planet earth looks blue

North Korea launched its missile, Taepodong-2.  Compared to the July 2006 attempt, when the rocket fell apart less than a minute after taking off, this was a success for the waning North Korean dictator.  Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke last summer.  Some believe that this was an attempt to show his people, and the world that he remains a force to be reckoned with.  Pyongyang is saying that the satellite was successfully put into orbit, where it is circling the earth, broadcasting revolutionary songs.  Japan and the US have said that the satellite never actually made it into orbit.

So what does this mean?  Well, first of all, whether the satellite is circling around us or not, Pyongyang is officially capable of shooting a missile as far as Alaska, forcing Obama’s hand.  He now has to make missile defense a priority, and is planning on setting up rockets in Poland, making Russia unsettled, as this encroaches onto former Soviet territory.  Other than that, North Korea may face nothing more than reprimands.  South Korea, Japan, and the EU have all commented on the act, as regrettable, provocative, reckless, and the Security Council is expected to have an emergency meeting to discuss possible repercussions.  But with both China and Russia saying that they will veto any sanctions on the rogue nation, it is unlikely that much action will be taken, at least for now.  Japan was worried that debris from the launch would fall on their territory, and some did in the Sea of Japan, as well as the Pacific Ocean.  Other than the obvious environmental concern, this illicited no action other than strong words from Tokyo.  This may in the end be a significant marker in the evolution of our new world order.  Russia and China have enough influence to assure that the West cannot isolate North Korea even further, and North Korea is able to emerge out of this relatively unscathed, and slightly more advanced.  Washington really doesn’t have much in terms of energy or resources, or sway to impose more sanctions, and certainly can’t take any military action.  The other question is, will Kim Jong-il feel satisfied with the missile launch, or more emboldened?

The dust is still settling for Israel’s new coalition government.  Prime Minister - designate Benjamin Netanyahu has until the start of April to form his coalition.  He has had no trouble winning over the members of the right-wing, and could continue joining with them with no problem, but Netanyahu promised a balanced government.  He needs either the Likud party or the Kadima party to do that.  

The centrist Kadima party, headed by Tzipi Livni is out of the question.  They won the most seats in February’s election, with 28.  Kadima wants to pursue peace talks with the Palestinians, with a two state resolution on the table.  Ehud Barak’s Labor party wants the same thing.  Although Labor only managed to gather 13 seats, this is the center-left camp that Netanyahu is trying to win over.  Barak himself seems poised to join, arguing that their presence could help facilitate peace talks, but others in his party have no interest in joining Netanyahu.  Probably for the same reason that Kadima doesn’t want to - they would be a nominal part of a passive attempt at a peace process made by a hawkish government.  Netanyahu’s Likud party favors diplomacy with the Palestinians, but has no intention of offering them sovereignty.  His focus would be on their economy and security force.  Considering this is not a viable option for the Palestinians, everything is at stake here with Netanyahu’s government.  If he can’t win over Labor, and is forced to take more members from the right, then prospects for peace are dim.  The far-right party, Yisrael Beiteinu won 15 seats in the election.  Netanyahu already offered the post of Foreign Minister to the party’s leader, Avigdor Lieberman.  With such a nationalist stronghold, could Labor have any influence at all if it chose to jump into the new coalition, or would they just serve their purpose of appearances?  The other issue at stake here is Tehran.  Israel feels that Iran is a serious threat.  They will have elections in June.  We will have to see if Ahmadinejad takes the office of President again, or if a more moderate leader can overtake him.  

The small beautiful island of Sri Lanka has been plagued by fighting since 1983, but the roots of the conflict go back even further.  Sri Lanka is made up of three ethnic groups - the majority Sinhalese, who make up over 70% of the population and control the government, the Tamil, most of whom have lived on Sri Lanka for centuries, but also some are the descendants of the laborers brought by the British during the colonial period, and the Burghers, who are the descendants of the European colonists and the Sri Lankan tribesmen, the Veddhas.  Since Sri Lanka gained it independence in 1948, ethnic tensions have been rising between the Sinhalese and the Tamils.  The Tamils, who have a different language and religion (they are Hindu or Christian, while the Sinhalese made Buddhism the state religion) have felt increasingly alienated.  Over the years they have protested for autonomy.  In 1983 the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam was formed to fight for the independence of the Tamil people.  

Since then, fighting has more or less been on-going, with the Tamil Tigers taking and holding parts of Sri Lanka.  Just this month the fighting has increased.  The Sri Lankan forces took back the village of Elephant Pass, which the Tamil Tigers had for nine years.  Today they announced the takeover of Mullaittivu, a village that the was under rebel control for 12 years.  The Sri Lankan military has been criticized by the international community for its high level of civilian casualties.  

With more than 70,000 people dead, the violence continues.  Journalists and humanitarian aide workers have been banned from the areas where there is heavy fighting.  Just in the past 2 years, 14 journalists have been killed.  Others have left the island for fear of being imprisoned and tortured by the government.  Without the presence of journalists, or an international community such a long-standing ethnic conflict can only get worse.  With the Tamil Tigers acting as a terrorist organization, and the Sri Lankan government in the role of military dictatorship, doesn’t this spell recipe for disaster?  Is this going to be added to the long list of conflicts around the world that we will read about in years to come, that students will say to their teachers - why didn’t anyone do anything?  

One sector is benefiting from the rising unemployment rates - the military.  As jobs dwindle and people aren’t able to support themselves or their families, they are forced to find other options, ones that they wouldn’t normally have chosen.  One of those choices is the military.  Men and women, young, and old are being drawn by the promises of economic security, benefits, and education.  Where years ago we were a nation talking about the possibility of a draft for the unpopular oil wars, today people are lining up to join.  Last year all active-duty and reserve forces met or exceeded their recruitment goals.  That hasn’t happened since 2004.

Pretense along with increased funding for recruiting efforts by the Army and Marine Corps are at play here.  People believe that with Obama stepping into the White House, the likelihood of superfluous combat will decrease.  They reason that they can last the recession/depression in the safety of the military, and then come out on the other end with training and savings, and possibly even an education.  Sounds like a good deal for the desperate, doesn’t it?  

We are all responsible for making our own decisions.  And choosing to join a war effort based on what a recruitment officer, who will be financially compensated for your signature, says, or based on a marketing campaign isn’t the wisest of things to do.  For those who decide to join the oil wars, that is their decision, their right, but wouldn’t it be wise to further investigate such a grave decision?  

Take, for example, the experience of Iraq War Veterans.  The organization, Iraq Veterans Against the War have compiled a fact sheet, the Truth in Recruiting.  According to this fact sheet, the recruiters out there are offering up a host of promises that are not kept, and neglecting to inform possible recruits of, well, the negative statistics.  

One assertion they may make is that, depending on the field you choose, you definitely won’t be sent to Iraq or Afghanistan.  The truth is that the recruitment officers have no say in who is sent.  Personnel from all sectors are pulled to go abroad.  The Marine Corps has even sent band members to Iraq combat missions.  Another is the terms of the contract.  They say you can choose the length of your commitment, a couple years, maybe four…but the truth is that all contracts are for eight years.  Also, the contract only bind you, not the military, so they can change it whenever they want.  This has happened already to 120,000 men and women, who’s contracts were involuntarily extended.  They claim you will be given money for college, but there is a catch.  If you don’t start putting your own money  into your education fund from the day that the military starts paying you, then you are disqualified.  In reality only 5.6% of GI Montgomery Bill recruits use all the money that is said to be available to them.  

So there is the fine print, and then there are also a few bleak stats that anyone considering military service should think about.  Nearly one third of all women report being raped.  One third of all homeless people are veterans.  So for those entering for financial security, think again.  Veterans are twice as likely to commit suicide as everyone else.  

I understand that people have to make certain decisions, but at least make informed ones.  So many people enter the war, and come out of it feeling like a victim.  Or worse yet, don’t come out at all.  

I am really excited about Obama’s pick for the head of the Labor Department - Hilda Solis.  The daughter of two labor immigrants, she is a champion of woman’s issues, Latin issues, immigrant’s rights, worker’s rights, and there’s more, she has a great record with the environment.  She supports a guaranteed health insurance system, cares about woman’s health issues, introduced The Green Jobs Act of 2007, supports Latinos.  So where’s the catch?  There isn’t one.  I think she’s perfect. Some say Obama has sold out already - he did put off rolling back the Bush tax cuts.  He’s been making quite an effort to appease the whining elephants with Republican cabinet picks.  They aren’t the ones that voted for him by the way.  Others say he is just appeasing the right so he can surprise us with his left-wing agenda later on.  I think he’s being more transparent than anyone is giving him credit for.  He’s balancing.  I believe he’s trying to even out the scales of justice.  Maybe he has this theory, that if everything is even, with no side having too much or too little, that that vision of the future, the one we’re all squinting our eyes to hold on to, might just work out.  Maybe he understands, that with this country, everyone’s voice should matter.  That no matter how humanist and open-minded you, and your followers may be, when you’re on top, you always leave somebody out.  And that somebody is going to spend the next four years building his case against you.    Even with Congresswoman Solis, he has balanced her with former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk for the US trade representative pick.  Kirk is a huge proponent of free trade, a fundamental problem for Solis and the Labor unions.  So will Obama’s theory work?  With both Solis and Kirk in key positions, will everyone’s issues be addressed, is there a perfect compromise?  Can Newton’s law of reciprocal actions be proven wrong?  Or will nothing be accomplished.  Will two equal and opposite forces be constantly fighting one another.  2008-12-19 

The planets are shifting, the stock markets plummeting, the ice caps melting, world leaders and organizations are playing musical chairs - is it time for the next phase of humanity?  Are we moving on from the modern, capitalist, commercial world order?  And if so, to what?  Right now, only those who kept up with the arts of astrology and maybe the Quiche day-keepers will have any insight into the far future, but the pivotal question for now is, what will America do?

Can the old red, white, and blue re-invent itself?  Or will it fade into the sea of, well, everybody else.  When you’re in you’re in, but when you’re out, you’re out.  That’s how we do things here isn’t it, with fifteen minutes.   

With our present financial situation, America’s only hold on superpower status is its military, and even that only counts for so much.  We aren’t at the forefront of innovation, the gap between the rich and poor is looking more and more like the third-world, we haven’t been investing in our future (ahem, that’s a cry for help Arne Duncan).  

But what exactly would be the legacy of American culture?  Is there one?  Could it be apple pie and baseball?  Democrafakism?  Please don’t say McDondald’s.  And I beg you even more don’t stay Starbuck’s or Wal-Mart.  

We don’t have one cohesive spiritual or cultural movement to pass on.  We have Evangelists and Atheist pseudo-intellectuals, Burning Man and the Log Cabin Club.  And from the view-point of the all-embracing, I’m glad for all of it, variety, spice, multi-everything.  But I’m still left wondering about the legacy, and America’s ability to transform.  I don’t know what it is we have to hold onto. I know, I know, freedom, and all the other abstract ideals, but where are our awe-striking pyramids, or entire family of languages, or new world religion?  

And here we are now, at the close of 2008, so much wiser and more refined than the peoples and cultures that came before us, right?  With our own president, the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, attacked by a pair of size 10 shoes.  Even President Bush laughed when confronted about the flying shoes.  Why?  Because it wasn’t a dramatic, inspiring, or even maddening event.  It was a joke.

2008-12-17