december 24, 2011

A Christmas songbook

This is NOT the Christmas spirit.
Christmas! An ideal occasion to do some easy 'cheap' blogging. Yet I do not want to forsake the idea behind this blog. In short: don't expect what isn't obvious. Like a guy with a certain background and a critical attitude could go singing merry Christmas tunes. Or could he?

Anyway, so here it is merry Christmas! Everybody's having fun? Or maybe not everybody, as some people might not know it is Christmas. So Is Christmas a celebration in spite of much suffering? Is it an expression of hope or the worshipping of consumption? The 'true' nature of Christmas combines both beauty and perversion. So don't you go saying that Christmas is for losers just yet!

Maybe the only Christmas song I truly like - one that combines both the critical attitude with the optimism - is John Lennon's Happy Christmas (War Is Over). Cherish all nice things that come with the holidays, but make sure that all hopes for a better future don't stay mere hopes!

december 19, 2011

Les blues de Bruxelles

The recent update included the possibility where I would blog on 'urgent matters' in spite of me lacking time. This post already exploits that built-in glitch in my otherwise quite firm schedule. The topic once again is the protest against Kabila's re-election as president of Congo. This connects to former posts in which I made a brief sketch of the candidates and commented on Europe's waning commitment to promote democratic values.

Congolese in Matonge with a sign praising the Belgian
anti-establishment party N-VA, of which Bart (de) Wever
is the chairman. They are blatantly missing the point...
This post is a result of my indignation toward anti-Kabila protests in Belgium. Ever since the results of the Congolese presidential elections have been announced, people have been protesting in the Congolese Matonge neighborhood of Brussels. People of Congolese origin are unhappy that Belgium tolerates Kabila's alleged election fraud. They wave Flemish nationalist flags (?!) and they accuse the Belgian establishment. They are totally missing the point! The Congolese in Belgium are fitting themselves an identity that does not exist. As they see it, the West supports Kabila's oppression out of economic self-interest. This view of course can not account for the lack of unity within Congo. I do not deny that economic patterns play a defining role. Complex reality can however not be reduced to a one-on-one relationship of Western exploitation and Congolese dictatorship.

Congolese waving a Flemish flag during the protests.
This can well be considered a strange sight in Brussels.
Colonial inheritance, Cold War dynamics and modern day globalization trough interplay shaped the Congolese economy to what it is today: an inconsistent amalgam of Western-dominated resource extraction, feudal farming methods and an informal petty market in urbanized regions. The Congolese economy is directed at meeting external demand and as such can not realize domestic development. The people of Congo are forced to fall back on the local community to satisfy their basic needs. This causes commitment to a regional identity created along ethnic and cultural divides. Since an economic base is lacking, no civil community or indeed 'nation' can develop.

Without nationhood the central government lacks the legitimacy it needs to be effective. In addition local patterns of clientelism and ethnic tensions are projected into the government institutions. Different groups became engage in a struggle for power over the state, an instrument of which each community wants to avoid that it gets used against its own security concerns. Where the state fails to provide public good, local communities struggle for power. This is the case in Congo - there is no Congolese nation, no Congolese citizenship, no Congolese identity.

The protesters in Brussels are trapped by the modernity paradigm. They blame Western egotism but remain trapped in a liberal discourse of progress and citizenship. I encourage them to tackle the real economic causes which lie underneath. Even if this means recognizing that part of the fault lies with local Congolese interests and the understandable but backward reliance on a closed identity.

Congolese elections and European values

A few days before the Congolese were to choose their new president, I blogged about the candidates. Last week the results of those elections were announced: Joseph Kabila succeeds himself as president of the Congo DR. He is believed to be won with little under half of the votes. However, he is not believed to be so by everyone: Supporters of Étienne Tshisekedi, who came in second, called the elections a fraud. They point toward the 'irregularities' that occurred to support their case. While it is true that not everything about the election process was democracy proper, all by all the result is called credible by the authorized commission.

Belgian police forces restraining Congolese protesters in
Matonge - the Congolese district in Brussels, Belgium.
Kabila was not elected by a majority of the people and in a one-to-one race against Tshisekedi he would surely bite the dust. The incumbent president profited from the divided opposition as I predicted in my previous post. Tshisekedi's followers, and indeed the political leader himself, fail to recognize this. While in the urbanized region of the capital opposition against Kabila is strong, the majority of the nation accepts a second term. Riots in Congo or abroad (we had some trouble with protesters in Matonge, the Congolese neighborhood of Brussels) are ungrounded. I do recognize that the grievances held against the Kabila regime are just, but the election outcome is representative.

What I find a real pity is that Europe didn't send a strong signal when tensions rose. A call to 'sit back and stay calm' can hardly be called a signal, can it? I noticed that the Old Continent is no longer as agile in promoting democratic ideals. Congo is just a single dot in a much broader pattern: values are forced to take a back seat more often than should be good for our conscience. Take for instance a bilateral trade agreement between the EU and Columbia: should we really strike a deal with a regime that doesn't take too kindly to human rights? The same goes for a deal in the making with India; the Indian government refuses to accept any trade agreement that holds a clause on human rights - and the EU is actually considering to drop its standard human rights clause!

It can be expected that this tendency will grow stronger in the future, and this for two reasons: First of all, the playing field for international trade is changing drastically. Countries like India, China and Brazil gain prominence and they are not stupid enough to attach value judgements to their contracts. Also, Russia is joining the WTO soon - this nation isn't exactly a staunch defender of personal freedom either. Holding on to its noble ethics would compromise the competitiveness of the EU. A second cause might be the declining power of the Commission and the Parliament. They have lost some of their grip on foreign policy since the creation of the External Action Service. What the future might hold, I can not say, but for sure fragmented and superficial protest wont bend the forces that shape our world.

december 17, 2011

Update

Hi dear readers! This blog is getting quite some more attention than I expected. I'm not going to publish my entire statistics, but I get quite some visitors from all around the world. Mostly Europe and the States, but also a lot of Russians and even a Kenyan regular. A big thanks to all of you who keep reading this blog!

As you might have noticed my activity dropped. I however promise to publish no less than four decent articles a month, and this up till February. To guarantee the quality of my blog - and to make sure you don't have to read silly updates every week - I have prepared enough material. If anything out of the ordinary would happen, I will take the time to write down my five cents too.

To finish this update: I will put a stronger emphasis on theory once my examinations are over. To this purpose I have added a new page to my blog, called 'theory'. Feel free to use it as I sure will! :D

december 16, 2011

On sustainable growth

Conclusions at COP-17 in Durban, South Africa were meager. True, the Kyoto Protocol to combat greenhouse emissions is prolonged. And surely commitments have been made to get a binding environmental treaty operational by 2020. Even if this outlook becomes reality, it can be classified under the label of 'too little too late'. Besides, emerging economies like China and India remain averse to far-going and legally binding measures. The other champion of environmental pollution, the United States, would have to ratify any such agreement in Congress. I seriously doubt that with its economic power waning, the States will make ecological commitments.

Bridging leftist ideas on the capitalist economic system with
ecological approaches that take into consideration the well-
being of the planet, provide useful insights for our future.
Up till today politicians have handled a strange logic in dealing with the climate crisis: the economic environment is taken as given, and from thereon we see what green measures we might take. That's bullocks, you can't negotiate with the climate! We must take into consideration the boundaries of our planet's ecosystem - without compromise. And from thát point on we should investigate what economic model is suitable. This radical shift has to take place in our minds and the minds of our political leadership.

We need to put an end to the parasitic way in which our economy relates to the environment. On a global scale, the political level must interfere in the sphere of economics. The pattern of consumption among prosperous citizens needs to shift drastically; away from unnecessary waste and luxury and toward investment in a green revolution. Parallel to the sustainable switch a big push is needed to close the ever-widening gap between rich and poor. The reason for this is twofold:

(1) Poor strata in a world dominated by market forces are confronted with unequal access possibilities. They are cut of from land, food and water even though such vital resources are abundant. Indeed it can be proven that such shortages are caused by unequal access rather than objective scarcity. As a result poor people will resort to clearing forests, burning cheap coal, etc. - this further exploiting the planet.
(2) Rich strata will make brainless consumption choices. They waste money to unneeded stuff simply because to them the marginal gain of a single euro/dollar is low. If the money thrown away had been invested in alleviating poverty, it would have contributed to a socially and environmentally sustainable world.

The essence: welfare should on a global scale be invested in the shift toward an ecologically sustainable society, which includes closing the gap between rich and poor. More growth at expense of the planet (and the poor) is in the long run devastating. Growth shall be sustainable or it shall not be at all.

december 09, 2011

Eurocrisis: An evaluation

That the euro might disappear is a thought that keeps on circulating. Today I heard that even some Irish banks are working along that scenario. A poor decision if you ask me. Political will to carry on with the euro-project is big and no economic law dictates that the eurozone should break up any time soon. Let's not forget that the euro is still a strong currency; in the end there is more room for a devaluation than for abandoning the euro altogether. The problem with the eurozone is that we have one currency that covers 27 different budgets, 27 different debts, 27 different wage policies, etc. Without getting too technical this makes the eurozone, and indeed the euro itself, vulnerable to asymmetric shocks. These are caused when one of the covered countries spends beyond its own economic payment capacity in the spirit that it is protected by the European umbrella. If one country starts to slip down the slope toward financial disaster, others soon follow. Just do not put the blame entirely with Greece and other 'small big spenders'. It were German and France banks who kept on financing in the search for profit. After all their risk was covered by government and taxpayer.

ECB president Mario Draghi, who brought the main rent
down to 1%, the lowest figure ever in the ECB history.
Now how get out of the difficult situation we're in? No two economists can seem to agree so what I will say next is certainly up for criticism. It is an opinion, but an informed opinion too. Something most EU politicians seem to agree upon is that Europe should get more grip on national budgets. Last night, 23 countries agreed to a (new) stability pact. They will implement the common rules: only 3% deficit, a public debt under 60% of BNP, etc. This formula exists since long, but this time the Commission and the European Court play a major role. In the past countries had to monitor themselves which obviously wasn't a big success. Less agreement can be found when it comes to the role of the European Central Bank. The ECB has announced yesterday that it would not keep on buying government bonds. For you who are not at home in the world of finances: Europe won't keep supporting indebted countries without limit. ECB president Mario Draghi stressed that the ECB does not have the proper mandate to do so. Yet, there is something the ECB could do instead: release the inflation genie! Inflation is the diminishing value of money over time, which manifests itself in rising prices. Generally, inflation is caused by wages going up faster than productivity or by a huge amount of new money being printed.

"Some more inflation would not be so bad
concerning our 1,5 billion of public debt"
Now why would the ECB want to print money? First of all, higher inflation means that the public debt of states would shrink. A quick example: I owe you hundred bucks and the rent is two percent, I have to pay you a 102. However, if in between inflation has risen from zero to three percent, those 102 are now worth 99 in real terms. I thus payed back less than I owed you. This isn't magic, but just a logical consequence of the inflation rate being higher than the rent. Additionally, high inflation allows the ECB to combat the speculators and strengthen Europe's concurrence position. Of course inflation is in the short run harmful to consumers and savers, common people already hit hardest by the economic crisis and budget austerity. Whilst not fair, it is paramount that we come clean. Inflation is in this a unique instrument. Sure, we need to handle it with care and no doubt that eventually we will need to get control back. But for now I can no longer agree with the neoliberal view that inflation is an ultimate evil. No wonder I was happy when the ECB reduced its most important rent from 1,25% to 1% yesterday - widening the inflation-rent gap with 25 percent points.

december 04, 2011

A dragon and its cave: China's environmental policy

Before I start, an important notice to my more regular readers: you might notice a drop in activity the next two months or so. This due to the holidays, examination period and preparation for my paper. The past two weeks I have been writing some scraps that can be turned into articles with ease. Just to make sure that, even without much time, I never run out of interesting material to post.

Now, after monetary and economic policy, this final post in the 'dragon nation' series will focus on China's environmental policies. China is often portrayed as a big polluter who doesn't want to see its economic growth constrained. The People's Republic is indeed the biggest carbon emitter in absolute numbers. When emissions are however expressed in terms relative to say population or wealth, the West still does a lot worse. Additionally, the United States and Western Europe pollute a lot more than their own ecology can cope with. Thus an 'ecological debt' is created to countries who's environment is polluted by the excess of the West.
The per capita carbon emissions from various countries. Just compare India and China (left) to Belgium or the States.
The ecological debt surely puts things in perspective; industrialized and industrializing countries suffer the same ailments. The question now is whether China undertakes efforts to mitigate its impact. In its most recent five-year plan, the Chinese Communist Party emphasized energy efficiency and laid out a strategy for cleaning the air. A lot of uncertainty remains, but the Chinese government is working on market-based mechanisms to combat climate change. An emissions-trading system and green taxes are among the favored techniques. The national strategy in the making draws upon regional experiments with carbon-trading and petroleum taxes.

China profits from betting on sustainability. It already is
the leading producer of solar panels and CF light bulbs.
Now why does China seek to implement this shift? One thing most debaters agree upon is that economic motives are driving the process. China is the leading manufacturer of compact-fluorescent light bulbs and solar panels already. Its industries profit from energy-efficiency goals. Yet the so-called green technologies might cause ecological stress in their production and disposal processes, a factor too often ignored. Another motive for China is that it needs to crick up its credibility if it wants to keep enjoying cash inflows from the Clean Development Mechanism. This tool, created under the Kyoto Protocol, allows industrialized countries to invest in carbon-reducing initiatives abroad. The emission reduction then goes on account of the investor. China received a lot of such funding in the past but its biggest investor, the European Union, wants to revise its policy before 2013.

As always, the picture looks more complex upon careful examination. China isn't the environmental boogieman we often blame it too be. Though its efforts are economically motived, I for one expect China to do a lot in the future.

november 29, 2011

Turning the lens around

Recently I told a good friend of mine about the concept détournement. I was quite amazed that he didn't know it, since it is a valuable contribution to anyone's mindset. Therefore I wish to share it on my blog. Détournement is a French term that translates as 'deflection' or 'distortion'. It was developed as a technique in the 1950s by a group of radical artists and thinkers called the Letterist International. Founder and exponent of this movement was Guy Debord. He described détournement as "using spectacular images and language to disrupt the flow of the spectacle". This sounds more difficult than it actually is, as it comes down to using imagery handed to you by common culture and deflecting its message so that it becomes critical of that culture.

Big corporations and their unethical practices are often the
target of détournement messages. Especially since the most
dominant field for this technique is anti-consumerism.
As an artistic technique, détournement is closely related to other forms of art you might know better. A parody, for instance, takes common imagery and symbols to construct a new message often critical of that which is parodied. Parallels can also be found with Pop Art, which expresses a critical attitude against a high arts-low arts division. To speak of détournement, however, something more is needed: the goal of the trick must be social change. Détournement is rooted in Marxist thought and as such it seeks to alter society for the better. While the filosofical concept might be marginal in terms of popularity, manifestations are nonetheless visible. Just think of so-called culture jamming; groups of activists who create satirical and cynical messages on consumerism and globalization.

For people who like heavy material on détournement and the surrounding structure of theory, I recommend Guy Debord's The Society of the Spectacle. This work deals with the idea that, in a state of advanced capitalism, mass media and dominant cultural patterns oppress human potential. The eponymous film is enjoyable if you're into Marxist social theory. For all the others I refer to more accessible - less radical - material of people such as Noam ChomskyNaomi Klein or even Michael Moore. They all make use of détournement or promote similar ideas.
My favorite piece of détournement art by street artist Banksy. If you have no idea what this is about,
check out this picture. It was taken during the Vietnam War, after an American napalm-strike...

november 27, 2011

'GOP' election fever

I apologize to those of you who came here expecting something on the upcoming US primaries. Indeed 'GOP' (Grand Old Party) is a nick for our dear fellows of the Republican Party. If you wish to read about those I recommend keeping an eye on this all-American blog. My post here will be about a more recent display of election fever: the election of a 'Good Old President' in Congo-Kinshasa. Tomorrow, monday October 28, the Congolese people will elect a new president. Or they can of course extend the mandate of the incumbent one. Not many people are familiar with Congolese politics, so first up is an overview of the main candidates:

Joseph Kabila is the incumbent president of the Democratic Republic Congo. He holds the office for the People's Party for Reconstruction and Democracy. Kabila has a considerable support base with the urban population, who profited from his policies. The president, however, has a lot of opponents too. And not without reason as you might expect. Congo still has trouble in strengthening its democratic institutions and obtaining a positive economic outlook. Did you know that Congo has the highest rate of extreme hunger while, at the same time, it holds the second highest agricultural potential? Until 2010, Congo didn't even have an agricultural policy!

Joseph Kabila of the social-democratic PPRD. Incumbent president of the Congo DR.
Main opponent of president Kabila is Étienne Tshisekedi of the Union for Democracy and Social Progress. Tsishekedi has some very militant supporters who feel that the current regime did not carry out its promises. Supporters who already announced not to stand idle if Kabila succeeds himself. A major issue for victory over Kabila is that the elections consist of just one round. This might strengthen the position of Tshisekedi as most likely of all opposing candidates, due to strategic voters. Though it is more likely that the opposition will be divided and that not a single candidate will gain enough votes to trump Kabila.

Étienne Tshisekedi of the liberal-conservative UDPS
Tshisekedi has been a 'constructive opposer' in former political settings. He even made it to Prime Minister on some brief occasions. Despite his liberal and conservative views he is my personal favorite. He has a sense for realism and wants to tackle issues of corruption. I thus named my post after this 'Good Old Premmy'. Other interesting candidates are the also very popular Vital Kamerhe of the Union for a Congolese Nation and the more radical François Joseph Mobutu of the Union of Mobutuist Democracts. Both of these candidates promote Congolese unity, though with very different accents.

As you might have noticed 'construction' and 'progress' are buzzwords. All parties have inspiring names, but their capacities are all too often overrated. That is why I set my hopes on the reasonable voice of Tshisekedi. Soon enough we will get an idea of what the Congolese future looks like. Even more important than a capable candidate to win is for all losing candidates to accept their defeat, and not resort to violence. The drama we saw in the capital Kinshasa the past two days is a shame. Unfortunately, Tshisekedi too negated the prohibition on gathering earlier today. I hope this was just a stunt in his campaign and not a prelude to actual destabilization.

november 26, 2011

A dragon and its younglings: State-owned enterprises

Today I finally present the second article in my 'dragon nation' series. As explained in the previous installment, the aim is to tackle some misconceptions surrounding the oft-mystified Chinese policy. This time I investigated the claim that reforms in China have made it a capitalist economy. Hereto I focused on the state-owned enterprises and their role in the Chinese economy. Well-aware that a complete image requires much more, I would still like to draw some conclusions.

Under impulse of Deng Xiaoping, China moved beyond Maoist recipes and reformed its way out of Third World status. I will not discuss the Chinese economic reform into detail. Much more interesting is to see how much 'Chinese characteristics' there really are in Deng's socialist market economy. After all, once reform was initiated, liberal theorists expect(ed) the People's Republic to move ever-closer to the western model of capitalism. The attachment to ideological references they dismissed as futile shadow-discourse; a canalization of Chinese nationalism at most. How solid is this view?

The Chinese government protects the state-owned enterprises. Favored
companies are effectively shielded from competition by perverse policy.
In 2001, China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO). In this the Chinese establishment subjected itself to the liberalization of its international trade relationships. While this surely is a big move, the power of state-owned enterprises within China's domestic market is still overwhelming. Indeed, ten years after the country's admission to the WTO, state-owned enterprises are stronger than ever. The Chinese government ensures a dominant position for its partners; favored companies abide and in return their share in the market is protected. The authorities realize this by applying rules with a double standard and by obstructing the take-over of domestic companies by foreign ones.

For a detailed analysis of how the state shamelessly obstructs market forces I can recommend this article from The Economist. Now our focus shifts again to the WTO: while domestic suppliers have a guaranteed playing field, they have it easier to export their services/products. The WTO strives toward free trade between its member states and, while it is true a foreign company can access the Chinese market, it is shielded from actual demand. Meanwhile Chinese firms, enjoying subsidized/enforced demand at home, can well-compete for the demand in Europe and the United States. China is thus far from a capitalist country. Much more it resembles a covert form of state-capitalism or even modern mercantilism. Regardless of the label, the state and indeed politics are a most determining factor in China's enterprise environment.

november 20, 2011

Silly intermezzo (cartoon)

So much that needs to be done and so little time to do it in. It is a real pity I can't write a real post for now, but to give you something I have this fun comic starring Jesus. The clever cartoon is about how sometimes well-intended help can actually worsen the conditions of those who are supposed to benefit. I lifted the cartoon from this website, I do not own the rights to it. So please don't try to make a profit or whatever without permission from the author/artist. I totally suck at intellectual property rights, but you got the point. Enjoy!

november 16, 2011

The rise of social media: A conservative revolution

The title of this post is inspired by my love for the oxymoron: a figure of speech that combines contradictory terms. After all how can a revolution be conservative? Well, consider the latest revolution in the way we communicate. There is the increasing importance of mobile communication, we have a proliferation of social network sites, and let us not forget the blog, of course. When you are just like me skeptic towards this digital (r)evolution people tend to classify you as 'conservative' or 'backwards'. Yet I dare to argue that not the critics but the revolution is conservative. At first this statement might sound silly but allow me to explain.

The communication revolution that brought about chat services and facebook is just a next step ahead on the road to modernization. I wont argue against that. However, it is just a next step down a certain road. It might be modernization, but it is mainly the intensification of an already existing process. Look at it from an historical viewpoint: way back, when man still had an oral culture, few individuals controlled the information stream trough tradition. Over time, various communication revolutions (writing, printing, etc.) have freed the individual from this control. The balance in society shifted from traditional/communal thought to more modern/individual modes of expression. New ways of communicating actually liberated the private sphere from community control and brought about the modern individual. So far so good. But now for more recent changes in our communication: the rise of mass media and, subsequently, of social media. In effect, this evolution is sucking us back into the communal world of before. Television and social network sites seem to stress the dominant value patterns in society. Two mechanisms are at work here: first of all our identity becomes increasingly fragmented. We have become hyper-individuals who associate with numerous groups at a time. This is not bad per se, since I like to see the influence of say religious or ideologic dogma waning. At the same time however this leaves us vulnerable for the second mechanism: the socialization of dominant values.

How contradictory it may seem, growing individualism brought us to a point where people become socially inert. The majority of us no longer questions things in a fundamental way. As a society we do not care for change or justice, we have become indifferent towards our own future. People are more empowered than ever, but at the same time they have lost a critical awareness. Therefore I advocate an alternative use of the tools that currently enslave us to a pensée unique; I want the digitalized media to be used for liberation and true empowerment. The essence of my plea is captured beautifully by this quote from Edward R. Murrow on television:

Unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late. [...] if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box.

Feel free to replace 'television' with 'twitter' or 'facebook'. I could go on for [p]ages, but this post is getting long and complex enough. If you feel the need to more thorough explanation, I can point to Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman. Or you might enjoy the ideas of bright chaps like Herbert Marcuse and Antonio Gramsci. Feel free to use the comments section too!

november 15, 2011

The super soft and washable world of eco-plush

Today I was quite surprised to find a big package of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in my mail. As a supporter of the WWF I've had their member magazine send to me before, but that usually looks small and flat. Never did I receive any package this inflated and shapeless. Apparently I won with a member survey I had taken some time ago, so the attached letter said. A real aha-erlbenis remained distant as I take practically any survey I come across.

An eco-plush silver back gorilla. His real-life counterpart is
one of the so-called flagship species of the WWF. This
basically means that people regard the gorilla as cuddly.
Without further bothering what survey earned me this package, curiosity took over. My price? A beautiful plush silver back gorilla. Admittedly not entirely suited for a guy of my age, but then again one shouldn't look a gift uhm... primate in the mouth. Besides, he's totally free of 'chlororganics' (some type of nasty chemicals) and eco-friendly in any other imaginable way. The ticket says:
In buying WWF plush items you are supporting WWF - the global conservation organisation. For more information visit the WWF website. Carefully tested. High quality. Super soft. Washable.
Before you start judging the quality of my eco-plush gorilla I want to say I was a sceptic at first too. How can eco-plush measure up against any standard stuffed animal? Believe me, it can. My gorilla's ticket totally speaks the truth: he is super soft, but really amazingly soft. Not like any plush animal I felt before. It's also completely safe to put parts of the plush animal in your mouth as they are made according to leading safety standards. I wish I could transmit the feel of my silver back gorilla but sadly that isn't possible. Anyway, I'm totally into eco-plush right now as it is superior in all qualities, save the price. They are indeed a bit more expensive but they are sustainable and in buying them you support a good cause. Did I mention the 'free of child labor' guarantee already?

Writing on the conclusion, I realize that I am not sure what it is I hope achieve with this post. Maybe I'm only expressing how happy I am with my little gift? Or maybe I am making you aware of how awesome eco-plush is. Anyway, eco-plush animals make a wonderful gift. It would be good to keep this in mind considering the upcoming holidays. Finally something you can buy without the need of feeling guilty about consumerism ruining the planet...

SOME LINKS

november 14, 2011

Update

Followers might have noticed how my blogging activity dropped since the beginning of the month. I have been very busy collecting source material for my thesis, which got by the way approved already some time ago. This is a work in progress and it will be so for quite a while. Nonetheless I promise to shift not too much attention away from the blogosphere.

Earlier today, I published the first installment in my 'dragon nation' series. This series of posts aims to clear out some myths that surround China's economic rise. The one I gave you already was on China's monetary policy. I got two more in the making, one on state-owned corporations and one on China's environmental politics. You can expect those later on this month so make sure to pass by every now and then. Also, if you have any myths bothering you just let me know. I'd be more than happy to expand the series!

A dragon and its treasure: The Chinese yuan

The title of this post refers to the Chinese People's Republic as a dragon. Chinese economic policy is almost as mythical as the creature often used to portray the nation. Incredible growth, enormous exports, vast amounts of financial reserves and yet lead by a party that calls itself 'communist'. In a series of three posts I would like to examine some of the myths that surround Chinese economic policy. First up is the supposedly undervalued currency and its perverse effects on global trade.

The Chinese leadership is often accused of keeping the yuan, the currency of the China, artificially low. An undervalued currency holds a significant advantage: it suppresses domestic prices of raw materials and labor. In essence you make domestic production artificially cheap, compared to foreign production. This causes  Chinese rubbish to be priced too low and thus to sell better than American, Japanese or European rubbish. The Chinese government rejoices when it checks its export numbers. Other industrialized countries are less happy for they see their trade balance - the worth of export minus import - become less balanced.

The trade balance of countries around the world, based on IMF statistics for 1980-2008. Notice the high deficit for the United States, which is largely benefited Japan in the eighties and China since WTO-admission in 2001.
The question that keeps us busy is twofold: is China keeping its coin artificially cheap and, if so, then how do we deal with it? The grievances of China's trading partners are without a doubt legitimate. It needs however to be said that, ever since 2007, the Chinese government has taken measures to adjust its underpriced coin. Indeed since June 2011 the yuan has appreciated over 7% against the dollar. And considering the spread between China's inflation rate and the much lower one of its trading partners, relative costs in China have risen even more. All this show us that the yuan is not as much undervalued as it used to be.

Myth 1: "The Chinese yuan is kept artificially low
and thus the Chinese policy distorts global trade"
Yet China-bashing is more popular than ever, especially in the United States. On October 11, the US Senate approved a bill that allows its government to take measures against what it deems undervalued currencies. This strategy might be politically successful as it might get one votes from people who lost their manufacturing jobs allegedly due to cheap Chinese imports. Yet from an economic point of view the results would be devastating. A trade war between two economic behemoths, who are also each other's principal foreign debtor/creditor, will disrupt today's fragile economy even further. To ward cheap Chinese products from your market would by the way mostly harm the consumer. And China only needs to challenge such a policy before the WTO to enforce free trade. After all the international economic regime regards undervalued currencies to be a prerogative of the IMF.

Then should we stay inert and leave the matter be? There is something to say for abstaining from action. Though the yuan is far from flee-floating, it is steadily gaining in value. A more 'flexible' yuan offer chances for China to hasten the reorientation of its economy from exports to domestic consumption. This is something the Chinese authorities recognize and seek to achieve, even more so when a global recession might be just around the corner.

oktober 30, 2011

Catching Kony: altruism or geopolitics?

Some days ago I learned that president Obama is going to send military reinforcements to Uganda. This is announced in a time when the US military presence in Iraq is almost completely reduced. The goal of the military venture is to make an end to the activities of Joseph Kony and his Lord's Resistance Army (LRA). The LRA is a renegade rebel army that seeks to overthrow the Ugandan government. It is hard to convey an image of the LRA in brief, but I'll try it nonetheless: it combines a mix(ed)-up ideology rooted in Christianity, traditional African mysticism and Acholi nationalism. The LRA recruits children in its ranks by raiding villages, accompanied by the many cruelties commonly associate with child soldiers (think rape, murder and drugs).

Entire Mid-Eastern Africa is politically troubled:
(1) Somalia as a 'failed state' and the many refugees in Kenya
(2) South Sudan, only just independent, is extremely poor
(3) The Great Lakes with the LRA and refugee camps in Goma
(4) The unstable Central African Republic with lots of violence
Would it be wise to add more military to the equation?
You can imagine how relieved I was to learn that the United States would 'finally' do something worthwhile with its military capacity. An emotional reaction and, as it turned out, a biased one. Without any doubt a monster like Kony has to be stopped. But several aspects have been left out of the picture when Uncle Sam presented its great humanitarian deed to the world. First of all, LRA activities in the region have been on a low pitch since 2007. The rebellion against the government is not what it once was and this might open the way for non-military conflict resolution. It is however the corrupted Ugandan regime that seems to put on its brake when being asked for more democracy, pluralism and liberties.

A second noteworthy fact is that the United States are already involved in hunting down Kony and other LRA leaders. So far their tactics didn't prove very successful. It is very doubtful that stronger military pressure would be a road to result. Some would even dare to say that it might undermine regional stability even further, actually endangering the common people more than was the case since 2007. But American-Ugandan ties have strengthened during the War on Terror in Somalia. Another major strategic importance of good ties with the Ugandan authorities are the oil reserves in the nearby region. Especially now that South Sudan, with considerable reserves, became independent.

What first seemed an altruist deed to protect people now looks a lot grimmer. And it is easy to buy the 'peacekeeper' story, even when being sold by a country that has a pretty nasty record of military interventions. The reason that we are tempted to do so is that we are under-informed on the Ugandan situation, and African politics in general. The lesson I learned: stay informed or stay sceptic.

oktober 24, 2011

Turkish accession: some obstacles

Turkey has been a recurring topic in the past week's media. First there were attacks by the Kurdistan Working Party (PKK), then there was the retaliation of the Turkish army. Few days later there was an earthquake in the East of the country, a region were a lot of Kurds live. I first considered writing something on the Kurdish question, but that would require some research. Because I don't exactly have a lot of time right now, I will stick to more familiar terrain: what are the biggest obstacles for Turkish accession to the EU?

(1) The first issue to pop up in my mind would be the Turkish recognition of North Cyprus. In 1974 a coup d'état on Cyprus would have lead to annexation by Greece, so the Turks made a military intervention. The island has been divided ever since. The northern part declared itself independent in 1983; Turkey is the only country to have recognized it. Since Cyprus is a member of the European Union, this issue needs to be settled one way or another.

(2) Another obstacle on the road to accession is the Kurdish question I already mentioned. The EU already has talks with Turkey about accession since 2005. In the light of these talks, Turkey already expanded the rights of the Kurdish minority. At least on paper, Kurds have gained various right such as education in their own language, etc. However, relations between the Turkish authorities and Kurds remain difficult. And the EU doesn't think lightly of human right...

Do you think Turkey would make a great addition?
(3) The third, and perhaps most difficult problem to solve is one that lies with the EU itself. The public opinion in countries with notable Turkish minorities is not in favor of Turkish accession. I think of Belgium, France, Germany, etc. The governments of these countries are most sensitive to this. Strange enough, a lot of Turkish immigrants and their children aren't big fans of Turkish accession either. Promises have been made so if Turkey insists it will become a member state. But all the stalling might make that Turkey changes its mind.

I myself am a most fanatic supporter of Turkish accession. Turkey has a young and dynamic population, a growing economy and a (relatively) big army. Also, as a predominantly muslim country and gateway to the Middle East, it holds diplomatic and strategic importance. I honestly hope we can welcome Turkey in the EU within a matter of years!

oktober 20, 2011

Security issue or security dilemma?

Recently, the United States claimed they had prevented an Iranian terrorist attack. The supposed violence-in-the-making would have been directed against the Israeli and Saudi-Arabian embassies in Washington. A faction of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards - the country's politically influential elite army - would have been behind the plotting. The Iranian government denies all accusations, which they percieve as a framing operation set up by the United States itself. I will stay clear of declaring any truth. In stead, this article will offer a framework to analyse the tensed US-Iran relation, based on the classic notion of the safety dilemma.

A safety dilemma occurs when one state raises its military capacity and, by doing so, becomes a treath to a second state. This other state will have to decide whether to respond proportionally or to remain idle. When responding with armement, the first state may interpret this as a hostile signal undoing its initial effort; an arms race is started. Persuing the second option however means that a (percieved) risk is left unattended. This phenomenon, which involves a great deal of subjectivity, proves to be most usefull in explaining US-Iranian frictions.

Uncle Sam and president Ahmadinejad in a 'staring contest'
Let's start with the States. The US has a Cold War-era ally in the Middle East which isn't too loved by the Arab nations. This ally Israel is believed to possess nuclear arms, though it never formally confirmed or denied this. In adittion, the States supported Irak in its war against Iran back in the eighties. American support was given to Saddam Hussein (yes, the very same) because the Iranian regime wasn't too favorable for the West. This war, which continued from 1980 to 1988, is a bit forgotten by most of us but the terrible attrocities inflicted upon the Iranian people are well-remembered over there. It  is a scar that never fully healed and here is where trouble kicks in. Iran is still traumatized by its history. It still thinks that the main objective of the West concerning Iran is to install a friendly regime it can influence. Just like the one of the Shah before the Islamic Revolution. With a nuclear treath in Israel and ongoing military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran feels enclosed. The only way it sees out of this 'brutal imperialism' is a nuclear weapon of its own. Iran's nuclear program, together with its violent language when condamning Israel or the US, are only the stepping stone to the next degree of the security dilemma. Now the Iranian bomb in turn is seen as a treat to regional stability by the Americans.

The perception of both states is in this all more important than the facts. Does the US seek to overthrow the Ayatollahs? Is Iran being agressive in its nuclear program? Was a terrorist attack prevented or is it a framing operations after all? These questions might be interesting, but they do not reach the heart of the conflict. What really matters is that the US and Iran are engaged in a logic of confrontation; there is a lack of mutual trust. We aren't looking at a security issue, but rather at a security dilemma.

oktober 16, 2011

Join the Banana War

I have recently joined a fight of a global scale; a war that involves some of the world's major economic powers: the Banana War! To fully understand this trade conflict, it is necessary to take a look at its history first. The European common market may be internally open to competition, it has a firm tradition of protectionism. The common market was born in 1957 when the European Economic Community (EEC) was formally erected. France however feared it couldn't face the German competition. Therefore it demanded that the principle of the common market was applied to the agrarian production too. France after all is one of the most agricultural countries on the continent. To safeguard European domestic food supply, the EEC also decided to pull up barriers against food imports.

Just five companies control 80% of the world wide banana
trade. These are Dole, Del Monte, Chiquita, Fyffes and
Noboa. Don't support their exploitation-based monopoly,
Buy Fair Trade!
Now what could this possibly have to do with bananas? Believe it or not, but Europe is a producer. Spain has a small share in the EU's banana production, but the major source is again France. Easily overlooked are the French overseas territories and they practically live from banana cultivation. A lot of Europe's trading partners don't like the tariffs we handle since they give an unfair advantage to French bananas. Luckily for American multinationals, Europe has a demand for bananas which surpasses the own production capacity. The war only commenced once Europe altered its protectionist policies in favor of fair trade...

In 2001 the EU approved the "Everything But Arms"-ordinance. This nice piece of legislation granted a reduction in trade tariffs for the ACP-countries (former European colonies). For the Least-Developed Countries, trade tariffs were abolished altogether. Europe didn't demand any compensations in return, this action was inspired by ethics only! The Commission wanted to stimulate the position of fair trade products to aid the developing world. And indeed, the competitive advantage greatly reduced the price gap between fair trade bananas and the so-called 'dollar bananas'. The difference in your purse between buying Oxfam or buying Chiquita became marginal.

The big American concerns, who grow their bananas at big plantations in Latin America using cheap labour, were not amused. Like an adult whining over some candy given to children, they demanded tariff reductions for themselves too. The World Trade Organization already ruled that the EU falsifies competition and this doesn't sort with their neoliberal dogma. Only free competition between exploitation and fair trade can lead to a better world, say the big boys. Europe has to give up on its supportive measures for fair trade. In the future the price gap will certainly rise. I urge you all to join this war, you can all help make a difference. Corporate exploiters haven't won yet; please stop buying dollar bananas and give the South a chance! Buy fair trade!

oktober 15, 2011

Thesis: Wallerstein 2.0

I only just proposed my thesis subject to my promotor. Hopefully, it gets approved because it is what I really want to do. My thesis subject can be situated at the crossroad of all my major interests: economic systems, development in the global South and ecology. What I hope to be preoccupied with for the two years to come is the ecologically unequal exchange. 'Unequal exchange' is a marxist idea signifying a trade in which the price of the traded good does not reflect the actual costs and benefits for both parties. Of course it's a very contested concept.

The Third World Studies Center of Ghent University
Probably the best known application of the concept is its usage in Immanuel Wallerstein's World-systems Analysis. In this theory, Wallerstein argues that a set of core nations (the industrialized North) develops by exploiting the periphery (the global South) trough unequal trade relations. Such ideas were very popular in the 70's but with the rise of neoliberalism it got more and more contested. My thesis will focus on a chance of revival for World-systems Analysis; a chance embodied by the ecologically unequal exchange or EUE.

An EUE is just like the marxist concept, only it focuses specifically on the negative effects of an economic activity on the environment. EUE-theorists claim that often such ecological costs are not included in the pricing mechanism. The result is a product with an artificially low price, the excess value being transfered to the buyer. Can you see where this is going? Indeed, the industrialized North buys not-so-eco-fiendly goods produced in the global South thus extracting the excess value. My goal is to find out whether this effect plays in the real world, outside the field of theory, and in what way it contributes to problematic development in the South.

You all burn a candle for that the promotor may set the light to green and this exciting matter comes my way!

oktober 14, 2011

Bush behind bars?

I try to avoid America-bashing since it has become really ordinary; a whole whiny discourse of its own. With an interest in international politics it is however hard to ignore the facts. Reality is that superpowers like the States aren't amongst the most honorable actors on the world stage. Todays newspaper offered me a topic I can't allow to pass by without mentioning: the accountability of former US-president George W. Bush for the violation of human rights.

National hero, war criminal or both?
In the light of the War on Terror, pronounced by president Bush after the September 11 attacks, a lot of policy shifts were made. The one that concerns us here is his decision to allow 'reinforced interrogation techniques' to be used against suspected terrorists. By now Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib have become concepts in itself. In military-penitentiary complexes like these, human rights may be violated to safeguard national security. In the case of Abu Ghraib sheer fun of the occupying forces also was a valid reason for mistreatment. Keep in mind that in a lot of cases the objects of torture were only <u>suspected</u> terrorists. Last time I checked guilt was determined trough a fair trial. Nonetheless president Bush allowed practices such as waterboarding to be used against people that ever got past being accused.

One of the leading NGO's in protecting human rights is Amnesty International (AI). This organization has send a thousand-page report to the Canadian authorities, requesting the apprehension of George W. Bush if he would visit the country as planned for October 20th. The Canadian responded negatively to what they called 'a stunt', but worldwide pressure is big. Bush already had to cancel a trip to Switzerland and if he would visit my country - Belgium - he would be extradited to the International Criminal Court for sure. Now, I do think Bush is responsible for some nasty stuff, but that is not the point of extradition at all. What really matters is that the United States government, and most US citizens for that matter, refuses to accept that its (former) leaders are accountable for their acts. Even, or particularly, when such acts violate the rights of individuals who can not appeal to the US judicial institutions.

The Obama administration has no intention of handing Bush over to international justice, nor does Canada so it seems. The entire topic is highly controversial in the States since the protection of national security seems to be very important to a lot of people. More important than the human rights and dignity of some Muslim guy who probably hates America anyway. All I can say is 'keep the pressure on'. Americans need to learn that they can not intervene outside their own judicial territory without being accountable to anyone.

For those interested in this particular case and its details; you can always take a look at Bugliosi's The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder. I haven't read it myself, but it was suggested to me by a good friend. He called it 'comprehensive', for whatever that is worth.

oktober 10, 2011

How aid really functions

Ever since the Second World War, several aid programs for the Third World have been called into existence. Most of these initiatives can hardly be called a success. This failure of development aid is partially due to the creative exploits made by the industrialized North. Indeed a lot of misuses exist and today's objective is to expose them.

DEFINING AID
Most important is to give a proper definition of what development aid is. The accepted standard is the 'Official Development Assistance' (ODA) as put forth by the OECD countries. A lot of spending included in ODA is highly controversial. For instance, up till 1990 it was allowed to book military aid as development assistance. Just think of all the 'developing' the United States have done in the Vietnam War... Less striking examples of such misfits include the administrative costs a country makes to deliver aid and the costs attached to the first year of shelter for refugees and asylum seekers. All these positive reductions contribute to a higher number of delivered aid while the benefits for development remain a mystery.

Military assistance is NOT development aid (or is it?)
Another curiosity is the inclusion of humanitarian aid; the kind of emergency aid raised to combat the results of a natural disaster or a food crisis. This is not development aid in a strict sense, yet it was good for almost one tenth of all ODA donated in 2008. My personal favorite amongst the ODA misfits is however debt remission. In 2008, debt remissions made up a staggering 28% of all ODA. While it is true that debt remission lightens the burden that lays on a country it remains an exploit due to the way it is used. The instrument of debt remission is addressed only to avoid default and to keep countries borrowing.

A NOBLE GESTURE
So far for cheating trough accountancy. Up to another sore now: the motives for aid. Why is it that developed countries allocate part of their wealth to the not-so-wealthy? It will not surprise you that 'contributing to a better world' is not the main incentive. A most effective way to make motives for aid visible is to take a look at who is receiving it. If development really was the goal one could expect ODA to flow mainly to the Least Developed Countries (LDC's). Yet a lot of financial means are dedicated to middle-income countries. Between the lines you may read that donor countries subsidize the local purchasing power to the benefit of their own export.

Is world-wide development even possible?
A more explicit manifestation of economic motives is the so-called 'tied aid'. This is to be understood as ODA given under the condition that the money is spent on purchases in the donor country. Old-fashioned and vulgar subsidizing. It is sound to assume that this type of aid will be applied least in the LDC's as their purchasing power is lowest. Figures show that in 2005 almost half of the ODA destined for LDC's was tied aid.

Next to economic motives, geopolitics are an important factor too. At the end of the Cold War, in 1991, Egypt and Israel had a joint share of 41% in the development assistance provided by the United States. Inescapable in this light is the war on terror which provided a new boost for geopolitically motived aid. In the period 1999-2003, means donated by OECD countries to Pakistan increased tenfold. In 2009 Afghanistan and Iraq were the biggest receivers of US paychecks.

CONCLUSION
The facts and figures displayed in this post show a grim image of development aid. Numerous multilateral efforts have been made to correct the highlighted mistakes, but to no avail. My prediction is that until 2015 - the end date for the fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals - governments will continue as they are. In little over three years time they will come to the conclusion that it didn't work out quite as they planned. But we ought to be confident that civil organizations will remind them; that they will point out their mistakes. And just maybe 2015 can be the start of a new practice of actual development.

oktober 01, 2011

Working on the looks

Blogger has some great standard templates you can edit yourself. There is also a nice assortment of images you can pick for a background. Finding one that fits your specific blog is however a little harder than you'd suspect. Therefore, I made myself a custom background and uploaded it to Blogger. It's a mosaic of politics-related logo's. Do you recognize any? I myself find it a lot better than the rather lifeless solid-color background I used until recently. Feel free to comment on the new design, it's only a try-out!

This post is - sadly - a short one since I have lots of work to do. University wants me to pick a subject for my thesis real soon. Maybe something to blog about next? :p

september 28, 2011

Youthful idealism

Today, I had my first class of the new academic term. The course in question was Theory of International Relations and the lesson provided me with some - much needed - inspiration for this blog. People who read my first contribution to Blogger might start to see a pattern. ;-)

Anyhow, the first lesson wasn't the average introduction speech on which text book to use etc. Quite the contrary; the prof used his premiere to test our worth. We were asked to engage in a hundred person debate revolving around one given question: Why did the NATO intervene in Libya? As the exemplary students we are, many a valuable contribution was made. We stressed the importance of regional stability, the perceived threat of political Islam and of course the inescapable Libyan oil reserves. One explanation was remarkably absent from the debate, accidentally the official one. Can you by any chance remember French head of state Nicolas Sarkozy mentioning the violation of human rights by the Libyan regime? Or maybe you recall American president Obama saying something about the protection of Libyan citizens?

For some reason my fellow students didn't buy the noble motives NATO itself put forth. Is it naive to rejoice when I hear Belgian military planes will help to enforce the no-fly zone? Sure, the NATO members have their agenda, but a nationwide massacre was avoided. It came as a genuine shock to me how harsh and negative the people I socialize with sounded. My grandma portrays more joie de vivre than our entire theatre together and she's almost eighty! It is good to have a critical attitude, but most comments left a real bitter taste. Luckily the professor assumed the role of devil's advocate and pointed out the multitude of facets involved. He kept cool and made clear we are hypocrites out of necessity: we don't protect the Chechens because Russia has nuclear arms, we don't support the Syrian uprising since Assad has close ties with Iran, etc. Just like him, I believe that the political elite of the democratic west wants to address those issues. The price is however too high to pay and so we abstain.

The lesson I learned today is that idealism on it itself doesn't do much good, even though I often flirt with it myself. To all readers who just like me enjoy the occasional stay at Castle Sky: dreaming of a better world is a must, but reality is a bitch. Even idealists should take it into account if they seek a resolution. The blinding light of prefabricated ideologies - of whichever kind - can muddle our vision when dealing with REAL problems. Situations are often more complex than we tend to present them, so remember: it's all swings and roundabouts! :p

september 13, 2011

Just getting started...

A few days ago, a good friend of mine asked whether I could write something for his blog Monticello to Walden. My guest blog was an opinion on the Middle East policy of the US, written in the light of ten years 9/11. I really enjoyed contributing and somehow the blog vibe got to me. This inspired me to write a blog of my own, Swings & Roundabouts.

'Swings and roundabouts' is an English idiom of which I always loved the sound. It signifies that something has about as much advantages as it has disadvantages. Since this blog will mostly cover my two cents on recent (political) developments, I find it fit to have a reminder on the many sides of a debate. S&R serves as an incentive for me to keep up with the world and to think things over. I see it as a project to develop my skills.

Though the aim of S&R is rather personal, everyone is free to read along. Comments or questions are appreciated too. Hope to write for real soon,

Joeri