about the light sentence given t
 o a rich woman , but about the lack of confidence ordinary people have in 
China 's judicial system . In China , power , money , and connections trump the 
law . Even as they are becoming ever more litigious , many Chinese believe that 
they have no hope of securing justice against the powerful . The apathetic 
response of the dead peasant woman 's husband to the $10,000 in compensation he 
received was telling . " I do n't care about the verdict and whether it is 
justice or not , " he said . The most harmful consequence is the public 's loss 
of trust in the system . Social trust is not something you can buy with money . 
If an entire society believes that you cannot depend on legal rights for 
protection - that one must instead rely on a web of relationships with those 
who have power and influence - questions about whether such a society is 
livable or desirable will remain . Similarly , in the second BMW case , people 
did n't blame a corrupt businessman ; they ascribed culpability to the 
 lottery center , a government body . So instead of mistrusting one person , 
they grew suspicious of an institution - even of government itself . When a 
stubborn teenager went up against the mighty lottery authority with its army of 
auditors and inspectors and initial alibis , this individual , not the system , 
was the clear winner of the public 's admiration . Liu Liang may have been just 
a working-class kid , but there was wisdom in his words that there is still a " 
silent majority " who can affect the workings of China 's fragile society . He 
refused to settle privately , because he believed that if he let corrupt 
government officials off the hook , " they 'll keep scamming the public . " 
Thanks to his perseverance and the media 's investigation , the fraud was laid 
bare . Power corrupts everywhere , but individuals in China such as Liu have 
come to form a countervailing force . Even so , such marginal forces do not yet 
constitute a system for redressing grievances . While pop mus
 ic fans in China can listen to whatever they like , including Madonna singing 
" I 'm gonna shake up the system , " ordinary Chinese need courage to speak 
such messages aloud . As one saying goes , " There is not want of conscience in 
Chinese , but there is want of courage . " </text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-and-a-new-balance-of-power">
+China and a New Balance of Power SHANGHAI – The last rival superpower to the 
United States , the Soviet Union , collapsed in 1991. But , apart from its 
military strength , the USSR was never really powerful enough to counterbalance 
US influence . In the late 1980’s , Japan seemed capable of challenging 
America’s industrial leadership , but by the 1990’s it lost its competitive 
edge . China might itself wish to be a major force in a multi-polar world , but 
has been plagued by its lack of overall strength . Given these realities , 
China sees the expanding European Union as a likely counterweight to unchecked 
US power . In terms of economic output , today’s EU is on par with the US . 
But it has yet to build a strong defense system that can respond effectively 
either to regional contingencies or to global needs . What would be the 
strength of such a system if and when it is developed , and how will it compare 
with that of the US ? In assessing America’s strength , China foll
 ows US debates on the merits of a uni-polar or a multi-polar world with keen 
interest . Some Americans favor a uni-polar system in which the US dominates . 
Such a Pax Americana would cost the country less to sustain , but the world 
would worry if America adopts a wrong policy , as has been the case in Iraq . 
The US certainly has a right to curb terrorists like those who staged the 
attack on September 11 , 2001. But the “ war on terror ” did not warrant 
the decision to attack a sovereign state and topple its government on the 
flawed presumption that it housed weapons of mass destruction and was linked to 
the 2001 attacks . The US went to war despite strong opposition from France , 
Germany , Russia , China , and other United Nations Security Council members . 
France and Germany have since sought to restore good relations with the US , 
but continue to disapprove of the war . The Middle East , always a region of 
concern for Europe , has become even less stable as a result of the war
  . American leadership has been one of the war’s casualties . In China , the 
concept of an independent European defense – embodied in the European 
Security and Defense Policy ( ESDP ) , as well as the EU’s Rapid Reaction 
Force ( RRF ) and various police missions – is thus generally seen as 
necessary and effective in a multi-polar world system . China observes that on 
most security matters , the ESDP will ( for now ) mimic American security 
interests , because the EU and US share fundamental values of human rights and 
democracy . Moreover , many EU members have simultaneously pledged their 
defense capabilities to NATO , which has been led by the US since its creation 
. But the ESDP , once fully developed , will not necessarily follow America’s 
lead unconditionally , especially if American policy continues to deviate from 
the norm of international law , as in Iraq . As a result of acquiring a 
pan-European defense capacity , the Europeans are likely to play a more 
independent
  role than at present in managing intra-European security relations and 
carrying out global missions . China welcomes this expanded security role for 
the EU . Although it remains wary of international intervention by the EU , the 
substance and pattern of ESDP operations are likely to win China’s respect 
for several reasons . First , China’s leaders note that the ESDP gives 
priority to the legitimacy of its missions . So far , all ESDP missions have 
respected international law and governmental arrangements among disputing 
parties . Most of its military or police missions have been based on UN 
Security Council resolutions , and ESDP missions outside Europe have been at 
the invitation of local authorities . Of course , ESDP security missions , even 
those in accordance with Security Council resolutions , may not operate within 
the UN system – the EU prefers its own independent leadership . The ESDP does 
not necessarily require Security Council authorization as a condition for its 
 missions , and it retains an independent role in executing them . However , 
when compared with the US , the ESDP ( in Chinese eyes ) cares far more about 
international legitimacy , backed by the authority of the UN . Second , the 
ESDP is concerned with good governance and institution building . The EU is 
keen to restore or establish human rights , stability , and prosperity . 
Outside Europe , the ESDP acts to enhance governance rather than promote regime 
change , and the EU has often assisted governments ’ efforts to improve 
security conditions . Third , the ESDP is open to international cooperation . 
The EU works with either non-EU states , such as NATO members like Canada , 
Norway , and Turkey , or applicants for EU membership . The ESDP cooperates 
with the UN and other regional organizations , such as the African Union and 
ASEAN . When the EU reaches out , it tends to play a leading role in these 
collaborations . There are good reasons to expect that China will continue to 
acce
 pt an independent European security mechanism . There is little concern , if 
any , about the ESDP intervening in internal Chinese affairs , such as Taiwan . 
Indeed , China wants a strong and independent Europe , and from that vantage 
point it is not too early for China to envisage a truly multi-polar global 
system . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-and-russia-in-the-new-world-disorder">
+China and Russia in the New World Disorder Can Kosovo achieve independence 
without the tacit consent of Russia , and can there be a humanitarian and 
political solution to the tragedy in Darfur without the active goodwill of 
China ? The two crises have nothing in common , but their resolution will 
depend in large part on whether these two permanent members of the United 
Nations Security Council use their veto power . Comparing the respective 
abilities of Russia and China to block key international initiatives makes no 
sense in itself , but it does constitute a useful tool for understanding the 
transformation of the international system that is now taking place as a direct 
consequence of the relative decline of America’s global power . From that 
standpoint , the deepening of chaos in the Middle East poses both opportunities 
and risks for Russia and China , which may force them to define the roles they 
want to play and the images they want to project in the world . The key 
question i
 s this : Is Russia taking giant steps in the “ wrong direction ” while 
China is taking “ minuscule ” steps in the “ right direction ” ? 
Superficially , Russia and China may give the impression that they are pursuing 
the same path when they both proclaim with pride that they are “ back ” on 
the world stage . But this boast means different things for each country . For 
China , a deeply self-confident country , to be “ back ” simply means 
regaining the country’s historical centrality in the world after an absence 
of more than two centuries . After all , at the end of the eighteenth century , 
China became the world’s first producer of manufactured goods , and it 
perceives itself as a center of civilization unequalled by any other in Asia , 
if not the world . China’s renewed self-confidence is based on its remarkable 
economic prowess , which is derived not from natural resources , but from 
productivity and creativity . Whatever the huge political , social , and 
 economic tensions may exist , there is a “ feel good ” factor in China , a 
sense of progress , with the 2008 Olympics in Beijing figuring as the symbolic 
moment that will proclaim to the world the scale of the country’s 
achievements . Above all , with the exception of the Taiwan issue , China is a 
satisfied status quo power when it comes to the evolution of the international 
system – a patient actor that finds it perfectly legitimate to behave and to 
be seen as the world’s number two power . By contrast , the Russians remain 
insecure about their status in the world . Russia’s explosive “ revisionist 
” behavior on the eve of the recent G8 summit is an indication of the 
Kremlin’s “ unsatisfied ” nature . Because they know they are less potent 
, particularly in demographic and economic terms , Russians feel they have to 
do “ more . ” For them , to say “ Russia is back ” means that the 
humiliating Yeltsin years are over , and that they now must be treated a
 s equals , particularly by the United States . Russians are nostalgic not for 
the Cold War as such , but for the international status they lost when it ended 
. Now that America is no longer a “ hyperpower ” with no strategic 
challengers , Russia has reasserted its status as a “ superpower , ” a 
claim that is not necessarily supported by reality . Unlike the Chinese , the 
Russians do not create economic wealth , but merely exploit their energy and 
mineral resources . Moreover , unlike the Chinese , they have not always been 
confident of their position in the world . Torn between Europe and Asia in 
cultural and political terms , victimized by a dark , narcissistic instinct 
that pervades their reading of their past and their visions of the future , it 
should surprise no one that Russia is now behaving like a “ revisionist ” 
power . Unsatisfied with their inner identity , it is only natural that 
Russians should demand changes that make them feel more secure and proud . Less 
 than 20 years ago , the Czech Republic and Poland were part of their sphere of 
influence , so Russians understandably cannot accept the US unilaterally 
implanting its security system there . Of course , in their respective 
judgments on Russia and China , the West – and Europeans in particular – 
may be demonstrating selective emotions . “ We ” tend to be less demanding 
of China than of Russia , because we tend to see Russia as “ European ” ( 
at least culturally ) . As a result , the culture of physical violence and 
verbal provocation that is gaining ground in Putin’s Russia is deeply 
disturbing , whereas we tend to judge Chinese misdeeds with a greater sense of 
distance , if not indifference . But the differences between Russia and China 
today may prove to be less significant tomorrow if the deterioration in the 
Middle East imposes a sense of collective responsibility on all five permanent 
members of the UN Security Council . It is one thing for Russia and China to 
expl
 oit America’s growing difficulties from Gaza to Kabul ; but it is quite 
another if the situation deteriorates to the point of general destabilization 
in the region . Indeed , the Middle East’s deepening problems may impose a 
sense of restraint in Russia and China by forcing them to calculate not in 
terms of their global “ nuisance value ” vis-à-vis the West , but in terms 
of their ability to make a positive and stabilizing contribution to the world 
order . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-japan-protests-islands-by-liah-greenfeld">
+The Roots of Chinese/Japanese Rivalry BOSTON – The anti-Japan protests that 
continue to roil China are just another indication of the rise of a potent 
Chinese nationalism . After a century slowly fomenting among Chinese 
intellectuals , national sentiment has captured and redefined the consciousness 
of the Chinese people during the last two decades of China’s economic boom . 
This mass national consciousness launched the Chinese colossus into global 
competition to achieve an international status commensurate with the 
country’s vast capacities and the Chinese people’s conception of their 
country’s rightful place in the world . Rapidly , visibly , and inevitably , 
China has risen . Indeed , our era will likely be remembered as the time when a 
new global order , with China at the helm , was born . Competitive national 
consciousness – the consciousness that one’s individual dignity is 
inseparably tied to the prestige of one’s “ people ” – worked its way 
into the mind
 s of China’s best and brightest between 1895 and 1905. In 1895 , China was 
defeated by Japan , a tiny aggressor whom the Chinese dismissively called wa ( 
the dwarf ) . China was already accustomed to rapacious Western powers 
squabbling over its riches , but had remained self-confident in the knowledge 
of these powers ’ irrelevance . However , the assault from Japan , a speck of 
dust in its own backyard , shattered this self-assurance and was experienced as 
a shocking and intolerable humiliation . Japan’s triumph in 1905 over “ the 
Great White Power , ” Russia , repaired the damage to China’s sense of 
dignity . From the Chinese point of view , Russia was a formidable European 
power , one feared by other Western powers . Its defeat , therefore , was seen 
as a successful Asian challenge to the West , in which China , its 
intellectuals felt , was represented by Japan . Japan thus became the focus of 
Chinese attention . Gentlemen-scholars , who would reform and staff the Chin
 ese army and civil service in the early decades of the twentieth century , 
went to study in Japan . The Revolution of 1911 was inspired by the example of 
Japan’s Meiji Restoration ; and , because early-twentieth-century Japan was 
stridently nationalistic , the new China that emerged from its image was 
constructed on nationalist principles as well . Thus Japan became the 
significant “ other ” for China , the model that was imitated and the 
anti-model that was resented . Chinese nationalism borrowed from Japan its 
concept of the nation , including the very word by which it was expressed ( 
kuoming , from the Japanese kokumin ) . The Kuomintang ( the Chinese 
Nationalist Movement ) was explicitly inspired by Japan and fueled by repeated 
Japanese aggression . Paradoxically , but not unexpectedly , Mao Zedong’s 
struggle against the Kuomintang was inspired by anti-Japanese nationalism as 
well . As was the case virtually everywhere else , communism in China was 
nationalism incarnate 
 . Mao’s speech on the establishment of the People’s Republic plainly 
expressed the nationalist agenda behind it . Calling the nation “ communist 
” assured the new People’s Republic of China of the Soviet Union’s 
support , which was viewed by Mao as more reliable than that of the United 
States . But neither the Russian nor the Chinese Communists were ever unclear 
about the nationalist nature of their respective projects . The upper echelons 
of the bureaucracy and intelligentsia in Russia and China were self-consciously 
nationalist and , throughout Communist rule , shrewdly pursued the supreme 
nationalist goal : prestige – the power , naked and otherwise , to impose the 
nation’s will on others . But national consciousness , particularly in China 
, was limited to a narrow elite , leaving the masses almost untouched . This 
changed dramatically with the Chinese government’s restoration of a 
capitalist economy . Much like in Germany in the 1840’s , when the appeal to p
 rivate enterprise converted the entire middle class to nationalism , the 
explicit definition of economic power as the central pillar of China’s 
greatness awakened ordinary Chinese to nationalism’s appeal . Hundreds of 
millions now see themselves as sharing in the nation’s dignity , and are 
eager to contribute to it , as well as to defend it from insult . Competition 
for prestige , even when the contest is economic , is not a purely rational 
undertaking . So it should be no surprise that old injuries are likely to 
resurface . Some Chinese , especially those who are not economically successful 
, harp bitterly on Japan’s past depredations . Despite China’s embrace of 
capitalism and Japanese investment , Japan remains China’s reviled other . 
Indeed , a professor in Beijing told me not long ago , “ Two in every ten 
Chinese dislike the US , but nine in every ten hate Japan . ” For the West , 
there is a silver lining in this nationalist rivalry : neither China nor Japan 
is 
 a rogue state , and , so long as their quarrels do not lead to the use of 
unconventional weapons , we may treat the friction between them as an internal 
Asian quarrel . Japan , moreover , is likely to let today’s passions over 
disputed islands in the East China Sea cool down , despite the anti-Japanese 
outbursts in Chinese cities . But the West – and the US in particular – is 
new to dignity games à la Chinois . If it gets carried away and presumes to 
talk down to the 5,000-year-old culture of the Sages , the West could become 
the next object of China’s nationalist resentment . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-s-cyber-warriors">
+China’s Cyber-Warriors NEW DELHI – The world now accepts that protecting 
our atmosphere , hydrosphere , lithosphere , and biosphere – the “ global 
commons ” – is the responsibility of all countries . The same norm must 
apply to cyberspace , which is critical to our everyday life , economic 
well-being , and security . At a time when cyber attacks are increasing 
worldwide , US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was right to declare that an 
attack on one nation’s computer networks “ can be an attack on all . ” 
Indeed , the attacks are a reminder that , as a new part of the global commons 
, cyberspace already has come under threat . Cyberspace must be treated , along 
with outer space , international waters , and international airspace , as 
property held in common for the good of all . And , like ocean piracy and 
airplane hijacking , cyber-crime cannot be allowed to go unpunished if we are 
to safeguard our common assets and collective interests . Naming China among a 
ha
 ndful of countries that have stepped up Internet censorship , Clinton warned 
that “ a new information curtain is descending across much of the world . ” 
Her statement , with its allusion to the Cold War-era Iron Curtain , amounted 
to an implicit admission that the central assumption guiding US policy on China 
since the 1990’s – that assisting China’s economic rise would usher in 
greater political openness there – has gone awry . The strategy of using 
market forces and the Internet to open up a closed political system simply is 
not working . Indeed , the more economic power China has accumulated , the more 
adept it has become in extending censorship to cyberspace . If anything , China 
has proven that a country can blend control , coercion , and patronage to 
stymie the Internet’s politically liberalizing elements . Through discreet 
but tough controls , Beijing pursues a policy of wai song , nei jin – relaxed 
on the outside , vigilant internally . Google is now crying f
 oul over “ a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate 
infrastructure originating from China . ” But , despite its corporate motto 
– “ Don’t be evil ” – Google itself was instrumental in aiding online 
censorship in China , having custom-built a search engine that purges all 
references and Web sites that the Chinese government considers inappropriate . 
Now Google itself has become a victim of China’s growing cyber prowess , in 
the same way that appeasement of Hitler boomeranged onto France and Britain . 
China deploys tens of thousands of “ cyber police ” to block Web sites , 
patrol cyber-cafes , monitor the use of cellular telephones , and track down 
Internet activists . But the threat to the new global commons comes not from 
what China does domestically . Rather , it comes from the way in which the 
know-how that China has gained in fashioning domestic cyber oversight is 
proving invaluable to it in its efforts to engage in cyber intrusion across it
 s frontiers . Canadian researchers have discovered a vast Chinese surveillance 
system called “ GhostNet , ” which can compromise computers in 
organizations abroad through booby-trapped e-mail messages that automatically 
scan and transfer documents to a digital storage facility in China . This is 
what happened when computers of the Tibetan government-in-exile in Dharamsala , 
India , were attacked last year . India’s national security adviser recently 
complained that his office was targeted yet again by hackers . “ People seem 
to be fairly sure it was the Chinese , ” he said . Officials in Germany , 
Britain , and the US have acknowledged that hackers believed to be from China 
also have broken into their government and military networks . The 
state-sponsored transnational cyber threat is at two levels . The first is 
national , with the hackers largely interested in two objectives . One is to 
steal secrets and gain an asymmetrical advantage over another country . Cyber 
intrusi
 on in peacetime allows the prowler to read the content and understand the 
relative importance of different computer networks so that it knows what to 
disable in a conflict situation . The other objective is commercial : to pilfer 
intellectual property . The second level of cyber threat is against chosen 
individuals . The most common type of intrusion is an attempt to hack into 
e-mail accounts . The targets also can face Trojan-horse attacks by e-mail 
intended to breach their computers and allow the infiltrators to corrupt or 
transfer files remotely . To be sure , if a cyber attack is camouflaged , it is 
not easy to identify the country from which it originated . Through the use of 
so-called “ false-flag espionage ” and other methods , attacks can be 
routed through the computers of a third country . Just as some Chinese 
pharmaceutical firms exported to Africa spurious medicines with “ Made in 
India ” labels – a fact admitted by the Chinese government – some Chinese 
hacker
 s are known to have routed their cyber intrusion through computers in Russia , 
Iran , Cuba , and other countries . But , like their comrades in the 
pharmaceutical industry , such hackers tend to leave telltale signs . Then 
there are many cases in which the attacks have originated directly from China . 
It seems unlikely that these hackers , especially those engaged in cyber 
espionage , pilferage , and intimidation , are private individuals with no 
links to the Chinese government . It is more likely that they are tied to the 
People’s Liberation Army . In war , this irregular contingent of hackers 
would become the vanguard behind which the PLA takes on the enemy . Systematic 
cyber attacks constitute a new frontier of asymmetrical warfare at a time when 
the world already confronts other unconventional threats , including 
transnational terrorism . With national security and prosperity now dependent 
on the safekeeping of cyberspace , cybercrime must be effectively countered as 
an intern
 ational priority . If not , cyberspace will become the new global-commons 
battlefield . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-s-gift-to-europe">
+China’s Gift to Europe Europeans are wrong to be angry with China because 
its currency peg to the US dollar has boosted the euro against most currencies 
on foreign exchange markets . On the contrary , they should view the currency 
peg as a valuable gift . In New York and other American cities , European 
shoppers are on a spree . They’re enjoying first hand the euro’s enhanced 
purchasing power abroad . The currency peg has also helped make the euro into 
an important reserve currency , rivaling the dollar . Investments from all over 
the world are flowing into Europe as a result . It was predictable that 
China’s currency peg would have this effect . It forced China to accumulate 
huge amounts of dollars to stabilize its currency and gave the euro an extra 
boost as the dollar depreciated . To protect itself from the declining 
greenback , China and other countries are converting a portion of their 
accumulated dollar reserves into euros . The International Monetary Fund 
estimates t
 hat the euro’s share of foreign exchange reserves rose to 26.4 percent in 
third quarter of 2007 from 25.5 percent in the second quarter of 2007 , and 
24.4 percent in the third quarter of 2006. The euro’s becoming a major 
reserve currency bestows important economic advantages on the euro-zone economy 
. Europeans should thank the Chinese currency peg for the part it is playing in 
this . Of course , with an augmented supply of euros , China can be expected to 
make substantial investments in Europe , which also is a good thing , 
especially since , in the United States at least , China has demonstrated a 
preference for investments in financial institutions rocked by the sub-prime 
crisis . Europe has plenty of those . So far , China’s biggest European 
investment has been in the Belgian financial company , Fortis N. V. , where 
Ping An Insurance recently acquired a 4.2 % stake , making it the largest 
shareholder in the company . China Development Bank also made an investment in 
Barcla
 ys to bolster its bid for ABN AMRO which , though it failed , helped the Dutch 
bank get the full value for its assets . This is only a start . Merrill Lynch 
predicts that , as currency reserves climb in countries like China , state-run 
investment funds will grow to $7.9 trillion , from $1.9 trillion now . 
China’s currency peg has also come in handy for Europe in its fight to keep 
inflation in check , while its monetary policy remains constrained by the 
sub-prime crisis . Experts estimate that , in terms of guarding against 
inflation , the euro’s appreciation has been equivalent to about 35 basis 
points rise in the interest rate . The strong euro has helped insulate Europe 
from skyrocketing oil and commodity prices , which are priced in dollars on the 
world markets . The big downside of the currency peg for Europe is supposed to 
be exports . That’s what sent French President Nicolas Sarkozy and other 
high-level European officials scurrying off to China last November—and why m
 any ordinary Europeans continue to think of the Chinese as not playing by the 
rules . This is protectionist thinking par excellence . What makes exports so 
special ? Why are they more important than cheap imports or the bargains that 
European shoppers get in New York ? Should Europe give up all the advantages of 
the currency peg just because it makes European exports more expensive ? Of 
course not ! Note that it was French President Sarkozy who went to China to 
protest the currency peg , not German Chancellor Angela Merkel . German exports 
are not being substantially damaged by the strong euro—indeed , German costs 
are so competitive that exporters are confident they can cope with the euro at 
1.50 dollars and even higher . This is not true for France-- but the answer is 
obvious : reduce costs and France too will be able to cope with the strong euro 
. In the final analysis , cutting costs is all the Europeans can do if they 
want to preserve the competitiveness of their exports . Th
 e Chinese are not going to change their exchange rate regime , which has 
strategic as well as economic motivations , just because the Europeans are 
unhappy with the currency peg . China has given the Europeans a gift . They 
should be grateful , rather than foolishly insist that China take it back . 
</text>
+<text id="syndicate/china-s-threat-to-russia">
+China’s Threat to Russia Last week , Russia and China held joint military 
maneuvers in the presence of both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese 
President Hu Jintao . But a new strategic alliance between the two countries is 
not likely , as it is China that poses the greatest strategic threat to Russia 
, although many in the Kremlin seem blind to this as they rattle sabers at 
America and the West . Indeed , China officially considers several regions in 
Russia’s Far East to be only “ alienated ” from it . China’s 
territorial claims on Russia are often noted in Chinese grade school geography 
textbooks , which include a number of Russian Far Eastern regions within 
China’s borders . This is consistent with the Chinese strategic concept of 
“ vital space , ” which includes all spheres of a state’s strategic 
activities , on land , at sea , under water , in the air , and in space . The 
dimensions of “ vital space ” are determined by a country’s economic , sci
 entific , technical , social , and military capabilities – in essence , its 
“ total power . ” According to Chinese theorists , the “ vital space ” 
of great powers extends far beyond a state’s borders , whereas the “ vital 
space ” of weak countries is limited to strategic boundaries that do not 
always correspond to the borders of their national territory . Today , China 
has territorial claims against 11 of its 24 neighbors , including India , Japan 
, Vietnam , and the Philippines , in addition to Russia . In China’s 
relations with all of them , the potential use of military force was and 
remains an important factor . In September 2006 , China’s People’s 
Liberation Army ( PLA ) conducted an unprecedentedly large 10-day exercise , 
involving the Shenyang and Beijing military districts , the two most powerful 
of China’s seven military districts . Shenyang abuts the Russian Armed Forces 
’ Far Eastern District , and the Beijing district shares a border with Russia
 ’s Siberian Military District . During the exercises , Shenyang units 
advanced 1,000 kilometers into the Beijing district , where they engaged in 
joint war games . To military observers , the Beijing/Shenyang exercises seemed 
to be practice for a possible offensive operation against Russia , because 
exercises on such a scale are undertaken only at the final stage of a 
multi-year program to train troops to enact specific strategic and operational 
plans . The geography of the exercises , and the offensive nature of the tasks 
undertaken , leaves little doubt that Russia was cast in the role of “ 
potential adversary . ” Such a show of force is an ancient , traditional 
Chinese political technique . Paradoxically , these exercises were undertaken 
during a period when bilateral political and economic ties appeared on the 
surface to be at their highest point . Russia has an important place in Chinese 
geopolitical calculations , as a supplier of both modern weaponry and energy 
resource
 s needed to continue its modernization . Therefore , the Chinese are doing 
everything possible to strengthen their economic and political position in 
Russia , and to draw Russia into their sphere of influence . And China is 
succeeding , most importantly by consistently reinforcing Putin’s 
anti-American and anti-Western agenda . While Beijing/Shenyang exercise should 
have indicated to Russian leaders that China’s intentions toward Russia may 
not always be benign , Russia’s political and military leadership seem not to 
sense any threat ; on the contrary , they continue to sell the Chinese advanced 
weapons . Russia’s current diplomatic tilt , indeed , is clearly against its 
own long-term national security interests . China will never be interested in 
Russia’s economic and political modernization , for it prefers Russia to 
remain a source of mineral and energy resources and a vast “ strategic rear 
” in its looming challenge with the United States . Likewise , the Shanghai 
 Cooperation Organization ( SCO ) , which just concluded its annual meeting , 
is in China’s eyes a tool of regional policy that helps strengthen China’s 
influence and control over Central Asia’s natural resources at the expense of 
Russia . No nation threatens China’s land borders . China can solve its 
domestic problems , such as separatism , by itself . China is militarily 
self-sufficient and needs military cooperation under the SCO framework only in 
order to free its hands if any conflict should arise that affects its interests 
. In fact , conflict between Russia and China is possible precisely in Central 
Asia , given the clear differences in the two countries ’ economic and 
political interests in that region . Aside from control of the region’s 
energy supplies , water has become a potential source of conflict , given 
China’s serious shortages . Yet , while the Chinese clearly understand these 
contingencies and are preparing themselves to deal with them diplomatically 
 and militarily , the Kremlin remains myopically obsessed with the phantom 
threat of America . Thus , as the Kremlin dreams of re-establishing its 
domination over what Russians refer to as the “ near abroad ” ( Ukraine , 
Belarus , the Baltic countries , and the other post-Soviet states ) , China is 
increasingly looking at Russia as its own “ near abroad . ” Will the 
Kremlin finally wake up to this ? Thirty-six years ago , Richard Nixon and Mao 
Zedong turned world politics upside down , as both America and China realized 
that it was the Soviet Union , and not each other , that posed the greater 
threat . Vladimir Putin needs his own “ Nixon moment . ” Alienating the 
West is a foolish strategy when the greatest long term threat to Russia comes 
from the East . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/europe-s-vital-french-connection-by-kemal-dervi">
+Europe’s Vital French Connection PARIS – In the debates raging over the 
future of the European Union and the eurozone , Germany always takes center 
stage . It has the largest economy , accounting for 28 % of eurozone GDP and 25 
% of the eurozone’s population . It is running a current-account surplus that 
is now larger than China’s – indeed , the largest in the world in absolute 
value . And , while weighted majorities can overrule it on some issues , 
everyone acknowledges that little can be done in the eurozone unless Germany 
agrees . But the emphasis on Germany , though justified , should not lead to an 
underestimation of France’s critical role . France not only accounts for 
roughly 22 % of eurozone GDP and 20 % of its population – behind only Germany 
– but also has the healthiest demography in the eurozone , whereas the German 
population is projected to decline over the next decade . At the same time , 
France’s critical role reflects more than its size . Indeed , 
 in terms of influencing outcomes in Europe , France is as important as Germany 
, for three reasons . First , France is an indispensable link between southern 
and northern Europe at a time of growing economic and financial division 
between creditors and debtors ( a fissure that has begun to assume a cultural 
dimension ) . An active France can play a bridging role , leveraging its strong 
relationship with Germany ( a friendship that is a pillar of the EU ) and its 
proximity and cultural affinities to the Mediterranean . France is “ southern 
” in its current-account deficit , but “ northern ” in its borrowing 
costs ( slightly above Germany’s ) , owing partly to inflows of capital 
fleeing the south , as well as to modest but positive economic growth . 
Moreover , there is no perceived “ re-denomination ” risk affecting French 
assets , given markets ’ confidence that France will retain the euro . So , 
while France faces huge economic challenges , its northern and southern 
 features permit it to play a proactive role in the European project’s 
survival . French President François Hollande has already given a rather 
successful preview of this role , meeting German Chancellor Angela Merkel in 
Berlin on his first day in office , and , a month later , participating in a 
high-profile meeting with the Italian and Spanish prime ministers in Rome . 
Indeed , he took the lead in adding a “ growth pact ” to the “ stability 
pact ” that had been negotiated under Merkel’s leadership . Second , France 
, under its new center-left government , must demonstrate that the “ European 
model ” of a market economy coupled with strong social solidarity can be 
reformed and strengthened , rather than abandoned – not just in Europe’s 
more pragmatic north , but also in its more ideological south . French 
Socialists will not renounce their traditional commitments ; nor should they . 
But they now have the opportunity to contribute to the European model’s renewa
 l . Under Hollande , France’s Socialists favor achieving that renewal 
through a process of social dialogue that convinces rather than imposes , that 
focuses both on revenue measures and on boosting government efficiency , and 
that may adopt some of northern Europe’s more successful “ flexicurity ” 
policies , which combine greater labor-market flexibility with strong social 
protection . The reforms should also introduce much greater individual choice , 
permitting solutions to retirement , education , health , and lifestyle issues 
that can be more easily tailored to citizens ’ specific circumstances and 
needs . The government of Hollande and Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has 
strong majorities at all executive and legislative levels , giving it a rare 
opportunity to act . If it can renew the European model at home , it will be 
able to project that success much more widely , particularly in southern Europe 
, in turn reinforcing confidence and belief in the EU , particularly
  among the young generation . The French center-left must lead in conceiving a 
vision for Europe in which solidarity and equity reinforce long-term economic 
strength . Finally , along with the United Kingdom among European countries , 
France retains more of a global role than Germany has yet acquired . While the 
United Nations Security Council is outdated in its structure , it still plays a 
crucial legitimizing role ; and France , not Germany , is a member . In many 
other international organizations as well , France punches above its weight . 
Similarly , while France exports much less than Germany outside the EU , many 
large French enterprises rival Germany’s in global reach and technical 
know-how . And French is still a global language . In other words , France not 
only is a link between Europe’s north and south , but also contributes 
substantially to linking Europe to the rest of the world . Europe needs a 
renewed vision and effective policies to realize that vision . Franceâ€
 ™s Socialist-Green government can play a critical unifying role as Europeans 
confront their biggest challenge in decades . Its success will be highly 
consequential – not least for the political debate that will inform the 
outcome of Germany’s elections in 2013. </text>
+<text id="syndicate/exchange-rate-disorder">
+Exchange Rate Disorder NEW YORK – Two troubling features of the ongoing 
economic recovery are the depressed nature of world trade and the early revival 
of international global payment imbalances . Estimates by the International 
Monetary Fund and the United Nations indicate that the volume of international 
trade in 2010 will still be 7 % to 8 % below its 2008 peak , while many or most 
countries , including industrial nations , are seeking to boost their current 
accounts . Indeed , if we believe the IMF’s projections , the world 
economy’s accumulated current-account surpluses would increase by almost $1 
trillion between 2009 and 2012 ! This is , of course , impossible , as 
surpluses and deficits must be in balance for the world economy as a whole . It 
simply reflects the recessionary ( or deflationary ) force of weak global 
demand hanging over the world economy . Under these conditions , export-led 
growth by major economies is a threat to the world economy . This is true for 
Chi
 na , Germany ( as French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde has consistently 
reminded her neighbor ) , Japan , and the United States . Countries running 
surpluses must adopt expansionary policies and appreciate their currencies . 
More broadly , to the extent that major emerging-market countries will continue 
to lead the global recovery , they should reduce their current-account 
surpluses or even generate deficits to help , through increased imports , 
spread the benefits of their growth worldwide . But , while that implies that 
emerging-market currencies must strengthen , disorderly appreciations would do 
more harm than good . To use an American saying , it might mean throwing out 
the baby ( economic growth ) with the bathwater ( exchange rate appreciation ) 
. Consider China , which accounts for the largest share by far of world trade 
among emerging economies . Real appreciation of the renminbi is necessary for a 
balanced world economic recovery . But disorderly appreciation may seri
 ously affect China’s economic growth by disrupting its export industries , 
which would generate major adverse effects on all of East Asia . China needs a 
major internal restructuring from exports and investments , its two engines of 
growth in past decades , to personal and government consumption ( education , 
health , and social protection in the latter case ) . But this restructuring 
will tend to reduce , not increase , import demand , as exports and investment 
are much more import-intensive than consumption . Moreover , a sharp 
appreciation of the renminbi could risk domestic deflation and a financial 
crisis . Chinese authorities certainly seem to have that interpretation of the 
roots of Japan’s malaise in mind as they seek to avoid rapid revaluation . 
The only desirable scenario , therefore , is a Chinese economy that transmits 
its stimulus to the rest of the world mainly through rising imports generated 
by rapid economic growth ( i. e. , the income effect on import demand ) 
 , rather than by exchange-rate appreciation ( the substitution effect ) . This 
requires maintaining rapid growth while undertaking a major but necessarily 
gradual domestic restructuring , for which a smooth appreciation is much better 
suited . Now consider other major emerging markets . Here currency appreciation 
is already taking place , pushed by massive capital inflows since the second 
quarter of 2009 , and in some cases it can already be said to be excessive ( 
for example , in Brazil ) . These countries can , of course , resist upward 
pressure on their currencies by accumulating foreign-exchange reserves , like 
they did before the global financial crisis . The result is , of course , 
paradoxical : private funds that flow into these countries are recycled into US 
Treasury securities via investment of accumulated reserves . Why should 
emerging-market countries ’ central banks undertake this peculiar financial 
intermediation , which represents a major cost , as the yield of priva
 te funds is higher than that of reserves ? The implication here is that 
relying on free movement of capital to achieve exchange-rate appreciation and 
current-account deficits may generate a myriad of problems , including slower 
economic growth and the threat of asset bubbles and financial crises of their 
own . So , a more orderly way to induce current-account deficits without 
risking disruption of emerging economies ’ growth should be considered . One 
solution ( already advocated by some , including me , and adopted to some 
extent by a few countries ) is broader use of capital-account regulations . 
Surprisingly , however , this issue has been entirely absent from current 
global debates on financial reform . Fortunately , the IMF opened the door to 
discussion of this issue in a recent staff position paper . Equally important , 
a desirable global scenario is possibly one in which most developing countries 
run current-account deficits . But this requires major reforms in the global f
 inancial system to reduce the vulnerabilities that such deficits generated in 
the past , and that were reflected in major financial crises in the developing 
world . These past crises gave rise to a form of “ self-insurance ” among 
developing countries through reserve accumulation . This helped many of them 
weather the recent storm , but it also contributed to global payments 
imbalances . Recent IMF reforms are just a step in the direction of trying to 
create better financial instruments to help these countries . It is essential , 
in particular , to create reliable large-scale financing for developing 
countries during crises , through a mix of counter-cyclical issuance of SDRs 
and emergency financing without onerous conditions . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/france-and-germany-must-act-in-iraq">
+France and Germany Must Act in Iraq Next week , President Bush , President 
Chirac , and Chancellor Schroeder will meet on the cliffs of Normandy to mark 
the 60th anniversary of the D-Day invasions that led to the liberation of 
Europe . They should also seize the moment to liberate themselves from the 
bitterness that has divided the Atlantic Alliance over the Iraq War , argue 
Pierre Lellouche and Christoph Bertram . When the United States launched the 
war against Saddam Hussein 's Iraq , France and Germany rightly warned that the 
invasion could well end up worsening instability in the Middle East and 
increase the threat of radical Islamic terror . But now that America and its 
coalition have proven themselves to be incapable of bringing stability to Iraq 
on their own , the French and German governments can no longer rest and smugly 
say , " I told you so , " as the situation deteriorates even further . Both 
governments must now become seriously and fully engaged in what must now be a u
 nited Western effort . Of course , it would be best for everyone - France and 
Germany included - if the current US-led coalition were to succeed and Iraq 
could turn into a pillar of Middle East stability and modernization . Yet , 
however desirable this outcome , it is no longer likely ( if it ever was ) . 
Internal stability and economic recovery continue to be elusive , with the 
specter of civil war hovering ever closer . A divided Iraq at war with itself 
would be a disaster for the region , for America 's international credibility 
and authority , and for transatlantic relations . In an already fragile region 
, a major Arab country like Iraq would most likely prompt interventions by its 
nervous neighbors - of which there is no shortage - if it turns into a failed 
state . Instead of the rule of law , there would be the law of the mafia , of 
terrorist groups , and of tribal militias . Many of them are already in place . 
Instead of moving toward modernization and development , the regi
 on would be confirmed as a cockpit for conflict , a threat to itself and to 
the world beyond . Were the US forced to withdraw in failure , Islamic 
terrorist groups would claim a historic victory , promising more bloodshed for 
the West . Moreover , America might also once again retreat bitterly into 
isolationism , blaming her failure on the UN and on disloyal European allies . 
So the stakes are high in Iraq , for Europeans no less than for Americans . 
That is why it is time that even those who have been most skeptical about US 
policy in Iraq start to do something about it . Both Jacques Chirac and Gerhard 
Schroeder have repeatedly pronounced that what happens in Iraq is a strategic 
challenge to their countries . Yet their actions in response to this insight 
have been modest . The recent turmoil in Iraq has , on the contrary , 
strengthened those in both capitals who argue that there is now even less 
reason to get involved on the ground . At the very least , France and Germany 
are dema
 nding that the Bush administration openly admit to its failure and the need 
for help . Yet not only is such a demand naïve , with the Bush team battling 
for re-election , it is not at all certain that most of America 's European 
allies would heed a US call for solidarity if one were issued . Confronting the 
threat that an unsettled Iraq poses to Europe and to the transatlantic 
relationship implies stopping these tactical games . The passing of authority 
in Iraq from the US-led coalition to an Iraqi government and the need for a 
much stronger UN role now offers the chance and imposes the need for everyone 
to stop posturing and get serious . For their part , EU governments should 
provide the UN - on whose involvement in Iraq they have long insisted - with 
the protective force it needs to prepare nation-wide elections in Iraq later in 
the year , and ask others to join . A UN staff protected by US marines simply 
cannot do that job . With the consent of both the US and Iraq 's new leade
 rship , EU governments should also offer to organize an international 
conference uniting all those with a stake in Iraqi stability , including Iraq 
's neighbors , to work out a strategy and commit resources in order to save 
Iraq from slipping into protracted turmoil . If Europe is to act , France and 
Germany must lead . Precisely because they opposed the war , they are now the 
only countries that can restore Europe 's unity of action in promoting 
stability . France professes to bearing a special responsibility for 
international order , but so does Germany ; only a few weeks ago , Chancellor 
Schroeder based his claim to a permanent German seat in the UN Security Council 
on Germany 's readiness to shoulder such responsibilities . Of all the crisis 
regions in the world today , instability in Iraq constitutes the greatest 
challenge to international order . But France and Germany can also block 
European responsibility for international order and for solidarity with a US 
facing possible d
 efeat in Iraq . The decision is theirs . It is time for both to realize that 
the consequences of inaction will be no less severe for the region than for the 
Atlantic relationship . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/france-s-fourth-moment">
+France’s Fourth Moment KYIV – Since World War II’s end , France has 
consistently risen to the challenge of restructuring Europe in times of crisis 
. In doing so , France became the catalyst not only for building European unity 
, but also for creating the prosperity that marked Europe’s post-war decades 
– a prosperity now under threat because of the global financial and economic 
crisis . If we are to see a stronger Europe emerge from today’s challenges , 
visionary French leadership is needed again . The first moment when decisive 
French leadership began to unify Europe came when Robert Schuman and Konrad 
Adenauer created the European Coal and Steel Community . By rooting the then 
West Germany in the political , economic , and social fabric of the West , that 
step heralded the start of Germany’s rebirth and economic miracle . The 
second time that France consolidated Europe’s internal architecture came in 
1983 , during the debates over the stationing of American cruise 
 and Pershing missiles in Germany to counter the deployment of SS20 missiles by 
the Soviet Union . France’s resolve to stand with Germany helped prevent 
Germany from drifting into a dangerous neutrality that would have shaken the 
European community to its core . The third moment came after the Berlin Wall 
fell , and it was feared that an enlarged Germany might destabilize Europe . 
After initially trying to delay reunification , France embraced it , in 
exchange for Germany’s reaffirming its commitment to European unity and 
Franco-German leadership of the European community . As a result , Germany 
bound itself to the idea of “ ever closer union ” even more definitively by 
pledging to join the common European currency , the euro . It is now urgent 
that the insights that have animated Franco-German relations be applied to all 
of Central and Eastern Europe . Only by securing the European identity of this 
entire region , and by anchoring the growing Russo-German relationship in a E
 uropean context , can the European Union continue on its path of stability and 
prosperity . Only by reinforcing open trading and financial relations across 
Europe can we hope to subdue today’s crisis . For it is in no European 
country’s interest , or in the interest of the EU as a whole , that Central 
and Eastern Europe feel that they have been cast adrift or that Germany and 
Russia fixate on each other in this time of crisis . As with Germany in the 
1950’s , the nature of Russia’s links with its immediate neighbors is 
turning out to be the defining factor in shaping the country’s international 
image . Many observers regard these relations as a signal not just to the 
region , but to the rest of the world , of the sort of power that Russia wishes 
to be . The issue is partly one of “ internationalism ” itself . In 
contrast to Europe – with its close-knit network of multilateral 
organizations through which states formulate and conduct much of their foreign 
policies – 
 Russia is not accustomed to intensively cooperative international procedures . 
But keeping Russia at arm’s length from Europe has only strengthened the 
sense of isolation that many Russians feel , tempting them to define the 
country’s interests in ways that are irreconcilable with those of Europe . It 
has also heightened Russia’s desire to construct a special , bilateral 
Russo-German relationship heedless of the context of the EU . European history 
during the past 60 years makes clear that the most promising approach to 
meeting the challenge of national reconciliation and stability is not to focus 
on specific contingencies , but to establish procedures that encourage orderly 
change . A singular vision has always animated this process : animosity between 
neighbors must not be allowed to fester , and the rule of law must reign not 
just within countries , but also between them . To believe that such a vision 
can work for Russia , Ukraine , and Europe is not wishful thinking , but
  rests on the successful experience of France and Germany in promoting amity . 
Indeed , the existence or absence of a framework of cooperation often 
determines whether a dispute mutates into a crisis . Such cooperative 
frameworks seek to reconcile national independence with regional 
interdependence , focusing political leaders ’ minds on prosperity for their 
people rather than on gaining unilateral advantages that ultimately impoverish 
and unsettle everyone . The first lesson of European unity is that times of 
crisis must draw the continent closer together , not divide it through 
protectionism , competitive devaluations , and expulsions of immigrants . 
Similarly , the euro must not be allowed to become an Iron Curtain that 
consigns non-members to a high-risk zone where investors dare not venture . For 
Ukraine , Europe can help by embracing the free-trade agreement that we are now 
negotiating . Coupled with our successful membership in the World Trade 
Organization , Ukraine would s
 tand to benefit when world and European trade begins to recover . Europe can 
also consider using various stabilization funds to help our economy through the 
crisis that we are all enduring . I do not ask for these things out of a narrow 
concern for my country’s health . Just as the US Federal Reserve has engaged 
in credit and currency swaps with Brazil , Mexico , Singapore , and South Korea 
and other countries to ease their access to the dollars they need , the 
European Central Bank must offer such swap arrangements to Europe’s non-euro 
countries in order for trade and production processes to continue . Yes , these 
are dark times , and all politicians want to protect their voters . But 
Europe’s greatest postwar leaders understood that keeping the wider view of 
Europe in mind is the best way to achieve this goal . As at so many times 
before , now – with all of our economies in peril – is a moment for 
decisive French leadership . </text>
+<text 
id="syndicate/fran-ois-hollande-s-wrong-idea-of-france-by-brigitte-granville">
+François Hollande’s Wrong Idea of France LONDON – France’s new 
president , François Hollande , has achieved a remarkable series of political 
victories – at home and in Europe – since his election in May . 
Unfortunately , his streak of success will inevitably call forth an economic 
reckoning that will shock France’s apparently unsuspecting citizens and doom 
the French elite’s approach to the “ construction of Europe . ” Since 
winning the presidency , Hollande has won a parliamentary majority and pushed 
Germany toward accepting joint liability for eurozone countries ’ debts . But 
forebodings of crisis have become widespread in French business and economic 
circles . But the real danger – which even Hollande’s sternest critics may 
be underestimating – is not so much his individual policy failings ( serious 
though they may be ) as his approach to the twin challenges posed by France’s 
economic imbalances and the eurozone crisis . On each front separately , he
  might manage to muddle through ; together , they look likely to cement 
France’s loss of competitiveness . Declining competitiveness is best captured 
in a single indicator : unit labor costs , which measure the average cost of 
labor per unit of output . In a monetary union , discrepancies in wage growth 
relative to productivity gains – that is , unit labor costs – will result 
in a chronic accumulation of trade surpluses or deficits . Since the euro’s 
introduction , unit labor costs have risen dramatically faster in France than 
they have in Germany . According to Eurostat data published in April 2011 , the 
hourly labor cost in France was €34.2 , compared to €30.1 in Germany – 
and nearly 20 % higher than the eurozone average of €27.6 . France’s 
current-account deficit has risen to more than 2 % of GDP , even as its 
economic growth has ground to a halt . The high cost of employing workers in 
France is due not so much to wages and benefits as it is to payroll taxes lev
 ied on employers . The entire French political class has long delighted in 
taxing labor to finance the country’s generous welfare provisions , thus 
avoiding excessively high taxation of individuals ’ income and consumption 
– though that is about to come to an end as Hollande intends to slap a 75 % 
tax on incomes above €1 million . This is a version of the fallacy that 
taxing companies ( “ capital ” ) spares ordinary people ( “ workers ” ) 
. Of course , such taxes on firms are always passed on to households – 
usually through straightforward price hikes , and , in France , also through 
unemployment . High tax rates on labor – together with rigid regulation of 
hiring and firing – make employers extremely reluctant to recruit workers . 
As a result , France has had chronic long-term unemployment – forecast to 
reach 10.5 % by 2013 – for many years . Hollande’s predecessor , Nicolas 
Sarkozy , tried to address this problem . He exempted voluntary overtime pay fro
 m employment tax and shifted some of the burden of labor taxation onto 
consumption ( via a hike in VAT ) . But Hollande quickly reversed both of these 
reforms . The repeal of the tax break on overtime reflects another economic 
fallacy to which French Socialist politicians are deeply attached : the “ 
lump of labor ” notion that underlay the most disastrous of their economic 
policies – the 35-hour workweek , introduced in 2000. The idea behind the 
policy is that demand for labor is a constant , and that this fixed number of 
aggregate working hours required by employers to meet final demand can be 
spread more evenly among workers to reduce unemployment . Such measures , 
designed to create jobs by freeing up work hours , are futile at best , and are 
often detrimental . French Socialists should recall their school physics lesson 
about communicating vessels : when a homogeneous liquid is poured into a set of 
connected containers , it settles at the same level in all of them , regard
 less of their shape and volume . Generating more “ liquid ” ( jobs ) 
requires not discouraging the entrepreneurs on whose activities sustainable job 
creation ultimately depends . The effect of fiscal and regulatory pressure on 
employment is to encourage French firms to invest and hire outside France . 
Hollande’s apologists praise his gradualist and consensual approach to 
addressing the economy’s structural distortions . They argue that his 
penchant for setting up consultative commissions is the best way to forge the 
consensus required for structural reform , whereas Sarkozy’s combative style 
was counterproductive . Even banishing skepticism and assuming that Hollande 
could over time persuade his supporters to embrace competitiveness-boosting 
policies , the eurozone crisis is denying France the time that such gradualism 
requires . A simple , effective way to buy time would be to abandon the euro 
and restore competitiveness through a devalued national currency . But this exp
 edient is incompatible with mainstream French politicians ’ devotion to the 
“ European project , ” which amounts to a projection of French soft power ; 
indeed , building Europe lies at the heart of the French establishment’s 
version of what Charles de Gaulle used to call “ a certain idea of France . 
” For mainstream French politicians , renouncing the European project to buy 
the time required to restore competitiveness is as unthinkable as is the 
logical alternative : an all-out push for full European political union . This 
would reestablish monetary sovereignty and create a normal central bank ( like 
the Federal Reserve or the Bank of England ) at the European level . But it 
would also mean abandoning France’s republic in favor of a federal European 
government – anathema to that “ certain idea of France . ” The 
combination of gradualism ( on the most generous interpretation ) in domestic 
economic reform and the paralyzing effect of the eurozone crisis will lead 
 to a massive shock . Remaining in a currency union with the much more 
competitive German economy will require wrenching and rapid reforms , for which 
Hollande’s tepid approach will fail to prepare the complacent French . The 
result will be even more support than was seen in last April’s presidential 
election for extremist political parties that reject both Europe and 
competitive market capitalism . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/hollywood-s-favorite-villains">
+Hollywood’s Favorite Villains Once upon a time , Cold War enemies , white 
supremacists , and evil geniuses reigned supreme as Hollywood’s favorite bad 
guys . No more . Today , it is multinational corporations that are increasingly 
being cast as the über-villains of our globalized world . For all their 
subliminal paid promotions and subtle product placements , corporations are 
getting drubbed in the main story lines of our popular culture . This treatment 
goes far beyond documentaries like Michael Moore’s polemical Fahrenheit 9/11 
or The Corporation , an earnest if somewhat paranoid portrayal of multinational 
companies ’ role in globalization . It extends to mainstream hits like The 
Constant Gardener , in which the idealistic protagonists do battle with a 
malicious global pharmaceutical company that is bent on exploiting Africa’s 
misery to test experimental drugs . To be sure , sociopathic corporations have 
populated books and films for more than a century . But corporate 
 villains , typically multinational companies , have never been so ubiquitous 
as today . Is it unfair ? Most corporations , after all , are merely convenient 
mechanisms for ensuring that scarce global capital is used at maximum 
efficiency , to the benefit of all . Are famously liberal Hollywood film 
directors spending too much time going to anti-globalization rallies ? Perhaps 
. But I would submit that Hollywood’s misgivings , however untutored , 
represent only the tip of a growing iceberg of resentment against the perceived 
injustices of globalization . The simple truth is that corporations represent 
capital , and capital – in the form of factories , equipment , machines , 
money , and even houses – has been the single biggest winner in the modern 
era of globalization . Corporate profits are bursting at the seams of investors 
’ expectations in virtually every corner of the world . Even in moribund 
economies like Germany and Italy , where employment security is vanishing , cor
 porations are swimming in cash . This phenomenon comes as no surprise to 
economists . Add two billion Indian and Chinese workers to the global labor 
force , and the value of other means of production – particularly capital and 
commodities ( for example , gold and oil ) – is bound to go up . And so it 
has , with capitalists everywhere gaining an ever larger share of the economic 
pie . ( In theory , capitalists in labor-abundant China and India could end up 
as losers , but in practice they , too , have benefited thanks to their 
governments ’ success in simultaneously liberalizing and globalizing . ) Many 
policymakers seem to be under the impression that surging profits are a purely 
cyclical phenomenon , as economies continue to grow out from the depths of the 
2001 recession . Wait a bit , they predict , and wages will fully catch up 
later in the cycle . Not likely . Capital’s piece of the pie has been getting 
bigger for more than 20 years , and the trend looks set to continue 
 . Indeed , corporations ’ growing share of income has been a major driver 
behind the long , if uneven , bull market in stocks that began in the early 
1990’s . At the same time , inflation-adjusted wages for rich-country 
unskilled workers have barely budged over the last two decades . Some of these 
trends also have to do with the nature of modern technological change , which 
seems to favor capital and skilled workers disproportionately . But , 
regardless of their cause , rapidly growing inequalities are a powerful force 
for instability everywhere , from wealthy America to rapidly growing China to 
reform-challenged Europe . “ A rising tide lifts all boats , ” 
conservatives like to say . Fine , but what happens to people , like the poor 
of hurricane-struck New Orleans , who don’t own boats ? Growing inequality 
would not be such a problem if governments could simply raise taxes on the rich 
and strengthen subsidies to the poor . Unfortunately , any country that taxes 
capital to
 o aggressively will only succeed in chasing it to regions where the tax burden 
is lighter . In a globalized world , national governments ’ ability to tax 
potentially mobile factors of production is sharply circumscribed . The same 
mechanism that pours profits into the pockets of global corporations also 
prevents governments from claiming a larger share of the spoils . Unfortunately 
, the long-term trend towards ever-lower income shares for unskilled workers is 
likely to continue over the coming decades , as modern technology permeates the 
globe , and as emerging markets like China , India , Brazil , and Eastern 
Europe continue to integrate into global production . This is not to say that 
unskilled workers are actually being made worse off by globalization in 
absolute terms ; the vast majority are actually breaking even or better . But 
unskilled workers ’ incomes are not keeping pace with overall economic growth 
, and the resulting social strains are a ticking bomb . If so , then
  Hollywood’s cartoon-like caricatures of evil multinational corporations may 
some day seize mainstream consciousness , leading to political upheavals that 
shatter today’s social contract . That won’t be good for profits , or for 
the poor . Governments – and corporations – must find better ways to 
provide equal opportunity through improved education , broader financial 
markets , and other channels . Otherwise , globalization’s storyline may not 
proceed according to the script . </text>
+<text id="syndicate/japanese-lessons-for-china-s-currency">
+Japanese Lessons for China’s Currency SHANGHAI – The question of how much 
China’s currency should appreciate to rebalance its trade has become a global 
hot-button issue . But the answers have been all over the map , with some 
finding that the yuan is not undervalued at all , while others argue that it 
should appreciate against the dollar by more than 30 % . Clearly , there must 
be major differences in the macroeconomic models used to produce such a wide 
range of estimates . But the one thing about which everyone seems to agree is 
the theoretically and empirically unjustified assumption that an equilibrium 
exchange rate actually exists . The theoretical problem is simple : a 
country’s trade balance depends on a lot more than the value of its currency 
in the foreign exchange markets . Interest rates , employment , aggregate 
demand , and technological and institutional innovation all play a role . As 
the economist Joan Robinson pointed out in 1947 , just about any exchange rate
  will be the equilibrium value for some combination of these other variables . 
The equilibrium exchange rate , she famously argued , is a chimera . Not 
surprisingly , the empirical evidence that trade imbalances can be resolved 
through exchange rate changes alone is unconvincing . In the case of China , 
the most useful precedent is probably that of Japan in the period from the end 
of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange-rate regime in August , 1971 , to the 
collapse of its “ bubble economy ” in 1990. During that period , the 
yen’s value more than doubled against the dollar , rising from its original 
fixed rate of 360 to 144 at the end of 1989. Yet , even as Japan’s exports 
became much more expensive in dollar terms and its imports much cheaper in yen 
, its trade surplus rose from $6 billion in 1971 to $80 billion in 1989. For 
two decades , expectations that an appreciating yen would restore external 
balance were repeatedly disappointed . At the time of the December 1971 Smithson
 ian Agreement , 308 yen to the dollar was supposed to do the trick . Fourteen 
years later , during the Plaza Accord negotiations , the Japanese argued for an 
eventual level of 200-210 , while some US Treasury officials thought the final 
target should be as high as 165-170 . At the end of the 1980’s , some 
analysts thought rates as high as 120 might finally produce the long-sought 
equilibrium . Yet , as Japan entered the “ lost decade ” of the 1990’s , 
its exports continued to grow faster than its imports . Japan’s trade surplus 
peaked only in 1994 , at $144 billion , just a few months before the yen’s 
April 1995 all-time high of 79.75 . In retrospect , it is easy to see why none 
of these supposed equilibrium exchange rates delivered external balance . As 
the yen appreciated , Japan responded not by exporting less but by improving 
productivity and quality control through plant and equipment investment and 
innovations in factory management , making possible rapid growth in
  exports of high-value-added products . Exchange-rate equilibrium calculations 
from the 1970’s and 1980’s , which could only have been based on the export 
sector’s contemporary structure , naturally would have little relevance 
subsequently . The same is true of calculations at the beginning of the 
1990’s , which would have forecast Japanese import growth based on 
extrapolations from the high GDP growth rates of the previous 40 years rather 
than on the decade of stagnation that ensued . In China , changes in the export 
sector’s structure similar to those observed in Japan are now taking place . 
These changes are likely to make today’s attempts to find an equilibrium 
yuan-dollar exchange rate seem just as chimerical in hindsight as previous 
calculations of the yen-dollar equilibrium rate . For the 30 years since the 
beginning of China’s economic reforms , Chinese industry has achieved 
impressive efficiency gains by adopting new technologies and realizing 
economies of sca
 le , leading to a huge expansion in locally made products suitable for export 
. While an appreciating currency might eventually drive labor-intensive 
manufacturers out of business , if Japan’s economic history is any guide , 
they are likely to be replaced by producers of things like ships , machine 
tools , semiconductors , and doubtless new products yet to be invented . The 
equilibrium yuan-dollar rate is a chimera not because China’s trade could 
never be balanced , but because the exchange rate alone does not determine 
equilibrium . The structure of the entire economy matters , too . As this is 
constantly evolving in unpredictable ways , there is no reason to expect that 
the assumptions underlying any particular macroeconomic model will ever remain 
valid long enough for its steady-state solution to be achieved in practice . 
</text>
+<text 
id="syndicate/kennedy--khrushchev--the-cuban-missile-crisis-and-nuclear-deterrence-from-cuba-to-iran-by-joseph-s--nye">
+The Cuban Missile Crisis at 50 CAMBRIDGE – This month marks the 50th 
anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis – those 13 days in October 1962 that 
were probably the closest the world has come to a major nuclear war . President 
John F. Kennedy had publicly warned the Soviet Union [ 178]not to introduce 
offensive missiles into Cuba . But Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev decided to 
cross Kennedy’s red line surreptitiously and confront the Americans with a 
fait accompli . When an American surveillance plane discovered the missiles , 
the crisis erupted . Some of Kennedy’s advisers urged an air strike and 
invasion to destroy the missiles . Kennedy mobilized troops , but also bought 
time by [ 179]announcing a naval blockade of Cuba . The crisis subsided when 
Soviet ships carrying additional missiles turned back , and Khrushchev agreed 
to remove the existing missiles from the island . As then US Secretary of State 
Dean Rusk put it : “ We were eyeball to eyeball , and I think the oth
 er fellow just blinked . ” At first glance , this was a rational and 
predictable outcome . The United States had a 17-to-1 advantage in nuclear 
weaponry . The Soviets were simply outgunned . And yet the US did not 
preemptively attack Soviet missile sites , which were relatively vulnerable , 
because the risk that even one or two of the Soviet missiles would be fired at 
an American city was enough to deter a first strike . In addition , both 
Kennedy and Khrushchev feared that rational strategies and careful calculation 
might spin out of control . Khrushchev offered a vivid metaphor in one of his 
letters to Kennedy : [ 180]“We and you ought not now to pull on the ends of 
the rope in which you have tied the knot of war . ” In 1987 , I was part of a 
group of scholars that met at Harvard University with Kennedy’s surviving 
advisers to study the crisis . Robert McNamara , Kennedy’s secretary of 
defense , said he became more cautious as the crisis unfolded . At the time , 
he thoug
 ht that the probability of nuclear war resulting from the crisis might have 
been one in 50 ( though he rated the risk much higher after he learned in the 
1990’s that the Soviets had already delivered nuclear weapons to Cuba ) . 
Douglas Dillon , Kennedy’s treasury secretary , said he thought that the risk 
of nuclear war had been about zero . He did not see how the situation could 
possibly have escalated to nuclear war , and thus had been willing to push the 
Soviets harder and to take more risks than McNamara was . General Maxwell 
Taylor , the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , also believed that the 
risk of nuclear war was low , and he complained that the US let the Soviet 
Union off too easily . He felt that the Americans should have removed the 
Castro regime . But the risks of losing control of the situation weighed 
heavily on Kennedy , too , which is why he took a more prudent position than 
some of his advisers would have liked . The moral of the story is that a little 
nuc
 lear deterrence goes a long way . Nonetheless , there are still ambiguities 
about the missile crisis that make it difficult to attribute the outcome 
entirely to the nuclear component . The public consensus was that the US won . 
But how much the US won , and why it won , is hard to determine . There are at 
least two possible explanations of the outcome , in addition to Soviet 
acquiescence to America’s superior nuclear firepower . One focuses on the 
importance of the two superpowers ’ relative stakes in the crisis : the US 
not only had a greater stake in neighboring Cuba than the Soviets did , but 
could also bring conventional forces to bear . The naval blockade and the 
possibility of a US invasion strengthened the credibility of American 
deterrence , placing the psychological burden on the Soviets . The other 
explanation questions the very premise that the Cuban missile crisis was an 
outright US victory . The Americans had three options : a “ shoot-out ” ( 
bomb the missile si
 tes ) ; a “ squeeze out ” ( blockade Cuba to convince the Soviets to 
withdraw the missiles ) ; and a “ buyout ” ( give the Soviets something 
they want ) . For a long time , the participants said little about the buyout 
aspects of the solution . But subsequent evidence suggests that a quiet US 
promise to remove its obsolete missiles from Turkey and Italy was probably more 
important than was thought at the time ( the US also gave a public assurance 
that it would not invade Cuba ) . We can conclude that nuclear deterrence 
mattered in the crisis , and that the nuclear dimension certainly figured in 
Kennedy’s thinking . But it was not the ratio of nuclear weapons that 
mattered so much as the fear that even a few nuclear weapons would wreak 
intolerable devastation . How real were these risks ? On October 27 , 1962 , 
just after Soviet forces in Cuba shot down a US surveillance plane ( killing 
the pilot ) , a similar plane taking routine air samples near Alaska 
inadvertently viola
 ted Soviet air space in Siberia . Fortunately , it was not shot down . But , 
even more serious , unbeknownst to the Americans , Soviet forces in Cuba had 
been instructed to repel a US invasion , and had been authorized to use their 
tactical nuclear weapons to do so . It is hard to imagine that such a nuclear 
attack would have remained merely tactical . Kenneth Waltz , an American 
scholar , recently published an article entitled [ 181]“Why Iran Should Get 
the Bomb . ” In a rational , predictable world , such an outcome might 
produce stability . In the real world , the Cuban missile crisis suggests that 
it might not . As McNamara put it , “ We lucked out . ” </text>
+<text id="syndicate/merkel-in-china-by-sanjaya-baru">
+Merkel in China NEW DELHI – German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s second visit 
to China in a year comes against the backdrop of dire forecasts of a difficult 
September for the eurozone . Mindful of such concerns and persistent pessimism 
in global financial markets , Merkel is now taking bold political initiatives 
at home and overseas . Indeed , her China trip should be seen as an effort to 
assert leadership across the eurozone . At home , Merkel recently sent out a 
clear message to her critics that Germany must pay a price for eurozone 
leadership . She cautioned her colleagues against loose talk about a “ Grexit 
” – Greece’s exit from the eurozone – and assured visiting Greek Prime 
Minister Antonis Samaras that Germany remained committed to his country’s 
membership of the eurozone . While it required courage to take such a tough 
stance , doing so helped to bolster her position at home and throughout the 
eurozone . There is now no doubt that Merkel is willing to commit Ge
 rmany to the cause of preserving both the European Union and the eurozone , 
and that she will work to achieve that goal . If she succeeds , she will emerge 
as the first great European leader of the twenty-first century . This stance 
suggests that Merkel appreciates the essence of the argument that François 
Heisbourg , the chairman of the council of the International Institute for 
Strategic Studies ( IISS ) , advanced in a [ 179]recent essay : a federal 
arrangement does not fall apart because of problems at the periphery but 
because of “ failure at the heart of the system . ” Merkel has come to 
terms with Germany’s position – and that it must act to preserve the unity 
of the whole . The eurozone ( and probably the EU ) cannot be saved in Greece 
or Finland if it cannot be saved in Germany . Committing Germany to that 
objective is precisely what Merkel has defined as her political goal for the 
rest of her term in office . Within hours of declaring her leadership at home , 
Merk
 el announced her visit to Beijing . The timing was highly significant : Merkel 
goes to China , the emerging global power , after declaring her own commitment 
to strengthening the eurozone , if not the EU as a whole , as a credible pole 
of an emerging multipolar world . In recognition of Germany’s growing 
significance , Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao welcomed a delegation of 
German business leaders to Beijing this May with the words : “ Stronger 
Chinese-German cooperation is good for the two countries , good for China-EU 
relations , and good for world prosperity and stability . The strategic 
dimension of Chinese-German relations , therefore , can only be strengthened , 
not weakened . ” There are several dimensions to the bilateral relationship . 
Germany needs both China’s markets and the funds that its government can 
deploy to purchase German and European bonds . It also has more than 7,500 
enterprises operating in China , with gross investment totaling $18.5 billion . 
Mor
 eover , Germany has sold $15 billion worth of technology to China , and 
bilateral trade hit a high of $169 billion in 2011 , accounting for 30 % of 
total China-EU trade . The two countries have set a bilateral trade target of 
$280 billion for 2015. Trade , however , is not the only immediate concern . 
Far more important , especially for Germany , is to get China to invest in and 
hold its bonds . In mid-August , at the First IISS Oberoi Lecture in Mumbai , 
Klaus Regling , the CEO of the European Financial Stability Facility , 
underscored the importance of Chinese demand for EFSF bonds and China’s role 
in stabilizing the eurozone . Regling also revealed that there is now increased 
and frequent coordination between monetary authorities in the United States , 
Germany , and China , drawing attention to the fact that the “ old Triad ” 
of the dollar , euro , and yen may now have been replaced by a “ new Triad 
” of the dollar , euro , and Chinese renminbi . While Regling spoke of 
 an emerging “ multipolar monetary system , ” his remarks clearly indicated 
the functioning of a “ tripolar ” system . Lying at two ends of that 
monetary triangle , the eurozone and China have acquired a geopolitical stake 
in helping each other . [ 180]Hans Kundnani and Jonas Parello-Plesner of the 
European Council on Foreign Relations view the China-Germany relationship as 
one that will shape the overall China-EU relationship . Like many strategic 
analysts , they worry whether Germany , in pursuit of purely short-term 
economic interests , might forsake long-term strategic interests and concerns 
about human rights , environmental problems , press freedoms , and other 
political and geopolitical issues . It is significant , therefore , that German 
political parties have emphasized the need for Merkel to raise such matters in 
her talks with Chinese leaders . However , Merkel’s focus may well remain on 
trade , investment , and currency flows . After all , unless she can turn ar
 ound the eurozone , her rising profile at home and in Europe could easily 
wither . What this means is that to secure German leadership of Europe , and 
her own leadership of Germany , Merkel has to “ walk on two legs , ” so to 
speak . She needs to balance both geo-economic and geopolitical factors – 
both interests and values – in advancing Germany’s relations with China . 
</text>
+<text id="syndicate/ms--europe-or-frau-germania-">
+Ms. Europe or Frau Germania ? BERLIN – Just what is the matter with Angela 
Merkel ? Only a short while ago , she was celebrated as “ Ms. Europe ” ; 
now , she increasingly gives the impression of being Frau Germania . Instead of 
providing resolute leadership in the global financial and economic crisis , the 
European Union’s largest economy is withdrawing into its shell . Germany has 
always been the motor of European integration , in accordance with its 
political and economic interests . Every post-World War II government has 
always been willing to harness Germany’s financial strength to further that 
aim , i. e. , to foot the bill for Europe . The motto was simple : Germany 
gives and profits in turn . Should Germany spurn the first part of this formula 
, the European project would suffer serious damage – and so will German 
national interests . Yet this is the direction in which Chancellor Merkel seems 
to be heading . Indeed , in the wake of the Greek crisis , Merkel spoke 
 publicly of the need to be able to exclude eurozone members that do not play 
by the rules . Does she seriously believe that the euro and the EU would 
survive such punitive action ?

<TRUNCATED>

Reply via email to