AVR's Overseas Adventures

Tonight I had the pleasure of attending a lecture by Ambassador John Bolton. For those of you who do not know who he is, Bolton is the former Permanent US Representative to the United Nations (August 2005 to December 2006) as appointed by President Bush. Yet, lest you think he just a typical diplomat, let me reveal his character by noting the title of his forthcoming book: “Surrender is not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations”. Further to this point, perhaps his most (in)famous quote is: “there’s no such thing as the United Nations. If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference” (1994). The question of why President Bush would assign an outspoken critic of the UN to a key UN post was not addressed in the lecture, but might be worth considering when thinking about how the administration valued international institutions and international norms. That aside, the main topic of the LSE lecture focused on how the international community was responding (he would say incorrectly) to regimes pursing weapons of mass destruction – specifically, North Korea and Iran.

As someone who sees some good coming out of the United Nations despite the organization’s obvious shortcomings, I was prepared to be vehemently opposed to Bolton’s aggressive, “I don’t do carrots” hawkish, neo-conservative rhetoric. However, I was very surprised to hear Ambassador Bolton articulate positions that did not seem entirely alien to my ears. His desire to cease negotiations with North Korea on the nuclear issue was, I thought, an accurate if unpopular assessment, although his solutions are less logical. Here let me elaborate; I will leave Iran for another night.

North Korea has, over the last 20 years, made a poor secret of its ambitions for nuclear weapons. It has consistently advanced its technical knowledge and physical capabilities, culminating in the 2006 test of a nuclear device. However, what is incredible about this case study is that throughout these two decades, the North Korean regime was continually involved in negotiations to abandon its nuclear weapons program. Several times, the DPRK formally agreed to halt its development in exchange for massive, desperately needed foreign aid. Yet, while aid flowed liberally to the regime, the world proved unable and/or unwilling to effectively enforce the nuclear aspect of the agreements, allowing the DPRK off the hook on every occasion. In short, the DPRK was able to leverage the threat of a nuclear program to sustain its repressive regime, while nevertheless covertly pressing forward towards its ultimate goal – nuclear great-power status.

As the DPRK has continually and comprehensively subverted its commitments to the nuclear non-proliferation regime, Bolton considers negotiation with the DPRK fruitless for the international community. This includes writing-off the achievements of the most recent treaty, signed in February 2007, which has been championed by many in the West. In a paper I wrote in late 2006, I agreed with Bolton’s stance. Despite the rhetoric of this recent agreement, history and logic indicate Kim Jong-Il will never give up his nuclear weapons program – they are far too valuable to the survival of his regime, both in terms of a physical deterrent and as a symbol of prestige.

Unfortunately, a potential nuclear attack is not the only threat posed by the DPRK, as it is beyond dispute that a nuclearized North Korea presents a serious danger to non-proliferation efforts. The rogue state has been involved in horizontal (state to state) proliferation with Iran, Pakistan and now potentially, Syria (Israeli fighter jets attacked and destroyed an alleged nuclear site in Syria in September 2007 that is arguably linked to the DPRK). Not to mention, there is always the possibility that Jong-Il might be able and/or willing to sell a nuclear device to a non-state, ‘terrorist’ organization if the price is right or his need for finances grows desperate.

Where all of this really gets interesting (read complex) is in the difficulty in finding a workable solution to the problem. Bolton desire is for a toppling of the government of Kim Jong-Il, and he is ready to commit to military action at any cost over a nuclearized DPRK. However, even the hawk recognizes that the cost of force against the DPRK million-man-army would be staggering, and that a heavy-handed diplomatic track might be pursued first. To this end, Bolton argued that the US should greatly increase its pressure on the Chinese government (which effectively props up the government by supplying it with nearly all its energy and food) even if that means jeopardizing the budding Sino-US economic and political ties. In fact, Bolton suggests that China might be persuaded to remove Kim Jong-Il from power even though the collapse of North Korea would produce a flood of refugees that would seriously destabilize North Asia and disrupt the peaceful conditions that China considers essential to its personal skyrocketing economic growth. Too bad he does not elaborate on what measures the United States might take to bring China to this conclusion.

To me, it seems impossible to consider China ever coming on board with US interests in the region, whether through positive diplomatic relations or pressure tactics. As much as China dislikes a nuclearized North Korea, China is primarily focused on its domestic modernization and does not want to deal with the messy repercussions of a failed state on its border – it has no interest in pushing Kim Jong-Il’s government to the breaking point. Unfortunately, breaking apart the DPRK regime appears the only realistic method of disarming it. Thus, Bolton’s hope for a Chinese-led, US-instigated effort to destroy North Korean leadership is illogical.

The US is left with three unpalatable options. One is to forge harsh UN sanctions against North Korea in an effort to squeeze it into extinction through multilateralism – however, this has already failed as China’s presence in the Security Council moderated UN responses to the nuclear test. Alternately, the US can seize on a moment of opportunity or provocation to engage in military action (whether targeted against the leadership, or on a larger scale) and endanger its South Korea and Japanese allies, as well as run the risk of Chinese intervention. Finally, the US can grudgingly tolerate North Korea as a nuclear power, continually trying to constrain DPRK capabilities and proliferation with enticements of aid while trying to ignore the fact that voluntary compliance by North Korea will never be forthcoming.

Unfortunately, the United States will be forced in the coming years to pursue the third option, as it is constrained by a plethora of overlapping concerns: military overstretch in Iraq, domestic distaste aversion to another military conflict (especially in Asia), anxiety among US regional allies, the threat of China, international disagreement over appropriate action, etc. How this policy will impact global security is yet unforeseen. In some senses, the US can rest easier knowing that the DPRK regime is primarily concerned with its own survival and would not provoke an international confrontation unless it genuinely felt itself under threat from either domestic or foreign pressures (or both). In this light, the DPRK might actually be a fairly predictable actor. However, it would be dangerous to forget that Kim Jong-Il is both a desperate and opportunistic leader. He is eager to vault North Korea into the great power elites, and paranoid of the United States threats against him (he hid for 6 weeks in underground bunkers at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom). China’s economic and political reforms, the rejuvenation of the US-Japanese alliance and other regional security changes will deeply influence the DPRK’s future behaviour, and will alter DPRK perceptions of its friends and foes. Thus, while it is unlikely that there will be a direct attack by North Korea in the region, it is already evident that that the increasingly isolated regime is finding it shares common interests with terrorist groups and other rogue nations. One thing is for certain - the more actors are involved with North Korea, the less stable the global security picture becomes.

So after 6 weeks of LSE, in a lull between the early round of essays and the Christmas blitz, I thought the time was right to take advantage of London’s proximity to continental Europe. After much debate about the destination (mostly concerning cost- I am after all still a student on a student budget!) my friend Colleen and I decided that Paris was beckoning!

Our journey started at St. Pancras International Train Station, the jewel of the English transportation system and the new home of the Eurostar high speed rail network. The station had just opened three days before we were scheduled to leave, and it was beautiful in itself. We had managed to book a seat sale on the Eurostar, and I now agree that travel by train is sooooo much easier than travelling by plane.

Metal detectors, passport control: Yes. Huge lineups, lost baggage and take-off-your-shoes-and-belt: No. Extremely convenient and very fast as well. From the heart of London to the heart of Paris, the entire trip was only 2 hours and 15 minutes!

After orienting ourselves, we took a jaunt through downtown Paris down towards our hostel.

It was a good thing we were planning on walking the city before we left – there is a massive public transportation strike in France right now and our feet were the only way of getting around. However, for me, there is no better way to get to know a new place than by experiencing it at street level, and we were keen to get started.

Having successfully located our hostel, it was off for a leisurely stroll along the Seine as the sun set over Paris.

With Notre Dame looming on the Paris skyline, we could not help but be drawn inside the famous icon. Much different than St. Paul’s in London, Notre Dame was dark and distinctly Gothic in design (evident even to a non-expert in art history).

Inside, countless recessed chapels lined the walls, lit by prayer and memorial candles. Just as we were leaving, the Friday evening service started and we decided to stay. It was amazing to hear the choir’s songs and organ music fill the hall, and to watch the priest perform the rites in a tradition nearly 900 years old. It was an experience I will not forget.

It was a clear night in Paris, but briskly cold (near freezing) so Colleen and I kept warm by poking our heads into every shop that looked interesting. By the time we found dinner in a French bistro, we were ready for a touristy but nonetheless classic meal in one of Paris’ eclectic neighbourhoods. Finally, to top off the night, we decided to go adventure-hunting and, passing by an ally filled with young, well-dressed French people, we thought we would check out what was happening. Somehow, from there, we stumbled into this uber-hip underground French art show/concert. No joke, the club was inside a nondescript warehouse, where the drinks were free (yes free!) all night long. On stage, they had a group we dubbed the Supernerds, appropriate because they were four nerdy-looking guys – two with their laptops, one with a violin and one with a keyboard – mixing live house music by synthesizing computer-generated bass beats with the live instruments.

As weird as it is to describe, their product was unique and the crowd loved it. To make the night even more random, the basement was full of crazy new-age art (i.e. a photo of a severed pig’s head, surrounded by luxurious pink satin!!) Tres bizarre!

The next morning Colleen and I split up, and I meandered through the Saturday morning Parisian markets a fair distance off the traditional tourist tracks. Eventually, I made my way back down to the Royal Palace, a vast and impressive complex that now houses the exhibits of the Louvre.



Unable to resist the opportunity, I paid entry and navigated through galleries filled with relics of the great civilizations (which I am actually learning about in my Empires class!). Statues from Greece and Rome, hieroglyphics from Egypt, paintings from the Renaissance – I was only there for a few hours but I got the whirlwind tour!



From there, it was onwards up the Champs D’Elise and up to l’Arc du Triomphe, where I could not help but snap a clichéd photo of myself with baguette!



The last spot to visit was, of course, the Eiffel Tower, and Colleen and I met up again in the afternoon and wove our way towards the landmark. On the way, we stopped to pick up the ingredients for a Parisian picnic – wine, cheese, sliced meat and baguette. When we reached the foot of the Tower, we sat down and had ourselves a proper feast under the clear night sky, just soaking in the experience.



Having eaten and drank our fill, there was nothing left to do but to climb up as high as we could and enjoy Paris by night.

Surveying the city, it was hard to even grasp the twists and turns of life that brought me to that moment. It seems like only an instant ago I was idly working on sets in Vancouver, yet I have now enjoyed three legendary capital cities – Washington, London and Paris – in the span of a year. Now, it seems that life could take me anywhere...

So I have officially survived my first LSE essay.

Two weeks ago, in the fourth week of term, I had finally figured out my life. Daily demands on my time - when to study, when to go to school, when to work out, go out, etc - had developed into manageable rhythms, and I had grand hopes of keeping everything under control. Enter the Roman Empire.

It has been a long while since my last attempt at a formal paper, and so the task of writing 3000 words on the vague and massive question "why did the Roman Empire last so long" seemed daunting. Adding to my concern was the reality that I have zero background knowledge of any ancient history. Ten days later, after multiple trips to the library, a few late nights and a LOT of mini-Snickers bars, I handed my finished product in to the professor on Friday. Yay! Now the waiting game begins.

Curiously, none of the essays I will write here have any impact on my final grade. LSE considers them 'non-assessed papers', used to hone your research, writing and analytical skills. This means that we receive a blizzard of comments and a theoretical grade, but it all hinges on the summer-term exam. With that in mind, let me provide a quick account of the wacky marking scheme the university uses. The first thing to note is LSE actually has two levels of failure: Bad Fail (0-40%), and just regular Fail (40-49%) - you know it’s not a good sign when they need to make distinctions!! Next step up is the Pass (50-59%), but from thereon up it gets really strange. Graduating with Merit, something to be proud of, only requires a 60-69%. Graduating with Distinction, the highest award LSE gives to its students, takes up the last bracket at 70-85%. They don’t even pretend to give high marks; it is simply not possible to earn an 86% or above at LSE, even though they technically grade on a 0-100% scale. Very strange indeed. Anyway, the long and short of it is that I am hoping my initial attempt will not get me laughed out of the school! Updates to follow.

I have also started French classes at LSE, with the intention of rediscovering some knowledge from my seven years of instruction in Ontario. Ideally, I would like to achieve basic conversational fluency at the end, so that living in France or working in the Canadian government become more realistic possibilities. Thankfully, LSE’s language centre programs are, to quote the teacher ‘not designed to make you fail’ (unlike the aforementioned grading system!).

Squash is progressing well – much of the day-to-day responsibility has been delegated to the team captains, so that I can enjoy playing without having to micro-manage. Hooray for hierarchical management! We have also ordered uniforms for the teams, so I will post some flashy (read nerdy, haha) team and action pictures as soon as we are properly kitted-out. On a side-note, it turns out that the LSE Squash club is annually LSE’s largest club, and the Athletic Director predicts that our membership rolls at the end of the year will run close to 500. Luckily most just do their own thing, book their own courts and don’t require any attention. The most we have done was to organize a club night last week, at the Ministry of Sound.

For those who don’t know, the MOS is considered the birthplace of house music, and the club attracts world-famous DJ’s and performers. As someone who likes that genre and has heard about the Ministry for years, it was like going to a party and a tourist attraction at the same time!

(FYI, no I did not get inside the Matrix at MOS, nor was my camera on a crazy acid trip when this picture was taken. It's just a cool decorative element inside the club!)

All round, a fun night that will no doubt be repeated soon.

Again I will end with a question that was brought up in my classes. Last week, we examined the role of China, specifically how its continuing growth will affect traditional international power structures. China is undoubtedly booming economically – Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is pouring in, and exports are pouring out – and China publicly states that its chief policy goal is to maintain the peaceful conditions necessary for sustained growth. This view is shared by many scholars outside of China, who now consider the nation too caught up in the web of economic globalization to pose any serious security threat. In essence, the ‘democratic peace’ argument popular in the 1990’s (that democracies do not go to war with other democracies) has now transitioned into a new concept of ‘economic peace’: globalized economies do not go to war with other globalized economies.

However this, to me (a history student), appears a naive position that has been embraced, and then disproven, numerous times throughout world history. Most notably, this same ‘economic peace’ argument was evident in scholarship in the early 20th century, when German and English markets were booming and international trade had skyrocketed. Despite a fiercely competitive arms race, the idea that two ‘modern’ industrialized economic powerhouses would go to war seemed ludicrous. Yet, obviously, war broke out nonetheless.

Certainly, the economic situation of today is not comparable to that of the 1910’s. But today’s globalization does not only provide stability (via expanded market access, reduction/elimination of tariffs, mobilization of capital, etc) but also increases the risk of catastrophic failure by massively increasing the liquidity of international investments. In the event of a war (or looming threat of it), Gap and GM might lose their tangible assets in China, but many other investors could instantly relocate their funds. I am not saying that it would be a financially intelligent decision – it is obvious that large-scale war typically decimates economies – but simply trying to point out that wars are rarely logical or inevitable, and that the financial system does have an important element of liquidity.

On that happy note, I sign off for the evening! Oh, I just wanted to alert everyone again to the option of subscribing to the blog (top right) so that you just recieve an e-mail when I post an update. Saves me having to put up bulletins every time.
Cheers

Hello all,

Well I thought it fitting on this day, my 4-week anniversary of moving to the UK, to write another entry.

It's amazing to feel the duality of time moving very quickly, yet very slowly here. In many instances, it still feels like I have barely arrived - I've yet to recieve my working bank card or public transit pass, I just barely have ironed out my final course selection, and can still get very lost, very quickly even in the most 'familiar' of LSE corridors and London streets. However, the product of living so close to so many people means that the friendships you forge rapidly develop strength and history. In this respect, it seems like I have been here for ages. Thus, the overall effect is to guarentee that each day is a jumble of experiences. Bumping into familiar faces in the midst of an unknown place can be both disorienting and comforting. Time can certainly tick by painfully in lectures (though this doesn't happen too often, yet!) but I am amazed at how fast I seem to end up at home making dinner, trying to unpack and digest the day's events.

I've also been thinking about the content of this blog. Obviously, after 4 weeks, everyone can safely assume that I'm settling into my schooling and am adapting to the city. I do have every intention of remaining at least part tourist through my time here, and plan on travelling as well. You should expect a travel-commentary as the opportunities present themselves to explore. However, I would also like to discuss some of the ideas that grab my attention at LSE. Part of this is for my own selfish benefits - I need to hone my writing skills on learned concepts, and this is an ideal outlet. But beyond that, I hope some of you who read the blog will challenge my opinions and ask questions both of me, and of yourself. I feel very lucky to be studying at this school and hope to share with you some of the different perspectives that have opened themselves to me. I realize I may bore you at times, but hey, it's my blog -- if you don't like it, close it!

With all of that on the table, I want to abandon it for a moment and tell you about visiting St. Pauls Cathedral. The current incarnation was built in the years after 1666, overtop of the foundations of a previous church destroyed in the great fire of London. Since then, it has stood the test of time (including the Blitz) and continues to dominate the skyline even as the urban hub of London grows up around it (as you have no doubt noticed from other posted pictures).

Stepping inside the doors (and paying the 8.50 entry fee!) reveals a massive space that is lavishly decorated with gold leaf and glittering tile. Stone pillars rise many stories overhead, drawing the eye upwards to stunning mosiac ceilings covered in hand-painted scenes of biblical tradition. A solumn quiet wraps itself around every visitor, and as you walk past the High Altar and pulpit you cannot help but reflect on the centuries of ceremony - both in happiness and sorrow - that now share this space with you. Though I am not religious, the Cathedral interior is nevertheless powerful and humbling.

St. Pauls also allows you to climb the 434 old, spiralling, stone-cut stairs up to its observatory galleries. From here, you get an unobstructed 360 panorama of London, not much lower than that afforded at the apex of the London Eye. Again, I picked a day where the sky was clear so that I could rake in the view. I don't really know why I love city-scapes, but this was a treat for me!

I will leave you with one thought that has inspired me in my studies thus far. It sparks from what I considered an otherwise-irrelevant journal article articulating strict definitions of empire. I will spare you 65 pages of dull text, but want to discuss one of the conclusions offered on the merits of studying empires and imperialism. The thrust is that the idea of modernity is not unique to our current political, social and economic moment. We must remember that every great empire across time, whether in Asia, Europe, Africa or South America, has considered itself a complex and developed power, and that citizens of empire (subjects of empire aside) considered themselves part of a modern and advanced culture.

Accepting this fact, we only have to glance through history to see many examples of these 'modern' empires embracing and propagating values that we consider unacceptable today - slavery, institutionalized racism, religious crusading, etc. Further, we take pride in our own ability to overcome many (though not all) of these evils through countless acts of personal bravery and individual courage.

Thus, it is puzzling to understand why today, so many people think of the injustices of our own 'modern' world as unchangeable, too monolithic, complex and/or distant to be altered by a single personal action or choice. So many times, we witness suffering in Africa or Asia, or environmental abuses, or gaping economic inequalities, yet we throw our hands up and despair: "What can I do that will change anything?". In this sense, the concept of being 'modern' and 'advanced' permits us to deflect responsibility and preserve our moral dignity in the face of glaring evidence to the contrary.

What we have to remember is that change rarely comes from top-down action or decree. People at the top are all-too-often those who are most resistant to change, having drawn their positions of power and/or wealth from the system that is institutionalizing the problems. Meaningful, lasting social change is a bottom-up phenomenon, and the power to change is possessed by every person in every society, no matter whether it is governed by dictatorship or democracy. You can reclaim ownership of 'modernity' and 'development' by making a personal committment to small positive changes within your own environment. In doing so, you are joining a grass-roots movement that can, and often does, succeed over time in making a powerful, global impact.
[Original Article: Cooper, F. "Colonialism in Question" (Berkeley: U of California Press, 2005), especially pages 234-242]
- - - - - -
Well, the time is upon me to make some dinner. A final suggestion: I would recommend you subscribe to this blog by clicking on the "Subscribe" button at the top, right of the page (Under the Navigation Header). You'll get an e-mail when I put up another entry, which saves me endlessly notifying everyone.
~Alex

Obviously, so sorry friends for the long delay between posts - life has gotten very hectic very quickly over here, both by choice and by necessity. That does not mean that I have forgotten about you, merely that I have needed to do all of my readings and organize my other commitments to avoid appearing incompetent so early in the year!

First, let me sum up my activities in the last two weeks. In terms of being a tourist in London, I have not made much progress. I did manage to get up on the London Eye (the massive ferris wheel looming over the Thames), which was an incredible experience. It is one thing to know London hold 8 million people, but it is another thing entirely to witness the city stretching away from you to the horizon, in every direction.

Additionally, the Eye is unique in it's gift of comprehensivity - you can see nearly every historical attraction in one majestic, unobstructed 360 degree panorama. Looking down on two millenia of history, progress and challenge forces an internal reflection of one's own purpose and impact in this lifetime.

Scholastically, things are ramping up quite quickly. In the first week of classes (last week) we were encouraged to sample a number of different possible classes to see which best suited our interests and skill-sets. Naturally, that luxury did not exclude us from the onslaught of weekly reading! The pain of it was this: though we were only given our reading lists at the beginning of the 1st class, we were required to 'catch up' by studying all the material for both Week 1 and Week 2. So with twice the regular workload for twice the regular number of classes, you can only imagine what these last few days have required! That being said, I am taking several classes where the subject matter will undoubtedly be engaging and far from a chore.

For those who are curious, I have settled on taking the History of International Relations, specializing in East and Southeast Asian relations. My studies at UBC provided little relevant experience in this subject, however they say great rewards often require great risk. As such, I am going to work hard and immerse myself in what is, for me, a subject of interest and growing relevency in today's international political, security and economic environment.

I suppose the last bit of information for today's post concerns my extra-curricular activities. As some of you know, I've been playing squash on and off for close to a decade. Somehow, this experience coupled with a (fool-hearty?) desire for involvement have led me to become Co-President of the LSE Squash Club, running five different varsity-level teams as well as overseeing the general operations of a club with 130 members! This commitment provided a lot of additional work this week, but we just had our club-wide tryouts today (an all-day marathon of matches), with great success! I will even get to play, albeit on the 2nd tier - there are many excellent players here at LSE! I think this opportunity will help me get some perspective on / distance from school when necessary, hone my organizational and leadership skills, and be a fun way to meet students from all parts of London. Wish me luck!

The Eye by night

The Millenium Sports Complex, home of the 2012 Olympic Games

Ok, time to hit the hay - the tomorrow is the beginning of another jammed week. FYI, I have been posting more complete photo albums on Facebook, and the site does have external links. Below are the two albums I have created so far:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=58975&l=ad34a&id=506525297
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=57396&l=4e68d&id=506525297

I do hope that all of you are well and enjoyed Thanksgiving!

~Alex