Final Reflections

I have to say that I have loved UC World Politics. I feel like I have learned a lot in this class and had a chance to partake in a good community learning experience. I’ve enjoyed the activities we have done, the books we have read, writing blogs, and having discussions inside and out of class on the various pressing issues in the world today. I loved being able to talk with PTJ outside of class about whatever caught our fancy in an informal matter, be it over pizza in the lounge or lunch in TDR. I also thought that the trips into D.C. to gain hands-on experience about what we were learning were a great element of the program, and should definitely be continued. If I could suggest one improvement, it would be more activities and simulations specifically involving governments trying to work with one another on various issues such as international security, environmental policy, human rights, and so on. I feel like I really learned a lot about poverty, international cooperation, national and international security, and global economic development; not only did I learn in class about these things, but I ended up having deep conversations about them with my peers.

This was a great class I, and I’m glad I took it. I hope everyone stays in touch and that everyone has an awesome spring semester!

-Gregory Proulx

Future Combat Systems: The Army’s $200 Billion Gamble

I read recently in The Washington Post about the US Army’s $200 billion modernization program, Future Combat Systems. Future Combat Systems is comprised of high-tech ground combat vehicles, unmanned air, ground, attack, and sensor systems, and employs the doctrine of net-centric warfare by using state-of-the-art Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C³I) technology to increase battlefield effectiveness.

Sounds nice, but I have several concerns.

First off, I don’t think it’s wise for the Army to be spending $200 billion dollars on a new weapons system while we are embroiled in Iraq and are having trouble just putting troops on the ground. I really don’t see how the Army can spend that much money in that fashion when they are outsourcing things like providing food and water to troops to companies like Halliburton and KBR. There have been continuous equipment problems, ranging from a lack of body armor for soldiers to armor for Humvees. Secondly, I can understand the unmanned vehicles and sensors being introduced by Future Combat Systems, but it seemed to me like many of the new manned vehicles of the Future Combat System are unnecessary, seeing how we already have vehicles that can do the job. Do we really need a new mounted combat system—also known in layman’s terms as a tank—when the M1A2 Abrams tank, a vehicle that has never in its entire history been destroyed or lost a crew member to enemy tank fire, works just fine? The same goes for the M109A6 Paladin and the M2A3/M3A3 Bradley, both of which are superb fighting vehicles and have many years left of service in them. We don’t need a new tank, infantry fighting vehicle, or self-propelled artillery piece right now. Looking at the manned vehicles of Future Combat Systems, I noticed many of them have a very high profile, which would make them ideal targets for anti-tank weapons, helicopters, and other armored vehicles.

The project has also seen major increases in cost coupled with doubt about whether it will live up to what the military and the defense industry has made it out to be.

If I can say anything, it is this: Army, continue with the unmanned sensors and vehicles component of Future Combat System, but hold off on the vehicles—the ones you have right now are some of the best in the world.

-Gregory Proulx

Tankers of the 1st Armored Division drive an M1 Abrams tank through the Taunus Mountains north of Frankfurt during Exercise Ready Crucible on February 14, 2005.

Related Links:

Future Combat Systems

U.S. Army’s ‘Future Combat Systems” Program Remains Under Fire

News & Analysis: Future Combat Systems

Slow, Fat “Future” for Army

Reflections on Week Thirteen

The major simulation was the highlight of the week, with the European Union, Ukraine, the Dominican Republic, Uganda, McDonald’s, and Doctors Without Borders vying to accomplish their goals while at the same time working collectively. Representing McDonald’s felt strange as I do not support them due to their operating practices and impact on society in terms of things such as health (I stay the hell away from their food), so that was an interesting experience. However, I found it even stranger to be representing McDonald’s and talking about helping developing countries because when I think international development, McDonald’s is the last thing that comes to my mind. We were talking about opening restaurants, bring in capital, and creating entrepreneurship, but all I could think was, “Wow, McDonald’s is definitely not going to be lifting any developing countries out of poverty.” When I think international development, I think USAID, Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam International, the Red Cross, the United Nations, and Habitat for Humanity, among others. I personally feel that NGOs and governments are more responsible for contributing to international development, especially since governments are around to better their people. It was amusing to watch Uganda try to deny it had problems with corruption and saying that it was an internal issue that didn’t have any impact on foreign companies in the country, which it did. I was surprised to hear about how severe corruption was in Ukraine, especially with all their efforts to “Westernize.” I feel like I was a bit removed from the exercise for some reason, but I can’t really pinpoint that reason—maybe some end-of-the-semester aloofness? It was a fun activity to do nevertheless, and I’m glad we got to explore the interconnected world of development from the standpoints of nation-states, NGOs, and corporations.

-Gregory Proulx

The Great Capitalist Peace Doesn’t Stand Up To War Profiteering

I think that the idea of “The Great Capitalist Peace” is both unattainable and foolish. When you think capitalism, you don’t think world peace—you think money. The main goal of capitalism is to make as much money as you can, any way you can. And there are lots of ways to make money, such as opening your own restaurant or getting a job with a software company. I think we can all agree those are innocent enough, right? But there is something else more ominous that has shown its potential to be a lucrative enterprise: war. If there are huge amounts of profit to be made off war, it would be in the best interest of capitalists to encourage war. Just look at Iraq. In the first 11 days of the 2003 Iraq War, the Navy fired 700 BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles at targets in Iraq (Borger), a missile that costs about $500,000 each (“BGM-109 Tomahawk”).

Do the math—that’s $350,000,000 worth of cruise missiles.

If you were the CEO of Raytheon or McDonnell Douglas, the two companies that manufacture the Tomahawk, might you not be, dare I say, excited for this war?

Many defense companies have profited enormously from the death and destruction caused by the Iraq War. The defense industry has enjoyed “a contracting free-for-all” and little governmental oversight, with defense contracts totaling $269 billion in 2005 (“Cracking Down”). Among the top offenders are Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon, KBR, Halliburton, General Electric, Bechtel, CSC/DynCorp, and Blackwater. These companies have committed a variety of crimes, ranging from Halliburton and KBR’s providing troops with contaminated water and spoiled food to Blackwater’s use of excessive force in Iraq. Thanks to the widespread cronyism and corruption within the current administration—such as Gordon England, former Secretary of the Navy and current Deputy Secretary of Defense (even though he has no military experience), a former executive for General Dynamics, and Vice President Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton—it is very easy for these companies to get away with their crimes. If you are not only the former executive of a defense company but also in the government and in a position to push for a war, wouldn’t you be tempted? Like I said before, if you were the CEO of Raytheon or McDonnell Douglas, wouldn’t you be eager for this war?

Defense contractor Brent Wilkes was. In fact, according to several of his former colleagues, he wasn’t just eager, but “ecstatic” and “gung-ho” about the Iraq war and the “new opportunities it would create for the company” (Calbreath)—so much that he used his friendship with former CIA Executive Director Kyle Foggo to land an Iraq contract to deliver $1.7 million worth of bottled water and other supplies to CIA operatives in Iraq and bribed former Representative Randy Cunningham to obtain further contracts from the Defense Department, for which he was convicted of 13 felonies, including conspiracy, bribery, and money laundering (Moran).

Last time I checked, being eager for a war because of the new opportunities it would create for the company didn’t translate into any sort of peace, let alone the “Great Capitalist” one.

-Gregory Proulx

Further Information:

Presenting Arms: The Iraq War & The U.S. Weapons Industry

CorpWatch: War Profiteers

IRAQ FOR SALE: The War Profiteers

US Labor Against the War

Works Cited

“BGM-109 Tomahawk.” Federation of American Scientists. 1 Dec. 2005. 10 Dec. 2007 <http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm>.

Borger, Julian. “Air War Weapon Stockpile Runs Critically Low.” Guardian Unlimited 1 Apr. 2003. 10 Dec. 2007 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,926996,00.html>.

Calbreath, Dean. “Case Shines Light on How War Contracts are Awarded.” The San Diego Union-Tribune 15 Feb. 2007. 10 Dec. 2007 <http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20070215-9999-1n15contract.html>.

“Cracking Down on War Profiteering: Contracting Free-for-All.” Center for Corporate Policy. 10 Dec. 2007 <http://www.corporatepolicy.org/topics/warprofiteering.htm>.

Moran, Greg. “Jury Finds Wilkes Guilty.” The San Diego Union-Tribune 6 Nov. 2007. 10 Dec. 2007 <http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20071106/news_1n6wilkes.html>.

Final Reflections

Looking back this has been a great semester. Though I still have a long way to go on all counts I have learned so much - not only about World Politics, but also about human nature and interactions (and aren't those helpful for understanding the former?). Living with a group in this way has taught me a lot and certainly changed my way of thinking and doing things. It may of course be difficult to pinpoint how exactly, but I know that it is there. Whether spoken or unspoken we have all certainly learned a lot about compromise - sometimes it just happens but we (for the most part) have all learned to deal and go along with life as planned. In a way these lessons were brought to the table in the major simulation where we were asked to converse and compromise. While these efforts may have been far less successful I believe that we could have had some progress if we kept working - probably more than average because of the collaborative and interdependent community that we have developed as a class.
Speaking of this community I would just like to thank every body for being so great this semester, it's been such a wonderful experience! Though I know I will see most of you next semester some of you are moving and so i wanted to be sure to tell you that and that I will miss you!! - Good luck with everything !!!!!

Final Reflections!

It’s been a great first semester in UC! I look upon all our excursions, discussions, and laughs fondly and feel grateful to have been a part of this experience. There are fun times and frustrating times, but they all cover far more than a standard academic class. In addition to a challenging and mind opening class, it was even better to be able to relate new concepts to weekly experiences of living in DC. The cultural differences seen in the city combined with the class analysis of how our countries relate to each other definitely leads to a broader perspective on life, both globally and even down to Leonard 7 hall. Living with people who share similar interests and classes was not only more exciting in political discussions, but allows for an experience that taught me more about both myself and about the ways in which others live and think. When I think back on the college years, I know I will definitely remember how they began!

Final Reflection

I came into this class ambitious and optimistic, ready to solve the world’s problems with a stroke of my pen (or keyboard more accurately). I leave it not quite so optimistic though perhaps slightly more prepared for the really world. We wrestled with some pretty difficult issues in this class; ones that go directly to the difficult questions of morality and reality. We talked a lot about what should be done and is that possible. We started out in this class by establishing that world peace is not possible. Though I agreed with this statement I felt like the class was throwing the baby out with the bathwater by saying that there was no point in trying to achieve peace. This made me wonder why I was here trying to make the world a better place. I realize now that that served only as the slight reality check I needed to bring my idealism into check with reality. I know now that it might take trillions of pen strokes, trillions of keyboard clicks, and many years of hard work and even then only slight changes might occur. However, in a universe full of evil, and yes goodness too, even a small individual triumph is a triumph. Maybe if we can spread just a little bit more goodness we can have an impact because while powerful governments matter so does culture and culture is created by individuals. I think the creation of a culture of goodness, acceptance, and harmony could have a dramatic impact while not completely solving the world’s problems.

Fundamentalism 101: Saudi Arabia, and Absurdity 101: Sudan

Recently in the news there were two stories involving Islam and its continued perversion by religious nutcases. First there was the case in Saudi Arabia involving the gang-rape of a 19-year old woman by seven men, for which she was sentence to 90 lashes and a prison sentence (upon her lawyer appealing the sentence and making public comments about it, the penalty was increased to six months in prison and 200 lashes).¹ Second was the case in Sudan about the British teacher sentenced to fifteen days in jail and then deportation after her class named a teddy bear Muhammad.²

Being a person who supports women’s rights and logic, I find these events mind-blowing.

If one thing is clear, it is that rape is never the fault of the victim. This woman did not ask to be gang-raped—she was simply getting a photo of herself from a male high school friend because she had recently married. It is true that she violated the laws regarding the segregation of sexes, but these laws themselves are unjust, not only because they are highly biased towards women, but if any violation occurs, the guilt is placed primarily on the woman. This ruling by the Saudi judicial system contains two messages: first, it’s the woman’s fault, and second, she asked for it. This is just one of the many such cases in Saudi Arabia, where women’s rights are shown little respect, if even acknowledged at all. Women are restricted from doing many basic things, including:

• Voting

• Driving

• Showing their faces

• Renting an apartment for themselves³

• Checking into a hotel alone³

• Going out in public without being accompanied by a male relative⁴

• Leaving the country without permission of a male relative⁴

• Marrying a non-Muslim man⁴

Women who break these rules risk arrest, torture, sexual abuse, and execution at the hands of the Saudi religious police, or Mutaween. Saudi Arabia’s cruel and inhumane treatment of women is well-documented. On March 11^th, 2002, fifteen Saudi schoolgirls died when they were beaten and forced back into their burning school by the Mutaween for not wearing proper Islamic dress. Scuffles broke out when the Mutaween prevented firemen from attempting to rescue the girls, stating, “It is sinful to approach them.”⁵ Foreign women are also subject to this same treatment. In 1993, Canadian nurse Margaret Madill and a female friend were taking a taxi home when they were stopped by the Mutaween, who locked them in the taxi in extreme heat for six hours, beat and accused them of indecent dress and public intoxication, and jailed them for two days before releasing the two without charge.⁶ Such occurrences in Saudi Arabia are common, and not just limited to women—human rights violations are a signature of the Saudi leadership.

Somehow I feel like we should stop giving the Saudis F-16s and oil money.

The whole uproar regarding Gillian Gibbons, the British teacher who let her class name a teddy bear Muhammad, is so ridiculous that it’s amusing. People were out in the streets of Khartoum shouting for her beheading. The Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas stated that, “What has happened was not haphazard or carried out of ignorance, but rather a calculated action and another ring in the circles of plotting against Islam.”⁷

Oh really?

I’m pretty sure that a teddy bear won’t bring down Islam, but judging from the reaction of many Muslims and non-Muslims alike to this absurdity⁸, it will bring down whatever twisted fantasy these fanatics believe in.

Oh, and one more thing. If Sudan has a law against insulting religion and faith, maybe they should put one in there about war crimes, too.

-Gregory Proulx

Works Cited

¹ El-Magd, Nadia A. “Saudi Rape Ruling Puts Govt on Defensive.” The Associated Press. 1 Dec. 2007. 4 Dec. 2007 <http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5itRFLIdKb8OnJpiQRpQl1tHq0oGAD8T8U0UO0>.

² “UK Teacher Jailed Over Teddy Row.” BBC News. 30 Nov. 2007. 5 Dec. 2007 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7119399.stm>.

³ Doumato, Eleanor A. “Saudi Arabia.” Freedom House. 4 Dec. 2007 <http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=182>.

⁴ SAUDI ARABIA: GROSS HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AGAINST WOMEN. Amnesty International, 2000. 4 Dec. 2007 <http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE230572000?open&of=ENG-SAU>.

⁵ “15 Girls Die as Zealots ‘Drive Them Into Blaze.’” Telegraph. 15 Mar. 2002. 4 Dec. 2007 <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/03/15/wsaud15.xml>.

⁶ “Women.” Amnesty International: Saudi Arabia. 4 Dec. 2007 <http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/saudi/briefing/4.html>.

⁷ Montesquiou, Alfred De. “Sudan Charges Teacher for Teddy Bear Name.” The Associated Press. 28 Nov. 2007. 5 Dec. 2007 <http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUYY9aFqMRYNGvVIYkw8XTkcTi0QD8T6PHKG1>.

⁸ “Sudan Teddy Insult Teacher: Readers’ Views.” BBC News. 30 Nov. 2007. 5 Dec. 2007 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7115400.stm>.

Reflections on Week Eleven

I thought our focus on poverty was very helpful in informing us on the issues of both domestic and global poverty. Our visit to Bread for the City was very informative on the problem of domestic poverty in D.C. I thought their multifaceted approach to addressing poverty—providing medical, legal, social, and financial services, along with food and clothing—was very ingenious, for it dealt with the major issues facing D.C. residents who are impoverished or at risk for poverty. It was also very telling to hear the staff that came and talked with us voicing their concern, and in some cases disgust, over how the city is dealing with poverty. I was disturbed to hear about the lack of supermarkets in low-income D.C. communities, as access to food is such a basic and vital requirement for people everywhere. Since I plan on doing community service here in D.C., it was good to learn about a possible venue where I could help the community!

Our activity on global poverty was really good, and I enjoyed looking at the many different aspects of poverty, as well as the many different ways in which poverty can be addressed. Although I felt it was difficult in choosing between all the different options for fighting poverty, I think our group did a good job by addressing the base problems of poverty, such as lack of infrastructure, clean water, literacy, and agricultural development, so that a foundation could be built on which to continue further improvements, such as healthcare, education, and so on. We reasoned that education would be no good if people were dying because they didn’t have access to clean water and food, so that is why we picked these. One thing I noticed was that there was no option regarding population control, which I feel is a very important step in fighting poverty due to the fact that the planet’s resources are limited and cannot support an infinite amount of people. The activity also sparked a lot of interest for me in exploring international development, especially the use of appropriate technology to help fight poverty and further progress in developing countries, so I hope to take a closer look at that area of international relations.

-Gregory Proulx

Reflection on why I hate pointless discussions and blogging

During Tuesday's discussion many of us expressed our views on different areas of the
"Ethical Realism" theory. While I felt that this discussion was constructive and informative at first I felt that it ended in being a repetitive dialogue of the same points presented in slightly different ways. Furthermore the people presenting these points argue as if they are saying something that directly opposes the previous speaker when in actuality they are in almost complete agreement with one another ( despite some select nuances in arguments) . While I know that I am guilty of this as well I still find that its a waste of time and (at least in my opinion) does not teach anything. I constantly find myself not gaining any further knowledge on the readings and theories presented than I had upon initially received upon reading. Though I understand the method of teaching so that students teach themselves and I am learning - I feel that I am not learning anything on the intended topic. While I have learned a great deal more about human interaction, how we try to manipulate one another and twist facts to make them look better I still feel like I don't actually know anything useful about world politics. Of course politics does seem to be all about manipulation and how to be a jackass so maybe I have learned something. Though I find this class style unfair I deal with it because life is not fair - I was told by our lovely PA that I should just talk about how I feel and my take about the learning experience so here it is. That being said, I would just like to add that I think that blogging is completely and utterly useless

Reflections Week XIV

During Thanksgiving break last week I enjoyed Ethical Realism and thought the class discussion Tuesday went particularly well. The pauses after people’s comments were effective and allowed for a clear flow of responses that were related, yet provided new insights. As people commented on the balance between ethics and realism, I began to think the title of the book should be Realist Ethics, because the realist agenda determines the amount of ethical practice implemented. The well-being and wishes of another people are considered and granted only “when possible” and compatible with a realist policy; however, either title clearly incorporates the new approach to relations with other countries. While no solution is perfect in its creation or implementation, a system that allows peace through economic interdependence between countries and places emphasis on market values instead of individual rights might be the most practical and effective manner of relation for many areas of the world. A system with the most potential to prevent military confrontation and other forms of violent force should be considered most seriously, especially one that forms an alternative approach to a zealous spread of democracy, considering the ideological differences and struggles of today.

Reflection Week 13

The Major Simulation project seemed to dominate this week, not only over other parts of World Politics but over all of Leonard 7 and certainly in my case the entire week. This simulation was certainly more complex than the previous simulation and I felt like it demanded much more research and much more general knowledge than the previous one. In relation to that, this project made me wish that I had more of a background in economics. I felt that while research was useful I would have been able to do a better job if I knew more about global economics. I think that I learned a lot more during the project about international economic relations and about my individual country, Ukraine.
Furthermore, I agree with Rachel that it seemed like consensus would be difficult because of the different positions represented. While the jury is still out on that point it appears to me that this will be the case. However, I think that adds another layer to the simulation because, while it is not entirely accurate, the simulation does reflect certain realities when it comes to international cooperation. Our difficulty coming to a consensus is only a fraction of that which it is in the real world because we are dealing with specific outlined issues and we only represent a few nations, among which the United States is absent. We are dealing with developing nations, international organizations, and the European Union. Tension has been developing between the Ukraine, Doctors Without Borders, the EU, and McDonalds who wish to eliminate corruption and Uganda and the Dominican Republic who deny corruption exists. While this makes consensus difficult it does not make it impossible especially because we have other issues to discuss.
In the real world, however, the WTO must balance the needs of all nations throughout the world including the United States. So in many ways this simulation is a microcosm of what happens in the real world concerning varying opinions and a lack of consensus. This is further evidenced in the United Nations. While I believe the UN is a useful tool in international diplomacy, it is also difficult for it to reach consensus on anything because of the different perspective that each nation brings to the table. I think the simulation gives an accurate picture of how difficult it is to reach international consensus even under the best possible circumstances, which rarely happen.

The Great Capitalist Peace

The Great Capitalist Peace is an ideal that can never be achieved in reality due to the fallen nature of mankind. Lieven and Hulsman contrast the philosophy of the Great Capitalist Peace with the philosophy of the Democratic Peace which states that if all nations were democracies war would cease to exist. I think their emphasis on economics, rather than on political structures is important because democracies are not all the same and they have fought each other in the past. However, the Great Capitalist Peace emphasizes that if all nations share in the global economy they will be less likely to go to war. This is more feasible than the argument about democracies, though it is a goal that can never be obtained. Humanity is naturally flawed and constantly seeks greater and greater advantages at the expense of others. Therefore nations, composed of humans seek conflict with their enemies to achieve the goals for which they strive. Not all nations would voluntarily agree to such economic conditions and even if they did this will not lead ultimately to universal peace. Just because economic connections provide a disincentive for nations to go to war with one another that does not mean that such economic interconnectedness will eliminate conflict altogether.
While it is a noble goal the Great Capitalist Peace is an ideal that simply can never be achieved. This is because universal peace is not possible no matter the mechanism used to achieve it. While I believe that the Great Capitalist Peace, in which all people have a stake in the international economy, is the best hope at eliminating conflict to a certain extent. When all people have a stake in the global economy they will be less likely to jeopardize that prosperity through conflict and a relative peace will result. However, in certain situations the desire for conflict will exceed the desire to maintain trade relations and the nation will be willing to sacrifice its economic success for military struggle in hopes that it will obtain even greater success. Subsequently the Great Capitalist Peace will fail to eliminate all conflict.

Reflections on Week Ten

The main excitement of week ten for me was Embassy Trick-or-Treating on Halloween. Since I heard about it I looked forward to it, and it was really cool. It was fun to get to see all the embassies, as well as the reactions on people’s faces to the large groups of costumed college students walking around all afternoon. We were greeted warmly at the embassies we came to and received lots of compliments on our costumes. Wearing my Russian Ground Forces uniform, complete with gas mask, I got quite a few comments from embassy personnel, as well as several people on the street. In one embassy they took my picture, and in the South Korean embassy a man put a Snickers bar in my hand, clasped them together, shook my mask a bit, and exclaimed, “Holy shit!” I think we were both quite amused, he by the unexpected appearance of a fully-uniformed Russian soldier, and I by his reaction. One thing I was set on doing that day was going to the Russian Embassy to see what their reaction would be to my uniform. After several hours of bad directions and searching, I finally made it there with an exhausted Gunperi in tow. It was by far one of the biggest embassies in D.C. I knew they weren’t giving out candy, but I had hoped to see the reactions of the Russians and get a picture. I didn't see any embassy personnel outside, but I can bet all the guards were looking at me through the one-way glass windows in the guard building wondering what this American was doing. We went to take a picture, but were told it was not allowed by a voice over a small speaker near the entrance. I guess the fact that they used aggregate as a siding material is considered a state secret.

-Gregory Proulx

"other" or brother?

The quote " The man who finds his country sweet is only a raw beginner; the man for whom each country is as his own is already strong; but only the man for whom the whole world is as a foreign country is perfect" is somewhat misguided. It is my belief that "the man for whom each country is as his own" is the most perfect. The reasoning behind this is that this man would be inclined to look out for the best interests of every country, as he thinks of each as his own. On the contrary the man who approaches every country as a foreigner could be trying to exploit every country as he considers none of them his own. Therefore the first man would be the one more likely to carry himself in a morally responsible manner because he would see everyone as his equal and none as the "other" , while the second would be more likely to see himself as above all those he encountered. So the question is which is more perfect: to think of every man as your brother?, or to think of every man as "other". Who would you treat kinder? Who is more likely to trade with you, help you, merge with you to become stronger? I think we can all agree that the answer would be your brother and that the more perfect man is he who sees each country as his own.

The Question of Poverty

Does the government have an obligation to address poverty? Is this a legitimate issue for public policy to take on?

Absolutely.

Throughout human history, poverty has always been a persistent issue. In ancient and medieval societies, the wealth gap between rich and poor was enormous. The wealthy minority was composed of royalty and high-level clergy, while the majority was composed of poor peasants. As history has progressed this system of economic polar opposites has lessened somewhat, due to numerous factors including new technology, ideas, and practices. The “first world,” or countries that are technologically-advanced democracies whose citizens have a high standard of living, include countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and those of Western Europe. The economic class structure in many of these countries consists of a large middle class and smaller low and high classes. However, it should be noted that this does not indicate a global decrease in poverty; instead, it highlights a shift in these countries from exploiting domestic labor to exploiting foreign labor. The North-South gap is a lasting legacy of such colonial imperialism. Millions of people live in abject poverty with no access to clean water, proper nutrition, medical care, education, and the myriad of other things that we in the United States take for granted. I think tackling the monumental challenge of poverty is possibly one of the most pressing obligations of the world’s governments. Not only is it a monumental challenge, but it is one governments and people everywhere must address so as to build a better, more equal and just future for all mankind.

-Gregory Proulx

Fevers and Reflections

When I reflect back on this week, there isn't too much to reflect on. I was sick, I slept a lot, I couldn't really do much of anything.....doesn't make for that much of a reflection; but it did get me thinking.
Think back to a time when you were really sick. You probably didn't have much energy, and you probably felt pretty awful. You may have vomited until all that came up was a watered down form of stomach bile. You may have had a fever so high that the room wouldn't stop spinning. You definitely stayed home, or got sent home from school. You may have been hospitalized. You may have gotten medication, maybe it helped a lot maybe it helped a little - but chances are it helped some. You may have been cold, in which case you used a ton of blankets - you may have still been cold but hey, you tried.....or some one tried for you. Chances are you had some one to take care of you. If you didn't have someone to take care of you then you probably had some where that you could be where you didn't have to do much, if anything. If your reading this, then you got better.

For people living in severe poverty, this wasn't the case. They may have felt the same as you, at first. Then you got medicine, and they didn't. You got blankets, and they didn't. You had a hospital to go to if it came to that, chances are, they didn't.

When we try to rank what issues are most important when addressing global poverty, it is all fine and well to say the education will solve all the problems....but a person cannot get that education if they cannot get to school. They can't get to school if they don't have roads to get there, and they certainly can't walk down the roads if they are too sick to stand. While there is certainly an order of things that people need it is unquestionable that basic needs: food, water, shelter, and overall physical health are the most important. Imagine if you felt the worse you've ever felt. Some people feel that way every day. Think about it.

Deadly Legacy: The Soviet Union’s Ravaging of the Environment

The Russian Federation faces a variety of societal problems. Government corruption and suppression of democracy are rife, and human rights violations abound. The Russian military faces numerous operational challenges, including low morale and budgetary problems. Issues regarding Chechnya and terrorism continue to plague the government. Crime and drug use are on the rise, and the population is declining at an alarming rate. Such issues are well-known, often making their way into the public’s eye via the Washington Post or BBC news.

However, one, lesser-known but equally serious issues it that of Russia’s ecological malaise.

The environmental legacy of the Soviet Union is one of mind-boggling disregard and destruction. Soviet industries operated unhindered by environmental regulations which, although stringent, were seldom enforced, releasing massive amounts of pollution into the air, land, and water. In fact, the former Soviet Union is home to some of the world’s most polluted places. The Blacksmith Institute, an environmental organization dealing with pollution problems, ranked Sumgayit in Azerbaijan, Dzerzhinsk and Norilsk in the Russian Federation, and Chernobyl in Ukraine among the top 10 in its annual report, “The World’s Worst Polluted Places: The Top Ten of the Dirty Thirty” (The World’s Worst Polluted Places 6). Of the further twenty locations, six are located in the former Soviet Union. Pollutants at these sites include heavy metals, chemicals and toxic byproducts, harmful particulate, and radioactive materials, which have resulted in increased mortality rates and a myriad of health problems, such as cancer, genetic defects, and respiratory diseases. Still worse is the fact that many sites like these exist across the country. However, industry was not the only source of pollution—agriculture was also to blame. Poor farming practices resulted in major erosion, and the improper use of pesticides—tons of which lie abandoned across the country—contributed to contamination of the soil and water.

The Soviet armed forces also contributed significantly to the destruction of the environment, regularly dumping old munitions, jet fuel, and other hazardous wastes without regard for the health of the environment or citizenry. Clandestine dumping of chemical weapons was widespread, and took place at locations such as the pine forests of Leonidovka and the Baltic Sea. Lev Fedorov, activist and president of the Union of Chemical Safety, estimates that the Soviet military dumped half a million tons of chemical weapons between the end of WWII and the late 1980s, tens of thousands of tons of which still sit buried in “unmarked and still undisclosed graveyards” throughout the former Soviet Union (Hoffman). Military facilities with huge stores of deadly chemical weapons slated for destruction also dot the country, such as those at Gornyy, Maradykovsky, and Shchuchye (“SGP Issue Brief”). The Soviet Navy had the particularly appalling practice of nuclear disposal at sea, dumping large quantities of radioactive waste and submarine reactors with spent fuel into the Barents and Kara Seas, the Seas of Japan and Okhotsk, and the North Pacific Ocean (Steinhardt et al 9-11). Many decommissioned Soviet nuclear submarines sit rusting in port and awaiting dismantlement, adding to the threat of further contamination or accidents. Norway has raised concerns about accidents at Andreyeva Bay, a storage facility for radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel of the Russian Northern Fleet located 45 kilometers from the Russian-Norwegian border and 100 kilometers from Murmansk, and the Bellona Foundation has labeled Andreyeva “a ticking time bomb” after research confirmed the possibility of an uncontrollable chain reaction, and small nuclear explosion, at the facility (Alimov). Radiological pollution at Russian nuclear weapons facilities was and continues to be endemic, as highlighted in a publication by the Pacific Northwest Center for Global Security:

“Three of Russia’s nuclear materials production sites, referred to historically as Chelyabinsk-65, Tomsk-7, and Krasnoyarsk-26, have accounted for over 95 percent of the world’s radioactive waste released to surface and subsurface water systems” (qtd. in Fuller and Leek).

Unsound operating practices and accidents have plagued these facilities, further adding to the threat they pose to the environment and the local population. One of the most serious accidents occurred at Chelyabinsk-65, home to the Mayak Chemical Combine, in 1957 when a radioactive waste storage tank exploded, contaminating some 20,000 square kilometers of land and exposing over 272,000 people to radioactive fallout (Kudrik et al 66-69). This accident, as well as numerous others, has earned Chelyabinsk-65 the infamous reputation of being the most radioactively polluted spot on the planet. Another accident at Tomsk-7 in 1993 resulted in the contamination of 100 square kilometers of land (Kudrik et al 78). Various other sources of radioactive pollution, such as the approximately 1,000 radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) built to power remote navigation beacons and lighthouses, remain scattered throughout the former Soviet Union, posing lingering health and environmental risks.

Unfortunately, this trend of criminal disregard for environmental protection and human health still continues to a large degree. Many of Russia’s industries continue to function as they did in Soviet times, unfettered by environmental regulations which remain inadequate or unenforced. A recent plan was hatched by Minatom, Russia’s nuclear ministry, to receive foreign shipments of nuclear waste at Chelyabinsk-65 in an attempt to raise much-needed funds; however, this plan was condemned in 2002 by Gosatomnadzor, the ministry’s own nuclear regulator (“Russian Regulators Condemn Own Ministry”). Russia’s pristine forests are facing the threat of increased logging, and the accelerated extraction of natural resources, such as oil and gas at the Sakhalin I and II projects, risks further environmental destruction.

With all this in mind, a prudent question to ask is what is being done about these issues? Many NGOs, such as Greenpeace Russia, the Blacksmith Institute, and the Bellona Foundation, are working towards remediating the ecological devastation of Soviet times. Governments and international organizations, including the United States, Norway, the World Bank, and the European Union, are also helping the Russian Federation by providing environmental assistance in the form of funding and joint cleanup programs. However, many challenges still remain. The Soviet government’s tradition of hostility towards the environmental movement continues to this day, with activists often facing harassment, beatings, and arrest at the hands of Russian authorities. Many are suspicious of government involvement in the beating death of a Siberian anti-nuclear protestor in July 2007 (Kopeikina). Years of Soviet rule also bred indifference towards the well-being of the environment, a trend persistent in many of the former Soviet republics. It is important that the international community continue and expand efforts to deal with the ecological damage caused by the Soviet Union, as well as work to foster environmental consciousness. Such efforts will benefit not only the Russian Federation and the former Soviet republics, but the greater global community by preventing further environmental tragedies like those at Mayak and Chernobyl and building a better, cleaner future for the next generation.

-Gregory Proulx

Works Cited

Alimov, Rashid. “Andreyeva Bay is a Ticking Bomb, Bellona’s Documents Prove.” Bellona Foundation. Trans. Maria Kaminskaya. 7 June 2007. 15 Nov. 2007 <http://www.bellona.org/articles/andreyeva_ticking_bomb>.

Fuller, James L., and K. M. Leek. United States. Pacific Northwest Center for Global Security. Department of Energy. Debt for Ecology: a Concept to Help Stabilize Russian Nuclear Cities. 2001. 11 Nov. 2007 <http://www.nti.org/e_research/official_docs/labs/debt_ecology.pdf>.

Hoffman, David. “Wastes of War: Russia’s Forgotten Chemical Weapons.” Washington Post 16 Aug. 1998. 13 Nov. 2007 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/coldwar/leonidovkaa.htm>.

Kopeikina, Victoria. “Investigators Seek to Frame Environmentalists in Attack on Siberian Ecological Protest Camp.” Bellona Foundation. Trans. Maria Kaminskaya. 8 Aug. 2007. 14 Nov. 2007 <http://www.bellona.org/articles/angarsk_attack>.

Kudrik, Igor, Charles Digges, Alexander Nikitin, Nils Bøhmer, Vladimir Kuznetsov, and Vladislav Larin. The Russian Nuclear Industry: The Need for Reform. Bellona Foundation, 2004. 14 Nov. 2007 <http://www.bellona.org/filearchive/fil_Bellona_2004_RedReport.pdf>.

“Russian Regulators Condemn Own Ministry Over Nuclear Dump Plans.” Greenpeace International. 21 June 2002. 12 Nov. 2007 <http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/russian-nuclear-dump-plan-cond>.

“SGP Issue Brief: Implementing Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia.” Strengthening the Global Partnership. Center for Strategic and International Studies. 15 Nov. 2007 <http://www.sgpproject.org/publications/SGPIssueBrief/Annex%201.PDF>.

Steinhardt, Bernice et al. United States. Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division. Government Accountability Office. Nuclear Safety: Concerns with Nuclear Facilities and Other Nuclear Facilities and Other Sources of Radiation in the Former Soviet Union. Nov. 1995. 11 Nov. 2007 <http://www.gao.gov/archive/1996/rc96004.pdf>.

The World’s Worst Polluted Places: The Top Ten of the Dirty Thirty. New York: The Blacksmith Institute, 2007. 9 Nov. 2007 <http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/wwpp2007/finalReport2007.pdf>.

Reflections Week XII

This week’s class was interesting with the use of two simultaneous conversations, one using AIM and the other natural. To be honest, however, I was not a huge fan of the distraction that came with the two types of conversation because, even though I was not part of the AIM chat, the entire time I was very curious as to what was being said electronically. I regret not joining the online chat because I think I might have shared my thoughts more spontaneously, as compared to the more directed discussion of the isolation group. Some of the comments made during class seemed, from my point of view, to stem from the online conversations and sometimes tied into the discussion, yet it was apparent that the two conversations were touching on different material. As a result, I thought the spectrum of ideas brought up out loud did not always follow the directed discussion, which could be positive, yet often the shared ideas seemed more scattered than they followed a focus. The online chat seems to be a great conversational tool, especially to brainstorm the ideas of many people effectively in a short period of time, yet I think the discussion might be most effective if the whole class was involved in only one method of interaction.

reflection week 12

The discussion on Tuesday with the online chat going throughout the discussion was, I think, the most interesting part of this week. I was skeptical at first, since I’m not really technologically savvy, as to whether the online chat would benefit or hinder our discussion. I was pleasantly surprised to realize that the online chat really did contribute to our discussion. I felt like I was able to better contribute to the discussion on the chat because I could get my ideas out before I was able to forget them and before the topic moved on. Often in discussions there are so many hands raised that it takes time before you are able to speak and then you have either forgotten your point or it is completely irrelevant. However, with the online chat I felt like not only was I able to express my views but I also heard from many different people both on the chat and in class. Therefore many more different opinions were aired and I think it added a new dimension to the discussion which was refreshing. I definitely think this is a worthwhile format that should be used again in this class, if time permits, and certainly in future classes.
All week I have been wondering about the world politics significance of Conquest of America and the visit to the Museum of the American Indian. Initially it seemed like a domestic issue to me rather than one of world politics. I see now many of the connections that were not initially apparent. First of all I think it is telling that the United States, a major world power, would not exist as it does had the native civilization not been destroyed. This does not mean that the action was justified but I think it means that sometimes good results can come from horrible actions. Also the book chronicles an historical clash of civilizations and it illuminates how various cultures respond to one another and how conquest happens. This is critically important in today’s world because nations need to be wary of the consequences both for their own nation and for others when the seek conquest. Furthermore the aspect of cultural interaction is pertinent anytime an individual or group encounters and new culture. By knowing what our responses tend to be we can hopefully morph them into something that is more constructive for all parties involved.