WikiLeaks Discloses 2278 cables from Kathmandu to US

News At a time when the activities of Nepal's two big neighbors India and China grow in Nepal, the US too seems to have been sensetive in this part of the region which is known for the great game in 29th century. After discloser of WikiLeaks that US embassy in Kathmandu sends 2278 cables from Kathmandu, there will be more activities of Nepal's other two neighbors which claim that they have genuine security interest in Nepal.

Indo China Shadow Boxing Over Lanka

News


Sri Lankan journalist Gamini Weerakoon writes about growing India-China competition in Sri Lanka.
The visit of Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna to Sri Lanka closely followed by Pakistan President Asif Zardari may be seen by some as the success of the Rajapaksa government’s foreign policy, particularly in the South Asian region but a different view is held by others who see Sri Lanka becoming a backyard for play by the regional powers.

Maoist should led the new government: professor Muni

India's professor SD Muni suggested that Nepal's Maoist should be leading the new government.

New Spotlightnepal

New Spotlightnepal

New Spotlightnepal

New Spotlightnepal

Study reveals immense importance of ‘invisible’ water to urban poor

A key water resource that will grow in importance as climate change takes hold is currently going largely unmeasured — with big implications for poor communities in developing nations, says research published today (15 November 2010).

The International Institute for Environment and Development’s study shows that hundreds of millions of urban people in such countries already depend on this hidden resource.

Water taken directly from wells rather than being piped to users from surface-water supplies such as rivers and reservoirs is rarely taken into account, and it is therefore being used invisibly.

This might mean that it is being used unsustainably but it might also mean that groundwater has even greater potential to supply poor communities than is currently thought.

The study estimates that almost a third of urban households in sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia rely on groundwater from local wells, and the share is considerably higher among poorer households.

It warns that policymakers, donors and others have neglected poor people’s dependence on wells, and it urges action to ensure that people can use groundwater in a safe and sustainable way.

“The policy trend is to promote the use of piped water but as our research shows, large proportions of urban populations are not served and must supply themselves with groundwater from wells,” says co-author Dr Jenny Grönwall. “Unfortunately most official statistics, including those that measure progress towards the UN Millennium Development Goal on water, fail to acknowledge the value of different kinds of wells.”

Grönwall adds: “It is critical that the neglect of this resource ends, as research suggests that climate change will make groundwater increase in importance in large parts of the world, not least in the urban areas of developing nations.”

One problem is that the UN Millennium Development Goal system defines wells as being ‘improved’ or ‘unimproved’ when these terms do not reflect real differences in the importance of wells and can in fact condemn vital sources of water.

One of the reasons that groundwater gets neglected is an assumption that it is of poor quality or likely to be contaminated, especially if a well is located close to a latrine.

“It is a misconception that sanitation facilities near wells will automatically cause disease and that such wells deserve to be shut down,” says co-author Dr Martin Mulenga. “In reality, transmission routes for harmful microbes are much more complex.”

The researchers say that, overall, a greater availability of well-water can be better for people’s health as it promotes good hygiene, and not all water used must be of potable standard.

“Household treatment and good hygiene practices such as hand-washing may still need to be promoted to reduce health risks,” says co-author Dr Martin Mulenga. “Governments and donor agencies should take steps to enable poor communities to use groundwater in a safe and sustainable way, rather than discouraging their use of this resource.”

The researchers call for better monitoring of urban groundwater resources and wells and for groundwater to be included more often in plans and policies for integrated water resource management. Measures to improve recharge of aquifers and to protect both groundwater and wells from pollution are urgent.

“While water privatization and regional water scarcities grab the limelight, this study shows that a large share of the world’s poorest urban dwellers actually depend on local wells,” says Dr Gordon McGranahan, head of IIED’s Human Settlements Group.

“Far more needs to be done to support the efforts of local households and communities, and to make water supplies from wells more reliable and safe. This will be a challenge for water sector organizations more accustomed to working through large utilities and regional water resource authorities.”

The research — which includes extended case-studies of Bangalore, India and Lusaka, Zambia — adds that self-supply from local wells can be a cheaper alternative to piped supplies in situations where infrastructure for house connections is unfeasible or too costly.

INDIA-NEPAL RELATIONS: A PERSPECTIVE FROM NEPAL

Chiran Jung Thapa email: chiranjthap@gmail.com An Indian national with longstanding ties with Nepal recently remarked – “Indian policy in Nepal appears as if oceans separate the two countries. For a country that aspires to be a world power and a Security Council member, its public diplomacy and relationship capabilities remain infantile and its behaviour towards smaller neighbors juvenile.” These sentiments resonate with Nepalese. Nepal and India are supposed to have exemplary bilateral relations for innumerable reasons. Our two countries share an intimate and symbiotic bond unlike any contiguous neighbors. Generally, the religious and cultural affiliations are cited to illustrate that entrenched bond. But, there are other ignored factors. Particularly, there are thousands of Nepali men serving in the Indian Army and other security branches of India. No other country allows its men to protect and die for its neighbours’ frontiers. Nepal does. In fact, Nepalese have continued to play a pivotal role in providing security to India’s frontiers. Then, there is the “Roti Beti” (Bread and daughter) relationship. Daughters from both sides are frequently married off across the borders. These inter-marriages range from commoners to elites. Also, India has been the main employment center for the Nepalese. An estimated 4 million live and work in India. Given these ties, both sides avowedly claim to have amicable relations at the official level. In reality, however, the relationship is strewn with landmines of distrust. Lately, the intensity of distrust and disdain amongst Nepalese has spiked ominously. The culpability greatly rests on India’s botched Nepal Policy. For many Nepalese, India’s nurturing of the Nepali Maoists (the Maoists, however, did a volte face the minute they ascended to power) smacked of outright duplicity and connivance. Before any other country, India had branded the Nepali Maoists as terrorists. However, after the Nepali Maoists affirmed their growth under the Indian tutelage, India’s dubious role is no longer a secret. And, this has unmistakably bred a lot of anti-India sentiment. Also, as Nepal’s peace process teeters on the brink of collapse, many have begun to blame the unholy alliance stitched by India. India was the main architect that orchestrated a shotgun wedding of the Maoists and the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) through the 12-point agreement in Delhi. These two ideologically divergent groups were cobbled up simply to emasculate the unheeding Nepali Monarch. Today, the botched policy is becoming even more apparent. India - that had the leverage to topple regimes in Nepal repeatedly, could not even clinch a contract for the Machine Readable Passports. Instead, its bid stirred a widespread outrage. The case of a Maoist lawmaker being threatened by an Indian Embassy official spoke volumes about India’s waning influence and leverage in Nepal. The largest Nepali media channel– Kantipur, just had a bitter spat with India. Later, the entire Media community in Nepal was up in arms against the Indian Embassy for its press release against the Nepali media. And for the first time in history, shoes and stones were pelted at an Indian Ambassador (by Maoist cadres). Of all the countries in the world, Nepal should have been India’s dearest and vice versa. But, why have the two nations been incapable of translating the entrenched bond at policy level? Why do the Nepalese consistently feel that India harbors devious motives towards Nepal? And what is India doing to allay these fears? While China and other countries continue to send high level delegations to express their interest and concern, why has India not accorded equal if not higher priority to Nepal? Undoubtedly, Nepal’s rotten political leadership is equally if not more culpable for the present rut. Their power lust and their recidivist tendency to unabashedly wrangle for power are blatant. And their rabid tendency to use the Indian leverage for personal gains has adversely hampered the state of affairs and the bilateral relations. Nevertheless, Nepalese are not oblivious to the formidable preponderance of India. For us, India is not merely a country or a subcontinent; it is one of the most ancient and richest of civilizations and is the locus of South Asia. Also, we are fully aware of India’s security interests and that it is not in Nepal’s national interest to allow its territory to be exploited for any untoward activities against India. We genuinely wish to see India take the lead in South Asia and become a beacon of hope for all neighbouring countries. And we aspire to follow India’s lead to propel our nation towards prosperity. However, India must also realize a few things. We acknowledge our pygmy status in the comity of nations. Yet, we are fiercely independent. No foreign flag has ever flown over our land. Like any other independent nation, we hold a perpetual desire to have a dignified sovereign existence. And a slavish puppet state would be intolerable. India coddles Bhutan for a few hundred megawatts of electricity while Nepal feels consistently coerced despite providing India with an unquantifiable value of security. Perhaps it is high-time the Indian juggernauts began to re-evaluate its priorities and neighborhood policy? Views expressed by the author are his own. Follow: http://www.ipcs.org/article/nepal/india-nepal-relations-a-perspective-from-nepal-3260.html

Nepal Launched NAPA

Out of 250 adaptation options proposed by Thematic Working Groups (TWG), nine integrated projects have been identified as the urgent need and immediate national adaptation priority. This is what

Prime minister Madhav Kumar Nepal launched National Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA) to climate change. Started in May 2009, it took 16 months to finalize the document. Following the official launching, Nepal can now seek much needed fund for adaptation programs.

“Climate change adaptation is our national priority. The NAPA has been prepared to address climate vulnerabilities and advance our human development agenda. NAPA is a product of an intensive nationwide consultative process involving all relevant sectors,” said prime minister Nepal launching the document.

With support from Embassy of Denmark, United Kingdom’s Department of International Development, Global Environment Facility and UNDP Nepal country office, Nepal’s NAPA document is prepared after intensive consolations among all the stake holders.

“I consider that NAPA process was also instrumental in enhancing public awareness, institutional development and capacity building, developing implementation frame work and establishing coordination mechanisms. I am proud to say that this is the document which is finalized incorporating the voices of people,” said Thakur Prasad Sharma, minister of Environment.

As the impacts of the climate change are more prone in landlocked and mountainous country like Nepal, managing the adverse impacts of climate change on livelihoods, agriculture, water resources, energy, health, bio-diversity and national well being is a tremendous challenge. To address these, there require a comprehensive national adaptation agenda.

“Nepal prepared the NAPA through thematic working group approached by engaging line ministries and departments, local governments, academe, and non-governmental organizations, youth, women, indigenous communities and civil society representatives. Over 2500 people participated at different stages of NAPA preparation in particular the consultation programs during the last 15 months,” said Ganesh Raj Joshi, Ph.D, secretary to Ministry of Environment. “ Nepal is establishing a knowledge management platform and has constituted a multi-stakeholder coordination mechanism named Multi-Stake holder Climate Change Initiative Coordination Committee in April 2010 to serve as a platform for ensuring regular dialogue and consultations and ensue functional level coordination on climate change related policies, plans, financing, programs, projects and activities.”

“This NAPA was prepared by the NAPA project team with the collective efforts and contributions from six thematic working group coordinators, facilitators, TWG members, and with contribution from several organizations and individuals,” said Purushottam Ghimire, joint secretary and National Project Director.

Nepal’s Progress in HDI

At a time when Nepal has been facing a grim picture in politics, there is reason to rejoice in overall development indicators. The recently published Human Development Report and a study on Child Poverty Disparities in Nepal showed some positive signs.

The Human Development Report highlights that Nepal is one of the fastest movers in the Human Development Report Index since 1970 and is 3^rd among the Top Ten Movers list in terms of progress in health and education. Between 1970 and 2010, Nepal’s HDI value increased from 0.210 to 0.428, an average increase of 104 percent, while Nepal’s Gross National income per capita increased by 94 percent during the same period. The gap between Nepal’s life expectancy and the global average has narrowed down by 87 percent over the past 40 years.

Launched by the vice chairman of National Planning Commission Dr. Jagadish Chandra Pokharel, the report says Nepal’s impressive progress in health and education can be traced to major public policy efforts such as the Free primary education for all children, legislation as far as back 1971 and the extension of primary health care through community participation, local mobilization of resources and decentralization.

The report also reveals that the economic growth has been modest and a lack of employment opportunities had led many Nepalese seek opportunities abroad. Nepal is still a poor country with an HDI value for 2010 of 0.428- keeping the country in the Low Human Development Category- ranking 138 out of 169 countries and territories listed.

Continuing inequality remain a major reasons for Nepal’s HDI position. According to the Human Development Report 2010, large disparities remain between boys and girls in school attendance as well as in the quality of education between urban and rural areas and across ethnic groups. Major health challenges remain, related to communicable diseases and malnutrition. Large disparities separate regions and groups, with quasi-feudal oligarchic system and caste based discriminations continuing to marginalize some.

“Nepal needs to learn from its own success in health and education and apply the same determination to tackle the areas in which it is still lagging behind,” said UNDP country director Ms. Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau.” Addressing inequalities across gender, regions, groups remains a priority to ensure that no Nepali child, women, youth or person living in remote areas or from any particular groups is left behind, and also to ensure every Nepali can enjoy his or her fundamental rights and can actively participate in moving Nepal out of Low Human Development Category.”

But, children are seen to be the most affected by poverty and inequality and remain disproportionately poor according to the NPC/UNICEF report on Child Poverty and Disparities. Indicators on malnutrition and sanitation are particularly noticeable.

“ Malnutrition is a real obstacle to the survival , growth and development of children,” said Gillian Mellsop, UNICEF Representatives,” and the serious effects of under-nutrition at a young age can be irreversible, and can ultimately hinder the development status of the whole nation.”

According to the report, over half of Nepal’s children (55.7 percent) defecate in open spaces. Recent calculations by WHO estimates, that about 13,000 children aged less than five years die each year in Nepal from diarrheal diseases and further 13,000 from Acute Respiratory Infection.

China-India Relations Are No Good

Relations between India and China have deteriorated in last 18 months and are unlikely to get better, a former US Ambassador to India has said and he shared the perception of many Indian strategic thinkers that Bejing is using Pakistan to slow India's rise.

"I think it's fair to say now that China-India relations are not very good and in fact have been deteriorating for about last 18 months," Robert Blackwill, former US Ambassador to India said in a conference call with reporters in a briefing on Obama's India visit.

"The Indians have a long list of Chinese transgressions, which in my judgement are accurate, having to do with Chinese policy on Kashmir and on the border dispute between the two countries and the so-called 'ring of pearls' of Chinese quasi-military installations in Bangladesh and in Sri Lanka and in Pakistan and so forth," he said.

Blackwill is currently the Henry Kissinger Senior Fellow for US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations -- a prestigious US-based think tank.

"So the relations aren't very good between the two. The Prime Minister keeps saying, and I think deeply believes, that there's no reason why India and China could not have a good long-term relationship. But it isn't clear that same degree of enthusiasm for that end state is felt in Beijing," he said.

Many Indian strategists think there's some evidence that China's preoccupation with Pakistan and its long-time close links is closely connected to the Chinese realisation that if India is preoccupied, if not pinned down by cross-border terrorism from Pakistan and problems in the India-Pakistan relation, that it will slow the rise of India as a great power.

"In other words, China using Pakistan to slow India's rise," Blackwill said.

"So China-India relations are not good, and I myself don't think they're going to get very much better on the geopolitical and security side. Now on the economic side, they're thriving, and of course, that's good for both countries," he said.

"The Indians have no interest in thoughts of containing China, a concept that one sees in the American media from time to time. No way faster to clear a Delhi drawing room than to begin to talk about containing China.

"But what India would like is an agreement with the US that over the long term, the US and India will keep in close touch, both to the issue of Chinese behaviour and trying to decipher it, and second, close touch on trying to shape Chinese external behaviour in a positive way," Blackwill said.

Blackwill, the former US Ambassador to India, said that "so that's what the Chinese national security elite is waiting to hear from the Obama administration, which is, do you see us as a partner, if not the most important partner in Asia, in trying to help manage the rise of Chinese power, not in a confrontational way, but in a way that seeks to find instruments to produce Chinese behaviour which is more congenial to both US and Indian long-term vital national security interests?"

"That wish on the part of India to have that informal understanding with the Americans has been accelerated and intensified by Chinese external behaviour over the last year and a half, including, again, to add more, the South China Sea and so forth. So that's the way India sees China," he said.

"I think it would be true to say that the Indians regard the rise of Chinese power, at least most of the Indians, the national security experts -- the rise of Chinese power as the most important of the long-term strategic challenges facing India.

"And since at least I believe the rise of Chinese power is the most important long-term challenge strategic challenge facing the US, we ought to have a lot to talk about with the Indians," he said. (Indian Express)

Nepal: Caught Between China and India

By JYOTI THOTTAM / NEW DELHI

Nepal may be most famous for its majestic Himalayan peaks, but much of the country is a vast stretch of plains, the terai, which have long been underdeveloped and largely ignored by the two powers on either side. No longer. India has just launched a plan to spend $361 million over the next several years on roads and rail links in the terai, announcing the grants just before Nepali President Ram Baran Yadav made his Feb. 15 official visit to New Delhi. China, meanwhile, recently increased its annual aid to Nepal by 50% to about $22 million.

The money is certainly welcome in Nepal, which has the lowest per capita income in South Asia. But the jockeying for influence between China and India may be undermining Nepal's fragile democracy, as the country's 24 political parties trade charges of being pawns of one or the other. Even a tiny royalist party, supporters of Nepal's deposed King Gyanendra, have gotten into the act, staging a rally in Kathmandu on Feb. 22 that shut down the capital for a day. Meanwhile, the parties are debating complex constitutional issues, including a proposed federal system of 14 ethnicity-based states. Nepal's interim constitution will expire on May 28, and if its politicians cannot agree on a new one by then, the constituent assembly will be dissolved, new elections will be called and, many observers fear, the country will enter a period of deep uncertainty. Says Nihar Nayak, a researcher with the New Delhi–based Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses: "They are moving toward a political crisis."

India, for its part, maintains that it has always had a "very deep and vast relationship" with Nepal based on its shared cultural ties. Both countries have a majority Hindu population, and they share millions of cross-border migrant workers. But the character of that relationship has changed. India used to engage Nepal only at the highest levels, in meetings between bureaucrats, ministers and — until Gyanendra stepped down in 2008 — representatives of the King. That has changed dramatically over the last few years, since Nepal's Maoists came to power in a 2006 peace agreement that ended the monarchy, halted a decade-long insurgency and set the country on the road to democracy. The Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, known as Prachanda, has cultivated close diplomatic ties with China. In the meantime, India's government changed too: the ruling Congress Party severed its parliamentary alliance with the leftist parties in 2008, resulting in the closing of a key channel of communication to Nepal.

Recent security concerns, however, have given India new reasons to reassert itself in Nepal by investing in infrastructure as well as more troops on the border. Security experts say that that jihadist groups in the region exploit the porous border between India and Nepal, and they worry that India's Maoist insurgency may do the same. "That is their biggest concern," says Nayak.

China's main interest in Nepal has always been led by its concerns over Tibet, which has been ruled by China since 1950. Beijing's involvement with Nepal grew much more intense after the March 2008 ethnic Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule, which deeply embarrassed the Beijing government on the eve of its expensive Olympic Games. There are an estimated 20,000 Tibetans living in Nepal but, with China pushing Nepal to tighten its border with Tibet, the number of new refugees reaching Nepal has dropped to about 500 from an annual figure of around 2,500. But it too has increased its focus on economic ties — trade between China and Nepal has quadrupled since 2003. This week, China said it would restart the tourist bus route between the Tibetan capital Lhasa and Nepal's capital Kathmandu. It had suspended the service in 2006.

The apparent jostling for influence is making Nepal's tricky politics even trickier. By far the most difficult issue left unresolved since the 2006 peace talks is the integration of the former Maoist guerrilla fighters into Nepal's army, a conflict that led to Prachanda's resignation as Prime Minister last year. India's military academies have historically been the training ground for Nepal's top officers — the Nepali army chief graduated from the Indian Military Academy in Dehradun — so the Maoists have long claimed, most famously in a fiery speech by Prachanda in December, that India backs the Nepal army and wants to restore the monarchy. Ironically, the influence of India is the one point on which the former King and the Maoist former Prime Minister agree. When Gyanendra was on the throne, he too chafed at any hint of excessive Indian influence. It may be an inevitable dilemma for a small country squeezed between two giants — and one that Nepal has less than three months to resolve. (Times)

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1967859,00.html#ixzz14KRUAo4Q

How Obama Saved Capitalism and Lost the Midterms read the article by

By TIMOTHY EGAN

If I were one of the big corporate donors who bankrolled the Republican tide that carried into office more than 50 new Republicans in the House, I would be wary of what you just bought.

For no matter your view of President Obama, he effectively saved capitalism. And for that, he paid a terrible political price.

Suppose you had $100,000 to invest on the day Barack Obama was inaugurated. Why bet on a liberal Democrat? Here’s why: the presidency of George W. Bush produced the worst stock market decline of any president in history. The net worth of American households collapsed as Bush slipped away. And if you needed a loan to buy a house or stay in business, private sector borrowing was dead when he handed over power.

As of election day, Nov. 2, 2010, your $100,000 was worth about $177,000 if invested strictly in the NASDAQ average for the entirety of the Obama administration, and $148,000 if bet on the Standard & Poors 500 major companies. This works out to returns of 77 percent and 48 percent.

But markets, though forward-looking, are not considered accurate measurements of the economy, and the Great Recession skewed the Bush numbers. O.K. How about looking at the big financial institutions that keep the motors of capitalism running — banks and auto companies?

The banking system was resuscitated by $700 billion in bailouts started by Bush (a fact unknown by a majority of Americans), and finished by Obama, with help from the Federal Reserve. It worked. The government is expected to break even on a risky bet to stabilize the global free market system. Had Obama followed the populist instincts of many in his party, the underpinnings of big capitalism could have collapsed. He did this without nationalizing banks, as other Democrats had urged.

Saving the American auto industry, which has been a huge drag on Obama’s political capital, is a monumental achievement that few appreciate, unless you live in Michigan. After getting their taxpayer lifeline from Obama, both General Motors and Chrysler are now making money by making cars. New plants are even scheduled to open. More than 1 million jobs would have disappeared had the domestic auto sector been liquidated.

“An apology is due Barack Obama,” wrote The Economist, which had opposed the $86 billion auto bailout. As for Government Motors: after emerging from bankruptcy, it will go public with a new stock offering in just a few weeks, and the United States government, with its 60 percent share of common stock, stands to make a profit. Yes, an industry was saved, and the government will probably make money on the deal — one of Obama’s signature economic successes.

Interest rates are at record lows. Corporate profits are lighting up boardrooms; it is one of the best years for earnings in a decade.

All of the above is good for capitalism, and should end any serious-minded discussion about Obama the socialist. But more than anything, the fact that the president took on the structural flaws of a broken free enterprise system instead of focusing on things that the average voter could understand explains why his party was routed on Tuesday. Obama got on the wrong side of voter anxiety in a decade of diminished fortunes.

“We have done things that people don’t even know about,” Obama told Jon Stewart. Certainly. The three signature accomplishments of his first two years — a health care law that will make life easier for millions of people, financial reform that attempts to level the playing field with Wall Street, and the $814 billion stimulus package — have all been recast as big government blunders, rejected by the emerging majority.

But each of them, in its way, should strengthen the system. The health law will hold costs down, while giving millions the chance at getting care, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Financial reform seeks to prevent the kind of meltdown that caused the global economic collapse. And the stimulus, though it drastically raised the deficit, saved about 3 million jobs, again according to the CBO. It also gave a majority of taxpayers a one-time cut — even if 90 percent of Americans don’t know that, either.

Of course, nobody gets credit for preventing a plane crash. “It could have been much worse!” is not a rallying cry. And, more telling, despite a meager uptick in job growth this year, the unemployment rate rose from 7.6 percent in the month Obama took office to 9.6 today.

Billions of profits, windfalls in the stock market, a stable banking system — but no jobs.

Of course, the big money interests who benefited from Obama’s initiatives have shown no appreciation. Obama, as a senator, voted against the initial bailout of AIG, the reckless insurance giant. As president, he extended them treasury loans at a time when economists said he must — or risk further meltdown. Their response was to give themselves $165 million in executive bonuses, and funnel money to Republicans this year.

Money flows one way, to power, now held by the party that promises tax cuts and deregulation — which should please big business even more.

President Franklin Roosevelt also saved capitalism, in part by a bank “holiday” in 1933, at a time when the free enterprise system had failed. Unlike Obama, he was rewarded with midterm gains for his own party because a majority liked where he was taking the country. The bank holiday was incidental to a larger public works campaign.

Obama can recast himself as the consumer’s best friend, and welcome the animus of Wall Street. He should hector the companies sitting on piles of cash but not hiring new workers. For those who do hire, and create new jobs, he can offer tax incentives. He should finger the financial giants for refusing to clean up their own mess in the foreclosure crisis. He should point to the long overdue protections for credit card holders that came with reform.

And he should veto, veto, veto any bill that attempts to roll back some of the basic protections for people against the institutions that have so much control over their lives – insurance companies, Wall Street and big oil.

They will whine a fierce storm, the manipulators of great wealth. A war on business, they will claim. Not even close. Obama saved them, and the biggest cost was to him. (NY Times)

For details follow:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/how-obama-saved-capitalism-and-lost-the-midterms/?src=me&ref=homepage