Get your act straight Uzbekistan. You need more Foreign Direct Investment.

 Full of rich natural resources such as gold, cotton, oil and natural gas with the largest population in Central Asia and fairly developed human capital with low wages, Uzbekistan is potentially the best country in the region for foreign investments. The inability to stabilize macroeconomic and structural refinement has aggravated bureaucratic incompetency and promoted vast corruption. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, which led to huge losses in technological development and economic growth, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is the best way to diversify and improve the economy of Uzbekistan. For Uzbekistan to attract more FDI it has to standardize and increase currency-converting process, as well as unify and organize licensing and investment entry procedures, restrain corruption for more efficient investing environment as well as increase tax-cutting incentives.

     Uzbekistan has to revise the foreign currency exchange processes and allow FDIs to convert greater amounts of currency in more efficient ways as the first step to bring in foreign businesses into the economy. Currency conversion is one of the greatest difficulties for foreign businesses wishing to invest in Uzbek markets (Lautier and Francois). National Bank of Uzbekistan (NBU), which is the Central Bank, is the only bank authorized for any transactions by FDIs. Thus, the government has full control over how much profit money the FDI can withdraw or transfer for its operations and at which speed this process is initiated. As the centralized economy, Uzbekistan is trying to prevent easy outflow of money from the country; thus, slows down the exchange processes. However, these policies hurt FDIs ability to smoothly make transactions, pay wages and do basic business like buying equipment, so fewer investments are made.

       The initial process of licensing and investment for foreign businesses has to become more systematic and centralized. Licensing and initial registration of investment are ambiguously separated between different agencies and ministries, which are poorly coordinated and often contradict with each other’s policies (Loungani). Moreover, some of these agencies are in charge of State Owned Enterprises (SOEs), so they present competing interests to investments that make the licensing process counteractive (Abdurakhmonov, p.200). Instead of having multiple malfunctioning agencies that slow down the preliminary registration and legalization of FDI, there should be one concentrated ministry. It can consist of one or two representatives from each ministry in the same locale, who are in control to oversee the entire procedure and expedite it accordingly. Also, these ministries can’t acquire shares in FDI competing SOE industries.

        Uzbekistan Ministry for International Trade and Investment (MITI) has to create universal laws, instead of case-by-case based regulations, which are passed in top down manner in order to eliminate lower levels of corruption and provide safe and stable environment for the FDI. Uzbekistan is ranked “177th out of 183 in Transparency International’s 2011 Corruption Perceptions Index”(US Department of State). Executive branch of Uzbekistan highly advocates in favor of FDI, but poorly organized local and regional ministries “Hokimiyat” are able to tweak regulations on individual case that promotes corruption (Allan, Jorg p.43). Expropriation rules and regulations change so often that it’s almost impossible to abide with them that result in arbitrary and illegal fines. MITI has to provide standardized and universal regulations, which will protect FDIs and represent interest of the executive government instead of corrupt small bureaucrats.

      While Uzbekistan is very attractive state for FDI in Central Asian region, it has to compete with other states that don’t have as much potential, but provide enough tax incentives and safety regulations to become more desirable place for investment. After July 2006 cancelation of tax holidays and protection from expropriations to 10 years, many FDIs closed their businesses (Abdurakhmonov, p.183). Uzbekistan won’t sustain and loose FDI if it will not introduce more vigorous pro-investment tax reforms immediately. First, the MITI should reconsider property tax, the environment tax and the road user tax and eliminate it. These taxes are not rational for the government and represent strain for the investors. Secondly, it should remove all the inconsequential and extraneous limitations on removal of advertising, entertaining and labor costs.

      The productivity potential, low labor costs and substantial market are very inviting conditions for the FDI. Unfortunate inability to follow through with its promises and punishing regulations serve as very discouraging attributes for FDI in Uzbekistan. If Uzbek government wishes to enjoy more FDI, great technological advancement and human capital growth, besides rapidly growing economy it has to revise its policies and stabilize its operations. Otherwise, it will remain stagnant and lose its last remaining FDIs.

                                                            Works Cited:

Abdurakhmonov, Mukhsinkhuja. "FDI Scenario in Uzbekistan-Glancing at the First Decade after Independence." Economic journal of Hokkaido University 32 (2003): 183-200. Web. 23 Oct. 2014. <http://www.worldcat.org.libproxy.usc.edu/title/fdi-scenario-in-uzbekistan-glancing-at-the-first-decade-after-independence/oclc/678242350&referer=brief_results>.

Allan, Rorry, and Jorg Weber. "Investment Policy Review in Uzbekistan." UNCTAD. New York and Geneva. 1999. Web. 23 Oct. 2014. <http://unctad.org/en/docs/poiteiipm13.en.pdf>.

Lautier, Marc, and François Moreaub. "DOMESTIC INVESTMENT AND FDI IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE MISSING LINK."Journal of Economic Development 37.3 (2012): 1-23. ProQuest. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.

Loungani, Prakash, and Assaf Razin. "How Beneficial Is Foreign Direct Investment for Developing Countries?" Finance and Development. A quarterly magazine of the IMF. June 2001. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.

United States. Department of State. Burreau of Economic and Business Affairs. “2012 Investment Climate Statement – Uzbekistan.” N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2014. <http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2012/191261.htm>.

Energy Poverty and "Akon Lighting Africa"

Do you know how much of your daily routine is dependent on having simple electricity? Can you imagine your education, working environment or home chores with out reliable supply of energy? Simple use of ATM machines, iPhones, Macs, Laundromats, Printers and even as simple as use of a toaster in morning are all dependent on electricity. People in developed countries simply don’t realize what a blessing it is to be provided with constant energy. Having electricity and being able to use it is so normal to us that we forget its true value.

An ugly reality is that not the entire world is gifted with reliable sources of energy. Even further, lives of so many people around the world are at stake because hospitals can’t keep vaccines refrigerated. People can’t store their food under required temperature. Very often huts get caught on fire because people use other unsafe sources of energy like ceresin lamps instead of electricity.  Many children can’t acquire basic education and drop out of schools and poverty of these countries just grows bigger and bigger. Just to see the severity of this problem, try to imagine that 7 out of 10 people in Sub-Saharan Africa lack basic electricity. That is a heart-breaking and horrifying fact.

Growing up in Uzbekistan, that is a former USSR country and is located in Central Asia south of Kazakhstan and north of Afghanistan and Iran, I was unlucky enough to experience lack of stable energy flow first hand. Ironically “Uzbekistan was the third largest natural gas producer in Eurasia, behind Russia and Turkmenistan in 2011.” On the contrary about 3 to 4 out of 7 days a week my family would spend with out any sign of electricity. I remember how my grandmother would get so devastated and upset when just as she’d buy groceries and put them in the fridge, the power would go off for days and the entire fridge of food would get thrown away because we can’t eat it all before it went bad.

During one of the coldest winters in Uzbekistan when temperature dropped below zero degrees Fahrenheit we were out of electricity as well as hot water for a week. In order to sleep and not get sick my mom made me wear all my warm clothes, including boots, gloves, puff jacket, hat, and scarf before I got under several layers of blankets. Now living in LA and enjoying this blessed beautiful weather sometimes I still get horrified by memories of those days and nights that all you do is just hope that electricity will come back on and I’d be able to have a cup of warm tea or water.

A person that also was unlucky enough as myself and had to experience hardships of life without electricity is Akon. Akon is an international Philanthropist, business mogul, hip-hop and R&B recording artist, songwriter and record producer. He was born in Saint Luis, Missouri and ended up growing up in Senegal. He is known for his chart-dominating singles “Smack That” and “I Wanna Love You.” In February 2014, Akon began and initiative that would bring electricity to more than one million homes in Africa by the end of 2014. “Akon Lighting Africa” is an effort that will address immediate needs of people in Africa. “This initiative will address the concern that more than two-thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa is without electricity, and that more than 85 percent of those living in rural areas lack access.”

Akon is being assisted by One a “campaigning and advocacy organization of more than 3.5 million people taking action to end extreme poverty and preventable disease, particularly in Africa. Cofounded by Bono and nonpartisan, they raise public awareness and work with political leaders to combat AIDS and preventable diseases, increase investments in agriculture and nutrition, and demand greater transparency in poverty-fighting programs. ONE also works closely with African activists and policymakers as they fight corruption, promote poverty-fighting priorities, monitor the use of aid, and help build civil society and economic development.”

This past Monday Akon and One with help of Michael Drachkovitch, who is USC Dornsife alumnus, manager of marketing and external relations at ONE brought the entire campaign to USC. As a former International Relations student Michael saw an opportunity to seek help of young, innovative and passionate International Relations student. Students were presented with a challenge of how to efficiently use social media and draw attention to the Energy Poverty problem and stimulate young people to send online letters to Congress. “These letters will urge Senators to support legislation that will bring modern energy to more than 50 million people living in sub-Saharan Africa for the very first time - all at zero cost to the US taxpayer. Letters are one of the most effective ways to influence the way Congress votes. The goal of the #PowerProject is to generate 50,000 letters to Congress.”

This campaign made me very proud and happy that there are people in this world that don’t forget their roots and where they came from, like Akon. Others like Michael Drachkovitch and One Campaign team are able to see beyond their own community and country and reach out to people in need in other parts of the world with the attempt to positively change their lives.

The ICC goes after North Korea's Kim Jong-un.

     Peter Walker, a journalist for The Guardian, in his article “North Korea human rights abuses resemble those of the Nazis, says UN inquiry” reports that UN’s commissioner has been gathering a lot of material over the past year about North Korea’s leadership committing “systematic and appalling human rights abuses against its own citizens on a scale unparalleled in the modern world, crimes against humanity with strong resemblances to those committed by the Nazis a United Nation inquiry has concluded.” UN commissioner on human rights personally addressed leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-un, to warn that he could face trial at the international criminal court (ICC) for his personal responsibility as the head of the state for letting such atrocities to happen. UN’s intentions are absolutely admirable, but the actual realization of such an act and possible consequences of this trial are a bit more complicated and unsettled. It is very uncertain who will or will not support ICC in bringing Kim Jong-un to trial, because ICC has no standing army that can intervene and capture Kim Jong-un, unless he willingly surrenders himself, which won’t happen in any near future.

     One of the first powerful protesters that ICC may face is China with its veto right of this trial. Even though, China may seem as not a “supporter” of North Korean regime, it shows absolutely opposite behavior and have “close links with North Korea and maintains a policy of sending back people found to have fled across the border, despite widespread evidence that they face mistreatment and detention on their return” (Walker). Max Fisher from The Washington Post explains China’s political stand in the region as a very straight forward “no war, no instability, no nukes.” That explains that as a hegemon in the region China wants everything around it to be stable and under control. China absolutely doesn’t want to loose its people again if another Korean war erupts because of the ICC trial.

     The other issue that the ICC may face is what happens next in case the trial ends up being successful and the North Korean leader as well as the regime will go down. The ICC doesn’t have any military power that can prevent civil violent upheavals and turmoil as well as provide safety for the people. Moreover, ICC has to be able to gradually reform the country and radically transform the authoritative and corrupt regime into liberal and democratic. In order to implement anything close to what I described above in North Korea, the ICC has to have other nations to support it and provide it with standing military, think tanks, money, and etc. The big question here is who would want to get involved in North Korea’s transformation and send its own troops and minds there. As we’ve already seen China not only won’t support, but also would actually try to prevent the ICC from doing anything. South Korea doesn’t want to do anything with N Korea, zero relations. The US has no national interest in N Korea and has much more important issues to concentrate on. That means that there is actually no regional or world hegemon that is powerful and fully willing to get involved and support the ICC. The only countries that might be interested in such huge commitment might be like-minded members of the ICC that are small European countries that promote humanitarian and democratic values.

     All of this is very complicated and before the ICC decides to take Kim Jong-un on a trial, it has to create a really strong plan of action in case the trial is successful and make sure that it has enough support to really make a difference in people’s life, instead of allowing another vicious leader just take Kim’s place and continue the same atrocious regime.

Huntington says FEAR the differences, I say Embrace Them with all your Heart !!!

         The American political scientist Samuel Huntington provoked a huge academic debate when in 1993 he presented the article ”The Clash of Civilizations” in the magazine Foreign Affairs. In this article he presented a theory of the geopolitical situation after the Cold War. His main thesis was that the world’s conflicts were no longer just between ideologies, but between civilizations, where different cultural and religious identities are the main factors in creating cooperation or conflict. Huntington fears that the self-assertion and the cooperation between the non-Western “civilizations,” especially the Islamic and the Sinic, would be at the expense of the Western “civilization.” “The people of the West must hang together,” was his message when a question became of how to meet the new “threat.” While describing the tense relationship and clash between “Western Civilizations” and “Islamic Civilizations,” Huntington misleads readers with his oversimplified determination of “civilizations” and purposefully carries very negative presentation of Islamic religion and culture of Muslim countries.

             First of all, Huntington identified eight major civilizations — Indian, Chinese, Asian, Islamic, Western etc. — and emphasized that instead of converging towards universal liberalism globally, human consciousness within these civilizations is underlying; people are becoming increasingly parochial and conscious of their cultural, religious or civilizational values and differences. The concept of “civilization” is an abstract theoretical construction that simplifies reality in an almost dangerous way. It looks like it is an almost impossible task to give a sustainable objective basis for concepts of civilizations, no matter whether one uses a universalistic or pluralistic approach. Huntington’s starting-point for splitting the world into eight big cultures seems to be very questionable.

         The clash of civilizations thesis has attracted considerable amount of criticism on the basis of its language of 'us' and 'them' or its embedded epistemology of 'othering'. The critics generally hold that Huntington's understanding of Islam-West relations is fundamentally based upon orientalist scholarship of Islam, in which Islam is perceived as a problem and even a threat to the West. Edward Said, a well-known critic of orientalism, contends that Huntington's thesis has orientalist backdrop, hence it always privileges the West and ignores the other (Islam). For Said, this approach is less likely to lead any critical understanding of 'other' but it only feeds self-pride. He also argues that there is a 'clash of ignorance' rather than 'clash of civilizations'. On the other hand, Manochehr Dorraj argues that the clash thesis reifies, distorts, and de-humanizes the Muslims. Finally, the critics argue that perceiving the 'other' as a 'threat' instead of a 'challenge', leads to 'siege mentality', which originate from 'Western hubris'. 

           After thinking critically, you would think what can motivate Huntington to write such a piece, that makes people realize that war is ok, and it's even natural. Moreover, that different “civilizations” were clashing for centuries, because of different ideologies, and now time has come for war of religious views. The motivation behind generating such ‘official’ mythology, by the US elite, and the multiple think tanks that push their agenda, is primarily ‘prepping’ the domestic public for massive funds and manpower. In other words, legitimation is achieved by generating an ‘us versus them’ climate of fear and paranoia by scaring “the hell out of the American people.” We should note at this point that the agenda of the US elite is different to that of the masses in the US, most of whom are politically quite apathetic and are busy earning a living or chasing a dream that most never attain. The point is that such frightening of a generation by the US elite is for ulterior motives and not for the sake of any benefit to the American people. As C. Wright Mills explained in his book, The Power Elite, in the 1950s and as William Domhoff has been empirically verifying almost every decade since then, these US elite have a social profile and a lifestyle very different to the profile of mainstream America, and their sense of community is such that they consider themselves ‘separate’ and ‘superior’ from the rest of society over which they rule. 

              This ‘prepping’ of the public so that it considers elite agenda to be in their best interest, with the accompanying language of fear and the pseudo-scholarship that legitimizes it, is necessary for conducting wars because the manpower as well as the funding for it is provided by the masses. They are also the ones who do the fighting but ironically never take part in the decision to go to war. The second and lesser reason for such a thesis like the “Clash of Civilizations,” is for altering the agenda of the rest of the world, particularly the underdeveloped part of the world, away from domestic issues towards conducting America’s wars. The ‘you are with us or with the enemy’ mentality, which is the privilege that the rest of the world grants the US based on its position in the global order, inevitably achieves that end. 

                 Huntington in his describing of Islam represents it as a violent, war centered, “boarding with blood” religion. One should start thinking of “who speaks for Islam?” in the World and whether Islam is a political religion, as well as considering how Islam is perceived by the others. There was a disagreement among the Muslim participants and panelists as to whether Islam is a faith to be defined by the individual according to his reading of the sacred texts, or whether Islam is rather a way of life that cannot be separated from a government. A consensus was established that there is a difference between who should speak for Islam and who does speak for Islam. Osama Bin Laden, for example, did not have the support of most Muslims, and yet he tried to claim the authority to speak for the Muslim world, which he sometimes was granted—at least in the mind of the others. The discussion of Western perceptions restated that Islam is not a monolith and that the West should develop a more complex understanding of the Islamic world. There was no such agreement, however, when it came to whether the West is indeed “hated” by the Muslim world and, if so, why. Likewise, conflicting opinions emerged as to whether the West’s perceptions of Islam constitute discrimination and vilification, or whether these attitudes and fears are driven (or justified) by a recent history of Americans being killed by people claiming Islam as their motivation. 

               Generally speaking one can say that Huntington with his hypothesis “the clash of civilization” has come up with an important contribution to the theoretical discussion about the concept of civilization and to the discussion about the driving forces behind today’s more complex geopolitical situation. But his emphasize on cultural dividing lines as the decisive factors behind conflict and cooperation seems to be over exaggerated, and also potentially dangerous. Even though he replaces the importance of ideology with the importance of culture, his way of thinking is still connected to the spirit of the Cold War: “the West against the rest”.

                                         Works Cited:

“The Clash of Civilizations,” by Samuel P. Huntigton,Foreign Affairs Summer 1993.

“ The Clash of Ignorance,” by Edward Said.The Nation, October 22, 2001.

“Why Samuel Huntington’s “Clash Of Civilizations” IsInadequate,” by William Holland.

“The Power Elite,” by C.Wright Mills. Oxford Press. 1956.