Has anybody else noticed that AlJazeera English stopped inviting As’ad Abu Khalil to comment on their programs after he criticized them about their Libya reports?

That’s notable because the ‘Arab Spring’ has been the focus of AJE’s reporting for the last three months.

And As’ad is right. AJE seems to rally with a certain agenda.

For example, it seems to sell the youth movements over other strands. In Egypt, when the referendum was up for votes, although it was clear most people there liked the referendum, AJE framed it in a way that put focus on the youth groups who were opposed to a yes vote (because they wanted a more drastic change in the constitution.)

The over-emphasis on social networking was annoying, because internet penetration in Tunisia (~30%) is quite low. Even less in Egypt (~20%). Why was the emphasis on English speaking affluent Facebook users, while somewhat downplaying  labour movements etc?

Similarly, AlJazeera seems to completely ignore support base that Gaddafi has in and out of Libya. They never reported on the laudable social programs that Gaddafi implemented- for example free education and free healthcare(1). Libya has a low GINI index (~36) which means less income inequality than most countries. AlJazeera never cared to report.

They also seemed to cheer the Western powers into invading Libya, whereas if they reported on the misgivings people have about another Western invasion, perhaps UN would mandate the neighboring Arab/Muslim countries to take action(2).

Even worse, AlJazeera barely mentioned the attacks on blacks in Libya by racist mobs and the lynchings that took place. Similarly, the attacks by some Bahrainis on South Asians got no attention at all.

They cold shouldered African Union when they expressed concern about the Western involvement, and also when offered to intervene to reach a deal.

I am not even sure that the ‘rebels’ in Libya are genuine about change. Despite all their bravado when facing the camera, they fled their posts when facing guns. That’s not the trademark of a desperate population, that’s the behaviour of rich who want others to fight for them. The situation only improved after Egyptian, British and some other special forces were seen on the ground.

And what was the “where are you Sarkozy” call (from some ‘rebels’) about? I have serious misgivings about who these Libyan ‘rebels’ are.

I think these issues can be understood when we recognize that AlJazeera is really a pan-Arab news channel that has a deep admiration for the West. That’s not unhealthy, but it’s important to keep in mind.

Notes:

1. The way Gaddafi treated criticism can not and should not be defended, but that is the only thing that gets covered.

2. When there was reports of the crackdown in Libya, I was hoping for some kind of intervention from it’s neighbors. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Turkey, even. It was naive to assume that the Western powers will let that happen. They like to ‘seize the initiative’, i.e. they want to be there and directing events wherever and whenever they can on whatever excuse they can find.

In the 1950s, US and Europe combined made up 60% of world economy. That’s not counting Canada, Mexico and Australia.

If we look at the fractional share of US+major European countries over the last four decades:

GDP of the US and Europe as fraction of world GDP

We see that their share has been falling over the years. From 62% in the early ’70s, to about 47% now.

So who’s gaining?

There’s a lot of talk about the so-called BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries. These countries are supposedly rising stars in the world economy- and have seen unprecedented economic rise. Let’s see if that’s true.

Here is BRIC’s share of world economy over the years:

Fraction of world GDP controlled by the BRIC countries

So it did indeed go up from about 8% of world economy to about 16% now. Impressive.

However, it’s not the whole picture. Let’s examine each of the countries separately. First, Brazil-

Brazil's GDP divided by the GDP of the world

Brazil has seen a steady rise in the last decade in it’s share of world economy. It now commands about 2.7% of world economy, not very unlike it’s share in 1996 (2.9%), 1982 (2.7%), and 1976 (2.6%). So it’s position now is by no means “unprecedented.”

Next, Russia:

Russia's share of world GDP

Russia saw a steady decline in it’s share of world economy through the ’90s. It has recovered it’s strength of the early ’90s now. It had 2.5% of world economy in 1990, now it has about 2.7% too.

What about India?

Indian economy as a Fraction of world GDP

We can see that India has seen a steady rise in it’s share of world economy from the ’90s from about 1% to 2.2% now. But it’s nowhere near it’s best days in the early ’60s share of 3.5%. (Note that we fought two major wars right around that time- with China and Pakistan, and focus shifted from development to armament.)

So, as you’ve guessed, among the BRIC countries only one that has seen real unprecedented rise is China. Here is how it’s share of world economy have changed over the years from a mere 2% to about 7% over the last two decades. It is interesting to note that it had a share of world economy similar to India in the ’60s. Now China’s economy is four times that of India’s.

China's GDP/world GDP.

But that’s not all. Here is the total share of the major Muslim economies in the world (Turkey + Indonesia + Malaysia + Saudi Arabia + UAE + Qatar + Pakistan + Bangladesh + Libya + Algeria + Kazakhstan).

Fractional share of Muslim economies in the world (total gdp of Muslim countries/world gdp)

That goes up from a baseline of approximately 2.7% in the ’90s to 5% (and rising) now.

This list includes Kazakhstan (became free only in 1991) and Bangladesh (created in 1971). Excluding Kazakhstan, and Bangladesh we see the following:

Fractional share of Muslim economies in the world (Excl. Kazakhstan and Bangladesh)

Therefore, Muslim economies have yet to reach the share they had in the ’80s, in spite of their rise in the last decade. I can only hope and pray that their growth will not be stifled this time. Ameen.

It would be interesting to understand the causes and make some predictions.

Data is from Wolfram Alpha.

1. NATO led War against Libya means a major supplier is unable to supply any oil.

2. Nuclear crisis in Japan makes people nervous about future of nuclear energy- especially in earthquake prone regions.

But that’s not all.

3. Production of oil in the US are low. The stockpile (reserve) is at their 25 year low. Keeping in mind US is the biggest oil importer by far, it is natural that oil prices will go up.

Oil is keeping around 120. Hopefully it’ll stay there for some time (a month or so) before starting to climb again. That’s because if it sees a spike, it’ll fall back to 120 if the baseline is established there, and not to 90.

We in the “third world” buy locally grown food, travel in public transport, save on electricity- and that makes our economies much more fuel efficient and robust against rise in oil prices. Only high prices of oil will force the “developed” countries to change their habits and become civilized. Otherwise they’ll blame us when their CO2 causes Bangladesh to sink under the sea.

Secondly, a high price of oil will cause the West’s hegemony to lose grip, iA.

I feel the pinch too, but we should be able to rise above saving a hundred (rupees) or two if that causes the poor to sink under the sea.

However, now that I am fishing for interesting news for TwoCircles.net for the election season as a volunteer, I needed to fix that problem. And AH, fixes were close at hand.

For Aajkaal.net, and Bartaman, all one needs to do is to go to their help pages and download and install the true type fonts. It’s very simple, really. Just browse to this page, click on the two links for the .ttf files, on the download dialog box, choose to open with font installer, and then click install. Then go to the homepages and refresh the page with F5.

Anandabazar patrika is a bit different. To be able to see their page, you will need an extension called Padma which is available for both firefox and chrome.

In that light, it is my sincere hope that oil price does not spike upwards, but keeps rising at a steady rate.

Now here is why I am cheering high prices of oil-

1. Oil is undervalued. Like gold, we have only a finite supply of it. Unlike gold, we are using it up at an ever accelerating rate. The price must go up for the consumption to slow down.

2. Burning fossil fuel is one of the leading causes for global warming. High prices of oil will force leading emitters to change their habit. Mere preaching has had no effect so far.

3. High price of oil will level the playing field for developed and developing countries. Developing countries are much more fuel efficient (Widespread public transport etc.) and are much more frugal about spending energy.

The rich countries, on the other hand, have built their system on cheap/stolen oil. As all oversupplied economies do, they are horribly inefficient in terms of energy usage. A high price of oil will  force them to become more energy efficient- something the poor countries have already got.

4. After trillions of new dollars (printed out of thin air as bailout money), the value of the dollar ought to be on the decline.

Etc. etc.

If they are, then year end price will be around 120, and not 150. Nevertheless, oil prices are irreversibly on an upwards trajectory. We may see short term falls, but no long term decrease in price. No turning back from here.

If the food prices rise in the West, there will be more food exports to the West from the countries that produce food for cheaper. Because the Western countries typically have more purchasing power (for the moment), the prices of food are going to go up globally.

It is critical then that the countries that are import-dependent just because imports are cheap must focus on food production in their own countries. They are in for big trouble if they don’t manage that within next one-two years.

The price is paid by people in oil producing countries. From the Iranians to Egyptians to Venezuelans to Ecuadorians.

The pressure for cheap oil has global implications too. The economy in the US is so transport dependent, that four/five major food producers provide meat for the entire country. Food at any store has on average traveled more than 500 miles. To grow 1 calorie worth of food, US spends more than 10 calories in burnt oil. There is no public transport to speak of. All that add up to make close to one fifth of world’s carbon emissions. Yes- the US alone produces about 20% of world’s carbon emissions. (China  22%/1.4billion, US 19%/.3billion, EU 14%/0.5billion.)

That can not be true forever. It has to change.

I am happy that oil prices are rising because of the ongoing revolutions.

Our economies are far more energy efficient. Food typically comes from the neighboring regions, unless there is a justification for brining them from afar. Eastern economies are much more robust with regards to high oil prices. Europeans are comparatively well off too.

Let us welcome the new era of expensive oil. I hope and wish to see $150/barrel by the year end, and $200-300/barrel in three years (adjusted for inflation.)

Let me also take the opportunity to express my best wishes for my struggling brothers and sisters.

By the way, protectionism is not going to save US economy in the long term because of some systemic faults. The crisis in Europe is going to go back to the US in two years time, while Asian economies will continue to grow.

Al Jazeera English gains cachet in U.S. during Egypt rallies

Mubarak’s Fall Prompts Double Takes by Anchors

Al Jazeera English Blacked Out Across Most Of U.S.

Al Jazeera gains popularity during uprising

Egypt coverage gives Al Jazeera surge in US viewers

UPDATE: Here is a collection by AJE itself.