SOUNDING BOARD is an outlet for opinions on good and crazy things going on at home (wherever I may be). All are welcome. You are not expected to bring anything except your common sense & sense of humor.
'If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce would today cost $100, get one million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside.'
-Robert X. Cringely (from geek wisdom)
SOUNDING BOARD
Monday, September 30, 2002
_____________________________________________
Mobile technology for poverty alleviation
This article reminds me of grameen phone - a completely revolutionary poverty alleviation/microcredit scheme that revolves around mobile phone use, started by Iqbal Quadir in Bangladesh. Not that it presents something like the grameen phone in scope, but it says "developing countries are taking up next generation technologies". And somehow, I am still searching for a reading material that discusses in details how new technologies can benefit the poor as well as provide profits to private business - aside from grameen phone. Well ok, since I'm on the grameen phone topic, 2 things puzzle me on this grameen phone: (1) is it only efficient and effective whe linked with microcredit schemes?; and (2) does it work only in areas where there is no (or less) competition with respect to mobile coverage? Hmmm...
posted by Allan at 8:45 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
These people will have a hard time existing in an open society. When dependence on oil declines due to technological advances (which is not so far away), these guys will be forced to open up to the rest of the world. And when you do, be ready for the intolerance of the outside world, the way you practiced intolerance to the rest of us.
posted by Allan at 8:38 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Here's a web special on Jemaah Islamiah (JI) network. This one outlines the reasons why they turned to terrorism. The leaders "give them a sense of self-worth, paint a cause worthy of total commitment and self-absorption, and promise power and personal absolution - all for the price of obedience, submission and conformity" (Straits Times Web Special on JI). So it's not really poverty, as what Gloria Arroyo thinks. I guess this is what her government needs to realize - that counterterrorism interventions should not be just military and anti-poverty measures.
posted by Allan at 12:17 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
SOUNDING BOARD
Sunday, September 29, 2002
_____________________________________________
Indeed, the essence of democracy does not end in elections. Prof. Randy David made an excellent point with this op-ed. However, and I don't want to sound hopeless, majority still vote based on popularity and not on platform. These voters, who think that government is an extension of the TV soaps they religiously watch, dictate the future of the country. It's high time that government opens up and really collaborate with the civil society on advocacy and social mobilization in educating the voters. This is the comparative advantage of civil soceity groups and their role should be maximized.
posted by Allan at 9:48 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
This seems to be a welcome development. Nepal government decriminalizes abortion. The government has come to grips with reality. I wonder when will this happen in the Philippines. With politics of patronage and insufficient coalition-building to neutralize the church's position, clandestine and unsafe abortion will continue. Blame it on the Spanish people who brought Philippines one backward "legacy" - religion.
posted by Allan at 4:50 PM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
So it's a psychological warfare before the passage of the official UN Security Council resolution. US threatens to go in; Iraq threatens that it won't be a picnic for US. We shall see if the moves will change once the UN Security Council resolution is final.
One thing is certain, US is not backing out from its threat. So if this is a "chicken" game, and the official resolution is passed, Iraq's rational move is to yield. But Saddam is anything but rational.
It is risky to approach this whole thing from the point of view of deterrence. There may be some aspects of deterrence in general issues on homeland defense. However, it seems reasonable to believe that rational choice theory (hence, game theory) does not explain adequately Saddam's moves (of course we can half-seriously say he isn't a rational person). Propect theory may explain it better, and I think this paper lays the foundation for further analysis.
posted by Allan at 4:08 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
This article says Saddam has impersonators posing for him in some occasions. Question... why does Saddam have three doubles? Answer... cuz he wants to beat around the Bush.
posted by Allan at 4:07 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Suu Kyi going to work with junta??? Ok, tell me... what's going on here? Why is she going to work with these guys? I hope this is a strategic move.
posted by Allan at 4:07 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
East Timor joins UN. I can picture it in my head...
UN: Congratuations East Timor, you're the 191st member of UN.
East Timor: So what does a member do?
UN: Oh, that's easy - read the news and make sure you look busy.
posted by Allan at 4:07 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
This is one scary story. Something tells me it's gonna be a messy battle. Even if the anti-Saddam forces were able to find him and his weapons, they have no way of quickly and safely destroying these weapons once they've been tracked down. I hope this is not entirely correct. It's really gonna be damn messy down there.
posted by Allan at 4:06 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Record companies - hacker wannabees. I couldn't believe this. They wan't to hack into our PCs? Things are getting crazier everyday. These people even want to ride on the internet security hype these days.
posted by Allan at 4:06 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
This article is based on a 1992 article in the same source. It's amazing that the issue is valid today as it was 10 years ago.
This is related to some of my posts in my old SOUNDING BOARD. There are no straightforward answers. Some smart ass would say it's a matter of choice. Women chose to be where they want to be. Where? At home. Some of them especially in the developing world may get up to middle level positions. As the rank goes up, the number of women goes down. This inverse relationship is common all over the world. Why is that? Choice? I guess the more valid question is this: Is it an informed choice? Are they being constrained by other factors in making choices?
posted by Allan at 4:05 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Hungry state refuses food donations. This is a coverage on Zambia. Zambia's president refuses to accept donations from US. I thought the only unbelievable reason was because the government thinks it's dangerous to the people's health. Duh. Then let them die. You don't want to feed them anyway. There is another reason, and that is because Europe is Zambia's major importer of agricultural products. And they're worried that their crops might be contaminated. It will affect trade with Europe. OMG. It's worse that I thought. Then fine, let them die so you can trade with Europe.
posted by Allan at 4:04 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
The Bush administration recently published a document that contain its rationale for the refocusing of military strategy toward pre-emptive action against hostile states and terrorist groups, especially those who are developing WMD. A hawkish document bearing the stamp of Condoleeza Rice. Bush edited the document because he thought there were sections where US sounded arrogant or overbearing. That's not the "stamp of Ms. Rice, is it? Nevertheless, she's quite an extraordinary woman, don't you think so?
posted by Allan at 4:04 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
China warns US on Iraq. Chinese PM's warning during the Asem meeting recently in Copenhagen. Blah blah blah.
Maximum penalty should be given to those Chinese poachers detained in the Philippines. Click here. Philippine Justice Secretary was mad as hell because of alleged bullying by the Chinese Ambassador. Well, don't be upset too much Secretary Perez, he's probably just being himself.
Seems like they're going for regime change. Colin Powell did not want to comment on the issue. I guess they're really going for it. That's fine with me.
posted by Allan at 4:01 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
There was high online demand and the UK sites had difficulty coping up. I did have some difficulty accessing the dossier from all the sources mentioned. By 3 pm (GMT+8) everyone must be downloading like mad. I got it quickly. Yessssss.
posted by Allan at 4:01 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
Don't fret, some creative people are circulating a certain unique solution to bring peace this our world. All along, I didn't realize that I've started doing peace advocacy when I was in grade school.
posted by Allan at 4:01 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
I saw it coming. Someone would write something about this. Someone with a predisposition or political leaning that is a bit similar with mine. Here's a nice piece of article on buraucratic leftism. Yeah, tell me about it.
posted by Allan at 4:00 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
The Blair dossier - a product of intelligence work. The major website sources for this document at 3 pm (GMT+8) were all down. Good thing I had some "alternative" sources to draw from. I like the way Blair ended his speech "...should Saddam continue to defy the will of the international community, this House, as it has in our history so many times before, will not shrink from doing what is necessary and right".
No matter what the current context is, some people really have three 'dominant strategies' (no game theory implication) to anything related to US - object, object and object.
The writer argues that US has no moral obligation 'to beat the drums of war' against Iraq. He wrote a whole litany of weapons, military strategies, defense system and budgets of US, and concluded that 'What is endangering the world most is the United States imposing its militaristic policy and mass-producing weapons of mass destruction. The United Nations and the rest of the world are correct in opposing America’s planned war against Iraq.
Huh?! So it's US endangering the world now, and we should ignore Iraq? What?! You gotta be kidding me. Open your eyes to reality. Iraq did not allow unfettered access to sensitive areas during the last weapons inspection in 1998. What does that imply? Think.
'UN and the rest of the world opposing America's planned war' against Iraq? I don't know where that came from. It certainly is very sweeping.
It was under the old UN Security council resolution that Iraq did not give unfettered access to weapons inspectors. It was under the old resolution that they objected to further continuation of the inspections. Now the Iraqi government, upon the theat of international military campaign, gave in. To some it was good news. But is it? Think. If they will let inspections continue, they might as well do it in the old resolution, as the proposed resolution/s will surely be tougher. And if they can afford not to give unfettered access and even discontinue as what they did before, they can do it now, and anytime as long as they are governed by the old resolution. This will defintely delay the process, asssuming US doesn't 'go it alone'.
Iraq agreed "unconditionally" to let the weapons inspectors in. That was official. But did Iraq categorically stated they agreed to an unfettered access for inspectors? Think. That's a totally different ballgame.
There are a lot of aspects to consider here. In fact, assuming that US goes to war with or without UN, the more crucial questions are - how do we deal with Iraq after the war and after regime change? How do we rebuild Iraq? Of course, for some people (and some of them are still holding hammer and sickle even after thousands of lessons all over the world has shown that their revered system won't work), it's always gonna be three simplistic and overused strategy - object, object and object.
posted by Allan at 3:57 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
As Iraq agrees for UN inspectors' unconditional access, Bush seeks support from US Congress.
I don't know what the hell Iraq refers to as "practical arrangements". It agrees to unconditional access but they want to talk about practical arrangements. Indeed, as Dick Cheney said, "we've seen this sort of thing before". The Iraqi government should be reminded that the UN Inspection process may proceed even without any warning to the sites for inspection. See this BBC feature on weapons inspectors for details.
It seems that the Arab world has indeed a valid reason for having encouraged Saddam to admit the inspectors back in. However, what they didn't see is the resoluteness of the hawks. As of this time, Bush seeks US Congress' support for a military action against Iraq. US seems very determined to "go it alone". Machiavelli will smile at US and say "make your wars big and quick". This is scary (read: exciting, ooops).
George Bush has learned to play it smart this time. The UN Security Council is the legitimizing factor to a military campaign against Iraq. With UN Security Council resolution(s), US will never have to "go it alone".
The "hawks" may have won the earlier rounds, but the "doves" are certainly happy with the turn of events. The burden of proof is on Iraq's shoulders now. The Iraqi government has defied UN a couple of times. They are in no way to demand any comprehensive package as what that senior Iraqi official is hinting on. And I don't appreciate that whole "US is looking for pretext to attack" rubbish argument. Sure, that could have been Bush's motives, nevertheless, if Iraq has no WMD, it will allow weapons inspectors for the last time. Otherwise, we have all the reason to believe they are hiding something. The burden of proof is on their shoulders. And we should move fast.
The phrase "go it alone" was borrowed from Joseph Nye's book entitled "The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can't Go It Alone". He focused on US "soft power" (generally, the ability to co-opt rather than coerce) as opposed to hard power (military force). US soft power is on a rise and fall (but on the rise generally) for the past few years. We can see this on MTV, US scholarships, movies, etc. Greater unilateralism will decrease US soft power. Bush's legitimacy-seeking expedition through that blunt (in a good way, yes I like the speech) speech to the UN General Assembly recently seems a good tactic. It appears he is learning. Bush may soon get legitimacy on his planned attack. But this time, it's gonna be a UN military campaign on Iraq. This seems unavoidable, and that's why the rest of the Arab world is sending a "let-the-weapons-inspectors-in" sort of message to Saddam.
What happens to American soft power after all these is just coincidental. Nevertheless, this whole thing of going through UN may surely increase US soft power. It's the way to go. UN may soon declare "you'll never go it alone" to US in a multilateral military campaign against Iraq (unless Iraq lets weapons inspectors in). Tony Blair will say, "That was my idea" (which he mentioned during his speech to the trade unions). And Joseph Nye will just humbly smile and say, "This is all in my book".
posted by Allan at 1:33 AM (GMT+8)
permalink (URL of this post) ::
(0) comments
::
main page
