July 2007: Preventing Global Conflicts
Via Email
Comments: Mr Walsekar While posing question you have analysed Pakistan very logically. Pakistan has been a graveyard of its own future.There is very less hope that it will survive. It seems to me that it is going to be like ruined and wounded Afganistan. I remember Chomsky, that the structure built upon destructions, will end with destruction.
Email Address: rahmanabbas2006@yahoo.co.in
Via Email
Comments: The article is very well written more than thought provoking it is conscience provoking, if we have one. The role of ethics, education comes into play. If we talk of globalization in economic terms divorced of ethics such cartelization of resources is natural corollary. If there is a Catholicism that defines us at all, it should be the notion of right and wrong, justice and injustice, and how to hang onto your principles in the face of pressure and prejudice. If we are able to do that than the beneficial effects of globalization can be seen.
Email Address: rintu_bt@hotmail.com
Via Email
Comments: I am no expert in history or its analysis, but this is what I would like to say in response: I fully subscribe to the theories that, \”we allow ourselves to be taken for a ride by these stupid theories.\" This could probably be seen in light of history itself. Since time immemorial, mankind has created sophisticated structures to destroy all that has been created by earlier generations. Death and destruction are basic tools of time. It allows for the creation of the new along with its death story. As long as there is insecurity & fear of any nature, seeking a harmonious human society will remain just an aspiration. That of course does not mean that we should not aspire for it. All human efforts should indeed be in that direction with a clear understanding that the expected outcome will be illusive unless the root cause is addressed. Machiavelli, Marx, Francis Fukuyama ....and many more who will follow, are probably different names of the same principle which thrives on insecurity & fear. I applaud your analysis which will no doubt ensure that the debate continues....which in fact it should, especially the thought of \"placing faith in the simple wisdom of core human values.\"
Email Address: m_agnihotir@yahoo.com
Via Email
Comments: Dear Mr. Waslekar, your comments in this article on Samuel Huntington\'s notion (or interpretation) of a \"Clash of Civilizations\" really go to the core of the misunderstandings that have characterized the conduct of western foreign policy and military interventions in the past decade. Countering this trend with the meme of an \"Alliance of Civilizations\" is critical to containing the fallout of the events of the last decade and constructing a peaceful future for the globe. While an international political scenario driven by conscience is the ideal to strive for, it seems inevitable that the evolution of power structures and decision making paradigms will be the path that events will flow along. To some extent, different civilizational perspectives and narratives will influence how the role of conscience evolves in different geopolitical or cultural contexts. Hence finding points of civilizational juncture or common ground will have to be a key focus in coming years.
Email Address: anilsivak@yahoo.com
June 2007, Part 15 : Emerging Eight
Jonathan Fryer in his Blog
Sundeep Waslekar, President of the Strategic Foresight Group, is in town and several of us from the LibDems’ International Relations Committee met up with him on the terrace of the National Liberal Club. I’d first encountered him at a meeting of the Liberal International Executive in the Philippines last year, since when he has been zooming round the word; his globetrotting makes my travel programme look like a suburban train ride. The motto of the Strategic Foresight Group is ‘anticipating and influencing Global Future’ — a matter of increasing importance and urgency, given the various conflict flashpoints round the world, not least in the Middle East, and the fact that powers such as Russia and Iran are flexing their muscles. So much for the post-Cold War ‘peace dividend’!
One thing Sundeep has been campaigning on recently is the need to create a global forum to replace the Group of Eight, the exclusive, informal gathering of the world’s seven leading industrialised countries plus Russia (with the President of the European Commission sitting in on the sidelines). The G8’s remit is to tackle global problems through both discussion and action, and we will get a good impression of how effective (or otherwise) it is, as its leaders meet at Heilingendamm in Germany over the next three days. The hot topic this time is climate change, so we’ll see whether Tony Blair really does have any influence with George Bush, after all he has done for him. Don’t bank on it.
Sundeep Waslekar argues persuasively that the G8 is no longer truly representative of the movers and shakers in an increasingly multi-polar world, in which new powers are beginning to demonstrate their economic and political might. Recently, the five largest emerging economies — Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa — have been invited along for dinners at these G8 events, but not to participate in the main discussions — a bit like the Victorian habit of having people in for coffee after the important guests had enjoyed a good meal (and the important conversation). As Sundeep rightly avers, ‘the time has come to find space for a group of eight emerging countries in central discussions on global governance.’ In my view, if the G8 had any sense, they would accommodate this change willingly, before it is forced upon them.
http://jonathanfryer.wordpress.com/
May 2007, Part 14 : Future of Stupidity
Via Email
Comments: This is an excellent article. Waslekar has correctly described the horrible stupidities that we face today. My compliments to Strategic foresight Group and Waslekar.
abbas.bakhtiar@yahoo.no
Via Email
Comments: Dear Sir, I discovered today your web, I find it excellent, many thanks. I thikn that if we are to survive as human beings, we will need to disactivate the Monotheist war. Monotheism itself can be consdiered a stupidity, a false belief based in different writings that talk about One only sacred possible truth. It is very difficult to find reasonable solutions when faith tells different people different things. And it is truth that Christian USA is on the Jewish side this time. During the last 200 years, Jewish people built Israel, that is the only difference. I agree that \"The theory of religious justice, in its deep analysis, is a cover for power politics\", but religious justice is the fuel that sends the conflict spiralling. It is the most dangerous conflict since Cold War, and much more difficult to solve. I see two big dangers in our future: the global ecosystem breaks down or a nuclear war between Israel, USA and muslim countries. I´m very interested in knowing how you see my point of view. Excuse me my English, Spanish is my mother lenguage. Best regards Eduardo Blasina Montevideo Uruguay If we do not solve that knot, giving Palestineans a country and sharing
eblasina@adinet.com.uy
Via Email
Comments: A good mixture of current and old international relations theories and human frailties. Had human society could manage itself without the need for stupid leaders, had there not been down trodden people there would not be an opportunity for those so called wise men who cause nothing but suffering. But that is a pipe dream. There will always be people who theorize social activities and foolish leaders who follow their teachings unquestioningly. Sad but true.
S.Tashan- tashan@bilkent.edu.tr
January 2007, An Inclusive World: In which the West, Islam and the Rest have a stake (report)
Via Email
Comments: Dear Mr Sundeep Waslekar. It was refreshing to read the booklet (An Inclusive World in which the West, Islam and the Rest have a stake) made by you .It was interesting to note that there is a concern on these vital topics affecting the world from India/Bombay where international topics get less attention as well as that it has received international attention & can become a movement
This mail is to congratulate you for the extensive study undertaken & share some observations/suggestions which you may like to consider. In view of the Islam vs. West scenarios emerging, it will be important to understand Islam in different dimensions, and from "authentic” sources. This is all the more important since 'Islam' is quite different from what Muslims are/convey Islam today .The crisis is of Knowledge as identified by you , but in my humble view it is the crisis of 'True Knowledge of Islam & its teachings.' This will include the obligation to acquire knowledge in all other fields. Another matter requiring more study would be the continuous negative relations of the West ( & Arab to some extent) with Iran. Further, more insight on the Media’s control of minds and general perceptions of the masses needs attention too. Lastly, an interfaith dialogue would also be relevant to remove misconceptions identify commonalities & get people to value "values" common across all religions/nations.
Email address: a.muljiani@gmail.com
Via Email
Comments: I have just had the pleasure of reading “An Inclusive World", and have a couple of comments. Firstly it was educational for me, particularly the chapter dealing with older Arab/ Persian knowledge focused culture. And the theoretical analysis was interesting, but for my taste there was too much emphasis on old, non-working prescriptions on the proposals for solutions. It was good to see the recognition that the Middle East is an area that has been exploited by outside powers for a very long time, and the process of colonization is still ongoing. The only three countries that were not colonized by the west were Iran, Syria and Iraq. Now there are only two left. The west is hungry for oil and new markets for their products, so they can not take the chance to introduce western style democracy in the area, all countries on the Saudi Arabian peninsula are effectively repressive entities, defined as "friendly” states to the West. The West can not afford democracies in these countries, and Saudi Arabia is by far the worst example.
As for the lack of solution to the Palestinian problem there are a couple of roadblocks that will prevent this problem to be solved as long as the US is having so much global power. Firstly there is a fundamental flaw of the Christian religion. The decision to include the Old Testament in the bible has effectively made the religion non-universal and sectarian. This part of the bible is essentially the Tora, which teaches about the Jewish god, and make the Jews God’s own people.
The New Testament provides the fundamentals about Christianity, and a core message here is that all human beings are equal (Paul). Both statements can not be true, and the Old Testament focused Christian environments in the US feel they have an absolute duty to promote the interest of the Jews, a key reason why Zionism has been a success. In addition there is the very powerful lobby (AIPAC) in the US that bribes and threatens top level US politicians. The US is therefore a completely unsuitable broker in this conflict, hence no hope for the poor Palestinians.
The only way forward, as I see it, is to drastically change the composition of the Security Council to include many more third world countries, and remove the ability for single countries to veto resolutions. The US will never agree to this, so again, the poor Palestinians do not stand a chance.
The only hope for change then is that at one point in the future the US is so much weakened compared to other world powers that reasonable minded voices of the world can be listened to (provided the other world powers allows that, of course).
Regards, Svein (a Scandinavian)
|
Print this Article