Connect with us

Diplomacy

The Vietnam-US Relationship in a Dynamic and Prosperous Asia Pacific

Published

on

I have great pleasure to come here and speak to you at the CSIS. In the audience, I am aware of the presence of many renowned scholars. Many of you have maintained long-standing interests in Vietnam. And many of you have made outstanding contributions to the relations between Vietnam and the United States. My compliments and best wishes to you all.

I appreciate the role of the CSIS as a pre-eminent strategic think tank in the United States and the world in fostering dialogue and understanding between the political circles, academics, and the public of the two nations. CSIS also plays a very important role in promoting awareness of issues relating to security, peace, stability and prosperity in the region. These are the concerns and interests that all nations share. And this is a very important and essential factor that helps promote the co-operation between Vietnam and the United States in the coming period.
I wish to raise a few thoughts on the strategic environment of the Asia Pacific, and bilateral relations between Vietnam and America in this context.

Current situation of Asia-Pacific
 The profound and unprecedented changes in the world over the last decade have confirmed Asia Pacific as the most dynamic region in the 21st century. Asia Pacific leads the world in economic integration. We have ten out of twenty leading economies here. The flow of trade across the Pacific now accounts for two-thirds of the world’s total. The region also contributes 40% of the world’s total growth.
Today, Asia Pacific stands as a destination of opportunities for all countries in the world: (i) The United States shares its Pacific Rim with us; (ii) Europe enjoys long standing ties with Asia; And (iii) countries on the Indian Ocean are closely tied with the Pacific through the Malacca Straits. Economic prosperity of all countries – be it the United States, China, Japan, Korea or India and ASEAN member states – all contribute to the overall prosperity of the region. A prosperous Asia in its turns serves as a catalyst for the development of each country. The wealth of this region is tied to that of the rest of the world. And therefore, there is little wonder that today’s leading powers all place Asia Pacific at the forefront of their foreign policies.

These enormous opportunities offered by the region are conducive to the trend of co-operation and dynamic connectivity. Regional forums such as APEC and ASEM continue their important role linking Pacific Rim countries with Asia, and Asia with Europe. In the last several years, in addition to bilateral trade agreements, we note the emergence of multilateral trade arrangements such as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), and the free trade agreement in Northeast Asia. These linkages will make up a sizable share of world trade & eonomy and create new growth engine for and will lead to changes in the global economy. We can even speak of an eventual Free Trade Agreement that encompasses the entire Asia Pacific (FTAAP). Needless to say, the successful realisation of these linkages is of strategic importance to all of us.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Our region has vast potentials to offer, but to translate them into reality requires an environment of peace in the region. Therefore, we must safeguard this environment of peace and stability. We must prevent and manage conflicts. This is a shared responsibility of all countries, within and outside the region.
I believe that the key to a secured peace and prosperity is to build and consolidate a regional structure. In this way, we can promote co-operation and create linkages among economies, among societies, in trade, politics, security, and culture. In this connection, ASEAN has an essential role to play. ASEAN countries lie at the crossroad between the Pacific and the Indian Ocean. We connect all countries in the region, large and small. ASEAN is at the heart of regionalism in Asia . This is why all countries accept ASEAN centrality in the emerging regional architecture.

To ensure peace and security, ASEAN will bring into full use the established mechanisms and forums, and promote the development and implementation of instruments, norms and rules. To ensure the freedom, safety and security of navigation, ASEAN will promote dialogues, confidence building measures, full implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (DOC), and settlement of disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the international law and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS). Recently, ASEAN and China agreed to open formal consultations toward a Code of Conduct in the East Sea (COC). This is a positive, yet early sign, and we need to continue to work on it.

To promote its role as the nexus of economic and trade connectivity in Asia, ASEAN will double its efforts to forge linkages among bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements with a view toward a region-wide free trade agreement. The drive toward closer regionalism will serve as the catalyst for economic relations and intertwined interests, which in turn guarantees lasting peace and stability.
Major powers always maintain a grip on international relations, at multilateral forums and in Asia Pacific. To promote relations with external partners is a priority for both ASEAN and Vietnam. In the quest for a solution to regional security issues, what ASEAN wants to see is the maintenance of peace and stability, the effective operation of regional mechanisms, and the strict adherence to the international law. We hope that all powers will constructively engage in and contribute to this common endeavor. ASEAN shall not be a tool for confrontation or division as this will benefit no country, major powers or smaller countries alike.

In this context, the ASEAN Community of 2015 has become the foremost priority for all ASEAN member states. For us in Vietnam, this is a very important component of our foreign policy. We have been engaging ourselves in ASEAN affairs in a proactive, positive and responsible manner. We link our own interests with those of ASEAN. We strive to help enhance ASEAN’s role, stature, unity and consensus. Only by doing so can ASEAN have adequate strength to carry out successfully the Community. We will work with other member states to consolidate the role of the Association as the nucleus of regionalism. We will intensify our interaction in a profound way with our external partners for the common goals and interests.

Vietnam – US Relationship
Within this regional dynamism and prosperity, relations between Vietnam and the United States have broadened and taken off in many areas in depth, in breadth and in the quality of co-operation. If we look back on the long road that we have taken so far historically, we can realize the truly enormous dimensions of those steps and achievements.
You may be aware that President Ho Chi Minh stepped ashore the United States a hundred years ago on his journey for freedom and independence for his nation. He shared the universal aspiration of the mankind as stated by Thomas Jefferson in the 1776 Declaration that established the United States of America: The rights to life, equality, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In December 1946, not long after the founding of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, President Ho Chi Minh wrote to President Harry Truman, in which he expressed the desire for the two nations to establish ‘full co-operation’. History has had many twists and turns. Not until 1995 did the nations establish formal diplomatic relations that opened a new chapter in the ties between Vietnam and the United States .
For Vietnam, a strengthened relationship with the United States is within the context of our foreign policy in which we seek to ensure independence, self-reliance, diversification and multilateralisation of relations, the overall international integration and the deepening of relations with important partners.

I just held talks with President Obama this morning. And I have the pleasure to announce to you: Vietnam and the United States have decided to form a Comprehensive Partnership between the two countries. Accordingly, our bilateral co-operation will expand to include all areas, including political, diplomatic, economic, trade, investment, education, science and technology, defense and security. I also held meetings with the Commerce Secretary, Agriculture Secretary, the US Trade Representative, World Bank President and IMF Executive Director, Senators and Congressmen, and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. President Obama and his Cabinet secretaries stressed that our two countries are having great opportunities to move the relationship forward, and that the United States are committed to boost co-operation with Vietnam in many fields, especially in trade, investment, economic ties. We will continue to establish mechanisms for dialogue and cooperation, with concrete plans, in order to deepen and bring substances to the growth of our relationship.

Another important element of this visit is that Vietnam and the United States have reiterated the determination and commitment to work with other partners to bring the TPP negotiations to a conclusion, in accordance with the planned roadmap. We look to a balanced agreement for development. With the eventual joining of this leading economic linkage, Vietnam has taken a giant step in our overall international integration and in the regional dynamism and prosperity. We hope to realize the benefits in trade, investment, technology, access to higher stages of the global and regional value and supply chains. We also look to create more jobs, to ensure social welfare and to bring the living standard of the population to a higher level.

Joining TPP will help accelerate economic restructuring and transformation of our growth model, and also help further improve the business environment. We do not expect this to be an easy process for a developing economy like ours. We will make our utmost effort, yet we also look to see more of the US side’s flexibility and co-operation. This is a very important factor. US business leaders whom I spoke to affirmed their strong support for our overall bilateral ties, especially trade and investment. And they would do their best to support a high-standard, comprehensive trade agreement that addresses the balanced interests of all parties. They would support a transitional period appropriate to Vietnam in the TPP process.

We are conscious that when our bilateral relations develop in a stable, lasting and substantial way, that matters not only to both countries, but also to regional peace, stability and prosperity. We welcome President Obama’s commitment to enhance co-operation with Asia Pacific for peace, stability and co-operation. The United States views ASEAN as the central pillar of this policy and supports ASEAN centrality in the regional architecture. The US also voices support for peace, stability, security and maritime security and safety in the Eastern Sea . Apart from TPP, Vietnam will accelerate cooperation with the United States at various forums, including ASEAN-led mechanisms, Lower Mekong cooperation, the East Asia Summit and APEC.
In the meantime, we need to continue our work on outstanding issues that remain between us. As a nation with a pacific tradition, Vietnam shelves the past and looks to the future. I am of the view that differences and disagreements exist as a matter of course in any international relation. What we need to do is to build confidence, to build our relationship on the respect for each other’s independence, sovereignty, equality, political system and the principle of mutual benefit.

Looking back on the history of Vietnam – US relations, the establishment of the Comprehensive Partnership today is the culmination of a forward-looking co-operation process pursued by both sides. It began with efforts for post-war normalisation of relations, then the establishment of diplomatic ties in July 1995, hence a new era of relations between the two countries and people. In the past 18 years, bilateral relations have made great strides. 2005 marked yet another milestone with the establishment of a friendly, constructive, and multi-faceted cooperative partnership on the basis of equality, mutual respect, and mutual benefit.

With the growth of bilateral ties comes the change in how we work together. The policy of embargo, encirclement, sanction as the modality of relations between the two ex-foes gave way to the policy of reconciliation, multifaceted cooperation and of forging constructive partnership under the principles of respect for each other’s political system, mutual benefit, dialogue and increased exchanges to bridge differences. Bilateral trade and economic ties have been growing fast. The U.S. became Vietnam ’s largest export market in 2005. Then within 18 years, bilateral trade saw a 54-fold increase. By the end of May 2013, US total investment in Vietnam amounted to US$10.5 billion, ranking seventh among countries and territories investing in our country. Co-operation in science, technology, culture, education, tourism, defense, security has all seen substantial growth. A range of activities has been conducted with fruitful results and positive impacts on both sides on such areas as healthcare, humanitarian co-operation like mine clearance, unexploded ordnance, consequences of Agent Orange and dioxin, accounting for missing people in the war.

On the topic of human rights, we accept that there are differences. The most viable way is to continue our dialogue in a frank manner so as to enhance understanding and to narrow differences. It is with that spirit that during the meeting with US Senators and Congressmen, we exchanged views in an open and friendly manner on our bilateral relations, including human rights and religious issues. I also invited several religious clergies from Vietnam to join me on this visit and they had very frank talks with American and international institutions who are interested in these issues.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
The message I wish to emphasise is that Vietnam hopes to work with the United States to further this full co-operation in the interests of both nations. We should work together to nurture a peaceful, stable, dynamic and prosperous Asia Pacific. And we strive, we must strive harder in our co-operation for that common objective with the principle of mutual respect, equality, and mutual benefit.
I thank you, Dr John Hamre and other participants for your very cordial reception. I hope that CSIS will continue with your many conferences, seminars and roundtables in order to exchange ideas on the cooperation process in Asia Pacific. I hope that you will exchange ideas on how to boost the bilateral relations with Vietnam as well. I hope each of you will continue in your activities to contribute in a significant way toward this process, as you have done so far.

 

 Posting granted exclusively for the Modern Diplomacy

(*)This speech was  delivered by President Truong Tan Sang at the Centre of Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC on July 25, 2013 during an official visit to the US.  President highlighted the Vietnam-US relationship in a dynamic and prosperous Asia Pacific

Continue Reading
Comments

Diplomacy

Can BRICS Underpin a New World Order?

Published

on

Amid an unprecedented spike in global geopolitical risks, the world is becoming increasingly aware of the fact that the architecture that underpins the old world order is giving way to a new configuration of international relations and regional blocs. The countries of the Global South are establishing their own institutions, alliances of regional integration, and payment systems, with them turning into a crucial force in the transforming global economy. The largest developing markets, primarily the nations of BRICS, are among the leaders here. In March 2022, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs Sergey Ryabkov said that BRICS will form the foundation of a new world order, saying “I think that the BRICS states, totaling almost half of the world’s population and accounting for a large chunk of the global GDP, will be among the backbones of the new emerging world order.”

However, for the BRICS states to become the foundation of a new world order, the bloc has to offer other countries in the world economy new paradigms of development on a global scale. Such areas in the new economic architecture may include relaunching globalization on a platform of new states and regions, establishing a new institutional system for modernizing nations engaged in the global economy, agreeing on a new reserve currency pool with currencies of developing countries, creating a global development track as an alternative to the one promoted by the West, and forming new regional blocs and platforms to coordinate and develop those blocs.

Virtually all possible global-scale paradigms could be implemented within the broad BRICS+ format that offers BRICS states various options for cooperating with other states in the global economy. Spearheaded by China in 2017, BRICS+ still has to acquire its tangible development outlines in many ways, although some possible models for cooperation within BRICS+ have already been announced by representatives of the BRICS states. China’s 2022 BRICS presidency forms a favorable foundation for facilitating BRICS+, with China’s representatives having stated that they are considering the options of developing the BRICS+ concept within interactions, among other things, between regional integration alliances of the countries of the Global South.

As regards the idea’s implementation, a format that appears most suitable for BRICS+ is an alliance of three pancontinental alliances: the African Union, CELAC (the community of Latin American states), and the SCO/SCO+ in Eurasia. Such an alliance spans the largest possible number of countries across the Global South, while it requires no in-depth and complex economic integration or alignment of economic interactions across all three continents. Such an extended format offers developing countries an opportunity to coordinate interaction on the international stage, advancing the Global South’s priority agenda in sustainable development.

This year, we are seeing quite favorable conditions for the emergence of such an extended circle of interactions between developing states: Argentina, currently presiding in CELAC in Latin America, has recently stepped up its efforts to set up interactions with BRICS. Brazil suspending its CELAC involvement in 2020 is a limiting factor, though, but it will mostly likely be temporary. Uzbekistan, now presiding in the SCO throughout 2022, is increasingly involved in integration processes in Eurasia following a period of being closed off. The African Union presidency of 2022 has passed to Senegal, a nation that actively promotes coordination and cooperation of regional integrational alliances and builds tangible interactions with BRICS states, primarily with China.

A platform for interactions between regional integration blocs involving BRICS states could become another track of interaction within BRICS+. Such a platform could include priority projects of regional integration involving BRICS states, such as MERCOSUR, SACU, BIMSTEC, the EAEU, as well as the RCEP or the ASEAN-China Free Trade Area. All these regional blocs could cooperate in coordination, moving toward aligning their standards and creating a more open economic space for trade and investment by BRICS states and their regional partners. It is important to notice that most BRICS states currently choose to shape their foreign policies in the form of regional integration blocs (Russia – the EAEU, Brazil – MERCOSUR, South Africa – the SACU), and, consequently, BRICS+ based on “integration of integrations” is the only possible format for economic integration and for opening markets between BRICS states.

The spirit of multilateralism and of building a new architecture that suits the interests of the entire Global South is important in establishing such platforms. Attempts to base BRICS solely on the narrow national interests could adversely affect the development prospects of BRICS+ as such and of other multilateral initiatives spearheaded by BRICS states. As a new format of interaction between BRICS states, BRICS+ hinges for its success on multimodal interaction formats within BRICS+ that would account for the entire range of national interests and priorities for BRICS states and their regional partners.

Therefore, BRICS+ could shape two tracks for interaction between nations of the Global South: the SCO + the AU + CELAC, the most inclusive one geared toward broad interactions between developing states within international organizations; such a format may possibly reflect predominantly China’s vision its Minister for Foreign Affairs Wang Yi announced back in 2017 when he proclaimed BRICS+ to be the most inclusive interaction platform for developing states. A platform for “integration of integrations” between regional economic groups led by BRICS states may become another development track for BRICS+. This format is a better reflection of Russia’s BRICS+ concept that Sergey Ryabkov announced in early 2018, “We suggest that our partners consider BRICS+ as a platform for developing what could be termed an ‘integration of integrations,’” Ryabkov said. If China’s vision of BRICS+ provides the broadest horizontal span of the Global South, Russia’s vision of BRICS+ prioritizes the depth and alignment of integrating BRICS states’ priority regional projects.

Generally, the number of tracks and formats for interaction between developing countries may be far greater, reflecting the globalizing vision of every BRICS member. In other words, unlike the unipolar approach to integration in developed states, BRICS+ may serve as a foundation for diversifying the models and platforms of development and economic integration. In this regard, in order to develop BRICS+ as part of diversifying development models, it is important for India, Brazil, and South Africa to also present their visions of BRICS+ and of globalization in the Global South and outside it. It is possible that India, Brazil, and South Africa see a more appealing option in expanding the membership in BRICS’ New Development Bank by admitting regional partners; this paradigm has been used after Egypt was admitted to the NDB as South Africa’s partner in the African Union, Uruguay was admitted as Brazil’s partner in MERCOSUR, and Bangladesh as India’s partner in BIMSTEC and the South Asian Free Trade Area.

Improving the functioning of BRICS Provisional Monetary Reserves Pool (PMRP) could also be a direction of ramping up international activities of BRICS. Recently, BRICS’ PMRP has stepped up coordination with other regional financial organizations (RFOs) within regular consultations the IMF holds with RFOs. At the same time, BRICS’ PMRP was significantly less active in its responses to crisis phenomena in BRICS states compared to BRICS’ NDB. Another option is considering, as part of BRICS+, the possibility of bolstering BRICS’ PMRP’s mandate to monitor the macroeconomic situation in BRICS’ states, to develop coordinated anti-crisis measures, and to interact with other RFOs from developing states and BRICS states’ regional partners. In particular, there could be formed a regular coordination mechanism including BRICS’ PMRP, the Eurasian Fund for Stabilization and Development (EFSD), ASEAN’s Chiang Mai Initiative and their regional partners (CMIM), and Latin American RFO FLAR. Another area here could be expanding BRICS’ PMRP membership by admitting BRICS states’ regional partners, including several states admitted to BRICS’ NDB.

On the whole, the prospects of transforming the world economy today are tightly bound to coordinating the activities of the largest countries of the Global South, primarily the BRICS states. However, a global restart of global economic development requires a larger interaction format, BRICS+, that will make it possible to engage other developing countries in the process. In this case, the process of reformatting the world economy will become truly inclusive and stable. The “integration of integrations” format involving cooperation between regional integration blocs of the Global South may become an important tool in scaling the global economic transformation. China’s 2022 BRICS presidency may give an additional impetus to building platforms for interactions between regional groups of developing states.

Progress achieved by the BRICS nations in moving toward new platforms for cooperation between alliances of developing states may form the foundation of a common cooperation platform for all the states of the Global South. This expanded platform could advance inclusivity and openness in the development of the Global South countries, accelerate dynamics and structuring of the integration processes, could fill the gap and the lacunae on the map of integration processes in the developing world. So far, we can but state that developed countries are far better provided with dynamic and well-structured integration alliances than the countries of the Global South.

From our partner RIAC

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Understanding The Strategy and Use of Military Diplomacy by Nepal

Published

on

Authors: Harsh Mahaseth and Ananya Shukla*

From the very inception of Nepal as a modern nation state, its geopolitical status was clear and in response, the role of military diplomacy in securing Nepali sovereignty from the Great Powers of the time was anticipated by its founders. The predominance of Military Diplomacy in Nepal’s foreign policy naturally arose from Nepal position as a buffer state landlocked between the two Great Asian Military Powers of India and China. The Gorkha Kingdom, the precusor state to modern Nepal was founded by Prithvi Narayan Shah, who established the Kingdom in 1768 with the conquest of the dominant power in the region at the time, the Kingdoms of the Kathmandu valley.

King Shah famously quipped that the unified kingdom that he had founded was “a yam between two boulders”. Shah’s aphorism contrasts the small squishy starchy tuber of Nepal against the two massive boulders of the Qing Empire and an ascendant British Raj. Though the internal political structure of Nepal has shifted dramatically several times since its founding, Nepal’s status as the proverbial yam persists though the boulders have morphed into modern day India and China. Though the two massive boulders to the North and South seem like they will eventually absorb the soft vulnerable yam, not only has Military Diplomacy played a leading role in securing Nepal’s sovereignty in the Colonial Context, it has also served the Nepali National Interest in the Post- Colonial Era.

From a purely geopolitical perspective, Nepal exists only as a buffer state between the two historical military powers of the Asian Continent, India and China. The Himalayas being the highest peaks on the planet have separated these two great powers for millenia though the himalayan branch of the silk route served to connect their peoples through trade. While the Chinese remained a unified political polity under the Mandate of Heaven for millenia, the Indian Sub-Continent was a patchwork of Kingdoms of vastly differing sizes, cultures, languages, religions until they were forcibly consolidated by the Mughals and the British, giving rise to modern day India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. While rule of over India was slowly and effectively consolidated by the British Colonialists, the Chinese were going through what they refer to as “the Century of Humiliation”, in which Chinese supremacy was toppled. A resurgent China in seek of “National Rejuvenation” will naturally come in conflict with the national security interests of India.

However, after reform and opening up of the Chinese Economy under Deng Xiaoping, India has found itself with a powerful geopolitical, ideological, economic rival to its North for the role of the Asian Hegemon. The Point of contention lies in the nebulous terms of the 1950 treaty, especially considering the Since Nepal was declared a Federal Democratic Republic by first Constituent Assembly in 2008, Nepal-China defense co-operation has increased significantly.

Being landlocked, Nepal has suffered many trade embargoes for political reasons. The Indian hegemony has made Nepal turn to China for trade diversity, which has been wrongly interpreted by the Indian establishment as Nepal playing China card. With India too facing the same adverse situation of salami-slicing tactics by China on its Ladakh border, it has been a realization for both countries that relations had to be prevented from going down further.

Military diplomacy is a very important concept for the Nepalese Army especially in the Buffer zone of Nepal. When it comes to Nepal’s military diplomacy towards the neighborhood and beyond, it’s better to acknowledge the fact that Nepali Army has been conducting joint military drills with different countries, most importantly with the USA, India, and China for many years. Essentially, Nepal’s vibrant role in exercising military diplomacy with the great and emerging powers is immensely triggered by neutrality and non-alignment, which are also the foreign policy objectives of Nepal. Unforgettably, having almost six decades of experience in peacekeeping operations around the world, the Nepali Army has effectively enhanced the image of Nepal through the UN peacekeepers.

*Ananya Shukla is a penultimate year law student of Chanakya National Law University. She is an executive member of CNLU Pro Bono Club which provides legal support to the underprivileged and underrepresented. 

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Where Have The Soft Powers Of Western Nations Gone?

Published

on

Labeled as ‘soft power’ and measured in terms of “culture, politics and foreign policy” within a given nation; Joseph Nye introduced the concept of “soft power” in the late 1980s. Today, where have all the soft powers of Western nations gone? Which free democracy or Western nation is a shiny example? 

The term, “culture” already in the meat grinders, squeezing out into casings of ‘political correctness’ sandwiched between mesmerized and hypnotized folklores in styles of riots or metaverse

The term, “Politics” mostly about licking self-inflicted fresh wounds of mismatched promises, costumed and rehearsed leadership parades in the house of cards.

The term, “Foreign Policies” mostly about how to crush down local citizenry or how to hurt overall humankind when proclaimed as vision.

Ignoring humanity, diversity and tolerance, without civility and respect while dancing in costumes is not culture, it is circus. Ignoring citizenry while selling national policies to highest bidders is not politics, it is tyranny. Ignoring humankind, while destroying other nations is not foreign policies it is stealing, where deception rules and fakery respected. 

New definitions and new measurements are now mandatory; after all, when dumbness silences the smartness but accepted as social victory, when critical analysis becomes offensive, as it demands comprehension, when visible idiocy refuses to dialogue or discuss options to change, a global transformation must occur.

There are 36 nations having a National Election in 2022… a new world with unstoppable new economic thinking is emerging.

As a new world is awakening, the “soft power of a nation” is now melting into “people power of a nation” it is all about real value productivity, national grassroots prosperity in hands of local citizenry, where governments have already let them down. People Power is the most valuable power of any nation.

Within the earlier decades of this century alone, in places, culture, like a historic pearl, nicely saved inside an oyster, politics like a library of manifestos and institutionalized practices, and foreign policies designed to expand national and global prosperity. Is there where all the soft powers of the western nations and free democracies disappeared?

In time, masses treated as herds, populations as hungry mouths, and local public opinion only as noise. Just observe how such thinking helped Machiavellian fantasies morphed into constant live streaming of chaos, fragmented tribalism, divide, and conquer doctrine to shakedown the foundations of humankind.

Observe the proclaimed hallucinations of creating global democracy during the last century. Nations must align their priorities and declare their own nation building as top priority over exporting armed-democracies to disturb other nations.

The “soft power of a nation” now melting into “people power of a nation” but how? 

As technology advances, nations surrender to digital intellectualism and virtualization of economies, as the digitized 24x7x365 live platforms forcing bureaucracies into meritocracies. The citizenry starts to turn into trained armies of entrepreneurial out of box thinkers with the job creator mindsets. The world already have enough resources for every single person, it is the fair distribution this is jammed.

After all, nations with most digital platforms on global highways, upskilled government agencies, and talented entrepreneurial citizenry, with upskilled manufacturing and high-speed create the citizenry to cope with the future with productivity power to claim ‘people power’ as their biggest assets.

Never imagined before, now, growth hidden in digitization, robotization and commercialization, along with liberalization of borderless human talents create brand new models. Especially, when multiplied by five billion connected alpha dreamers, eager to form the largest group of informed mindshare ever assembled, such triangulations become the more powerful reservoir greater than of all the soft powers of the world combined.

How does this translate into simple applicability? What such ideas translate into national prosperity? What it takes to mobilize national entrepreneurialism on digital platforms to upskill exporters and reskill manufacturers and quadruple small medium business economy. Study more on Google. The rest is easy

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending