[lit-ideas] Re: Worst Case Scenarios
- From: Teemu Pyyluoma <teme17@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 07:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
--- Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> *Certainly there are responsibilities that come with
> being a great global power and "a stakeholder in the
> current international system". For example, George
> Bush this week will have to entertain in the White
> House Azarbaijan's tyrant, Ilham Aliyev.
>
Which is indeed unfortunate, but I don't see what it
has to do with the fact that the China has an
increasingly larger stake in smooth running of say
global economy, or global energy security on the
whole.
It is quite simple, globalization implies if not
global government, then global governance. The
imperfect but best thing we have on global scale are
institutions like IMF, WTO, UN, IPCC, and one hopes
ILO too in the future. If global issues like trade
imbalances, protectionism, nuclear proliferation,
climate chance and exploitation of labor can not be
solved co-operatively, it is hard to see how they can
be resolved at all. And if they can't be resolved,
globalization will stop and reverse due to increased
isolationism. Whether that would be good or bad, I
don't know.
Cheers,
Teemu
Helsinki, Finland
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
