Globalization: Are You In or Are You Out?

In many ways, the benefits afforded by cyberspace are also its most potent fault lines. The ubiquity, anonymity and freedom available in cyberspace furthers many civil liberties. At the same time, the interconnectedness of cyberspace makes it very difficult to regulate, leaving significant portions of the global population, economy and infrastructure vulnerable to abuse.

The common strand within debates relating to the management of cyberspace concerns the difficulty of arriving at a global consensus on rules of the road for this medium. Many conversations on the best way to secure cyberspace are premised on the flawed conflation of the security of the network with the security of the content it hosts. Is it connectivity itself we are securing, or banking transactions, or freedom of expression, or all these elements? Ultimately nations will want both network and data security, but on the specific issue of how content is protected – and indeed, what content is protected – there is bound to be wide divergence among countries.

Source : The global policy journal

A group of 36 Yazidi survivors were recently rescued from ISIL slavery and are being cared for by the United Nations Population Fund with international support. The UNFPA set up various checkpoints to provide women and children with first aid as well as medical, psychological, and legal services. They will be referred to comprehensive women’s centers established by the UNFPA for further treatment.

It is estimated that up to 1,500 women and children are being held captive and potentially exposed to sex slavery by ISIL. The UN acknowledged the Governments of Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, and the United States for the support of the UNFPA’s work.

I think it’s interesting how even markets we would think are separate depend a lot on each other. This article explains how activity in the EU directly affects trade in Asia. Unsurprisingly, France leaving the EU would be bad for Asian markets. A stable EU is good for Asia. Plus, France doesn’t have very strong times with Asia, not in the way that Germany does (with China) and the UK does (with India). So I understand this to mean that without access to the EU, there would be no trade with France, right away at least.

“If you look at trade, it’s more about how a shock in France can have a shock in the EU, then this can have a shock on Asia Pacific – that is the derivative impact on trade,” Mahamoud Islam, an economist for Euler Hermes in Hong Kong.”

I cannot understand that in intercontinental ballistic missile era, why the North Korea still has the strategic value as a”buffer” to Beijing. It might be used as a bargain chip but no more a buffer?

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21721146-donald-trump-grapples-his-trickiest-task-how-deal-worlds-most-dangerous-regime

Israel and China have come to an agreement to bring Chinese construction workers to Israel. However, the Chinese specifically bans their workers from working on West Bank settlements. Israel’s construction in the West Bank settlement is viewed as illegal by the international community. This deal represents the Chinese expanding their influence but also their desire to not be involved in the Israeli-Palestinian affairs.

Interesting perspective on what cattle ranchers stand to lose/gain in future international trade agreements. The US exports more beef than it consumes, and cattle ranchers would like for this to continue. They mostly voted for Trump and appreciate the regulations that Trump has rolled back, but are concerned about how his stance on trade deals will effect their business.

“As a part of TPP, US beef producers who currently face import duties of up to 38.5% on fresh and frozen beef entering Japan would have seen those tariffs phased out over 16 years.”

Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon has called on NATO to modernise its structures in order to make itself faster at dealing with current and future threats, such as terrorism and cyber.

Source http://european-union-news.newslib.com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

London

Today our adversaries are increasingly turning to cyber.

Prime Minister triggers Article 50 and we begin the process of leaving the European Union…we won’t simply be strengthening our Parliamentary sovereignty…retaining control of our borders and our laws…we’ll be becoming an even more Global Britain…standing up for British values and the international-rules based system…alongside our friends and allies.

 

Defence can banish despair in fragile nations. But the Commonwealth can do more than that. It can bring hope. I’ve had the great privilege to see some of the Commonwealth’s work up close. I’ve seen you fighting poverty…to support good governance…to devise innovative solutions to challenge climate change. I’ve see you fighting for people’s right to make a better life.

It seems that in Trump-Xi Summit in Florida, the US and China agreed to pressure the North Korea. This deal between two main powers even reversed Trump’s claim that “China is not a currency manipulator.”

The interesting thing is that, yesterday Russia vetoes UN statement on North Korea’s missile tests, which even China is in favor of. (http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/19/asia/russia-un-veto-north-korea/)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/world/asia/china-north-korea-war.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FXi%20Jinping&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=collection

This article in the Economist thinks that with increasing power China is leaning in and trying to exert its global influence. However, the author believes that selling its own model or talking of “guiding globalization” does not mean China is going to abandon the existing global order or overturning American leadership across the board. China still wants to play the game within the existing system. “It is neither a revolutionary power bent on overthrowing things, nor a usurper, intent on grabbing global control.”

http://www.economist.com/news/china/21719828-xi-jinping-talks-china-solution-without-specifying-what-means-china-challenging