So, first of all a happy new year! may 2009 be much better than 08. I have been quite busy through the whole winter vacation due to some homework that's going to take a long time to complete (read 2 books in Japanese about International Relations then write a 5 page report on that in Japanese). One of my new years resolutions is to start updating this blog more frequently so hopefully I'll start posting at least once every 2 days (as soon as I'm done with my finals in early February) .
I have not yet chosen what I will specialize in in the field of IR but I am interested mainly in 4 things,
1: Water-wars, the increasing scarcity of water is quite a interesting and is already starting to show it's face as a partitial cause (though, yet quite far from being the sole cause) in conflicts like the previous Israel-Lebanon, Sudan and China-Tibet-India.
2: Post Green-wave global structures: If there is a green wave how will trade structures and the relations between the countries look afterwards. I can't imagine there being anything but major changes.
3: Cyber-IR: How is the cyber-structure affecting IR new organizations and treaties etc. are already springing up and to research this would be extremly interesting.
4: EU-Japan, Sweden-Japan Relations: probably the most boring of the 4 but still interesting
as for the finishing touch one of my favourite academics Lawrence Lessig has all his books up for free at his website under a Creative Commons License!! (what else to expect,, he created it)
In the horror/tragedy section we find swedes debating in blogger HAX's comment section about whether it's ok to accept the Guantanamo Prisoners (who are cleared of all charges and released) as refugees in Sweden (in swedish)
Saturday, 3 January 2009
Thursday, 16 October 2008
19th century thinking is the future? a clash of green and global
I'm just going to think out loud for a little while about Russia and it's territorial thinking. I belive that there might actually be something to it. In the days when problems are hoarding up on globalization and a green wave is becoming something of a Tsunami I can't help but to marvel over Russia's (unintentional?) foresightedness. One very probable characteristic of the green wave and increased resistance towards globalization, would be the regionalization of trade-patterns.
This would mean that even though information is abundant, connections and interests outside the local areas would probably loose much importance. For even though the green problem is a global problem part of the solution lies in the efficiency that closeness will provide.
The regionalization might thus tilt the powerbalance in Russias favour granting it much more influence over it's direct neighbors as global influence and oversight ebbs (until a new global system, hopefully one with more friendly characteristics than what we've seen so far, takes over)
This would mean that even though information is abundant, connections and interests outside the local areas would probably loose much importance. For even though the green problem is a global problem part of the solution lies in the efficiency that closeness will provide.
The regionalization might thus tilt the powerbalance in Russias favour granting it much more influence over it's direct neighbors as global influence and oversight ebbs (until a new global system, hopefully one with more friendly characteristics than what we've seen so far, takes over)
Wednesday, 8 October 2008
a good writer
first of all I haven't been productive at all lately but I will make a renewed effort to write every now and then.
Secondly, lately I've been following William Pfaff's columns in Japan Times and I have to say that I really do admire his intelligent writing, I especially recommend the article called "the Threat of a Pentagon Crash"
Secondly, lately I've been following William Pfaff's columns in Japan Times and I have to say that I really do admire his intelligent writing, I especially recommend the article called "the Threat of a Pentagon Crash"
Sunday, 3 August 2008
Japanese Right-wingers and the Beijing Olympics
When I was meeting up with a friend in Shibuya yesterday the (quite unpleasant) "uyoku" set up a protest against the Beijing Olympics (with arguments such as "think of the environment" I have to say that I found it to be quite amusing as well, but,after checking out Arudo Debito`s blog I realized that it`s actually part of the tactics of "Great Japanese Vermillion Light Association") right by the Shibuya Crossing. Needless to say they are extremely loud and don`t like foreigners. The regular "thugs" of these groups don`t seem to have an agenda except for the regular "love my country, hate foreigners and other countries (especially S-E Asia)" and probably they don`t. These groups are quite diverse with an estimated 1000+ groups and 100 000+ members. However, these groups seem to be quite powerful when considered their ties to Yakuza and Japanese politics.
A lot of the groups join causes such as Tibetan/Taiwanese/East Turkestan independence which seems to be quite good causes virtually anywhere but in China. However, taking a strong stance against the Beijing Olympics conveys something more about how these groups are set up to be in politics. They did rise to prominence once again after the war because of the cold-war "red scare" and hence a common theme is the hatred of Communism. All the above mentioned regions as well as the Olympics are items crucial to China's internal stability and security as Tibet gives China a "security buffer" (Himalaya acting as a protective wall) between the Chinese Heartland and the potential rival India. East Turkestan is a vast step land that separates China and Russia/Russian "allies" giving China secure boarders and more internal stability. Taiwan is an Island which makes it less useful geopolitically, but if established as a place where US can put up a military base (note how many troops US have stationed around Chinas western boarders) Bejing would definitly get scared. South Korea is at the moment an island (with North Korea cutting it off providing another buffer for China) hence the unwillingness from not only China but also US and Japan against a Korean reunion as if they reunited in a North Korean manner US military in South would loose it`s foothold (and hence be a threat to Japanese security and American military interests). If united under South Korea, Chinas buffer (the heavily militarized North) would be lost and Beijing would find itself having to deal with the U.S. having land-access to the China.
The Uyoku foreign stance seems to be set up as a grassroots movement to keep China as concerned with internal problems as possible. Not that they can actually do anything about it but nontheless I think that the causes they choose to support says something about how strong a threat that they consider China to be and how monolithic China is made out to be according to a lot of Japanese. "The Red Scare" is definitly alive and well
A lot of the groups join causes such as Tibetan/Taiwanese/East Turkestan independence which seems to be quite good causes virtually anywhere but in China. However, taking a strong stance against the Beijing Olympics conveys something more about how these groups are set up to be in politics. They did rise to prominence once again after the war because of the cold-war "red scare" and hence a common theme is the hatred of Communism. All the above mentioned regions as well as the Olympics are items crucial to China's internal stability and security as Tibet gives China a "security buffer" (Himalaya acting as a protective wall) between the Chinese Heartland and the potential rival India. East Turkestan is a vast step land that separates China and Russia/Russian "allies" giving China secure boarders and more internal stability. Taiwan is an Island which makes it less useful geopolitically, but if established as a place where US can put up a military base (note how many troops US have stationed around Chinas western boarders) Bejing would definitly get scared. South Korea is at the moment an island (with North Korea cutting it off providing another buffer for China) hence the unwillingness from not only China but also US and Japan against a Korean reunion as if they reunited in a North Korean manner US military in South would loose it`s foothold (and hence be a threat to Japanese security and American military interests). If united under South Korea, Chinas buffer (the heavily militarized North) would be lost and Beijing would find itself having to deal with the U.S. having land-access to the China.
The Uyoku foreign stance seems to be set up as a grassroots movement to keep China as concerned with internal problems as possible. Not that they can actually do anything about it but nontheless I think that the causes they choose to support says something about how strong a threat that they consider China to be and how monolithic China is made out to be according to a lot of Japanese. "The Red Scare" is definitly alive and well
Tuesday, 29 July 2008
so here we go,,,
Due to my lack of a Swedish keyboard I`ll just be lazy and write in English I guess.
My intention with this blog is that it will become a place for brainstorming about Geopolitics, Global Politics, International Relations, Power structures etc. anything concerning international politics basically.
It`s meant to be something to keep track of my own thoughts and not to drive opinion but to try and see where politics is moving.
I hope that some of my friends will write about global politics on this blog every now and then and post might show up in either Swedish, English or Japanese but I`ll make sure that there is always an English translation available. That said I`ll start on the subjects of India, Globalization and Democracy.
I recently came across a Podcast from Johns Hopkins where a professor named Rina Agarwala held a short 10 minute presentation that made my mind spin(the others were quite good as well except a journalist named Donald Oberdorfer who tried to cover all of Asia in a quite subjective 10 min presentation). prof. Agarwala talked about the impacts globalization has had on the workforce in India where about 92% of the workforce (of about 400 million workers) are informal workers (defined as: wage workers without legal or social protection who work for formal or informal firms, for households. or for no fixed employer).
Competitiveness is crucial in this day and age and transnational firms have to (not always, but when it comes to manufacturing) rely on cheap labour, hence a huge chunk of workforce ends up in a position where they can`t hold the companies responsible as they don`t always know who their employers are as they often use a lot of middle-men, and they have to compete for the job`s I.E it`s hard to blame the employer (no working conditions+ Making demands + other jobtakers = Fired). So they end up with the politicians.
In India this had led to something interesting, in a democracy when an economically insecure group (who, we can assume, wants security for their day to day livelihood) makes up a huge part of the (voting)population politicians have to react, and it seems like they are. Instead of the increased wages that they might demand from an employer if they organized, they organize on a town/city/region level making demands of the politicians such as welfare benefits and ask for recognition for the work they do from the state. This all forces the state to play a much bigger part in the workers lives and thus the decline of the role of the nation-state that`s been proclaimed by so many seems quite far off. Or is it?States also have bills to pay. Todays capital (at least for the TNCs) is highly mobile when it comes to the manufacturing sector and uneducated workforce is not. The developement is hard to foresee but will be interesting to watch.
My intention with this blog is that it will become a place for brainstorming about Geopolitics, Global Politics, International Relations, Power structures etc. anything concerning international politics basically.
It`s meant to be something to keep track of my own thoughts and not to drive opinion but to try and see where politics is moving.
I hope that some of my friends will write about global politics on this blog every now and then and post might show up in either Swedish, English or Japanese but I`ll make sure that there is always an English translation available. That said I`ll start on the subjects of India, Globalization and Democracy.
I recently came across a Podcast from Johns Hopkins where a professor named Rina Agarwala held a short 10 minute presentation that made my mind spin(the others were quite good as well except a journalist named Donald Oberdorfer who tried to cover all of Asia in a quite subjective 10 min presentation). prof. Agarwala talked about the impacts globalization has had on the workforce in India where about 92% of the workforce (of about 400 million workers) are informal workers (defined as: wage workers without legal or social protection who work for formal or informal firms, for households. or for no fixed employer).
Competitiveness is crucial in this day and age and transnational firms have to (not always, but when it comes to manufacturing) rely on cheap labour, hence a huge chunk of workforce ends up in a position where they can`t hold the companies responsible as they don`t always know who their employers are as they often use a lot of middle-men, and they have to compete for the job`s I.E it`s hard to blame the employer (no working conditions+ Making demands + other jobtakers = Fired). So they end up with the politicians.
In India this had led to something interesting, in a democracy when an economically insecure group (who, we can assume, wants security for their day to day livelihood) makes up a huge part of the (voting)population politicians have to react, and it seems like they are. Instead of the increased wages that they might demand from an employer if they organized, they organize on a town/city/region level making demands of the politicians such as welfare benefits and ask for recognition for the work they do from the state. This all forces the state to play a much bigger part in the workers lives and thus the decline of the role of the nation-state that`s been proclaimed by so many seems quite far off. Or is it?States also have bills to pay. Todays capital (at least for the TNCs) is highly mobile when it comes to the manufacturing sector and uneducated workforce is not. The developement is hard to foresee but will be interesting to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
