This Newsweek article describes the inefficiency of india's PM Manmohan Singh's reign, much of which is not actually attributed to him personally but to party politics and general corruption and incompetence.

Following the wave of infant sickness in China stemming from milk deliberately added with a hazardous chemical, as well as other similar products, there has been a lot of outrage, both domestic and international, over food quality in China. This Toronto Star piece talks about how this crisis is symptomatic of the "Two Chinas" which exist in that nation. This dual state of affairs, in which proud achievements such hosting a great Olympics and developing a space program is contradicted by tremendous problems on the domestic front such as widespread low food and product quality and significant environmental pollution. What makes it worse is the milk crisis has two dimensions, the first being the roles of the milk companies who processed and distributed these contaminated products, and the second being the government cover-up which prevented and then delayed the release of information on the sicknesses.

Royson James of the Toronto Star has a good piece on the sad state of affairs in Haiti, which has suffered from 4 hurricanes this year. Not only is it in a seriously dire situation but it has been largely ignored by media and has not received as much aid as it needs. One of the poorest nations on Earth and so close to 2 of the wealthiest nations in the world- US and Canada. As James describes it poignantly: "the first black republic of the new world, the seat of a slave revolt that would send the pillars of Caribbean and American slavery toppling within 60 years. Maybe it's because France, America and other imperialists have never forgiven the country."
Famed activist, writer and medical doctor Paul Farmer has an article on Haiti's tremendous need for help in Counterpunch.

Here's an interesting piece on globalization by former HK governor Chris Patten (extracted from his new book) in the Guardian which might at first glance probably infuriate some of the good folks I went to school with who persist in seeing globalization as this great Western-led system of dominance.
Rather than bash it, people should understand it better, he says and points to the ironic use of globalisation by anti-globalisation activists to rally and fight it. He does say that in several developed nations like the US and the UK, most respondents in a survey thought globalization had a more negative than positive effect.
He then makes some thoughtful and effective criticisms of world trade but without blaming it on globalization itself as many do. He slams the protectionism of wealthy countries in imposing heavy tariffs on imports or banning them altogether which are hypocritical and exploitative to poor countries, as well as the obscene agricultural subsidies which powers like European nations and Japan grant to their farmers which thus enable them to keep their prices down and even export to poor countries. Of course, some might say that these unfair protectionist measures are main aspects of globalisation itself and which can't be seen as separate.

He also speaks out on the current financial crisis, saying that globalisation isn't to blame but the incompetence and greed of the financial players like banks and so on.

"I remember a banker once trying to explain to me how the mortgage of, say, an unemployed single parent in St Louis could be morphed into a triple-A rated financial investment in London, New York or Paris. Magically, impoverishment became a "special investment vehicle". Try as hard as the banker did to get me to comprehend the beautiful simplicities of the whole process, I remained baffled. It was, I suppose, some sort of relief later on to discover that it was not me who was stupid."

It's a very long article which goes all the way to the bottom but which is well worth the read.

The world is in the midst of the alleged worst economic global crisis (since the 30s with no end in sight, as the powerful USA got caught up with the closure of a venerated brokerage firm and the potential loss of another before being saved by the government. Here's some readings on this crisis:

The bailout of AIG may actually signal more potential financial turbulence up ahead as other larger firms also indulged in the same things it did.
This AsiaTimes article explains why an insurance giant was so affected by the financial crisis.

Whatever the specific financial causes of these events, it's not surprising that a system driven by high lending and borrowing and hence, often unsound loans, would collapse over time. It's smething that's always struck me as unsustainable in the long run, like a "house built on cards" sort of thing.

The world economy has been sputtering a lot this year and Asia's strong economies are showing serious signs of vulnerability. This Newsweek piece asserts "why Asia won't save the world" as Asian economies so dependent on export growth and on the American consumer are beset by inflation and unable to maintain their own growth. Asian powers like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have all been seriously affected which gives an idea of the extent of economic slowdown, with Japan and Taiwan's governments having to introduce hefty stimulus packages .
One wonders if these problems are indeed confirmation of the error in focusing on economic growth rather than a steady approach addressing domestic social problems which many of these countries especially India and China certainly have a lot of.

Is Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe starting to come to his sense? A power-sharing deal has been agreed upon which will see opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai become Prime Minister, though Mugabe will remain as President. Rightly so, people are skeptical and even worried like opposition leaders and even Tanzania's President. It will be interesting to check back in the near months to see how this joint government holds up.

The recent brief conflict between Russia and Georgia, fought over two disputed Georgian territories proved to be one of the most significant events of the year. Auspiciously, or inauspiciously, starting on the same day as the opening of the Beijing Olympics, this conflict set off a load of alarms all over the world, especially in Europe and the US, over the aggressiveness of Russia and the possibility of a new era of global confrontation with the heir of the West's Cold War foe Soviet Union. Several issues were perceived from the conflict including that of the right of places to secede due to ethnic or cultural differences (Kosovo being a striking example), which brought up inevitable comparisons with Taiwan's situation, Russia as a resurgent foe and possibly wanting to invade other nations namely Ukraine, and the role of the US as global superpower being brought into question, in its inability to directly assist Georgia. The biggest issue has to be that seemingly overnight, the possibility loomed of a new military conflict with a dangerous Russia and the West. Notwithstanding the many civil wars and conflicts happening all over the world and the US troubles in Afghanistan and Iraq, the closeness of the threat of Russian military actions on Europe aka the developed world and the European dependency on Russian oil supplies, shocked the EU.
There's no doubt that Russia delivered a savage retribution to Georgia which was far destructive and brutal than Georgia's initial aggression. In the interest of being a cooperative and moral power it should retreat from Georgian territory and allow for international probe and peacekeeping in the disputed areas. But there is also no question that Georgia was the aggressor, sending tanks and soldiers into the disputed territories and attempting to take control by force. The real question which should be asked is was there any substantial Western or American role in this action or was it solely the Georgian leader's prerogative?
Back in April earlier this year, there were already signs of possibly military action by Georgia which was detected by Russia who warned of retaliation.

A roundup of interesting reading:
Here's the French President warning of a "new Cold War" before an emergency NATO meeting in mid-August.
This piece written as the conflict broke out, claims that the conflict is mainly about Russia's concern and anger over Georgia's NATO yearning. The writer does make a good point about Russia's hypocrisy in crushing separatists in Chechnya while endorsing the rights of South Ossetia to separate.
Foreign affairs expert columnist Gwynne Dyer says a new Cold War might be possible.
This article from Canadian Dimension examines the role of the US as an instigator in the conflict given its support for Georgia's leader Saakashvili and its foreign policy moves.
Commentators such as this one think a Russian move on Ukraine is very plausible.
This Guardian editorial slams Russia for its military action and claims that this is a sign of its weakening.
And finally to get a good overview of the conflict, check the BBC here.

The Toronto Star has a touching story on a survivor of Sierra Leone's vicious civil war now making a new life in Toronto. Mariatu Kamara suffered through a double hand amputation as well as losing a baby from a prior rape, and she recalls these events in a book that was recently released-The Bite of the Mango. As the article points out, her story brings a new perspective to the conflict
because mostly the story has been told about the blood diamonds and former child soldiers, not of
civilian victims like her.