« The fable of the mountain and the mouse | David Seaton's Blog | China/USA: those in the red must read the little red book »

Deflation as a metaphor


The world is shifting towards a multi-polar system with a less dominant US and a more powerful China and India, and a "historic" transfer of wealth from west to east, according to a new US intelligence report. Financial Times
In the NIC's view, the rise of China, India and the rest will mean that by 2025 the US will be "one [my emphasis] of a number of important actors on the world stage, albeit still the most powerful". For more than 200 years, even when challenged, the US has been a rising power. The adjustment will not be easy. Philip Stephens -FT

This week's news of a drop in consumer prices may sound on the surface like a good deal for financially strapped U.S. households. But economists warn that sustained deflation -- a period of falling overall prices -- would deepen the nation's economic troubles. Such a period would make it harder for people to repay debts and would prompt consumers to delay purchases in anticipation of lower prices and harder times. "Everyone is having these huge sales, and consumers know if they wait longer, the chances of them not having a good selection is fairly small and the chances are that the prices will be lower," said Charles McMillion, an economist who runs MBG Information Services. "So why buy today? This is exactly why economists are always scared to death of deflation." Washington Post
When Obama takes office in two months, he will find a number of difficult foreign policy issues competing for his attention, each with strong advocates among his advisers. We believe that the Arab-Israeli peace process is one issue that requires priority attention.(...)The major elements of an agreement are well known. A key element in any new initiative would be for the U.S. president to declare publicly what, in the view of this country, the basic parameters of a fair and enduring peace ought to be. These should contain four principal elements: 1967 borders, with minor, reciprocal and agreed-upon modifications; compensation in lieu of the right of return for Palestinian refugees; Jerusalem as real home to two capitals; and a nonmilitarized Palestinian state. Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski - Washington Post

"Deflation as a metaphor" compares the perception of America's relative decline as a superpower to economic deflation, where people hold off from making a purchase because, with prices falling, they think that they can get a better deal if they wait longer. When this happens, prices fall even faster as frantic sellers try to attract reluctant buyers with even lower prices and the potential buyers become even more reluctant to buy. Finally the economy seizes up and only those with great cash reserves benefit.

Deflation is a process, a self-fulfilling prophecy that feeds on itself: falling prices make prices fall faster.The National Intelligence Council's report, "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World" postulates that by the year 2025 the United States will be dramatically less powerful than it is today. If we take deflationary process as our guide, the universal perception of America's decline should quickly accelerate that decline.


I agree with Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski when they say that solving the Palestinian/Israeli conflict would be the keystone to a re-invigorated US presence in the Middle East. As they put it:

(To) let attention lapse would reinforce the feelings of injustice and neglect in the region. That could spur another eruption of violence between the warring parties or in places such as Lebanon or Gaza, reversing what progress has been made and sending the parties back to square one. Lurking in the background is the possibility that the quest for a two-state solution may be abandoned by the Palestinians, the Israelis, or both -- with unfortunate consequences for all. Resolution of the Palestinian issue would have a positive impact on the region. It would liberate Arab governments to support U.S. leadership in dealing with regional problems, as they did before the Iraq invasion. It would dissipate much of the appeal of Hezbollah and Hamas, dependent as it is on the Palestinians' plight. It would change the region's psychological climate, putting Iran back on the defensive and putting a stop to its swagger.
However, I think that in no other question is the "superpower deflation paradigm" more applicable than in the Middle East in general and the Israel/Palestine conflict in particular.

To cut to the chase, I think the "two state" solution is dead on its feet. Even the "painful concessions" necessary to create this "nonmilitarized Palestinian state" Bantustan described by Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski are beyond the Israelis; and by the shape the new administration appears to be taking, Barack Obama seems even less likely than Bush or Clinton to lean on them.

Without veering off too far into paranoiac scenarios, with Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State the Israelis and the assorted "friends of Israel" in the US establishment must be sleeping much, much easier than when they were fretting over the President-Elect's middle name.

What is needed is not rocket science, The Palestinians live where, or as near as they can live, to where they have always lived. All of the Palestinians are covered under a multitude of UN resolutions. What is required is a realistic two state solution. A "realistic two state solution" means a Palestinian state with full sovereignty, control of its own airspace, access to the sea, the same right to be armed as the Israelis have etc. in short a real country, not a Bantustan.

The Israelis have always resisted any realistic two state solution, even when the United States was powerful enough to guarantee one very favorable to Israeli interests and more so now when American power is in a sharp decline.

That leaves the Israelis three alternatives:

  1. Ethnic cleansing

  2. Apartheid

  3. Full citizenship for Palestinians in one democratic state containing both Jews and Palestinians.

Giving the superior Palestinian birthrate number three would probably result in the Jews soon being a minority in the new state.

Number two is what we have defacto at the moment.

If neither a realistic two state solution or a democratic one state solution are acceptable to the Israelis. Then it seems obvious to me they are only marking time with defacto apartheid until, when in a moment of great international confusion, say a general war in the Middle East, an occasion arises to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians. It appears to me that much of the talk in Washington and the EU on this subject is just so much smoke to screen this obvious analysis.

In my opinion, the Israelis and especially AIPAC (who use Israel for their own agenda in American politics) are doing nothing and have never done anything but run out the clock, and play for time.

This strategy has been based on the idea that American military, political, economic and cultural hegemony were eternal, and in the last decade, also on the idea that Israel's technologically driven economic growth was also endless. Both of these assumption are proving false. This leaves Israel in a very delicate position indeed. In the end the Israelis being able to maintain their maximalist positions depends almost entirely on US hegemony. As the world becomes more multi-polar and less eurocentric (white), Israel will be looking at a vastly different playing field.

To give you an example, which is already relevant and will become much more so in coming years: there is no China/Israel, Public Affairs Commitee (CHIPAC) in Beijing. Think about it.

The Chinese don't suffer from much Holocaust guilt. Their only interest in the Middle East is that there be peace and cheap, accessible, oil. Israel has zero strategic value for them and little or none of the influence over their domestic politics that it has over America's.

As America's influence fades, the Israelis are being left naked. Israel missed its best chance for peace on the best possible terms when the triumphant father Bush dragged them kicking and screaming to the Madrid conference in 1991. That is a ship that will never return.

Will the Palestinians wait for a better deal as US influence fades? Will the Israelis do something desperate like lighting the fuse to a general war in the Middle East to interrupt this spiral?

http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/

13 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Very good analysis, I think; and well put together.

And with Israel's stockpile of nuclear weapons, very possibly including battlefield nukes, we wonder why the Iranians would want nuclear weapons.

user-pic

Questions. Got any suggestions?

Israel probably can keep up the apartheid indefinitely, as better-educated and financially flush Palestinians just give up and leave. Hamas and Hezbollah probably can't do more than be a pain the ass, strategically. Iran would never risk a frontal attack, and any unclaimed nuclear attack would be assumed as hers. Bye-bye Tehran.

But Clinton is thought to mean a strong push for a deal is coming, given her husband's strenuous efforts on that topic. Arafat is out of the picture, ditto Sharon. If Hillary has enough clout to push Israel and Hamas closer, things might happen. I disagree that Rahm Emanuel as staff chief means only agreeing with Israel.

user-pic

I'm with you, Tom.

user-pic

TheraP, do you of all people approve of Apartheid?

user-pic

I agree with Tom:

If Hillary has enough clout to push Israel and Hamas closer, things might happen.
user-pic

If the situation in the Middle East continues as it is and the economy stays in the tank. What you are going to see in the Holy Land is poor Palestinians and the poor Haredi Jews (who also breed like rabbits) fighting over the thing. The Israeli elite of today are tech folk and they will move where the jobs are.
As to Hillary's plans for the Middle East. Believe me no Palestinian leader could ever sign anything she could dream up and survive the week. What the Clintons have always pushed for is a Palestinian Bantustan... That might have been doable if father Bush and James Baker had continued in the White House, but with the USA sinking majestically, the Arabs who are patient and long suffering people will just wait for the better deal. With the USA in decline, time is really on the Arab's side. That is what I'm talking about with my "deflation" metaphor.

user-pic
The Chinese don't suffer from much Holocaust guilt.

You really are offensive on so many levels, it's astounding.

user-pic

And what's the cheesy eye-catcher graphic? That helps how? Why not cute college co-eds? We've already had Johnny Depp.

user-pic

?
Seaton is right about China although I'd go further and say the Chinese suffer NO Holocaust guilt. Do you think that the Israelis don't take that into consideration when looking at what kinds of pressures work in their pursuit of their goals?

Israeli absolutely relies on Holocaust guilt in their relationships with Europeon countries. The Germans don't build subs and sell them to Israel at cost because they are lousy businessmen.

For some reason, the fact that Israelis are pragmatists above all else when it comes to their goals escapes many.

Their pre-emptive moves to avoid Russian ire prior to the demented Saakashvili's attacks (the Israelis warned him not to proceed) provides a recent example. Lucrative contracts for weapons, advisors and trainers were swiftly adjusted, voided and withdrawn in order to prove that Israel wasn't taking sides with Georgia, oh nosiree.......

IMO, the statement about China and Holocaust guilt is far more likely to offend Americans of Israel's "behalf" than Israelis.


user-pic

Put yourself in the Chinese place. 30million Chinese died of famine in the 1950s so that Mao could have an A-bomb. For them the Holocaust with 6million dead is just another anecdote from the world of the round eyed devils. They certainly aren't going to cut the Israelis any slack over it. The only interest the Chinese have in the Israelis is buying electronic weapon technology... and the USA won't let the Israelis sell it to them.

user-pic
I agree with Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski when they say that solving the Palestinian/Israeli conflict would be the keystone to a re-invigorated US presence in the Middle East.

Actually, the authors are not putting their plan forward with the goal of invigorating the US presence in the ME. In fact, many people would rightly argue that the US presence in the ME, especially since 2003, but before then also, is part of the problem.

However, there are more benefits than costs for peace between Israel and Palestine, a factor that P-E Obama has surely taken into consideration.

The Global Trends report is better late than never, I guess. They're just now figuring this out?

user-pic

The current deflationary danger is worldwide, China, India, France...it's hard to find a place that it's not happening.

You make it about the U.S. alone, and then, extend that as a metaphor as to the winners and losers after the current situation is over. Which is a sophist exercise, perhaps useful to get one thinking about options, but certainly nothing I would want to bet on.

Beware: the kind of "intelligence" that produced the National Intelligence Council's report is also the kind of "intelligence" that had no idea that the Soviet Union would fall, said Saddam Hussein had WMD's, and also is similar to the kind of "intelligence" that said you should get in on the Credit Default Swaps.

I think the truth is that forecasting from the current situation is exceptional folly, and anyone who is wise enough to know the limit to their knowledge would not be doing it and would be admitting being unable to forecast.

Also, somewhere out there I am sure there is also a forecast that says oil will not be such a desirable commodity in 25 years, and therefore few outside the Mideast will give a damn about the Israel/Palestine situation, with most of the developed world ignoring news that comes out of the Mideast like they now ignore the news out of Africa, and with Dubai being a ghost town.

Things looked pretty bleak in the U.S. in the late 70's--high unemployment, high inflation, Japan buying up the country. I remember it this way: all the economists said that we might get out of that, but there was no way no how we could ever have both low unemployment and low inflation at the same time, especially with the huge boomer generation competing with each other. Pundits saying that U.S. dominance was history were in great supply.

BTW, most of us boomers eventually found jobs (in the meantime did things like working several part time Mcjobs while partying at discos, while our parents melted down a lot of old silver and played the bouncing-the-deposits-from-bank-to-bank game. :-))

Alternative sophistry: What happens if Africa really finally takes to birth control? You think radical change there could take forever? Well, it took China how long to go from Cultural Revolution to "to get rich is glorious"?

user-pic

aa.

"I think the truth is that forecasting from the current situation is exceptional folly, and anyone who is wise enough to know the limit to their knowledge would not be doing it and would be admitting being unable to forecast."

An Israeli commenter "Shai" on Syria Comment absolutely shreds the report along the lines you mention. He finds it useless:

"If we look carefully at the words, we see that nothing in the assessment, almost, can be checked or verified. That is, if this official assessment is wrong, the statement could still stand on its own. “The world of the near future”, for instance, could be almost anything. It could be the United States, in 5 years from now. It could be Indonesia, 10 years from now. No clearer definition of “world” is given, and no timeframe is specified. Then the term “haunted”. Does that mean something physical that actually happens, of a psychological effect. Btw, if our intelligence agencies use terms like “haunted”, doesn’t that in itself already lead to people being haunted? Then there’s “… with greater access to nuclear weapons.” What does “greater” mean? More than they have now, right? But what is that? And how do you measure whether in 2009, Al Qaeda has greater access to nuclear weapons than it did in 2008? How do you measure this assessment? It’s a win-win for its authors, because they can never be proven wrong.

To people who understand how to read through such statements, how to decipher and eliminate the sophisticated-sounding babble, such an “assessment” sounds like nothing helpful whatsoever. If I was on the receiving end of this report, I would call over the head of the organization, and tell him/her that the next time I receive a piece of official paper from them, that neither says anything, nor can be verified, I’ll expect its followup to be his/her resignation letter. And yet, most of us still buy into this. And we still support taxpayer’s money going into such useful organizations."
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=1591&cp=all#comments

Leave a comment

David Seaton

user-pic

Following:
Followers: 10

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address