Dear Readers,
Despite the sarcastic ending, How to end the blockade of Gaza by Stephen Walt brings up an interesting and plausible solution to the current crisis about the aid blockade put up by Israel against access to the Palestinian Territories.
Dr. Stephen Walt suggests that the US kills two birds with one stone--improve its reputation in the Middle East, ease suffering AND help the Israelis (okay, so that is three birds). The suggestion is that the US use the Navy to end the blockade by bringing aid...and therefore making sure that there are no weapons or possible threats in the aid ships (Israel has expressed concerned that weapons will be given to the Palestinians--which is their reason for having the blockade).
Nice quote:
"All it takes is an administration that is willing to take bold action to correct a situation that is both a humanitarian outrage and a simmering threat to regional peace."
I left out the sarcastic ending--but you're welcome to go see it yourself.
Best,
Alena
Thanks to iraqthemodel.blogspot.com for passing this article to me.
Showing posts with label humanity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label humanity. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
The Chinese in Nigeria: What should I ask them?
Dear all,
I will ask this question in a few forms as I prepare for this job in Nigeria. I will be spending 6 months in the Niger Delta, working on a project. On the side, I figure I have a unique opportunity to befriend and interview the Chinese businessmen, government officials, etc while I'm there (since I speak Chinese).
Everyone wants to know what China is up to on the continent of Africa.
What should I ask them? What does everyone really want to know?
Best,
Alena
I will ask this question in a few forms as I prepare for this job in Nigeria. I will be spending 6 months in the Niger Delta, working on a project. On the side, I figure I have a unique opportunity to befriend and interview the Chinese businessmen, government officials, etc while I'm there (since I speak Chinese).
Everyone wants to know what China is up to on the continent of Africa.
What should I ask them? What does everyone really want to know?
Best,
Alena
Friday, April 30, 2010
How to be a consultant?
Dear readers,
I have to pick up the pace, I know.
However, I've been caught up in figuring out how to be a consultant.
I never realized how much work it is...it seems like everything that involves being 'independent' is for the super talented.
You need to be part lawyer, all businessman, an accountant, figure out insurance, health stuff, make sure no one can sue you, you have a good reputation, they have a good reputation, etc and so on.
You also need to make sure that. you. get. PAID!
I've been spending tons of time, trying to figure out contracts, tax language, legal documentation, figuring layers of relationships and more.
Have you been a consultant? Worked for yourself? Tell me how you pulled it off without losing track of something important!
Would love to hear your thoughts!
Best,
Alena
I have to pick up the pace, I know.
However, I've been caught up in figuring out how to be a consultant.
I never realized how much work it is...it seems like everything that involves being 'independent' is for the super talented.
You need to be part lawyer, all businessman, an accountant, figure out insurance, health stuff, make sure no one can sue you, you have a good reputation, they have a good reputation, etc and so on.
You also need to make sure that. you. get. PAID!
I've been spending tons of time, trying to figure out contracts, tax language, legal documentation, figuring layers of relationships and more.
Have you been a consultant? Worked for yourself? Tell me how you pulled it off without losing track of something important!
Would love to hear your thoughts!
Best,
Alena
Thursday, April 15, 2010
In honor of the Nuclear Summit, part IV
Dear all,
Here is part IV in my series of excerpts from President Ikeda's 2010 Peace Proposal.
2010 Peace Proposal
Toward a New Era of Value Creation
Daisaku Ikeda
President, Soka Gakkai International
Expanding frameworks for non-use of nuclear weapons
To date, the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ) has represented an effort to fill the gap in the legal framework left by the absence of any treaty or convention providing a blanket prohibition against the use of nuclear weapons. In 2009, NWFZ treaties entered into force in Central Asia and Africa. These followed similar agreements covering Latin America and the Caribbean, the South Pacific and Southeast Asia. The decision by so many governments to eliminate nuclear weapons from so many regions around the world is truly significant.
Although the preamble to the NPT, which entered into force forty years ago, calls on signatories to “make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,” it is clear that the nuclear-weapon states have not fulfilled that obligation.
The NPT does not, of course, accord these countries an open-ended right to possess nuclear weapons. Despite this, their continued adherence to the doctrine of nuclear deterrence has had the effect of encouraging both “vertical proliferation” (expanded and enhanced nuclear arsenals within nuclear-weapon states) and “horizontal proliferation” (the spread of nuclear technologies to other states and entities). The real-world effect has been to shake and undermine the foundations of the NPT regime itself.
The time has come for the nuclear-weapon states to develop a shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons and to break free from the spell of deterrence—the illusory belief that security can somehow be realized through threats of mutual destruction and a balance of terror. A new kind of thinking is needed, one based on working together to reduce threats and creating ever-expanding circles of physical and psychological security until these embrace the entire world.
As evidence of the nuclear-weapon states’ genuine resolve to move beyond deterrence, I urge them to undertake the following three commitments at the 2010 NPT Review Conference and to work to fully implement them by 2015.
1. To reach a legally binding agreement to extend negative security assurances—the undertaking not to use nuclear weapons against any of the non-nuclear-weapon states fulfilling their obligations under the NPT.
2. To initiate negotiation on a treaty codifying the promise not to use nuclear weapons against each other.
3. Where nuclear-weapon-free zones have yet to be established, and as a bridging measure toward their establishment, to take steps to declare them nuclear non-use regions.
I have no intention of underestimating the difficulties that lie in the way of realizing these commitments, especially the second and third. But it is important to stress that these are political decisions that the nuclear-weapon states can take now while maintaining their current status as possessors of nuclear weapons.
Stay tuned till tomorrow!
Best,
Alena
Here is part IV in my series of excerpts from President Ikeda's 2010 Peace Proposal.
2010 Peace Proposal
Toward a New Era of Value Creation
Daisaku Ikeda
President, Soka Gakkai International
Expanding frameworks for non-use of nuclear weapons
To date, the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ) has represented an effort to fill the gap in the legal framework left by the absence of any treaty or convention providing a blanket prohibition against the use of nuclear weapons. In 2009, NWFZ treaties entered into force in Central Asia and Africa. These followed similar agreements covering Latin America and the Caribbean, the South Pacific and Southeast Asia. The decision by so many governments to eliminate nuclear weapons from so many regions around the world is truly significant.
Although the preamble to the NPT, which entered into force forty years ago, calls on signatories to “make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,” it is clear that the nuclear-weapon states have not fulfilled that obligation.
The NPT does not, of course, accord these countries an open-ended right to possess nuclear weapons. Despite this, their continued adherence to the doctrine of nuclear deterrence has had the effect of encouraging both “vertical proliferation” (expanded and enhanced nuclear arsenals within nuclear-weapon states) and “horizontal proliferation” (the spread of nuclear technologies to other states and entities). The real-world effect has been to shake and undermine the foundations of the NPT regime itself.
The time has come for the nuclear-weapon states to develop a shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons and to break free from the spell of deterrence—the illusory belief that security can somehow be realized through threats of mutual destruction and a balance of terror. A new kind of thinking is needed, one based on working together to reduce threats and creating ever-expanding circles of physical and psychological security until these embrace the entire world.
As evidence of the nuclear-weapon states’ genuine resolve to move beyond deterrence, I urge them to undertake the following three commitments at the 2010 NPT Review Conference and to work to fully implement them by 2015.
1. To reach a legally binding agreement to extend negative security assurances—the undertaking not to use nuclear weapons against any of the non-nuclear-weapon states fulfilling their obligations under the NPT.
2. To initiate negotiation on a treaty codifying the promise not to use nuclear weapons against each other.
3. Where nuclear-weapon-free zones have yet to be established, and as a bridging measure toward their establishment, to take steps to declare them nuclear non-use regions.
I have no intention of underestimating the difficulties that lie in the way of realizing these commitments, especially the second and third. But it is important to stress that these are political decisions that the nuclear-weapon states can take now while maintaining their current status as possessors of nuclear weapons.
Stay tuned till tomorrow!
Best,
Alena
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)