Multilateralism Matters is penned by Ms. X (not her actual name). Since the end of the Cold War, there have been definitive changes between herself and her predecessor, Mr. X. Their versions of the international community are one of the more notable differences.
As globalization continues to rage throughout the system, threats to security have become transnational, shaking old notions of traditional diplomacy to the core, and in some cases rendering them completely useless. Increasingly, the world is realizing that multilateralismdoesmatter in this point in history.
The realm of international relations is changing, and consequently, what matters to those in positions of power.
Ms. X does not necessarily take partisan stances on issues. Any organizations she mentions are just institutions she thinks are interesting, but she in no way represents these organization’s views.
Ms. X is also not paid for what she does, she considers blogging a simple intellectual exercise on the world wide web.
Ms. X welcomes comments from real people, not ad-bots, and is hoping that you join the conversation on various multilateral matters. She just asks that you do not attack her personally if you disagree with her views, since it’s probably not her problem… but the world’s.
It also confuses her self-esteem.
I love Russian names. A few years ago, I told several colleagues of mine that my next dog would be named after a Soviet/Russian politician. I also happened to be slightly immersed in everything Cold War, so perhaps this is what sparked my interest. Their names just roll off the tongue so nicely. And since I do not think my children would necessarily fit these exquisite names (unless I marry Russian), I conveniently decided to bestow all my future dogs with Russian names.
My top choices: Andropov (nickname: Andy) Gorbachev (nickname: Gorby) Nikita (this one would bang his paws on the table) Adlai (this dog would eventually lose 2 presidential races)
And to think, my future pets will have names that carry HISTORY, a much-needed departure from lazy names like "Fluffy" and "Spot."
My current dog's name is Ivan. It's a start.
By: Ms. X | Thursday, April 26, 2007 at 12:27 AM | |
Victor Hugo’s revolutionary Les Misérables preached timeless themes of peace, love and hope for the future, but his brutal picture of a miserable, ignorant world is no different from ours today. What the world might have missed from the author’s message
Victor Hugo once said, “If a writer wrote merely for his time, I would have to break my pen and throw it away.” With his masterpiece, Les Misérables, Hugo clearly wrote for an audience beyond his time. In 1862, his revolutionary novel echoed enduring themes – themes that were cures for the ills of his day. But these cures are no different from the ones needed to address the problems of our time. Did Hugo manage to accurately predict that the world would still be plagued with the same ills today? Or did his audience simply not get his message?The novel encapsulated immortal themes to overcome common human struggles, but a century has passed and learning from Hugo’s work is still pending.
Despite the massive changes brought by the tide of history, Hugo’s nineteenth century world strangely resembles ours. We may be endowed with more sophisticated technology like water filters, hybrid cars, iPods, the Internet and Japanese-made robots, but the state of the world is not without a Les Mis-esque brand of injustice, despair and carnage.
In the 20th century, history featured events that go beyond Hugo’s simple depiction of an 1832 bloody street revolution led by student activists. The major powers in the international system took up arms in 1919 and the clash that ensued was World War I. The failure of economic institutions led to the Great Depression in 1929 and World War II followed soon after in 1937. Facism and Nazism, two belief systems that sought to reorder a chaotic society, eventually claimed lives of millions.
Contemporary history is still not without Hugo’s original concepts of human struggles. The world is burdened with the War in Iraq, civil war and unrest, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, transnational terrorism and criminal networks, vast poverty and inequality, religious extremism and the diminishing sustainability of the planet. Human struggles have, needless to say, transcended the barriers of time.
Interwoven in Hugo’s work is a foundational truth – that overcoming ignorance and misery is possible, despite the obstacles that stand in the way. Hugo’s portrait of Jean Valjean, Les Misérables’ protagonist, embodies just that. Valjean’s conversion from Prisoner 24601 to a hero for others follows Hugo’s bold thesis that man is perfectible and able to overcome whatever challenges he encounters in life.
Hugo’s point was neither subliminal nor in fine print – his hero underwent a radical transformation. And it was this transformation that changed his life and the lives of many others in the story, for the better.
When the novel was published in 1862, it was said to cause a stir unrivaled by other published books in history. Were readers from 1862 to the present simply wowed by Hugo’s masterful story-telling? Did those who consume Les Misérables simply take in the story without seeking to apply its themes to redeem the world’s bleak state?
In a world where history is defined by the milestones of conflict, Hugo’s eternal truths are silenced. We may live in a miserable world, but Hugo told us in 1862 that we don’t have to. All we would need is a change of perspective – to open ourselves to a transformation and care for others before ourselves.
In the preface of Les Misérables, Hugo wrote, “so long as ignorance and misery remain on earth, books like this cannot be useless.” In a world plagued with problems that are as timeless as the themes that could solve them, Les Misérables is not a candidate for the far corner of the bookshelf. Since the novel is no stranger to the curriculum of educational systems around the world, maybe it’s about time we started seeking an application of Hugo’s timeless themes.
Then maybe, Hugo’s truths would be more than heard and understood, but revolutionary.
By: Ms. X | Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 3:32 PM | |
“This election offers us the chance to turn the page and open a new chapter in American leadership,” Mr. Obama said. “The disappointment that so many around the world feel toward America right now is only a testament to the high expectations they hold for us. We must meet those expectations again, not because being respected is an end in itself, but because the security of America and the wider world demands it.”
I indicated in a previous post that a new year brings new statistics. And here's another tidbit, measured recently, that we could all learn from.
An article on Forbes.com extensively identifies the World's Cleanest Cities. Among the usual suspects are two cities in Canada (Calgary, Ottawa), Helsinki, Honolulu and Minneapolis. I am usually not one to critique cleanliness, but I was bothered by a commonality between the cities that author Robert Malone pointed out: that the cities were democratic, therefore clean.
This is a classic case of Western mis-prescription of democracy. When a one-word diagnosis of an issue is needed, democracy is usually the front runner. Not far behind is another word, globalization. It seems like no matter what is wrong with the world, democracy is the generic answer:
Iraq? Democracy. Sudan? Democracy. China? Democracy. Ozone layer? Democracy. Kim Jong Il? Democracy. Britney and K-Fed? Democracy.
Can we not attribute cleanliness to other things? Efficient public transportation, proper waste regime, non-use of styrofoam, hybrid cars... there are numerous things that could be taken into consideration. The only time I would consider democracy is considering the factor of formidable institutions (like the EPA), but last time I checked, not all democratic cities are clean anyway.
And, taking a lesson from history, Hitler wanted his Germany to be clean. He even included this important thought in Hitler Youth manuals!
Don't get me wrong, democracy is a wonderful thing, but when we use it as the causal variable to determine a city's cleanliness, maybe we mis-prescribed it somewhere.
Side note: Those 5 cities look damn good. Nice choices, Forbes.
By: Ms. X | Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 10:34 AM | |
*arf arf* ...the one who can identify the polycarbonate compound in pirated DVDs?
I guess the one with the waggly tail got the short stick this time.
Two "sniffer dogs" named Lucky and Flo made their Manila debut 2 days ago. They managed to raid one of Manila's more popular hotspots for piracy. According to the report, 300,000 discs were found in the first hour of the raid.
The dogs were brought in from Ireland, where they were trained to sit/freeze upon smelling a certain polycarbonate compound found in discs. Among the seized stash were copies of American, Filipino, Japanese and Korean films. Some of these were said to be pornographic.
Who would have thought that besides man's best friend actually saving man, leading man when he is blind, herding man's sheep, finding man's dope, and being furry, that dogs could actually expose man's underground piracy rings and deprive man of his need for cheap porn.
That copy of 300 doesn't smell right to me...
Surprisingly, they are not as scary one would perceive.
By: Ms. X | Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 2:08 PM | |
The beginning of every year means a lot of things. New beginnings. Spring semester. A rerun of annual holidays. Fireworks on January 1st. And most importantly...
Updated statistics.
The release of the 2007 version of the World Development Indicators (WDI) concludes that the growing inequality in the Philippines has established 15M people living on less than $1 a day.
The less painful statistic, people living on at least $2 a day amounted to approximately 43M. Who knew that the extra dollar would yield a gap of at least 28M people.
Despite the qualification associated with perceiving the state of a single country or the rest of the world, the WDI data provides a "detailed picture of the world." It does not take a case-by-case study of each statistic to prove that poverty is a major problem for the country, and that little has changed in the data over the years.
Like almost all the post-Martial Law politicians, tackling the problem of uneven growth is going to a major factor in this year's midterm elections.
A routine rotation of American forces stationed in the island of Mindanao, in the Philippines, is set to take place. There have been denials of a dramatic troop increase, with officials claiming that these forces are simply being rotated.
Where do we park?
What started as a Visiting Force has evolved into a military exercise, and now, more specifically, a Joint Special Operations Task Force. President Arroyo's hard line stance on the country's domestic and international terrorist involvement perfectly complemented her (and predecessors' Ramos and Estrada) policy: bring in Uncle Sam to teach his little Asian comrade to fight.
The international image of the Philippines as an island haven for international terrorists, its link to transnational terrorist network al-Qaeda, and the extensive knowledge its radical Islam followers have of bomb-making/detonating/acquiring/kidnapping-for-ransom and the like, will not land unnoticed in the lap of this American administration. Clearly for Bush, it hasn't.
To America, the Philippines, I believe, is like an annoying sibling that cannot seem to stand on its own. Perpetually seeking favor with America, Arroyo has steered foreign policy towards staying on Uncle Sam's good side. America, on the other hand, cannot wait for the Philippines to deal with its own problems, and grow up. Like a younger brother that cannot teach himself to use the computer.
But similes aside, the Philippines is in no way capable of handling its terrorist problem. While citizens are arguably numbed to the gravity of situation, as these groups continue to align themselves with more intricately linked goals (separatist, terrorist or otherwise), the government will soon find itself in the epitome of a Third World crisis: poverty, terrorism, poor institutional infrastructure, and capital flight.
Arguments against the U.S. involvement in counterterrorism efforts should be completely ignored. Next time the Armed Forces or the intelligence agencies can efficiently coordinate a response to a terrorist attack, maybe I'll open up my ears again. If the local government can't even handle an efficienct flashflood response, then who are we to shut the door in America's face. For something as globally-oriented as terrorism, it is not possible to go at it alone.
Bush in Barong (national dress). It "suits" him, if you ask me.
By: Ms. X | Wednesday, April 11, 2007 at 6:21 PM | |
Seeking the optimal balance between trade protectionism and liberalization is an oft explored topic in implementing foreign economic policy. To determine the right policy, I usually picture renowned policy-makers disregarding the micro- and macroeconomic models that proclaim sense, and turn to the situation with politics in mind.
Time and time again, it has been noted that not everyone reaps the benefits of globalization. Asymmetrical trade in the international system is often considered the culprit.
Familiar cases of such are completely random (well, at least to me). Who knew that countries would fight over dolphin-safe tuna (U.S.-Mexico) or wood (U.S.-Canada)? Everyday products as menial as tuna or wood apparently make large waves in the realm of economic policy-making. Politicians, in particular, need to know that tuna and wood will make people happy.
One Federal Reserve Banker noted a few months ago over a breakfast conference, "please do all you can to resist the urge to protect." The need for multinational companies to keep the machinery of globalization well-oiled with openness to the markets, would apparently spread globalization's benefits, instead of concentrating them. He noted, however, that politicians would most likely say otherwise, because of the concern that would be generated regarding job/profit loss as a result of competition with foreign products.
There is no simple formula to implement across all cases: protectionism and liberalization must vary from case-to-case or more specifically, from country-to-country.
The Philippine midterm elections are coming up next month, and once again, we prove that anything political can be a riot if we truly try hard enough. Legislative and local positions are up for grabs for literally ANYONE who has the money and the charisma to try.
What is the criteria? Well, you must be a Philippine citizen, age may vary depending on position (older=wiser=higher position=more money to steal), and most importantly the candidate must have to read and write. It's just like getting into elementary school!
The general divide in the political circus is: Together Everyone Achieves More (TEAM) Unity (Filipinos are SO CORNY) and the Genuine Opposition (not just any, but the genuine kind). With their respoective party leaders: Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Joseph Estrada. Estrada is still in jail the last time I checked, and Arroyo might as well join him.
Who are this year's funniest candidates? One is Richard Gomez who is the Philippine equivalent of Tom Cruise (why? Because his wife is taller than him, mostly, and fine, he makes a lot of money doing what he does... acting) and Cesar Montano. I'd say Montano is the Billy Bob Thornton equivalent. He's tattoo-ed up and a washed-up actor, need I say more?
I cannot rest easy knowing that the fate of my country may lie in the hands of lunatics! We all know that money makes the lives of these people go 'round... but they are not simply living within their means, politicians can easily purchase houses, BMWs, Mercedes-Benzs for all their wives and girlfriends... it's just madness.
On a personal note, my father's sister is running for Congress. My father, being the good brother that he is, is the official "money holder" of the campaign. He simply walks around with his bodyguards (some are not really bodyguards but unemployed "friends" he brought with him from the U.S. who could use a couple bucks), holding the money purse, going back and forth to the banks and so forth. The money holder is responsible for purchasing all things for the campaign. So far, he and my grandfather have hired magicians, singers, and dancers to be part of the official campaign. Hopefully people are mesmerized by this entertainment and my aunt wins her seat (yeah right!).
U.S. elections are not as fun as this, I believe. We're all serious with cancer coming back and forth in some candidates and concerned about whether he/she stands for abortion or implementing an exit strategy in Iraq. In the Philippines, all that matters is that your candidate entertains you enough to make you pencil in their name on your ballot.
