10.29.2009
GRAND BARGAIN
......Such rapprochement would be most effectively embodied in the negotiation of a U.S.-Iranian "grand bargain." A grand bargain approach means putting all of the principal bilateral differences between the United States and Iran on the table at the same time and agreeing to resolve them as a package.
5.23.2009
超主權貨幣
這一波全球景氣大反轉，起因於金融市場的混亂，而檢討最初的禍首，有人就把矛頭指向了美元，認為美元同時身兼一國貨幣，以及全球儲備金的雙重角色，才導致了目前的金融失序，這一次的倫敦峰會，與會領袖一方面是來尋求解救經濟的共識，但另一方面，各國也在磨刀霍霍，準備檢討其他國家的責任，其中，中國挑戰美元權威的動作，尤其引人側目。
貨幣，是任何交易的前提、國際金融的根本，也就難怪，在拖垮全球的金融大地震之後，有人要質疑現今美元為王的制度，是先天不良，基礎不穩，乾脆打掉，重新來過。
中國國務院總理 溫家寶
說句老實話我確實有些擔心 因此我想通過(媒體)再次重申 要求美國保持信用信守承諾 保證中國資產的安全
二十國峰會登場前，中國總理溫家寶先在人大閉幕會上，表明對美元幣值的憂慮，接著中國央行行長周小川也撰文公開質疑目前美元掛帥的貨幣體系，有著制度性缺陷，為了避免金融危機一再發生，有必要改採超越主權的儲備貨幣，譬如目前國際貨幣基金會ＩＭＦ、內部使用的特別提款權。
所謂特別提款權ＳＤＲ，是ＩＭＦ根據各種貨幣重要性，機動調整比例的一個記帳單位。目前一單位ＳＤＲ由美元、歐元、日幣、和英鎊四種貨幣組成，其中美元44%，歐元34%，日圓和英鎊則各佔11趴。由於它具備平衡國際收支作用，因此也被視為國家外匯存底的一部份。事實上，正由於中國擁有高達兩兆美元的外匯存底，而這筆看似驚人的資產，隨時有可能因為美元的貶值而跟著縮水，因此中國官方才會喊出推翻美元獨霸地位的口號，希望藉由採行一種超主權貨幣，來分散持有美元的風險。
經濟學人雜誌 易普
(美國人)高傲的以為美元強勢了那麼久 地位不容挑戰 但歷史證明並非如此
在美元成為公認的國際貨幣之前，各國原本是以金本位制度，作為彼此匯兌貿易基礎，而若是把國際貨幣基金看成是全世界的央行，那麼ＳＤＲ也可以算是一種具潛力的世界性貨幣，雖然在目前這個階段，ＳＤＲ的運用侷限ＩＭＦ內部，只存在於帳本上，並非實體發行的貨幣，然而，包括諾貝爾經濟學桂冠史提格里茲等人都認為，建立一種新的國際性貨幣，確實有助於降低持有單一貨幣的風險，只不過，要將全世界各國的外匯存底，全部都轉換為另一種新的貨幣，工程之大，談何容易，Ｇ２０最多可能只是個起個頭而已。
倫敦商學院教授 波特茲
今年預估全球貿易規模可能縮水9% 任何大動作的保護主義 絕對會招來災難性後果
中國、俄羅斯等新興經濟體，挑戰美元地位，已經讓峰會前夕暗潮洶湧，而二十國各自背負國內壓力，先保護國內企業和就業機會，貿易公平擺一邊，則是讓保護主義的陰霾，早就籠罩整個會場。
英國首相 布朗
2009年我們必須共同對抗保護主義 以確保我們可以避開貿易崩解的風險
從去年的第一場Ｇ２０，到上個月的財長預備會議，各國都是口徑一致，聲稱不會放任貿易保護主義抬頭，但官員說的是一套，做的又是另一套。美國振興法案明文寫著公共工程優先採購美國鋼鐵，法國對企業紓困，也要求車廠雇用本國勞工，連批判保護主義最力的英國自己，也不例外。
英國工業總會主席 布魯頓
在拯救、紓困銀行過程中 也是先給英國國內銀行特殊待遇 這就是保護主義的另一個形式
在眾人共乘一條船的氣氛下，貿易保護主義，和新的國際貨幣，也許不是這場Ｇ２０桌上的主要議題，然而在峰會場邊，和峰會開完之後，相關的討論預料仍將持續發酵。
(民視新聞查修傑專題報導)
貨幣，是任何交易的前提、國際金融的根本，也就難怪，在拖垮全球的金融大地震之後，有人要質疑現今美元為王的制度，是先天不良，基礎不穩，乾脆打掉，重新來過。
中國國務院總理 溫家寶
說句老實話我確實有些擔心 因此我想通過(媒體)再次重申 要求美國保持信用信守承諾 保證中國資產的安全
二十國峰會登場前，中國總理溫家寶先在人大閉幕會上，表明對美元幣值的憂慮，接著中國央行行長周小川也撰文公開質疑目前美元掛帥的貨幣體系，有著制度性缺陷，為了避免金融危機一再發生，有必要改採超越主權的儲備貨幣，譬如目前國際貨幣基金會ＩＭＦ、內部使用的特別提款權。
所謂特別提款權ＳＤＲ，是ＩＭＦ根據各種貨幣重要性，機動調整比例的一個記帳單位。目前一單位ＳＤＲ由美元、歐元、日幣、和英鎊四種貨幣組成，其中美元44%，歐元34%，日圓和英鎊則各佔11趴。由於它具備平衡國際收支作用，因此也被視為國家外匯存底的一部份。事實上，正由於中國擁有高達兩兆美元的外匯存底，而這筆看似驚人的資產，隨時有可能因為美元的貶值而跟著縮水，因此中國官方才會喊出推翻美元獨霸地位的口號，希望藉由採行一種超主權貨幣，來分散持有美元的風險。
經濟學人雜誌 易普
(美國人)高傲的以為美元強勢了那麼久 地位不容挑戰 但歷史證明並非如此
在美元成為公認的國際貨幣之前，各國原本是以金本位制度，作為彼此匯兌貿易基礎，而若是把國際貨幣基金看成是全世界的央行，那麼ＳＤＲ也可以算是一種具潛力的世界性貨幣，雖然在目前這個階段，ＳＤＲ的運用侷限ＩＭＦ內部，只存在於帳本上，並非實體發行的貨幣，然而，包括諾貝爾經濟學桂冠史提格里茲等人都認為，建立一種新的國際性貨幣，確實有助於降低持有單一貨幣的風險，只不過，要將全世界各國的外匯存底，全部都轉換為另一種新的貨幣，工程之大，談何容易，Ｇ２０最多可能只是個起個頭而已。
倫敦商學院教授 波特茲
今年預估全球貿易規模可能縮水9% 任何大動作的保護主義 絕對會招來災難性後果
中國、俄羅斯等新興經濟體，挑戰美元地位，已經讓峰會前夕暗潮洶湧，而二十國各自背負國內壓力，先保護國內企業和就業機會，貿易公平擺一邊，則是讓保護主義的陰霾，早就籠罩整個會場。
英國首相 布朗
2009年我們必須共同對抗保護主義 以確保我們可以避開貿易崩解的風險
從去年的第一場Ｇ２０，到上個月的財長預備會議，各國都是口徑一致，聲稱不會放任貿易保護主義抬頭，但官員說的是一套，做的又是另一套。美國振興法案明文寫著公共工程優先採購美國鋼鐵，法國對企業紓困，也要求車廠雇用本國勞工，連批判保護主義最力的英國自己，也不例外。
英國工業總會主席 布魯頓
在拯救、紓困銀行過程中 也是先給英國國內銀行特殊待遇 這就是保護主義的另一個形式
在眾人共乘一條船的氣氛下，貿易保護主義，和新的國際貨幣，也許不是這場Ｇ２０桌上的主要議題，然而在峰會場邊，和峰會開完之後，相關的討論預料仍將持續發酵。
(民視新聞查修傑專題報導)
2.24.2009
Smart power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Smart power is a term in international relations defined by Joseph Nye as "the ability to combine hard and soft power into a winning strategy."[1][2] According to Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela R. Aall, smart power "involves the strategic use of diplomacy, persuasion, capacity building, and the projection of power and influence in ways that are cost-effective and have political and social legitimacy" – essentially the engagement of both military force and all forms of diplomacy.[3]
The term, invented in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, comes as a reaction to George W. Bush's more neoconservative-driven foreign policy.[4] Viewed as a liberal alternative to such policy, its proponents prefer international institutions that provide a major role, as opposed to solo role, to the United States.[4] Smart power has also been viewed as an alternative for soft power because the latter can reinforce stereotypes of Democratic politicians being perceived as weak.[5][6] According to Foreign Policy, there is a debate on who should be credited for coining the term, though it found the most likely candidate to be Suzanne Nossel, who in 2004 wrote an article entitled "Smart Power" in Foreign Affairs.[7] Earlier in 2004, Nye referred to "smart power" in his book Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics.
[edit] Clinton usage
The term gained notice when New York Senator Hillary Clinton used it frequently during her Senate confirmation hearing on January 13, 2009, for the position of Secretary of State under the administration of President Barack Obama.[8]
We must use what has been called smart power – the full range of tools at our disposal - diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural - picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.
—Hillary Clinton[9]
Clinton's view contrasts with Condoleezza Rice's strategy of Transformational Diplomacy. Clinton's plans have not been realized to the point of a comparison of the similariries and differences in diplomatic relations between Rice's plans and the smart power approach.
Jump to: navigation, search
Smart power is a term in international relations defined by Joseph Nye as "the ability to combine hard and soft power into a winning strategy."[1][2] According to Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela R. Aall, smart power "involves the strategic use of diplomacy, persuasion, capacity building, and the projection of power and influence in ways that are cost-effective and have political and social legitimacy" – essentially the engagement of both military force and all forms of diplomacy.[3]
The term, invented in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, comes as a reaction to George W. Bush's more neoconservative-driven foreign policy.[4] Viewed as a liberal alternative to such policy, its proponents prefer international institutions that provide a major role, as opposed to solo role, to the United States.[4] Smart power has also been viewed as an alternative for soft power because the latter can reinforce stereotypes of Democratic politicians being perceived as weak.[5][6] According to Foreign Policy, there is a debate on who should be credited for coining the term, though it found the most likely candidate to be Suzanne Nossel, who in 2004 wrote an article entitled "Smart Power" in Foreign Affairs.[7] Earlier in 2004, Nye referred to "smart power" in his book Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics.
[edit] Clinton usage
The term gained notice when New York Senator Hillary Clinton used it frequently during her Senate confirmation hearing on January 13, 2009, for the position of Secretary of State under the administration of President Barack Obama.[8]
We must use what has been called smart power – the full range of tools at our disposal - diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural - picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.
—Hillary Clinton[9]
Clinton's view contrasts with Condoleezza Rice's strategy of Transformational Diplomacy. Clinton's plans have not been realized to the point of a comparison of the similariries and differences in diplomatic relations between Rice's plans and the smart power approach.
2.11.2009
以巴恩怨史
以色列與巴勒斯坦的血腥暴力史，在很多人的記憶中，就像是打了一輩子，從來沒停過。就算是在國際調停下，短暫停火，鏡頭前握手言和，但總是不久之後，又重起勃谿，巴人自殺炸彈、引來以色列重兵還擊，一遍又一遍的不斷循環。到底以巴之間，有沒有解？要回答這個問題，或許必須要先釐清，以巴之間的恩仇，所為何來？他們到底是什麼時候，結下的樑子？兩邊爭得又是什麼？
喊著反猶太口號，一群不知哪裡冒出來的兒童和少年，對著戰車丟石塊，打完就溜，不需要旁白解釋，這一幅景象，已經說明了這裡是中東。 從1987年巴勒斯坦人發動投石起義開始，石頭對抗坦克的強烈反差，透過新聞畫面，向國際放送，突顯了巴人坐困愁城的絕望，也激起伊斯蘭世界的同仇敵愾，但在邊界另一頭，換個觀點，同樣的悲劇也在同時上演。
21歲巴勒斯坦青年，混在特拉維夫的市集人群裡，引爆身上的炸藥，瞬間奪走9名以色列人的性命，1命抵9命，復仇的短暫甜蜜，激進派的巴勒斯坦人認為值得，用盛大葬禮和金錢犒賞家屬，號召後人前仆後繼，冤冤相報的暴力輪迴，也從此啟動。
二戰結束後，以色列建國，引爆和鄰近阿拉伯國家的一連串戰火，是近代以巴紛擾的根源，但回溯到更早歷史，從西元2世紀以來，就散居歐洲各地的猶太人，由於在19世紀末，受到俄國等東歐國家當局的屠殺與迫害，逐漸興起猶太人獨立建國思潮，也就是所謂的錫安主義。猶太人大量自發性地移民到巴勒斯坦地區，當時統治巴勒斯坦的鄂圖曼帝國，同意接納這群人，不過新移民和原本的舊住民之間，卻悄悄醞釀排外情緒。
以巴紛爭，爭的是一塊地，所謂的巴勒斯坦，是從羅馬時代就開始使用的地域名稱，包含了現在的以色列、西岸、迦薩地區，還有部份的約旦、黎巴嫩、敘利亞領土。 在以色列人眼中，這裡是希伯來聖經裡以色列王國所在地，也是上帝賦予猶太人的應許之地，不過對回教族群來說，巴勒斯坦這塊地在中世紀之後，超過500年的時間都屬於鄂圖曼帝國統治範圍，也就是說，阿拉伯人才是原住民。
扭轉世局的兩次世界大戰，也是引爆以巴問題的導火線，鄂圖曼帝國在戰後崩解，受託照料巴勒斯坦的英國，治理無方，族群對立情形不斷惡化，1947年，聯合國決議將巴勒斯坦地區一分為二，猶太人和阿拉伯族裔分別建立自己的國家，這個看似公平美好的願景，不幸的是，在60多年後，依舊無法實現。
1948年，聯合國仲裁後後的第2年，以色列宣佈建國，激怒了巴勒斯坦地區的阿拉伯人，也就是如今通稱的巴勒斯坦人，巴人對於只佔人口少數的猶太人，竟然分到過半的領土，感到極度不滿，武力抗爭也就一觸即發，戰火從一開始的內戰，延燒成泛阿拉伯世界對以色列的圍剿，1948年到2006年之間，中東地區至少6場戰爭，都是為了巴勒斯坦問題而打，中東，從此演變為國際爭端的火藥庫，激進主義更趁亂坐大，煽動仇恨，對外輸出恐怖活動。
以巴問題，衍生成世局動亂的根源，國際社會為了化解干戈而做的外交努力，也從未停止過。 1978年，卡特斡旋，埃及總理沙達特和以色列總理比金，簽下的大衛營協定，1993年，柯林頓出面，阿拉法特和拉賓握手達成的奧斯陸協議，先後都受到了諾貝爾獎和平獎肯定，可見外界對以巴停火，握手言和的殷切期盼。 只不過，巴勒斯坦這塊地，牽扯太多的歷史情結，敏感的耶路撒冷聖城歸屬問題、歐美國家對猶太人的補償心理，還有現實的水資源分配問題，都讓和談過程千頭萬緒，走走停停，以巴和平所需要的，似乎已經超乎人為的努力，更關鍵的，恐怕還是天時地利。
(民視新聞查修傑專題報導)
喊著反猶太口號，一群不知哪裡冒出來的兒童和少年，對著戰車丟石塊，打完就溜，不需要旁白解釋，這一幅景象，已經說明了這裡是中東。 從1987年巴勒斯坦人發動投石起義開始，石頭對抗坦克的強烈反差，透過新聞畫面，向國際放送，突顯了巴人坐困愁城的絕望，也激起伊斯蘭世界的同仇敵愾，但在邊界另一頭，換個觀點，同樣的悲劇也在同時上演。
21歲巴勒斯坦青年，混在特拉維夫的市集人群裡，引爆身上的炸藥，瞬間奪走9名以色列人的性命，1命抵9命，復仇的短暫甜蜜，激進派的巴勒斯坦人認為值得，用盛大葬禮和金錢犒賞家屬，號召後人前仆後繼，冤冤相報的暴力輪迴，也從此啟動。
二戰結束後，以色列建國，引爆和鄰近阿拉伯國家的一連串戰火，是近代以巴紛擾的根源，但回溯到更早歷史，從西元2世紀以來，就散居歐洲各地的猶太人，由於在19世紀末，受到俄國等東歐國家當局的屠殺與迫害，逐漸興起猶太人獨立建國思潮，也就是所謂的錫安主義。猶太人大量自發性地移民到巴勒斯坦地區，當時統治巴勒斯坦的鄂圖曼帝國，同意接納這群人，不過新移民和原本的舊住民之間，卻悄悄醞釀排外情緒。
以巴紛爭，爭的是一塊地，所謂的巴勒斯坦，是從羅馬時代就開始使用的地域名稱，包含了現在的以色列、西岸、迦薩地區，還有部份的約旦、黎巴嫩、敘利亞領土。 在以色列人眼中，這裡是希伯來聖經裡以色列王國所在地，也是上帝賦予猶太人的應許之地，不過對回教族群來說，巴勒斯坦這塊地在中世紀之後，超過500年的時間都屬於鄂圖曼帝國統治範圍，也就是說，阿拉伯人才是原住民。
扭轉世局的兩次世界大戰，也是引爆以巴問題的導火線，鄂圖曼帝國在戰後崩解，受託照料巴勒斯坦的英國，治理無方，族群對立情形不斷惡化，1947年，聯合國決議將巴勒斯坦地區一分為二，猶太人和阿拉伯族裔分別建立自己的國家，這個看似公平美好的願景，不幸的是，在60多年後，依舊無法實現。
1948年，聯合國仲裁後後的第2年，以色列宣佈建國，激怒了巴勒斯坦地區的阿拉伯人，也就是如今通稱的巴勒斯坦人，巴人對於只佔人口少數的猶太人，竟然分到過半的領土，感到極度不滿，武力抗爭也就一觸即發，戰火從一開始的內戰，延燒成泛阿拉伯世界對以色列的圍剿，1948年到2006年之間，中東地區至少6場戰爭，都是為了巴勒斯坦問題而打，中東，從此演變為國際爭端的火藥庫，激進主義更趁亂坐大，煽動仇恨，對外輸出恐怖活動。
以巴問題，衍生成世局動亂的根源，國際社會為了化解干戈而做的外交努力，也從未停止過。 1978年，卡特斡旋，埃及總理沙達特和以色列總理比金，簽下的大衛營協定，1993年，柯林頓出面，阿拉法特和拉賓握手達成的奧斯陸協議，先後都受到了諾貝爾獎和平獎肯定，可見外界對以巴停火，握手言和的殷切期盼。 只不過，巴勒斯坦這塊地，牽扯太多的歷史情結，敏感的耶路撒冷聖城歸屬問題、歐美國家對猶太人的補償心理，還有現實的水資源分配問題，都讓和談過程千頭萬緒，走走停停，以巴和平所需要的，似乎已經超乎人為的努力，更關鍵的，恐怕還是天時地利。
(民視新聞查修傑專題報導)
2.05.2009
Road to Protectionism
反外勞之火 延燒全球
【經濟日報╱編譯王麗娟／綜合外電】 2009.02.05 04:28 am
嚴重不景氣開始衝擊外勞工作機會；馬來西亞計畫於年底前把十萬名印尼工人解雇，送回印尼。其他國家也出現反外勞情緒。
馬國今年至今已解雇近1萬名印尼工人。為免外勞搶走馬來西亞人的飯碗，馬國政府已禁止工廠、商店、餐館雇用新外勞。
印尼駐馬國大使巴契提亞告訴新海峽時報說，今年被裁的印尼外勞，多數在製造業。馬國約雇用200萬印尼工人，其中80萬為非法勞工，約30萬人受雇於製造業。
馬國為亞洲第二大勞力輸入國，去年外勞總人數達220萬，主要受雇於種植與製造業。但移工過多，已漸成政府問題，並試圖減少。
景氣差導致本勞也就業困難後，排外勞的情緒已陸續出現。本月初，英國即發生反外勞風潮，幾個煉油廠的本勞，抗議雇主優先雇用歐洲外勞，發動罷工潮；而美國眾院上月28日通過經濟振興方案時附加「買美國貨」條款後，參議院也計劃再增添「雇美國人」（Hire American）的條款，要求接受振興方案援助的企業，未來只雇用美國公民。
英國的反外勞罷工潮直到4日仍未結束。這項罷工行動始於英格蘭北林肯郡的「林賽煉油廠」。
該廠將200個工作機會提供給外勞，引發本勞反彈，其後蘇格蘭、威爾斯及北愛爾蘭等的8個煉油廠，以及一些發電廠也陸續出現抗議行動。工會幹部說，每小時都有新的勞工加入，他們要讓政府了解他們的感受，不讓外勞搶走飯碗。
林賽煉油廠直到4日仍無法與工會談攏協議，外傳煉油廠同意將200個工作機會的60個提供給本勞，40個技術工人，20個非技術工人，但工會嫌少。工人同時要求煉油廠證明外勞與本勞同工同酬。
【2009/02/05 經濟日報】
【經濟日報╱編譯王麗娟／綜合外電】 2009.02.05 04:28 am
嚴重不景氣開始衝擊外勞工作機會；馬來西亞計畫於年底前把十萬名印尼工人解雇，送回印尼。其他國家也出現反外勞情緒。
馬國今年至今已解雇近1萬名印尼工人。為免外勞搶走馬來西亞人的飯碗，馬國政府已禁止工廠、商店、餐館雇用新外勞。
印尼駐馬國大使巴契提亞告訴新海峽時報說，今年被裁的印尼外勞，多數在製造業。馬國約雇用200萬印尼工人，其中80萬為非法勞工，約30萬人受雇於製造業。
馬國為亞洲第二大勞力輸入國，去年外勞總人數達220萬，主要受雇於種植與製造業。但移工過多，已漸成政府問題，並試圖減少。
景氣差導致本勞也就業困難後，排外勞的情緒已陸續出現。本月初，英國即發生反外勞風潮，幾個煉油廠的本勞，抗議雇主優先雇用歐洲外勞，發動罷工潮；而美國眾院上月28日通過經濟振興方案時附加「買美國貨」條款後，參議院也計劃再增添「雇美國人」（Hire American）的條款，要求接受振興方案援助的企業，未來只雇用美國公民。
英國的反外勞罷工潮直到4日仍未結束。這項罷工行動始於英格蘭北林肯郡的「林賽煉油廠」。
該廠將200個工作機會提供給外勞，引發本勞反彈，其後蘇格蘭、威爾斯及北愛爾蘭等的8個煉油廠，以及一些發電廠也陸續出現抗議行動。工會幹部說，每小時都有新的勞工加入，他們要讓政府了解他們的感受，不讓外勞搶走飯碗。
林賽煉油廠直到4日仍無法與工會談攏協議，外傳煉油廠同意將200個工作機會的60個提供給本勞，40個技術工人，20個非技術工人，但工會嫌少。工人同時要求煉油廠證明外勞與本勞同工同酬。
【2009/02/05 經濟日報】
12.13.2008
Banana republic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007)
For other uses, see Banana republic (disambiguation).
Banana Republic is a pejorative term for a small country that is politically unstable, dependent on limited agriculture (e.g. bananas), and ruled by a small, self-elected, wealthy, and corrupt clique.[1] It is most commonly used for countries in Central America such as El Salvador, Belize, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Guatemala.
In some cases, these nations have kept the government structures that were modeled after the colonial Spanish ruling clique, with a small, largely leisure class on the top,and a large, poorly educated and poorly paid working class of peons, though it might have the (fake) trappings of modernity (such as styling itself a republic with a president etc.)
Frequently the subject of mockery and humour, and usually presided over by a dictatorial military junta that exaggerates its own power and importance—"the epaulettes of a banana republic generalissimo" are proverbially of considerable size, usually portrayed in satire with a pair of mops—a banana republic also typically has large wealth inequities, poor infrastructure, poor schools, a "backward" economy, low capital spending, a reliance on foreign capital and money printing, budget deficits, and a weakening currency. Banana republics are typically also highly prone to revolutions and coups.
usage
Canada
In 2008, with the minority government threatened to be toppled by the opposition, whose goal was to form a new coalition government without an intermediary election, Fen Thompson, director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Ottawa's Carleton University remarked that the crisis would turn the nation into a "banana republic with snowflakes."
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007)
For other uses, see Banana republic (disambiguation).
Banana Republic is a pejorative term for a small country that is politically unstable, dependent on limited agriculture (e.g. bananas), and ruled by a small, self-elected, wealthy, and corrupt clique.[1] It is most commonly used for countries in Central America such as El Salvador, Belize, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Guatemala.
In some cases, these nations have kept the government structures that were modeled after the colonial Spanish ruling clique, with a small, largely leisure class on the top,and a large, poorly educated and poorly paid working class of peons, though it might have the (fake) trappings of modernity (such as styling itself a republic with a president etc.)
Frequently the subject of mockery and humour, and usually presided over by a dictatorial military junta that exaggerates its own power and importance—"the epaulettes of a banana republic generalissimo" are proverbially of considerable size, usually portrayed in satire with a pair of mops—a banana republic also typically has large wealth inequities, poor infrastructure, poor schools, a "backward" economy, low capital spending, a reliance on foreign capital and money printing, budget deficits, and a weakening currency. Banana republics are typically also highly prone to revolutions and coups.
usage
Canada
In 2008, with the minority government threatened to be toppled by the opposition, whose goal was to form a new coalition government without an intermediary election, Fen Thompson, director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Ottawa's Carleton University remarked that the crisis would turn the nation into a "banana republic with snowflakes."
12.06.2008
How did Thai protesters manage it?
By Jonathan Head
BBC News, Bangkok
Claiming victory, the yellow-clad hordes from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) rolled up their mats and sleeping bags.
They queued for souvenir autographed scarves - yellow of course - from the leaders who had taken them into this astonishing act of insurrection, and boarded buses and pick-up trucks for the ride home.
An army of cleaners, technicians and security personnel moved in behind them to get Bangkok's $4bn (£2.7bn) state-of-the-art airport back into operation.
Within a few days the mass sit-in will just be a surreal memory.
But the questions their actions have raised about the state of Thailand will continue long after the last plastic hand-clapper is picked up and disposed of.
How could a country as advanced and as dependent on exports and tourism as Thailand allow such a vital transport hub to be stormed by a mob that never numbered more than a few thousand?
What is the PAD, and what gives the movement the confidence to commit its dramatic acts of economic sabotage without fearing any legal sanction?
Weak police
The airport sit-in shows the PAD's skill at pulling off bold and unexpected stunts.
When the first PAD convoys approached the airport last Tuesday, they said they were only going to protest against then-Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who was due to arrive back from the Apec summit in Peru.
The government had a strategy of avoiding confrontation - it did not want a repeat of the disastrous events in October, when several PAD supporters were seriously injured in clashes with the police.
The police were under orders not to use force and retreated.
No-one thought the PAD would try to take over one of the world's biggest and busiest airport terminals.
In fact, PAD organisers told the BBC they had carefully planned the seizure of the airport weeks before.
The weakness of Thailand's police is also important.
They have proved no match for this determined and organised movement. They are poorly trained in riot control, and lack the status of the army.
When it became clear that the PAD was set on taking over the airport, the local governor asked the army for assistance. None came.
As throughout this year, the army's refusal to help contain the PAD has left the government with no means of resisting this insurgency.
The police are up against an organisation of considerable logistical strength.
It is a remarkably well-trained and well-funded movement.
Logistical efficiency
One of the many retired generals supporting its occupation at the airport observed that it should be seen as a military, not a civilian organisation.
Behind the "aunties with clappers" and well-groomed young women clutching lap-dogs that are the public face of the movement are squads of hoodlums, armed with batons, metal spikes and hand-guns who man the barricades and hunt down intruders.
One morning I followed them as they dragged an alleged government spy off to an undisclosed location, kicking and punching him.
I was unable to find out his fate. Some of these thugs are members of private armies run by retired generals.
The PAD's logistical efficiency is impressive.
Within hours of occupying the airport it had ample supplies of food, water, blankets and medicines for the thousands of supporters who joined the sit-in.
The food never ran out. You could get your mobile phone charged, or have a massage. PAD cleaners were brought in to keep the floors and toilets in order. The duty-free and check-in areas were sealed off and vigilantly protected by PAD guards.
The PAD's propaganda arm is equally impressive.
It runs its own television station, ASTV, which is widely broadcast and pours vitriol on the government.
Everywhere the movement goes it takes mobile stages, on the back of trucks, which blare out speeches and music from dawn until the small hours of the following morning.
The message is simple: Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is evil, stole the people's money and will destroy the country. The poor rural people who voted for his party were all bribed, and unable to think for themselves.
Some of those taking part in the airport occupation had been listening to these firebrand speeches for months, without a break.
They all passionately believed their actions were worth the cost to the country, to see Thailand's politics cleaned up.
The question of who is behind the PAD is a subject of intense speculation in Thailand.
I met a lot of ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs at the airport who were helping keep the PAD supplied.
But much bigger Thai businesses are widely believed to be financing the movement, including at least two national banks.
Royal support?
Thaksin Shinawatra made a lot of powerful enemies while he was in office with his aggressive efforts to re-shape the country.
These are now using the PAD militants to get back at his party.
There are also plenty of former military commanders offering their help to the PAD - people like General Pathompong Kesornsuk, who has openly urged the army to launch a coup against the government.
One of the top PAD leaders is Chamlong Srimuang, a former general with close ties to Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, the king's most senior advisor.
Then there is the most sensitive question of all - the royal connection.
The PAD has justified its actions as being in defence of the monarchy, and the king's portrait has been displayed prominently during all its protests.
Senior figures close to the palace have openly supported the movement.
When the queen offered to preside over the funeral last month of a PAD protestor killed during clashes with the police, it appeared to be a tacit blessing for the movement.
Some in the government even believe the revered king may be backing the movement, although at the age of almost 81 this seems unlikely.
Hard evidence is difficult to come by. But people's actions in Thailand are now being driven as much by what they believe as what they know to be true.
The government and its rural followers believe there is a palace-army-elite conspiracy to rob them of their electoral mandate.
The PAD and its middle-class followers believe the pro-Thaksin camp intends to turn Thailand into a republic, and overthrow the existing social order.
With so much believed to be at stake, compromise between the two sides is almost impossible.
BBC News, Bangkok
Claiming victory, the yellow-clad hordes from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) rolled up their mats and sleeping bags.
They queued for souvenir autographed scarves - yellow of course - from the leaders who had taken them into this astonishing act of insurrection, and boarded buses and pick-up trucks for the ride home.
An army of cleaners, technicians and security personnel moved in behind them to get Bangkok's $4bn (£2.7bn) state-of-the-art airport back into operation.
Within a few days the mass sit-in will just be a surreal memory.
But the questions their actions have raised about the state of Thailand will continue long after the last plastic hand-clapper is picked up and disposed of.
How could a country as advanced and as dependent on exports and tourism as Thailand allow such a vital transport hub to be stormed by a mob that never numbered more than a few thousand?
What is the PAD, and what gives the movement the confidence to commit its dramatic acts of economic sabotage without fearing any legal sanction?
Weak police
The airport sit-in shows the PAD's skill at pulling off bold and unexpected stunts.
When the first PAD convoys approached the airport last Tuesday, they said they were only going to protest against then-Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who was due to arrive back from the Apec summit in Peru.
The government had a strategy of avoiding confrontation - it did not want a repeat of the disastrous events in October, when several PAD supporters were seriously injured in clashes with the police.
The police were under orders not to use force and retreated.
No-one thought the PAD would try to take over one of the world's biggest and busiest airport terminals.
In fact, PAD organisers told the BBC they had carefully planned the seizure of the airport weeks before.
The weakness of Thailand's police is also important.
They have proved no match for this determined and organised movement. They are poorly trained in riot control, and lack the status of the army.
When it became clear that the PAD was set on taking over the airport, the local governor asked the army for assistance. None came.
As throughout this year, the army's refusal to help contain the PAD has left the government with no means of resisting this insurgency.
The police are up against an organisation of considerable logistical strength.
It is a remarkably well-trained and well-funded movement.
Logistical efficiency
One of the many retired generals supporting its occupation at the airport observed that it should be seen as a military, not a civilian organisation.
Behind the "aunties with clappers" and well-groomed young women clutching lap-dogs that are the public face of the movement are squads of hoodlums, armed with batons, metal spikes and hand-guns who man the barricades and hunt down intruders.
One morning I followed them as they dragged an alleged government spy off to an undisclosed location, kicking and punching him.
I was unable to find out his fate. Some of these thugs are members of private armies run by retired generals.
The PAD's logistical efficiency is impressive.
Within hours of occupying the airport it had ample supplies of food, water, blankets and medicines for the thousands of supporters who joined the sit-in.
The food never ran out. You could get your mobile phone charged, or have a massage. PAD cleaners were brought in to keep the floors and toilets in order. The duty-free and check-in areas were sealed off and vigilantly protected by PAD guards.
The PAD's propaganda arm is equally impressive.
It runs its own television station, ASTV, which is widely broadcast and pours vitriol on the government.
Everywhere the movement goes it takes mobile stages, on the back of trucks, which blare out speeches and music from dawn until the small hours of the following morning.
The message is simple: Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is evil, stole the people's money and will destroy the country. The poor rural people who voted for his party were all bribed, and unable to think for themselves.
Some of those taking part in the airport occupation had been listening to these firebrand speeches for months, without a break.
They all passionately believed their actions were worth the cost to the country, to see Thailand's politics cleaned up.
The question of who is behind the PAD is a subject of intense speculation in Thailand.
I met a lot of ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs at the airport who were helping keep the PAD supplied.
But much bigger Thai businesses are widely believed to be financing the movement, including at least two national banks.
Royal support?
Thaksin Shinawatra made a lot of powerful enemies while he was in office with his aggressive efforts to re-shape the country.
These are now using the PAD militants to get back at his party.
There are also plenty of former military commanders offering their help to the PAD - people like General Pathompong Kesornsuk, who has openly urged the army to launch a coup against the government.
One of the top PAD leaders is Chamlong Srimuang, a former general with close ties to Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, the king's most senior advisor.
Then there is the most sensitive question of all - the royal connection.
The PAD has justified its actions as being in defence of the monarchy, and the king's portrait has been displayed prominently during all its protests.
Senior figures close to the palace have openly supported the movement.
When the queen offered to preside over the funeral last month of a PAD protestor killed during clashes with the police, it appeared to be a tacit blessing for the movement.
Some in the government even believe the revered king may be backing the movement, although at the age of almost 81 this seems unlikely.
Hard evidence is difficult to come by. But people's actions in Thailand are now being driven as much by what they believe as what they know to be true.
The government and its rural followers believe there is a palace-army-elite conspiracy to rob them of their electoral mandate.
The PAD and its middle-class followers believe the pro-Thaksin camp intends to turn Thailand into a republic, and overthrow the existing social order.
With so much believed to be at stake, compromise between the two sides is almost impossible.
9.24.2008
阿富汗越糟，世界越危險！
阿富汗情報單位在上星期三（1月17日）公布了審問塔利班（Taliban）發言人Dr. Mohammad Hanif的錄音，Hanif供稱塔利班的領袖Mullah Muhammed Omar目前藏身在巴基斯坦Balochistan省的首府Quetta，並由巴國情報單位ISI（Inter-Services Intelligence）提供保護，他的供詞與西方軍事情報單位的判斷相符。在美軍轟炸阿富汗將塔利班逐出之後，他們持續地重建勢力，在阿富汗與巴基斯坦交界處發動相當多次的自殺炸彈攻擊，造成西方聯軍與無辜百姓的傷亡，且情勢越來越不樂觀。塔利班這樣的回教極端派正應該是反恐體系要對付的目標，但基於國際政治的現實考量，加上阿富汗政府本身不爭氣的情況下，恐造成塔利班再度崛起的可能。
巴基斯坦與阿富汗兩個國家的界線，是由英國強行制訂的，大筆一揮把Pashtun族中間隔了一條杜蘭線（Durand Line），雖然被國界分開，但是Pashtun族群一直存在著民族主義，想要結合，巴基斯坦政府相當擔心民族主義發酵，因此對境內的Pashtun相當地寬容。塔利班的成員就是Pashtun所組成，從任何面向來看，巴基斯坦境內的Pashtun對塔利班提供相當多的援助，這也迫使巴基斯坦政府成為少數幾個在塔利班當政時承認其身份的國家。Omar的藏身地Quetta城市的大部分居民都是Pashtun族。
Barnett Rubin曾涉入聯合國對阿富汗的任務，他在本期外交事務（Foreign Affairs）的「Saving Afghanistan」中抨擊美國政府，他認為只要巴基斯坦政府持續提供基地給美軍使用，美國會持續容忍塔利班在巴基斯坦重整他們的勢力。美國政府的目標是賓拉登的「凱達組織」（Al-Qaeda），為了巴國的基地使用權利，布希政府願意容忍獨裁的軍人政府，更默許塔利班的醞釀崛起。在英俄爭霸與冷戰時期，阿富汗的戰略價值僅是作為一個列強的緩衝地區，除此之外，在國際舞台上毫無影響力，現實環境更讓美國政府不願意投注太多的資源，助其重建。但Rubin在文中也強調，若不趕緊拯救這個國家，與各國政府一起解決塔利班問題，將來會付出更大的代價。
除了現實的國際環境之外，阿富汗境內的貧窮與政府的腐敗，讓塔利班對人民的吸引力重現。腐敗的司法體制讓殺人犯能夠買通執法單位而出獄，衰敗的經濟狀況讓貧民願意加入塔利班的陣營，賺取費用，農民為了維生，只好種植大量的鴉片，此舉更提供了塔利班優渥的經濟支柱。若西方盟國願意投注資源截斷讓塔利班茁壯的管道，或能重重打擊塔利班，甚至迫使其加入執政團隊，這也是外界期待的作法，但我們並未看到這些努力，情勢反而越來越糟。
Rubin說：「阿富汗是最應該地方分治的國家，但卻由最中央集權的政府所統治。」正因為複雜的族群被強行劃分，導致內部衝突不斷，國家無法團結，執政的北方聯盟無能又無力，才讓塔利班在世紀之交與現在有了重新崛起的機會。世界各國若將此地情勢當成國際政治來考量，而忽略了族群政治的因素，不願抽絲剝繭、細膩地處理該區域的糾紛，動亂會一直持續下去，並冒著恐怖主義重新席捲的危險，阿富汗也只好繼續在世界國民所得排名中 －除非洲以外－ 敬陪末座。阿富汗越糟，世界就越危險！
巴基斯坦與阿富汗兩個國家的界線，是由英國強行制訂的，大筆一揮把Pashtun族中間隔了一條杜蘭線（Durand Line），雖然被國界分開，但是Pashtun族群一直存在著民族主義，想要結合，巴基斯坦政府相當擔心民族主義發酵，因此對境內的Pashtun相當地寬容。塔利班的成員就是Pashtun所組成，從任何面向來看，巴基斯坦境內的Pashtun對塔利班提供相當多的援助，這也迫使巴基斯坦政府成為少數幾個在塔利班當政時承認其身份的國家。Omar的藏身地Quetta城市的大部分居民都是Pashtun族。
Barnett Rubin曾涉入聯合國對阿富汗的任務，他在本期外交事務（Foreign Affairs）的「Saving Afghanistan」中抨擊美國政府，他認為只要巴基斯坦政府持續提供基地給美軍使用，美國會持續容忍塔利班在巴基斯坦重整他們的勢力。美國政府的目標是賓拉登的「凱達組織」（Al-Qaeda），為了巴國的基地使用權利，布希政府願意容忍獨裁的軍人政府，更默許塔利班的醞釀崛起。在英俄爭霸與冷戰時期，阿富汗的戰略價值僅是作為一個列強的緩衝地區，除此之外，在國際舞台上毫無影響力，現實環境更讓美國政府不願意投注太多的資源，助其重建。但Rubin在文中也強調，若不趕緊拯救這個國家，與各國政府一起解決塔利班問題，將來會付出更大的代價。
除了現實的國際環境之外，阿富汗境內的貧窮與政府的腐敗，讓塔利班對人民的吸引力重現。腐敗的司法體制讓殺人犯能夠買通執法單位而出獄，衰敗的經濟狀況讓貧民願意加入塔利班的陣營，賺取費用，農民為了維生，只好種植大量的鴉片，此舉更提供了塔利班優渥的經濟支柱。若西方盟國願意投注資源截斷讓塔利班茁壯的管道，或能重重打擊塔利班，甚至迫使其加入執政團隊，這也是外界期待的作法，但我們並未看到這些努力，情勢反而越來越糟。
Rubin說：「阿富汗是最應該地方分治的國家，但卻由最中央集權的政府所統治。」正因為複雜的族群被強行劃分，導致內部衝突不斷，國家無法團結，執政的北方聯盟無能又無力，才讓塔利班在世紀之交與現在有了重新崛起的機會。世界各國若將此地情勢當成國際政治來考量，而忽略了族群政治的因素，不願抽絲剝繭、細膩地處理該區域的糾紛，動亂會一直持續下去，並冒著恐怖主義重新席捲的危險，阿富汗也只好繼續在世界國民所得排名中 －除非洲以外－ 敬陪末座。阿富汗越糟，世界就越危險！
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)