Deconstruction and the development it engenders

The big news of the day is, of course, the earthquake in Ica Province, Peru, which at an initial count has left 450 dead. Much like quakes in Pakistan and China, the death toll is expected to rise and many people have died because their houses, made of clay, stone and mud brick, were never really meant to withstand anything like this.

It brings to mind questions of the resilience of a society when that society's material basis is involved in a tabula rasa event, and everything the citizenry has worked for is reduced to rubble. The usual accompaniments of catastrophic events, disease, water deprivation, and so on, are sure to follow unless prompt action is taken.

I wish there was something more substantial than the Red Cross/Crescent, Oxfam, etc. etc. network of NGO's that could offer immediate relief. Some sort of global emergency fund from which any country affected by a disaster of this magnitude could request assistance.

It's easy for us to sit behind a computer screen and donate money when the suffering is so far away, and doubtless it is a good thing to do (in fact, I have a challenge for anyone who reads this: next time there is an earthquake or a tsunami or a volcano explosion with a death toll higher than 100 persons, donate at least 1% of your last paycheck to a relief organization. That leaves you with 99% of your financial capital and a higher proportion of social capital than you had to start with;^) .

When I was flying back from Boston, where I had gone to visit friends and conduct some business of a confidential nature, we flew over Mt. St. Helens at the exact time that it was releasing a large cloud of steam. It reminded me of 1980 when, living in Portland, I saw half the mountain vaporize in front of me.

My point in bringing this up is that the next earthquake, tsunami, heat wave, volcanic eruption, could be here. Could be on the coast, could be where your cousin lives, could be where you're living 5 years from now. And without continuing donation to build up emergency funds, we as a people have no recourse to aid. So let's build it up, if we can, as we can.

I guess this embodies that ideal of 'from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs', and I guess that makes me a flaming idealist, and possibly categorizes me as fulfilling any number of preconceptions of other people's. So be it. If we are going to live in a lifeboat society, let's make that lifeboat as big as possible.

Some bits of news are more important than others

For example, this piece on the fact that there has been a 30% reduction in arctic sea ice. One of the scientists in the article says that there is no known natural variation that could account for this reduction.

I want to repeat that: no known natural variation.

My mother in law is one of those that insists that the Earth is an unfriendly place, and that its (allegedly natural) fluctuations have caused massive human die-offs throughout history, which is the easy thing to say if you don't want to take individual responsibility and add to the (hopefully growing) masses of people who are doing what they can to mitigate this impending disaster. I can't see it that way, because to me the planet is the friendliest place possible. Just look at the rest of the solar system by way of comparison- clouds of methane and sulfur, negative temperatures measured in hundreds of degrees Kelvin, and so on. Even Mars, the next step according to a vocal minority of our visionaries, is so challenging just to land robots on that a viable trip for humans is still centuries off.

So here we are on this planetary island fighting with each other and killing off people just because they believe differently than we do, and the whole time all of us are, collectively, in greater danger on a grander scale than any war could accomplish. And we like to think our species is rational.

Best of intentions stymied by reality

Well, that could apply to this news article or to my stated intention to blog every day that I am on this business trip to Boston. The intention to blog and turn in assignments in a timely fashion was trumped by a lack of internet access- it started working at my hotel today. The staff must've figured out what was wrong with it.

So, the news article is about political failure in Iraq. In it we read that the Sunnis are boycotting the Iraqi parliament.

I have serious doubts about the efficacy of this tactic. Their fundamental problem seems to be that they (the Sunni parliamentarians) are being marginalized. The problem I see with their response has a couple of aspects to it. The first is that if you actually are being marginalized, you have people actively working to silence you. What good does it do to do your enemies' work for them by refusing to attend sessions and speak? The second is that even if your marginalization is a product of ego and paranoia, and doesn't really exist, you are working against yourself by removing yourself from an equation in which you could shift the balance to your own benefit?

Does the free market hold up in bad weather?

Yesterday, as we were vocally flinging our, um, ideas at each other in class, I brought up the idea of dual dependency. It's something that no one likes to think about: the idea that we are now, and will continue increasingly to be, as dependent on third world countries as they are on us.

Trade has been a staple of human civilization for literally centuries. I see nothing wrong with trade. It is the way that we have figured out to get goods to where they need to be. I was reading this article the other day, about Failaka Island, in the Red Sea, now controlled by Kuwait, that was conquered and colonized by Alexander the Great in the 4th century. Looked at another way, Alexander and conquerors of his ilk were the first multinational corporations- bodies of traders and fighters out to expand their territory. The major difference now is that wars are fought purportedly for ideology (I don't believe it for a second but that is how it is portrayed) and slaves are not captured, they are advertised to and placed in voluntarily-assumed debt. (Oh, and Alexander was 33 when he died. So if I wanted to take over the world, I'm already a year behind him!)

I work in a large local laboratory that I don't really think I need to name, because it's the only one. When Hurricane Katrina hit, there were supplies that we could not get because the suppliers were Louisiana-based. After a week there were tests that we couldn't run. That means that someone's grandfather or aunt or cousin was waiting anxiously for a diagnosis that couldn't be made.

Expand that a thousandfold, just as a thought experiment, and think about what it would be like if we couldn't import anything because it isn't being produced. One example: the Indian state of Assam is or has been largely under water for the past week or two, as one of the worst monsoon seasons in recent history hit. Now imagine you are a tea dealer in the US. Suddenly you have no product to import because the rain flooded out your sources and the growers are struggling to survive. If it isn't being produced it can't be traded. This will become a growing concern as global warming really kicks in. The biggest irony is perhaps that the very mechanisms that allow us to trade, vehicular traffic and shipping routes, are major contributors to this process.

Up to 50,000 Iraqi children to be enrolled in Jordanian schools

Jordan has announced that it will help up to 50,000 displaced Iraqi children enroll in schools this year. This will be the first structured education they will have received since the exile from their homeland. This move is being facilitated, not surprisingly, by the UN.

It is known that the King of Jordan places emphasis on education, however one can't help but wonder if he sees this as a mitigator for the instability the country is facing. Between 10 and 20% of the country's total population are now Iraqi refugees and when you add in the fact that Jordan is one of the few Middle Eastern countries that is friendly with the U.S. and moderate towards Israel, one wonders if this is a way to forestall internal violence and prevent another Black September from happening. After all, all of these refugees will need places to live and food and water and healthcare, and it's quite possible that they would see it well within their rights to demand same from a country who is perceived as an ally of the country that caused the exile.

The best thing about all of this is that the children will get a chance at a more normal life.

Hmmm, something doesn't add up here.

Apparently the General Accounting Office is looking into the disappearance of large numbers of firearms that have disappeared in Iraq. They were supposed to have gone to the Iraqi army, but now no one knows where they are. In other words, the tax dollars of every person reading this went to buy guns, which were handed to Iraqis (in some cases without proper procedure, by the US Army's own admissions) and never seen again. And, in fact, may be some of the weaponry that is currently being used against US troops on the ground.

Anyone else see a problem with that? I mean, at this point is it even believable when the Pentagon continues to claim that we went over to Iraq to improve the way of life for the Iraqi people? No one's buying it, why keep saying it?

I know I'm not saying anything new here but today the lack of competence is really getting to me. It is never a good idea to make weapons available to any faction that hates your guts to start with. I mean, that should be obvious. And there are generals, like Petraeus, who don't seem to get this!

It reminds me of the part in the movie Lord Of War (which everyone in this class should go rent immediately if they haven't seen it) where the African warlords are buying arms with the obvious intent of committing genocide against a nearby refugee camp. There are situations that any trained strategist (such as, presumably, Petraeus) should be able to recognize and deal with, ideally by defusing or preventing them. This whole missing weapons situation was one of those, therefore it could easily, at some long past point, have been avoided.

Someone somewhere is making a lot of money off of this. It's not a good form of "aid", no matter how you look at it.

A tribe with few alternatives

This sad tale comes from northern Russia, which is the ancestral home of the Sami people, who traditionally lived a nomadic lifestyle based on the herding of reindeer.

Because metals and oil have been discovered in that area of Russia, and because the Barents sea is home to many naval bases, the Sami have been corralled and forced to live in towns. Though they still attempt to herd reindeer, their herds are shot at by bored naval officers and they are barred from using land that has been coopted for industrialization. They try to keep their culture alive by teaching the young ones the language and keeping traditional crafts going, but their tribe, by its own admissions, does not understand communism or capitalism as political systems and really can't seem to integrate. Unlike other stories I have read about tribal systems and their interface with the modern world, the Sami seem to be able to see no alternatives for themselves.

It is telling that this story of cultural destruction is posted in the business section of the BBC's news site. This suggests that the 1,600 Sami people left are simply an interference in the progress of capitalist Russia, as it removes what resources are left from the ecosystem that it started laying waste to decades earlier.

Biofuels being held hostage by OPEC

In this article, OPEC leaders claim that if biofuels are pursued, crude oil prices will be artificially increased by them so that they can still make their planned profits.

This is another case of those that control the resources making the worst possible choices they can, with regard to the greater good. It would be one thing if those monies were being used to support the standards of life in OPEC countries, but that money goes to buy bling for the elite.

Supply and demand does not apply in a monopoly. OPEC seems to think their cause will be relevant forever. The great irony here is that if everyone went sustainable tomorrow (assuming that this was possible, which it is NOT), OPEC wouldn't have a word to say. All their power would count for nothing.

I actually hope that OPEC continues on this asinine track, because it will push technological development away from dino-fuel and towards biodiesel. Bioethanol already doesn't count, unless you are in Brazil with tons of sugarcane waste to make it from.

Votes for Women

Interesting news this morning from Jordan, where the very conservative Islamist party has withdrawn its candidates from the mayoral elections. It isn't directly related that this is why, but this is the first round of elections in which a high percentage of women were allotted quotas, which in Jordan means that (under new legislation) 20% of government seats are guaranteed to women. Now, presumably this would be achieved by appointment if the popular vote did not fulfill that expectation, and in a highly Islamic country that seems to be a very likely scenario.

Jordan is a monarchy, and so their version of democracy really isn't direct representation like the United States version is supposed to be. Before this year, the King, Abdullah II, appointed mayors. He also appoints half of Parliament. But he has done more to democratize the monarchy than any of his successors, although arguably King Hussein, who ruled before him, did a lot. I am not sure what the ultimate aim of the Jordanian monarchy is- by all accounts it isn't to create a democracy and abdicate the reins of power, but they are one of the most moderate of the Middle Eastern states. It is quite possible that this tentative democracy is simply a way of ensuring an economic future in a country with few resources of its own. They do, after all, have a free trade agreement with us to maintain and if our tactics in other countries hold true, I'm sure there's been pressure from Washington to democratize.

I do want to point out that this progressive process of giving women a voice in government predates Jordan's alliance with the US. If I had to guess, I would guess that it has been the influence of the Queens of Jordan, all of whom seem to have been very strong, opinionated, smart women, that has created this impetus. I seriously doubt we can take any credit, as a country, for this refreshing news.

Aid recommendations for Iraq and the role of corruption in redevelopment delays

This morning's reading is of a white paper published by Oxfam detailing a 'looming humanitarian crisis' in Iraq. Sad stuff.

I remember when the American public was told that the Armed Forces would be welcomed with open arms and seen as liberators. What seems to have escaped the folks making that claim is the issue of responsiblity. We owe the people of Iraq assistance in getting back on their feet after we have destroyed their country through extended warfare. I know it wasn't all roses before the invasion, but this is a step backwards. For example, only 20% of Iraqi citizens now have access to sanitation, and malnutrition among children has risen by half. These same children, growing up in wartime, will have a high incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder, their ability to learn is damaged, and we are therefore helping to create an entire generation of people whose intellectual capital has been stunted from the very outset. This does not bode well for productive reconstruction efforts, and it is, without debate, a worse state of being for the citizens left alive than before the invasion happened.

I wish I could take the large portion of my taxes that is going to the defense fund and divert it to Oxfam.

One thing that is interesting is the number and variation in NGO's in Iraq that have stepped up to do what neither government seems capable of doing- sharing water and food, distributing medical supplies, and so forth. It saddens me that in this country, if I were to give money directly to any one of them to assist with the distribution of humanitarian aid, and any portion of that were to be used for sectarian agendas, even without my knowledge, I could in theory be arrested for abetting an enemy of the United States. However, from my view, if the ability of the citizens of Iraq to pursue 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' is being deliberately impaired by our country, we have failed every touted objective of this war already. How can they seek happiness with IED's everywhere? Liberty with curfews? No sanitation and no water, food rations inadequate? All three of these ideals that we espouse as essential to the great American idea of democracy, that we seek (at least in rhetoric) to promote across the globe, are in danger if not already lost, and we are the cause of it.

This is not the freedom I know.

Brave new worlds

In the novel Snow Crash (by Neal Stephenson), one of the most seminal cyberpunk pieces of fiction ever written, the main character lives in a storage unit with a roommate and delivers pizza to earn money. He and his roomie are effectively economic refugees in an LA of future imagining, in which anyone with any money has walled themselves into a gated community. But Hiro, the main character, has no problem with his surroundings because he is a computer genius who spends all his spare time in a virtual world which he had at some point helped to design, and in which, therefore, he lives a totally unreal life of luxury and social standing.

This (second life) would be a case of life imitating art (imitating life!), the designers making a Snow-Crash-esque virtual world in which to forget the crushing meaninglessness and desperation of everyday existence.

I realize this is unusual fodder for a news blog but I do a lot of thinking about why it is that people are content with the status quo. I think that there are probably a lot of people who use prosthetics for their imaginations in order to escape a Hobbesian reality. The danger is that without any sort of perceived need to change everyday reality, citizens of any nation-state become pliant and gullible. Our critical thinking skills are not required, and therefore they atrophy. One thinks of our President's post-911 admonition to go shopping and to take the family to Disneyland. There is a particular type of backlash to the boredom of the middle classes as well, which I observe in the moneyed young men of my brother's generation- driving around in Eugene listening to hip hop and trying to pick fights and live large, simply because life will then have adrenaline and spark to it. Such posturing is generally unproductive in my opinion, but it seems to satisfy them, at least in the short run.

I bring this up because I feel that it is difficult for me to understand news like this, about the suicide bomber outside the Red Mosque in Islamabad. I have never in my life touched the edge of the level of desperation and hopelessness that would be necessary to give momentum to such a desire, let alone carry such a thing out. I simply lack the ability to understand such a thing. But from the outside, what I see is an act of horrible, soul-crushing disenfranchisement. It is the most final and horrible way in which one could possibly say "listen to me!" and yet the message, whatever it is, is lost along with all respect for any cause that could inspire such fanaticism. It is a totally opposite response to the perceived horrors of the modern real world, than that of the hyperenhanced daydreaming which is fostered by the creation of a perfect virtual world.

133

That (one hundred and thirty three) is the total number of Iraqi refugees that have been allowed into the United States in the last 9 months.

Let's put that number in perspective with the numbers of refugees being housed in some other countries:

Syria: 1,200,000
Jordan: 750,000
Iran: 54,000
Lebanon: 40,000

Jordan has been housing Palestinian refugees since 1947 or so, and is the site of no less than four UN-funded permanent refugee camps already.

So where is our sense of responsibility as a nation? It makes me angry that we can't house the very people who we are displacing because of 'security concerns'- how about if we as a nation stop contributing to the insecurity of the planet so that we won't have to worry about it!

Not only that, but what do you suppose the number of Iraqis in Guantanamo Bay prison is? Larger than 133? Anyone want to bet on that?

Links to articles for this class

This page, from a previous iteration of the INTL240 class, seems to have links to many of the articles we are supposed to be reading.

Enough to eat up the rest of tonight's homework time, anyway!

First post....

Ok, so here's a little about me so that you, the reader, can understand where I'm coming from a little bit. I'm an environmental science student and the things that really fascinate me are climate change, global ecology (how different biomes interact with each other and evolve over time) and the human dimensions of these changes. Now, it would be really easy to cherry pick the news and post all sorts of things that may or may not be related to actual climate change (like, for example, the heat wave in Hungary that's killing people right now) but that really wouldn't be intellectually honest because we don't know whether it's related or not. The jury's still out. The causal link isn't visible to us right now.

But there is a direct causal link between pollution and industrialization, and here is an interesting example of what happens when a country that is poised to host an upcoming Olympic summer games can't seem to face up to the fact that steel mills spew pollution, and cement creates greenhouse gases, and, well, in order to have massive Westernization, you need steel mills and cement.

In the last paragraph, we read that the Chinese government successfully blocked inclusion in a World Bank report of the number of people who died prematurely every year from air and water pollution. That number was 760,000. Now, why would they object? Was the figure inaccurate? If so, how inaccurate? What if it was exaggerated twice over? (That would be the best case scenario in terms of human life. ) That would mean that only 380,000 had died prematurely.

But what if it was too low, yet still so shocking that the Chinese government didn't want it released for fear people would investigate and find that the number was actually much higher? That would make the actual number to be something approaching a million. Even taking the number at face value, an entire San Francisco or Indianapolis worth of Chinese are dying every year, of what amounts to industrial poisoning.

You hear a lot of talk about not buying Chinese goods because of their human rights record, and that is a good and valid reason. But what about not buying so that the factories will have less reason to continue to pollute? Is it even possible to have such an impact?

I will be watching the Olympics, when they happen, not so much for the atheletes (sorry, sports fans!) but as a primer of PR spin. You can bet there will be plenty to go around.