Welcome to the daily presentation at âForeign Policy and International Events Groupâ aka FP&IE. Join us on todays journey. Share links and stories of your discoveries and thought. Who are we and what we are trying do â Launching A Dailykos Discussions and Republishing Group For International or Foreign Policy Stuff
We use sources and links that might not be familiar to most kossacks, what with this being a Foreign Policy and International stuffs group and all. So press right mouse button on links and open in new incognito/private tab/window to reduce your tensions somewhat.
For today, I thought I would anchor the foreign policy around white man's burden (to be carriedby coloured servants/serfs/slaves of course)
A topic that a few of our usuals have briefly mentioned before without getting much traction, but I do know from commentaries and mails that many are interested in this, Over at Modern Diplomacy (29 May 2021) Nicholas Forbes explores Race and Racismâs Critical Role in International Relations
The majority of realist International Relations theory attempts to explain the outcome of the Thirty Yearsâ War and the 1648 Peace of Westphalia. Given that many of the core tenets of IR theory revolve around explaining the results of a three hundred and thirty eight year old peace treaty, it is clear that a disconnect between the past and the present exists. As a historically Eurocentric field, IR commonly neglects nonwhite experiences and attempts to tailor the perception of events and experiences to a fit a european. With the first texts and theories of IR thought being realist theories originating in Europe, the damage comes from the longstanding assertion that only white European countries are capable of bringing order and security to the globe. Examining the historical impacts of race and racism on modern international relations allows for a more holistic view of interactions within the gamut of world powers by validating the experiences of those subjugated to injustices of the past and present, and integrating their experiences to create a more empathetic field. A prime example of this disconnect is The Democratic Republic of The Congo. Subject to Belgian colonial rule as well as numerous abuses, the DRC exemplifies the pinnacle of racism in IR.
The modern IR field is undeniably rooted in racist theories and philosophy. The 1916 book An Introduction to the Study of International Relations makes the racist underpinnings of the field astoundingly clear. With an entire chapter of the text devoted to Political Relations Between Advanced and Backwards Peoples and promoting the necessity of empirical rule colonization, this fundamental book lays a foundation of racism in IR. Belgian rule of the DRC began in 1885 under King Leopold II, however full control of the country under the Belgians did not occur until 1908 and finally ended in 1960. Even American hands meddled in the DRC during World War II, as the DRC (under Belgian rule) supplied uranium for the Manhattan Project.
The DRCâs history lends itself to great instability, resource extraction and devastating internal conflict. In 1930, the discovery of diamonds and widespread commercial mining set a precedent of brutal working conditions and exploitation. In the wake of instability created by decolonization in 1960, a 1965 CIA backed coup placed Mobutu Sese Seko in power, granting Western powers greater access to minerals and resources within the country. From 1991-2009, the nation experienced constant (and still ongoing) conflict, largely driven by a desire for control of minerals and rampant sexual violence. When examining the connection between these factors, for example, countries with a larger share of natural resource extraction as a source of their GDP is correlated with increased rates of sexual violence against women, suggesting that colonial exploitation has consequences and impacts beyond just that of the economy.*
From the Nature (28 May 2021) journal, as the world of academic publishing pitches different journals divergent in geograpphy and home location compete for contributors,how much credence do you give to, for example, an engineering Journal from Tishuan university, or an economics journal from Dalian university? Of course there are also numerous journals world wide that have some sort of home online, so as you search for something, how do you judge the suitability of a paper becomes important. If a journal is publishing a paper that lays out deatils of physical inducements related experiments, results, and efficacy of âtreatment of homosexualsâ (ie. beat the the homosexual until cured) then do you give other papers published in the same journal credence? Article here does not quite get to that level of detail but still Hundreds of gibberish papers still lurk in the scientific literature
Nonsensical research papers generated by a computer program are still popping up in the scientific literature many years after the problem was first seen, a study has revealed1. Some publishers have told Nature they will take down the papers, which could result in more than 200 retractions.
The issue began in 2005, when three PhD students created paper-generating software called SCIgen for âmaximum amusementâ, and to show that some conferences would accept meaningless papers. The program cobbles together words to generate research articles with random titles, text and charts, easily spotted as gibberish by a human reader. It is free to download, and anyone can use it.
By 2012, computer scientist Cyril LabbĂ© had found 85 fake SCIgen papers in conferences published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE); he went on to find more than 120 fake SCIgen papers published by the IEEE and by Springer2. It was unclear who had generated the papers or why. The articles were subsequently retracted â or sometimes deleted â and LabbĂ© released a website allowing anyone to upload a manuscript and check whether it seems to be a SCIgen invention. Springer also sponsored a PhD project to help spot SCIgen papers, which resulted in free software called SciDetect. (Springer is now part of Springer Nature; Natureâs news team is editorially independent of its publisher.)
An interesting topic here Modern Diplomacy (28 May 2021) which looks into Why big states lose small wars: A case study of USAâs war in Afghanistan. Although on a personal level I disagree with the premise and the initial conclusion that big state lose small wars, nevertheless the article itself is interesting to read.
Fighting a battle against your enemies is not easy. In war, there are always some rules and regulations that have to be followed and it is important to know that what can be done or what cannot be done in a war. But the most important and essential factors in wars are modern weapons, military equipment, resources, strong policies, and tactics. Despite the well-trained military, technologies, and equipmentâs the superpowers were failed to win the small wars. An example of the USA fits best in these cases. Being a superpower, USA has everything, every modern technology, equipment, and well-trained army but still despite having all these things the USA failed to win the Vietnam war and now USA is ready to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan, which shows that the US is going to lose this war too and failed in bringing stable peace in Afghanistan by ending the war on terror. Now the policymakers of the US are well aware that the USâs strategy of war on terror is no longer stable and they are finding ways to withdraw their troops from Afghan land. It has been clearly shown that in todayâs world, the main concern of superpowers is to defeat some terrorist groups and organizations like Al Qaeda, Daesh, etc., and not to bring stable peace by ending wars. The US with the professional military failed to ensure peace in Afghanistan and now the unsuccessful war will make things worse in Afghanistan. There is also another variable behind US failure is that the United States did not know the Talibanâs nature and culture of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has a mountainous region with different ethnonational groups. It has a huge history of local autonomy which has no tradition of democracy. But the United States did not understand this concept of Afghanistan. According to Sun Tzu âKnow yourselves and know your enemy and you will win a thousand battlesâ
In the case of the Vietnam war, Viet Cong was confident about winning the war and they had a firm belief that they will drive out the American military troops from their land because they were united and determinant. But on the other side, American soldiers were demotivated and stoned. Lack of confidence and determination was the major reason for the USâs losing war in Vietnam that is why a small untrained group crushed a well-trained army of the US. And this is what exactly happening in Afghanistan right now, the innumerable attacks by the Talibanâs are now forcing them towards withdrawal. This depicts that it is important to have determination, confidence, and strong strategies because, without these factors, one cannot win the war because determination is the key strength of forces in wars.
So what about the emotional attachment to wars and deaths of soldeirs in bad wars?, Meanwhile over at Counter Currents (30 May 2021), Mourn Not Honor Americans Who Died in Dishonorable âMistakenâ Wars for GOP DEMS & Wall St. Deep State
Humankind is in an ugly period of suffering in the bloody hands of imbecilic investors in war, who own the American government and media and who cannot stop themselves from planning war, even terminal nuclear war, since they know that wars make money. Their funded elected politicians and media praise war on Memorial Day.
On Memorial Day, be aware of why Americaâs elected and appointed politicians make a grand show of praising past military service, especially lauding those who were killed in one of the illegal US invasions of so very many smaller countries.
Elected Politicians Had to Vote to Fund Those Wars
(even the wars declared âmistakesâ afterward)
Massively murderous crimes against humanity have been openly admitted to by high officials of the government of the United States of America by their characterizing wars as either having been mistakes or bragging about their having been successful.
Americans Vulnerable for Having Confessed or Bragged About Their Illegal, Unconstitutional and Genocidal Crimes
American officials claiming that their mega genocidal invasions, bombings and occupation wars in Vietnam and Iraq were honest mistakes are the two most devastating examples.
âWe were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why.â â former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara,[1] speaking of Vietnam.
âIt was a mistake, and I acknowledge that,â Presidential candidate Joe Biden referring to Iraq invasion war.[2]
But no talk of Americans paying for their âmistakes,â of years long murder and maiming of millions and the destruction of their countries.
At the Conversation (29 May 2021), President of France Emanuel Macron, seems to be leading an effort to rehabilate French image with small steps. Not sure how this will sit with the French electorate and his chances at re-election might be taking a hit. However Rwanda genocide: Macron forgiveness plea resets historic ties
French president Emmanuel Macron has just paid his first state visit to Rwanda. While many world leaders have visited the central African nation of 13 million, including past French presidents, such as President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2010, this trip was going to be different.
Sure enough president Macron would come the closest to apologising for Franceâs involvement during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis.
At the Kigali Genocide Memorial, Macron asked for forgiveness for Franceâs involvement in the genocide. He also expressed his desire to combat genocide ideology and denial in order to foster stronger relations with Rwanda.
The long-term impact of this trip will be based on building on this commitment. Franceâs tangible foreign policy mechanism will be committing itself to helping Rwanda through foreign aid development funding and COVID-19 vaccines. However, for France to gain the trust of Rwandans, the country has to commit itself to combatting genocide ideology and denial. A great start would be the arrest and extradition of Rwandans who participated in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis.
You have probably already seen the German progress, (NPRâ Germany Officially Recognizes It Committed Genocide In Present-Day Namibia) and (BBC â Germany officially recognises colonial-era Namibia genocide). The growing fascist movements in Europe and entrenched fascist movement North America are bound to result in blowback in domestic politics which of course will have foreign affairs impact. It will still be a long time before UK, USA, Canda, Australia governments ever get round to actually accepting that they have carried out genocide anywhere.
Enjoy The day
If youâre not already following Foreign Policy and International Events (FP&IE), please go to our homepage (link), find the Follow Group button in the left margin, and click it to FOLLOW GROUP. Thank You and Welcome, to the group offering new adventures on Daily Kos. Now youâll get all our FP&IE diaries in your stream.
|
This is an open thread. All Topics welcome.