Thomas P.M. Barnett

Why We Need to Focus on Strategic Partnerships with New CorePowers

This will be the main thrust of my Outlook article for the Washington Post next Sunday. Hereís a group of articles that speaks to how such New Core powers as China, India and Russia are dramatically connecting themselves to the global economyóand each other.

WSJ article of 30 March entitled, ìRussian Oil Exports Are Rising, Setting Counterweight to OPEC.î Russia is going like gang-busters to create new energy linkages with neighbors in every direction. Hereís the key excerpt:

ìThe Russian (oil) industry is hustling to add pipeline capacity and develop alternative delivery systems, from tankers to barges to pricey rail delivery. It looks set to extend its streak of steady export gains for a few more years, according to industry executives and analysts.î

Who is Russia linking up to at top speed? China, of course. See the NYT article from 30 March entitled, ìRussia Catches China Fever: Commerce Thrives in Free Trade Zone in the East.î

Some great quotes:

ìBacks to a biting Siberian wind, Russian welders toiled recently, their bright blue flames securing a new kind of fense on this spare landscape where Russia meets China.
Inside the steel mesh enclosure will be a 75-acre free trade zone, where Russians and Chinese can mingle freely without visas, make purchases at a huge department store, be treated at an ëeastern medicineí clinic, produce duty-free goods in factories and stay at a five-star hotel.
Ö
For decades in Russia, ëon the borderí meant military duty. But now, in the Russian Far East, it means making money. Held back by decades of mistrust, the region is catching up with the rest of Asia. It is catching China fever.
Russian governors are tumbling over themselves to create free trade zones, to improve rail ties, to build highway bridges, and to set up banking services in rubles and yuan. Quietly, without a shot fired in a tariff war, Russiaís eastern third has followed the rest of Asia into Chinaís economic orbit.î

This is connectivity breaking out all over a border that was, for years, one of the most dangerous on the planet. Connectivity creates rules and rules means less conflict. Already, with all these rails lines coming on-line, Russia aspires to become a major transshipping route for Chinese goods, moving all that trade through Russian ports on the the Sea of Japan. This is a future worth creating.

A third article in the same vein appears in the 30 March WSJ entitled, ìIndian Travel Is Set for Takeoff: Asian Tourism Industry Rolls Out Red Carpet to Cash In on Boom.î

Hereís the excerpt:

ìLast year, hotels all over Asia and Australia began hiring Mandarin-speaking staff to better tap the boom in tourists from China. This year, they are adding Hindi television channels and spicy curry to in-room offerings.
The number of Indian tourists heading abroad is expected to jump to six million this year, up 30% from 2003. Outbound Indian tourism will increase at least 15% a year during the next five years as that nationís liberalizing economy expands and incomes rise, according to forecasts by the World Tourism Organization of Madrid. That growth rate could become much higher still, if the Indian government pushes ahead with plans to loosen restrictions on its aviation industry, where limited capacity long has constrained international travel.
Asian tourism boards and hotel chains are stepping up marketing efforts in India to tap the regionís next big travel boom. ëIn the no-too-distant future, India will be as strong as China,í says Patrick Imbardelli, managing director of the Asian-Pacific region for Intercontinental Hotels Group.î

China sent 20 millions tourists abroad last year, but the tourism industry is more excited about the rising tide of Indians, because they shop more and stay longerólike Americans!

Key to me in this article is that connectivity of global air travel, yet another aspect of globalizationís connectivity that terrorism has used against us in the past and will certainly seek to use again. The goal here is the same one I cite repeatedly in my book: we need to balance the connectivity of technology with sufficient security rule sets to keep us all safe.