In the 18-century you were old at 30, dead by 40 and the state of medical science was leeches. Broken bones were crudely splinted but, wounds were often an agonizing end. Medical science from the east had been condemned by the church and forgotten.
Global warfare during the 19th century greatly advanced medical science and treatment. Experiments on the casualties built a curriculum for new generation of Doctors. By the beginning of the 20th century these doctors understood how little they really knew about medicine. Even more brutal wars in foreign lands led these doctors to new insights on saving lives.
By the 21st century technological advances in medicine make it possible to keep even the dead, alive. Medicine has become big business and everyone must pay for all the pumps, ventilators, medication, bedpans and around the clock monitoring that keep the body technically alive. Insurance companies are all to ready to pull the plug, while hospitals vote to keep the body alive as long as paitents’ money holds out. Medical personnel stand ready to recycle poor soul’s parts and drug companies invent a more expensive cocktails that promises to raise the dead. Med-business tabulates the profits, forecasting population growth as greater prospects for share holders. The bottom line, the rich get taken, the poor are left in the dust while the middle class goes broke paying Band-Aid freight.
Medical care is on the political agenda this year. Debate centers on the cost and who gets the most Band-Aids. The lines are drawn, insurance companies (vested interest), drug companies (vested interest), Med-businesses (vested interest), medical personnel (vested interest). Who represents the injured and ill, not the legislature (vested interest) looking for votes in the fall?
In an affluent and civilized society necessary medical care should be available to all without social bankruptcy. Debate should really consider what is really necessary care for quality of life. A broken leg, fix them all. Civilizations destroying contagious plague, cure them all. How about a butt lift, or social overhaul while you are unconcious, two operations for one anesthesia, with three you get egg rolls.
There is clearly a need for health care reform but who is best able to draft those reforms, the imperial health care industry or an imperial government? Neither vested interest is capable of objective resolution of conflicting patient interests. All proposals raise the cost of treatment and fail to cure the malady. We are back to the age of leeches now sucking bucks from patients’ wallets.
The medical buzz around a hospital is to have a living will for your treatment. Who do you trust as executor, a government bureaucrat or a Med-business bureaucrat or a prospective heir, maybe even a disinterested stranger walking down the hall? It’s time for serious debate on quality of life care rather than technical possible care.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Ownership 0031510
The financial bull is in the china shop. Both the bull and the shop are now owned by China (PRC). The United States is not the greatest debtor in the world when consider against its GDP but according to government economist it is the greatest debtor in real dollars.
The problem of economics can be linked to the development of computers, now every theorist can crunch their own favored numbers for favored outcomes. That said, comparing debt/GDP of the United States’ 54% against China’s 18% indicates a disparity between the two. America is carrying three times the debt of China. China is also one of the fastest growing economies at 8.7% GDP while America dropped into negative returns in 2009. The U.S. projections are that in the next five years its the Debt/GDP ratio will grow between 15 and 45 % depending on who’s numbers are used, but the trend is to greater debt.
There is little wonder then that the Bush administration went to China to borrow operating funds (selling bonds). China already held massive amounts of American debt and in self-interest had to prop up the dollar. Still faced with a shaky economy the Obama administration has approached the Chinese about devaluing those bonds by financial manipulation. China strongly opposes the figurative ten cents on the dollar deal, which makes their good faith investment a bad debt. Did the U.S. government hire two many Lehman Brothers’ bankers?
Already on a fast track it appears that China will pursue its own economic model. China is building an economic market that may eventually be closed to U.S. participation. China’s Premier Wen Jiabao acknowledges that China economy is in transition and fragile. A massive American default could rip the fabric of growth for a period but the cost to America would be greater.
For most of this century China has been out making friends, providing aid and inking resource agreements around the world. China has oil agreements with Iraq, Sudan, Canada, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile and is building a pipeline across Afghanistan linking to CAS and Iranian oil fields. America on the other hand finds an increasing number of oil producers are not friendly either on geo-politics and ideology. The Bush missteps in attempting to take over friendly oilfields further alienated producers. America’s history of supporting dissent and encouraging ethnic insurrection in foreign lands while suppressing it at home does not encourage world trust.
In two years seven of the nine seats at the center of Chinese power are up for election. It is the campaign season in Beijing and reversing the American playbook, nothing looks better for a politician than to be tough on the West. Expect China to assert itself, it will not step lightly on the world stage. Chinese memories are long and western exploitation is still fresh in living memories.
The problem of economics can be linked to the development of computers, now every theorist can crunch their own favored numbers for favored outcomes. That said, comparing debt/GDP of the United States’ 54% against China’s 18% indicates a disparity between the two. America is carrying three times the debt of China. China is also one of the fastest growing economies at 8.7% GDP while America dropped into negative returns in 2009. The U.S. projections are that in the next five years its the Debt/GDP ratio will grow between 15 and 45 % depending on who’s numbers are used, but the trend is to greater debt.
There is little wonder then that the Bush administration went to China to borrow operating funds (selling bonds). China already held massive amounts of American debt and in self-interest had to prop up the dollar. Still faced with a shaky economy the Obama administration has approached the Chinese about devaluing those bonds by financial manipulation. China strongly opposes the figurative ten cents on the dollar deal, which makes their good faith investment a bad debt. Did the U.S. government hire two many Lehman Brothers’ bankers?
Already on a fast track it appears that China will pursue its own economic model. China is building an economic market that may eventually be closed to U.S. participation. China’s Premier Wen Jiabao acknowledges that China economy is in transition and fragile. A massive American default could rip the fabric of growth for a period but the cost to America would be greater.
For most of this century China has been out making friends, providing aid and inking resource agreements around the world. China has oil agreements with Iraq, Sudan, Canada, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile and is building a pipeline across Afghanistan linking to CAS and Iranian oil fields. America on the other hand finds an increasing number of oil producers are not friendly either on geo-politics and ideology. The Bush missteps in attempting to take over friendly oilfields further alienated producers. America’s history of supporting dissent and encouraging ethnic insurrection in foreign lands while suppressing it at home does not encourage world trust.
In two years seven of the nine seats at the center of Chinese power are up for election. It is the campaign season in Beijing and reversing the American playbook, nothing looks better for a politician than to be tough on the West. Expect China to assert itself, it will not step lightly on the world stage. Chinese memories are long and western exploitation is still fresh in living memories.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
GOD Gap 030110
Its official there is a “God Gap” in American foreign policy. According to a two-year study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, American foreign policy is handicapped by narrow, ill-informed and "uncompromising Western secularism" that feeds religious extremism, threatens traditional cultures and fails to encourage religious groups that promote peace and human rights.
The Council is not alone in its findings a number of previous government studies support their findings. Senior scholars have long noted that the government has failed to understand the roll of religion in many parts of the world. In 1998 Congress passed the International Religious Freedom Act making religious freedom a U.S. foreign policy priority. Of course Congress' focus was only on freedom for Christians.
Richard Cizik notes that some parts of the world are particularly sensitive to the U.S. government's emphasis on religious freedom and sees it as a form of imperialism. The current wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan began as religious wars of Saintly Christians against Demonic Muslims. Senior American officers preached that Islam was next to devil worship and invading soldiers desecrated Islamic relics, holy places and insulted religious leaders. The United States has been slow to adjust to the global role of religion not only in the Middle East but also Latin America, Africa the Far East even to domestic religious turmoil.
Religious warfare is not new. In 1096ce, 200 years of Catholic Crusading began against Muslims. Today it is ignored that the Crusaders killed probably more Christians than Muslims. It is also forgotten that the crusades began because a Roman pope wanted to bring all Christendom under his power and his soldiers wanted only loot. The eight crusades in the “Holy Land” were followed by brutal crusades across Europe. Martin Luther put a match to the fuse in 1517 with his (Protestant) thesis leading to French religious wars, and 400 years of Irish warfare that is still on and off. America was founded with a principle of religious freedom but has been less than free with a history of religious persecution of Indians, Catholics, Jews and any other group not of an accepted Protestant faith.
In the mid 1940s when the issue of Israel and Palestine was being hotly debated at the United Nations, the American ambassador stated he could not understand why the two parties could not sit down as Christian gentlemen and settle their differences. The Jews and Muslims looked at each other asking how Christians settled disputes and have been killing each other ever since.
The Council’s report was intended as a call to accept religious differences in foreign affairs. It is probable however that the religious right will seize on the report as justification of their particular brand of fundamentalism. The 21st century is in danger of being the century of religious warfare. A century where all sects invent their own Joan of Arc rallying the fateful to kill for a GOD.
The Council is not alone in its findings a number of previous government studies support their findings. Senior scholars have long noted that the government has failed to understand the roll of religion in many parts of the world. In 1998 Congress passed the International Religious Freedom Act making religious freedom a U.S. foreign policy priority. Of course Congress' focus was only on freedom for Christians.
Richard Cizik notes that some parts of the world are particularly sensitive to the U.S. government's emphasis on religious freedom and sees it as a form of imperialism. The current wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan began as religious wars of Saintly Christians against Demonic Muslims. Senior American officers preached that Islam was next to devil worship and invading soldiers desecrated Islamic relics, holy places and insulted religious leaders. The United States has been slow to adjust to the global role of religion not only in the Middle East but also Latin America, Africa the Far East even to domestic religious turmoil.
Religious warfare is not new. In 1096ce, 200 years of Catholic Crusading began against Muslims. Today it is ignored that the Crusaders killed probably more Christians than Muslims. It is also forgotten that the crusades began because a Roman pope wanted to bring all Christendom under his power and his soldiers wanted only loot. The eight crusades in the “Holy Land” were followed by brutal crusades across Europe. Martin Luther put a match to the fuse in 1517 with his (Protestant) thesis leading to French religious wars, and 400 years of Irish warfare that is still on and off. America was founded with a principle of religious freedom but has been less than free with a history of religious persecution of Indians, Catholics, Jews and any other group not of an accepted Protestant faith.
In the mid 1940s when the issue of Israel and Palestine was being hotly debated at the United Nations, the American ambassador stated he could not understand why the two parties could not sit down as Christian gentlemen and settle their differences. The Jews and Muslims looked at each other asking how Christians settled disputes and have been killing each other ever since.
The Council’s report was intended as a call to accept religious differences in foreign affairs. It is probable however that the religious right will seize on the report as justification of their particular brand of fundamentalism. The 21st century is in danger of being the century of religious warfare. A century where all sects invent their own Joan of Arc rallying the fateful to kill for a GOD.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Overloaded 022310
Pundits, executives and politicians have lauded the advent of an information age as the golden advancement of civilization. Ancient agrarian societies gave way to industrial societies. During the latter half of the 20th century however, advanced industrial societies began to collapse when faced with free market world competition. Rather than adjust to new dynamics, leaders of developed States heralded the information society where no one worked but all talked, as the savior of their exalted status.
During the Dark Age information was tightly controlled by an oligarchy of clerics and lords. Information was disseminated from pulpits or shouted out as royal edicts. This limited information of course supported only the interest of the oligarchy. There was an information explosion around 1439CE when Gutenberg invented his printing process. People learned to read priests lost their lock on religion and kings lost their monopoly of governance. Information advanced ideas; leaders like Martin Luther and Oliver Cromwell led increasingly enlightened populations from the oligarchy’s oppression.
For nearly 500 years the printed word served to free people, the most notable was the 18th-19th century revolutions that freed the west from Old World oppressions. Small towns had morning and afternoon papers. Cities had dozens of each with multiple editions and extras that informed. The printed word advanced science where ideas were shared and built upon. This information sharing led to inventions of telephones and radio. Telephones equally served business and gossips and radio provided news and entertainment. Reality became confused as when Orson Wells broadcast the War of the World and America panicked. Radio was powerful because it linked the listener’s own imagination to reports. Radio became the ideal instrument for propaganda for people believed what they thought they heard and couldn’t reread its reports. There was still the books and papers for the discussion.
Television sold soap and flipped burgers along with its news and entertainment, blending all into a competing societal misinformation mire. Now nothing is news unless there are pictures but the pictures don’t go along with the stories and the screen is cluttered with simultaneous advertisements and unrelated notes, charts and crawls. People who get their news only from TV are less informed than those who received no news. TV is the toy of politicians, sound bites, photo ops and spin-doctors, dis-information rules.
Scientific exchange became the Internet now carrying e-chats, twit notes (twitter), personal videos and phones link into a molasses of ignorance. The hallowed newspapers are closing their doors because increasing numbers of non-readers prefer light shows and entertainment to facts, explanations and reason. Reason is lost in a stormy sea of contradictions.
After 600 years the oligarchy of political media masters are again gaining control of the message. The information age heralds an Orwellian world of an oppressive technological Dark Age. Obey their message!
During the Dark Age information was tightly controlled by an oligarchy of clerics and lords. Information was disseminated from pulpits or shouted out as royal edicts. This limited information of course supported only the interest of the oligarchy. There was an information explosion around 1439CE when Gutenberg invented his printing process. People learned to read priests lost their lock on religion and kings lost their monopoly of governance. Information advanced ideas; leaders like Martin Luther and Oliver Cromwell led increasingly enlightened populations from the oligarchy’s oppression.
For nearly 500 years the printed word served to free people, the most notable was the 18th-19th century revolutions that freed the west from Old World oppressions. Small towns had morning and afternoon papers. Cities had dozens of each with multiple editions and extras that informed. The printed word advanced science where ideas were shared and built upon. This information sharing led to inventions of telephones and radio. Telephones equally served business and gossips and radio provided news and entertainment. Reality became confused as when Orson Wells broadcast the War of the World and America panicked. Radio was powerful because it linked the listener’s own imagination to reports. Radio became the ideal instrument for propaganda for people believed what they thought they heard and couldn’t reread its reports. There was still the books and papers for the discussion.
Television sold soap and flipped burgers along with its news and entertainment, blending all into a competing societal misinformation mire. Now nothing is news unless there are pictures but the pictures don’t go along with the stories and the screen is cluttered with simultaneous advertisements and unrelated notes, charts and crawls. People who get their news only from TV are less informed than those who received no news. TV is the toy of politicians, sound bites, photo ops and spin-doctors, dis-information rules.
Scientific exchange became the Internet now carrying e-chats, twit notes (twitter), personal videos and phones link into a molasses of ignorance. The hallowed newspapers are closing their doors because increasing numbers of non-readers prefer light shows and entertainment to facts, explanations and reason. Reason is lost in a stormy sea of contradictions.
After 600 years the oligarchy of political media masters are again gaining control of the message. The information age heralds an Orwellian world of an oppressive technological Dark Age. Obey their message!
Friday, February 19, 2010
Political memory 021810
(from a conversation with old curmudgeon friends)
One of the advantages of age is that we are expected to, and now can afford to, voice our contrarian views. Age also allows us the advantage of learning to live with ourselves, viewing our actions objectively even while we may continue to act subjectively. We may not have seen it all, but we’ve seen enough to recognize the past when it comes around again. Maybe memory loss is not such a bad thing.
The natural enemies of governments are the people governed. This is true whether we consider State governments, political parties, trade unions or corporate management. Eventually organizations come to view those governed sole purpose is blind support the governors. My (country, party, union, company), right or wrong, is still mine, is the march to oblivion.
America was an experiment of change and innovation. This questioning of the status quo led to advancements for mankind. Rejection of the past allowed two bicycle mechanics to fly but even they fell victim to the disease of governors when they attempted to obscure the contributions of others to age of flight. Finally their small kingdom was steam rolled by greater innovations when they failed to adjust.
Economic adjustment is the challenge that governors are failing to face. One fact is ignored by parties and people. Governments have no money, make no money, or advance civilization. States’ wealth picks the pockets and minds of their populations. States’ populations are their sole resource. When the cry is to throw public money at a perceived crisis or quite the masses with infusions of government largess, it drains that resource. Debt, public or private, is not a bad thing when it is incurred as and investment in the future to be paid for in timely manner. Debt incurred by deficit spending (planning to spend more than foreseeable income) for non-essential programs without planning for future payment, burdens future generation with declining standards and negative growth. Someone must pay and the only ones to pay are the people. When grandchildren are left to address their ancestors’ follies they are forced into a systemic Dark Age that precedes the rise of new orders.
Great powers are not destroyed but rather rot from the inside till they are no longer able to support their own weight. Governments, parties and corporations could stop their rot but will not as long as their focus is organizational self-interest rather than the real requirements of the people that foot the bills.
Those that govern must face the fact that they exist to serve their publics rather than the other way around. The bills are now due. Exploitation of the bill payers has carried the world to a crisis of economic warning that can only get worse without responsible governance. It is sad that irresponsibility continues to rule politics and business.
I may not remember how it came to pass or I may pass before the final melt down but darkness is on the horizon. Before the question of “can we afford it” must be asked “do we really need it, is there a better way?” Who will light a lamp?
One of the advantages of age is that we are expected to, and now can afford to, voice our contrarian views. Age also allows us the advantage of learning to live with ourselves, viewing our actions objectively even while we may continue to act subjectively. We may not have seen it all, but we’ve seen enough to recognize the past when it comes around again. Maybe memory loss is not such a bad thing.
The natural enemies of governments are the people governed. This is true whether we consider State governments, political parties, trade unions or corporate management. Eventually organizations come to view those governed sole purpose is blind support the governors. My (country, party, union, company), right or wrong, is still mine, is the march to oblivion.
America was an experiment of change and innovation. This questioning of the status quo led to advancements for mankind. Rejection of the past allowed two bicycle mechanics to fly but even they fell victim to the disease of governors when they attempted to obscure the contributions of others to age of flight. Finally their small kingdom was steam rolled by greater innovations when they failed to adjust.
Economic adjustment is the challenge that governors are failing to face. One fact is ignored by parties and people. Governments have no money, make no money, or advance civilization. States’ wealth picks the pockets and minds of their populations. States’ populations are their sole resource. When the cry is to throw public money at a perceived crisis or quite the masses with infusions of government largess, it drains that resource. Debt, public or private, is not a bad thing when it is incurred as and investment in the future to be paid for in timely manner. Debt incurred by deficit spending (planning to spend more than foreseeable income) for non-essential programs without planning for future payment, burdens future generation with declining standards and negative growth. Someone must pay and the only ones to pay are the people. When grandchildren are left to address their ancestors’ follies they are forced into a systemic Dark Age that precedes the rise of new orders.
Great powers are not destroyed but rather rot from the inside till they are no longer able to support their own weight. Governments, parties and corporations could stop their rot but will not as long as their focus is organizational self-interest rather than the real requirements of the people that foot the bills.
Those that govern must face the fact that they exist to serve their publics rather than the other way around. The bills are now due. Exploitation of the bill payers has carried the world to a crisis of economic warning that can only get worse without responsible governance. It is sad that irresponsibility continues to rule politics and business.
I may not remember how it came to pass or I may pass before the final melt down but darkness is on the horizon. Before the question of “can we afford it” must be asked “do we really need it, is there a better way?” Who will light a lamp?
Friday, January 29, 2010
Nuremberg’s shadow O12810
An ongoing investigation of the United Kingdom’s role in the invasion of Iraq has opened a window into the backstage maneuvers of the governments leading up to the war. A great many documents are now available for inspection and testimony of leading UK politicians are exposing flawed justifications for the attack on a sovereign nation.
International legal scholars have long held that the invasion was not justified under international law and was in fact contrary to international law and the UN charter. The Bush administration rejected this position and repeatedly attempted to force the UN to sanction its strike on Iraq. Seeking allies for its intended course of action the administration resorted to a massive dis-information program to cloak illegality in a fog of known false claims.
The British inquiry has discovered that legal opinions in the UK also concluded that such action was illegal and based on false claims. Political pressure was brought to bear on both the intelligence and legal establishment to support Prime Minister Tony Blair’s decision to side with the Bush administration. Bush and Blair attempted to coerce a justifying resolution from the UN Security Council but failed.
During the Cold War both America and the Soviet Union generated proxy coups to overthrow sovereign governments. Direct foreign invasions to effect regime changes however have been acknowledge as illegal since WW II. No matter how odious and onerous a Saddam Hussein may be no state has the unilateral authority to dispose him. This appears an objective of invasion as Gordon Brown (current Prime Minister) states the attacked lacked plans for reconstruction that would allow Iraq to recover.
Whatever the outcome of the inquiry its ramifications will resonate through international affairs. While America is a founding member of the UN and its world court, America has repeatedly opted out of their jurisdiction. Using Nuremberg findings over half a century ago member states have generated a body of laws governing interactions between states. Although a number of cases have appeared before the world court on these laws, there is now precedent for abrogation of those laws. Eventually the international community will decide on matters of law and justice.
It is unlikely that the UK inquiry or any future American investigation will produce any immediate clarity or implement international reforms. Ultimately however shredded documents and “lost” computer drives documentation will become available. The proliferation of copy machines and electronic mail has resulted in most records surviving political efforts to rewrite a politically acceptable history. A future change in the international power structure may decide that compliance to international law is important to all states and punish past transgressions.
When it was in its interest America established the precedent that there is no statue of limitations on crimes committed during modern warfare.
NOTE: During his testimony Blair admitted that Saddam’s WMD program and links to al-Qaida were non-existent. However, he continues to argue that the war was justified because Saddam could not be trusted. Blair, now serves as peace envoy to the Middle East, stated that Iran now poses a similar danger of WMD and terrorism. The question is whether Blair has the credibility to drive the UK into another invasion?
International legal scholars have long held that the invasion was not justified under international law and was in fact contrary to international law and the UN charter. The Bush administration rejected this position and repeatedly attempted to force the UN to sanction its strike on Iraq. Seeking allies for its intended course of action the administration resorted to a massive dis-information program to cloak illegality in a fog of known false claims.
The British inquiry has discovered that legal opinions in the UK also concluded that such action was illegal and based on false claims. Political pressure was brought to bear on both the intelligence and legal establishment to support Prime Minister Tony Blair’s decision to side with the Bush administration. Bush and Blair attempted to coerce a justifying resolution from the UN Security Council but failed.
During the Cold War both America and the Soviet Union generated proxy coups to overthrow sovereign governments. Direct foreign invasions to effect regime changes however have been acknowledge as illegal since WW II. No matter how odious and onerous a Saddam Hussein may be no state has the unilateral authority to dispose him. This appears an objective of invasion as Gordon Brown (current Prime Minister) states the attacked lacked plans for reconstruction that would allow Iraq to recover.
Whatever the outcome of the inquiry its ramifications will resonate through international affairs. While America is a founding member of the UN and its world court, America has repeatedly opted out of their jurisdiction. Using Nuremberg findings over half a century ago member states have generated a body of laws governing interactions between states. Although a number of cases have appeared before the world court on these laws, there is now precedent for abrogation of those laws. Eventually the international community will decide on matters of law and justice.
It is unlikely that the UK inquiry or any future American investigation will produce any immediate clarity or implement international reforms. Ultimately however shredded documents and “lost” computer drives documentation will become available. The proliferation of copy machines and electronic mail has resulted in most records surviving political efforts to rewrite a politically acceptable history. A future change in the international power structure may decide that compliance to international law is important to all states and punish past transgressions.
When it was in its interest America established the precedent that there is no statue of limitations on crimes committed during modern warfare.
NOTE: During his testimony Blair admitted that Saddam’s WMD program and links to al-Qaida were non-existent. However, he continues to argue that the war was justified because Saddam could not be trusted. Blair, now serves as peace envoy to the Middle East, stated that Iran now poses a similar danger of WMD and terrorism. The question is whether Blair has the credibility to drive the UK into another invasion?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Not to smart 011910
With the collapse of the Soviet Union came the end of the cold war. American neo-conservatives saw this as a great military victory and developed a new international strategy. This strategy concluded that the United States was so powerful that it could dictate to the world, which had no option but to obey.
The truth however was that the Soviet collapse was not the result of an American military victory but rather the collapse of Soviet central planning economic model. One that failed to adapt to a new generation of Russians demanding their piece of the pie.
In 2003 political scientist Joseph Nye coined the term “Smart Power” as a counter to advocates of Soft Power and Hard Power. A country’s soft power includes its culture; values and policies, however it depends on the perceptions of other states that the culture and values are attractive and policies are consistently and legitimate. Hard power is more easily understood as overwhelming force applied freely. Smart power requires intuitive analysis of issues and alternative courses, which assist policy makers to align tactics with objectives for more effective strategies.
Bush, ‘the younger’, and his entourage counted regiments concluding that the American strategy should only be applications of hard power. In the wake of 911 the United States had the opportunity to achieve most of its international objectives through smart power. Instead the Bush administration unilaterally deployed hard power while demanding other states get on board or become targets. Oil producers and religions were already on the target list. European and Asian states were insulted, cooperation and support dried up and the administration discovered that it did not have enough regiments for its multiple taskings. The military became politicized and American foreign policy became a military prisoner, not to smart when seeking international legitimacy and allies.
When an earthquake struck Haiti (011210) America was presented with another opportunity to regain some of the eroded standing. Here was a purely humanitarian crisis just off the American shore and the United States had experienced crisis teams but instead its military staged an invasion. The military took over Haiti’s air space and refused landings of other countries’ assistance. Among them were, international evacuations flights, a complete field hospital “but it was French”, Brazil’s support for it own forces stationed in Haiti. and denied support for third country nationals. The American Navy had a fleet off shore with medical capabilities but its helicopters were not allowed to pickup casualties. The Air Force did make a token bomb run on survivors with water and rations in the same manner that failed in Afghanistan. Not very smart applications of power for a nation facing increasing power competition.
Immense international pressure was brought on military arrogance and the international community finally wrestled control of humanitarian efforts. The administration is faced with the embarrassment of apologizing to Haitians and insults to others. It is time to purge the Bush hard-liners from the military and employ some foreign policy smarts.
The truth however was that the Soviet collapse was not the result of an American military victory but rather the collapse of Soviet central planning economic model. One that failed to adapt to a new generation of Russians demanding their piece of the pie.
In 2003 political scientist Joseph Nye coined the term “Smart Power” as a counter to advocates of Soft Power and Hard Power. A country’s soft power includes its culture; values and policies, however it depends on the perceptions of other states that the culture and values are attractive and policies are consistently and legitimate. Hard power is more easily understood as overwhelming force applied freely. Smart power requires intuitive analysis of issues and alternative courses, which assist policy makers to align tactics with objectives for more effective strategies.
Bush, ‘the younger’, and his entourage counted regiments concluding that the American strategy should only be applications of hard power. In the wake of 911 the United States had the opportunity to achieve most of its international objectives through smart power. Instead the Bush administration unilaterally deployed hard power while demanding other states get on board or become targets. Oil producers and religions were already on the target list. European and Asian states were insulted, cooperation and support dried up and the administration discovered that it did not have enough regiments for its multiple taskings. The military became politicized and American foreign policy became a military prisoner, not to smart when seeking international legitimacy and allies.
When an earthquake struck Haiti (011210) America was presented with another opportunity to regain some of the eroded standing. Here was a purely humanitarian crisis just off the American shore and the United States had experienced crisis teams but instead its military staged an invasion. The military took over Haiti’s air space and refused landings of other countries’ assistance. Among them were, international evacuations flights, a complete field hospital “but it was French”, Brazil’s support for it own forces stationed in Haiti. and denied support for third country nationals. The American Navy had a fleet off shore with medical capabilities but its helicopters were not allowed to pickup casualties. The Air Force did make a token bomb run on survivors with water and rations in the same manner that failed in Afghanistan. Not very smart applications of power for a nation facing increasing power competition.
Immense international pressure was brought on military arrogance and the international community finally wrestled control of humanitarian efforts. The administration is faced with the embarrassment of apologizing to Haitians and insults to others. It is time to purge the Bush hard-liners from the military and employ some foreign policy smarts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)