by Richard Gowan | Dec 21, 2009 | Cooperation and coherence, East Asia and Pacific, Economics and development, Europe and Central Asia, Global system, Off topic
A tragic tale from the Khaleej Times of the UAE:
At long last there is a foreign minister on the international scene with ice-cold blood in his veins and an uncomplicated, unemotional comprehension of national interest. His name is Kieren Keke. He carries the flag for Nauru, an eight-square-mile island-nation of 11,000 inhabitants in the South Pacific famous on two counts.
It is the smallest republic in the world, and its principal source of revenue was through the export of phosphates formed by bird droppings [guano]. That was undoubtedly the most valuable bird waste in history, but the republic killed the local version of the golden egg by selling more phosphate than the birds ?could drop.
When the money ran out, Nauru’s imagination blossomed. It invested millions of dollars from its national saving in a London musical. The musical flopped, wrecking the country’s bank balance. It then tried to solve Australia’s troublesome problem by providing a base for immigrants en route to the Pacific El Dorado, in return for suitable compensation. Regrettably, the refugees wanted refuge in Australia rather than amidst lost bird droppings.
But Nauru’s imagination remained fertile. In 2002 Nauru took $130 million from China to break relations with Taiwan. In 2006, presumably after this sweetener was exhausted, it reopened links with Taiwan. It is not known whether there was a financial angle to this decision, but the track record tells its own story. This year Nauru recognised Abkhazia [population: 215,000], one of two “nations” that Russia “liberated” from Georgia in 2008. The price: $50 million. Mr Keke has also paid a visit to the second region, South Ossetia, possibly with an accountant as travelling companion. The message has gone to every chancery: if the price is right, Nauru, a full member of the United Nations, will oblige.
(more…)
by David Steven | Dec 21, 2009 | Articles and Publications, Climate and resource scarcity, Reports
Report by Alex Evans and David Steven analysing the post-Copenhagen context on climate change, including a proposed 12 point action plan. Written for the Brookings Institution / NYU Center on International Cooperation Managing Global Insecurity programme.
Download Report
by David Steven | Dec 21, 2009 | Climate and resource scarcity
“This agreement is a vital step forward for the whole world,” Gordon Brown after the Bali climate summit in December 2007.
“This is the first step we are taking towards a green and low carbon future for the world,” Gordon Brown after the Copenhagen climate summit in December 2009.
“A pivotal first step toward an agreement that can address the threat of climate change,” Ban Ki-Moon after the Bali climate summit in December 2007.
“It is a step in the right direction,” Ban Ki-Moon after the Copenhagen climate summit in December 2009.
by Alex Evans | Dec 19, 2009 | Climate and resource scarcity, Global Dashboard, Global system
So here’s a very rough first analysis of the Copenhagen outcome.
Of the three Copenfailure scenarios David and I outlined, we think this morning’s Copenhagen Accord is closest to a very, very weak version of Bali #2. On that basis, here are 10 initial thoughts on what happened, where we go next, and how countries performed at the summit.
1. Don’t Panic.
2. We need to own up to how weak and ineffective deal-makers have been.
3. We also need to face the fact that the international system for dealing with climate is broken.
4. With this said, as UN Assistant Secretary-General Bob Orr observed in a press conference this morning, the head of governmment level engagement was “the most genuine negotiation I’ve ever seen between leaders”.
5. The main thing deal-makers need to do now remains: be brave, and steer into the skid.
With regard to countries’ positioning:
6. The US is still all about domestic legislation – which is as far away as ever.
7. The EU had a shocking summit, captured for all to see in its exclusion from the closing hours caucus of US, China, India, South Africa and Brazil. The open question of whether any hypothetical deal would have been bad enough for the EU to reject it did nothing whatsoever to enhance EU influence.
8. Appeasing China has failed. Period.
9. Much of the G77 participated in its own shafting – a point seen most clearly in Sudan’s chairmanship of the bloc.
10. But there are some weak signals of fragmentation in the G77 – seen most clearly in the case of the Maldives, which showed real determination in standing up to China.
by Alex Evans | Dec 18, 2009 | Influence and networks
From Sparxoo, this:
1. Do you have a profile on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook?
2. Do you have more than 300 friends on Facebook?
3. Do you know what a twestival is?
4. Do you have so many Facebook friends, that you’ve actually started to de-friend people?
5. Have you tried other social networks such as Friendster, Myspace, or more niche communities?
6. Do you have a Facebook app on your phone?
7. Do you know who Mark Zuckerberg is?
8. Do you update your Facebook status at least once every 24 hours?
9. Have you heard of FourSquare?
10. Have you read Trust Agents or the New Influencer?
11. Do more people follow you than you follow on Twitter?
12. Do you have a “persona” (i.e. use the same pseudonym across all social platforms)?
13. Are you on more than 15 Twitter lists?
14. Do your friends like four out of five of your Facebook status updates?
15. Are you such a social media maven you need a manager like HooteSuite?
16. Do you have more than 5 Twitter lists?
17. Do you find out about valuable articles through Twitter?
18. Do you participate in Twitter games, like #followfriday?
19. Do your followers retweet your tweets?
20. Do you have more than 250 connections on LinkedIn?
Now count up all the times you answered yes and let’s see how you did:
18-20 — Social Maniac
14-17 — Social Climber
8-13 — Social Wannabe
Less than 7 — Newbie
