Friday, November 29, 2002
posted by Mooraq at 3:57 PM
The Ghost of Days Past I personally do not find this so strange or hypocritical, the world was a different place twenty years ago. A dirty war was fought on several fronts, and human rights concerns were always coming second to more pressing worries about containing Russia and Iran in their middle-east ambitions. But often, as in Saddam's case, short term tactics can jeopardise long term goals. History may not repeat itself but often it rhymes. At present the US and the rest of the civilized world are fighting another battle, not against Russia but against terrorism. The incentive again might be to take shortcuts, supporting unsavory regimes for short-term gains. Let’s not make the same mistake we did few years ago, condoning bad regimes for good reasons. Today’s crooked allies will become tomorrow’s real threats (Saudi may be a strong candidate for this award). The war on terror will never be completely won until the last country in the world will be fully democratic and free. Turning a blind eye on dictators that keep poisoning the minds of their subject is a sure recipe for future trouble.
On why the US has to be careful on the allies it chooses
Declassified State Department documents, the IHT reports, show that Donald Rumsfeld, at that time Reagan’s special envoy to the Middle-East, basically approved Saddam’s use of chemical weapons against Iran and the Kurds. Apparently the same weapons that Saddy was using at the time with US blessings are now the main reason why the US wants him out for good.
posted by Mooraq at 3:51 PM
It’s a small world Searchers globally are increasingly attracted by similar words, brands and celebrities. It is also possible to find interesting patterns about how news and fashions spread through the world in a wave-like form. It’s good news that we are getting closer to each other, it’s not so good news that Britney Spears is driving our integration.
The world is getting smaller, just ask Google
First link of the day to the IHT for an article about what people are searching for in Google.
Thursday, November 28, 2002
posted by Mooraq at 1:28 PM
An Economist’s View People were much less careful about their stock purchases. Another reason is that the public and the government went wild with the idea that we should have very free markets. But free markets mean you have more regulation and more monitoring. If you keep your toddler in a playpen, you don’t need to monitor them. When you let the toddler out of the playpen, you need to watch them much more. I agree, most people (including no-global and free-market ayatollahs) think that free-market means a lawless world while exactly the opposite is true. A free market is one where clever and sensible regulation allows the market to be really free and not manipulated by few insider players.
A short interview with George Akerlof
Check this interview out if you are interested in all things economics. I particularly like the quote (about the reason why Enron and co. happened):
posted by Carla Passino at 8:28 AM
Happy Thanksgiving
Have a wonderful holiday
I give thanks for my family
And all the happy things we do together
Wednesday, November 27, 2002
posted by Mooraq at 5:27 PM
A Tragedy of Unbelievable Proportion Somebody asked me a few days ago what good is humanitarian aid, since it all goes into the hands of dictators. I believe that we have to be careful about how aid is distributed and utilized, but even if some of it ends up in some thieves pockets we still cannot turn our heads away from a calamity of this magnitude.
The African continent is slowly dying of AIDS, the developed world should do more to help
New figures from the UN show that over 30 million people in Africa are infected by AIDS. An entire generation is being swept away as almost 1 out of 10 adults is infected. Economic and social effects are still difficult to estimate correctly but will surely be massive and could delay the development of southern Africa for many years.
posted by Carla Passino at 12:27 PM
The Most Brilliant Politician of our Time
Why Tony Blair is muddled, hypocritical, superficial - but brilliant nonetheless
Contemporary Britain is "a spoilt and materialistic" country and Tony Blair is its perfect leader. Peter Oborne paints a rather dire picture of British society in this week's The Spectator: muddled, complacent, hypocritical, it wants "to be led, but taken nowhere." Which is exactly what Tony Blair excels at doing, in Oborne's view.
"Blair offers a contemporary version of Victorian hypocrisy: moral purpose which makes powerful demands neither on himself nor on the voters," he writes. "The Prime Minister makes us feel good about ourselves, but behind it all there is an ethical miasma that makes no searching demands." Interestingly, this criticism, which comes from the political editor of an established right wing magazine, mirrors the very issues - Blair's political opportunism, his betrayal of fundamental Labour principles and his overwhelming desire to compromise - which make some fringes of the Labour party so uncomfortable with their own Government, and which are so eloquently condemned by left wing journalist Sholto Byrnes in the same number of The Spectator.
"When did power become the end and not the means? Why is there no trace [in Blair's Government] of the idealism that always characterised the Left?" laments Byrnes. The answer, I guess, lies in the fact that, when the old Labour party wholeheartedly embraced the sort of idealism advocated by Byrnes, Britain had 18 years of consecutive Conservative governments. Sure enough, power was not 'the end' at the time - but it wasn't 'the means' to achieve anything either, because it simply wasn't anywhere near the Labour party.
The harsh truth, and one which the more seasoned Oborne doesn't fail to see, is that elections are won or lost by wooing the middle classes, who, by their very nature, tend to be moderate and self-serving. When the Conservatives held the political centre ground, they won and Labour lost spectacularly. When Labour took the centre ground from under the Tories' feet, the reverse happened.
While there is no real substance to him, Blair is a successful Prime Minister because he understands the British people, their needs and their wants - something which could not be said of old Labour (remember their opposition to the 'right to buy'?) or the bulk of today's Conservative party. Perhaps because I espouse some of the 'suburban middle class' culture that Oborne rejects, I disagree with his implication that the British people are a bunch of bland and benevolent brats. But he is right when he says that Blair "is, quite simply, the most brilliant politician of our time."
posted by Mooraq at 10:44 AM
America and the New Imperialism Two quotes: “the question the world now confronts is whether largely anarchic relations between sovereign states can be allowed to endure given threats from terrorism…..to weapon of mass destruction. If not what should replace them?” A very good question that needs further reflection and which Mr. Wolf does not address completely. In the modern era, international institutions provide legitimacy and so offer the means through which the US can secure and other states can justify support. Multilateralism makes sense, not because it is necessary if the US is to win wars, but because it is essential if it is to win a subsequent peace. Very well put, reflects exactly my opinion as discussed in previous posts (here, here and here) and endless discussions in response to P.
A v. good analysis on the FT
Excellent article (requires registration) on the FT by Martin Wolf. In short, it says that America is engaging in new form of imperialism (meant in a positive, not derogatory, way), especially in the Middle-East region. The US must then realize that 1) they are taking a commitment for the long run 2) different from the Imperialism of old, this new form of imperialism is not self-justified by brute force but only as a part of a global Wilsonian effort at shaping the world according to democratic and liberalistic values.
Tuesday, November 26, 2002
posted by Mooraq at 5:24 PM
Good News on the Free-Trade Front Today two announcements helped rekindle the spirit of those that believe free-trade can make this world better for all of us. US trade representative Robert Zoellick unveiled a proposal to reduce aggressively tariffs, hoping to kick start a fresh round of negotiation for the Doha agenda. At the same time the EU announced a big breakthrough in the process of creating a real single-market for electricity across the EU. In a world currently starved for good news these are two remarkable stories. They might not sound as much but they could be the signal of greater things to come, at the very least they show that the commitment to free-trade is not dead.
US and Europe are moving in the right direction
It has a been a gloomy year so far for free-trade. First came the subsidies for farming and steel that the President formerly known as pro-free-trade Bush introduced, then the postponement of the CAP reform by the EU until 2006. The no-global front was dancing, free trade suddenly sounded sooo XX century.
posted by Carla Passino at 10:05 AM
New Party for Britain
A group of conservative businessmen has launched a new centre-right party which could eat into what remains of the Tory vote
Breakaway Tory supporters have launched a new political party "to pull Great Britain back together into a united, effective and progressive country."
The rationale behind the launch is that Britain has never had it so bad and that none of the current parties is able to address the dramatic issues that the country is facing. The picture the founders paint on their website is particularly gloomy and somewhat at odds with the rampant plenty that we see every day in London's well decked out streets. The British economy is sick, society is crumbling, and our democracy is failing. A telltale sign of this, they say, is the "ever lower turnout for the elections" - an interesting reinterpretation of the West's growing lack of interest in politics which is more usually put down to wealth and high standards of living.
Exactly who 'they' are, however, remains a mystery. The brains behind the new party are as yet unknown, preferring to let their policies speak for themselves. Their site declares that they are "people who, well qualified by experience, are committed to taking difficult decisions in a competent, detached and professional manner." According to the Sunday Times, one of them is a leading Scottish industrialist and former Tory donor, who - disaffected with his own party and disillusioned with Blair's government - has gathered together a group of businessmen with similar political views.
Broadly summed up by the Sunday Times as "centre right, one nation" approach, the group's philosophy shares some core values with the Conservatives. It identifies the unrestrained growth of the welfare state and the EU as a major culprit of Britain's current crisis, and calls for a smaller state. However, it also advocates building a caring society where "as many people as possible receive the education and example needed to allow them to be trusted with their own destiny."
If it does take off - and it's a big if because the funding required to launch a successful political operation is huge - the breakaway party could attract Tory modernisers and eat well into what remains of the Conservatives' electorate. But it would also court moderates whose votes have swung to New Labour in the last two elections.
The New Party for Britain certainly represents one more headache for troubled Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith. Whether it is one more reason for Tony Blair to celebrate, however, remains to be seen.
 |
|