The world is often guilty of ignoring Africa. There are many local or regional conflicts which have the potential of threatening all of us. Marc Linville suggests that we look at the following article on Uganda. Let us know what you thik. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070302/ap_on_go_ot/us_uganda
Labels: A Continent Adrift
posted by Dipak K. Gupta at 4:54 PM
18 Comments:
The world is always forgetting Africa it seems as if the conflicts currently happening throughout the continent are of no interest to the American media. As an African woman myself it baffles me as to why, Africa's ethnic conflicts usually garner a small paragraph in the newspaper or no news at all. The conflicts going on in Uganda, Darfur are the ones we are now hearing about but their is so much other conflict that know one talks about. Is it because Africa is seena as a failed states, are the countries itself to blame or the companies who have ravaged the continent for its natural resources but have more often than not never given a thought to the conflicts in the countries which they get their goods from. Whatever the case may be the continent is heading into the 21st century in utter turmoil.
The Pinochet Case
I attended the lecture series about the Pinochet Case and the Globalization of Justice. I had heard of the Chilean dictator Pinochet because of the media attention brought about by his death but had never heard of him before. Peter Kornbush the lecturer spoke about the apprehension of Augusto Pinochet one of the most cruel and barbaric dictators in Latin America. His arrest changed how the international commnunity would deal with human right violations caused by dictators. The Pinochet case became a precedent for the arrests and capture of other dictators around the world, in parts of Africa, Asia and surrounding nations in Latin America. Augusto Pinochet was not only a symbol of hate but he became to his people after years and years of suffering a symbol of death and destruction. The case was very important on the immunity that government officials are accountable for crimes committed, and are subject to scrutiny from the outside world. Mr. Kornbush also said that although Pinochet was released in Britain after his case was dismissed. His return to his native Chile was also plagued by rising disdain within the Chilean population with the dictator and his government. One lawyer Juan Guzman filed an appeal in Chilean court that the dictator be stripped of his protection and tried in Chilean courts. Augusto Pinochet later died in December of 2006 while under house arrest, but many people under him still alive along with his family have been tried and sent to jail. The Pinochet Case has been a precedent for the international world to fight for justice, and let government officials across the globe that killing and torturing your own people are crimes that they will be tried for regardless of their standings. Since his death many top generals have been convicted.
The Pinochet case goes along well with what we've learned in class especially concerning ethnic conflict in different parts of the world. Dictators such as Pinochet at times suppressed their minorities to the point that they formed a different ethnic identity than the majority. Constant oppression seems to take a toll. The focus in these times is on terrorism that it almost seems like we are turning are backs on outsing and trying dictators. Saddam Hussein was was overthrown but not for the reasons of justice for the people. His assumed link to Al Quaeda and Osama Bin Laden brought about his downfall. Although he was finally tried for his murdering of thousands of Kurdish people after his botched assassination attempt in the early 1980s, blaming him for September 11th is what really brought him into the courtroom.
It was very interesting to learn about the Pinochet Case and its implications around the world and how that case has really made a big change in the case of international justice. It was a very interesting lecture.
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...
John Shimkus
Polysci 370
Gupta
April 17, 2007
Dr. Pranab Bardhan Lecture
Dr. Pranab Bardhan’s lecture Thursday, April 12, focused on globalization and its connection to world poverty. With poverty being at the forefront of media attention and public awareness, it is a topic that begs the question, “why is such a large percentage of the world’s population living below the poverty line?” According to many, globalization and the exploitation of poorer nations is ultimately to blame. However, Bardhan argues a different perspective. According to Bardhan, globalization can actually work to help the poverty stricken, insofar as proper legal measures are taken to protect their best interests at an international level.
The argument against globalization is that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. This is true to a certain degree, yet one must examine the opportunities offered in such a scenario to those who may have had no opportunities prior. Dr. Bardhan discusses sweat shops and the understandably negative stigma attached to them. Yet he offers a counterfactual test in asking, “would sweatshop workers be better off without these jobs?” The answer is no. In Southeast Asia, people line up at the gates of sweatshops for a chance to work there, and although the working conditions may be brutal, for many, it is far better than what the alternative may be. A recent child labor bill passed in the U.S. resulted in over 40,000 overseas child laborers losing their jobs. Though 10,000 thousand eventually made their way back into school, the other 30,000 were reduced to lower forms of labor such as stone-breaking and even child prostitution. If sweatshop work is a means by which the starving and homeless can afford at least the basic units of survival (food, water, and shelter), then perhaps it is better than no available work at all.
The fact of the mast is, however, that poverty stricken countries need to take steps toward ensuring the social security of their people. Government negligence is one of the main problems that the poor must combat, yet they cannot do it alone. It will take an international effort to aid in those regions that do not have the means to create a stable economy. These peoples cannot receive credit or insurance, and thus are reduced to scraping by on daily wages, often unfairly taxed by local corrupt governments. The international community can step in and help offer social security through international banks or other funds; however, relief aid cannot be given to the leaders of these corrupt governments with the expectation that they will use it to build a more stable economy. Instead, other institutional measures must be put into place to aid the people directly.
It is these unstable economic regions that become breeding grounds for corporate entities to try and establish less-than-nominal working environments. Dr. Bardhan describes retail and other powerful corporate entities as cartels, saying the anti-trust movements have done little to prevent the monopolization of world markets. It is the competition and price fixing between these cartels that won’t allow them to stop utilizing sweatshops and child labor.
Dr. Bardham discusses a number of solutions which may prove beneficial in combating poverty and expanding the positive influences of globalization on poverty stricken regions. There needs to be a reduction rich-country protection of goods produced in poor countries (i.e. give the producers of the goods some steak in the price of the good). There must be stronger anti-trust action against monopolistic retailers. The international community must align in creating products that are suitable for the poor and assist them in international negotiations. Finally, there must be quality certification for international products produced by the poor.
In conclusion, Dr. Barnham’s lecture on globalization and world poverty claims that poverty is not a direct result of globalization, and that if the proper steps are taken, globalization can open doors to new opportunities for poverty stricken societies. Although his perspective on sweatshops being somewhat beneficial may seem outrageous, his argument is valid: these people would be far worse off without them. Yet, as a college student, one expects a professor from such a prestigious school as Berkley to give an enthralling lecture, and though informative, Dr. Barnham’s lecture fell short of evoking the emotion that the topic discussed should have, thus leaving little on what should have been a lasting impression.
Reese Stewart
Poli Sci 370
Lecture Write Up
On March 22, 2007, I had the opportunity to attend a lecture given by Loretta Napoleoni on “Globalization: Transnational Terrorism and Crime.” Napoleoni, expert in research and describing financiers in support of global terrorism, discussed the past five decades of modern terrorism with its roots in armed struggle revolving around money. According to Napoleoni, the deregulation of finance has allowed terror networks to deeply penetrate legitimate institutions of the international financial system. While a main point of discussion around terrorism is its root causes, I felt that Napoleoni’s discussion of financing held some valid points in that without funding, the backbone of terrorism would be absent. The United States is in an armed conflict with terrorism when its main concern should be targeted on a terrorist network’s source of income.
Napoleoni covered such terrorist organizations as Al-Qaeda, discussing the intelligence services global effort to break the notorious network’s code. Their main goal is to break the code in order to obtain information which could deter future terrorist attacks as well as gather information leading to the financiers behind the network. These jihadist investors range from wealthy Saudis to modest donators who have helped in funding such terrorist plots as the London suicide mission.
I was very impressed with Napoleoni’s knowledge of the secretive Al-Qaeda network along with her keen insight as how to infiltrate the terrorist organization. While many scholars in terrorism are looking into the root causes of terrorism, I believe Napoleoni keeps a realist eye into monitoring methods on how to topple operating networks. I believe it is a very important part of counterterrorism measures in looking into what causes terrorism to take place but I feel it to be equally important in discovering what makes them fall apart.
Political Science 370
Understanding the Terrorist
In Dr. John Horgan's discussion of terrorism, he argues that the psychological profiling of individual terrorists is a waste of time. Rather, one should focus on the process of how people get involved in terrorism and then disengaged or remain in it.
Terrorist profiling is a consequence of successful terrorism. After a successful terrorist operation, we want to know why they did what they did. We are searching for some sort of explanation. We imagine that they must be abnormal, different, sick or crazy in order to commit such an atrocity. Actually there is very little to differentiate a terrorist from a normal person. Another downfall of terrorist profiling is that it fails to capture important factors, such as the kinds of things that happen to an individual as they become a terrorist, the pull-factors leading an individual to join a terrorist organization, how individuals move from role to role within the terrorist organization, and the attractions, which may offer the individual a "higher cause" to work for.
Involvement in terrorism can mean different things. Consequently, when profiling, one ought to focus on roles and functions within terrorist organizations and how these affect the people involved, rather than profiling terrorists individually. One ought to ask how and why people get involved, remain involved, and cease to be involved, as well as the implications which the answers to these questions imply.
There are risk factors which my make individuals more susceptible to partaking in terrorism. These include the experience of victimization, identity, socialization, opportunity, and expectations of involvement. Even so, if an entire group of people experiences all or some of the abovementioned factors, that does not necessarily mean that everyone in the group will become involved in terrorism. Very few people become terrorists. Factors which encourage increased involvement in terrorism are group processes, confirmation of initial expectations, prior commitment, propaganda, and ideology.
To answer the question "What makes a terrorist?" one ought to look into how and why someone gets involved, how someone goes from becoming involved to being involved, what happens once they are a member, and what happens to encourage disengagement from terrorism. This provides a more accurate portrait of a terrorist than does mere individual profiling.
Juan Fernando Meza
Political Violence
It seems that almost every state of Africa has conflicts. States like Congo, Ghana, and Rwanda. There is no doubt that these conflicts are not a major problem on the eyes of United States. Or could it be that it’s not on America best interest to intervene. Cecilia mentioned information of the events in Africa is almost non existent. And the little information available is a short segment or few sentences and no more.
But it’s great that universities are providing classes like Political Violence, where students are exposed to different ethnic conflicts around the world. Courses that lets us put human value on individuals and groups that are suffering
Sonia Carrillo
Political Science 370
April 17, 2007
Prof. Gupta
Dr. Pranab Bardhan
Globalization and World Poverty
In Dr. Bardhan lecture he addresses the issues of Globalization and how it has helped or hurt a country and what people think about it. Although there are many meaning for globalization but a common cliché that is herd in the media as well as those protesting in the street is that “Globalization is making the rich country richer and the poor poorer. In a way this has not helped those that really need the help, which make is seems like it is useless, that is if it not really helping anyone. Although he believes this can cause many hardships for the poor nevertheless, he also believes that it can also open many great opportunities. Which some countries can utilize but there are countries that do nothing about it and that is why citizen of these countries do not believe that globalization is working the way it should be. In general, while globalization is in the sense of opening the economy it can also wipe out some existing jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities for the poor and for small enterprises; and this is what the poor and small business worry about. Thus it may be said that for developing countries globalization is often not the main course of their problem, contrary to the claim of the critic’s globalization; just as globalization is often not the main solution, “to these problems, contrary to the claim of some over-enthusiastic free traders.” Moreover, these countries largely depend on their domestic politics and economic institutions, as well as their net outcome which is often quite complex and almost always context-dependent, belying the glib pronouncements for or against globalization made in the opposing camps.
Furthermore the abundant poor country is modified by various factors. The first factor being that Globalization is helping increase the elasticity of labor demand in any given country may reduce wages; lower the bargaining power of unions, and the increase of jobs insecurity. As well as workers mobility issues are very important, that is constrains of infrastructure and credit market imperfection, labor market regulations. Lastly tariff decline sometime and that is why it is in the highest in labor-intensive industries. Overall there are winners and losers, but the job anxiety for most works goes up.
In his lecture he also mention how people in the third world like Asian countries, South American, Latin American as well as Africa are being exploit in the work force and are not given any health benefit and are almost treaty like animal. Children at an early age start to work in order to help provide or provide for there family. Many time children are the worst victim because they are force to do unsafely things because they are small and fit almost anywhere. In addition they have no one that would stand up for them, or simply they themselves do not say anything because they really need the money, for whatever reason. Although in the United State people view this as being bad and can not believe that it is still happening in the twenty first century. This led me to the question “who is really at to fault.” Of course we can always point figure at each other but is there anything done about the problem, so less people would have to go thought it. Moreover is the manger/owner of these factor that make these individual work under poor conditions, or is it the American that are willing to pay for a certain item and knowing where it comes from. But many times we forgot it that it’s not as bad as it might seem because at least theses individual have a job and are bringing some sort of income which benefit everyone. Even though they are not getting paid enough for their services, but least they have a job, considering that these factory can go any where but they did choose to make their product there. All in all it not as bad as many people might put it.
In short he talked about the impact it has made in trade on the poor workers and the producers. He suggests that working towards a reduction of rich-country protection on good produce by the poor. To organize more substantial financial and technology transfer and international adjustment assistance for displaced workers and farmers. Thus Globalization is helping increase the elasticity of labor demand in any given country may reduce wages, lower the bargaining power of unions, and the increase of jobs insecurity exports.
Brennan Okusako
Political Science 370
Tuesday 4-640
Gupta
Lecture Series
I attended the lecture titled “Global Rise of Religious Violence” by Mark Juergensmeyer on April 5th and the lecture by Ching Kwan Lee titled “The Labor of Globalization: How Chinese Workers Confront 21st Century Capitalism?” on April 19, 2007. I have decided to write my lecture series summary on Ching Kwan Lee’s lecture. She discussed many different aspects of the Chinese labor force and their rise in the interests of capitalists throughout the world. Amazingly, China has been able to increase their economy at a consistent rate of 10% each year.
One of the biggest things going for China is the size of its labor force compared to the rest of the world. China’s workforce makes up 29% of the global labor force. With labor readily available, China has taken a surprising angle of attack to increase their economy and become a major competitor in the world. China has made a conscious effort to win “The Race to the Bottom” which is when countries compete for the lowest labor costs so that capitalists will want to invest and build manufacturing plants in their country. So far, China is winning the race, but with low labor costs comes poor working conditions and wages. In China’s effort to win “The Race to the Bottom” they have received a lot of negative publicity and are thought to be a big reason for a decrease in standards of the labor force.
China has the lowest hourly wages for manufacturing in the world by far. While the United States averages $21 per hour and Mexico averages around $4 per hour, China has an average of $0.64 per hour for manufacturing costs. I knew that labor costs were cheap in China after all the majority of the big companies are manufacturing in or moving to China these days, but I had no idea how cheap the labor was. It is ridiculous to think that there is a $20.36 difference per hour of labor for manufacturing between the United States and China. To make things even worse, Ching Kwan Lee said that around 72% of migrant workers in China have suffered non-payment at one time or another. Is it not enough that companies are paying their workers less than a dollar an hour that they feel the need to withhold payments as well? This is absolutely ridiculous.
Along with the low wages, in China’s attempts to keep labor costs down to attract capitalists, they have kept the standards for working conditions low as well. Working conditions are dirty, unsafe, and consist of long hours. China’s working conditions are so bad that they have been compared to the sweatshops of England at the start of the Industrialization era over 100 years ago. Although, the sweatshops existed in a time when England’s manufacturing was probably similar to China’s current situation, there is no reason why it should be. Companies that invest in manufacturing in China should not take advantage of cheap labor and treat humans as if they are expendable. They are humans and if China will not make efforts to improve the working conditions the investing companies should take some type of initiative. There is no way that these companies would ever consider operating in a similar environment in their home country so although they have gone overseas for cheaper labor that does not give them the right to treat people like dirt.
It is sad to hear about the conditions in China. The Government’s tactics for rising to the top of the manufacturing sector of globalization makes the situation even worse. Their inattention to unsafe working conditions, long hours, and extremely low wages is setting them up for even more confrontation than they already experience. The Government is going to have to step up sooner or later and make changes to improve the conditions for their workers. Whether China changes their ways or not, I think it is up to the investing companies to take it upon themselves to improve the working conditions for their workers.
Marc Linville
Political Violence 370
Gupta
Lecture Series
Lost Boys of Sudan
The world today often ignores the harsh realities occurring within third world countries. It is only when such stories are told when we can come to grasp such atrocities. We hear of such events through the story of Benson Deng, a survivor of a group of young children called “The Lost Boys of Sudan.” After attending Benson Deng’s lecture series, he opened a new door and shed light on a huge atrocity I knew little about.
The Lost Boys of Sudan remains to be an international rescue committee which relocates refugee boys from Sudan to the United States. Located in Africa, Sudan is Africa’s largest country. It was during the Second Sudanese Civil war when such atrocities occurred. Omar Bashir, Sudan’s current president is not a name that is highly heard, but since his tenure as president he has killed more people than Osama bin Laden. During this civil war, villages were pummeled and many were killed during the nights. Denson tells his story about how he and many others left and became know as the “lost boys”.
In his experiences as a ‘lost boy’ Benson explained how during the raids on his village and nearby ones as well, 450,000 were killed and 3-5 million were left homeless. This resulted in Sudan’s largest genocide in history. With thousands of children wondering aimlessly Benson reminisces upon the walk of the lost boys. Most of the boys were separated from their families when the government sent in troops which attacked the villagers in southern Sudan. Benson explains that the young boys were able to survive because they escaped into the jungles, and marched in large packs. The ‘lost boys’ went from relief camp to relief camp in countries like Kenya and Ethiopia evading the civil war. Their marches lasted years, Benson recalls. During these long marches the boys faced many hardships and obstacles; starvation, wildlife, disease and dehydration were only a few of the physical hardships. Benson recalls some instances where children were eaten alive buy wildlife during their marches. During the civil war, the women were taken mainly as slaves, and many were killed and raped.
The United States brings over 90 ‘lost boys’ and gives them a place to live for two months rent free. After the two months they are forced to get a job and pay there own expenses, which includes reimbursing the group back for the airfare. Before they make their long journey to the United States, the lucky chosen ones are taught many skills on how to adapt to American life. In 2001 alone, approximately 4000 ‘lost boys’ arrived in America, given a second chance at life. Of those 4000 ‘lost boys’ they are scattered around 38 cities. The program became halted after the events of 9/11 but then in 2004, the program started again.
It was a privilege to listen to Benson Deng’s story of being a ‘lost boy’ his stories were that of bravery, heroism, and the will to survive. Benson Deng’s journey as a ‘lost boy’ was also made into a narrative, They Poured Fire on Us from the Sky: The True Story of Three Lost Boys from Sudan. At the end of Benson’s lecture he finished off by playing a song he wrote and played it on his makeshift musical instrument he made while on his marches. It is important that the United States gets involved in instances like these, providing the less fortunate at a better chance at life.
Trevor Szczygiel
Professor Gupta
Political Violence
7 May 2007
Aboubakr Jamai Lecture
On April 26th, 2007 Aboubakr Jamai spoke for the Understanding Globalization lecture series. This series is sponsored by the Fred J. Hansen Distinguished Lecture Series and the Charles Hostler Institute on World Affairs. Jamai’s lecture was titled “Globalization and Freedom of the Press: The case of Morocco. It focused on how the Moroccan government does not give very much freedom of the press and how it is very much against any news outlet that does not view it in a positive light. Jamai is the editor of one of the largest independent newspapers in the Arab world, called Le Journal. It features articles that in many instances are critical of the current regime in Morocco. As a result, his paper has been shut down two times and is always walking a fine line as two whether or not to print certain articles. The government of Morocco has many ties and contracts with large business in Morocco and thus has forced them to not advertise on Jamai’s paper. As a result, the paper is in constant need of money and cannot print every day, as Jamai would like. This also forces the paper to be very expensive and not as readily available to everyone. This has kept the paper in constant money problems. Jamai says that you cannot have half a freedom of the press paper and half not. It must be all or nothing and as a result, his paper is forced to fight for advertisers. Globalization is a good thing for freedom of the press and has allowed for more voices to be heard over greater distances.
Globalization has helped the freedom of the press greatly. Jamai says that in the case of his country, the regime is very concerned with how it appears to other countries. With so much access to the entire world at all times, a country like Morocco must always be aware of what actions it takes. Without such globalization, Morocco could completely stop the publication of this paper and not many people would realize that they had curtailed freedom of speech in the country. With the globe aware of the events of every country so keenly and readily, papers as Le Journal are allowed to survive, although barely. The Moroccan government can not censor the press and at the same time look good or appear free. Morocco has to let other voices be heard and allow for at least some criticism as a result. Even if the paper was allowed to operate pre-globalization, its scope would have been much smaller. With globalization, freedom of the press has never been greater. Everyone in the entire world can now read small, independent papers and opinions due to the fact that the internet is available almost everywhere. As such small papers gain footing and notoriety, due to globalization and the availability of it, it becomes increasingly tough to get rid of the paper.
Jamai argues that globalization is good for the press. It allows everyone to have a voice, big or small. No one can be completely shut out without the rest of the world noticing. Globalization has allowed for a certain degree of protection that otherwise would not have been allowed or tolerated by the oppressing regime. Globalization has not allowed for complete freedom of the press, but it has allowed for greater expansion of the rights of the press. Before, Al Jazeera and the state run or monitored media was the only way to stay informed in the Arab world. Now there are many other ways to stay informed and connected. Jamai kept on track throughout the lecture and was never dull and did not seem long-winded. He gave excellent answers to several audience questions and was very insightful. He was able to hold the attention of the audience very well as well.
Sarah Beaver
Lecture Series Review
Globalization and Prejudice
Jeff Victoroff - USC
I attended the lecture series ages ago in January, however am just now getting around to posting on the blog, so i am working from notes mostly rather than memory. Professor Victoroff spoke of the Islamic movement and its ramifications around the world. He stated that, "Europe has become a field of Jihad and it may be the part of the world where America faces the greatest threat from Islamic extremism". The Islamic Fundamentalists' violence stems from a millennium of perceived injustice and loss of place. The terrorists however, are just a certain subset of a group identity who express disliking of and conflict with an other group of violence. Then turning towards individuals and perceived intergroup conflict, one must recognize a combination of cognitive and emotional valences which make every human. The ability of someone to perceive conflict determine one's actions. Prejudice is an ancient and brain based phenomenon. Conflicts over identity and territory maintained by prejudice may very well, then, last forever.
Jason S. Oh
04/26/07
Political
Science 370
Prof. Gupta
On Thursday, April 19, 2007 I attended the lecture “The Labor of Globalization: How Chinese Workers Confront 21st Century Capitalism?” at Hardy Tower by Professor Ching Kwan Lee of Princeton University and I have chosen her lecture to write my lecture series summary on.
Just a few decades ago, China was a huge, poor country whose communist-based economy was floundering and its central government was struggling to offer its people a decent way of living. Today in the 21st century, China has now become a economic juggernaut (4th – GDP ) whose transformation into a capitalist state has made it the fastest growing nation in the world whose global influence is only second to the U.S. One of the things China has been able to do is take advantage of the huge workforce that it currently has. Due to its massive population, China has the biggest labor force in the world and its government has decided to use this to increase their economy and became a mayor player in the international market. The Chinese government believed that countries around the world especially in the West such as the U.S., Canada, the European Union will want to invest in China due to its low costs and huge labor force and they were absolutely right. Every year, China has been able to increase their economy at a staggering rate of 10% and has become the country with the most foreign investments in the world surpassing the U.S. China is becoming the largest trading partner with many countries such as the U.S., the European Union, Australia, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea.
Nevertheless, despite the huge gains and accomplishments that China has been able to make over the years, one of the troubling things that has happened is the terrible exploitation of its workers. Many Chinese labor workers make very little money in some cases less than a dollar per hour, have no rights whatsoever and work in terrible working conditions. The professor said that the majority of migrant workers about two-thirds have had their wages withhold at least once. As the inequality of wealth increases and the gap between rich and poor gets bigger, many people are becoming more disenfranchised which is causing huge tensions many resulting into riots and protests. The professor said that in 2005, there were an estimated 87,000 riots in China and in 2003 almost 2 million workers including retirees and laid off workers joined and participated in unions. In the Province of Liaoning from 2000-2002, 830,000 people were involved in 9,559 incidents and in the Shenzhen Province which has about 7 million workers there were an average of 2 or more strikes a day since 1998.
China’s rapid rise in the past 40 years to global economic dominance is truly amazing and very remarkable. However, China must make a better effort in improving the conditions of its workers because the way they are treating them now is truly unacceptable. China has one of the worst human rights record in the world and for China to truly become a respected member of the international community they must improve the living standards of its people. In addition, many of these foreign corporations who are attracted to China’s low costs and cheap labor are also responsible for the continuing abuse and exploitation of Chinese workers. They should put more pressure on the Chinese government to take better care of its workers because no amount of money should be considered more important than the fair treatment of human beings.
Marc A Meyer
Prof. Dipak K. Gupta
Short Summary Paper
7 May 2007
Pranab Bardhan: Globalization and Global Poverty
I was lucky enough to attend Dr. Pranab Bardhan’s discussion about the correlation between global poverty levels and globalization. It seemed to me that Dr. Bardhan’s main point was that the media tends to blame globalization for the decrease in poverty world wide. He expresses doubt that globalization is the sole driving force that influences global poverty rates. He does agree that globalization is one factor, but he contends that it is only one of the many factors that have an effect on global poverty rates.
First and foremost was the fact that in some nation-states poverty was on a rise. Mainly these nations were in Africa, but what this shows is the fact that globalization is not helping all of the world’s poor, a myth that globalization proponents like to spread. Some could even argue that globalization is helping the rich get richer, stay richer and the poor get poorer. Unfortunately globalization does not occur in all parts of the worlds equally so there are a disproportioned group of people that receive the benefits of globalization. Along this same train of thought Dr. Bardhan also made it clear that it is not possible to blame poverty on globalization. Many of these regions were poor way before globalization ever came about.
Secondly is the fact that some nations began to decrease their poverty levels way before globalization was even talked about. Dr. Bardhan gave the example of china, which had it’s biggest decreases in poverty in the 1980’s, and this was due to major changes in their agricultural system. Since China was able to produce more food, more efficiently their poverty rates decreased. This had nothing to do with globalization.
Another topic that Dr. Bardhan tackled was the status of sweatshops. He took a chance at almost advocating sweatshops. This is an argument that is very taboo in many circles. I commend him on addressing the issue. He did not explicitly condone sweatshops, but he did raise awareness about the fact that at least these people had jobs. He mentioned that millions of people world wide are displaced from their homeland, separated from their families, and most importantly unemployed because of labor shortages. As the old saying goes, “An idle mind is the devil’s workshop.” His main point about sweatshops is, “at least they have a job.” Sometimes these sweatshops provide the only income that many of these families will receive. It is important to understand that when one of these “sweatshops” is shut down, many wages are lost and people could go hungry.
One other thing that I enjoyed was Dr. Bardhan’s comparison of absolute numbers compared to the percentages. These numbers helped illuminate the real status of global poverty levels. This is interesting because some nations show a decrease in the percentage of people living under the poverty line. What these numbers do not take into account is the fact that population has risen in some of these countries. This rise in population affects the percentages. In some instances the percentage had gone down while the absolute number of people living under the poverty line increased or stayed stagnant. I am glad he pointed this out so that when speaking about the subject, proponents of either side can not cloud the argument.
I felt that Dr. Bardhan was more or less trying to tell all of us to keep our eyes and ears open when the conversation turns to the effects of globalization. In his opinion there is not enough evidence at this point to decide whether globalization is a path for positive change in the war against global poverty or whether globalization is to blame for creating a bigger economic gap between the rich and the poor. What he did seem to support was the fact that globalization s definitely here to stay, and that it does have some effect on poverty levels.
Marc A Meyer
Prof. Dipak K. Gupta
Short Summary Paper
7 May 2007
Pranab Bardhan: Globalization and Global Poverty
I was lucky enough to attend Dr. Pranab Bardhan’s discussion about the correlation between global poverty levels and globalization. It seemed to me that Dr. Bardhan’s main point was that the media tends to blame globalization for the decrease in poverty world wide. He expresses doubt that globalization is the sole driving force that influences global poverty rates. He does agree that globalization is one factor, but he contends that it is only one of the many factors that have an effect on global poverty rates.
First and foremost was the fact that in some nation-states poverty was on a rise. Mainly these nations were in Africa, but what this shows is the fact that globalization is not helping all of the world’s poor, a myth that globalization proponents like to spread. Some could even argue that globalization is helping the rich get richer, stay richer and the poor get poorer. Unfortunately globalization does not occur in all parts of the worlds equally so there are a disproportioned group of people that receive the benefits of globalization. Along this same train of thought Dr. Bardhan also made it clear that it is not possible to blame poverty on globalization. Many of these regions were poor way before globalization ever came about.
Secondly is the fact that some nations began to decrease their poverty levels way before globalization was even talked about. Dr. Bardhan gave the example of china, which had it’s biggest decreases in poverty in the 1980’s, and this was due to major changes in their agricultural system. Since China was able to produce more food, more efficiently their poverty rates decreased. This had nothing to do with globalization.
Another topic that Dr. Bardhan tackled was the status of sweatshops. He took a chance at almost advocating sweatshops. This is an argument that is very taboo in many circles. I commend him on addressing the issue. He did not explicitly condone sweatshops, but he did raise awareness about the fact that at least these people had jobs. He mentioned that millions of people world wide are displaced from their homeland, separated from their families, and most importantly unemployed because of labor shortages. As the old saying goes, “An idle mind is the devil’s workshop.” His main point about sweatshops is, “at least they have a job.” Sometimes these sweatshops provide the only income that many of these families will receive. It is important to understand that when one of these “sweatshops” is shut down, many wages are lost and people could go hungry.
One other thing that I enjoyed was Dr. Bardhan’s comparison of absolute numbers compared to the percentages. These numbers helped illuminate the real status of global poverty levels. This is interesting because some nations show a decrease in the percentage of people living under the poverty line. What these numbers do not take into account is the fact that population has risen in some of these countries. This rise in population affects the percentages. In some instances the percentage had gone down while the absolute number of people living under the poverty line increased or stayed stagnant. I am glad he pointed this out so that when speaking about the subject, proponents of either side can not cloud the argument.
I felt that Dr. Bardhan was more or less trying to tell all of us to keep our eyes and ears open when the conversation turns to the effects of globalization. In his opinion there is not enough evidence at this point to decide whether globalization is a path for positive change in the war against global poverty or whether globalization is to blame for creating a bigger economic gap between the rich and the poor. What he did seem to support was the fact that globalization s definitely here to stay, and that it does have some effect on poverty levels.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Juan Fernando Meza
Political Violence
Lecture of April 5th 2007
On April 5th, 2007 professor Mark Juergensmeyer of the University of California, Santa Barbara gave an eye opening lecture, where he emphasized that America has suffered and continues to suffer from terrorism. Unlike any other event in the history of the United States of America, the September eleven attacks on the World trade Center and the Pentagon has created an ever increasing concern among citizens from the USA and around the international community. But these attacks were minimal in quantity in comparison to the numerous attacks perpetrated by American internal terrorist groups. Groups like the Christian Militia, the KKK, anti abortionist groups have perpetrated many acts of terrorism in America. Also the ever increasing religious acts of violence around the world Like, the Militant Buddhism’s, Jewish terrorist, Christians terrorist and many more.
The attacks of the September eleven on America soil resulted with the largest loss of human lives on a single attack by a non military group. It was carried out by a cell of Al Qaeda, an international terrorist group founded by Fanatically Puritanical Islamist or better known as Islamic Fundamentalist. They were Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, Mohammed Atef, and Abu Ubaidah al Banshiri. Al Qaeda which in English means “the base” continues to gets stronger and larger around the world. The attacks perpetrated by al Qaeda on United States soil, made al Qaeda be seen by many in the Arab world as the most daring and single-minded challenger to the western world. The attacks and the immediate reaction from United States, United Nations, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the international community brought unforeseeable sympathizers of extremist groups around the world.
According to professor Mark Juergensmeyer, president George W. Bush made a huge mistake by making the statement that the attacks on the United States were “acts of war” feeding the ego of the terrorist groups. By making those statements the al Qaeda got more recognition, notoriety and support from sympathizers of the religious fundamentalist organizations as well as other anti-western groups. That acts like the Oklahoma City bombing of a federal building should have served as an example were an act of terrorist was handled by the American government as a criminal act and not as a bigger problem. In the Oklahoma bombing, Timothy McVeigh was apprehended and trial and ultimately found guilty of that criminal act. Not given credit to Christian terrorist groups that are operating in America soil. The Bush administration made it seemed that the terrorist groups were at the same level of power as the United States. It created lots of propaganda for Al Qaeda and its members, especially for Osama bin Laden, who continue to operate, train and provide intelligence and economic aid to other terrorist groups that are trying to disrupt the status quo of the world.
The United States is not the only country were terrorist are operating. They are conducting operations all over the world. China, Japan, Ireland, Pakistan India, Israel, Palestine Iraq and many other places suffer from this global problem. Most if not all are religious based with the exception of some states that are doing it to help their criminal enterprise.
Terrorism is not likely to go away any time soon especially when governments are not paying attention to what is creating it. For example the unilateral invasion of Iraq and the total disregard for Middle Eastern countries culture and religion has increased the anti-American sentiments among the Arab, Muslim and international community. This action is very likely to increase acts of terrorism around the world especially to any country that gives support in any form being military, intelligence, monetary or a place to station the American military forces.
Perhaps someday people will shift loyalties further, developing a global identity as humans first and members of a state and ethnic second. But until that day comes diplomacy and responsible forms of governments should pave the road to that goal.
Richard Dullaghan
Pol Sci 370
Lecture Series Summary
May Day 2008.
Forgive the informal nature of this summary. It is almost stream of consciousness combined with my notes. As this is a blog, and not a paper, I hope using liberty is not an abuse of the open-ended assignment. Also, forgive my cynicism with regard to international political puppeteering. I am new to this whole realm of international diplomacy.
______________________________________
The lecture I attended and will write about is the visit of the Ambassador of Bahrain, Mr. Nasser Al Balooshi. This particular lecture seemed much more formal than the others that I have attended in the past, as it was, I believe, the first foreign diplomat that has presented for the series this year. Mr. Ron Bee gave a delightful introduction, and appeared to be much more stiff than in his usual character. The flags of both the United States and Bahrain stood on either side of the podium, highlighting the official nature of the event. Mr. Hostler himself even attended which reinforced my inklings that this was serious.
Mr. Balooshi opened up his talk by drawing parallels between the US and Bahrain’s commitment to eco-conservation, which being mentioned as the first bullet point, I found odd. However, as the talk continued, I began to piece together the fragments of reason as to why he might be emphasizing such policies.
He gave a brief overview of the geographical nature of the territory, stating that it is an archipelago of thirty-three islands over two thousand years old. He mentioned that although the country was officially established in 1971, that it has been occupied by many groups, and that somewhere in there they discovered oil. After this mention, he continued to stress the relevance of eco-friendliness and his nations commitment to re-establishing he balance between nature and humanity.
He described his nations political system as a constitutional monarchy, which recently gave women the right to vote in 2002. This was followed by praise for the US economy, and our international business policies that benefit both parties.
And then it started to make sense. With mention of the arrival of American machinery to the area in 1893, and the 1932 discovery of oil I began to notice the connection between very recent commitment to eco-conservatism and the parallels to the US’s concern for the environment. My guess is that in less than 100 years Bahrain has completely exhausted its natural resources and is being forced to find new ways of stimulating a (literally) dry economy.
Praise for US military corporations ensued, possibly highlighting the revenue generated by our government and military contracts in exchange for bases and geo-strategic interests. He continued stressing how grateful their country is for our military business involvement, for some unknown reason.
In 2006, the US and Bahrain established a free trade agreement, and just last month they had developed civilian nuclear power as Mr. Balooshi stated “showing how far we have come”.
The ambassador went on to describe the economy in more detail, emphasizing the oil industry. It was interesting to piece together the connections between praise for American business, and the presence of oil, given the US dependency on oil with our ridiculous automobile-addiction. Then, he mentioned the complete expenditure of their oil reserves, which confirmed my suspicions as to why he kept emphasizing eco-friendliness, as if to apologize to nature for humanity’s irresponsibility.
The business friendly approach of the nation makes it a desirable location for entrepreneurs and businesses, he stated. They have a strategic location, which is exemplified by the causeway to Saudi Arabia, as well as the causeway in progress to Quitar. Business there is “tax-free” if I heard him correctly, which sounds rather appealing. Talk about business friendly.
With regard to the free-trade agreement between
the US and Bahrain, its implementation has stimulated bi-lateral trade from 700 million dollars to 1.2 billion dollars, annually.
He stated that they are the “First corporation, I mean country, to make an agreement with the US government [in the region],” highlighting the intense connection between politics and business.
Apparently, Gulf Air recently purchased Boeing, in a 6 billion dollar deal, which I was impressed by.
Bahrain hosts the US 5th fleet, 600 miles from Baghdad, furthering my suspicions about US government and military contracts.
He stated that the future of his nation depends on outside business being brought in, and that no one wants war, as it’s bad for business. He stressed that the main factors against security in the region were the tensions in Iraq.
He went on to describe how the US intervention in Iraq was positive, describing how if there is a violent nation in the neighborhood, then all neighbors should be worried. The Bahrain Embassy is scheduled to re-open in Iraq, and was an advocate of other nations also signing on in assisting the stabilization efforts in both Iraq, and the region.
These discussions were followed by an overview of his nations general stances on a variety of issues such as Iran, Palestine, and Lebanon, as well as human rights issues with an emphasis on human trafficking. Mr. Balooshi described Bahrain’s attitudes toward Palestine to be supportive of an independent state, but one which is in search of peace.
He mentioned the blend of constitutionalism and democracy, and emphasized that Bahrain is a leader in the Arab world in this respect.
Overall, this was a very informative lecture from an active ambassador. It was interesting to see how much political ‘back-rubbing’ goes on between friends, especially friends who help pocket books grow. I’ll be honest that I had no idea about Bahrain or its policies, and to hear it from the ambassador himself, to hear the ‘official’ story was interesting indeed.
Richard Dullaghan.
Post a Comment
<< Home