2009年3月24日星期二
Where does the Soul Go?
I remember writing that line at the end asking if we sell our soul if we could get a refund... because at that time in Beijing last year, I really felt like I had lost a large part of myself and what I held dear to me, mixed up in that whirlwind, that constant internal conflict of the love-hate over the city that only we who have lived there could ever understand.
I'm glad to say that since then, now that I'm living in Mexico, I believe that I've found my soul again, so maybe you can get the refund, or maybe it's because I left before I had signed it away in concrete.
Maybe soul is always there following us and waiting for us to respond to its beckoning, and we just have to listen. I'm still not 100% sure. But, read ahead, and let me know what you think.
-----
As my first semester in Beijing comes to an end, I find myself (as I often do) sandwiched between two completely polar emotions.
What is it about this city that is so alluring, yet at the same time so apalling?
When I was in Xi'an a few weeks ago I went to a club with a friend and while we were sipping our Qingdao beer, without any formal introduction three paid dancers dressed in flashy sequin-covered bikini tops with high slit mini skirts (red, blue, and gold) with their sparkling stilettos, climbed onto the dance stage and started...shaking their butts and jiggling their breasts.
I'm all about women embracing their sexuality and celebrating their bodies. However, the women on stage in the club disgusted me. It wasn't the women themselves, but what they represented in my mind. These women were definitely not celebrating liberation from Confucian culture, they might as well have been whoring for the Communist party. Ah, but I shouldn't be so harsh on them, like the rest of China they probably had no idea that their bodies were tools for exploiting the people.
You see, there's this polarity in China that fascinates me. Why is it that in the most populated country in the world, so few people here rise to challenge the status quo?
The answer to that is that there is a dichotomy of the dusty dirt-brown roads and the old grey buildings (even the reds are slate reds) that remind us to stay muted. And then there is also the bright city lights that distract us that have all too succsssfully created a diversion to what's really going on in this country.
China: the land that impoverishes its own people so much that they don't have time to think of rebellion, only time to think of survival. The land that takes care of foreigners better than it takes care of its own people, so that others coming in find themselves living in a world full of magic and fantasy, under an illusion that sweeps us under our feet so that we forget that we once campaigned for religious rights for Tibetans, and we forgive the censorship in exchange for cheap cab rides.
Did no one care that in the sequined mirrors of these women's costumes their reflection came out soul-less?
It is not just China, it's the world. "Where is the soul in the world?" I can certainly tell you where it ISN'T... but more importanly... where IS it? (Aside from the obvious, a flower, a tree, a beautiful painting...Where is it in humanity???) And what do you think it means to "sell your soul"? And who are you selling it to? And can you get a refund?
If energy and souls are recycled (as I believe they are), there must be some lingering soul out there dangling like a key on a kite, but perhaps we people are just afraid to get of facing the shock.
2008年10月17日星期五
Guide to Thinking about Emotions & Identity
I don't claim to have all the answers for everything on this blog, but I am using this to serve as a as a catalyst for thought... even if some entries are inconclusive. Here's an example of such an entry. I dug up notes from a lecture by Dr. Juluri, an International and Global Media class I took in my senior year of uni. You could write an entire thesis on each section/question, really, which I don't have time to do at the moment, but I will be talking more about the word "Oriental" in the future.
But for now, here are some interesting questions that we can ask ourselves as a guide to understanding our own identities and how we define various identities means...
Emotions and Identity
1) Are we orientalizing our own selves?
a. Discourses of identity:
i. Relationships
ii. Emotions
2) Identity segmented:
a. Who we are, Who we project, Who we want to be
i. Relationships and relationality
b. Labels: given to us and used by us
i. To what extent has identity become a label that ‘cuts throats’.
ii. Clash of Civilizations: people killing each other in the name of identity: how does this play out in global violence?
iii. Does violence or identity come first? Suppression of identity leads to emotional fundamentalism, etc. Power and Knowledge.
iv. Identity is dehumanization in the context of suppression/violence…leads to self-assertion of your humanization.
v. Threat to identity versus threat to existence different
c. Evolving
d. How to describe:
i. Who am I? Race, religion, culture, locality/nationality, occupation, age, gender, name, politics, subculture, education, class, looks, interests, sexuality, family, marital status, traveled to, personal characteristics, desires and goals, flaws, fears, *longings and belongings
1. to what extent are the aforementioned interconnected? Does our religion make us feel fear? Does our desire have to do with our education? Etc.
2. How does a country undergoing globalization define themselves with those categories? Which would not be relevant?
3. we have more discourse about desire than the pre globalized times. To what degree are all these aspects of identity discoursified?
e. individual vs. collective: modernity is associated with the rise of the individual
f. are identity politics formed by the powerful? And how do we play into their labels? And how does this play into the global violence?
g. How does society use identity discourse for violence? Ies:
i. Post 9/11 (is freedom a euphemism for Christian-loving, etc?), VA Tech, placing identity on people: Jews, Japanese-Americans (WW2),
3) Modern/Western concepts of identity (and Reality)
a. Cartesian Individualism
i. I=rational consciousness: I think therefore I am
ii. Self as source of action, not a product of divine will
b. Freudian Psychoanalysis
i. Unconscious all important, “I” is not just consciousness
ii. Id, ego, superego
c. Marx: Historical Materialism
i. “Being” gives rise to consciousness
ii. its not who you think or what you feel, it is who you are in the class system
iii. “I” as false consciousness
d. Neo-Marxian Theories
i. “I”: effect : effect of language/ideology
ii. interpellation: “hey YOU!”
iii. not who you are but the language that affects you from movies etc.
e. Postmodern/Postructuralism Discourse (Foucault)
i. “i” as multiple and constructed
ii. highlights epistemic politics
iii. Subject as a product of knowledge
1. eg: insane, patient, Orient
HOW DO WE THINK ABOUT A LIFE BEYOND DISCOURSE???
If Japan Revises Article 9...
In 2006 former Japanese P.M. placed on the table the discussion for the revision of Article 9, a reflection of Japan becoming a U.S. meme. Shinya Wantabe, a Japanese art curator living in the U.S., unhappy with the government pushing such a policy without faciliating adequate discussion decided to create an art exhibit called "Into the Atomic Sunshine". It started in NYC, and although controversial, it did find a place in a Japanese art gallery in August 2008. Here is an article and some links to an article and also a link to the exhibition. I wish I could have seen it! Below is a paper I wrote about the history of Article 9 and the issues surround revisions, especially regarding the U.S. using Japanese "Self-Defense Troops" in Iraq and the 1998 TMD missile defense system. It's a complicated issue because advocates feel that Japan deserves "ordinary nation" status while opposers feel that Japan should not become a pawn for the U.S. and that Japan's economic success can be in part creditted to its lack of military spending.
"Making Art out of Article 9" Japan Times
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fa20080807a1.html
Tokyo Art Beat blogger review of the exhibit
http://www.tokyoartbeat.com/tablog/entries.en/2008/08/into-the-atomic-sunshine.html
"Into the Atomic Sunshine"
http://www.spikyart.org/atomicsunshine/
Brief Synposis for you in English:United we stand, divided we fall; the
FYI.... Article 9's full text states: "Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized."
《 日本修改宪法第九条对于东亚地区稳定有什么影响?》
“1.日本国民衷心谋求基于正义与秩序的国际和平,永远放弃以国权发动的战争、武力威胁或武力行使作为解决国际争端的手段。
2.为达到前项目的,不保持陆海空军及其他战争力量。不承认国家的交战权。” 第九条【放弃战争,否认军备及交战权】
一.导言
东亚地区的军备竞赛已经开始了。虽然不能回到以前改历史,但是可以创造新的未来。东亚地区的不稳在增加,而日本修改宪法,消除和平思潮只会在火上加油。
修改宪法不是即时,由于公投规则,全民投票条例草案确立一项为三年关于暂停实际公投。三分之二的国会议员要投这样一个全民投票,并以过半数的选民将需要支持的修改它才可能发生。然而,日本修改宪法的争论已经迅速加快。改变宪法会影响到日本“自卫军” (Self Defense Force) 的使命,结构,与规模,将更加破坏东亚地区稳定。
日本国内在这个问题上意见不一。有些人希望日本成为“正常国家”(ordinary nation)有机会发展平等军事,对于中国崛起和朝鲜技术试验有自卫能力。反对者希望日本能隔离跟美国的关系。和平主义者觉得第九条是日本文化特色而其他国家应该学日本的和平思潮精神,其感觉修改宪法会摧毁一个世界从未见过的, 重要的非军事化的国家模型。
日本对于自国在东亚地区地位担心是自然的。中韩朝对于日本发展军事的威胁也是自然的。没有人对或错,总是要考虑国家利益。但是,这种循环行为不解决问题,只是浪费能在其他方面投资的钱(例:健康护理,教育,等)。这种用循环对付敌人的行为产生了双边输的结果。
二.和平宪法及自卫军的来源
日本在第二十世纪的前半纪,日本殖民韩国半岛、台湾、与许多其他在太平洋的岛。日本也入侵中国、菲律宾、与其他的亚太国家。在这区域有二十万个人经过种族灭绝、强迫劳动、人类试验、与性奴役(后被称为的“慰安妇”)、某种类的日本折磨。 同时在日本,将近三万人,大多数的平民,失去他们的 命在于日本城市的空袭, 冲绳的地面战争,和原子弹炸广岛与长崎。
在1945年的7月当中,第二世界大战终,日本接受了美国政府写的“Potsdam Declaration”, 承认日本侵略的错误。接着,美国大量辅助日本创造新的宪法。现行的日本宪法是在1946年通过于1947年生效。为了避免未来 任何进攻性军事能力,美国压迫在1947年日本宪法包含第九条的原则。第九条是日本对于东亚地区的人民的承诺,不再犯以前的错误。
但是宪法建立不久,“战争力量”这个词引起了争论。这个词是怎样解释?而,什么才算战争力量?一个国家是否应有自卫权?1952年争论后的结论是主权国家都应有自卫能力。1950年在美国占领下成立的国家警察(National Police Reserve) 在1954年演变成了自卫军。虽然日本建立了军队,应该是仅仅为了自卫用处,不准协助盟国,也发展到有战争能力的地步。
三.日美军事与技术同盟简史
虽然日本法律禁止协助,日美同盟违反了许多日本宪法的和平思潮。其中最有争议性的两个事件是1998日美导弹防御合作及2004年日本出自卫军协助美国在伊拉克战争。此外,今年日本从美国买军事技术,例如:F-22 Raptor战斗飞机也引起了主意。
1998年的日美导弹防御合作,建立战区导弹防御系统 (Theater Missile Defense) 使了中国特别发怒。日美当时的逻辑是朝鲜刚做了导弹试验,而日本应该也有自卫权,所以日美同盟是保护日本。日美觉得战区导弹防御系统能够维持东亚地区稳定,在东亚地区维持平等军力。但是不管怎么说,这个现象违反了导弹技术控制制度(Missile Technology Control Regime)的规则。1998年朝鲜导弹试验始,引起了日美导弹防御合作。日美索赔是为了保安,但是有非常负面的情绪。因为中国部署了超过400个弹道飞弹对准台湾,日美考虑把台湾包括在其合作。
另外最常被争论的事件是日本出自卫军协助美国在伊拉克战争,违反日本的和平宪法。2004年日本兵士竟入伊拉克,标志这日本从第二次世界大战正以来的第一次进入战地。
日本从美国买了F-22”Raptor”战斗飞机后, 中国开始研究同等的技术,2015年前打算成功发展“箭-13” 与 ”箭-14”。台湾回应,打算从美国得到六十个F-16 C/D 飞机。专家预测韩国夹着在这个情况间也会尽力发展自防卫机制。跟据斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究所 (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute)的统计,2007年日本在全世界军费开支拍第五名,花了51.4亿美金,从2006年的43.7亿美金增加了不少。中国日本这两个东亚地区国家一贯拍全世界军费开支前五名。2006年韩国也排第十一名,花了21.9亿美金。”2004 年中国拟增加国防支出21.83亿元,比上年增长11.6%。中国2003年的国防预算总额为18.53亿元” (ACLA.org)。根据瑞典报告,中国2006年军费开支到了49.5亿美金。军费开支不停的张,证明东亚区的确存在军备竞赛,与日美同盟是其中的旭东原因之一,使了中日关系产生了安全困境。
四.消除第九条的后果
第九条限制日本军事,但是自卫军任然在扩张,以及如今是全世界日本军费开支最高之一。有些学者争论因为日本行为已经破坏第九条,是否修改宪法的问题不重要因为日本政策早就消除了和平思潮。但是,第九条还是有限制力量。虽然没有完全限制军事化,但是如果没有第九条,军备竞赛到此刻会更加严重。
根据第九条的限制,日本政府不能攻击其他国家,而且除非其他国家攻击日本,日本政府不准用防御力来威胁其他国家。1992年之后日本开始协助联合国维持和平与人道的行动,出兵到海外。不过,政府解释说,这种海外部署是为了和平目的,而不是为投影权力。不过,有这些限制,日本无法服从美国的要求;虽然派了自卫军,但是无法从事实战。
自从第九条宪法,日本保持了第九条禁止行使集体自卫权(collective self defense)的规则。按照1967年宣布(而1976年加强的)"武器控制三个原则" ,日本无论目的地不能出口武器。有些反对修改者支持集体自卫权但是反对集体安全权(collective security)。由于1960年的日美安全同盟,日本修改宪法第九条后会被美国要求在任何地方出兵。除了日美技述交换以外日本仍然坚持了全世界最高的武器管制政策标准。
由于美国对于中国崛起与朝鲜导弹试验两个现象感到威胁,与中国朝鲜对于美国霸权感到威胁,增加美国在东亚区的影响会有负面现象,而日本修改宪法第九条肯定会增加日美同盟,增加美国在东亚区的威权。1998年的日美导弹防御合作证明中国朝鲜不赞成日美同盟而对于这个现象有阴性反应。
日本修改宪法会会会1
会让东亚地区感觉日本想恢复军事主义化。中国反对因为日本在历史上对于中国的侵略行为。再加,日本修改宪法对台湾问题有威胁。1998年时,日美台三国曾仅考虑过联盟来对付朝鲜,但是日美台三角联盟增加台独的机会。韩国反对因为其脆弱的地理位置,夹在两个强国中间对其威胁很大。 朝鲜反对因为假如美国在东亚地区的权力增加,对朝鲜的安全有威胁,尤其因为2003年美国总统Bush称为朝鲜是“Axis of Evil”之一。
除了这些以外,日本消除了宪法的和平思潮使日本发展能力攻击东亚区外的国家。从前平安的事件会变成战争,例如:为了北方四岛攻击俄罗斯。
五.结论
团结则存,分裂则亡。美国看透了东亚地区的弱点,利用敏感的中日关系与东亚地区缺乏地区主义来建立权威,完成自国的利益。美国引发军备竞赛的行为对于美国经济受惠很高。美国应该用他的权力来推动和平,但是因为美国不牺牲国家利益,东亚地区的不稳定继续增加。分析历史案列中能结论日美同盟对东亚地区的影响有负面成果,而按照日美关史的行为,日本修改宪会加强日美同盟的可能性非常高。这个现象会影响到东亚区的稳定,前进军备竞赛。
Sino-Iranian Relations
Despite the downfall of their empires, China and Iran have recovered and become dominant powers in the international community. Today their alliance is a major concern to the international community because of China’s support of Iran’s development of nuclear energy.
China and Iran’s history of friendly sentiments goes back to the time of their empires. Their trade relations date back to the Han and Parthian2 empires. There were over a dozen caravan routes connecting major cities in modern day China and Iran in what is known today as the Silk Road. Many Persians and Arabs from the Parthian empire moved to Guangzhou and Hanoi3 for business and trade purposes. Large amounts of Sassanian4 coins were uncovered in China, further demonstrating proof of ancient trade alliances.
Friendly ties extended past monetary reasons and into cultural, scientific, and social aspects for both nations. The Chinese were glad to aide the Persians by sharing their astronomical discoveries, printing techniques, and the advent of paper money. In return, Persia shared its research in alchemy, mathematics, Euclidean geometry, medicine, and pharmacology. The notorious blue and white porcelain pottery that is displayed in Chinese palaces and museums also influenced the Persians not just artistically, in that the Persians made a significant fiscal profit in the blue and white porcelain-ware industry (Garver, “Twenty Centuries of Friendly Cooperation”).
Buddhism’s popularity in China is indebted to the first translator of the Buddhist sutra into the Chinese language, a Parthian prince. Persian poetry also influenced poetry of the Chinese Tang dynasty, which is considered the peak of classical Chinese poetry. The Tang period is the origin of the flourishing “Tang shi” and “Tang si” style of poetry, which is still a required study for all Chinese students today. In addition to religious and literary influences, Persian performance art such as the Zoroastrianism dance and magic routines, in addition to Persian cuisine, both delighted and fascinated the Chinese.
China and Iran’s anti-Western sentiment and civilizational solidarity has lead to the development of cooperation between two influential countries that continue to dominate international politics. Although they are not unconditional allies, they hold an underlying sympathy for each other due to their similar history of humiliation from Western powers. As Peng Zhen, the 1985 chairman of China’s National People’s Congress (the Chinese Parliament) observed, “[China and Iran] had similar experiences [as] victims of imperialism and colonialism and [are] subjected to hegemonic threat today” (Garver, China and Iran). China and Iran are both proud countries known for their strong feelings of nationalism. The Persians invented algebra, the modern version of chess, the modern formula for soap, and the windmill, while the Chinese invented the wheelbarrow, the kite, the abacus, gunpowder, and firecrackers. Although in present day they cannot compete with the West’s technological advancements, they are not quick to forget their ancient civilizations’ significant contributions to science. They are currently working to regain their power in the world, and they have made significant strides in becoming major players in the international community.
A 2000 joint communique proposed by former Chinese president Jiang Zemin and former Iranian president Khatami identifying themselves as the “two great civilizations in Asia”. In 1998, Mohammed Khatami presented the idea of “dialogue among nations”, calling the international community to practice tolerance in order to cooperate for global security, including peacekeeping and the environment. In 2001, Khatami developed a theory called “Dialogue among Civilizations”, and presented it to the United Nations, asking Kofi Anan to make 2001 a “year of dialogue among civilizations.” This was in response to Samuel P. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” theory that specifically targeted Confucian civilization (China) and Islamic civilization as the two major threats to world peace. The ideology of dialogue among civilizations is still an important concept that the UN continues to utilize in their work towards building peace.
Throughout different times in history, China and Iran have formed conflicting alliances, yet underneath this China has never abandoned Iran as a Third World brother. The shah came to power in Iran through the aide of the United States, and was actually the most Western society Iran had been and would be its entire history. It was shocking that a communist country would support a country so closely aligned with the United States, the poster child for imperialism; however, Mao had his reasons. The PRC supported the shah, despite its hatred for U.S. imperialism and was careful never to publicize any anti-shah statements in its media. This was because of Mao’s hope to unite third world countries against all Western imperialist countries. Mao recognized the significant role of oil in the world and knew that the third world possessed most of the oil in the world. Mao particularly applauded Tehran’s decision to raise oil prices in the 1970s.
Although the PRC (People’s Republic of China) under Mao’s rule and the Kingdom of Iran under the shah’s rule had conflicts, both Beijing and Tehran realized the benefits of supporting each other rather than being in opposition. It was equally shocking that Iran opened itself to China despite the shah’s anti-communist sentiments. However, the shah was very strategic in his thinking. The shah was by no means loyal to the U.S. Iran wanted the U.S. to see that it could survive independently from it. It also strategically used the Sino-Iranian relationship as a threat to Russia. Iran wanted Russia to cut-off its support to Iraq and threatened a Sino-Iran-U.S. bloc if Russia continued to support Iraq.
Although the relationship was not completely solid during the time of Mao and shah, they were able to see the benefit in allying. However, the relationship was about to become rockier. In 1979, when Khomeini, an Islamic militant came to power, he and his followers resented the Chinese support of the shah. He proposed a “Neither West, nor East” foreign policy plan. In October 1978, months before he came to power, he warned Iran that:
“China and Russia like the U.S. and Britain feed on the blood of our people…try to be independent without any inclination toward East or West…. Foreign policies of America, England, Russia, and China and others have support the corrupt regime of the shah and his crimes. Have destroyed our economy. Have made our army dependent. Have contaminated our culture.” (Toukouyama)
When John Garver interviewed a retired PRC-ambassador to Iran about his time in Tehran, he said he saw anti-China graffiti covering the walls of Tehran (Garver, China and Iran, 58).
During this time, the ideologies from both countries flipped. Iran formerly had the strongest ties with the United States it would ever have to present day, and switched to being ruled by an extremist Islamic party; whereas, China would start it’s (economic) ties with the United States under Deng Xiaoping . This would be the strongest effort China had made to cooperate with the United States for years past. China’s shift away from Communism and into capitalism under the guise of social democracy was an additional reason for Khomeini’s mistrust and hatred towards China.
Beijing continued to pursue an alliance with Tehran, despite the challenges the Tehran gave the Chinese government. China was an atheist nation who has always ruled under the principle that she will not interfere with religious affairs in other nations, and she expects the same respect from other nations. Tehran gave Beijing no such respect. Although Iran’s Islamic beliefs were of little concern to China, China’s atheist, non-Islamic beliefs were blasphemous and heathen in Iran’s perspective. Iran did form relationships in China, but not the way Beijing would have hoped. Iran took an interest in the Muslim community of China in the region of Xinjiang. Khomeini was an Islamic internationalist whom felt that his mission and purpose was to spread Islam in the world. He did that by building mosques and madrasses (Islamic schools) in China without the permission of the Chinese government. Iran also offered scholarship programs to Chinese Muslims, allowing students to move to Iran under deceptive motives and where these Chinese Muslims were educated on the principles of extremist Islamic religion. They were then either sent home to further spread the fervor of Islam or allowed to stay in Iran without the Chinese government’s approval. Although Beijing continued to push its principle of noninterference, it wasn’t until the Iran-Iraq war that Tehran began to realize the value of cooperation with the Chinese government.
The Sino-Iranian relationship fell to an all time low during 1979 through the early 1980s but by 1987 China had earned back the trust of Iran through supporting Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Throughout the late 1980s, China became one of Iran’s major suppliant of arms. China further secured Iran’s trust by not allowing U.S. pressure to stop arms sales to Iran. China became the only member of the U.N. Permanent Security Council to consistently step up to Iran’s defense in the 80s, and stood up to the U.S. by asking the withdrawal of troops from the Gulf coast. Today Sino-Iranian relations have reached an all time high, as China has proved its commitment to its Third World brothers (especially Iran) by resisting Western dominance. Despite China’s 1996-97 decisions to suspend arms sales to Iran, China has by remained supportive of Iran’s nuclear energy development efforts.
Perhaps the biggest question being asked by the world today is whether or not Iran will become a nuclear state. Will China trade Nuclear Technology in exchange for Iranian Oil? In 2005, studies showed that China consumed 12% of the world’s energy. This places China as the country with the second highest energy consumption in the world (United States consumes 24%). Only 6% of oil was imported in 1993, but today, China’s dependency on oil has increased its import of oil to a dramatic 60% (Shuja). Based on their history of trade, the reality is that Iran could likely become a nuclear state. Although there have been a few exceptions where China have encouraged sanctions on Iran’s munitions imports, overall, China remains one of the largest foreign suppliers of Iran’s munitions, even if it sold to Iran indirectly. (To avoid international criticism, and to appear neutral during the Iran-Iraq war, China sold weapons to Iran through Syria and North Korea.)
An IAEA inspection in 2003 confirmed nuclear energy development in Iran, but cited the sites for future power plants. Things changed in March 2004 when the United States’ Bush administration pushed for the punishment of the development of nuclear energy in Iran, China’s veto in the security council were one of the major factors that came to Iran’s rescue. Iran had kept its developments secret, and because of that, the US feels it urgent need to stop uranium-enrichment. The Bush administration has continually targeted Iran specifically to be investigated by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Association) and pushed other countries to impose sanctions on Iran. Iran has repeatedly denied development of nuclear weapons, and has asserted its right to develop nuclear energy. Of the five countries on the UN Permanent Security Council, China has been Iran’s strongest advocate.
By September 2004, the UN had decided to give Iran a deadline of November 2004 to suspend all nuclear activity. Iran initially said they would suspend activity in exchange for trade concessions and stopping sanctions. In the end; however, when it came time to negotiate, Iran disagreed with one of the stipulations.
Although Iran and China have a good economic relationship, the US-China economic relationship is much stronger. Economic sanctions are not enough to scare China, nor Russia, whom have both supplied Iran with advanced missiles and technology since the mid-1980s. They are responsible for Iran’s acquirement of anti-ship missiles (i.e.: the Silkworm), surface-to-surface missiles, and long-range ballistic missiles (i.e.: Shihab-3 and Shihab-4 missiles) (www.atimes.com). Economic benefits from the US are not enough to sway China to side with them over Iran on issues. Despite objections from the United States, China has for the most part, sided with Iran, and has continued to push for Iran’s military development.
As of July 2007, the U.N. has imposed two sets of sanctions on Iran’s nuclear development program, but Iran continues as before; ignoring the sanctions. The United States (with support from Germany, France, and Britain), are proposing to impose a third sanction. China and Russia continue to stand in the way. Although neither China nor Russia have refused sanctions altogether, the United States has not achieved the strict level of rigid sanctions it would like the international community to impose on Iran.
"’China is the hardest nut, because its economic interests with Iran are growing so rapidly and across such a spectrum,’ said one Bush administration official” (Wall Street Journal, “Stiffer Iran Sanctions Sought”).
As aforementioned, Iran is becoming a threat to global security due to its potential to become a nuclear state. This reality is being realized with the help of China, in addition to support from Russia. Should China be considered a culprit? Can we blame China for destabilizing world peace? Iran still denies any progression towards becoming a nuclear state, and justifies its nuclear energy development:
"Iran's regime points to America's threatening talk as a reason to defend itself; to America, Iran's nuclear work makes it a potential target. If Iran agreed to halt its uranium and plutonium activities, and America agreed not to attack, might that open the way to talks that could help finesse the nuclear problem for good? America has resisted the idea of such talks." (The Economist, "Unstoppable?")
There are many strategic reasons for the Sino-Iranian nuclear cooperation. Iran is a key ally for China in keeping a cap on U.S. hegemony. Increasing U.S. power would mean increased pressure on China to concede on sensitive issues such as Taiwanese independence, religious freedom for the Tibetan-Buddhists and Muslims in Xinjiang, relaxing on censorship (ie: Google, Yahoo searches), and owning up to human rights (ie: TianAnMen Square Massacre).
The United States is actually considered to be as much of a threat to international peace by most Third World countries just as much as Iran is considered a threat to international peace by most First World countries. The United States is strongly opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons, yet the U.S. is home to the highest number of WMDs per country in the world. Nuclear deterrence worked during the “Cold War”… Would it work in Iran? One main point of skepticism against the development of a nuclear weapons program in Iran is that the region is very unstable, and that the energy and technology would not simply be in the government’s control. Many self-employed Islamic extremist groups could gain access to the weapons. This theory is based on the assumption that the Iranian government would have the sense not to go M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction).
These two countries are rising so rapidly in power and influence that they both need to be considered in foreign policy. Today, China is known as one of the most influential and rapidly growing nations in the world. It is the most populated country in the world with 1.3 billion of the world’s 6.5 billion inhabitants (CIA WorldFactbook). Studies predict that in approximately twenty years, China will surpass the United States as a global economic superpower. Iran’s geographical location in the Persian Gulf, with the Gulf’s access to oil and energy, makes Iran a power that cannot be ignored. The Persian Gulf alone is home to 50 percent of the world’s oil reserves. According to a 2004 statistic, Iran possessed 7 percent of the world’s oil reserves, and 15 percent of the world’s natural gas reserves.
Today, the United States demonizes Iran as one of the three countries that form what current President Bush termed the “Axis of Evil” in 2003. The United States also continues to criticize China for its human rights record. Although in the past, Chinese and Persian empires were brought down by Western powers, the current state of affairs in China and Iran indicates that they will not allow history to repeat itself. The Sino-Iranian alliance has shifted the balance of power in the world, and all countries need to make strides in understanding each other’s histories in order to develop better policies. Whether a nation allies or wars against either China or Iran, they are both countries that will play increasingly key roles in international relations.
Women's Reproductive Rights in Developing Countries
Thomas Malthusian was a philosopher who followed the Darwin thought "survival of the fittest." Malthusians, those who subscribe to his philosophies, believe that overpopulation is the key cause of poverty. While overpopulation is indeed a threat to poverty, blaming a problem that has been threatening the world for centuries solely on overpopulation overlooks too many other factors. For example, research shows that it is not a scarcity of food, but an inability to afford food that affects the families of lower socioeconomic classes. Malthusians claim that overpopulation can hinder human rights; therefore the ends justify the means. In other words, they believe that it is okay to coerce and/or force sterilization and other means of birth control upon women because in the end the benefits outweigh the loss. Organizations such as the World Bank argue that population control is an essential component of an important economic strategy (Hartman 13-41). The value of human lives should not and can not be calculated by an economic formula. According to international law, human rights are rights that every individual has upon birth. Human rights philosophy is based on the idea that every life has equal value. Therefore, no person's quality of life can be violated or sacrificed to improve the quality of life for another person.
In regards to human rights concerns, there are major health concerns associated with these state controlled family planning programs. In most instances, fear of population control has lead to an increase of family planning programs. This would lead one to believe that women are being opened to more health care and birth control opportunities; however, this is not necessarily the case. There is a crucial trend in the family planning programs in developing countries versus developed countries. Almost all family planning programs in developing countries are involuntary programs. In developed countries, women of lower socioeconomic classes also face involuntary sterilization, but it is much more common in developing countries. One explanation for this is due to the fact that governments of developing countries have historically had more power over the family planning programs, which essentially made it legal in to violate women's reproductive rights. In these countries, women's bodies have been put at the mercy of government powers. These government powers tend to ignore the root of the problem in favor of quick results, which may or may not actually lead to population decline in their respective country (Pillai & Wang). Many women are sterilized without their knowledge, and some who agree initially regret it later. Many women are forced to make quick decisions on the spot, persuaded by money or threats. In a 1985 WHO (World Health Organization) study of sterilized women from Columbia , Nigeria , the Phillipines, and the UK , a range of 1 to 6 percent of women regretted undergoing the operation. A 1987 WHO survey shows that over ten percent of Mexican women wish they could reverse the sterilization. In India , over 70 percent of sterilizations are performed in unhygienic camps. In fall of 1985, the low health standards in a Maharashtran camp caused one death and seventeen serious prolonging health issues. The woman who died screamed in pain because the anesthetic was not effective. The doctors ignored her, continued to operate, and she died. In developing countries, being withholding information and lying to the patients is common. In a Latin American sterilization camp, there were more nurses being trained to insert IUDs (IntraUterine Devices) than there were to remove them. This led to diseases and infections because many women were not able to get the IUDs removed in time. Many women who came to the hospital and wanted the IUDs taken out early were rejected. In both cases, oftentimes the removal of an IUD was dangerously performed by an untrained nurse (Hartman).
The most well known example of a state controlled family planning program is the One-Child Policy established in China . Although China 's population has declined due to the One-Child Policy, an important question remains: What is the greater violation of human rights--the potential threat of overpopulation or the methods used against women to fight overpopulation? We know that overpopulation can hinder human rights, but can violating human rights to a further extreme really solve the problem? Do these ends really justify the means? Today in China , what was originally started as a family planning program has become a government controlled, state planning program. According to Chairman Mao, babies were to be controlled under a state plan run the same way that grain and steel were controlled. The first Chinese family planning program in 1971 is proof that population decline can happen in China without the reproductive rights violations the One-Child Policy practices. The 1971 motto for the family plan program was: "Later, Longer, Fewer." This meant advocacy for later marriage ages, longer periods between children, and fewer children per couple. This program was founded on the principle of providing health care to rural (and usually most impoverished) areas of China . The program was successful, but the government wanted to push the results of further. First, incentives were offered to the women who agreed to be sterilized. In the late 1970s, sterilization stopped being rewarded and coercion and force were on the rise. The One Child Policy started in 1979 and was founded initially only to strongly encourage birth control, albeit forced coercions did occur. By 1980, the One Child Policy was no longer an option; it had become an official mandate. A woman from the village of Guizhou recalls her experience; a common experience for many families of rural China : "They often take things, your furniture, your car, your pig, your chickens, your preserved meat [if you resist sterilization]" (Hartman 157-172). In China , a lawyer named Chen Guangcheng offered his legal services to defend women who were victims of the One Child Policy. The Chinese government, notorious for oppressing political dissidents, placed Chen under house arrest. In August 2006, when Chen went to report the beating and violence against one of his family members, he disappeared. He reappeared a few months later and was then incarcerated under bogus charges of public disturbance and sentenced to 51 months in jail (Sui). Although population has declined, in other aspects, the plan has backfired. In Chinese Culture boys are valued over girls. As of October 17, 2006, statistics show that this mindset has led to a population of 60 million more boys than girls. Another problem is that there is an aging population with seniors and fewer children. This leads a lack of people for the workforce (NPR). We can see from the Chinese example that simply forcing sterilization, while it can lead to population decline, also leads to other sets of unpredicted problems to face. A society with so few women will continue to exploit the rights of women. In some cases having a daughter in such desperate times is considered a blessing to families. Unfortunately, the more common attitude is to hope another family would have the daughter to whom they would marry their son to. To avoid high abortion rates and in hopes of balancing the ratio, China has legally agreed to allow families to have one more child if their first-born is a daughter (NPR). Statistics do not look promising; however, and experts estimate that by 2020 China will have 40 million unmarried young men. As aforementioned, because of the preference for sons in Chinese culture, the rarity of females will not equate a higher value. Instead, there may be a similar result similar to the one in India . In India girls are often abducted and violated or sold into marriage like slaves--the likelihood in China is that molestation and rape will increase (Grewal & Kishore).
India 's population control policies are the largest in the world and stem further back than China 's policies. India 's family planning programs are the first, dating back to the 1950s. Like China 's family planning programs, it used forced and coerced sterilization as a means of population control; however, unlike China , its population has continued to grow (Hartman 251-254). A July 2006 estimate quotes India 's current population at 1,095,351,995 people. When the programs started in 1950, the population estimate was at 357,561,000. Although China is currently the most populous country in the world (albeit it is the second largest country), according to Geohive.com, India's population will surpass China by over 2 million people by the year 2050, and India is only 1/3 the size of the United States. What went wrong in India ? Betsy Hartman writes, "Lack of respect translated into lack of results" (290). Instead of educating its citizens about temporary birth control methods such as condoms, the government encouraged the most extreme method of complete sterilization. The agents who worked for the government ignored health issues and overlooked the best interests of the women because if they did not meet a quota, they would not be paid their salary. The situation continued to escalate in 1975 when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi declared Emergency Rule, using overpopulation as a means to suspend civil liberties. Couples who were not sterilized after three children were considered criminals and could face fines and or imprisonment, not to mention food rations were withheld from their family. 1976 was the most dramatic year for population control in India . The government resorted to violent force, and direct coercion, sterilizing 6.5 million people in only 6 months. All women were forced into this program, but the rich were given an option. Rich women were allowed to choose IUDs (a long term but not permanent method of birth control), while the poor women were offered only the option of sterilization (251-254). This mindset is connected to the Malthusian thought that if you eliminate the poor, poverty will cease to exist; however, there are obvious flaws in this plan. One can not simply kill all poor people, one has to analyze the reason why poverty exists. Although Indira Gandhi was not reelected and the number of sterilizations has dropped, serious issues still continue to exist. Female foeticide is most commonly associated with India . With modern technology, families can now use ultrasounds to determine the gender of their fetus. Due to the low status of women and the preference for males, female fetuses are frequently aborted. Promotions for these ultrasound tests prey on the idea that when girls are married off in India , the family must provide a dowry. Their slogans read, "It is better to pay 500 rupees now than 50,000 rupees (in dowry) later." Not only is this a serious human rights violation but it has also contributed to the low girl to boy ratio in India . In some Indian states, ratios go as low as 800:1,000; 8% to China 's 17%. These low ratios contribute to overpopulation. The low percentage of women in India has led to older men choosing younger and younger brides. As suggested by China 's initial family planning policy, later marriages could be one way to help control the population. (Grewal & Kishore).
Statistically speaking, there are parallels between high birth rates and poverty. Instead of attempting to sterilize all the poor, why not alleviate the reasons for poverty to encourage these people to have less children? By understanding the reasoning and need for many children, we can help reduce the birth rates by addressing their concerns. The top reasons for the connection with poverty and high birth rates are as follow: 1) high infant and child mortality rates, 2) financial security, 3) son preference, and 4) lack of education regarding the subject of birth control (Pillai & Wang, Hartman). UNICEF research shows that 10.5 million children die before their fifth birthday (2006 est.). This translates into 30,000 children a day. The 2004 global average for infant mortality rate, the number of children that die before their first birthday, is 54 deaths for every 1,000 live births. In developed countries this number is significantly lower, at only 5 deaths per 1,000 births. In developing countries, the average is higher, at 59 deaths per 1,000 births, and in least developed countries, it is a dramatic 98 deaths per 1,000 births. Losing a child is an incredible emotional tragedy for any parent. In families of lower socioeconomic classes, however, it is a financial loss as well. One explanation for high birth rates is because parents know that not all their children will survive, and poor families need the extra hand. Extra children can be used to help out around the house or the farm, or be sent out to work as an additional source of income. Poor families also have no luxury of a retirement plan so they depend on their children to take care of them at an old age when they can no longer work. Typically, if a family has more money, they are less inclined to have more children because they are either self sufficient, or because they tend to have a different mindset of raising their children and sending them to college (very costly). One way to stop population growth would be to improve health care for families in developing countries. If a family knew their child had a significant chance for survival, they would be much less likely to have so many children. Son preference is another reason for high birth rates. If the child is a daughter, some families may continue to have children until at least one son is born. One reason is that in many Asian cultures (predominantly in the regions of the Middle East, Central Asia, North India, and South East Asia ) men are valued over women. This is because women are viewed as the ones whom should work in the house, but seldom are the ones who join the workforce or obtain higher education. This limits the financial contribution a woman can give to a family. Women must have equal rights in order for population growth to decline. When women have the right to education and work, they are less likely to have as many children, because they will have a career in addition to the job of taking care of kids. This is because the culture in many of these countries is different. This mindset is passed down by their tradition and belief in tribalism. The community or a collective is valued over the individual. Unfortunately, women are expected to sacrifice their life and education to fulfill the needs of the family. This is one of the only ways to gain community acceptance. Women in Egypt are happy to agree to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in order to avoid public shame (Dawla, Hadi, & Wahab). Although most people should make sacrifices for their families at some point in their lifetime, the rules women in these societies are expected to follow are extreme to the point of oppression. Lastly, there just isn't a lot of information about birth control options given to developing countries, especially the most poor in the rural villages of these countries. Most people in rural villages don't know what a condom is. That is why it is so easy for the government to come into these villages and force sterilization on these women. Throughout history the poor have been looked down on as ignorant. The government often feels that the people don't need to or don't deserve to know the truth, so a lot of information about sterilization is withheld or simply overlooked during the birth control process (Hartman 243-267).
What can be done to solve both problems? Overpopulation is a legitimate problem, but so are the atrocious human rights violations. Developing countries have the obvious advantage of over developing countries in terms of financial resources. Although countries with a higher GDP tend to have lower birth rates, studies from countries such as Cuba , Sri Lanka , and the South-Indian state of Kerala show that poverty does not need to be a hindrance to safe and successful family planning programs. These countries have shown that there can be a decline in population if they increase employment opportunities, grant women equal social and legal status, and provide health care and education.
The situation in Cuba is by no means perfect, but women do have more freedom in Cuba than other Latin American countries. As of May 2005, "Save the Children USA" named Cuba as one of the 11 "developing countries most likely to succeed." This has no relation to monetary issues. Cuba has actively been implementing educational programs for girls. The report states that these 11 countries "can expect healthier, smaller families, lower child mortality rates and higher standards of living in the next ten years as a result, in part, of continued efforts to improve girls' education." This is not surprising due to the priority placed on education throughout Cuban history. Although Cuba was the poorest of 13 Latin American countries that participated in a UNESCO test, results showed that in this 1998 test Cuban students tested number one in both math and reading. The youth illiteracy rate in Cuba was nearly 0% in 1998. Additionally, the Cuban Family Code legislation states that men should equally contribute to household tasks (Schugurensky). Unfortunately, due to U.S.-imposed sanctions imposed in recent years, the quality of health care for Cubans has declined. Nonetheless, free family planning services are available to all citizens who choose to take advantage of the services. Cuba set a remarkable record between 1965 and 1980 when its birth rate fell by almost 50 percent (Hartman 294-295). This is the greatest decline in birth rate in the shortest amount of time. As of 1995, Cuba 's birth rate was 17 births per 1,000 women, only 2 points higher to America 's 15 per 1,000. In 1998 its infant mortality rate was only 6 deaths per 1,000 births (Save the Children USA).
Sri Lanka enjoys one of the lowest birth rates of any developing country despite its 1991 per capita income of only 500 USD. Although the current conservative government has cutback welfare to focus on economic development, previous to 1977 Sri Lanka was a welfare state that focused on human development. That status undoubtedly led to success. From 1946 to 1981 the infant mortality rate dropped from 150 deaths per 1,000 births to 18 deaths per 1,000. There are also more women than men in universities and many women have careers. This resulted in an average marriage age of 25, which is high for any developing country (Hartman 297). This is just one more example of how providing food, job and old-age security, and free education and health care led to success in population control.
Kerala is a unique state in India . Although Kerala's per capita income is the lowest in India , its poverty does not oppress the peoples quality of lives. In fact, Kerala has maintained a high quality of life relative to other Indian states. In Kerala there is a 90% literacy rate, while the overall Indian average is 52%. Its infant mortality rate is 17 deaths per 1,000 births, while India 's rate is 80 deaths per 1,000 births. In a 1991 population census, Kerala was found to be the only state in India with more females than males, a 104 to 101 ratio. The reason for all this success is because the state of Kerala governs under the belief that: "the foundation of equity rests on the political power of the poor." This is a very rare, yet successful ideology that has made Kerala's birth rate 18.1 in relation to the whole Indian average of 29.3 (1991 est.). This is not the usual trend. Most often, governments answer to those with money and oftentimes the popular voice is ignored. This inequality leads to a vicious cycle. The poor need more children to meet basic living standards and so they continue to contribute to population growth while the government continues to try to tame the growth my sterilizing these low-income families. The Keralan government's emphasis on human rights should be followed. The government pays special attention to education and improving the equality of women's status, which has lead to an increase of women who work. This leads to Kerala having the latest average marriage age in all of India . The government also concentrates on distributing equal health services for those of both urban and rural areas. The Keralan government does not ignore its poor, and its social policies to help all citizens equally have created a phenomenal formula other Indian states should follow (Hartman 298-300).
From Cuba , Sri Lanka , and Kerala, however, we have learned that compulsory sterilization programs are not necessary to achieve low birth rates. We have seen that even compulsory sterilization programs can be unsuccessful and can create new problems. Doctor D. N. Pai, a family planning director in Bombay once said, "You must consider it something like a war. There could be a certain amount of misfiring out of enthusiasm. There has been pressure to show results. Whether you like it or not, there will be a few dead people." (Hartman 243). Why resort to a violence and war if it is unnecessary? To dismiss human lives in such a manner is completely unjust.
By improving socioeconomic conditions and human rights there can be a win-win situation for everyone; both those concerned with overpopulation and those concerned with human rights violations. Violating human rights to limit population growth can not lead to better socioeconomic conditions and does not necessarily correlate to lower birth rates. Equality is what affects fertility. Hartman writes, "Take care of the people and they will take care of themselves."
Works Cited
"China Struggles to Maintain One-Child Policy." National Public Radio. Shanghai. 17 Oct. 2006. 6 Dec. 2006
El Dawa, Aida Seif, Amal A. Hadi, and Nadia A. Wahab. "Women's Wit Over Men's." Negotiating Reproductive Rights. Cumbria, UK: International Reproductive Rights Research Action Group, 1998. 69-107.
Global Statisics. 6 Dec. 2006
Grewal, Indu, and J. Kishore. "Female Foeticide in India." International Humanist and Ethical Union. 2 May 2004. 6 Dec. 2006
Hartman, Besty. Reproductive Rights & Wrongs. New York: Harper & Row, 1995.
Pillai, Vijayan K., and Guan-Zhen Wang. Women's Reproductive Rights in Developing Countries. Hants, England: Ashgate Limited, 1999.
Schugurensky, Daniel. "Unesco Report Ranks Cuban Students First in International Math and Reading Tests." History of Education. 2004. 6 Dec. 2006
"Some of World's Poorest Countries Show Most Progress in Educating Girls, Report Finds." Save the Children USA. 3 May 2005. 6 Dec. 2006
Sui, Cindy. "Activist on Trial After Exposing Abuse of China's One-Child Policy." Agence-Presse France 16 Aug. 2006. Lexis Nexis. USFCA, San Francisco. 6 Dec. 2006.