oneworldtalk

Fight has become a dirty word, giving way to diplomacy. While we counsel caution and overly high expectations in dealing with the enormity of the problems, we are not oblivious that the world has had enough of war cry and will endeavour to make peace through understanding and engagement, not violence. It is certainly a more credible, sincere, balanced and capable team than Bush and Cheney had ever wanted to thrown up.

Here's something to read about. Spot the difference :

Can Hilary Clinton and envoys rebuild diplomacy?

Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-ME), U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden, President Barack Obama and former Ambassador Richard Holbrooke look on as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during her first full day on the job at the State Department on January 22, 2009

The euphoria that greeted Hillary Clinton's arrival at the State Department on Thursday was not unfamiliar. Every few years, the usually reserved diplomats at Foggy Bottom drop their world-weariness and get all googly-eyed over a new leader: When Colin Powell took charge in January 2001, he was mobbed by star-struck Foreign Service Officers hoping he'd reverse the department's diminishing stature under Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright. In early 2005, their adulation was even more desperate as they greeted Condoleezza Rice following Powell's four-year emasculation at the hands of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney.

What the downcast diplomats really seek is someone who will return the State Department to the central role it played in the days when American diplomacy shaped the most important world events. And they embraced Secretary Clinton with fervor, as she arrived promising a new era of robust diplomacy.

With President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden at her side, she underscored that promise by announcing two high powered envoys to take charge of diplomatic efforts in two key hot spots: Richard Holbrooke was named Special Adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan, while Senator George Mitchell was named special envoy for the Middle East.

But as much as the envoys' appointments raise hopes for renewed vigor in American diplomacy, they raise questions, too: What's their brief, and does the appointment of either, in itself, signal that the Obama Administration plans to adopt new approaches? To whom will they report, and will deploying two such high-powered players result in conflict with their bosses or counterparts elsewhere in the bureaucracy?

"It shows that given the enormity of the challenges [Clinton] faces she's not scared to get the highest caliber people," says Daniel Levy, of the New America Foundation, "But how do you make it work?" There are reasons to be optimistic that Holbrooke and Mitchell, and Clinton herself for that matter, are part of a new beginning for American diplomacy.

Obama had made rejuvenating diplomacy a centerpiece of his campaign, and he has named a serious and strong-willed team whose members, as much as anything, hate to fail. Both envoys are known to be energetic in the field and to have records of peace-making achievement, Holbrooke in brokering the Dayton Peace Accords that ended the Bosnia conflict, and Mitchell in negotiating the Good Friday Agreement that marked the beginning of the end of the sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland. Some see Mitchell as representing a change in approach to the Middle East. Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League told New York's Jewish Week that he was "concerned" because Mitchell's "meticulously even-handed" approach - he was tasked with formulating proposals to restore the Israeli-Palestinian peace process during the upsurge of violence that followed the failed Camp David summit in 2000 - could represent a break from a policy based on U.S. support for Israel. Gaith al-Omari, a former Palestinian negotiator, says Mitchell's appointment "does send a very good signal and it's creating some excitement among Palestinians." Those who believe that an effective peace process will require that the U.S. talk to Hamas are finding hope in the Mitchell selection. Reflecting two years ago in the International Herald Tribune on his experience in Northern Ireland, Mitchell wrote, "Including in the political process those previously associated with violent groups can actually help. Sometimes it's hard to stop a war if you don't talk with those who are involved in it."

Clinton and Obama have, however, insisted that the U.S. will not talk with Hamas until it renounces violence, recognizes Israel and agrees to abide by previous Palestinian agreements. And on Friday, Clinton is expected to announce another key adviser in Dennis Ross, who has taken a hawkish view on engaging Hamas.

Conflicts within this group of players in the new Administration seem almost inevitable.

Holbrooke, for his part, faces the unenviable task of trying to get the antagonistic governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan to work together against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. That inevitably requires navigating the fraught relationship between Pakistan's civilian government and its security establishment, and rising tensions with neighboring India following last year's Mumbai terror attacks. Clinton described Holbrooke's role in broad terms, saying he would coordinate "across the entire government an effort to achieve U.S. strategic goals," including working with military leaders, foreign aid workers and diplomats in the region. Holbrooke, more than any diplomat of his generation, is known for his effectiveness but also his relentless leveraging of power and authority to the ends he is pursuing. He was a key foreign policy aide to Clinton during her primary campaign, but controlling him now will be difficult: Expect shoving matches between the envoy, the military and USAID, which has helped pour billions of dollars U.S. assistance to Afghanistan over the last eight years. Holbrooke on Thursday made a point of calling Clinton his "boss." If the weary diplomats at the State department want nothing more than action on the diplomatic front, they're certainly going to get it from Holbrooke and Mitchell.

Whether the two men will actually succeed may depend on the policies that guide their efforts and on Hillary Clinton's skills in managing them. She had a simple message for everyone at Foggy Bottom on her first day at work. "This is a team," she told the gathered diplomats, and "We are not any longer going to tolerate the kind of divisiveness that has paralyzed and undermined our ability to get things done for America." Says Levy of the New America Foundation: "I think you can make it work."

http://mobile.time.com/detail.jsp?key=366684&rc=to

The State department and the Foreign Relations network could look forward to more funding, and visibility. Thuggish behavior begets thugs. I don't think people would want to be suicide bombers if we give them enough reasons and hope to live on. But that is not to say that suicide bombings and terrorist activities would stop immediately. It takes time to change things and the world leaders should persevere on the building of peace.

I note with regret that a Buddhist country like Thailand has fallen into so much violence. Same for Tibet. The struggle for separation is getting ugly and in the end nothing is achieved but many lives are lost. What is so bad to accept China today? Same for Tawian although they are on the right track now. These people should work towards a meaningful outcome and avoid bloodshed. There are other places in the world where the struggle continues. Leave it to them, and they go on behaving childishly, irresponsibly - they just don't have leaders who could live up to the reality and vision. And when such leaders appear once in a while, they face assassination by some mad men or extremists.

It calls for a political climate change so that these terrorists could no longer have a platform to survive on. The UN must be seen to be non-partisan and truly able to provide workable solutions that is fair and to the benefit of all. While it may seem to be rhetorical at first, consistent effort and interim results should like to change things over time.

It may take more than a term or two for Obama to change things. But I hope, there would be enough momentum for it to blossom into a movement that would launch a renaissance of world order and bring on changes as fundamental and revolutionary as democracy has brought to the world. Idealism may have caused wars when large political-military blocks were shaped by idealism and pitted against each other. The new forces today ought to be the evolution of a peaceful ideologoy and way of the law vs a terrorists mentality. Bush with his Guantanamo prison, his Iraq invasion, and either-you-are-with-me-or-against-me attitude is not capable of presenting, leading, and mustering the peace-loving forces in the world. I am sure the world desires peace now. And it is just waiting for the right leadership to bring it along. Diplomacy and a constructive approach would pay much dividends for the world. Obama said it well, that the terrorists should measure themselves on what they could build and not on what they could destroy.

Terrorism is cowardly. Even suicide bombers are cowards in the final analysis because they failed to engaged the world positively. Whatever rewards they hope for in the after-life is delusory. Religion cannot be based on lies. Over time, such religions must be exposed for what they are and may the dark forces of terrorism dissipate when they are brought to face the light.

Obama sets stage for likely trade war with China

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20090123/t ... 2362a.html

****
Q : How do you divert attention from yourself being the greatest currency manipulator?
A : By calling others a greater currency manipulator.
Rebuilding diplomacy?? Way to go, Obama..

Allowing the Yuan to go up is in line with the trade balance and thus is good for the long-term equilibirum. Whereas, even though the US is printing more money, the world seem to want to hold on to more US$ for now. It is up these other countries and investors whether they want to buy more US bonds or hold the US currency.

As we look forward to the approaching Spring, we can envsion the beauty of melting snow melts, sprouting buds, all part of the renewal and regeneration of life.

Whether one subscribes to the scientifc study of evolution or not, human survival and growth rests largely on their tenacious traits and positive thinking. It would be advisable not to wander and venture off rudderlessly into shaky ground. Life is already full of challenging tests. These are challenging times for change. But when the revolution has arrived, one should seize the opportunity to reconstruct and not continue causing instability. Many of us has seen how continuous revolutions has caused havoc, turbulence and destruction. Being leftist was popular for a while but it is not sustainable if it goes beyond tensions tolerable by the delicate fabric that weaves human civilisation together.

On this occasion of the lunar new year celebrated by many Asian communities, we are often reminded of many wise and old sayings that carry profound significance, timeless, classic, and are still applicable to our modern world.

画蛇添足 : adding feet to the drawing of the snake does not reflect well of the artist. It lacks a sense of realism and does not convey what is real but an imaginary state that is imposed by the painter of false messages.

无中生有 : to make something out of nothing, in other words fabrication to suit one's purpose and is not an indication of creativity.

We can be open and analytical without getting into unrealistic territory.

It's not up to them.The demand for US dollars is related to its reserve currency status, and that status extent to its connection with oil.Non-oil producing countries cannot buy oil if they do not hold US$. If this connection were removed, it would result in a comparatively greater demand for domestic produce within the USA, stimulating the domestic economy and also reduce the trade imbalances which ultimately supplies the incentive for cheap credit.
By not decoupling between oil pricing and US dollars, the result of US printing more money is exporting this US-made inflation throughout the world and making the current financial crisis worse.

Thanks XP for the very helpful definitions and insightful comments.

Those people who talks about making changes to their lives and others' lives seem to be the sort of people that are more naturally “savvy” and “streetwise”, can ’sniff the wind’ and make the necessary adjustments for their own well-being and survival. However I am not too confident that the required broader sociological changes will occur quite so easily since there is still that massive group who haven’t got a clue and who will become very shocked and distressed when things start to bite.The climate caused by the financial crisis will be fertile ground for unexpected leftist incidents with the potential to exacerbate the situation in ways beyond what we can imagine.

Unfortunately, I’m probably more contrarian and pessimistic - given the scale of the debt accumulated/lies perpetuated and the dependence on growing debt/more lies to keep the show going. I expect we’re in for a serious one no matter what, and it will be prolonged for as long as governments continue trying to help the private sector validate debt that should never have been issued in the first place, and cover up/perpetuate the wrongdoings of pass administrations.