Insights, analysis and must reads from CNN's Fareed Zakaria and the Global Public Square team, compiled by Global Briefing editor Chris Good Seeing this newsletter as a forward? Sign up here. January 24, 2024 | |
|
In consecrating a new Hindu temple, some say, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has solidified both his hold on power and his country's trend toward Hindu-nationalist politics.
Crowds gathered this week to celebrate the opening of a new temple, devoted to the Hindu deity Ram, in the northern Indian city Ayodhya. Owing to a long-running dispute between Hindus and Muslims, the site of the temple has been contentious for decades. Modi's appearance to open the new temple there marked the culmination of a long political–religious drama. As The New York Times' Alex Travelli and Hari Kumar explain, Ayodhya is the original home of the revered god Ram. (The major Hindu festival Diwali celebrates his return there.) A 1500s, Mughal-era mosque in the city was believed by some to have taken the place of a former Hindu temple. Hindus and Muslims jockeyed for access to the mosque site after the British departed India in 1949; in 1992, a Hindu mob destroyed the mosque. A court ruling later handed the site to a trust for the construction of a temple devoted to Ram.
On Monday, Modi opened the temple. Given the Hindu nationalism of the prime minister and his party, the BJP—and the laws and administrative decisions during Modi's tenure seen as targeting Muslims—the political significance is heavy.
"Naturally, India's secularists see the rise of a Ram temple on the site of the Babri Mosque as confirmation of their own defeat, if not as a blasphemous conflation of Mr. Modi with Ram," The Times' Travelli and Kumar write. "India's 200 million Muslim citizens feel by and large alienated, which may be the point. But many Hindus, especially in the so-called cow belt in the country's north, just think it's nice that Ram will finally have a temple in the holy place where he was born. They were celebrating its inauguration at live screenings, as at a once-a-millennium holiday."
India will hold elections this year, and at Foreign Policy, Salil Tripathi writes that "Modi has choreographed the Ram temple consecration to consolidate his Hindu vote." Reflecting on the multiethnic, multi-religious country envisioned by democratic India's founders, Tripathi laments: "India is no longer a land of nuances. A significant part of its population wants an assertive government and a black-and-white narrative where subjugated Hindus are reclaiming their identity, and the foreigners who colonized the country in the past—the British and, before them, Muslims—are cast as villains."
Against this dismal picture of India sliding into religious nationalism and authoritarianism, The Economist takes a different view: that "Indian democracy is stronger than it seems" and that while Hindu nationalism may be powerful, it's not the only reason why Modi and the BJP have succeeded. Modi is a charismatic leader, the magazine writes; the BJP is better organized than its opponents, who have appeared lackluster; and the BJP focuses on economic development, too. What's more, the party is not all that popular in India's south, "where Islam arrived not by conquest but with proselytising merchants." Modi's BJP "is not really the overwhelming force it appears," The Economist writes, noting Indian democracy has righted itself after wobbly moments before. |
|
|
Does the US Economy Feel Good Again? |
Even as the US economy has improved, Americans haven't had great things to say about it. Despite a post-pandemic bounce-back, the fortunate avoidance of a recession many economists predicted, and the tapering off of inflation, President Joe Biden has suffered low approval numbers on his handling of the economy—just 31%, according to a recent ABC/Ipsos survey.
Why Americans don't feel the economic improvement has been a prominent topic of conversation. As many observers have noted, even if inflation has slowed, that doesn't mean prices are lower—just that they're not increasing as fast. Picking up the thread at Project Syndicate, Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg examines various hypotheses for the disconnect, including inequality, regional disparities in things like health outcomes, and an overall decline of faith in public institutions.
Regardless of what has motivated ongoing economic pessimism, some commentators see it changing. In a relatively-small-sampled but influential monthly survey conducted by the University of Michigan, consumer sentiment has recorded a notable rise, according to new survey results released last week, The New Yorker's John Cassidy writes. (Another, different influential survey on consumer confidence will be released this week.) "Given the flurry of positive economic news recently, that shouldn't be surprising," Cassidy writes. "What's more surprising is how long it's taken for the public narrative about the economy to change."
Hinting at the end of the so-called "vibecession"—a term coined by economics commentator Kyla Scanlon—New York Times columnist Paul Krugman contemplates the electoral implications for Biden and former President Donald Trump: "Will economic perceptions actually end up being a plus for Biden? Probably not. But if Trump was counting on perceptions of a bad economy to hand him victory, reality seems disinclined to cooperate." |
|
|
After Democratic Republic of the Congo President Félix Tshisekedi won reelection in December, two essays present vastly different views of the vote and its aftermath.
At The New York Review of Books, Nicolas Niarchos focuses on reported voting irregularities, violence, and the protests of opposing candidates, depicting the election—and its results—as unreliable. "Once again the Congolese people find themselves caught between clashing elites, and once again their institutions have failed them," Niarchos writes. "The more cynicism they have to deal with from their politicians, the more cynical they are likely to become. Corruption and violence will continue to be taken for granted across the country, and impunity will reign. If Tshisekedi did indeed win, the (national election authority) needs to show the world how he won fairly. But if kleptocrats are allowed to monopolize power illegally and in the shadows, the wounds that Congo has suffered during decades of colonization and war are unlikely to close."
At Foreign Affairs, Mvemba Phezo Dizolele and Pascal Kambale highlight signs of democratic health. "(T)he election's flaws should not obscure the fact that it did not feature the degree of violence that has marked past races," they write. "In a fragile democracy plagued by conflict, elections can crystallize antagonisms; peace or violence during an election reflects the nature of political participation and can serve as a prism through which to understand the progress of nation-building efforts. Although there were some irregularities in the official tallies, voters did appear to back Tshisekedi—an unusual result for an electorate that typically seeks to oust the incumbent. Despite many disappointments, the Congolese people continue to embrace the democratic process. Now Tshisekedi must reward that faith by delivering real progress on the country's most tormenting problems—among them the persistent insecurity in the country's east and some regions' feeling that they are still sidelined in the nation-building project." |
|
|
Is Vietnam Winning the US–China Trade War? |
It may need to keep reforming, but Vietnam is well positioned "to get rich," The Economist writes. "(A) country of 100m, (Vietnam) has shrewdly positioned itself halfway between China and America, prompting both superpowers to woo it," the magazine writes. "In 2023 Vietnam was the only country honoured with state visits from both Joe Biden and Xi Jinping."
That's saying something, as the schism between Washington and Beijing has trapped Pacific countries in the middle—and none appears eager to take sides. At Nikkei Asia this week, Shoichiro Taguchi peeked into the travails of the Solomon Islands, which saw riots in 2021 protesting a pro-China government.
But disruption can also produce winners. "Geopolitics is driving investment towards" Vietnam, The Economist writes. "Most manufacturers cannot simply pull out of China. But to mitigate the cost of current and future trade barriers, they can hedge their bets by making things elsewhere as well (a strategy known as 'China + 1')." Nonetheless, the magazine writes, challenges loom in Vietnam's reliance on coal and in the persistence of corruption. |
| |
| You are receiving this newsletter because you signed up for Fareed's Global Briefing.
To stop receiving this newsletter, unsubscribe or sign up to manage your CNN account | |
® © 2024 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved.
1050 Techwood Drive NW, Atlanta, GA 30318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario