On Tuesday, Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States - and I was there. Ever since last summer when he was given the nomination, I vowed that somehow or another I would be there at the Inauguration (I never really doubted that he would win). After his landslide victory in the Election, I was even more committed to going.
So at 4am I boarded a bus chartered by the local Democratic Party - having gotten only 2 hours of sleep, but wide awake with excitement. It was Inauguration Day! After sleeping fitfully on the bus, I awoke as we slowed down. Looking out the window, I could see why - there was a seemingly endless sea of buses, some parked and many more stretching out in front of us. The shear size of this event started to hit.
Once we parked, we joined the steady stream of people. We didn't really know where we were going, but figured that following the crowds would be a good bet. The lines for the shuttles were really long, and we waited forever. It was cold - but I was prepared, dressed in 3 pairs of pants, a T-shirt, 2 sweaters, and a sweatshirt, 3 pairs of socks, a hat and scarf! As we stood in line we encountered some interesting people - a woman from Florida who was flabbergasted by the cold, and a hippie guy with a beard and lots of bottons. Despite the long wait, though, people seemed very happy - there was an air of anticipation.
When we finally got on the shuttle, we were on it for over an hour and a half. Getting into the city was very slow - compounded by the fact that our driver didn't know where she was going! We ended up going past the Mall to the Pentagon, turning around and going past the Mall again until we convinced her to just let us off and walk. Some of the group took off running because they were afraid we'd miss the ceremony. We didn't exactly know where we were going, but asked the ever-present cops and state troopers, and then followed the crowds and signs as we got closer. There was this massive flood of people going to the Mall, and by the time we got there it was already packed! We were near the Washington monument, and after fighting the crowds (and crawling under a tree) we found a good spot where we could see one of the big TV screens.
The amps were incredible, because we could easily hear everything that was going on. It was a lot of fun listening to the crowd as we were there in the midst of it. There was a lot of booing for both Bush, Sr and George W, which made me sad. As much as I dislike them, they deserve some level of respect. There was of course a lot of cheering for Obama and his family and other VIPs. And some fun conversations were going on around us that were interesting to listen to...
You could feel the excitement and anticipation, which all came to head as Obama took the Oath of Office. (He and the Chief Justice kind of messed it up, but that's another story...) He looked very solumn, I guess as one should when you're taking on such a weighty responsibility. Very presidential. And when he finished - we have a new president, just like that!
I thought his speech was good, although I wasn't blown away by it or overcome with emotion like I thought I might be. I think what I felt most was simply relief. After all of this time, Bush was finally finished, and the country was in good hands. I could let out a deep sigh. Not that Obama would immediately fix everything - no, he is confronted with many very serious problems that don't have quick or easy solutions. But I am hopeful for the first time in a long time about where this country is headed. And he's certainly made a good start - closing Guantonimo Bay and putting an end to torture on his first day. From now on I'll be glued to the news to follow what he does.
And I feel like there's been an important shift in responsibility, too. We can no longer say that Bush is in charge so nothing will change and we can't do anything. With Obama in office, I think he shifts the responsbility back on us - we need to join with him to help him effect change.
One final thing I was struck with - as trite as it may sound, the historic significance of the moment. The majority of the people in the crowds were African-American, especially older women who may have grown up during the Civil Rights Movement. Thinking about what this means for them, what this means for our country, is pretty incredible. We still have a long way to go, but this certainly symbolizes how far we've come.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Reflections on the Campaign...
So I took a post-Election Day skip on my class today – after going to bed at 3am, I needed to get caught up on sleep :) Now well-rested, I wanted to take some time to reflect on the campaign which has been such a huge part of my life for the past 2 months…
Yes, there was a lot of stress – from partisan dealing on campus, to administrative hoops to jump through, to endless e-mails for planning. There were definitely points where I wasn’t sure if I could keep doing everything – it seemed like too much. But quitting was never an option. This was too important.
So the month of September was consumed by voter registration – stationing ourselves outside Lottie and elsewhere, repeating the mantra “Hi, are you registered to vote in Pennsylvania?” until our voices were hoarse. Checking through the forms and trying to correct mistakes. Trying to make students care about voting in PA. It was tiring, and discouraging at times – but by the October 6th deadline we had registered 100-200 students! That was a small victory in itself :)
October 1 was The Debate – preceded by endless drama, but turning out really well. I immersed myself in Obama’s plans for America, finding more and more reasons to support him as I studied his policies. I still didn’t feel ready, though, when I walked into that room. But we prayed with our friends on the other side (them in their matching polka dots, and us in our matching gray & pink J). The room was packed, and once we started it was so much fun – articulating answers to the questions I had prepared for, and coming up with rebuttals to the opponents points. What an adrenaline rush! I loved it J After it was all over I was floating, buoyed by everyone saying how great we were. That was definitely a highlight of the campaign :)
October was voter education/persuasion, focused on planning as many events as possible to convince students to vote for Obama. This is when we had to deal with bureaucratic nightmares in planning our events…endless paperwork, approval processes, etc. But we made things happen despite all that! In 2 days we pulled things together for Shaun Casey, National Director of Evangelical Outreach for the Obama campaign, to come speak. That was phenomenal – we had to switch rooms because so many people came! He gave an outstanding talk about why he as an Evangelical supports Obama, and had excellent responses to all of the tough questions about abortion, etc. It was great!
And then there was Donald Miller – a no-go the first try, but a huge success the second time around. It was an amazing feeling to look out over the sea of people and introduce him.
Hundreds of students had flocked to hear him speak, and he was everything we had hoped for – a wildly popular young Christian author who spoke eloquently about his journey and his views and why he supports Obama. It was what people needed to hear, and who they needed to hear it from.
After that event, we were basically done with persuasion – it was time to Get Out The Vote! I sent lots of red “high-alert” e-mails to the MC Dems/Students for Barack Obama about helping with the campaign. We stuck stickers and stuffed walk packets on Friday, and Saturday and Sunday I sent out people to knock on doors. Monday I got into it myself, and knocked on doors for 6 hours! Most people I talked to were very enthusiastic about voting for Obama – one even told us not to waste our time, and to move on to the next house! Another told us to go tell his hard-core Republican neighbor that we were with the Obama campaign :)
My personal favorite – the crazy dog lady! It was dark, and we knocked on this door. An older lady came and was peering out at us, sizing us up for a good 15 seconds as we smiled awkwardly. Then she left, and as were about to hang a door-hanger and leave, a different lady comes and opens the door – with her HUGE scary dog, which lets out a giant bark! Taken aback, we stammer our line: “Hi, we’re with the Obama campaign – ” and she doesn’t let us finish, giving a frosty “I’m not interested” and shutting the door in our face! We laughed about it for some time… :)
Door-knocking in the dark was an interesting experience, as we learned – especially since after Daylight Savings Time it got dark at like 5:30pm! Monday night we were given mini-flashlights – which were fine for reading our paper, but not too helpful in finding house numbers! The numbering in this area didn’t really make sense to start with, so we wandered a lot – looking for hidden houses and roads. But it was fun, and for the cause! :)
It’s hard to believe that the campaign is over now – but I am very happy. I can become a student again, and devote more time to other things :) But I will never regret all of the time I put into this. We made a difference – here in Cumberland County, a Republican stronghold where Bush won by 28% in ’04, we narrowed the margin to 13%! And we had so many great campaign memories along the way… That’s why I’m writing this, so I don’t forget. I want to remember and retell the part I played in getting Barack Obama elected President for a long time…
Yes, there was a lot of stress – from partisan dealing on campus, to administrative hoops to jump through, to endless e-mails for planning. There were definitely points where I wasn’t sure if I could keep doing everything – it seemed like too much. But quitting was never an option. This was too important.
So the month of September was consumed by voter registration – stationing ourselves outside Lottie and elsewhere, repeating the mantra “Hi, are you registered to vote in Pennsylvania?” until our voices were hoarse. Checking through the forms and trying to correct mistakes. Trying to make students care about voting in PA. It was tiring, and discouraging at times – but by the October 6th deadline we had registered 100-200 students! That was a small victory in itself :)
October 1 was The Debate – preceded by endless drama, but turning out really well. I immersed myself in Obama’s plans for America, finding more and more reasons to support him as I studied his policies. I still didn’t feel ready, though, when I walked into that room. But we prayed with our friends on the other side (them in their matching polka dots, and us in our matching gray & pink J). The room was packed, and once we started it was so much fun – articulating answers to the questions I had prepared for, and coming up with rebuttals to the opponents points. What an adrenaline rush! I loved it J After it was all over I was floating, buoyed by everyone saying how great we were. That was definitely a highlight of the campaign :)
October was voter education/persuasion, focused on planning as many events as possible to convince students to vote for Obama. This is when we had to deal with bureaucratic nightmares in planning our events…endless paperwork, approval processes, etc. But we made things happen despite all that! In 2 days we pulled things together for Shaun Casey, National Director of Evangelical Outreach for the Obama campaign, to come speak. That was phenomenal – we had to switch rooms because so many people came! He gave an outstanding talk about why he as an Evangelical supports Obama, and had excellent responses to all of the tough questions about abortion, etc. It was great!
And then there was Donald Miller – a no-go the first try, but a huge success the second time around. It was an amazing feeling to look out over the sea of people and introduce him.
Hundreds of students had flocked to hear him speak, and he was everything we had hoped for – a wildly popular young Christian author who spoke eloquently about his journey and his views and why he supports Obama. It was what people needed to hear, and who they needed to hear it from.
After that event, we were basically done with persuasion – it was time to Get Out The Vote! I sent lots of red “high-alert” e-mails to the MC Dems/Students for Barack Obama about helping with the campaign. We stuck stickers and stuffed walk packets on Friday, and Saturday and Sunday I sent out people to knock on doors. Monday I got into it myself, and knocked on doors for 6 hours! Most people I talked to were very enthusiastic about voting for Obama – one even told us not to waste our time, and to move on to the next house! Another told us to go tell his hard-core Republican neighbor that we were with the Obama campaign :)
My personal favorite – the crazy dog lady! It was dark, and we knocked on this door. An older lady came and was peering out at us, sizing us up for a good 15 seconds as we smiled awkwardly. Then she left, and as were about to hang a door-hanger and leave, a different lady comes and opens the door – with her HUGE scary dog, which lets out a giant bark! Taken aback, we stammer our line: “Hi, we’re with the Obama campaign – ” and she doesn’t let us finish, giving a frosty “I’m not interested” and shutting the door in our face! We laughed about it for some time… :)
Door-knocking in the dark was an interesting experience, as we learned – especially since after Daylight Savings Time it got dark at like 5:30pm! Monday night we were given mini-flashlights – which were fine for reading our paper, but not too helpful in finding house numbers! The numbering in this area didn’t really make sense to start with, so we wandered a lot – looking for hidden houses and roads. But it was fun, and for the cause! :)
It’s hard to believe that the campaign is over now – but I am very happy. I can become a student again, and devote more time to other things :) But I will never regret all of the time I put into this. We made a difference – here in Cumberland County, a Republican stronghold where Bush won by 28% in ’04, we narrowed the margin to 13%! And we had so many great campaign memories along the way… That’s why I’m writing this, so I don’t forget. I want to remember and retell the part I played in getting Barack Obama elected President for a long time…
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Election Night 2008
It’s a great night. As Barack said, this is our time, this is our moment. And I want to remember it forever.
Such a roller-coaster of emotions today. Waking up early knowing that it’s Election Day 2008. Heading off to the polling place in a tizzy, and proudly casting my vote for Obama-Biden! Going through the motions of class and work, but breaking out into excited dances whenever I remember what day it is :)
Then loading up 10 Messiah Dems to go Get Out The Vote in Upper Allen Twp. The adrenaline was high as we ran from place to place, racing against the ticking clock and darkening sky to get people to the polls. We searched for house numbers that didn’t seem to exist. We ran into some strange people. We got lost and turned around a lot. But it was all part of the adventure :) Most of the people I met were enthusiastic and had already voted for Obama. Kids broke in “O-B-A-M-A” cheers as we went by :) So it was certainly worthwhile. I felt like we were doing something important for the campaign, and it was fun doing it together.
After finishing our door-knocking, we headed to the Camp Hill Obama HQ to get some food. It was packed with people and hopping with activity – you could feel the energy pulsating through the place. After getting a few bites of food down, we were given call sheets to check in with more people to see if they’d voted. Plenty of wrong numbers and no answers, but most I did talk to had voted for Obama! As the minutes counted down, we went through the sheets as fast as we could, finally stopping at 7:55pm. It was done – now we just had to wait and see how it turned out.
Everyone gathered around where MSNBC was being projected, not knowing how long we’d have to wait for the results. But as soon as the polls closed, they called PA for Obama! The place went absolutely nuts – we were all cheering and yelling, and the campaign people were crying and hugging eachother. These were the people who had put their lives on hold for this campaign, working 20 hour days for weeks on end – and they had done it! We had done it :) It was such an amazing feeling – after all of the hard work poured into this, we had turned PA blue. And to have PA as the very first state called – wow, that was just icing on the cake :) Soon everyone was on their cell phones calling family and friends as we continued to ride on the euphoria of the moment. We had won PA for Obama! YES!
Shortly after that, we decided to head back to campus to watch the rest of the returns come in – but not before hugs and congratulations to the campaign folks we had gotten to know. Complete strangers, really, but this campaign and this victory bound us together in a way that’s hard for people outside to understand. But we shared the joy together in that moment.
Dropping in at the Union to get some food, we paused to celebrate PA (and Obama’s other wins so far) with others that we knew. Then headed en masse to Kyle’s house to watch the rest. At that point Obama was up pretty significantly, so we were excited but there were still plenty of states left. As they were called for Obama we cheered, and in between just chatted about political and non-political things :) A lot of watching and waiting, as each hour brought more poll closings and more states called. Obama was wracking up the Electoral Votes, and it didn’t look like McCain had much of a chance. At 11pm the West Coast states closed their polls, and we stood up to do the countdown, knowing that this could mean Obama had won. At exactly 11pm, CNN flashed – “Barack Obama elected President!” We went nuts – everyone was jumping up and down and screaming and crying. I didn’t anticipate how emotional I would get, but this was it – Obama was President! Everyone hugged everyone – we had done it!
With the adrenaline sky-rocketing, we raced to the Union for our victory lap. We go in and just start screaming and clapping – everyone’s starring at us, but we don’t care. We hug other Obama supporters, and then take it out outside to scream again. Such an amazing feeling – celebrating together our next President. Once our voices had gotten hoarse and our limbs had tired from constant motion, we returned inside again. It was group picture time for the Messiah College Democrats/Students for Barack Obama – under the red, white, and blue balloons no less :) There was still so much excitement in the air – we were still trying to wrap our heads around what had just happened. We all had kind of thought it would turn out that way, but now it was REAL, and we were beside ourselves!
Before too long it was time for the Concession speech from McCain. We had been kind of gleefully looking forward to this, but as he spoke we were impressed by how respectful and humble and articulate he was – it was a really good speech, as he gracefully conceded the highest office in the land.
Later on we took over the Blue couch to watch Obama’s Acceptance speech to the thronging crowds in Chicago. Seeing their faces – young and old, black and white, men and women – was inspiring. Some had tears running down their faces, others held American flags. All waited with us in anticipation of President-Elect Obama.
When he came onto the stage with his family, we were clapping not for our candidate anymore, but the President of our country. He had many heartfelt thank-you’s to those who had helped and supported him along the way, and then launched into an amazing speech. It was inspiring as well as pragmatic, and it sounded very Presidential. WE helped make this happen. This is OUR moment too. OUR time is NOW. And this is our President :)
That is what finally hit home for me, as Obama and Biden stood up on stage together, waving to the crowds with epic music playing in the background. It gave me chills. The only President I have clear memories of is Bush – that’s all I know. He’s been in office so long that it’s difficult to fully realize that this is the end – Obama and Biden will be leading our country starting Jan 20.
It’s hard to put into words what this Election means – but it’s fundamentally about CHANGE and HOPE, both of which Obama has restored our faith in. He is the right person at the right time for us. With such a landslide in the Electoral Collage he has a mandate from the American people spanning all demographic groups. And with Democratic majorities in both House and Senate, he has a real opportunity to implement his agenda. Normally a cynic, I am just SO excited to see what he will do!
And I’m SO glad that I had the privilege to be part of this. It IS historic, and I know I will be telling these stories to my grandchildren someday…
Such a roller-coaster of emotions today. Waking up early knowing that it’s Election Day 2008. Heading off to the polling place in a tizzy, and proudly casting my vote for Obama-Biden! Going through the motions of class and work, but breaking out into excited dances whenever I remember what day it is :)
Then loading up 10 Messiah Dems to go Get Out The Vote in Upper Allen Twp. The adrenaline was high as we ran from place to place, racing against the ticking clock and darkening sky to get people to the polls. We searched for house numbers that didn’t seem to exist. We ran into some strange people. We got lost and turned around a lot. But it was all part of the adventure :) Most of the people I met were enthusiastic and had already voted for Obama. Kids broke in “O-B-A-M-A” cheers as we went by :) So it was certainly worthwhile. I felt like we were doing something important for the campaign, and it was fun doing it together.
After finishing our door-knocking, we headed to the Camp Hill Obama HQ to get some food. It was packed with people and hopping with activity – you could feel the energy pulsating through the place. After getting a few bites of food down, we were given call sheets to check in with more people to see if they’d voted. Plenty of wrong numbers and no answers, but most I did talk to had voted for Obama! As the minutes counted down, we went through the sheets as fast as we could, finally stopping at 7:55pm. It was done – now we just had to wait and see how it turned out.
Everyone gathered around where MSNBC was being projected, not knowing how long we’d have to wait for the results. But as soon as the polls closed, they called PA for Obama! The place went absolutely nuts – we were all cheering and yelling, and the campaign people were crying and hugging eachother. These were the people who had put their lives on hold for this campaign, working 20 hour days for weeks on end – and they had done it! We had done it :) It was such an amazing feeling – after all of the hard work poured into this, we had turned PA blue. And to have PA as the very first state called – wow, that was just icing on the cake :) Soon everyone was on their cell phones calling family and friends as we continued to ride on the euphoria of the moment. We had won PA for Obama! YES!
Shortly after that, we decided to head back to campus to watch the rest of the returns come in – but not before hugs and congratulations to the campaign folks we had gotten to know. Complete strangers, really, but this campaign and this victory bound us together in a way that’s hard for people outside to understand. But we shared the joy together in that moment.
Dropping in at the Union to get some food, we paused to celebrate PA (and Obama’s other wins so far) with others that we knew. Then headed en masse to Kyle’s house to watch the rest. At that point Obama was up pretty significantly, so we were excited but there were still plenty of states left. As they were called for Obama we cheered, and in between just chatted about political and non-political things :) A lot of watching and waiting, as each hour brought more poll closings and more states called. Obama was wracking up the Electoral Votes, and it didn’t look like McCain had much of a chance. At 11pm the West Coast states closed their polls, and we stood up to do the countdown, knowing that this could mean Obama had won. At exactly 11pm, CNN flashed – “Barack Obama elected President!” We went nuts – everyone was jumping up and down and screaming and crying. I didn’t anticipate how emotional I would get, but this was it – Obama was President! Everyone hugged everyone – we had done it!
With the adrenaline sky-rocketing, we raced to the Union for our victory lap. We go in and just start screaming and clapping – everyone’s starring at us, but we don’t care. We hug other Obama supporters, and then take it out outside to scream again. Such an amazing feeling – celebrating together our next President. Once our voices had gotten hoarse and our limbs had tired from constant motion, we returned inside again. It was group picture time for the Messiah College Democrats/Students for Barack Obama – under the red, white, and blue balloons no less :) There was still so much excitement in the air – we were still trying to wrap our heads around what had just happened. We all had kind of thought it would turn out that way, but now it was REAL, and we were beside ourselves!
Before too long it was time for the Concession speech from McCain. We had been kind of gleefully looking forward to this, but as he spoke we were impressed by how respectful and humble and articulate he was – it was a really good speech, as he gracefully conceded the highest office in the land.
Later on we took over the Blue couch to watch Obama’s Acceptance speech to the thronging crowds in Chicago. Seeing their faces – young and old, black and white, men and women – was inspiring. Some had tears running down their faces, others held American flags. All waited with us in anticipation of President-Elect Obama.
When he came onto the stage with his family, we were clapping not for our candidate anymore, but the President of our country. He had many heartfelt thank-you’s to those who had helped and supported him along the way, and then launched into an amazing speech. It was inspiring as well as pragmatic, and it sounded very Presidential. WE helped make this happen. This is OUR moment too. OUR time is NOW. And this is our President :)
That is what finally hit home for me, as Obama and Biden stood up on stage together, waving to the crowds with epic music playing in the background. It gave me chills. The only President I have clear memories of is Bush – that’s all I know. He’s been in office so long that it’s difficult to fully realize that this is the end – Obama and Biden will be leading our country starting Jan 20.
It’s hard to put into words what this Election means – but it’s fundamentally about CHANGE and HOPE, both of which Obama has restored our faith in. He is the right person at the right time for us. With such a landslide in the Electoral Collage he has a mandate from the American people spanning all demographic groups. And with Democratic majorities in both House and Senate, he has a real opportunity to implement his agenda. Normally a cynic, I am just SO excited to see what he will do!
And I’m SO glad that I had the privilege to be part of this. It IS historic, and I know I will be telling these stories to my grandchildren someday…
Monday, August 11, 2008
"Kim's Nuclear Gamble"
One of the more interesting things we did in my International Politics class last week was watch a PBS special on North Korea. Not having researched it extensively, I knew the basic facts that have been repeated on the news - Kim Jong Il, the crazy reclusive cruel dictator of North Korea, has been defying the international community with a nuclear enrichment program aimed at building bombs. However, a situation is rarely as simple as "facts", which can be manipulated and interpreted in any number of ways. This documentary shed light for me on a different way they might be read...
Placing conflicts in their historical context is always very valuable, helping us understand how and why they originated. So as the film walked through the history of North Korea's path towards nuclear enrichment, I think it is very significant when they started - 1989. Other than being the year of my brother's birth, this was a highly significant date in world history - marking the fall of the Berlin Wall, and with it the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, North Korea had been protected under the "nuclear umbrella" of the USSR, so with the disintegration of their powerful ally they needed to find security somewhere else. This is huge for our understanding of North Korea's nuclear ambitions. When they started, it was not to thumb their nose at the international community, to threaten other countries, or to become a superpower themselves. It was a logical step for a country seeking to ensure its own national security after losing protection almost overnight.
Fast-forward to the Clinton era. By this time North Korea under Kim Jong Il is actively developing nuclear weapons, which is seen as a threat by the US and the West. Clinton manages to broker a deal by which North Korea will shut down its nuclear reactor in exchange for 2 light-water reactors (for energy purposes) and 500,000 tons of oil annually to jump-start their ailing economy. This could have worked - but the Republicans screwed it up when they gained control of Congress. The reason for their opposition? The deal contituted bribery, appeasing a cruel dictator. This argument makes no sense to me. Here we have the leader of a country who could potentially threaten us with nuclear weapons agree to give up the means by which to make those weapons. Please explain to me what the problem is with giving them these incentives so that perhaps they can develop their economy and infrastructure? Where is the bribery, the appeasement? Foreign policy is all about bargaining and compromise, and this is a fair deal - we eliminate a potential threat, they get some economic perks, we all live to fight another day.
Instead, though, the Republicans dragged their feet on implementation of our end of the deal - fuel delivery was consistantly late, and construction of the reactors fell behind. With any other country this would've been merely a nuisance, but with North Korea it was highly significant. This was essentially their first international agreement, and it was crucial for us to comply to the letter in order to establish the trustworthiness of the outside world. Unfortunately, our failure to consistantly and promptly fulfill our commitments was one of the factors that pushed North Korea to test a new long-range missile in 1998 - embarassing Clinton, and leading to a re-evaluation of US policy towards North Korea.
In the end diplomacy was the chosen route, and then-Secretary of State Madeline Albright flew to Pyongyang to meet with Kim Jong Il. The man she met was far from the charicature that had been fed to the Western world. She said that he took pride in his country, was humorous, attentive, and most importantly rational. This is key. I find it frustrating when the US and the West argue that certain countries cannot be trusted because their leaders are lunatics. By characterizing Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as irrational, we give ourselves license to treat them however we please, applying different standards (even double standards) as we see fit. Of course, I don't deny that these are dictators who oppress their people - that is horrible, but it does not make them irrational.
In fact, throughout this documentary we repeatedly saw Kim Jong Il willing to talk with the US, being open to compromise, and seeking a good relationship with us. Towards the end of Clinton's second term headway was being made towards an arms deal that would place limitations on the number of missiles the countries could possess. But sadly, the hope for this died when George W. Bush took the Oath of Office. He did not trust Kim Jong Il, and from that point on the US ceased talks and no longer tried to engage North Korea. Instead, the Bush Administration demanded concessions before it would talk with them (sound familar?) - then branded North Korea as part of the "axis of evil" in 2002.
At this point, the CIA reported that North Korea had restarted a clandestine nuclear program - and when confronted with this finding they admitted their intention to become a nuclear power. This set off a chain of events - Bush stopped fuel shipments and basically discarded the entire Clinton agreement; Kim Jong Il expelled IAEA inspectors and left the NPT. Many would say that Bush's actions were justified in face of blatant disregard for agreements by the North Koreans. However, I would say that Bush brought this on himself. What kind of reaction do you expect when you call someone part of an "axis of evil" - especially when the history books show that the last "axis" was crushed by American military might and nuclear bombs? It seems perfectly logical that North Korea would take this as a declaration of war, or at the very least a threat, and do the only thing they knew to do to increase their security - build nuclear weapons. In fact, the reason cited for their withdrawal from the NPT was that they needed nuclear weapons to deter an American attack. This was after the US invasion of Iraq, so with one "axis" member attacked, it was reasonable to think that they might be next.
Since then North Korea has repeatedly expressed a desire to talk directly with the US, but the Bush Administration has maintained that only multilateral talks will be acceptable. The same old arguments are used by conservatives - we can't be blackmailed into talking with a "rogue" nation, that would be appeasement. The Administration does not want to legitimize a reclusive, cruel regime that is acting in defiance of the international community. Yet I do not understand this either - since when does talking with someone mean condoning their actions? We talked with the Soviets throughout the Cold War even though we were poles apart on every concievable issue. And even if there was a good case to be made that meeting with Kim Jong Il directly would in some way give recognition to his regime, we may just have to deal with that. After all, every nation desires to be recognized as a legitimate world player and dealt with in a dignified manner - and I would guess that is at least part of the motivation for Kim Jong Il. What's the worst that could happen if we treated him like that, if we opened up the dialogue? Our current policy has certainly not succeeded...
Placing conflicts in their historical context is always very valuable, helping us understand how and why they originated. So as the film walked through the history of North Korea's path towards nuclear enrichment, I think it is very significant when they started - 1989. Other than being the year of my brother's birth, this was a highly significant date in world history - marking the fall of the Berlin Wall, and with it the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, North Korea had been protected under the "nuclear umbrella" of the USSR, so with the disintegration of their powerful ally they needed to find security somewhere else. This is huge for our understanding of North Korea's nuclear ambitions. When they started, it was not to thumb their nose at the international community, to threaten other countries, or to become a superpower themselves. It was a logical step for a country seeking to ensure its own national security after losing protection almost overnight.
Fast-forward to the Clinton era. By this time North Korea under Kim Jong Il is actively developing nuclear weapons, which is seen as a threat by the US and the West. Clinton manages to broker a deal by which North Korea will shut down its nuclear reactor in exchange for 2 light-water reactors (for energy purposes) and 500,000 tons of oil annually to jump-start their ailing economy. This could have worked - but the Republicans screwed it up when they gained control of Congress. The reason for their opposition? The deal contituted bribery, appeasing a cruel dictator. This argument makes no sense to me. Here we have the leader of a country who could potentially threaten us with nuclear weapons agree to give up the means by which to make those weapons. Please explain to me what the problem is with giving them these incentives so that perhaps they can develop their economy and infrastructure? Where is the bribery, the appeasement? Foreign policy is all about bargaining and compromise, and this is a fair deal - we eliminate a potential threat, they get some economic perks, we all live to fight another day.
Instead, though, the Republicans dragged their feet on implementation of our end of the deal - fuel delivery was consistantly late, and construction of the reactors fell behind. With any other country this would've been merely a nuisance, but with North Korea it was highly significant. This was essentially their first international agreement, and it was crucial for us to comply to the letter in order to establish the trustworthiness of the outside world. Unfortunately, our failure to consistantly and promptly fulfill our commitments was one of the factors that pushed North Korea to test a new long-range missile in 1998 - embarassing Clinton, and leading to a re-evaluation of US policy towards North Korea.
In the end diplomacy was the chosen route, and then-Secretary of State Madeline Albright flew to Pyongyang to meet with Kim Jong Il. The man she met was far from the charicature that had been fed to the Western world. She said that he took pride in his country, was humorous, attentive, and most importantly rational. This is key. I find it frustrating when the US and the West argue that certain countries cannot be trusted because their leaders are lunatics. By characterizing Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as irrational, we give ourselves license to treat them however we please, applying different standards (even double standards) as we see fit. Of course, I don't deny that these are dictators who oppress their people - that is horrible, but it does not make them irrational.
In fact, throughout this documentary we repeatedly saw Kim Jong Il willing to talk with the US, being open to compromise, and seeking a good relationship with us. Towards the end of Clinton's second term headway was being made towards an arms deal that would place limitations on the number of missiles the countries could possess. But sadly, the hope for this died when George W. Bush took the Oath of Office. He did not trust Kim Jong Il, and from that point on the US ceased talks and no longer tried to engage North Korea. Instead, the Bush Administration demanded concessions before it would talk with them (sound familar?) - then branded North Korea as part of the "axis of evil" in 2002.
At this point, the CIA reported that North Korea had restarted a clandestine nuclear program - and when confronted with this finding they admitted their intention to become a nuclear power. This set off a chain of events - Bush stopped fuel shipments and basically discarded the entire Clinton agreement; Kim Jong Il expelled IAEA inspectors and left the NPT. Many would say that Bush's actions were justified in face of blatant disregard for agreements by the North Koreans. However, I would say that Bush brought this on himself. What kind of reaction do you expect when you call someone part of an "axis of evil" - especially when the history books show that the last "axis" was crushed by American military might and nuclear bombs? It seems perfectly logical that North Korea would take this as a declaration of war, or at the very least a threat, and do the only thing they knew to do to increase their security - build nuclear weapons. In fact, the reason cited for their withdrawal from the NPT was that they needed nuclear weapons to deter an American attack. This was after the US invasion of Iraq, so with one "axis" member attacked, it was reasonable to think that they might be next.
Since then North Korea has repeatedly expressed a desire to talk directly with the US, but the Bush Administration has maintained that only multilateral talks will be acceptable. The same old arguments are used by conservatives - we can't be blackmailed into talking with a "rogue" nation, that would be appeasement. The Administration does not want to legitimize a reclusive, cruel regime that is acting in defiance of the international community. Yet I do not understand this either - since when does talking with someone mean condoning their actions? We talked with the Soviets throughout the Cold War even though we were poles apart on every concievable issue. And even if there was a good case to be made that meeting with Kim Jong Il directly would in some way give recognition to his regime, we may just have to deal with that. After all, every nation desires to be recognized as a legitimate world player and dealt with in a dignified manner - and I would guess that is at least part of the motivation for Kim Jong Il. What's the worst that could happen if we treated him like that, if we opened up the dialogue? Our current policy has certainly not succeeded...
Friday, August 1, 2008
Oh, France...
I just finished filling out the online evaluation for my study abroad semester in France (apparently that was the reason they weren't releasing my transcript to Messiah). I thought it would feel good to get everything off my chest - many times during the semester I had thought with glee "I can't wait to write about this on my evaluation!" But during the 2 months since my return (has it really only been that long?) I've been trying to forget many of the struggles and difficulties I experienced in France and immerse myself in life here. Now this evaluation has brought all of that crap up again.
I thought that when you look back on an experience you're supposed to mainly remember the good parts and kind of forget about the bad. It's been the opposite for me. There certainly were good parts - people, places, experiences that I really value from that semester - but it's always the bad parts that come to my mind first - the struggles, the frustrations, the loneliness. Maybe it's still too fresh...
Someone asked me last week if I would do it over again if I had the choice. I don't know. Without experiencing it I could never have anticipated the difficulties, so if I hadn't gone I probably would've always wondered "what if?" If I could keep the things I've learned without going through all that again, I think I would - but I know that's not how life works :) Would I have been happier and learned more from a semester in Philly or DC or the Middle East? Maybe. We'll never know...
One of the evaluation questions asked what was the most important thing I gained from the semester. That was easy - I learned so much about international politics through various documentaries and conversations with another student there. Without question the highlight of my semester. But as I was answering that question, I realized for the first time the longer-term impact of that. All the unanswered questions from those conversations were what motivated me to take the US Foreign Policy class this summer. That class, the hardest but most valuable I have ever taken, helped me understand the complexities of foreign policy so much better - seeing it not as impossible anymore, but an incredibly complicated yet comprehensible process. And now, as I am in International Politics, I have been seriously considering whether my calling might be related to foreign policy rather than domestic policy as I had always thought. Or maybe both? I don't know... But I guess I never would have realized all of that if I hadn't gone to France and had those conversations.
They say "no experience is ever lost" (whoever "they" are) and perhaps it's true. Perhaps God really did have a greater purpose in mind for that semester even as I struggled through it. Perhaps I need to trust more...
I thought that when you look back on an experience you're supposed to mainly remember the good parts and kind of forget about the bad. It's been the opposite for me. There certainly were good parts - people, places, experiences that I really value from that semester - but it's always the bad parts that come to my mind first - the struggles, the frustrations, the loneliness. Maybe it's still too fresh...
Someone asked me last week if I would do it over again if I had the choice. I don't know. Without experiencing it I could never have anticipated the difficulties, so if I hadn't gone I probably would've always wondered "what if?" If I could keep the things I've learned without going through all that again, I think I would - but I know that's not how life works :) Would I have been happier and learned more from a semester in Philly or DC or the Middle East? Maybe. We'll never know...
One of the evaluation questions asked what was the most important thing I gained from the semester. That was easy - I learned so much about international politics through various documentaries and conversations with another student there. Without question the highlight of my semester. But as I was answering that question, I realized for the first time the longer-term impact of that. All the unanswered questions from those conversations were what motivated me to take the US Foreign Policy class this summer. That class, the hardest but most valuable I have ever taken, helped me understand the complexities of foreign policy so much better - seeing it not as impossible anymore, but an incredibly complicated yet comprehensible process. And now, as I am in International Politics, I have been seriously considering whether my calling might be related to foreign policy rather than domestic policy as I had always thought. Or maybe both? I don't know... But I guess I never would have realized all of that if I hadn't gone to France and had those conversations.
They say "no experience is ever lost" (whoever "they" are) and perhaps it's true. Perhaps God really did have a greater purpose in mind for that semester even as I struggled through it. Perhaps I need to trust more...
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
"Wake Up Call" (Part 1)
Such is titled a West Wing episode in which President Bartlett and his staff struggle with how to respond to a crisis with Iran. In this fictional situation, a British commercial airliner is mistaken for a US spy plane and shot down in Iranian airspace. Despite the knowledge that it was unintentional, the British use fiery rhetoric to lambast Iran, and consider this an opportunity to potentially take out Iranian nuclear facilities. Within the West Wing, debate rages about how best to foster long-term change in Iran.
This is extremely relevant to the situation we find ourselves in today - where not Britain but Israel has been using fiery rhetoric. Ever since Israel's existance there have been tensions between the two countries, but recently these were heightened by an Israeli military exercise, which was widely interpreted as being practice for an attack on Iran. This was accompanied with warnings that if Iran does not halt its nuclear program, Israel will be "forced" to take it out pre-emptively. Those are fightin' words, especially in an area as volatile as the Middle East, and predictably Iran has responded with aggressive statements and military exercises of its own. President Ahmadinejad has assured the world that any strike against it will be responded to in kind. The likelihood of an Israeli strike is a matter of speculation, but the war hawks in Washington give cause for concern. On July 19 the Bush Administration offered a "freeze-for-freeze" deal to Iran, wherein they would freeze their enrichment program in exchange for a freeze in sanctions against them. The 2-week deadline for response is this Saturday, August 2, afterwhich Condeleeza Rice has warned of "punitive measures" - at this point looking like harsh sanctions, but the Administration has not ruled out military action.
[I wrote this on Monday, thinking that I would have time to finish it later in the day. But since the last few days have been busy I'm going to go ahead and post this anyway, and add a Part 2 later when I have time. This is an attempt to break my perfectionism - submitting an incomplete post! :) Keep reading for the rest... ]
This is extremely relevant to the situation we find ourselves in today - where not Britain but Israel has been using fiery rhetoric. Ever since Israel's existance there have been tensions between the two countries, but recently these were heightened by an Israeli military exercise, which was widely interpreted as being practice for an attack on Iran. This was accompanied with warnings that if Iran does not halt its nuclear program, Israel will be "forced" to take it out pre-emptively. Those are fightin' words, especially in an area as volatile as the Middle East, and predictably Iran has responded with aggressive statements and military exercises of its own. President Ahmadinejad has assured the world that any strike against it will be responded to in kind. The likelihood of an Israeli strike is a matter of speculation, but the war hawks in Washington give cause for concern. On July 19 the Bush Administration offered a "freeze-for-freeze" deal to Iran, wherein they would freeze their enrichment program in exchange for a freeze in sanctions against them. The 2-week deadline for response is this Saturday, August 2, afterwhich Condeleeza Rice has warned of "punitive measures" - at this point looking like harsh sanctions, but the Administration has not ruled out military action.
[I wrote this on Monday, thinking that I would have time to finish it later in the day. But since the last few days have been busy I'm going to go ahead and post this anyway, and add a Part 2 later when I have time. This is an attempt to break my perfectionism - submitting an incomplete post! :) Keep reading for the rest... ]
Monday, July 21, 2008
"Dangerous Straits"
That is the title of the PBS video we watched in International Politics class today. The topic? China and Taiwan. It turned out to be quite fascinating. My focus internationally is usually in the Middle East or Africa, and China has never really piqued my interest until now. Obviously I knew what everyone else knows - it's a rapidly growing economic giant that is and will continue to greatly influence the economic and political world of the 21st century. However, I had never really thought much about it beyond that - and the extent of my knowledge about Taiwan came from two West Wing episodes :)
The video explored a bit of the history of US relations with and policy towards China, especially the Taiwan question. It characterized US policy as that of "strategic ambiguity" - although a laughable term for US foreign policy, it does in fact accurately describe the situation. Since 1972 the US has recognized "one China", affirming Communist Beijing and not democratic Taipei as the legitimate authority. However, since 1979 US has been a major supplier of arms to Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, which requires the US to supply weapons of a defensive nature. The ambiguity comes in because nowhere is it specified under what circumstances the US would be obligated to protect Taiwan militarily from the Chinese.
So there's our little history lesson for today :) But this got me thinking, and one sentence from the video particularly jumped out at me. Bush was articulating (at least trying to :) US policy on Taiwan, and at one point said something to the effect of: this is in the interest of the United States. In my notes I wrote: why is Taiwan in our interests? I started thinking about this in terms of the rubric of US foreign policy theories I learned in my last class. How would each of them explain our policy towards Taiwan?
From a Balance of Power perspective, it could be argued that our unofficial support for Taiwan functions as a way to check the growing power of China. Thus, by arming Taiwan we have a strong ally in the region to counter China. That makes sense, but I'm not entirely convinced that it's the whole reason.
An American Values approach would see it as our obligation to support the struggling democratic state living in the shadow of Red China. This is a very convincing argument, and one that is often used, but I am inclined to think that it functions as more of a justification to the American people than an actual reason for policy.
Looking at Domestic Politics, many theories could be floated, but the one seemingly plausible one in this case is economic. I am becoming more and more convinced that US policy is often primarily motivated by economic gain, and so I couldn't help but wonder, could our policy towards Taiwan in fact be motivated by cold, hard cash - weapons sales? This hypothesis really intrigued me, so I lost myself in research for several hours. I certainly uncovered some interesting things...
1. In an address to the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council Defense Industry Conference in 2006, the tone of the US government spokesperson seemed to confirm my suspicions. He emphasized the US's commitment to ensuring Taiwan's security, and urged the Taiwanese to take that task more seriously, specifically by increasing the percentage of their budget allocated for defense! I couldn't believe this was a US government official talking - why did he care about Taiwan's defense budget? But the answer was obvious - a larger Taiwanese defense budget means more money for US weapons.
(Source: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/72100.htm)
2. The next fact fit well with that - the US is Taiwan's principle supplier of weapons. There are only 3 other countries that have sold Taiwan weapons at all since 1999 (France, Germany, and Israel) but those together only totaled $108 million. In comparison, US arms sales to Taiwan since 1999 came to a whopping $4.8 billion - 98% of all arms sold to Taiwan during the period. WOW. So it's safe to say that this is a market US weapons manufacturers can monopolize.
(Source: http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/values.php)
3. The number I was really curious about was where Taiwan ranked in the US's overall arms exports - that would make or break my hypothesis. In 2005, Taiwan was the 3rd-highest purchaser of US defense articles and services (1.3 billion) - below Israel (1.7 bn) and Egypt (1.3 bn), and above Saudi Arabia (990 mn) and South Korea (610 mn). WOW again. So I might just be right...
(Source: http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/values.php)
Although these facts could be circumstantial and not causal, I think there's something going on here. Taiwan was an untapped market before the US came along - the rest of the world either could not or would not sell weapons to them on any significant scale. Weapons manufacturers (a notoriously powerful interest group in Washington) must have put pressure on the government, which was likely already inclined to arm Taiwan for Balance of Power and American Values reasons. In addition to the billions of dollars accrued annually as a result, this policy keeps China on its toes without disrupting normal trade. And all in the name of protecting democracy :) Perfect!
(A related hunch... I wouldn't be surprised if Bush and/or those in his Administration have lucrative connections to weapons manufacturing companies, and have benefited directly or indirectly from increased weapons sales. But I have no proof of that...)
The video explored a bit of the history of US relations with and policy towards China, especially the Taiwan question. It characterized US policy as that of "strategic ambiguity" - although a laughable term for US foreign policy, it does in fact accurately describe the situation. Since 1972 the US has recognized "one China", affirming Communist Beijing and not democratic Taipei as the legitimate authority. However, since 1979 US has been a major supplier of arms to Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, which requires the US to supply weapons of a defensive nature. The ambiguity comes in because nowhere is it specified under what circumstances the US would be obligated to protect Taiwan militarily from the Chinese.
So there's our little history lesson for today :) But this got me thinking, and one sentence from the video particularly jumped out at me. Bush was articulating (at least trying to :) US policy on Taiwan, and at one point said something to the effect of: this is in the interest of the United States. In my notes I wrote: why is Taiwan in our interests? I started thinking about this in terms of the rubric of US foreign policy theories I learned in my last class. How would each of them explain our policy towards Taiwan?
From a Balance of Power perspective, it could be argued that our unofficial support for Taiwan functions as a way to check the growing power of China. Thus, by arming Taiwan we have a strong ally in the region to counter China. That makes sense, but I'm not entirely convinced that it's the whole reason.
An American Values approach would see it as our obligation to support the struggling democratic state living in the shadow of Red China. This is a very convincing argument, and one that is often used, but I am inclined to think that it functions as more of a justification to the American people than an actual reason for policy.
Looking at Domestic Politics, many theories could be floated, but the one seemingly plausible one in this case is economic. I am becoming more and more convinced that US policy is often primarily motivated by economic gain, and so I couldn't help but wonder, could our policy towards Taiwan in fact be motivated by cold, hard cash - weapons sales? This hypothesis really intrigued me, so I lost myself in research for several hours. I certainly uncovered some interesting things...
1. In an address to the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council Defense Industry Conference in 2006, the tone of the US government spokesperson seemed to confirm my suspicions. He emphasized the US's commitment to ensuring Taiwan's security, and urged the Taiwanese to take that task more seriously, specifically by increasing the percentage of their budget allocated for defense! I couldn't believe this was a US government official talking - why did he care about Taiwan's defense budget? But the answer was obvious - a larger Taiwanese defense budget means more money for US weapons.
(Source: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/72100.htm)
2. The next fact fit well with that - the US is Taiwan's principle supplier of weapons. There are only 3 other countries that have sold Taiwan weapons at all since 1999 (France, Germany, and Israel) but those together only totaled $108 million. In comparison, US arms sales to Taiwan since 1999 came to a whopping $4.8 billion - 98% of all arms sold to Taiwan during the period. WOW. So it's safe to say that this is a market US weapons manufacturers can monopolize.
(Source: http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/values.php)
3. The number I was really curious about was where Taiwan ranked in the US's overall arms exports - that would make or break my hypothesis. In 2005, Taiwan was the 3rd-highest purchaser of US defense articles and services (1.3 billion) - below Israel (1.7 bn) and Egypt (1.3 bn), and above Saudi Arabia (990 mn) and South Korea (610 mn). WOW again. So I might just be right...
(Source: http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/values.php)
Although these facts could be circumstantial and not causal, I think there's something going on here. Taiwan was an untapped market before the US came along - the rest of the world either could not or would not sell weapons to them on any significant scale. Weapons manufacturers (a notoriously powerful interest group in Washington) must have put pressure on the government, which was likely already inclined to arm Taiwan for Balance of Power and American Values reasons. In addition to the billions of dollars accrued annually as a result, this policy keeps China on its toes without disrupting normal trade. And all in the name of protecting democracy :) Perfect!
(A related hunch... I wouldn't be surprised if Bush and/or those in his Administration have lucrative connections to weapons manufacturing companies, and have benefited directly or indirectly from increased weapons sales. But I have no proof of that...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)