Entries from October 2007
GlobalWonk attended a debate in Chicago last week that outlined the impacts of China’s unprecedented economic rise on the environment. The debate was sponsored by The Economist and Chicago Public Radio. Orville Schell, Director of the Center on U.S./China Relations at the Asia Society, and Barry Weisberg, from the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), represented the affirmative position. Vijay Vaitheeswaran, correspondent for The Economist, and Kelly Sims Gallagher, Director of the Energy Technology Innovation Project at the Belfor Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, represented the negative position.
The affirmative side won the debate. They argued that China is already in the midst of an environmental catastrophe. Vaitheeswaran and Gallagher did not disagree that there are current significant issues; but thought that all developing countries cycle through this. Early stages of development being much dirtier than later, more technically savvy stages.
During the question and answer period GlobalWonk asked the following question; “If you were a presidential candidate in the ’08 election, what policies would you pursue relative to green and renewable energies, to ensure the United States were arguing from a defensable moral position when making recommendations to China on their development?”
In our opinion, while we certainly should be concerned, we have no right to castigate the Chinese when our own house is not in order. Let’s clean up our act, in all senses of the term, before we are audacious enough to make recommendations to others.
The New York Times has done an excellent series on this topic. We highly recommend it. The link is below:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/08/26/world/asia/choking_on_growth.html
Categories: China · U.S./China Relations · the truth about inconvenience
Tagged: , China, global, global security, pollution, the economist, u.s. china relations, wonk
It is the summer of 1992.
In the previous three years:
- Eastern Europe has become democratic.
- The Berlin Wall fell.
- Germany reunited.
- President George H.W. Bush grounded Looking Glass.
- Hardliners attempted to overthrow Gorbachev.
- The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.) ceased to exist.
- The Cold War ended.
- The United States military dealt a stunning defeat to Saddam’s vaunted military
The United States stood at a moment of singularity. Our power and prestige were at their pinnacle. Unchallenged.
Did we use this unprecedented position and influence to help shape the future of the world for the betterment of all mankind? Did we help Russia, and the other former Soviet republics, assimilate into the world economy? Did we work hard enough to understand the internal dynamics of Chinese society in order to nuture a positive orientation to the United States during their economic resurgence?
Did we wage peace?
After forty years of conflict with the Soviet Union in an epic battle of ideologies; why did we have no Marshall Plan to secure the peace and rebuild regions of the world that had stagnated and fallen behind under the grip of communism?
The only screams I remember hearing out of Congress were from narrow-minded members seeking a “peace dividend”. The United States Army, the same force that performed so brilliantly in the Gulf War, was cut in half.
All of the finger pointing now about overtaxing Guard and Reserve troops is a direct result of this demand by Congress for a peace dividend in 1992. Congress knowingly cut the Army’s troop strength in half. They burdened the Guard and Reserve with missions formerly assigned to active duty units. Fast forward nine years to the Summer of 2001. Enter your local high school kid looking to serve their country for a few years locally while finishing school or working to save enough money to do so. If he has been lucky enough to not have been injured, that kid has just served two extended tours in Iraq within three years.
The term ‘You reap what you sow.’ comes to mind. We failed to take advantage of our unprecedented opportunity in the early nineties. We were all too enamored with Windows, and our Internet stock portfolios. Many of the issues we are facing now, and into the foreseeable future, are the direct result of neglecting key strategic relationships throughout the nineties.
This is not a partisan slap at any one party or administration. Both parties failed us. We need leadership at all levels of our government that are willing to plant seeds and nurture our global relationships. We can not afford to fail now. Me must use all of our hard and soft power to wage peace and secure a future for all the world’s children.
Categories: China · No New Cold War · U.S./China Relations · Waging Peace
Tagged: China, cold war, global, global security, gulf war, leadership, Marshall Plan, national security, peace, peace dividend, persian gulf, president bush, Soviet Union, USSR
You would be hard-pressed to find former Vice President Albert Gore Jr. and myself simpatico on many issues. However, I admire him for the passion he has exhibited on environmental issues dating back to his early college years. He stuck his neck out, and put his credibility on the line, when no other political figures of his stature were willing to do so. He wrote his first book, Earth in the Balance, way back in 1992 when global warming wasn’t a sexy issue. For these reasons GlobalWonk applauds his receipt of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. (We were also happy to see him win the Oscar earlier this year.)
Unfortunately there are too few politicians, and leaders in all parts of society, willing to make the tough calls necessary to get the United States on a track that leads to sustainable growth, peace and prosperity. Let me preface the comments below by saying that I love my country. I served almost ten years active duty in our Armed Forces. I am saying these things because we need to make changes if we are to remain a great and free nation. Consider the following:
- What are we going to do about Social Security? We have seniors in our country that choose between food or medicine every night. The problem will only get worse. 2007 is the first year of the decade-plus wave of Baby Boomer retirees being added to an already strained system.
- Why are we not energy independent thirty-four years after the 1973 Oil Embargo that awoke a sleeping nation to the fact we were importing more oil than we were producing for the first time in our history; even though our government, and industry insiders, knew the inevitability of this as early as WWII.
- As of this posting the United States is $9.049 TRILLION in debt. This number increase by $1.42 Billion per day. This amounts to $29,838.44 per man, woman, and child living in our country. What happens when our financial system becomes so dire that nations like China and Japan cease buying our public debt? What if they decide the European Union, and the Euro, is a safer bet for their reserve currencies than the dollar?
We need strong leaders to make us confront these, and many other, critical issues. We need them because most Americans are unable, or unwilling, to face these issues themselves.
- We all know that Social Security may not be there for us as it was for our parent’s and grandparent’s retirement. Yet we are one of the least saving societies on the planet.
- We know we are trading lives and treasure every day to maintain our, and the world’s, free access to (relatively) cheap energy via Middle Eastern petroleum. Yet we drive cars larger than the homes of people in more modest countries.
- We know our country is deeply in debt. Yet we continue to expect the same level of government services and vote for politicians that bring the pork home in the form of pet projects and federally funded jobs.
We Americans will not change our ways until it becomes uncomfortable. I call this The Truth About Inconvenience. Sure, we should all drive a hybrid. But the kids can’t watch their DVDs in the back while they are driven the quarter-mile to soccer practice. We all talk the talk, but we do not want to be inconvenienced by having to walk the walk. The only way to get rid of gas guzzling monster trucks is to make fueling them cost prohibitive. I am certainly not a fan of higher taxes. I am however, a realist. There is a time and a place for government to step in and coerce activity that is conducive to progress for the public good.
Ridiculously expensive gasoline would also make people think twice about that eighth-of-a-mile trip to the gas station for the 300 oz. diet Dr. Pepper. We might actually walk more. Hey, we might even build sub-divisions with sidewalks that connect to each other, kinda like a community.You might meet your neighbors while walking to the store to pick-up a few things for dinner. Knowing your neighbor might encourage you not to call the cops the next time their kid crosses through your yard and steps on your perennials. We might all keep an eye on each other’s kids.
Ridiculously expensive gasoline would encourage the use of public transportation. It would spur venture capital investment in new energy technologies. This will create entirely new sectors of the economy (think Silicon Valley and the computer). They will innovate new products and potentially new energy sources. This will spur our economy which would generate more tax revenue and allow us to pay down the national debt. And so on, and so on…..
So, where do we find these leaders? Where is our Harry Truman? Where is our F.D.R.? Where is our Abraham Lincoln? If you spot one of these type leaders in the Presidential Debates, please drop me a line. We need a hero.
Categories: the truth about inconvenience
Tagged: al gore, energy independence, leadership, nobel peace prize, public debt, social security, the truth about inconvenience
We are glad you stopped by. Please bear with us as we develop the GlobalWonk community. We look forward to breaking down global issues, such as the U.S./China relationship, into actionable steps we as individuals can take to affect positive change and promote peace and stability.
Our mission statement is simple; NO NEW COLD WAR! Please stop by often to check-in. We hope you will register with GlobalWonk and actively participate by commenting and sharing your ideas with our worldwide audience.
Categories: China · No New Cold War · U.S./China Relations · Waging Peace
Tagged: China, cold war, foreign policy, global, globalwonk, international security, national security, U.S./China Relations, Waging Peace, wonk
