PREAMBLE: This is our 6th annual review of topics covered over the preceding year. Our 2011 review was presented in January this year (an aberration due to a scheduling conflict), but this time we return to our usual practice and close the year with our review.
As is our custom, we lead with praise (“flowers”) and criticism (“fertilizer”) in 3 categories: global stewardship, international development, and human rights. A synopsis of monthly blog themes follows.
1. Global Stewardship
For 2012, flowers for leadership go to the Gates Foundation, and the government of Japan, both of which demonstrated great integrity with their support for the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM), at a time when several European countries hid behind sanctimony and hypocrisy while withholding their funding (next para).
The fertilizer award goes emphatically to Germany, Ireland, and Sweden and the European Commission for suspending funding to the Global Fund (GFATM). In part, this decision was made ostensibly due to corruption in recipient countries, even though this was limited to only 4 countries (among over a hundred recipients) and was discovered, investigated and openly reported by the Global Fund itself. This level of corruption, independently analysed, is significantly lower than that of the EURO block. The truth behind this decision is that Europe itself has been financially mismanaged, with bank failures, corruption and mismanagement.
The decisions of these European entities smack of old style colonialism: arrogance from the top down. It damages their hard won (or restored) reputations for being global leaders. To use developing countries and the Global Fund as a scapegoat for this is unconscionable. Instead, these particular European entities should have had the intestinal fortitude to own up and say “sorry, we can’t afford this now, because we ourselves are in such a mess”.
Corollary: With this backdrop, it is amazing that Europe still “won” the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize
2. International Development
Flowers for this category go to many Developing Countries collectively for the real progress in addressing the long-standing lack of potable drinking water, as documented by WHO and UNICEF, and in line with one of the major planks of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The fertilizer award in this category goes to China. In November, China's 18th Communist Party conference underwent a power shift to a new generation of leaders in a tightly orchestrated process, characterized by opacity and lack of public participation, and with virtually no representation of women in the governing structure, carefully scripted although all this was for domestic and international optics. If China wants to be viewed as a leader in international development, it has to do much better than this in its own internal development
3. Human Rights
We offer flowers to countries now engaging in Truth and Reconciliation processes, whether this be for the indigenous people of Canada, the stolen generations of Australia, and the export of (allegedly) parentless children by the UK following the second world war (yet to be fully acknowledged by the British government). There are many more examples than this, in many countries and cultures, a historical legacy that moves forward with us all until properly confronted to address past wrongs and grievances, and to achieve a meaningful resolution.
the other end of the spectrum, we can only confer a deposit of rather smelly fertilizer to Canada (Harper government), for reducing refugee access to routine medical care: reduction of ‘basic’ coverage, including primary and preventive care, and ‘supplemental’ coverage similar to that available to many low-income Canadians. This is both short-sighted and wrong-headed.
January (2012): "2011 AS WE RECORDED IT..." if you would also like to revisit the prior year, here is a direct link: http://pacificsci.blogspot.ca/2012/01/international-global-development-year.html
February: MAJOR PROGRESS IN MALARIA CONTROL: THE ROLE OF THE GLOBAL FUND, ITS DETRACTORS AND SUPPORTERS.
This issue was dedicated to major successes taking place in malaria control, largely due to support from the Global Fund, despite decisions by several European entities (Germany, Ireland, and Sweden and the European Commission itself) to suspend funding to the Global Fund on AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM). See Global Stewardship (above) for further discussion. Thankfully, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, being evidence-based, stepped in to shore up Global Fund finances due to this donor default. Also, former Japanese prime minister Naoto Kan said his country would contribute $340 million to the fund this year. Two years ago, Japan contributed $200 million, but it gave only $110 million last year because of domestic needs from the earthquake and tsunami. Of course many other countries are honoring their pledges, even as many of them also have financial challenges at this time.
March: GLOBAL DRINKING WATER GOAL MET FIVE YEARS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE
This issue gave visibility to real progress in addressing the long-standing lack of potable drinking water in many developing countries. Our source is a new report from WHO and UNICEF entitled Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation 2012 Update. Despite real progress, challenges remain for some regions, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, especially in rural settings where the burden of poor water supply falls most heavily on girls and women. Equivalent progress also is not being made with regard to sanitation.
At the other end of the spectrum it is important to take note of recognition by the UN General Assembly of “water and sanitation as a human right". Unfortunately, there were abstentions, notably including Canada (Harper government again!). This abstention is curious, given that Canada’s indigenous people suffer disproportionately from poor water and sanitation.
April: APOLOGIES FOR PAST WRONGS AND GRIEVANCES
Here we addressed at a conceptual level the many contemporary political debates concerning recent and past conflicts. These demonstrate that perceptions matter in today’s politics, and that conflicts do not necessarily resolve by ending a war or signing a treaty. Negotiating an agreement can send a positive signal to the parties involved that they are willing to end the injustices and violence, but the emotional issues created can set the stage for resumption of hostilities even after a negotiated settlement is reached. Thus, in order for a conflict to be truly resolved there needs to be a lengthy process of reconciliation aimed at eradicating the emotional barriers between those involved and resuming trust between the victims and perpetrators. In this blog we offered an overview of underlying issues, mostly from a generic standpoint, keeping in mind that there are numerous conflicts of this nature around the world.
May: PUBLIC HEALTH IN THE MIDDLE EAST Reconnaissance of Issues and Developments
Over the past decade, this region has been dealing with social and political unrest, much of this of an extreme nature, largely resulting from a lack of good governance combined with negative geopolitical dynamics that have given scant regard to the wellbeing of the general populace. Countries in the region face many common challenges: social and economic development, status of women, environmental control and regulation, a highly mobile migrant workforce and other demands of a globalized economy.
This reconnaissance contained two sections: first, the published perspectives of the World Bank and WHO/EMRO, and second, observations on the emergence of two networks: public health associations, and membership of national public health institutes in a new global organization. It focused on the value of “healthy public policy”, the main aim of which is to create supportive environments to enable people to lead healthy lives, to make health choices possible or easier for citizens. In the pursuit of healthy public policy, government sectors concerned with agriculture, trade, education, industry, and communications need to take into account health when formulating policy, so as to benefit populations, communities and individuals.
June: CANADA RENEGES ON REFUGEE HEALTH
Canada’s federal government announced cuts to health services for refugees, to come into effect on June 30, 2012. These include reduced ‘basic’ coverage: primary and preventive care, and ‘supplemental’ coverage similar to that available to many low-income Canadians.
These changes are extremely short-sighted: diverting care for people in greatest need to urgent care settings, and may even give rise to public health threats such as tuberculosis especially if diagnosis is delayed or the condition left untreated. To deny health care to refugees is to inappropriately burden both Canada’s health system and the health of Canadians. This is both socially unjust and contradicts the principles of the Canada Health Act.
PacificSci thus joined with all organizations calling for the Federal government to rescind these proposed changes before they are implemented. The refugee health program should continue to provide basic benefits similar to provincial/territorial health care plans and supplemental benefits similar to what provinces and territories provide under social welfare.
July: MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS - 2012 REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
The MDG Report 2012 was launched in New York by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on July 2, 2012. Several MDG targets have been met well ahead of the 2015 target date. The report states that meeting remaining targets remains possible if Governments keep their commitments made over a decade ago.
Highlights: Extreme poverty is falling in every region including Sub- Saharan Africa. The world has met the target of halving the proportion of people without access to improved sources of water. Improvements in the lives of 200 million slum dwellers exceeded the slum target. The world has achieved parity in primary education between girls and boys. Many countries facing the greatest challenges have made significant progress towards universal primary education. Child survival progress is gaining momentum. Access to treatment for people living with HIV increased in all regions. The world is on track to achieve the target of halting and beginning to reverse the spread of tuberculosis. Global malaria deaths have declined.
These accomplishments notwithstanding, there remain major challenges:
Achievements are unequally distributed across and within regions and countries; progress has slowed for some MDGs after the 2008-9 economic crisis and related consequences; vulnerable employment has decreased only marginally over twenty years; decreases in maternal mortality are far from the 2015 target; use of improved sources of water remains lower in rural areas; hunger remains a global challenge; the number of people living in slums continues to grow; gender equality and women’s empowerment remain key challenges.
August: NEW GLOBAL JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH LAUNCHED
Illustrating a positive trend in research capacity development in developing countries, the Global Journal of Medicine and Public Health was launched early in 2012, honouring the principle that medical and public health practices must be appropriate to settings where they are applied.
An Inaugural Editorial is accessible at : http://www.gjmedph.org/uploads/EDITORIAL-Vo1No1.pdf
Readers may also visit the CURRENT ISSUE of the journal at: http://www.gjmedph.org/Current.aspxv
September: FACT CHECK: REPUBLICAN PARTY STATEMENTS ON HEALTH CARE REFORM
Normally we would not presume to comment on an election issue in the United States. However, this principle is based on the assumption that Americans will place their vote based on accurate information regarding the candidates and the issues important to them. It is for this reason that, in this issue of Global Perspectives, we made an exception. We are providing this “fact check” because Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan, in his apparent zeal to prevent the successful emergence of universal health care coverage in the United States (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010), was making negative references to the comparative performance of universal health care in Canada: these statements by Ryan were demonstrably misleading.
The health care system performance of six developed nations on several key parameters, was recently (2008) ranked by the Commonwealth Fund, a respected American foundation that promotes better access, improved quality, and greater efficiency, particularly for society's most vulnerable, including low-income people, the uninsured, minority Americans, young children, and elderly adults. The countries included in this exercise were: Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Notably the United States ranked 6th (last place) overall, and 6th in 5 out of 9 specific parameters; these include: safe care, access, efficiency, equity (fairness), healthy lives, and health expenditure per capita. Of the remaining parameters, it ranked 5th each for quality of care, coordinated care, and patient centred care. Its only first place ranking was for right care.
Contrasts with Canada are indeed relevant. A systematic review of 38 studies reveals that Canada’s system achieves more favorable outcomes when compared with the U.S. predominantly private for-profit system, at less than 50% of the cost.
October: ADDRESSING SOCIAL INEQUITIES:............ Fact Sheets - 10 PROMISING PRACTICES
As part of a 2009 Canadian Health Services Research Foundation Fellowship, the Sudbury & District Health Unit (which is located in Northern Ontario, Canada) identified 10 practices that are promising in their potential to reduce social inequities in health in our communities.
The fact sheets are designed to help public health practitioners and community partners apply each of the 10 Promising Practices to reduce social inequities in health. They have a common format that identifies essential components, key issues, and tools and resources for each Promising Practice.
The 10 Promising Practices Fact Sheets
1.Targeting With Universalism - http://bit.ly/OXBqsq
2.Purposeful Reporting - http://bit.ly/OSPYMm
3. Social Marketing - http://bit.ly/O6Pf8T
4. Health Equity Target Setting - http://bit.ly/Ml0s7m
5. Equity-Focused Health Impact Assessment - http://bit.ly/ONRCfq
6. Competencies/Organizational Standards - http://bit.ly/PHgx2Q
7. Contribution to the Evidence Base - http://bit.ly/P7KpuM
8. Early Childhood Development - http://bit.ly/Nq1Xgz
9. Community Engagement - http://bit.ly/NgalCF
10. Intersectoral Action - http://bit.ly/MBQPwB
November: SUPERPOWERS AT THE CROSSROADS What lies ahead for the United States and China (and others)
The lead-up to the US presidential election filled the airwaves for months, with constant analysis and forecasting, until Barack Obama’s re-election victory over Republican Mitt Romney was secured on November 9th with a large and impressively pluralistic margin in the popular vote and a very large margin in electoral college votes.
That same week, on November 8th, China's 18th Communist Party conference began a power shift to a new generation of leaders in a much more formal and tightly controlled process.
Observing these two approaches to transition in national political leadership has been a study in contrasts: the high visibility and overall transparency of the US election, despite its many apparent flaws, in stark contrast to the opacity and lack of participation inherent in the Chinese process, carefully scripted as it was for domestic and international optics.
December: INTERNATIONAL & GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT – YEAR IN REVIEW 2012… This Issue!
AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!
We extend to readers our best wishes for 2013, with hopes that the global challenges of recent years will be better understood and more humanely managed going forward. PacificSci will continue to offer an independent view.
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Sunday, 16 December 2012
Thursday, 15 November 2012
SUPERPOWERS AT THE CROSSROADS What lies ahead for the United States and China (and others)
PREAMBLE: The lead-up to the US presidential election filled the airwaves for months, with constant analysis and forecasting, until Barack Obama’s re-election victory over Republican Mitt Romney was firmly secured on November 9th with a comfortable and impressively pluralistic margin in the popular vote in favour of the Democrats and a very large margin in electoral college votes. As world citizens, people of many other lands felt part of the drama unfolding, glued to the TV in our living rooms, as votes were counted.
That same week, on November 8th, China's 18th Communist Party conference began a power shift to a new generation of leaders in a much more formal and tightly controlled process. This process, also subjected to global media scrutiny, will end today, Thursday, November 15, 2012.
Observing these two approaches to transition in national political leadership has been a study in contrasts: the high visibility and overall transparency of the US election, despite its many apparent flaws, in stark contrast to the opacity and lack of participation inherent in the Chinese process, carefully scripted as it was for domestic and international optics.
CHINA
The process in China began with the opening of the week-long 18th party congress by Hu Jintao, during which he gave up his role as party chief to Vice-President Xi Jinping. Seven of the country's nine top leaders will step down, including president Hu Jintao and prime minister Wen Jiabao. All but two of the Politburo standing committee, the country's top political body, will remain. About two-thirds of positions in the other key leadership domains and the Central Committee will change hands. For the 2,270 congress delegates, their elections surely merit the same media attention as their US counterparts did. Whatever one’s opinion on the legitimacy of this type of process, the handover’s results will reverberate eventually around the globe. Unlike the open campaigning of the of the US elections, and the universal adult right to vote (the one person, one vote system), Xi's ascendancy, and Li Keqiang's elevation to replace Premier Wen Jiabao, were determined at the last party congress in 2007, when jockeying for power started.
In China, where a consensus-driven authoritarian system stresses continuity, the general course of future policy will be outlined by the congress's political report, to be hammered out within the party over this year. In this superpower’s election process, even the 82 million Communist party members (less than 6 % of its 1.4 billion people) have no real role in choosing their leader. Females, in particular, are poorly represented in the highest level of Chinese politics: only one woman sits on the 25 member politburo (the party’s central decision-making body), while none sit on the 9-person committee (reduced today to 7) at its core.
Yet, in China citizens are becoming more vocal in expecting better governance and accountability from their officials; the internet has led to greater individual expression, and stories of malfeasance or incompetence spread quickly online. Authorities have stepped up investigations of corruption: 600,000 officials faced punishment for disciplinary violations over the last five years. In 2008, just under 40% of Chinese people deemed corrupt officials a very big problem. That has risen to 50%, according to the Pew Global Attitudes Project. The Chinese leadership is aware of rising scrutiny and expectations by the population. How well it responds to the rising tide of domestic expectations over the coming years will be crucial to its internal stability and global predictability as a potentially great nation.
The UNITED STATES
The United States has perhaps the most complicated electoral system in the world. Admittedly, its electoral structure does provide the greatest opportunity for input on a wide range of issues for decision-making, but at a cost—by demanding so much of the public so frequently it means that many are overwhelmed by the complexity of the system and ultimately fail to vote.
In the United States the conduct of national elections is under state control. Federal elections are therefore taken by states as a convenient opportunity for people to vote as well on other issues, not simply to fill in a ballot to indicate preference for a candidate. This set-up favours persons motivated by interest in the particular state issues in play, and who can spare the time to engage in such a potentially lengthy procedure. Perhaps needless to say, such attributes will not be equitably distributed across all socio-demographic groups, and therefore has the potential to be manipulated so as to influence voter participation.
The President and the Vice President are elected together in a Presidential election indirectly, the winning team being determined by votes cast by an Electoral College whereby particular states have inherited various (differing) allocations of “Electoral College votes” that largely reflect historical influence, rather than contemporary realities. The official winner of the election is the candidate with at least 270 Electoral College votes (President Obama received 365 votes in 2008 or 68%, and 332 in 2012 out of 538 electoral college votes, or 62%). A candidate can win the electoral vote, and yet lose the (nationwide) popular vote. This has happened historically, but clearly did not occur in 2012.
Money plays a big role in US politics. For example, the cost of the 2012 election was enormous: over $6 billion – on advertisements, organizing, and canvassing (with a sizeable amount spent on attack ads). It is relevant to note that a majority of persons who succeed in this to become members of Congress or Senator, (with some exceptions) are themselves wealthy or have wealthy backers, when compared with the realities that apply to the population as a whole.
In the 2012 US election, the candidates laid out dramatically different programmes, critical to ensure their base support. “Getting out the vote” was crucial to both candidates, with an army of volunteers and big-dollar contributors working with precision to capture ”hearts and minds”. This, at least, is the “positive spin” in a country that still lacks uniform standards for federal elections, and where authority for organizing the process resides with state governments. Oddly, there is no independent election commission as exists in most other western democracies; this is sorely needed in the US given the wide range voting practices, and even breakdowns of antiquated counting machines in some states.
One must also take note of charges of voter suppression in some settings, and insufficient allocation of resources to facilitate voting in areas where the characteristics of the electorate and their political views may differ remarkably from the politics of the state government. Nonetheless, the principle of “getting the vote out” appeared to be clearly the stronger force. In some areas also, individuals stood in line for up to 5 hours to cast their vote: clearly a measure of how important people understood their vote to be in this crucial contest.
The spectacle of the presidential election provides reassurance to the American people that their country, their achievements and their values are extraordinary. Yet, on child poverty, they rank 34th of 35 economically advanced countries; and social mobility is measurably greater in Europe, Australia, and Canada.
Despite the negatives, significant gains were made in 2012: three states voted to legalize same-sex marriage, two others voted to legalize some recreational use of marijuana, and (in contrast with several misogynistic Republican males who lost their seats) more women were elected to the US Senate than ever before.
As far as the most central purpose is concerned: the Presidential election itself, women, minorities and young people made the difference – described (in conservative media) as a “coalition of the ascendant”, this might be more aptly viewed as a shout for values such as truth, tolerance and compassion?
WHAT LIES AHEAD?
China remains the largest holder of US securities; they are each other’s second-largest trading partners. The significant bilateral trade imbalance between them, although decreasing, is a source of tension, as demonstrated by the rhetoric during the US elections. Concerns are rising in the public and private sectors of the US of alleged hacking and espionage by Chinese groups, and the infringement of Intellectual property rights. Chinese investments in sensitive US industries continue to be of controlled (e.g. in oil and high technology).
The Obama administration has worked with China on a broad range of issues, engaging in numerous dialogues: the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, Asia-Pacific geopolitical issues, humanitarian assistance and disaster response. Given President Obama’s multilateral stance, his second term is likely to maintain the emphasis on engagement, ranging from collaboration in economics to the environment, as part of a broader Asia policy. However, more attention is expected regarding China’s participation in organizations such as the World Trade Organization and the G20, with efforts to cultivate their support for broad international norms on issues such as North Korea, Burma/Myanmar and Syria. The Obama team will likely continue encouraging other partners, particularly in Europe, to expand their perspectives on China, taking into account broader strategic and security issues rather than focusing almost exclusively on commercial engagement. Regarding cyber and space security, there is a push by the US in building an international code of conduct.
As these countries move forward from their very different election processes, there is profound uncertainty globally with challenges that impact prosperity and security. China’s trajectory and its international standing is significantly affected by its relationship with the United States: cooperation will lead to a more positive Chinese role, while competition would retard progress on global issues such as the environment, space and cyber security, issues arising in the UN Security Council, trade and development. Nations that are dependent on both countries for economic and/or security reasons would face a difficult position of trying to balance the two.
Envoi: Room for China’s growth and participation is vital, with an emphasis on developing open and transparent relationships. Ensuring clarity and deliberation could do much to maintain relations on a positive trajectory or, at a minimum, ensure that they do not spiral out of control. In this respect, the continuity and maturity of a second Obama administration is a positive outcome, particularly as China goes through its own political transition.
References
Dormandy X. Americas Programme Paper AMP PP 2012/01 US Election Note: China Policy after 2012
Chatham House, London, May 2012 http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Americas/0512usen_china.pdf
Barack Obama’s Election 2012 Win: the world reacts. The Guardian Wednesday 7 November 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/07/us-elections-2012-usa
Branigan T. China prepares for power handover but reverberations will be felt worldwide. The Guardian Thursday 1 November 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/01/china-prepares-power-handover
Elections in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_States
Agrawal R. 2012 A year of elections (not just in the United States). In: Fareed Zakaria GPS (Global Public Square). http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/03/2012-the-year-of-electoral-pandering/
That same week, on November 8th, China's 18th Communist Party conference began a power shift to a new generation of leaders in a much more formal and tightly controlled process. This process, also subjected to global media scrutiny, will end today, Thursday, November 15, 2012.
Observing these two approaches to transition in national political leadership has been a study in contrasts: the high visibility and overall transparency of the US election, despite its many apparent flaws, in stark contrast to the opacity and lack of participation inherent in the Chinese process, carefully scripted as it was for domestic and international optics.
CHINA
The process in China began with the opening of the week-long 18th party congress by Hu Jintao, during which he gave up his role as party chief to Vice-President Xi Jinping. Seven of the country's nine top leaders will step down, including president Hu Jintao and prime minister Wen Jiabao. All but two of the Politburo standing committee, the country's top political body, will remain. About two-thirds of positions in the other key leadership domains and the Central Committee will change hands. For the 2,270 congress delegates, their elections surely merit the same media attention as their US counterparts did. Whatever one’s opinion on the legitimacy of this type of process, the handover’s results will reverberate eventually around the globe. Unlike the open campaigning of the of the US elections, and the universal adult right to vote (the one person, one vote system), Xi's ascendancy, and Li Keqiang's elevation to replace Premier Wen Jiabao, were determined at the last party congress in 2007, when jockeying for power started.
In China, where a consensus-driven authoritarian system stresses continuity, the general course of future policy will be outlined by the congress's political report, to be hammered out within the party over this year. In this superpower’s election process, even the 82 million Communist party members (less than 6 % of its 1.4 billion people) have no real role in choosing their leader. Females, in particular, are poorly represented in the highest level of Chinese politics: only one woman sits on the 25 member politburo (the party’s central decision-making body), while none sit on the 9-person committee (reduced today to 7) at its core.
Yet, in China citizens are becoming more vocal in expecting better governance and accountability from their officials; the internet has led to greater individual expression, and stories of malfeasance or incompetence spread quickly online. Authorities have stepped up investigations of corruption: 600,000 officials faced punishment for disciplinary violations over the last five years. In 2008, just under 40% of Chinese people deemed corrupt officials a very big problem. That has risen to 50%, according to the Pew Global Attitudes Project. The Chinese leadership is aware of rising scrutiny and expectations by the population. How well it responds to the rising tide of domestic expectations over the coming years will be crucial to its internal stability and global predictability as a potentially great nation.
The UNITED STATES
The United States has perhaps the most complicated electoral system in the world. Admittedly, its electoral structure does provide the greatest opportunity for input on a wide range of issues for decision-making, but at a cost—by demanding so much of the public so frequently it means that many are overwhelmed by the complexity of the system and ultimately fail to vote.
In the United States the conduct of national elections is under state control. Federal elections are therefore taken by states as a convenient opportunity for people to vote as well on other issues, not simply to fill in a ballot to indicate preference for a candidate. This set-up favours persons motivated by interest in the particular state issues in play, and who can spare the time to engage in such a potentially lengthy procedure. Perhaps needless to say, such attributes will not be equitably distributed across all socio-demographic groups, and therefore has the potential to be manipulated so as to influence voter participation.
The President and the Vice President are elected together in a Presidential election indirectly, the winning team being determined by votes cast by an Electoral College whereby particular states have inherited various (differing) allocations of “Electoral College votes” that largely reflect historical influence, rather than contemporary realities. The official winner of the election is the candidate with at least 270 Electoral College votes (President Obama received 365 votes in 2008 or 68%, and 332 in 2012 out of 538 electoral college votes, or 62%). A candidate can win the electoral vote, and yet lose the (nationwide) popular vote. This has happened historically, but clearly did not occur in 2012.
Money plays a big role in US politics. For example, the cost of the 2012 election was enormous: over $6 billion – on advertisements, organizing, and canvassing (with a sizeable amount spent on attack ads). It is relevant to note that a majority of persons who succeed in this to become members of Congress or Senator, (with some exceptions) are themselves wealthy or have wealthy backers, when compared with the realities that apply to the population as a whole.
In the 2012 US election, the candidates laid out dramatically different programmes, critical to ensure their base support. “Getting out the vote” was crucial to both candidates, with an army of volunteers and big-dollar contributors working with precision to capture ”hearts and minds”. This, at least, is the “positive spin” in a country that still lacks uniform standards for federal elections, and where authority for organizing the process resides with state governments. Oddly, there is no independent election commission as exists in most other western democracies; this is sorely needed in the US given the wide range voting practices, and even breakdowns of antiquated counting machines in some states.
One must also take note of charges of voter suppression in some settings, and insufficient allocation of resources to facilitate voting in areas where the characteristics of the electorate and their political views may differ remarkably from the politics of the state government. Nonetheless, the principle of “getting the vote out” appeared to be clearly the stronger force. In some areas also, individuals stood in line for up to 5 hours to cast their vote: clearly a measure of how important people understood their vote to be in this crucial contest.
The spectacle of the presidential election provides reassurance to the American people that their country, their achievements and their values are extraordinary. Yet, on child poverty, they rank 34th of 35 economically advanced countries; and social mobility is measurably greater in Europe, Australia, and Canada.
Despite the negatives, significant gains were made in 2012: three states voted to legalize same-sex marriage, two others voted to legalize some recreational use of marijuana, and (in contrast with several misogynistic Republican males who lost their seats) more women were elected to the US Senate than ever before.
As far as the most central purpose is concerned: the Presidential election itself, women, minorities and young people made the difference – described (in conservative media) as a “coalition of the ascendant”, this might be more aptly viewed as a shout for values such as truth, tolerance and compassion?
WHAT LIES AHEAD?
China remains the largest holder of US securities; they are each other’s second-largest trading partners. The significant bilateral trade imbalance between them, although decreasing, is a source of tension, as demonstrated by the rhetoric during the US elections. Concerns are rising in the public and private sectors of the US of alleged hacking and espionage by Chinese groups, and the infringement of Intellectual property rights. Chinese investments in sensitive US industries continue to be of controlled (e.g. in oil and high technology).
The Obama administration has worked with China on a broad range of issues, engaging in numerous dialogues: the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, Asia-Pacific geopolitical issues, humanitarian assistance and disaster response. Given President Obama’s multilateral stance, his second term is likely to maintain the emphasis on engagement, ranging from collaboration in economics to the environment, as part of a broader Asia policy. However, more attention is expected regarding China’s participation in organizations such as the World Trade Organization and the G20, with efforts to cultivate their support for broad international norms on issues such as North Korea, Burma/Myanmar and Syria. The Obama team will likely continue encouraging other partners, particularly in Europe, to expand their perspectives on China, taking into account broader strategic and security issues rather than focusing almost exclusively on commercial engagement. Regarding cyber and space security, there is a push by the US in building an international code of conduct.
As these countries move forward from their very different election processes, there is profound uncertainty globally with challenges that impact prosperity and security. China’s trajectory and its international standing is significantly affected by its relationship with the United States: cooperation will lead to a more positive Chinese role, while competition would retard progress on global issues such as the environment, space and cyber security, issues arising in the UN Security Council, trade and development. Nations that are dependent on both countries for economic and/or security reasons would face a difficult position of trying to balance the two.
Envoi: Room for China’s growth and participation is vital, with an emphasis on developing open and transparent relationships. Ensuring clarity and deliberation could do much to maintain relations on a positive trajectory or, at a minimum, ensure that they do not spiral out of control. In this respect, the continuity and maturity of a second Obama administration is a positive outcome, particularly as China goes through its own political transition.
References
Dormandy X. Americas Programme Paper AMP PP 2012/01 US Election Note: China Policy after 2012
Chatham House, London, May 2012 http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Americas/0512usen_china.pdf
Barack Obama’s Election 2012 Win: the world reacts. The Guardian Wednesday 7 November 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/07/us-elections-2012-usa
Branigan T. China prepares for power handover but reverberations will be felt worldwide. The Guardian Thursday 1 November 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/01/china-prepares-power-handover
Elections in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_States
Agrawal R. 2012 A year of elections (not just in the United States). In: Fareed Zakaria GPS (Global Public Square). http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/03/2012-the-year-of-electoral-pandering/
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
SEX RATIOS DESTABLIZING IN ASIA
PREAMBLE: “Sex ratio” (SR) refers to the ratio of males to females (M:F) in a population. Due to higher life expectancy of females in most populations, SRs tends to decline across adult age groups. Values for the world population are: overall 1.01; at birth 1.06; under 15 years still 1.06; 15-64 = 1.03; and >65 years = 0.79.
We are focusing on this topic because dramatic shifts in sex ratio are taking place in some parts of the world that reveal cultural preferences and social practices favoring the birth/survival of one sex over the other (more often favoring males over females). Other factors influencing the sex ratio of societies include: changing composition by ethnicity and race; civil unrest or warfare; large-scale immigration e.g., male labourers unable to travel with their families; ecological factors eg contaminants in environment; variables affecting mother’s health eg social status, smoking, nutrition, access to support networks.
Our main source for this issue is an analysis carried out by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) which we have summarized below. Further below, we offer a brief commentary, and some focused observations pertaining to India and China.
Feature Report: SEX RATIO IMBALANCES IN ASIA: TRENDS, CONSEQUENCES AND POLICY RESPONSES.
Asia’s population dynamics in recent decades reveal an alarming increase in the sex ratio (SR) within local populations. The ratio at birth (SRB) started to increase in East Asia from 1980-85, and in South-Central Asia from 1985-90, while elsewhere in Asia, SRBs remained relatively constant. In some regions, the SRB exceeds 1.30 e.g., Guangdong and Hainan in China. There are also variations in SR levels within each country in Asia, as well as between religious, ethnic and socio-economic groups; these have been well studied in India. Since, generally, the SR overall has remained relatively stable in Asia, the growing contribution of the younger generation to the growing SR imbalance has offset the opposite progress in SR being made by adults, among which mortality improvements have particularly benefited the female population.
The rise in SRB is linked to the introduction of pre-natal sex selection in many Asian countries following the arrival of ultrasound and amniocentesis technologies in the late 1970s. The deeply rooted preference for sons in Asia is related to a long list of demand factors such as social customs, marriage costs, old-age support, leading parents across cultures and geographic locations to decide against allowing a girl to live, even before her birth. Indeed, if the continent’s overall SR was the same as elsewhere in the world, in 2005 Asia’s population would have included almost 163 million more women and girls.
The ramifications of such an imbalance will continue for decades. While men of marriageable age will suddenly find a dramatic shortage of potential brides, it is girls and women of all ages who will truly feel the brunt of this dynamic, with forecasted increases in gender-based violence, trafficking, discrimination and general vulnerability of women and girls. The main question now concerns the intensity and tempo of the sex-ratio transition in relation to spontaneous social and economic changes, and to government actions. These are, to a large extent, the dimensions that will determine the severity of the crisis, and the overall number of men, women, boys and girls affected.
Key Conclusions:
• The sex ratios of Asian countries are in various phases of transition.
• Gender discrimination, son preference and the resultant unequal status of women and
girls have contributed to an in increasing demand for sex-selection services.
• In many regions, several generations will be affected by a severe marriage squeeze,
regardless of what is done today.
• Initiatives taken today will shape Asian societies in which future generations will live.
The Way Forward:
• Improve monitoring of trends and differentials in SRB and related discriminatory behaviours.
• Coordinate research on the harmful impact of imbalanced SRs already observed in Asia.
• Make eliminating sex selection an immediate priority for government and civil-society
organizations.
• Facilitate sharing of policy experiences across regions and countries in Asia.
• Develop strategies and interventions for greater engagement and accountability by
men and boys in confronting violence against women (including sex selection) and for promoting gender equality, women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.
Reference: Sex-ratio Imbalance in Asia: Trends, Consequences and Policy Responses. Executive Summary of Regional Analysis. 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Reproductive and Sexual Health and Rights. Oct 29-31, 2007 Hyderabad, India. UNFPA.
http://www.unfpa.org/gender/docs/studies/summaries/reg_exe_summary.pdf
COMMENTARY: Although many factors influence sex ratios, women’s education is the most powerful factor in reducing son preference. Educated women are less likely to prefer sons over daughters, and highly educated women even less so. Women’s exposure to primary-level schooling reduces son preference, and exposure to secondary-level education or higher is even more profound. Moreover, how many women are educated matters: women in villages with higher levels of female literacy are less likely to prefer sons than women in villages where most women are illiterate. Greater exposure to media is associated with weaker son preference, even after controlling for education and wealth.
India [1]: One of the biggest concerns in India with regard to son preference is that decades of policy efforts have not achieved positive change, and worsening sex ratios indicate a deteriorating situation. Most government policy related to son preference has focused on reducing sex-selective abortion, but it also important to address the underlying parental motivation. One important source for policy inspiration on this issue would be to better understand the motivations and social norms of women and communities who do not express son preference. Attention needs to be focused also on what is happening to surviving girls i.e., their health and nutritional discrimination. A specific category of surviving girls is much more vulnerable than the rest - girls with older sisters.
China [2]: Chinese authorities have pledged tough measures to control fetus-gender testing and sex-selective abortions, warning that people who illegally test the gender of fetuses and perform sex-selective abortions or who kill, abandon or injure infant girls or ill-treat their mothers, will be severely punished. Medical procedures that use ultra-sound technology to check fetal health will be more closely supervised. In an attempt to halt the growing imbalance, a "Care for Girls" campaign was launched nationwide in 2000 to promote gender equality. Cash incentives are offered to girl-only families in the countryside. Authorities also pledged to continue the 33-year-old family planning policy, as the country still faces huge challenges from a growing population. Formulated in the early 1970s, the family planning policy encourages late marriages and late childbearing, and limits most urban couples to one child and most rural couples to two. The policy is credited with preventing 400 million births but faces a challenge in rural regions, where the traditional preference for male heirs has not changed. The authorities promised to continue to improve family planning services in rural areas and help girl-only families.
References:
1. Son Preference and Daughter Neglect in India. What happens to Living Girls? Rohini Pande and Anju Malhotra. 2006 International Center for Research on Women.
http://www.icrw.org/docs/2006_son-preference.pdf
2. Rising sex-ratio imbalance ‘a danger’. Xinhua, China Daily. Updated: 2007-01-23 07:16. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-01/23/content_789821.htm
We are focusing on this topic because dramatic shifts in sex ratio are taking place in some parts of the world that reveal cultural preferences and social practices favoring the birth/survival of one sex over the other (more often favoring males over females). Other factors influencing the sex ratio of societies include: changing composition by ethnicity and race; civil unrest or warfare; large-scale immigration e.g., male labourers unable to travel with their families; ecological factors eg contaminants in environment; variables affecting mother’s health eg social status, smoking, nutrition, access to support networks.
Our main source for this issue is an analysis carried out by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) which we have summarized below. Further below, we offer a brief commentary, and some focused observations pertaining to India and China.
Feature Report: SEX RATIO IMBALANCES IN ASIA: TRENDS, CONSEQUENCES AND POLICY RESPONSES.
Asia’s population dynamics in recent decades reveal an alarming increase in the sex ratio (SR) within local populations. The ratio at birth (SRB) started to increase in East Asia from 1980-85, and in South-Central Asia from 1985-90, while elsewhere in Asia, SRBs remained relatively constant. In some regions, the SRB exceeds 1.30 e.g., Guangdong and Hainan in China. There are also variations in SR levels within each country in Asia, as well as between religious, ethnic and socio-economic groups; these have been well studied in India. Since, generally, the SR overall has remained relatively stable in Asia, the growing contribution of the younger generation to the growing SR imbalance has offset the opposite progress in SR being made by adults, among which mortality improvements have particularly benefited the female population.
The rise in SRB is linked to the introduction of pre-natal sex selection in many Asian countries following the arrival of ultrasound and amniocentesis technologies in the late 1970s. The deeply rooted preference for sons in Asia is related to a long list of demand factors such as social customs, marriage costs, old-age support, leading parents across cultures and geographic locations to decide against allowing a girl to live, even before her birth. Indeed, if the continent’s overall SR was the same as elsewhere in the world, in 2005 Asia’s population would have included almost 163 million more women and girls.
The ramifications of such an imbalance will continue for decades. While men of marriageable age will suddenly find a dramatic shortage of potential brides, it is girls and women of all ages who will truly feel the brunt of this dynamic, with forecasted increases in gender-based violence, trafficking, discrimination and general vulnerability of women and girls. The main question now concerns the intensity and tempo of the sex-ratio transition in relation to spontaneous social and economic changes, and to government actions. These are, to a large extent, the dimensions that will determine the severity of the crisis, and the overall number of men, women, boys and girls affected.
Key Conclusions:
• The sex ratios of Asian countries are in various phases of transition.
• Gender discrimination, son preference and the resultant unequal status of women and
girls have contributed to an in increasing demand for sex-selection services.
• In many regions, several generations will be affected by a severe marriage squeeze,
regardless of what is done today.
• Initiatives taken today will shape Asian societies in which future generations will live.
The Way Forward:
• Improve monitoring of trends and differentials in SRB and related discriminatory behaviours.
• Coordinate research on the harmful impact of imbalanced SRs already observed in Asia.
• Make eliminating sex selection an immediate priority for government and civil-society
organizations.
• Facilitate sharing of policy experiences across regions and countries in Asia.
• Develop strategies and interventions for greater engagement and accountability by
men and boys in confronting violence against women (including sex selection) and for promoting gender equality, women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.
Reference: Sex-ratio Imbalance in Asia: Trends, Consequences and Policy Responses. Executive Summary of Regional Analysis. 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Reproductive and Sexual Health and Rights. Oct 29-31, 2007 Hyderabad, India. UNFPA.
http://www.unfpa.org/gender/docs/studies/summaries/reg_exe_summary.pdf
COMMENTARY: Although many factors influence sex ratios, women’s education is the most powerful factor in reducing son preference. Educated women are less likely to prefer sons over daughters, and highly educated women even less so. Women’s exposure to primary-level schooling reduces son preference, and exposure to secondary-level education or higher is even more profound. Moreover, how many women are educated matters: women in villages with higher levels of female literacy are less likely to prefer sons than women in villages where most women are illiterate. Greater exposure to media is associated with weaker son preference, even after controlling for education and wealth.
India [1]: One of the biggest concerns in India with regard to son preference is that decades of policy efforts have not achieved positive change, and worsening sex ratios indicate a deteriorating situation. Most government policy related to son preference has focused on reducing sex-selective abortion, but it also important to address the underlying parental motivation. One important source for policy inspiration on this issue would be to better understand the motivations and social norms of women and communities who do not express son preference. Attention needs to be focused also on what is happening to surviving girls i.e., their health and nutritional discrimination. A specific category of surviving girls is much more vulnerable than the rest - girls with older sisters.
China [2]: Chinese authorities have pledged tough measures to control fetus-gender testing and sex-selective abortions, warning that people who illegally test the gender of fetuses and perform sex-selective abortions or who kill, abandon or injure infant girls or ill-treat their mothers, will be severely punished. Medical procedures that use ultra-sound technology to check fetal health will be more closely supervised. In an attempt to halt the growing imbalance, a "Care for Girls" campaign was launched nationwide in 2000 to promote gender equality. Cash incentives are offered to girl-only families in the countryside. Authorities also pledged to continue the 33-year-old family planning policy, as the country still faces huge challenges from a growing population. Formulated in the early 1970s, the family planning policy encourages late marriages and late childbearing, and limits most urban couples to one child and most rural couples to two. The policy is credited with preventing 400 million births but faces a challenge in rural regions, where the traditional preference for male heirs has not changed. The authorities promised to continue to improve family planning services in rural areas and help girl-only families.
References:
1. Son Preference and Daughter Neglect in India. What happens to Living Girls? Rohini Pande and Anju Malhotra. 2006 International Center for Research on Women.
http://www.icrw.org/docs/2006_son-preference.pdf
2. Rising sex-ratio imbalance ‘a danger’. Xinhua, China Daily. Updated: 2007-01-23 07:16. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-01/23/content_789821.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
