Well I think I can take a break for a while. There's nothing I can do on this page - by way of getting folks to think about the world and its real inter-connections - that can't be accomplished better by a celebrity or two showing up in some far-flung land. It might be Richard Gere relentlessly forcing a tonsil-hockey kiss on an Indian Bollywood star a few weeks ago. Or it might be Cameron Diaz showing up in Peru's Machu Pichu yesterday carrying a bag with the Maoist slogan of the Shining Path Guerrilla Movement plastered on it. Either way, the related headlines make the point, and they do so in a way that resonates with the majority of folks who follow pop culture.
I could produce pages of drivel, post after post, about the importance of understanding other cultures and other business and political environments, and about ways to interact with them productively. I could recite many examples, including counter intuitive (for the US audience) proposals for addressing many global issues. I could explain the success and failures of inter-governmental relations and cross-border business dealings. I could draw from liberal arts education and practical business experience. I could really dazzle.
But let's be honest. Nothing that comes from my pen will ever hit as hard as the images and footage of Richard awkwardly bending that actress over backwards or Cameron blankly looking around, flashing a deadly terrorist slogan on her in-vogue shoulder bag. Not that I am bitter or jealous or anything. You know me, progress is good, regardless of how incremental and regardless of its source. No I'm just fine with these realities. I do think I am ready for a summer break though.
Seen any good movies lately?
Monday, June 25, 2007
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Regulating Corruption
Not all of you were thrilled with my post on corruption in China, where I essentially asserted that corruption IS the market in many places, and businesses and investors would do well to consider it that way. I think corruption may be one of those lightning rod topics where folks' worldview drives a given conclusion. So I am not all that hopeful that skeptics can be swung round. But I was intrigued by an editorial on the subject that I saw in The Moscow Times today (some of you have asked, so here's the link to a soft re-print of the editorial).
The author's gist is that corruption in Russia's Government runs deep, but the leadership has started down a praiseworthy path to address it. That is, the Government has sought to reduce the effects (net cost to the Government's customers) of corruption by consolidating the services whose bureaucrats command corrupt payments. The thought seems to be that a single mafioso pyramid-like power structure is less expensive to the customer than would be a disparate collection of uncoordinated corrupt forces. According to testimony the author cites, businessmen are confirming that the Government's consolidation efforts in this area will indeed be useful.
Somehow the consolidation is a part of President Putin's "dictatorship of law" (think "rule of law" with a Russian flair?). Of course, the Russian leadership's motives and means are not seen as pure, and the author cites the Government's own interference and apparent corruption in the huge Yukos saga. But the author appears philosophical and pragmatic about these dichotomous aspects of the Government's focus on corruption. As I see it, the conclusion appears to be that official corruption IS the market in Russia, and the solutions to corruption-qua-problem should be constructed to be effective within the cultural history and operation of that market. Incremental change in the right direction is a good thing.
I am sure a saner mind could make more sense out of this confused editorial - draw something that is philosophically purer when it comes to eradicating corruption. I just wouldn't want to be in Moscow with the owner of that mind.
The author's gist is that corruption in Russia's Government runs deep, but the leadership has started down a praiseworthy path to address it. That is, the Government has sought to reduce the effects (net cost to the Government's customers) of corruption by consolidating the services whose bureaucrats command corrupt payments. The thought seems to be that a single mafioso pyramid-like power structure is less expensive to the customer than would be a disparate collection of uncoordinated corrupt forces. According to testimony the author cites, businessmen are confirming that the Government's consolidation efforts in this area will indeed be useful.
Somehow the consolidation is a part of President Putin's "dictatorship of law" (think "rule of law" with a Russian flair?). Of course, the Russian leadership's motives and means are not seen as pure, and the author cites the Government's own interference and apparent corruption in the huge Yukos saga. But the author appears philosophical and pragmatic about these dichotomous aspects of the Government's focus on corruption. As I see it, the conclusion appears to be that official corruption IS the market in Russia, and the solutions to corruption-qua-problem should be constructed to be effective within the cultural history and operation of that market. Incremental change in the right direction is a good thing.
I am sure a saner mind could make more sense out of this confused editorial - draw something that is philosophically purer when it comes to eradicating corruption. I just wouldn't want to be in Moscow with the owner of that mind.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
OK, Iraq again - Zoloft News
With apologies to my readership (both of you), this is another (brief) post on Iraq. Hey, as somebody who tracks the wonders of the Western media, a fellow has to go with what's covered.
Today, I note the remarkable stupidity that the Western media assumes its readership brings to the morning paper. The rambling AP story about today's repeat bombing at the Shiite Askariya Mosque drove the point home again, mostly through its omissions. The bit contained lengthy descriptions that gave the clear impression of strange religious sects who battle and kill each other for no apparent reason. Because the author included no explanation of the philosophical differences, the real estate tensions, or the global context, the reader could only conclude the Shiites and Sunnis must just be savage nut-cases.
On the other hand, the same criticism could not be levelled at the US forces who are in Iraq. The story quizzically noted that many Iraqis refer to the US military presence as an "occupation" - yes, the writer actually used quotation marks, as if the meaning was lost on him. Hundreds of thousands of uninvited foreign military forces in a country. How could anybody ever see that as an "occupation"? Sheeeeesh.
Also worthy of nothing more than a brief mention was the promise from the US military in the aftermath of the 2006 bombing at the Askariya mosque to re-build it. The author dryly noted that the US has taken no steps at all to fulfill that promise, and then he moved on to the next topic. Not at all possible, I suppose, that such a broken promise looms large in the minds of the "unoccupied" people. Gracious folks indeed - thanks for taking it all in stride.*
* Credit to Family Guy's Stewie.
Today, I note the remarkable stupidity that the Western media assumes its readership brings to the morning paper. The rambling AP story about today's repeat bombing at the Shiite Askariya Mosque drove the point home again, mostly through its omissions. The bit contained lengthy descriptions that gave the clear impression of strange religious sects who battle and kill each other for no apparent reason. Because the author included no explanation of the philosophical differences, the real estate tensions, or the global context, the reader could only conclude the Shiites and Sunnis must just be savage nut-cases.
On the other hand, the same criticism could not be levelled at the US forces who are in Iraq. The story quizzically noted that many Iraqis refer to the US military presence as an "occupation" - yes, the writer actually used quotation marks, as if the meaning was lost on him. Hundreds of thousands of uninvited foreign military forces in a country. How could anybody ever see that as an "occupation"? Sheeeeesh.
Also worthy of nothing more than a brief mention was the promise from the US military in the aftermath of the 2006 bombing at the Askariya mosque to re-build it. The author dryly noted that the US has taken no steps at all to fulfill that promise, and then he moved on to the next topic. Not at all possible, I suppose, that such a broken promise looms large in the minds of the "unoccupied" people. Gracious folks indeed - thanks for taking it all in stride.*
* Credit to Family Guy's Stewie.
Friday, June 8, 2007
Women in Saudi
OK, even more so than usual, I am way, way out of my league on this one. But I have to mention it. One of the gripes I most frequently hear about Islamic countries is that women are deeply suppressed. The accusation rings true to me, I have to admit, based on my limited knowledge and experience. And I wrestle with the subject as I seek to consider how the apparent divide between between Islamic cultures and non-Islamic cultures might be bridged.
Not that I believe the US or Europe has addressed women's rights all that well, mind you. My experience is that women in the West do live and work under very thick glass ceilings (glass, yes, but ceilings nevertheless). And as a guy, I hear much more (subtly) anti-female commentary from other guys in the workplace than I would have thought possible based on the West's superior equal rights mythology. But it does seem to me that the language of equality has come a long way in many parts of the West - that suppression of women's rights has become more marginalized than it was, say, before the 1960s.
Against that backdrop, I was intrigued by links on a Saudi news website, http://www.arabnews.com/. Check out the story from today (June 8) on women's futures, and the links on this webpage from earlier this year on the Top 20 Saudi Businesswomen and their successes. I suppose it is easy to put blurbs on the internet without effecting any real change. But if language and mythology are part of the way to advance a rights agenda, as I submit the West has seen, then perhaps these webpages are to be praised, at least a little? After all, it would be just as easy to effectuate no change without these webpages.
Not that I believe the US or Europe has addressed women's rights all that well, mind you. My experience is that women in the West do live and work under very thick glass ceilings (glass, yes, but ceilings nevertheless). And as a guy, I hear much more (subtly) anti-female commentary from other guys in the workplace than I would have thought possible based on the West's superior equal rights mythology. But it does seem to me that the language of equality has come a long way in many parts of the West - that suppression of women's rights has become more marginalized than it was, say, before the 1960s.
Against that backdrop, I was intrigued by links on a Saudi news website, http://www.arabnews.com/. Check out the story from today (June 8) on women's futures, and the links on this webpage from earlier this year on the Top 20 Saudi Businesswomen and their successes. I suppose it is easy to put blurbs on the internet without effecting any real change. But if language and mythology are part of the way to advance a rights agenda, as I submit the West has seen, then perhaps these webpages are to be praised, at least a little? After all, it would be just as easy to effectuate no change without these webpages.
Monday, June 4, 2007
Advantage Malaysia
The Star (of Kuala Lumpur) today reports that the Malaysian Government has offered to provide assistance to the Afghan Government in economic development. Malaysian PM Badawi spoke from Putrajaya via video link with Afghan President Karzai in Kabul. The occasion was a conference on the role of the private sector in Afghanistan's economic development. The PM suggested that the Malaysians have experience in transitioning an economy from agriculture toward manufacturing and hi-tech, and that experience may be valuable to Afghanistan at this stage. So many angles to examine here. Interesting that Malaysia is offering such aid in a land still so heavily populated with US military forces. Interesting that such an offer will receive zero attention in the Western media. Interesting that there probably is a good deal of merit to the PM's premise. I have long wished that Malaysia would take advantage of its history and position and exert some global leadership.
Think about it. Malaysia is a fascinating confluence of Southeast Asian culture, equatorial climatic influence on economic development, Islam, English colonization and legal/commercial tradition, Chinese slave importation and subsequent business dominance, and rejection of western prescriptions in the wake of the 1997-1999 Asian currency crisis. From one standpoint, one could see Malaysia along with Indonesia as a large swath of post-colonial territory located in a harsh climate, populated by Muslim people who tend to be much less well-off than the tiny non-Muslin country they surround (Singapore). That tiny, non-Muslim country is the product of maps and emigration policies of the former colonists, and the tiny country's population is dominated by an incredibly business-savvy group of people, many of whose families came from elsewhere. Sound familiar? If you were to learn that Malaysia has in fact come a very long way, that it has a thriving and growing private economy, and that its Government is increasingly savvy about its image at home and overseas, would you sense the same possibilities I do?
In the wake of 9/11, I was hopeful that then-PM Mahathir would seize the opportunity for Malaysia - from its Islamic perch overlooking an increasingly western-style economy - to be a moderating force throughout the world. I envisioned him traveling, conveying a message of confluence and moderation, a message touting his country's own ability to manage cross-cultural tension as perhaps holding lessons for the rest of the world. None of us would have liked it. Malaysia is still much too centrally controlled and politically dominated for western tastes. And it is much too religiously casual and indifferent for much of core Islam. But Malaysia has paved a kind of third way of its own that may yet hold value for people in places like Afghanistan. If Malaysia can have some success there, perhaps it would not be too silly for the rest of the world to notice.
I don't know about you, but The Star has re-kindled a spark of hope for me. What the heck, I'm feeling naive.
Think about it. Malaysia is a fascinating confluence of Southeast Asian culture, equatorial climatic influence on economic development, Islam, English colonization and legal/commercial tradition, Chinese slave importation and subsequent business dominance, and rejection of western prescriptions in the wake of the 1997-1999 Asian currency crisis. From one standpoint, one could see Malaysia along with Indonesia as a large swath of post-colonial territory located in a harsh climate, populated by Muslim people who tend to be much less well-off than the tiny non-Muslin country they surround (Singapore). That tiny, non-Muslim country is the product of maps and emigration policies of the former colonists, and the tiny country's population is dominated by an incredibly business-savvy group of people, many of whose families came from elsewhere. Sound familiar? If you were to learn that Malaysia has in fact come a very long way, that it has a thriving and growing private economy, and that its Government is increasingly savvy about its image at home and overseas, would you sense the same possibilities I do?
In the wake of 9/11, I was hopeful that then-PM Mahathir would seize the opportunity for Malaysia - from its Islamic perch overlooking an increasingly western-style economy - to be a moderating force throughout the world. I envisioned him traveling, conveying a message of confluence and moderation, a message touting his country's own ability to manage cross-cultural tension as perhaps holding lessons for the rest of the world. None of us would have liked it. Malaysia is still much too centrally controlled and politically dominated for western tastes. And it is much too religiously casual and indifferent for much of core Islam. But Malaysia has paved a kind of third way of its own that may yet hold value for people in places like Afghanistan. If Malaysia can have some success there, perhaps it would not be too silly for the rest of the world to notice.
I don't know about you, but The Star has re-kindled a spark of hope for me. What the heck, I'm feeling naive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)