Closing Guantanamo Bay

The first week of the Obama administration is going to be something to watch with keen eyes. One story, among the dozens that come out daily, really caught my eye today. It reported that Obama will be ordering the closure of Guantanamo Bay within the first week, maybe even his first day on the job:

Advisers to President-elect Barack Obama say one of his first duties in office will be to order the closing of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay.

That executive order is expected during Obama’s first week on the job — and possibly on his first day, according to two transition team advisers. Both spoke Monday on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Obama’s order will direct his administration to figure out what to do with the estimated 250 al-Qaida and Taliban suspects and potential witnesses who are being held at Guantanamo.

It’s still unlikely the prison would be closed any time soon. Obama last weekend said it would be “a challenge” to close it even within the first 100 days of his administration.

While the practical closure of the facility, as mentioned, probably won’t happen too soon, it’s the symbolic action that we, in Australia, are not unaccustomed to. Prime Minister Rudd, hours after being sworn in, ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Here, his first act as Prime Minister, his actions too would take time to come to fruition: the ratification would come into force 90 days after the instrument is received by the United Nations. Of this rather symbolic gesture (as Australia had been previously been targets to meet the reduced emission levels, though not officially as the Protocol was never ratified), Rudd said:

This is the first official act of the new Australian Government, demonstrating my Government’s commitment to tackling climate change.

Australia’s official declaration today that we will become a member of the Kyoto Protocol is a significant step forward in our country’s efforts to fight climate change domestically – and with the international community.

Another symbolic action from the Rudd government was the apology to the stolen generations. It was the first order of business for the new parliament, and was another (like Kyoto) campaign promise of Rudd’s for a Labor government. Neither of these two actions actually physically do anything on their own. But they are important and crucial actions that will allow for future progress in both the areas. It was agreed before the election, and by the election of the Rudd government by Australians, that the best way to tackle climate change was by first signing the Kyoto Protocol. It would open up opportunities in the next round of negotiations as well as set Australian governments goal in the future. The actual Kyoto Protocol goals would have been met by the Howard Government, who never signed it. So our effect on the climate would have remained the same. Yet with the signing, the symbolism behind it signified a new page in Australian policy on the environment. Similarly, the only way that reconciliation would occur between Indigenous Australians and the wider Australian community was with the first symbolic step of an apology. From there, a better effort could be made to improving the standard of living for Indigenous Australians, but it wouldn’t happen without the apology.

And so, with Obama’s own campaign promises to restore the world’s faith in America, to return to a more moral path, and to reinstate democratic justice to America’s actions, his largely symbolic action, possibly the largest symbolic act he can carry out, shouldn’t be more than a couple of weeks away. I’ll quote Obama on what his campaign promise was from a speech on August 1, 2007:

I also will reject a legal framework that does not work. There has been only one conviction at Guantanamo. It was for a guilty plea on material support for terrorism. The sentence was 9 months. There has not been one conviction of a terrorist act. I have faith in America’s courts, and I have faith in our JAGs. As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists.

Closing Guantanamo Bay down is the right thing to do. Processing the prisoners is long over due, has been a gross miscarriage of justice, and a stain on America’s history. But it can’t happen over night – and it won’t. But when Obama comes out next week and informs that world that he has ordered Gitmo, it will be a symbolic measure only. It will take time to close it down, and it will take even longer for the US to have its international image restored. But like Kyoto and the apology here, it’s an important first step to shaping and change the course of the country for the better. Progress can’t be made without a symbolic gesture to show that you are sincere about change.

The actual results won’t come for a while yet (not just for Gitmo, but for all three really), but for the place to even get shut down, for the US to start back on the right track, and for a point where we can mark a change between the old and the new, that announcement will be will be the thing to look to. I anticipate, and look forward to, it.

Thomas.

How cricket saved itself

Test cricket is alive and well. It is still the premier form of the game where the greatest skills of technical cricket, of endurance, and, above all, sportsmanship is shown. If a team lacks in any one of these three elements of the game and they are exposed as frauds taking part in a gentleman’s game. To show this, I want to contrast two test match series – and they should come as no surprise to anyone. Hark back to the previous cricketing season of 07/08 in Australia. India was touring here, taking part of a 4 test match series. Both countries were excited and anticipating a close and hard-fought series. Both teams had been preparing for this tour in particular.

Australia was keen to reestablish and show off their winning ways. They had lost some big names to retirement – Shane Warne, Justin Langer, and Damien Martyn after the Ashes 5-0 victory against England in 06/07, and then McGrath after the 2007 World Cup. Gone were some of the names that brought the winning Australian team of recent years to domination of the sport. Could a mix of veterans, players trained to take these new places, and new blood keep Australia on top?

India, always the cricketing mad hatters of the world, had a chance to take it to the world’s best team and prove their worth. They were keen to exact cricketing revenge from the 2007 ODI series loss, at the hands of Aussies, in September/Ocotober of 2007, and right before their tour Down Under. This was a hard loss to swallow because it had been hyped to no end: Australia had won the 2007 ICC World Cup, India had won the 2007 ICC World Twenty20 Cup. The clash of the two best limited overs teams, and India lost.

Some bad blood had been spilled between the two teams when Australia previously toured India – bad blood that hardly needs attention or covering in detail again. Generally, charges of racism, of cheating, and bad sportsmanship were thrown about. After it all, it didn’t matter who was right or wrong, the game of cricket, and its loyal fans, were the losers for over a year. Come the 07/08 series on Australian soil, both teams pledged to do their best not to recreated the fiasco again, promising to play in an honest, good natured way – a way that cricket demands in order to keep the sport true and live.

The series ended up going Australia’s way, 2-1 with 1 draw. But that’s not what most cricketing fans* remember. The pledge was broken – by both teams (not matter how much bias you inject into the argument). We remember how pathetic on-field and off-field behaviour was. We remember how both teams went back down a path towards bad play – not going so far as to cheat (which goes against some of the claims made by Indian players), but going so far as to not be playing in the spirit of the game. But most of all, we remember the series because the quality of cricket was good. Both teams endured for 18 days out of a possible 20. But the sportsmanship, the respect, and the nature of the game were gone.

Australians played cocky, and their behaviour on the field was, granted, their ‘natural game’. But they have been criticised for their ‘natural game’ (of sledging, of appealing excessively, of playing ‘too hard’) for a long time – with a lot of the criticism coming from the Indian cricket team and commentators of late. The second test of the series saw Australia ramp up all facets of their ‘natural game’ to a point where fans of the team had moments that made them cringe. They would be criticised harshly by the Australian media, cricketing greats, and commentators around the country. The Indians, after getting some bad decisions by umpire Steve Bucknor, lobbied the ICC to remove him from the series – not only breaking breaking both team’s pledge of “Neither team has a right to object to an umpire’s appointment”, but also demeaning the game to the point that Australia didn’t win by skill, they won because of bad umpiring. The Indian team were rumoured to be planning to abandon the tour, because of the suspension of Harbhajan Singh for racial abuse towards Andrew Symonds, until the ICC intervened and settled the matter.

The rest of the series hardly mattered in the light of all this mess. I can’t remember any greaat innings, bowling performances, displays of sportsmanship, anything that brought credit to either team. I’m sure there were moments, but no cricket fans remember them because the whole thing now had a shadow over it.

Lets contrast this to the test series that just finished between Australia and South Africa.It was hyped as much – the number 2 team in the world of South Africa having been nipping at the heels of the number 1 team in the world of Australia for a year and some. A clash of the titans, but a test for both. Australia had to find its footing without a host of players to rely on. It would, in a sense, have to find its next generation in action – and hope they hit the ground running. South Africa, having been through the trough of losses and defeat associated with bringing up the next generation, was poised to be what Australia was some 10 years ago: the winning team that would eventually become the dominating team in world cricket. This was bound to be a great match.

Not even a day finished, and it is being touted as one of the best test match series you will see in a long time. Each test went to the fifth day – endurance. Each team showed off their depth of talent, with magnificent innings by some batters, masterful displays of bowling, and lively players in the field – technical skills. But, and again this is the most important, both teams respected each other, Australian crowds could stand and applaud either team in their efforts, and there were no charges of dissent or abuse filed, nor did any issues really raise their head – sportsmanship. The three elements of cricket that make the game great were alive and well, and, as a result, the game flourished. The form of the game that some say is dead kept two nations on the edge of their seats for weeks.

We saw, and will remember, the moment that the Australian test team had serious and real competition at home, and thus on the world stage, when J.P. Duminy hit the winning runs in Perth for the first defeat on home soil, and then Hashim Amla for the series winning runs in Melbourne. We will remember Dale Steyn for the great bowler that has debuted to the world, and Makhaya Ntini for the great player he has become. We will be able to recall the great performances of the opposition for this series. We won’t forget about Australia’s moments in the sun – the nail-biting, gutsy victory in Sydney, Michael Clarke’s stand-out series with the bat, Ricky Ponting’s back-to-back (almost) centuries in Melbourne, Mitchell Johnson’s coming of age in international cricket, or the debuts of a whole bunch of new blood. The thing we will remember most about the series is Graeme Smith walking out to the SCG with a busted elbow, broken finger, and rugged resolve to save his team from defeat. He would fall short, but by gosh it was a gutsy performance that real cricket is all about. Braving the odds, fighting for glory, and taking the match to the last ball.

This is what cricket is about. This is the cricket that I could only ever remember in my very early years, and had been missing for over a decade. I tasted this type of match, this style of play, the closeness of this series and I want more. Go back to this time last year and I wanted nothing to do with cricket. I dispised the sport for what it had become. I couldn’t care less what happened to any team on the field. I only waited until the sick sport got better. I didn’t care how long I had to wait, I would wait. I had tasted a bitter victory that I wanted no part of. And I wanted no part of a sport where the Australian team and the Indian team could be successful in.

Looking at this series, and the series since that debarcle with India, it would seem the Australians have turned a new leaf. I can’t speak about the Indian team because they haven’t had to prove themselves to me. Next time they play our team, then I’ll judge them. But for now, I’m not interested in them. I’m only interested in Australia’s team – our team. My team. The team that represents my country when they walk onto the field. The team I expect to play in the spirit of the game, with sportsmanship, with sound technical skill, and able to endure defeat, victory, and the responsibilities of each. The series just finished showed the world that they can. An old Australian spirit of fair before tough play, of fighting spirit in the proper nature, and bringing back the gentleman’s game has been on display.

Last year fans and casual observers said that cricket was dead, that Twenty20 and ODIs were the way because no one was prepared to watch test matches go for three days with predictable play and outcomes. I argued against them then. I told them they were wrong then. I said they would be proved wrong sooner, rather than later. I was right. People have been talking about the cricket non-stop now. It’s back in the papers, on the front page. Armchair professionals have come out in force. The solution to Australia’s problems can be found on thousands of blogs, while tributes to South Africa can be found on as many. Cricket is alive and well again. And it didn’t need some cop-out excuse, some broken version, some flash-bangs to get the attention back. Cricket needed cricket to save it. And for my money, it has.

Thomas.

Bits of news

I’m going to go out on a leaf here and say that Israel doesn’t give two hoots what Australia says about what’s happening over there – critical or supportive of either side. So for anyone to claim that Israel is doing what they are doing because the Australian government hasn’t been overly critical of Israel’s latest use of force would be prudent, naive, attention-grabbing, and plain silly.

My own two cents? Prime Minister Rudd’s statements and attention paid to this is adequate, considering our involvement, location, and the politics of the issue. You didn’t think I would give you my two cents on the current problems over there, did you? I’m too smart for that – when everyone has cooler heads, and when it’s not such a hot topic I might write them down. But out of fear of how they might be interpreted and construed (which probably gives away my opinions on the matter), I’ll hold off.

Thomas.

Back onto the cricket

So far so good – though with a pitch like the one they are playing on anything can happen (much like with every ball). While the pitch quality is quite poor, and it hasn’t held up at all, I’m personally glad it has gone to the wall. Since the Perth wicket no long has cracks the width of a fist, every pitch in Australia is really a batter’s pitch. Now we have a crazy-interesting match because of how the pitch is. Makes for a one-off specticle (because it won’t be happening again).

Hayden’s spot in the team (should he survive) might have been saved by Asoka de Silva. He was plum as plum (probably as plum as Bollinger’s not given LBW against one of the South Africans through the day). It doesn’t matter if he scores a big score here, he should be dropped. I suspect that in either scenario, a good score or not, he will stay. The selectors just aren’t thinking clearly at the moment. Where McDonald and Bollinger came from I have no idea. They still don’t want to settle on a bowler. Didn’t they pick Hilfenhaus for the squad in Melbourne? Is he good enough for Melbourne but not Sydney? Same goes for McDonald. He’s our all-rounder. Though with our tail performing like it has over the past series, we didn’t really need to settle on an untested all-rounder. I wouldn’t pick him, but Brad Hodge has always busted out performances for Australia when he’s been picked. That’s if you want to go down the road of a specialist batter. I would have gone with another specialist pace bowler myself.

Australia is in a position where they could win the match – if they stick together and play like they used to. Then again, they lost that first match, and they really shouldn’t have. 50 more runs, which is what the openers should have got in their second innings (well, when I say openers, I mean Hayden could have hit a decent score and taken the pressure off Katich, then Ponting, of having dead-weight at the end), and at the least the match would have been a draw because they wouldn’t have had the time to score the total …

… I think de Silva again just called a 5-ball over … strange …

… I’ll be watching as much as I can of the last few days. Listening, for the most part, to tomorrow’s play. I really hope Australia can dig out the win. I would hate to see history made – the first time in, I think, 122 years that Australia will have been beaten in a whitewash at home.

Thomas.

Post-script

I quite liked this comment from Mark Boucher:

It is in the top three toughest decks that I have played on day three and it is not nice staring down the wicket and making sure you run on the side of the wicket so you don’t fall down.

Fixing Australian cricket

The cricket has been fantastic to watch of late. Certainly for the past two matches, South Africa has shown a skill that only Australia has had for the past years. It seems that there’s a new kid on the block. I stand by my statement that Australia is the world’s best team until they are beaten in a series at home. India came close last season but couldn’t do it. South Africa are poised to do it now. If they do, they will leave the country ranked #1 and, in my opinion be the best test-playing nation out there. The team that wins the World Cup from us will be the best one-day playing nation. But that’s some time off.

It’s easy to point to the reasons why Australia has come down from such heights: the retirement of Shane Warne, Glen McGrath, and Adam Gilchrist. There’s no argument there. We will probably never return to such a skilled team – they were once in a generation players, and to all come at once was an extreme rarity. But we can certainly improve in quality from the state of the team now. So how do we do that? After watching the past year’s cricket, thinking about it intesively since New Zealand were playing us here, and having conversations galore about the topic, I feel that the following are the best moves to make to lift up our team.

First up, drop Matthew Hayden tomorrow. I advocated dropping him before the series. He is not performin at all, and a player has no right to hang on to his spot because he made a massive score against Zimbabwe quite a few years ago. Nor does he have a right to be in his spot because of his past performance a year ago. Hayden isn’t just out of form unfortunately: he’s past his prime. He may want to play for a few more years, but he cannot justify it with his most recent matches. When Warne, McGrath and Gilchrist retired, I argued that we need to bring in new blood to gain some experience with the ‘veterans’ around them. The ACB decided against this and brought in some old hands. They were wrong, and I was right. Now, we’ve lost that opportunity because the ‘veterans’ aren’t performing.

The player I would bring in to replace Hayden is Phil Jaques (I’m a long-term supporter of his as you know). I argued that he should have been in the team before Katich. I’m not one to swap and change with my picks – you pick someone and you stick by them. They put him in, then dropped him for Simon Katich. Ok, so Katich has performed well in his role, and was going gangbusters in the domestic competition. You wouldn’t have had such a problem dropping Hayden if Jaques was already in the side – you could replace him with Katich, who is in-form. But, regardless, I’d bring in Jaques and give him the Sydney test to have a crack and settle in (because it might not count).

If you’re opposed to Phil Jaques, then Chris Rogers (opener for SA) and Phillip Hughes (the other opener for NSW) and Michael Klinger (a traditional opener, playing #3 for SA) are the three leading scorers in the domestic Sheffield Shield at the moment. There’s four viable options to replace Hayden with – and any other batters who might begin to slip.

Second, after the series I would sit down and negotiate with Ricky Ponting to take the captaincy off him and give it to Michael Clarke. It’s my belief that we need Ponting the batter more than we need Ponting the captain. If we can take the captaincy from him, we will also take the added pressure and off-field duties from him. Michael Clarke has stepped up a few times this series, and he was the only batter proper who could hold his head up after the previous test. He has matured, and has a good head about him. With Ponting around, he could still have an input, what with his experience and that, but Clarke would be calling the shots.

That’s assuming Ponting would give up the captaincy and keep playing. If it meant Ponting would retire, let him keep it. As patchy as Ponting has been of-late, this match now shows us that he does have the skills to lead from the front. I honestly think he will be a better player without the captaincy, but if he needs to keep it so-be-it.

With Clarke getting promoted, I’d make Brad Haddin the vice captain. In my ideal team, Phil Jaques has only just returned, Ponting has given up the captaincy, Mike Hussey is no good as captain, Andrew Symonds has been in trouble before, and the bowlers are a special case, which leaves Jaques or Haddin. It was a hard call between the two, but I find it hard to imagine a situation where Haddin could be dropped, whereas going out of form for long enough is reason for me to drop Katich, and be replaced by one of the domestic players who are ready and able. You want to make your vice captain someone who will stick around, and your wicket keepr who is a gutsy batter at the tail is one who will be around for a while.

Next, the ACB should state that a place in the team is a ‘horses for courses’ situation or a merit system, and settle on this. ‘Horse for courses’, for those who haven’t heard the saying before, is picking the best team (the horses) for the ground they are playing the match at (the course). If you are playing a spin-friendly wicket, and you are picking on ‘horses for courses’, you would drop a pace bowler, have two specialist spinners, and an all-rounder who can spin. If its a batting wicket, you would drop bowlers for batters. If its a pace ground, then you drop batters and spinners for specialist pace bowlers. If its a merit system however, which is what I endorse, you pick someone and for as long as their immediate performance record allows, they stay in the team. The selectors used to do this, but now they are all over the place that it looks like they are ‘course-ing’ it.

From this, if you are going to pick a specialist spinner in the team, pick on, settle on him, and stick with the decision. Personally, there are no specialist spinners in the domestic league that really warrant getting in the team – they don’t move the ball much and have little variety to trouble international teams. I would free up this spot for an extra pace specialist and rely on our part-timers. Without McGrath, we need that extra pace bowler. I’d pick Ben Hilfenhaus and stick with him, giving you a pace line-up of Stuart Clark, Brett Lee, Mitchell Johnson, and Ben Hilfenhaus. Your part-timers are Andrew Symonds (medium pace and spin) and Michael Clarke (spin), and the rare appearance of Mike Hussey. That’s seven bowlers, and with enough of a pace line-up to rotate with adequate rests.

I don’t want to repeat myself, so I further endorse the principle of making the ODI team a sort of ‘farming’ team for test callup that I proposed here. From this, they then have a clear call-up replacement for anyone who gets injured, instead of making injured players play (Lee, Symonds in this match), or struggling to figure out who should get the place that gets freed up (the Hilfenhaus/Siddle debate before this match, the problem of who to replace Hayden with).

Mike Hussey is an extremely talented and skilled player. He is in pitiful form at the moment though. He is ok up in the order, but much better, in my opinion, further down. If  you can sure up the openers and the upper order to get decent scores without quick loss of wickets, then Hussey at #4 works fine – he doesn’t have pressure on him, and he can play his natural game with some batters. But if you do lose quick wickets, Hussey gets in and is facing the new ball; he isn’t that good against a new ball. Drop him down at least one more place, so that he comes in right ahead of Haddin, and then he can ground out a gutsy partnership with Haddin if it is called for (where they can score three or four an over, and there’s something of a total already there for them to build on), and we aren’t relying just on Haddin to wag the tail.

Finally, moving on to the ODI series that is coming up. Here’s a chance to test some things and get the team into shape. Let’s write it off now as a competition and treat it purely as an experiment that we don’t need to win. We need to rest our injured players so that they are fit and ready for the up-coming Ashes tour. Rest Brett Lee and Andrew Symonds from the ODI team, keep Stuart Clark out of the series to recover his operation, drop Hayden from the team, bring in all these new players and get the gears working together. Here’s a chance to get the team into a ready position for the Ashes – the next big thing on the radar. I don’t want to see the Poms win them back. , and cannot watch that again. The ACB has a duty to get the team into shape to successfully tour and defend that little urn that means so much. Now’s their chance before it’s too late.

Thomas.

Why I dislike, and will never see, Australia the film

I can quite simply and easily tell you why I don’t care an iota about the new film Australia. It has been hyped up to something so monumental, so great, so fantastic that as a reaction to this over-the-top, Australia-obsessed (no pun intended), single-eyed media, and their goo-goo gaa-gaa-ing over this film, I have resolved myself to dislike it. I might not have seen it, I probably never will, but as long as the media continue on about how great it is, I will ensure that I think ill of the film.

Could it be at all possible that the film might not be the greatest film ever? I heard ‘Oscar contender’ on the news and felt sick. Why? BECAUSE THE REPORTER HADN’T EVEN SEEN THE FILM!!! I hate it when Americans do it to their own films. Thankfully, we don’t get much of their hype over here. But bring along an Australian movie, with a couple of Australian actors, and film it in Australia, and by gum! It’s the greatest film ever!

How could it not be!? It’s freaking called Australia!!! How more Australian can it get!?

I understand that the media and the film industry share a bed 6 out of 7 days of the week. But far out, every time an Australian film comes out, or an actor from Australia is in a film, or some blow-in from Broken Hill walks in camera shot for 1.275 seconds in some Hollywood release, then it’s made out to be the next ‘must see’ film of all time.

There is an obvious intent by the media to replicate the culture of Hollywood. They want to bring stardom and super-hype to our shores. It seems they must be succeeding too – closing George Street for a freaking movie presentation!? Are you kidding me??? Come on! If I had my car towed, or had to get through the bum-fight to get home that was that afternoon, I’d have probably started voodoo … or worse … on anyone associated with the film.

I just don’t understand why the media hype any Australian film to no end without even a possibility that it might be bad. I could only find independent critics before and after the film that said it wasn’t the latest Empire Strikes Back (by the way, that’s the greatest film ever made). I mean come on – there’s a good chance that the film will blow because Hugh Jackman is in it! That intrinsicly means the movie has a 50:50 chance of sucking or blowing. Couldn’t those talking heads (empty, I assume) just acknowledge that spending $130 million (… *sigh* I’m running out of pissed-off-ness to even go into this atrocity) is a big gamble because there’s always the chance it will flop?

No, of course not. And why? Because it’s Australian. How could anything Australian ever be bad?

Thomas.

The United Nations – Power politics

At the moment, you might hear a bit about the United Nations – certainly in Australia. With Prime Minister Rudd over there now set to address the U.N. General Assembly, and Foreign Affairs Minister Stephen Smith pledging money to 3rd world countries and lobbying for an Australian seat at the Security Council, the news will undoubtedly touch on this in the same shallow and superficial style they do with all serious matters. What Rudd and Smith are doing over there, in my opinion (which will be different to others, I acknowledge), is important and forward-looking.

One benefit of the Howard years was how Australia did take steps towards becoming a semi-important (in as much as a 20 million people, out-of-the-way, small economy with massive natural resources can be semi-important) country on the international field. But through the election campaigning, you could always sense that Rudd, if elected, wanted to take Australia further than the Liberal Party could. His diplomat experience, simply knowing a second language proficiently, his focus in terms of foreign policy all showed to me that Rudd had a domestic and international focus for his first term.So it doesn’t come as a surprise that he is touring the globe, and has made this latest visit which I see as rather important. Nor do I think it a bad thing in the slightest. 

But that’s not what I wanted to draw your attention to. What I want to highlight is a disparity between hype and importance. All the fuss around Rudd going to the U.N. is hype started up by the Liberals and right-wing pundits. What is more important still has something to do with the U.N., but doesn’t concern Australia directly. Of course, the self-importance that this country has instilled (let’s face it, we like to think we are much more important that we are) sees a majority of people overlook an issue like this.

The European Union recently released a foreign policy document entitled A Global Force for Human Rights? An Audit of European Power at the UN. The 80-page document covers precisely what the document is called: How the European bloc votes at the U.N., how their previous power has fared over time, as well as threats and challenges to their ‘democratic’ influence in the world through the institute. What the report details is rather scary and of concern for the future authority of the United Nations as well as the balance of power across the globe. The first page, as part of the Executive Summar, pulls no punches:

… the UN is increasingly being shaped by China, Russia and their allies.

The document continues on to give an analysis of what should be of concern to those who hope the United Nations could act if not in an entirely neutral way then at least in a way that is founded on human rights and democracy:

  [There is a] declining support among the UN’s members for European positions on human rights and the responsible exercise of sovereignty. That has been highlighted by 2008’s vitriolic Security Council debates … [where] Russia justified its decision to veto action on Zimbabwe … as a defence of the UN Charter’s definition of sovereignty.  

I don’t know how many people who are allowed to read this post or the E.U. document would argue against intervention at the cost of ‘sovereignty’ as defined by the U.N. To me now, as it did then, it reeks of power-grabbing and stonewalling for the sake of national gain. Russia, in blocking the move like many others, underminds the authority of the Security Council, its other members, while turning itself into a type of authority at the institute. To cover up a move like this wil ‘technicalities’ is absurd and should have been ignored by those countries that really did want to see action taken in Zimbabwe. As mentioned, Russia is not the only country to gain a new footing of power at the United Nations; China, also, has found new support:  

[On] voting on human rights issues … in the 1990s, the EU enjoyed up to 72% support on human rights issues in the UN General Assembly. In the last two Assembly sessions, the comparable percentages have been 48 and 55%. This decline is overshadowed by a leap in support for Chinese positions … from under 50% in the later 1990s to 74% in 2007-8. Russia has enjoyed a comparable leap in support. The trend away from the Europeans is markedly worse on the new Human Rights Council (HRC) where EU positions have been defeated in over half the votes.

In all honesty, I am not as surprised with China’s rise to power as I am Russia’s. Russia has been underhandedly and covertly setting itself up for a return to its Cold War place of authority. China on the other hand has a booming economy, 1.3 billion people, is central to nearly every economy in the world, and doesn’t hide the fact that it’s going to be one of the world’s authorities soon, if not already. That China would be able to find support among countries at the United Nations is logical – socialist, booming economy, money to invest.

The E.U. report struggles to come to a reason as to why they have lost power. Certainly they can attribute it to the rise economic power of China and the near-monopoly that Russia has over resources to its immediate neighbours and wider Europe. Militarily, too, these countries weild influence. I agree with a section of the inquiry that says a division between the U.S.A. and the E.U. on human rights and wider issues is another cause of their diminishing U.N. power. Related to this, it would also explain the U.S.’s diminished influence in the U.N., having broken away from its biggest ally, and now finds itself without credible backing.

Russia and China have gained support from countries that have generally not been approached by E.U. countries, the U.S., or the developed world. The E.U. could previously expect support from some 41 allies on issues of Human Rights. But this group of 41 politicians were made up, for the the Caucasus and Central Asia – which, being situated between Russia and China, have bolted from the E.U. to these two powers. Further, Russia and China have been able to swing allies by taking an anti-imperialist/anti-U.S. expansion approach, as well as renouncing encroachment by international organisations from the West. Popular among those countries that have negative experiences with imperialism of years gone by, have a dislike of U.S. authority, or are opposed to the fundamentals of the West, Russia and China have found that this approach carries significant weight.

Contrast this to the approach of the E.U.: Apealing to countries on a human rights and democratic basis. The countries they are apealing to in thsi case are represented and ruled by those people that stand to lose the most from this platform. While this aproach has managed to create a higher degree of unity among E.U. nations on voting, they still only make up 20% of the vote in the assembly.

Russia and China, in targeting central Asia and Africa, have gone for numbers and have come up trumps. Russia and China have also gained political/voting favours from developing and 3rd world nations by ‘backscratching’, the report states – they have supported minor countries in votes and moves in the assembly so as to gain their return at a future date.

At the end of the day, the report doesn’t want you to think that Russia is a top-dog here. Remember when I said I was surprised that Russia had made its big comeback? That’s because China is really the ring leader here, and Russia hasn’t quite returned to full glory. China is the one attracting more nations due to its post-Cold War view – Russia seems to be still stuck in that cycle. China attracts countries that look to Beijing as the centre of the world and relate to it, Russia attracts the old countries who look at the Cold War as evidence. 

What the report says to me is that a new approach is required for E.U. countries, and the wider Western world, in dealing with Russia and China. I think that for all the detractions the country has (and there certainly are a lot on the human rights front), China is the better of the two, and it should be the target of a new tactical approach by Europe and the U.S. to, first, dissolve the duoploy that these two countires hold. China is the leverage that the West has to control, or at least curb, Russia. If China were to bolt with its allies from Russia, Russia would be about as popular as isolated U.S. is at the moment. The way to get China away from Russia is to apeal to economics and business deals: China has a lot of fingers in a lot of economies, for good or for bad. Threaten this enough, and China’s diplomats might be willing to listen.

The United Nations does have a place in the world. It has been ineffective in the past, but only because of the power politics that have underminded it. What needs to happen, to instate the U.N. to a place of authority, is a shift back towards Western fundamentals and human rights approaches – not allow the institute to go down the path of China and Russia. It might be hypocritical to use China to enact a tactic of better human rights, but it’s an important step to correcting the mess going on in China, and around the world, right now. Power politics will always be a part of the U.N., but without the Western countries holding that power, the U.N. will be a hollow institute that can affect no change and can better no lives.

Thomas.

A post about cricket

Australia beat the West Indies 3 to blot in their latest test outing. And, quite frankly, I couldn’t be less excited about it. West Indies, who at the start of the series were ranked one above Zimbabwe in the national ratings (Zimbabwe for crying out loud!), managed their best performance in their last match and still lost by 87 runs. I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why I’m not excited about cricket at the moment.

Wait, I do know why – because it’s just not competitive! When India was over, and as much as a debacle of a tour that was on both sides, I was at least interested in cricket because India were providing competition, they were a challenge, and they could have won the series. Not once did I ever think West Indies could beat Australia. I don’t remember worrying about it or even concerning myself with the details of matches and teams. It was never going to happen – and everyone knew it. That’s why no one else cared much over here. The papers were more concerned with other news in other sports.

Had I watched any of the matches, I expect I would have seen empty stadiums. It would have happened here, that’s for sure. I don’t know what the fix is (Twenty20 is not the fix to test matches), but I know that increase cricketing skills the world around is probably a good start. I mean, bring up the minnows of the world to at least competitive skills and then you have a serious few teams to face. Not every team has to be as good as Australia, but certainly more than India and England (who is only seems to be good once every four years). Make test cricket more competitive and you will see crowds come.

Of course, the matches have to be situated through the week so as people can come. Starting tests on a Thursday or Friday is probably a good idea, because fans can then take a day off on Thursday or/and Friday, attend for 3 days because the all-important 3rd day is on Saturday, and the ‘final’ day is on Sunday, both days that people don’t generally work (unless you’re a greedy money hogger like me). And, if the test requires a 5th day, and it is coming down to the line, some people might take Monday off. Surely that’s one simple thing that could be done to boost attendance?

But, fact of the matter is, international cricket, at the test level, isn’t competitive. It just isn’t. Make it more competitive and it will keep itself going. It will take some time, but not so long as it will to let it die. And if it did die, cricket the sport would lose a heap of die-hard fans, and gain only the casual fan who isn’t going to invest the sort of money (regular attendance, club membership, merchandise, etc.) that a serious fan will. A serious fan doesn’t turn off their interest when they get bored with the sport – something casual fans do.

Thomas.

24 hours with Thomas

10:06pm – Started this blog post after commenting on one of Jim Belshaw’s posts. It took me roughly 8 minutes to think of what to write. Currently, I’m talking to a friend of mine – Chris, who lives in England and attends Birmingham City University. He is doing education, a drama and English major. I tried to meet up with him last year when I was over in England, but he was too far North in the country to get too. I do want to meet him one day, so I expect another trip to England (the 3rd) is in order. I was listening to Dance Floor Anthem by Good Charlotte. It’s the only song of their’s I like because of the ‘message’ behind it. I then decided that I would keep half-hour updates for this post this evening that contain my activities for that 30 minutes, unless something interesting happens. I’ll see how that goes, and if I need to have longer time periods between updates tomorrow.

10:36pm – Checked Ninglun’s Gateway – laughed that there is a 3rd layout for the day. Saw that I got a reference (I liked that layout Neil). I can hear my father snoring in the next room and fully expect my mother to come into the study (where I am) and kick me out so she can get some sleep on the sofa-bed. Checked for some interesting news on CNN Political Ticker to blog about- nothing since this morning. Checked Google News – nothing. Did some work on a U.S. politics post for tomorrow about ‘red’ and ‘blue’ states, and how unpredictability in voting is going to make for an interesting race come November. I had to find some stats and links for this, which got me distracted for a while. Checked my emails. Read the Sitemeter report for the week. Listened to Johnny Cash’s When The Man Comes Around a couple of times.

11:06pm – Went and got my HSTY2656 A House Divided: The American Civil War course reader and an Easter egg. I eat one of the two (you’ll never guess which one!). I’m trying to get ahead of my course readings to make assignments easier. I’m currently on the next tutorial’s readings – the Confederate Constitution (which was very interesting), 2 chapters from Southern Rights – Political Prisoners and the Myth of Confederate Constitutionalism, one chapter being called Jefferson Davis and History, the other Jefferson Davis and the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and a chapter from Lincoln – The Liberal Statesman, this chapter titled The Rule of Law Under Lincoln. This last one is so dense and filled with legal references and specific knowledge that it nearly puts me to sleep. I’d already nearly finished the last reading. A total of 29 pages, and all could be blog-worthy. While reading, I checked Jim Belshaw’s blog to see if there was a reply to my comment (no), followed a link to a blog that he also talked about – The Blonde Canadian, ate 4 mini-Easter eggs, finished my conversation with Chris in England.

11:36pm – Kept reading the course reader, and finished that week’s readings. Onto the next week’s, and a collection of Civil War songs, and an article from The Journal of American History titled ‘The Feminized Civil War: Gender, Northern Popular Literature, and the Memory of the War, 1861-1900’. I do not look forward to that week’s tutorial at all. While reading, I checked Ninglun’s Gateway to see if there was a new layout again – no. Checked his blogs for updates – none. I went to Yahoo7 to check what was on television tomorrow night. Jack crap is on. I remember the days where I used to watch hours and hours of television. Now, little-to-none. I’ve stopped listening to music, as it’s too distracting for these readings.

11:40pm – Reading about a feminised Civil War was too much, and I’m headed to my room to watch some more episodes of Gilmore Girls. I’ll continue this post tomorrow, when I wake up. I’ll also be noting what I get up to once I get off the computer for an update tomorrow.

11:43pm – After getting myself a glass of Vanilla Coke, I settled in to watch some Gilmore Girls. I watched 3 episodes, which totaled 2 hours. These were some really great episodes – some laugh out loud moments. This took me to nearly2am, where I read another chapter of I Am America (And So Can You!) by Stephen Colbert. This chapter was a poke at Hollywood.

2:15am – Lights out, went to sleep soon after.

10:08am – Woke up, shaved, showered, and was ready for a day of not much. I sat down to finish the article about the feminised Civil War. I got through nearly 5 more pages before I gave up again. Unlocked the house, let the dog out the back and had a look around the front yard. All in order. No one else is home – they are all at work.

10:37am – Turned the computer on, sat down and started checking all the news websites: Google News, CNN Political Ticker, Yahoo News, a few political blogs and websites, polling websites for the U.S. primaries, YouTube for new videos (where I find a new idea for a post), and then finally get around to checking my emails, then to my own blog to read any new comments – which there were – and then visit the Jim’s and Neil’s blogs. All this takes roughly an hour and a half, most of it is reading news articles on websites, and then recalculating the maths involved with the U.S. primary race with the latest polls and delegate counts (sounds like a boring act, but it keeps me informed enough). Afterwards, I play some Spider Solitaire to give my brain a rest.

12:15pm – Resumed work on the ‘red/blue’ state post.

12:33pm – Gave up on the ‘red/blue’ state post. Started work an a post about a certain campaign ad.

1:15pm – Posted ‘Fear ad vs truth ad‘. Took longer than usual because of all the parodies I watched concerning the original ‘3am ad’ of Clinton’s that attacked Obama’s foreign policy experience. Now headed downstairs to get some food, as I’ve finally got hungry.

1:31pm – Finished lunch. I prepared and ate a can of Scottish sardines, 2 glasses of Vanilla Coke, a slice of chocolate cake, and now am eating an Easter egg. All this will do me over until around 8pm-ish, when I will eat the dinner that everyone else in the family has already eaten. Back at the computer, I’m now going to start reading the next readings for my other history course HSTY2614 Australian Social History. I have a tutorial paper (1,500 words) on the next week’s reading due, about the Depression in Australia. I chose it because I wanted to get it out the way, but didn’t want to do the first week’s. Thus, I chose the 2nd week’s topic. But so did quite a few other people, which will be interesting to see how tutorial discussions play out (as people writing on the week’s topic are expected to ‘lead’ the discussions).

1:38pm – Signed onto MSN Messenger. Not too many people are online (which is to be expected). Only the Pope, a cousin of mine, and some people I know from overseas. I sign out nearly straight away.

2:08pm – While I was reading, I re-checked a few blogs and pages I had checked earlier. Nothing new. I return now to reading.

2:39pm – Taking a break from reading, I sent an email to a friend I met over the Internet in South Korea. Also, I sent one of my father’s work colleagues who lives in Connecticut, by way of Alabama. Larry from Alabama is a staunch Republican, and to his credit, he gave me his personal email to ‘trade political views’ if I wanted. He also said that when I go over to the States, if I’m going to anywhere his family is, they will gladly accommodate me. I’m thinking now of trying to find my way to Kansas now, to take up this offer. Boredom sets in afterwards and I mill around the Internet, looking up rumours for the next episodes of Lost, then reading some more political opinion pieces that I wouldn’t normally waste my time with.

3:09pm – Received a phone call from Andrew. The first human contact for the day.

3:16pm – Ended phone call with Andrew. Discussion included books we ordered on Amazon, a book I already have, the resurgence of poker, him not being online over the long weekend because the Pope was playing World of Warcraft for 4 straight days, and tentative plans to do something Friday night. I told him that I didn’t have a shift – upon checking after the phone call ended, I realised I did have a shift. Sorry Andrew. I’ll get back to him with this bit of information, and probably plan something for Saturday night now.

3:33pm – Just read some of Keith Olbermann’s The Worst Person in the World. Had a good laugh at some real idiots out there. Thought about resuming any of my history readings, but couldn’t be bothered. Instead, I’m going to get another drink.

3:49pm – After walking around the house for a while, trying to think of a blog post to write, I check on some links that I discarded about Pennsylvania voter registration. I find my way to the New York Times’ report on the story, and there discover a good post. Starting work on it immediately.

4:19pm – Finished my latest post – Campaigning in Pennsylvania – A second look. I think it’s definitely better than the campaign ad that I wrote earlier today, but not one of my best posts. I realised, as I posted it, it has started to rain lightly.

4:26pm – I’m going to check the letterbox to see what catalogues we’ve received today, and maybe some mail. I don’t expect to get any mail – I rarely do.

4:28pm – Guess what? No mail for me. Some for the parents though. Bills, I expect. I’ve decided to start work on my assignment for my Civil War course. I have to write an essay proposal. 500 words I think. But first I need to choose an essay from the list of options.

4:34pm – I checked Jim Belshaw’s blog for updates, and found a monster post. I read it and am quite impressed. Following this, I head over to Ninglun’s Gateway, and see that I’ve got a second reference for the day’s entry. I followed a link to a page where I’ve got a ‘who’s who’ entry. I was impressed, all things considered.

4:40 – Have ruled down the list of possible essay questions to 3:

• Why did foreign powers fail to intervene on behalf of the Confederacy?
• Compare the exercise of political power by the Union and Confederate governments during the war.
• Discuss the way new meanings have been invested in the Civil War by analysing at least three twentiet-century depictions of the war. (n.b.: you can use novels, films, memoirs, etc. You might also choose to focus on a particular theme – say, violence, race, combat experience, the coming of the war, the war’s aftermath, etc.)

I also remembered that the lecturer said if we came up with a question of our own, we could run it by her for approval, and if it passed the grade, we could do that instead. I doubt that my invented question would pass the grade – ‘Why is Barack Obama so great?’

4:45pm – Getting another drink. This time I’m getting 2 glasses and bringing them both up to save another trip.

4:49pm – Mother is home from work. She’s excited to see the dog. I venture downstairs to say hello. All goes well.

5:00pm – I recheck all of my relied-upon news sites, like this morning.

5:21pm – As I’m reading the Wikipedia entry about the Colt Manufacturing Company, I get an SMS from St. Ives Correspondent about my ‘comment section’ being a ‘cactus’. I go to check my recent comments. I apparently give St. Ives Correspondent too much credit in terms of deduction. He hasn’t seen that this has been a progressing blog post. St. Ives: The time that precedes each paragraph in this post is when I wrote and saved the post. I would have thought that by not signing my name at the end, it would denote that the post isn’t finished. If I need to point it out, I will: The post will not be finished until 10:06pm tonight. Leave the squabbling and nit-picking to me – it’s a fine art to perfect my friend.

5:30pm – Reply to St. Ives’ comments.

5:32pm – Sign onto MSN Messenger again. Conversation immediately starts with St. Ives.

5:38pm – Start listening to music. Start with 1234 by Feist. Start my plan for the Civil War assignment I have to do. I’ve settled on the questions: Why did foreign powers fail to intervene on behalf of the Confederacy?

5:47pm – Check a few of my familiar blogs again. Bored once more. I’ve begun to think about what I’ll be doing later tonight – watching some films that a friend lent me or watching more Gilmore Girls.

5:48pm – Mother asks me about going to the doctors. I tell her that the only way I’ll go is if she makes the appointment. She says she will make it for Wednesday. By her saying that, I think that she thinks today is Monday, and has been thrown off by the public holiday. I won’t mention anything until she is heading to bed.

6:01pm – Call from my father. He needs an email from a calling card he’s left at home. He’s in Brisbane at the moment on business. I give it to him. Conversation lasts 2 minutes.

6:27pm – I’ve been reading extremely interesting essays and pieces about diplomatic relations during the Civil War. I’m glad that I’ve chosen this topic, and expect I’ll enjoy it. Diana, a woman I know from New York through the Internet, has started a conversation with me. We’re catching up on people we both know, though I haven’t heard from for some time.

6:32pm – Sister gets home from work.

6:51pm – Dinner is served up. Burritos. My mother and sister are happy to eat together downstairs, while I bring my food back up to the study to eat at the computer.

7:18pm – In between reading about foreign relations during the Civil War, I’ve been trying to find tickets to a New York Yankees match in July. The prospects don’t look too good for getting good tickets without shelling out a ridiculous amount of money. The readings about the Civil War, while good, have started to get all melded together, and I’m giving it a break. I’m now going to seriously draw up an itinerary for my July holiday and get planning on that.

7:24pm – Checked some blogs while I waited for some flight websites to load.

7:32pm – Decided that flying directly into New York, and not taking a 3 day stop-over in Los Angeles is what is best for my holiday. I’m still talking to Diana from New York about baseball. She is a Boston Red Sox fan and a New York Mets fan.

7:41pm – Started playing with a trip planner that I found on STATravel. While it was fun to begin with, it is giving me headaches now. I want to go to some ‘out of the way’ places, like Iowa and Kansas, but this thing doesn’t give you the option, or when you try and use the feature that should enable it, it crashes on me. I’ve completely stopped thinking about the Civil War or the Depression.

8:04pm – The Pope starts a conversation with me over MSN, saying that Obama should be voted in as president, Pope, and something to do with the television show The Iron Chef. Seeings I don’t watch that show (because from the whole 5 minutes I’ve seen of it, it looks stupid), I told him I support the first two propositions. We exchange our happiness that Bill Richardson has endorsed Obama, and that Nancy Pelosi will be the one to tap Hillary on the shoulder to bow out of the race. I say I hope that Pelosi does the tapping with 2×4, which has the Pope laughing.

8:15pm – I check my WordPress Dashboard (where I control the blog from) for new comments and see that Jim and Mr. Rabbit have both commented. Both were rather recent, which means I don’t have to be annoyed with myself for being late in referencing them. Jim: The Monster post was fine as it was. Mr. Rabbit: Inspired was the last word I expected you to call this – futile, ridiculous, crazy all sprang to mind before inspired.

8:33pm – I stop playing with the flight planning thing. After a little under an hour, I’m no closer to having a formed schedule of what I want. I believe I’ve narrowed down where I want to go to, but I think the next part will include me trying to get the flights locked down with either my father’s help or a travel agent’s. I am a bit wary trying to do it all alone. What is troubling me is the accommodation for all the places I plan to go. Not the price (I know that it will be expensive), rather staying in the ‘right’ place – i.e. near to the people I want to meet over there.

8:35pm – Decide I need a drink. My mother has been bringing me drinks all afternoon – she has been offering them, and I’ve taken up the offer. While I probably should do some more university work, I’ve decided that I want to do some blog-related things. I check some people’s blogs, and then go to Google News to find something to blog about. If I can’t find anything there, I’ll go to some U.S. politics websites. I don’t have high hopes of finding something to write about – the dead news hours have come around now.

8:50pm – As expected, I couldn’t find anything that took my fancy to blog about. I checked my email accounts, cleaned out my spam folders, and read some subscription emails I received through the day, though didn’t read, knowing full well that extreme boredom come post-7:30pm for me.

8:53pm – Checked my MySpace for something to do. A good waste of time because the website takes so long to load.

8:57pm – My sister and mother sound like they are having fun downstairs. I’m going to investigate what they are doing, and try to put a stop to it. And I’ll get another drink while I’m down there.

9:18pm – I’ve come back from the computer. My sister and mother were intent on showing me parts of The Footy Show from last week. As I drank my can of Pepsi, I watchd and laughed at the bits. I found out my doctors appointment is for Thursday. All the while, when I say I’m a bit peck-ish for food, my mother suggests chips, chocolate, lollies, and more sugar-laden things.

9:22pm – Check my Technorati profile and blog rating. This blog, among the registered blogs at Technorati, is now ranked 150,747. Yesterday, at around the same time, it was 135,000-something. This fall is due to the blog losing ‘authority’ – links from other blogs. It was at 55 ‘authority’ yesterday; now it’s only at 51. Out of interest, I go looking for what Ninglun’s Gateway has (962,510/ 8 ‘authority’), New Lines from a Floating Life (294,012/ 28 ‘authority’) and then Personal Reflections, Jim Belshaw’s blog, (345,597/ 24 ‘authority’). While I am surprised at some of this, I then remember that nearly everyone one of my politics posts gets picked up by those blogs out there that trawl through WordPress for recent entries by keywords, then copies the first few lines, and links to my blog, inviting the reader to ‘read the rest of this great article’. I accept that these aren’t real links to my blog, and consider my blog’s ranking and ‘authority’ inflated.

9:34pm – Someone has cooked blueberry muffins. I saw the box was out when I went down for my lunch earlier today. I just heard my sister head into her room and close the door – I assume she has retired for the night and will watch television in her room until she goes to sleep. Thus, it is my mother who made the muffins. I think I know what my late night snack will be tonight.

9:37pm – I get a message from Diana. Our conversation, which had died at 7:48pm has now resumed. Baseball season was starting today, and she was all prepared to watch the game with some friends and rink some beers. Apparently the cable channel is out, and she can’t watch the match. I’m just glad to be talking to someone, and not amusing myself with stupid things I could find on the Internet. Because I’m definitely not going to do any university readings.

9:44pm – It just started bucketing down with rain over here. I love it – the sound, the smell. I really do like the rain.

9:49pm – For some reason I start thinking about the Sailor Moon and Pokemon cartoons. I used to watch Sailor Moon religiously through primary school, then Pokemon started on Cheez TV on channel 10, and I was so hooked on that. Those were so good cartoons. Not like today’s crap. I started to think how I could turn this thinking into a post, then abandoned hope, as those shows were so many years ago I would probably just get ridiculed for writing about them. For example: Sailor Moon was an anime cartoon about 5 teenage girls who had secret identities (each a different planet or the moon) and would fight monsters and bad guys. My favourite characters were Sailor Jupiter (who appeared later in the series) and Darien (I think the only male hero in the series, who was cool because he fought in a tuxedo, had amnesia, and wore what looked like a pair of glasses frames as his only method of disguise). Now do you see the problem?

10:02pm – I find myself at EzyDVD’s website. I’m interested in two things: 1) Is Sailor Moon on DVD yet?; 2) I wonder in my pre-ordered items are in yet?

10:06pm – I’m still at EzyDVD’s website, my mother just said goodnight to me, and I’m the last one left awake.

And that is how I spent my 24 hours. This was a somewhat productive day – 2 blog posts (other than this one), did quite a bit of my university readings, and started one of my assignments. I’ve had better days for both facets of my life – more productive on the university work, more blog posts written – but I think the ‘balance’ I struck today would suffice for the week’s break I have now. When I’m back at university, and the assignments are more ‘pressing’, I’ll be more productive. But for now, I’m happy with my day’s efforts.

Thomas.

The Republic of China election in 10 minutes

A lot of people accuse me of being ‘Americanised’ or ‘less worldly’ than I should be due to all my posts on U.S. politics. Not so, I say to them. Not so at all. You accusers want evidence? Well, here you go. A rundown of the soon-to-be-help presidential election in the Republic of China.

On the 22nd of March, the Republic of China(1) (commonly, and incorrectly, known as Taiwan among less worldly people) is going to hold their presidential elections. A good friend of mine, Ma Ying-jeou, running for the centre-right Kuomintang (KMT) party, with running mate Vincent Siew is expected to win the election by a healthy margin ahead of the centre-left Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and their candidate Frank Hsieh, with running mate Su Tseng-chan.

Now, I know what you’re thinking. Yes, there does seem to be some racial division here. The man with the least Western name is winning in the opinion polling, and expected to win the election in 2 days. I think Ma Ying-jeou played his cards right in appealing to both the ‘pro-West name’ demographic here, and the ‘anti-West name’ demographic name, by including Vincent Siew on ticket. This way, the ‘anti-West namers’ get ‘their man’ in charge of the country, and the ‘pro-West namers’ have their man second-in-charge. It’s a complicated set of demographics there, so I won’t bore you with any more details.

Unlike in America where you get bland nicknames for politicians like ‘Dubbya‘ Bush, ‘Slick Willy‘ Clinton, ‘Anti-Christ‘ Obama, or Australia with ‘King of the Caveats‘ Rudd(2), in the RoC, they know how to give a ‘polly’ a nickname. We have ‘Smiling’ Siew, who seems to be consistently smiling – whether he is talking about his children or the reunification with mainland China. And then we have ‘Teflon pot’ Ying-jeou. Why? Because no matter how many “scandals”(3) he went through, nothing stuck and he came out squeaky clean.

Sure, there might be allegations of bribery, preferential contracts, awful infrastructure planning and investment, financial illegalities, shutting down hospitals, misuse of special expenses, embezzling money (and get indited for it), and have his loyalty to his country called into question (by the left-leaning party of all groups!), floating around. Anyone can have these sorts of things casting a shadow over their name on the Internet and Wikipedia, but the good voters of the RoC know the real deal – that the left is secretly pushing their agenda with each of these allegations.

Something else that’s ‘Big Trouble in Little China’ is that there is something like 4 political parties running around. If Italy has taught us anything(4) its that having many political parties running a country is a recipe of disaster(5). What the RoC should do is take a leaf from countries like the United States or Australia who only have 2 serious parties to fight over the voters. Better yet, take a page out of ‘Big China’s’ book and have only 1 political party.

To avoid some of the problems that having many political parties brings to the front, there’s now 2 coalitions that will govern the country as a majority (if need be). There is the proud and masculine Pan-Blue Coalition, of which the KMT is part of with the People First Party, and the New Party, neither of which will field a candidate for the election, but have stated (repeatedly) that they will support the KMT’s candidate.

On the other side, we have the wussy, liberal, socially-corrosive Pan-Green Coalition, which is the DPP in some sort of relationship, that, no doubt, should be banned, with the Taiwan Solidarity Union. Just like Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin couldn’t get in the same communist bed(6), neither can these two parties. The chairman of the TSU, Shu Chin-Chiang, even met with Ma Ying-jeou, and declared him ‘president-to-be’. Newsflash: Stalin never endorsed FDR during the election!

The issues are surprisingly many and complex for a country as small as the RoC. You might think that their economic debates revolve around whether they should export cheap plastic kangaroos or cheap plastic koalas to Australia. You’d be wrong. The main issue for the economy is whether to create a ‘single market’ with China. The forward thinking Ying-jeou advocates this, while Hsieh cites toxic paint as a reason to not do this. If the Republic of China wants to be a true democracy, they will allow their citizens to decide for themselves if they want to give their kids toxic lead painted toys or not.

National independence is a raging issue that separates the two parties. I’m a bit miffed as to why the right-minded KMT want to unify with raging-communist mainland China, yet the left-minded dissidents of the DPP want to stay independent. But apparently that’s the case. I wouldn’t discount the theory that it’s a secret left agenda to get what they want whether the right party wins or the left party wins. Either way, you could get communism!

Now, to finish up this post, a brief rundown of the polls. Since January, 2007, consistent polling has been conducted. And … the KMT has won them all. And, in a pretty consistent trend, the undecided vote outnumbered the DPP vote. The biggest margin of victory for the KMT was 42% (60% to 18% with a 22% undecided vote). However, as the election has entered the final 10 days, I had to contact my bookie to find out the latest polling.

You see, the most reliable polling in the final 10 days comes by way of gambling circuits and syndicates. My connection in that neck of the woods, Hstang Wang(7), said that the best bet to get on was “Ma wins by 200,000 votes”, and to not touch the “Ma wins by 500,000 votes”, as the recent incident of 4 Pan-Blue members walking into Hsieh’s office, accused him of getting free office space from the government, then started a fist-fight with other Pan-Green members, has hurt Ying-jeou’s chances slightly. He is expected to win still, so my $280 bet(8) on Ying-jeou is looking like a sound investment.

Thomas.

Notes:

(1) Not to be confused with the crazy red menace People’s Republic of China
(2) Thanks Latham!
(3) Left-wing conspiracies to bring down their opponent
(4) Other than foundations for building should be sound and solid
(5) But not as tasty a recipe as pizza
(6) Or should that be under the same communist bed?
(7) No Western names for my made-up Asian bookies – just like the KMT would want
(8) That’s TWD$280 (or New Taiwan Dollars for the uneducated)