UN Peacekeeping... Hindrance?

The UN's biggest peacekeeping project right now is the Congo, but really, they're not that productive or helpful. At best, their successes are marginal. The mandate keeping 19,000 soldiers in the Congo expires in a few weeks according to Jeffrey Gettleman's article, but there is a lot of hesitation about whether or not it should be renewed. Much of the issue comes from the nature of the Congolese army, and their inclination to fight against the UN, and subsequently killl many civilians. So, that poses the question, is it better for the UN to stay out and save civilian lives, or be marginally successful (which is better than not successful at all) and have some lives taken??? It's all a matter of opinion I suppose because either way it seems as though the war isn't going anywhere.

Is Globalization actually Westernization by a different name?

NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. Globalization is not a gift to the world- Love, the West. As of lately, the West has seemed to benefit from globalization, however, who's to say that won't change. Amartya Sen makes the point that "over thousands of years, globalization has contributed to the progress of the world through travel, trade, migration, spread of cultural influences, and dissemination of knowledge and understanding" (pg 19). She acknowledges that fact that globalization has been taking place for thousands of years. It is NOT a recent phenomena. She also points out that, there are very significant parts of globalization which did not originate anywhere near the West. We simply choose to focus on Western influences. Sen further distinguishes that a thousand years ago, China was the only nation in the world to use gunpowder, a crossbow, the magnetic compass, and many more things. So, was that easternization? No. When something is proven successful, it is in human nature for others to copy that. At that time period, Asia was making significant progress which spread across the world. Now, its the West's turn. That's all. It's not Westernization, it truely is globalization.

DRC- One of the World's Richest Nations with the Poorest Internal Track record.

Within the Congo, you can find some of the world's last unpolluted rain forests, the potential for a perfect source of clean energy, some of the most fertile land on the earth, and riches that seem to sprout from the ground. However, this country has been unable to capitalize on any of these God-given gifts, due to a poor government structure, according to Greg Mill's article for the Christian Scientist Monitor.

Mill's argues that it is the government's fault for it's unfortunate track record. He brings up valid points such as the lack of infrastructure and inability to utilize the land to produce enough food to feed the country, but even the simplest things to grow (such as wheat for flour) are imported, jacking up prices and making it difficult for the average Congolese family to get by, let alone thrive. I completely agree with most of his points. More specifically, I completely agree with his example of misplaced priorities dealing with the government trading $50 million worth of minerals for $6 million in Chinese infrastructure. This is a pretty extreme case of globalization gone wrong, but nonetheless, this nation is opting for foreign goods and subsequently hindering the nations ability to grow and develop into not only a nation that could be self-sufficient, but also a nation that could potentially be a positive influence on our global economy.

I agree that this is indeed the government's fault. They are not acting in the best interest of the people as they should be, and the people are the one's paying the price. However, Mill's seems to be content with just telling this government what they should do, but the problem lies in the fact that this conflict and dysfunction has been an issue for decades. The Congo has been told these things before. I almost feel that in order for this to be beneficial, someone needs to show them how it's done. In a non-invasive, peaceful way... if that's even possible of course.

"The Case Against the West" Response

After reading Kishore Mahbubani's article called "The Case Against the West" I began wondering what America's role in the world really is today. Many would argue that we are a hindrance while others would argue that we are only seeking to help the greater good. I would argue that both are true to a certain extent. Mahbubani seems to believe that America is overbearing and presumptuous. And while I agree with that in some scenarios, I don't think it would be accurate to apply it to all scenarios or even as many as Mahbubani claims.

I agree with Mahbubani's arguement that America needs to back off a majority of the world's problems. We can no longer assume the problems of the world when we have such large problems at home. America can no longer be the world's police force. We have passed our golden age and now it's time to pass the torch. Asia's economy is booming and they are quickly catching up to America and other Western powers. For this reason, we need to back off and let history progress.

War in the Congo is called worst conflict of the decade

Strategypage.com is a website that keeps up to date on global military happenings. In retrospect they covered some of the largest conflicts from the past ten years including Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, and Korea. However, despite this agressively packed list, the author calls the war in the Congo "the worst conflict of the decade, with over four million dead."

I just found this!