Should Myanmar Be Invaded?
Published May 15, 2008 International Issue 8 CommentsTags: cyclone disaster, humanitarian relief, Indonesian government, Myanmar
Another catchy headline while I was cleaning my email struck me out. Just out of curiosity, I opened this article titled Is It Time to Invade Burma?
While the article mainly talks about how the government of Myanmar has been rejecting many foreign aid since the disaster struck out and therefore torturing their people by letting a humanitarian crisis continued, I found out that some parts of the article are interesting to comment on. Here it is.
….The trouble is that the Burmese haven’t shown the ability or willingness to deploy the kind of assets needed to deal with a calamity of this scale — and the longer Burma resists offers of help, the more likely it is that the disaster will devolve beyond anyone’s control……That’s why it’s time to consider a more serious option: invading Burma…..
Wow, hey, take it easy there! What is it with American people and their minds?? Now if we have an authoritarian regime in one country and they can just show up and attack the country? Even the UN Charter does not give the Security Council authority to use force for humanitarian purposes.
Without any permission from the legitimate government of a state, even humanitarian intervention violates the principle of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of a state. Armed intervention however justifiable in a strict interpretation only if the problem cannot likely to be contained, thus posing a threat to international peace and security.
….The Bush Administration has so far rejected the idea (of commencing a humanitarian intervention in Myanmar)— “I can’t imagine us going in without the permission of the Myanmar government,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday….
Can’t imagine going in without the permission of Myanmar government? What a polite statement coming from a state who has been doing “intervention” all the time, huh? At least his point was well delivered…
….Retired General William Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations says the U.S. should first pressure China to use its influence over the junta to get them to open up and then supply support to the Thai and Indonesian militaries to carry out relief missions. “We can pay for it — we can provide repair parts to the Indonesians so they can get their Air Force up. We can lend the them two C-130s and let them paint the Indonesian flag on them,”….
Daa..?! Maybe if some ‘bule’ read this statement of Nash, he might think what a poor country we are! We even can’t get our own planes fixed! *is it because of the embargo? probably it is, right?* And then lend us planes and let us paint our flag on it? Don’t we have planes? I don’t know how the other people take this but I personally offended by the statement. I believe that his statement was delivered on a good intention, but maybe our government should also shows them that we have the capability to deliver a humanitarian relief for Myanmar.
Anyone would like to add some more comments on the article? Maybe suggest Indonesia to invade Myanmar?? :p
Yusril & Syaiful Jamil…
Published May 8, 2008 Domestic Issue , Intermezzo , politics 29 CommentsTags: demokrasi, politik, syaiful jamil, yusril ihza mahendra
Kompas.com hari ini memuat satu berita menarik tentang mantan Mensesneg Yusril Ihza Mahendra. Headlinenya, ‘Film Laksamana Cheng Ho, Alat Kampanye Yusril?’.
Sebenarnya berita tentang keikutsertaan Yusril dalam film laksamana Cheng Ho ini sudah cukup lama beredar. Namun rencana peluncuran film di bulan Agustus yang akan datang diartikan sebagian orang sebagai upaya Yusril untuk mendongkrak dukungan terhadap rencana pencalonan dirinya sebagai calon presiden di pemilu 2009 nanti.
Berita tadi membuat saya berpikir, rasa-rasanya semakin mudah saja untuk mencalonkan diri sebagai pejabat di negeri ini. Cukup dengan dikenal orang banyak, kampanye seadanya (cukup dengan dangdut+poster dimana-mana) dan voila! Hampir bisa dipastikan anda akan terpilih! Oh iya, akan lebih membantu kalau anda seorang bintang film/mantan bintang film/berpasangan dengan bintang film… :p
Formula ini telah dibuktikan oleh selebritis lainnya yang telah lebih dulu terpilih sebagai pejabat; sebut saja Rano karno dan Dede Yusuf.
Mungkin itu juga yang terlintas dalam benak seorang Yusril ketika ia menyanggupi untuk memerankan sosok laksamana Cheng Ho, sehingga wajar saja ketika orang berpikir film tersebut akan digunakan sebagai salah satu media kampanye bagi Yusril. Fortunately, Yusril memang memiliki kapabilitas yang cukup untuk mengkampanyekan diri sebagai seorang calon presiden sekalipun.
Lalu bagaimana dengan calon-calon lainnya? Baru-baru ini Syaiful Jamil *untuk yang belum tahu, beliau adalah mantan suami Dewi Persik* mencalonkan diri menjadi wakil walikota Serang, Banten. Mengejutkan! Untuk anda yang belum pernah melihat sosok Syaiful Jamil, mungkin berita ini tidak begitu mengejutkan. Mungkin anda berpikir “loh, ya biarin aja dia nyalonin diri, apa salahnya sih mantan suami artis mencalonkan diri?”
Namun untuk lebih menekankan maksud penulis, berikut ini saya upload salah satu foto dari calon wakil walikota Serang tersebut.
All I’m trying to say is this…demokrasi memang mengakomodasi kebebasan, it is true that we have the freedom, true that we have the so-called ‘universal suffrage’ so that everyone can elect and get elected. namun kebebasan itu juga perlu diberi terms & condition. Terlebih lagi ketika demokrasi semacam ini dijalankan di sebuah negeri yang belum mencapai taraf kedewasaan berpolitik.
Saya ingat kata-kata yang ditulis oleh Michael Jubel di akhir tulisannya, “say no to streotyping”. I’m trying not to. Tidak semua selebriti Indonesia lack of the quality to be a stateman.
And anyway, kalau ternyata Syaiful bisa membuktikan dirinya mampu, why not? Mungkin sayapun bisa berubah pikiran….anyone for him?
Should Cinderella Be Blamed for Being Too Weak?
Published May 5, 2008 Intermezzo 21 CommentsTags: book review, fairy tales, Intermezzo, politics
…Suddenly there was a flash of light, and in front of Cinderella stood a man dressed in loose-fitting, all-cotton clothes and wearing a wide-brimmed hat. At first Cinderella thought he was a Southern lawyer or a bandleader, but he soon put her straight.
“Hello, Cinderella, I am your fairy godperson, or individual deity proxy, if you prefer. So, you want to go to the ball, eh? And bind yourself into the male concept of beauty? Squeeze into some tight-fitting dress that will cut off your circulation? Jam your feet into high-heeled shoes that will ruin your bone structure? Paint your face with chemicals and make-up that have been tested on non-human animals?”
“Oh yes, definitely,” she said in an instant. Her fairy godperson heaved a great sigh and decided to put off her political education till another day. With his magic, he then enveloped Cinderella in a beautiful, bright light and whisked her away to the palace….
Ever read that version of Cinderella?
Continue reading ‘Should Cinderella Be Blamed for Being Too Weak?’
Hollywood Is Now Branding Up the Bad Guy
Published May 5, 2008 Intermezzo , International Issue , Technology 4 CommentsTags: Add new tag, globalization, human rights, internet, Myanmar, Tan Shwe
General Tan Shwe of Myanmar might received a celebrity-like publicity after Hollywood decided to make a human right campaign featuring him—although the campaign described him as a “living-Hitler”.
The video shows Ellen Page of “Juno” giving a short narration to raise peoples awareness for human right while holding a picture of the general. One of her line in the video says “Hitler is living in Burma”. Sounds like a tough strike for the general?
The video is a part of campaign for human rights, planned to be distributed in the internet through social networking site and YouTube.
Here is the link to the original story.
——————————————-
True that in today’s world, among the most powerful and influential forces are the media and the internet. Individuals can make a real changes, world scale, in just one-click away. As a “nettizen”, the more people you can reach at one-click, the more influential you are.
The user-generated contents in websites like YouTube, MySpace or other social-networking sites are changing almost every aspect of our life. You name it. Arts, social, politics, commerce, and many more; none of them are unreachable by the internet.
Thanks to the internet, more and more campaign like this would be helped by the nature of today’s networked world. It is good to have this kind of technological savvy, but as most people says, “technology is a double-sided sword”.
I’m talking about the mentioned campaign. Can it be justified to put a label of “living Hitler” to someone like General Tan Shwe? I mean, I’m not defending the general for his act, but I think it is subjectively unfair to put a label like that in a human right campaign.
One of my friend said that the campaign itself is a “character assassination”. She said, “If Tan Shwe is to blame for his act, what about Bush? They (the campaigner) should put Bush in one of their campaign!”
It made me think that in this information superhighway, it is getting harder for us to get an objective, bias-free perspective. It forces us to work harder to filter all those ‘spams’ of information.
If now Hollywood can labeled up a dictator in a far, foreign country, as a living Hitler, what else would they labelled?
Americans are NOT stupid….NOT
Published May 4, 2008 Uncategorized 5 CommentsTags: american people, stupidity, video
Americans are NOT stupid - WITH SUBTITLES
An old video, but surely entertaining…
Enjoy…
Now It’s Food and Energy, What’s Next?
Published May 3, 2008 Uncategorized 4 CommentsTags: energy crisis, food crisis, international relation issue, security, strategic studies
This post is a short version of my assignment given by Prof. Banyu for his Strategic Studies class.
———————————————————
“It has become cheaper to look for oil on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange than in the ground”
T. Boone Pickens, Jr.
U.S. Business Executive—oil speculator
“Nothing is older to man than his struggle for food.”
Quoted from TIME magazine article
Federal Republic of Iraq: Will It Work?
Published April 30, 2008 International Issue , politics 0 CommentsTags: federalism, international politics, international relations, Iraq
I remember when I was surfing through my email in May 2003 when I saw the picture of President Bush, giving his victory speech over Iraq in the USS Abraham Lincoln. Displayed behind him was a huge, star-and-stripe banner saying “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED”. Now it has been almost exactly five years since the picture was taken. Although the war was officially ended, conflict seems to be continued.
Fixing a shattered Iraq could be at least on the top three list of hardest-task-to-do in the history of US foreign policy; right after managing the cold war and handling Vietnam.
First thing to do is to find, or create the most suitable system of government for Iraq. Requirement: can handle the long-rooted and highly violent conflicting groups of Shia, Sunni and Kurdis. Such system must be uniquely designed to reduce the seeds of conflicts and eliminate the chances for separatism among the conflicting groups. One proposed idea is to federalize Iraq.
Krisis Ekonomi AS: Akankah Berbuntut Resesi Global?
Published March 13, 2008 Uncategorized 12 CommentsTags: ekonomi politik internasional, kasus subprime mortgage, krisis ekonomi, resesi global
*** Artikel ini dimuat di harian Pikiran Rakyat 13 Maret 2008 kolom Opini ***
Jatuhnya perekonomian Amerika Serikat belakangan ini telah memunculkan kekhawatiran akan krisis ekonomi yang berdampak lebih luas dan lebih dalam. Kerugian yang dialami oleh sektor keuangan AS akibat kredit macet sektor perumahan diperkirakan mencapai kisaran 350-600 miliar dollar. Hilangnya kapital dengan jumlah fenomenal tersebut menyebabkan menurunnya angka pertumbuhan ekonomi AS sebagai akibat langsung dari tersendatnya ekonomi sektor riil.
Sebagai langkah darurat, bank sentral AS telah melakukan pemotongan tingkat suku bunga bank sentral sebagai upaya menggerakkan roda ekonomi. Namun langkah ini ternyata dianggap dapat menimbulkan ancaman inflasi. Pilihan dilematis harus segera diputuskan oleh otoritas keuangan AS. Apakah pemotongan tingkat suku bunga tetap akan dijalankan dengan resiko inflasi? Pilihan lainnya adalah langkah rate cuts reversal (mempertahankan atau menaikkan kembali tingkat suku bunga) yang memiliki resiko perlambatan pertumbuhan ekonomi dan berpotensi menyebabkan resesi.
Dalam istilah makroekonomi, resesi berarti penurunan GDP (gross domestic products) suatu negara atau adanya pertumbuhan ekonomi negatif selama dua periode triwulan atau lebih. Jika resesi ini diikuti dengan naiknya harga barang secara umum (inflasi), maka fenomena yang terjadi biasanya disebut sebagai stagflasi. Fenomena resesi biasanya berlangsung singkat dan memiliki periode tertentu. Resesi juga seringkali disebut sebagai kontraksi ekonomi. Namun jika resesi berlangsung cukup lama, maka fenomena yang terjadi akan berkembang menjadi sebuah ‘depresi ekonomi’ (economic depression).
Kekhawatiran akan terjadinya resesi di tahun 2008 ini dipicu oleh beberapa peristiwa penting dalam indikator ekonomi makro AS belakangan ini. Banyak analis memprediksikan bahwa resesi AS akan terjadi di kuarter perrtama tahun 2008 ini. Jika prediksi ini benar-benar terjadi, kemungkinan besar AS akan sulit keluar dari resesi tersebut mengingat tingkat likuiditas yang rendah dan banyaknya kasus kredit macet yang dipicu kasus subprime mortgage baru-baru ini.
Beberapa indikator resesi yang dapat dilihat secara kasat mata saat ini antara lain semakin lemahnya daya serap pasar tenaga kerja di AS, daya beli masyarakat AS yang turun drastis sehingga berpotensi menekan pelaku industri, defisit perdagangan dan government spending AS yang banyak sekali dihabiskan untuk perang, serta kerugian dari kasus kredit macet sektor perumahan yang jumlahnya fenomenal dan mengguncang fondasi ekonomi AS.
Banyak yang pesimis dengan peran The Fed dalam mengatasi krisis keuangan yang terjadi saat ini. Dikatakan bahwa usaha yang dilakukan oleh The Fed adalah sesuatu yang percuma, ‘It’s too little, too late’. Usaha bank sentral dipandang hanya akan menyediakan “lantai” untuk hard landing dan tidak akan mencegah hard landing tersebut.
Yang dikhawatirkan saat ini adalah suplai uang yang begitu besar telah diinjeksikan ke dalam masyarakat melalui tingkat suku bunga rendah dan berbagai program pinjaman pemerintah (bantuan likuiditas). Namun jika modal-modal tersebut dibiarkan begitu saja tanpa digunakan untuk memutar roda aktivitas ekonomi, maka uang yang beredar di masyarakat akan semakin melimpah dan mengendap. Inilah yang berpotensi untuk menciptakan inflasi.
Masalahnya, dengan kondisi perekonomian yang masih labil, kalangan industri dan usaha lainnya enggan untuk mengambil resiko untuk mengembangkan usahanya di saat-saat kritis seperti saat ini. Sebenarnya pemerintah AS telah meng-encourage para pelaku pasar dengan berbagai stimulus ekonomi demi menjalankan kembali perekonomian. Namun masalahnya adalah para pelaku pasar belum dapat percaya pada situasi ekonomi saat ini. Sentimen positif yang ditunggu oleh pemerintah AS tidak juga datang, malah ancaman inflasi yang semakin mengancam mengingat gagalnya berbagai stimulus tersebut.
Lalu mengapa kebijakan moneter AS saat ini dianggap tidak efektif dalam mengatasi krisis keuangan AS saat ini? Ada tiga alasan utama mengapa kebijakan yang dijalankan The Fed dan pemerintah AS belum dapat dikatakan efektif. Yang pertama adalah eksistensi dari non-bank financial system. Atau seringkali disebut sebagai ‘shadow banking system’. Mulai dari institusi hedge funds, pasar modal, sovereign wealth funds, bank-bank investasi dan lainnya. Kelemahan dari shadow banking system ini terletak pada kecenderungan spekulasi yang seringkali mereka lakukan. Tingkat resiko yang tinggi dari aktivitas ekonomi mereka menjadi sebuah ancaman bagi financial recovery yang sedang dijalankan oleh pemerintah AS.
Yang kedua adalah AS tidak hanya ‘terluka’ dari ilikuiditas namun menderita banyak kebangkrutan. Pada kasus tahun 1998, masalahnya hanya terletak pada likuiditas, sehingga kebijakan easy money cukup efektif untuk dilakukan. Saat ini, lebih dari 200 institusi keuangan yang dulu bertindak sebagai mortgage lenders (pemberi pinjaman) telah bangkrut. Krisis kali ini tidak dapat dipecahkan hanya dengan “throw some money at the problem”.
Yang terakhir adalah atmosfir ekonomi yang dipenuhi dengan ketidakpastian; bukan resiko. Resiko dalam aktivitas ekonomi merupakan sesuatu yang bisa diukur dan dapat dikendalikan. Namun ketidakpastian sama sekali tidak dapat diukur dan justru akan merusak aktivitas ekonomi. Ketidakpastian ini berbuntut ketidakpercayaan. Dan akhirnya, suntikan dana yang begitu besar justru tertahan di sistem-sistem perbankan karena pelaku pasar masih takut untuk kembali berinvestasi.
Banyak analis mengatakan bahwa jika AS mengalami soft landing atau berhasil menghindari resesi, maka ekonomi global akan mengalami de-coupling dan tidak akan terlalu terpengaruh oleh kondisi keuangan AS. Namun jika yang terjadi adalah hard landing maka kemungkinan re-coupling akan sangat besar terjadi dan ekonomi dunia akan terseret ikut menuju global economy slowdown.
Pada tahun 2007, AS berhasil meminimalisir dampak sementara dari krisis kredit macet yang menyebabkan kepanikan global. AS dapat dikatakan berhasil melakukan soft landing. Ekonomi dunia pada saat itu pun tidak terpengaruh secara signifikan. Jatuhnya saham global pun berhasil pulih dalam jangka waktu tiga hari hingga seminggu.
Namun prediksi resesi yang akan terjadi di kuarter pertama tahun 2008 nampaknya memiliki potensi untuk menjadi kenyataan. Jelas bahwa krisis ekonomi AS saat ini terjadi tidak hanya disebabkan oleh buruknya pengawasan likuiditas finansial saja. Kebijakan easy money belum akan dapat mengatasi masalah karena yang saat ini menjadi akar masalah adalah atmosfir ketidakpastian dan ketidakpercayaan pelaku usaha untuk kembali menjalankan aktivitas usahanya. Kebijakan moneter baru dapat efektif jika dapat diikuti dengan pemulihan kepercayaan terhadap institusi perbankan dan insitusi pemeringkat yang saat ini dijadikan kambing hitam atas lemahnya safeguard ekonomi AS. Nampaknya dunia memang harus bersiap menghadapi kemungkinan yang terburuk. ***
LOST….
Published February 17, 2008 Domestic Issue , politics 5 CommentsTags: campaign money, dana pemilu, election, kandidat presiden AS, pemilu AS, politics, politik AS, president candidacy
Noo…it’s not the TV show…this is ‘the other’ reality show that we’ve seen a lot in the past months.
Aren’t you curious about what happen with the candidates who have lost the race? Well, here they are…living their happy life by buying an empty island and set up a “Dropped-Out-Candidates” club. Kinda pathetic, huh?
I got this funny political cartoon from TIME’s cartoon-of-the-week. And out of nowhere, a question suddenly came up to me. After they lost their candidacy, what will happen with the rest of the money? Can the candidates keep the rest of the campaign money? If it’s a yes, then buy an island and set up a club like the one in the picture is an option for them, isn’t it? Maybe they could run a travel agency together with the upcoming dropped-out, Hillary and the rest of the Republican candidates…*oops…I revealed my candidate…*
Enough the prologue…so, just out of curiosity, I tried to googled how much money left in the lost-candidates pocket now. You can also check it here.
The first former candidate is Mitt Romney. He raised almost $88.5 million in this race. But poor Romney got $35 million from his own pocket. So I think he’s out of our topic, he got no money left, in fact he’s in debt for $35 million.
What about Giuliani? He managed to raise almost $61 million and “only” spent $48 million before he dropped out of the race. His debt is about $1.2 million and no money from his own pocket. So we can assume that he now have $12 million left from his campaign. Same thing happen with Christopher Dodd (D), Fred Thompson (R) and Bill Richardson (D), although the amount of the money is far away from Giuliani’s cash-on-hand.
Now the remaining question would be: what will happen with this unused money? Can the candidates keep it? Or does it go into the party’s bank account?
After another Googling session, I found out that before 1993, candidates could and did keep unused campaign contributions. Unused campaign funds often transferred into candidate’s personal account. But they also have the freedom to spend it in other ways such as spend it as a contribution for their party or even support other candidate’s campaign.
They can also spend it by donating the money to a nonprofit charity, such as foundation headed by relatives or friends, forming a public agency and funnel the money to it, or even put the money to companies he controls.
Legally speaking, according to Federal Election Commission, there are three options for the candidates who still have unused campaign money. Here it is:
- The candidate is allowed to retain his money for a future election,
- The candidate can donate the money to a non-profit organization of his choosing as long as it has 501 (C) tax status,
- The candidate can donate his money to other campaign committees.
So, even though there is no hope of winning, why some of them keep stay in the race? Why go through all the trouble? I think now we know why….
With a fresh $12 million in your hand, losing an election is not that painful, huh?
Recent Comments