by Richard N. Haass (President of the Council on Foreign Relations)
from to Sept/Oct issue of Foreign Policy "Here Today, Gone Tomorrow: 16 Ideas On Their Way Out"
--Powerful forces in the world today threaten the idea that "governments are free to do what they want within their own territory."
--Governments today must share power with "corporations, NGOs, terrorists, drug cartels, regional and global institutions, and banks and private equity funds."
--State borders cannot stop the flow of people, ideas, greenhouse gases, goods, dollars, drugs, viruses, emails, and weapons.
--Governments that neglect or mistreat their citizens and in the process create unstable situations that provide an opening for terrorists can expect "attack, removal, or occupation."
--States will also choose to give up some of their sovereignty to supranational organizations (such as the WTO) and treaties (such as the Kyoto Protocol).
--The author concludes that we will have a world made up of states that are not completely sovereign--neither world government nor anarchy.
Sunday, October 16, 2005
"Laissez-Faire Procreation"
by Lee Kuan Yew (Prime Minister of Singapore from 1959-1990)
(from the Foreign Policy Sept/Oct issue "Here Today, Gone Tomorrow: 16 Ideas On Their Way Out")
--Booming populations are a drag on developing countries and low fertility rates are sapping growth in developed countries.
--Wealthier countries will see attempts to migrate from poorer countries as a threat to resist.
--Efforts to increase birth rates in more developed countries have not generally been successful, so these countries may have to accept immigrants in order to maintain healthy economies. Immigration, however, presents a new set of problems.
--Will the United States continue to welcome immigrants as Hispanics change our "character and culture?"
--The social isolation of Muslims in Europe will make their assimilation more difficult.
--The author concludes that governments will begin taking a more active role in encouraging or discouraging procreation.
(from the Foreign Policy Sept/Oct issue "Here Today, Gone Tomorrow: 16 Ideas On Their Way Out")
--Booming populations are a drag on developing countries and low fertility rates are sapping growth in developed countries.
--Wealthier countries will see attempts to migrate from poorer countries as a threat to resist.
--Efforts to increase birth rates in more developed countries have not generally been successful, so these countries may have to accept immigrants in order to maintain healthy economies. Immigration, however, presents a new set of problems.
--Will the United States continue to welcome immigrants as Hispanics change our "character and culture?"
--The social isolation of Muslims in Europe will make their assimilation more difficult.
--The author concludes that governments will begin taking a more active role in encouraging or discouraging procreation.
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
"Inside the Committee that Runs the World"
Foreign Policy--March/April 2005
Article by David J. Rothkopf, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
General Observations
--A small group of insiders close to the President exerts a great deal of influence.
--The National Security Council (NSC) was formed in 1947 by FDR. Its purpose was to bring information and varying viewpoints to the president so that he can make informed decisions.
--Since the end of the Cold War, the NSC has become more powerful. They must still consider public opinion, but not a possible Soviet response.
--There is a struggle between "traditionalists" and "transfromationalists" within the Bush 43 administration. Traditionalists believe that we should continue to deal with the rest of the world by reaching out to allies and working through international organizations. Transformationalists believe that we need to bring change to the world by projecting our power into it.
Concerning Bush
--Bush feels that he is the one "chosen" to deal with the threat of terrorism, and part of his missionary zeal comes from that.
--The author is critical of Bush's absolutist beliefs. If you believe that you have a mission to fulfill, you can come to a place where the ends justify the means. "The paradoxical implication is clear: From undercutting traditional relationships with allies to Abu Gharib, the less moral ambiguity you have in your worldview, the more of it you can justify in your actions.
Concerning Condoleezza Rice
--Rice believed the job of the NSC was to support the president rather than bring him a variety of viewpoints. It has lost its function as a coordinating body.
--As head of the NSC, Rice spent several hours a day at Bush's side, and she has become personally close to the Bush family.
--Rice has been criticized for serving Bush's needs above the national interest.
--Her new position as Secretary of State may bring her to see her role in a changed light as she seeks to leave behind a legacy of her own.
Concerning Colin Powell and the State Department
--Colin Powell was seen as a bit of a threat because he took office with a higher approval rating than Bush.
--The Europeans thought Powell was going to be the voice of reason who could rein in Bush. He had to let them know that he would not be able to perform that function.
--The State Department is slower to respond to changing situations because of its bureaucratic nature.
--Powell's influence further suffered because of the Cheney/Rumsfeld "center of gravity" within the Bush 43 administration.
Concerning Donald Rumsfeld and the Department of Defense
--Henry Kissinger has referred to Rumsfeld as the most ruthless man he met while he was in government
--Many in the administration are frustrated by the Department of Defense's refusal to "play by the rules."
--Defense came to meetings unprepared, refused to discuss issues and operated through back channels.
--Rumsfeld's close relationship with Dick Cheney gives him greater access and power.
Concerning Dick Cheney
--Cheney has a great deal of influence--he can shape discussion and quash dissent .
Prospects for the Future
--IF we can wind down in Iraq, and IF there are no new terrorist attacks, the "war cabinet" mentality could abate. (These are big IF's.)
Article by David J. Rothkopf, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
General Observations
--A small group of insiders close to the President exerts a great deal of influence.
--The National Security Council (NSC) was formed in 1947 by FDR. Its purpose was to bring information and varying viewpoints to the president so that he can make informed decisions.
--Since the end of the Cold War, the NSC has become more powerful. They must still consider public opinion, but not a possible Soviet response.
--There is a struggle between "traditionalists" and "transfromationalists" within the Bush 43 administration. Traditionalists believe that we should continue to deal with the rest of the world by reaching out to allies and working through international organizations. Transformationalists believe that we need to bring change to the world by projecting our power into it.
Concerning Bush
--Bush feels that he is the one "chosen" to deal with the threat of terrorism, and part of his missionary zeal comes from that.
--The author is critical of Bush's absolutist beliefs. If you believe that you have a mission to fulfill, you can come to a place where the ends justify the means. "The paradoxical implication is clear: From undercutting traditional relationships with allies to Abu Gharib, the less moral ambiguity you have in your worldview, the more of it you can justify in your actions.
Concerning Condoleezza Rice
--Rice believed the job of the NSC was to support the president rather than bring him a variety of viewpoints. It has lost its function as a coordinating body.
--As head of the NSC, Rice spent several hours a day at Bush's side, and she has become personally close to the Bush family.
--Rice has been criticized for serving Bush's needs above the national interest.
--Her new position as Secretary of State may bring her to see her role in a changed light as she seeks to leave behind a legacy of her own.
Concerning Colin Powell and the State Department
--Colin Powell was seen as a bit of a threat because he took office with a higher approval rating than Bush.
--The Europeans thought Powell was going to be the voice of reason who could rein in Bush. He had to let them know that he would not be able to perform that function.
--The State Department is slower to respond to changing situations because of its bureaucratic nature.
--Powell's influence further suffered because of the Cheney/Rumsfeld "center of gravity" within the Bush 43 administration.
Concerning Donald Rumsfeld and the Department of Defense
--Henry Kissinger has referred to Rumsfeld as the most ruthless man he met while he was in government
--Many in the administration are frustrated by the Department of Defense's refusal to "play by the rules."
--Defense came to meetings unprepared, refused to discuss issues and operated through back channels.
--Rumsfeld's close relationship with Dick Cheney gives him greater access and power.
Concerning Dick Cheney
--Cheney has a great deal of influence--he can shape discussion and quash dissent .
Prospects for the Future
--IF we can wind down in Iraq, and IF there are no new terrorist attacks, the "war cabinet" mentality could abate. (These are big IF's.)
Saturday, January 15, 2005
"The Essential Vladimir Putin"
Anatol Lieven, the author of the above-titled article in the January/February issue of Foreign Policy, suggests that Russia's best hope for the future may be the continued semiauthoritarian rule of Putin. I think he offers some interesting explanations for Russia's slow progress towards a western-style democracy.
--We may have concerns about Putin's authoritarian ways, but there is no one waiting in the wings that would speed reform. Any replacement would probably be more nationalistic and anti-Western than less-so.
--We should expect Russia's transition to be slower, given its size and huge ethnic diversity.
--The 1990s brought economic decline, social and moral chaos, and corruption. As a result, many Russians question the goals of economic and political reform. Consequently, it has been difficult for a reform political party to establish itself.
--Most Russians are not willing to subject themselves to the additional sacrifices that economic reform would bring. They feel that they have suffered enough. (The New York Times posted an article today about widespread protests in Russia against a new law abolishing many social benefits for pensioners, veterans, and those with disabilities.)
--The 1990s also brought the domination of Russia by oligarchs who exert a strong influence over the mass media, judiciary, and parliament. There is a concern that the appearance of democracy could be used to plunder the state.
--So....to what extent should we push Russia on reform issues? What are the diplomatic implications for the United States and Russia?
--We may have concerns about Putin's authoritarian ways, but there is no one waiting in the wings that would speed reform. Any replacement would probably be more nationalistic and anti-Western than less-so.
--We should expect Russia's transition to be slower, given its size and huge ethnic diversity.
--The 1990s brought economic decline, social and moral chaos, and corruption. As a result, many Russians question the goals of economic and political reform. Consequently, it has been difficult for a reform political party to establish itself.
--Most Russians are not willing to subject themselves to the additional sacrifices that economic reform would bring. They feel that they have suffered enough. (The New York Times posted an article today about widespread protests in Russia against a new law abolishing many social benefits for pensioners, veterans, and those with disabilities.)
--The 1990s also brought the domination of Russia by oligarchs who exert a strong influence over the mass media, judiciary, and parliament. There is a concern that the appearance of democracy could be used to plunder the state.
--So....to what extent should we push Russia on reform issues? What are the diplomatic implications for the United States and Russia?
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Tsunami
The aftermath of the tsunami that occurred in South Asia on December 26 is almost beyond description. The scale of devastation and the suffering that has followed goes beyond anything we have witnessed in modern history. Simon Winchester (who wrote Krakatoa: The Day the World Exploded) wrote an interesting Op-Ed piece for the New York Times. He points out that we are going through a period of increased seismic activity and points to the earthquake that occurred at Bam, Iran a year ago as well as several other events. The San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 was accompanied by a similar period of activity.
Most tsunamis occur in the Pacific—a fact that may help to explain the lack of an early warning system in the Indian Ocean. The image of a 500 mph tsunami bearing down on heavily populated coastal areas is enough to get us thinking about our own early warning system.
International efforts have been impressive. There is a realization that the tragedy is still unfolding and that speed is of the essence. It is a bit frustrating to see this initially turned into a political football, but the finger-pointing seemed to die down pretty quickly. Some have suggested that this is a big enough event to change the way we deal with each other as nations. I am hesitant to go quite that far, but there is the potential for some good will to come of this.
The tsunami has devastated the fragile economies of these coastal areas, and the cost of rebuilding will impose an added burden on the governments involved. A suspension of foreign debt payments will help, but the task remains a huge one. Tourism is important to the economies of these areas, but it may be some time before that sector recovers.
Most tsunamis occur in the Pacific—a fact that may help to explain the lack of an early warning system in the Indian Ocean. The image of a 500 mph tsunami bearing down on heavily populated coastal areas is enough to get us thinking about our own early warning system.
International efforts have been impressive. There is a realization that the tragedy is still unfolding and that speed is of the essence. It is a bit frustrating to see this initially turned into a political football, but the finger-pointing seemed to die down pretty quickly. Some have suggested that this is a big enough event to change the way we deal with each other as nations. I am hesitant to go quite that far, but there is the potential for some good will to come of this.
The tsunami has devastated the fragile economies of these coastal areas, and the cost of rebuilding will impose an added burden on the governments involved. A suspension of foreign debt payments will help, but the task remains a huge one. Tourism is important to the economies of these areas, but it may be some time before that sector recovers.
Saturday, January 01, 2005
Blog Geography
The purpose of this weblog is to provide a forum for discussion of real-world applications of concepts and events that are discussed in my regional and A.P. Human Geography. It is appropriate to begin with the topic of blogging and its potential for influencing politics and culture. I became intrigued with the blogging phenomenon during last fall's election when I found myself dropping in on several blogs in an attempt to make sense of what was being reported in the mainstream media. The November/December issue of Foreign Policy magazine had an interesting article on blogs. A summary of the major points in that article might provide the context for some good discussion.
--In 1999, an estimated 50 blogs existed. Today the estimates range from 2.4 million to 4.1 million. Once the domain of web-savvy teenagers, blogs are increasingly influencing politics and the reporting of national and international issues.
--Although the blogosphere by nature has no central organization, a hierarchical structure has emerged. Some blogs have achieved a wide readership because they are linked to on other websites. This process helps to sort the interesting from the mundane. The elite blogs then act as focal points for discussion and analysis as well as a feedback mechanism for the mainstream media.
--Blogs can provide an outlet for individuals who might not otherwise be heard. University of Michigan professor Juan Cole ( a Middle East expert) started his own blog after having difficulty getting published. His blog caught on, and Cole has since become a "public intellectual," sought out by media outlets and government groups seeking information.
--Bloggers can post their reactions to events quickly—before other forms of media can respond. This speed can create some inaccuracies, but these are overcome quickly as readers are quick to pin them down on the facts. Blogs can also act as fact checkers for mainstream media. The controversy over CBS' decision to use unauthenticated documents in a story about George W. Bush's National Guard duty is a case in point.
-- Blogs are beginning to emerge in countries where governments control the media. While repressive government can make blogging more difficult, bloggers can take their case to a transnational network of advocates. (Note: Farsi is the fourth most widely used language among blogs worldwide.)
--The blogosphere remains dominated by the developed world. Demographically blogs are dominated by middle class white males. Like the mainstream media, they tend to ignore large parts of the world.
The geographic implications of this new form of communication are far-reaching. It affects the way ideas are formed and diffuse. Its ability to transcend political boundaries represents a challenge to the authority of the state. It is difficult to mount a disinformation campaign if the public has access to an alternate view of the facts.
--In 1999, an estimated 50 blogs existed. Today the estimates range from 2.4 million to 4.1 million. Once the domain of web-savvy teenagers, blogs are increasingly influencing politics and the reporting of national and international issues.
--Although the blogosphere by nature has no central organization, a hierarchical structure has emerged. Some blogs have achieved a wide readership because they are linked to on other websites. This process helps to sort the interesting from the mundane. The elite blogs then act as focal points for discussion and analysis as well as a feedback mechanism for the mainstream media.
--Blogs can provide an outlet for individuals who might not otherwise be heard. University of Michigan professor Juan Cole ( a Middle East expert) started his own blog after having difficulty getting published. His blog caught on, and Cole has since become a "public intellectual," sought out by media outlets and government groups seeking information.
--Bloggers can post their reactions to events quickly—before other forms of media can respond. This speed can create some inaccuracies, but these are overcome quickly as readers are quick to pin them down on the facts. Blogs can also act as fact checkers for mainstream media. The controversy over CBS' decision to use unauthenticated documents in a story about George W. Bush's National Guard duty is a case in point.
-- Blogs are beginning to emerge in countries where governments control the media. While repressive government can make blogging more difficult, bloggers can take their case to a transnational network of advocates. (Note: Farsi is the fourth most widely used language among blogs worldwide.)
--The blogosphere remains dominated by the developed world. Demographically blogs are dominated by middle class white males. Like the mainstream media, they tend to ignore large parts of the world.
The geographic implications of this new form of communication are far-reaching. It affects the way ideas are formed and diffuse. Its ability to transcend political boundaries represents a challenge to the authority of the state. It is difficult to mount a disinformation campaign if the public has access to an alternate view of the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
