Ismail Fan's blog

Meltdown? (hint: not in Fukushima)

My heart goes out to anyone who is affected by the recent calamity in Japan. I will keep you in my prayers. I would also like to express my admiration for the way that the earthquake survivors have conducted themselves in the face of seemingly insuperable difficulties. You have shown the world the true meaning of dignity and perseverance and personally you have inspired me, to cherish the life that I have and to live in the moment while remembering that there is greatness even in the most fragile of souls (Photograph: AP/Kyodo News).

What has engendered a lot of trepidation in the global community after the Sendai earthquake is of course the possibility of a nuclear meltdown in any one of the Fukushima power stations. This doomsday scenario was still very gently hinted on major news media immediately following the tsunami and always delivered with reassurances from prominent scientists on its improbability. But soon after the explosion at Unit 1 took place, reality seemed to have set in. Nobody is pretending or trying to persuade their viewers anymore that a meltdown is a far-fetched idea. Here in Taiwan, the news media, staying true to their inquisitive nature, went a step further by asking: what are the ramifications for Taiwan if the meltdown is to occur?

One nuclear scientist was quick to point out that the radioactive cloud would more than likely be carried over by the trade wind and enshroud most of the northern part of the country. This was when I really started to pay attention, not just because on top of the cancer-inducing smog one has to endure living in the city everyday now there is the prospect of a fresh boost of radioactivity in the mix, but also because the memory of the uproar against building a fourth nuclear power station on the island is still so vivid in my mind. In fact, in the city of Taipei, there surrounds three nuclear power stations and like Japan, Taiwan is also an earthquake-prone country, situated slightly off the Pacific Ring of Fire.

So what gives? The option of trying to find a balance, so to speak, between energy consumption and growth is not available, at least to an export-oriented economy like Taiwan, which is consisted mainly of highly polluting and power-hungry electronics manufacturing and chemical processing industries. The keyword is "growth". How do we define growth? More importantly, where do we want our growth to come from?

With meagre natural resources, an ageing population, and a health care system forecast to go bankcrupt in the not-so-distant future, the only thing Taiwan has got going for it seems to be its people. We are the Georgia of Southeast Asia but whereas war-torn Georgia is starting to realise the importance of human capital, Taiwan remains a hapless victim of self-denial. I read that it takes a combination of things to cause a nuclear meltdown, poor construction, pressure built-up, insufficient cooling, just to name a few. Wouldn't you agree that it is probably the same for a "societal meltdown"?

A startling revelation on the New York Times: "In the case of Saturday’s blast, experts said that problem was avoidable."

Only if it had been done sooner.

Paradoxes

 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

It has been more than two months since the death of Mohamed Bouazizi and the start of the popular uprisings against home grown dictators all over the Middle East. The toppling of the Ben Ali and Mubarak regimes should certainly be greeted with elation as it yet again opens up a fissure for real democracy for the Arab states since the end of European colonisation. However, there are some who watch warily as their allies are being overwhelmed by their rebellious subjects one after another.

 

Amidst the trepidations in Washington and no less so in Israel towards these unforeseen developments, there are two important observations that can be made:

Paradox of Security

Successive American administrations after the Second World War have chosen to pursue national security by propping up autocratic regimes in states considered to be strategic in the fight against the Soviet Union. This approach had backfired disastrously in some cases, such as in Vietnam, but in view of the fact that the Cold War did end with the U.S. prevailing over the U.S.S.R., most people would be hard-pressed to say that this policy has failed entirely. The problem is that after the Cold War, while countries like the Republic of Korea and Japan have transformed into maturing democracies with American assistance, Arab states still remain languishing under ruthless dictatorships backed by Washington. The sinister assumption underlying the continuous application of this policy by the U.S. seems to be that the Arabs are unfit for democracy by their very nature hence American interests can only be maintained where they reside through their suppression.

 

The paradox resulting from this Weltanschauung lies in the short-term attainment of security in oil supply and for Israel has spawned the long-term threat of extremism and radical Islamism. More importantly, Washington’s support for dictators who spurn democratisation and improvement of human rights for their own people has inevitably propelled the belief that democracy will never take root in the Middle East into becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. The toxic environment in domestic U.S. politics post-global financial crisis has unfortunately exacerbated this type of short-sightedness since Democrats and Republicans alike are now more than ever eager to make electoral gains through divisive rhetoric and quick fixes.

Paradox of History

The more we learn about people the more we realise that people never learn. The 1979 Revolution in Iran forced the Washington-backed Shah to abdicate and fled the country. Both Saddam Hussein and the U.S. at the time had wanted a piece of Iran for similar reasons, the former oil reserves and the latter continuous access to what comes out of those reserves. One would surely have to be surprised if the causes of the widespread discontentment that led to the Revolution were seriously deliberated in the inner circle of the Reagan administration because in the end it became simply a matter of replacing one pro-U.S. puppet with another in the Persian Gulf, i.e. Muhammad Reza Pahlavi with Saddam Hussein. Even though the White Revolution can at best be described as well-intentioned, it was an imposition nonetheless rather the outcome of democratic processes. In terms of human suffering, it has not only increased after Saddam gained Washington’s backing but sharply so due to the ensuing Iran-Iraq War which the U.S. helped foment and intensify.

After 9-11, it has become clear that decades of Washington’s meddling in the Middle East helped produce a monster in Islamic extremism. Under the rule of Washington-backed despots, living conditions of the citizenry range from deplorable to intolerable with little hope for the future. Not without a sense of irony though, this in part explains why anti-West fear-mongering has worked so well for the likes of Mubarak, Gaddafi and Saleh in holding on to power and controlling their people. Viewing in this light, the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt represent a seismic change in the Arab general public’s epistemology towards the West as a symbol and as an idea. In other words, they finally understood the game and with that understanding are able to muster their collective will to seize control of their own collective destiny – the pro-democracy protestors have already scored a victory by demonstrating to the world that Egypt can stand together as one.

Support Wikipedia and Knowledge

I Wonder

He said he's living in the epicentre,
climbing the social ladder...
How long will it take, I wonder?

Trade in youth for that piece of paper,
laughters for some fleeting numbers, is it worth the effort, I wonder?

Where will you be forty years later?
Catching your breath at a lonely corner or
sharing a heartfelt smile with
your friends
and lover?
I wonder.

Health of America

My constant fear every time I am in the U.S. either for business or for pleasure is that I would end up so sick that I would have to deal with its notorious health care system. This perhaps explains why I never venture so far south that I wouldn't be able to get back to Hockey Land within a day's trip. Imaginably, the passing of the health care reform bill doesn't alleviate a foreigner's somewhat idiosyncratic phobia too much but I, like many others who take socialised health care for granted, watch the unfolding of events on Capitol Hill in recent months with great interest.

It is Time to Pass Health Care Reform

From a citizen's standpoint, this bill is a triumph for social justice. As has been reiterated ad nauseam on news media for years, the U.S. is the only developed country in the West that did not provide universal health coverage to its citizens (save those in Massachusetts). This bill will finally close that gap between the working middle class and the nonworking poor, for the employed poor who have neither health insurance from their employers nor coverage through Medicaid. These are the people who are most vulnerable to a sudden setback in their health and those who can easily find their lifesavings in jeopardy because of exorbitant medical fees. For a society to claim that it is just, it simply cannot leave some 50 million people uninsured and languishing in the bowels of helplessness.

For the U.S. as a country, the health care reform should be just the beginning. What we are witnessing is likely to be the incipient period of rejuvenation and rehabilitation of a wearied superpower under heavy financial burden and critical military overstretch. Obama, being the worldly person that he is, knows that in order for the U.S. to stay competitive in a globalised world, it must look inward as well as out. Despite producing nearly a quarter of the world's economic output, the U.S. has been showing signs of imperial decay - its Interstate Highway System is half a century old and in deplorable condition, its PISA scores in Mathematics and in Science is only slightly ahead of Italy and Slovakia respectively, and its broadband services are experiencing growth pain both in bandwidth and in land coverage, indirectly limiting innovation and growth. Obama has made clear that improving on these areas are his priorities while in office but his reforms won't pay immediate political dividends either for him or his party since results of these reforms won't likely manifest for a decade or longer.

Globally, Obama's domestic reform agenda signals a more multilateralist US foreign policy in the foreseeable future. Part of this new identity is by choice - Obama is known for his propensity for consensus-building - but part of it is dictated by realistic constraint as well. Being at the epicentre of the global financial upheaval, the U.S. is still feeling its aftershocks. The government will find it increasingly difficult to fund education reform and infrastructure upgrade with its coffer, which is being sucked dry by two ongoing wars. The most likely outcome therefore is a weakening of American influence in less strategically important regions such as East and Southeast Asia where China has gradually expanded its clout through bilateral FTAs and the ASEAN+3 framework.

In the Middle East, however, exactly because of the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there will most certainly be a renewed focus in the peace efforts between the Israelis and Palestinians. The are three main reason: Firstly, the passing of a historic bill had given the Obama administration some much needed confidence and leverage against naysayers and detractors at home. Secondly, an escalation of violence in the Holy Land flies in the face of Obama's vision of a nuclear-free world because it galvanises the nationalist-fundamentalist elements within the Iranian government and boosts the country's nuclear ambition. Thirdly, despite what Prime Minister Netanyahu would have you believe, the settlement expansion is endangering American lives as it undermines any sort of legitimacy the American government has in Afghanistan and in propping up the Karzai regime, which in turn plays into the hands of the Taliban. It is quite possible that if a more centralist coalition emerges in Israel, we could see a breakthrough before 2012.

Minarets

A building is more than a building; it represents ideas, symbols, and histories. After all, it is the product of the human mind and because of this, it has the potential to be highly emotive, as attested by the recent minaret controversy in Switzerland. To begin a discussion on minarets however, we must first talk about the centrepiece, the masjid.

Although the masjid's main function is to accommodate daily prayers and Jumu'ah, the Friday prayer, as enjoined by the religion of Islam on Muslims, its roles are in practice much more variegated, invariably blending the sacred with the profane. Besides being a place of worship, the masjid serves as a place of learning, with the madrasa usually embedded or attached, and as a place of ceremonial and communal gatherings on important occasions. In a few cases, it has also supplanted the hospital as a medical facility. Moreover, the presence of a steady and predictable flow of masjid-goers attracts commercial activities to its vicinity, cementing its place as the nerve centre of a Muslim community.

The appearance of the masjid has evolved through the millennia by taking on indigenous elements and its diversity is a reflection of the religion's followers themselves. Cross-fertilisation between Islamic and Christian architectures has been especially common through a mixture of benevolent exchanges and bloody conquests. Al-Andalus is replete with such examples, first under the Caliphate of Córdoba and later the Nasrid dynasty, and its artistic influence has endured well beyond its epoch. Similarly, the Byzantium influence on the Ottoman masjids cannot be understated. The ancient buildings in Istanbul are testaments to this great synergy of art and technology in the heyday of the Empire.

Hagia Sophia

The minaret controversy in Switzerland is as much about psychology as it is about politics. Minarets, used to give the call to prayer, have become something of an adornment with the advent of loudspeakers. The problem lies in how minarets are being perceived differently by the Swiss citizens who voted no in the referendum and the Muslim community in Switzerland. For the former, minarets undoubtedly represent a symbol of political Islam, whose tenets are deemed incompatible with fundamental democratic values. For the latter, although Islam does not stipulate the building of minarets for the masjid, minarets are as much the embodiment of cultural and religious identities as the masjid resembles a castle that provides peace and security in a hostile land.

Is there room for compromise at all?

It is interesting to note that while the controversy is raging on in Switzerland, half way around the world in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world, is near its completion. A skyscraper with Islamic architectural elements such as the dome, the Burj Khalifa reminds us that the West still holds a certain appeal to the Muslim world and that there is still possibility for dialogue. The crux is both parties need to realise the outward is only a manifestation of what is within - a building is emotive not because of its physicality but rather its discursive power. Islam, like any other great religions, is at its strongest when it doesn't recoil from changes and when fear doesn't reign supreme.

WorldMUN 2010 Poem

WorldMUN 2010

Rules of Procedure can be fun, so long as you're not too dumb;
whether it's one half, two-thirds for a pass, just remember to do it fast.

So now you have the motion, why is there such a commotion?
No! They want another caucus, that's why they're acting raucous.
Quickly with the voting and another round of roll calling.

It's midnight. After countless PP, piles of WP, and a overheating laptop made by HP.
Finally! Here comes the DR,
a semblance of closure.
Intangible
peace
EVER
CLOSER.

The Almost Ten Percent

The plight of the Roma people in Eastern and Southern Europe has been well known and well documented but what was neglect and apathy of the general population seems to have transformed into something much more sinister in recent years — acquiescence towards aggression of a few but determined extremists. The rise of the Jobbik and far-right politics in Hungary is a snapshot of what has been happening all over Europe, and how the global financial crisis has exacerbated ethnic tension in many parts of the world. Visible minorities, who usually lack political clout and tend to be less favourably positioned to deal with an economic downturn to begin with, often have to bear the brunt of the general public's anger and frustration as in the case of the incident in Odz, Hungary. Since the Roma are not really the cause of this economic downturn and most of them lack the skill and education to compete with regular Hungarians in the job market, it begs the question: why the rising hatred for the Roma who has been in Hungary for centuries?

Ethnic tension rises for Hungary's Roma minority - 2 Sept 09

To answer this question, we can perhaps explore the underlying fear of Hungarians in the context of European integration. Firstly, Hungary's linguistic distinctiveness in one way contributes to the sense of isolation. Its history, replete with conflicts with its Slavic and Germanic neighbours, doubtlessly encourages a siege mentality, especially during the time of crisis. I once heard a Hungarian jokingly said that the reason the suicide rate in Hungary is the highest in the world is because they are a landlocked country in a crowded Europe with no one they can communicate with. Despite said in jest, it in some ways captures the Hungarian angst quite lucidly. Secondly, in an ever more integrated Europe, a mid-sized country like Hungary is seeing its culture and language being increasingly marginalised and diminished in significance. This is exactly the type of fear that the Jobbik and other far-right parties are exploiting, portraying the EU as an existential threat to Hungary rather than a united political and economic front. Lastly, the rapid growth in domestic Roma population obviously is not helping alleviate the sense of encroachment.

The ethnic situation in Hungary is interesting in its numerical nature — the fact that the Roma is approaching 10% of its population by estimation. If one looks at the demographics in South Africa (Whites) and Taiwan (Mainlanders), countries where ethnic bloodshed had occurred before, a 10-90 minority-majority pattern emerges. Perhaps this is a plain coincidence but it could also be suggested that the 10-90 pattern signifies a sort of equilibrium and a psychological tipping point. An equilibrium because a minority at 10% may be economically strong enough to be relatively self-sustaining in language and culture (Afrikaan and Mandarin, respectively), for example, in ensuring the continuous operation of its own radio stations, TV stations and the staffing of these cultural institutions. In the same vein, a minority edging on 10% may constitute a psychological tipping point or an impending 'threat', so to speak, to the majority, who realise that a self-sustaining and numerically significant entity is in the cards.

In an increasingly globalised world, identity politics has become ever more dominant. The Jobbik and other far-right parties should realise that minorities are there to stay and the best policy is one that focuses on how best to integrate them into the mainstream society and let them have a stake in shaping their future. If the Jobbik supporters see Hungary as being marginalised by the EU, then it is not right for them to replace one marginalisation with another, since it is not only self-contradictory, but self-defeating by further weakening the country. So the questions now are perhaps: What does it mean to be Hungarian? What are the Hungarian ideals? These are difficult questions but ones that must be answered for the future of this nation.
   

The Human and the Beast

Set in modern day London, Eastern Promises stars Viggo Mortensen as Nikolai Luzhin, a driver for the Russian Mafia Vory, and Naomi Watt as Anna Khitrova，a midwife. Their improbable encounter was set in motion by the diary of a fourteen-year-old Russian girl, Tatiana, who died while giving birth in the hospital where Anna worked. Determined to find the whereabouts of Tatiana's family before the baby girl was to be sent to an orphanage, Anna managed to track down Semyon, played by Armin Mueller-Stahl, the owner of Trans-Siberian Restaurant, whose business card laid amidst Anna's belongings. Initially aloof yet polite, Semyon became eerily enthusiastic upon learning the existence of the diary and even volunteered to help translate it.

It turned out that Semyon was in fact the leader the Russian Mafia Vory and was desperately trying to protect from the law both himself and his slightly erratic and emotional son, Kiril, played by Vincent Cassel, who had raped Tatiana. The diary and the baby girl's DNA not only were incriminating to Kiril but could also expose the Mafia's involvement in human trafficking. Meanwhile, a war in the underworld is raging between the Vory and its rival Chechen gangs with a couple of Chechen mobsters arriving at London seeking to avenge their brother's death, a hit ordered by Kiril not too long ago. All too aware of the Chechen ways, Semyon hatched up a plan where Nikolai would be offered as the sacrificial lamb for Kiril, who had just become cognizant of the existence of the baby girl.

"Eastern Promises" - Trailer #2

Violence is depicted in all its visceral and gory details in Eastern Promises but rather than the glorification of it, Director David Cronenberg seems to have intended it as the embodiment of human essence. On one level, violence is a manifestation of our bestiality and our instinct to survive, as exemplified by Kiril's masterminding the coldblooded murder of his Chechen enemy and the Chechens' equally cruel retaliation on the hapless Nikolai. On another level, however, such simplistic reading of violence is quickly overturned. Semyon turned against Nikolai out of his love for his son and his desire to protect him. Semyon, being the calculating type that he was, of course understood that Kiril, a much less competent and reliable leader, could put the whole Vory in danger if he was to succeed him. Lastly, we shan't forget either that it was rooted in brotherly love that the Chechens sought a gruesome revenge.

Moral ambiguity is a major theme in the film and it is embodied by Mortensen's character, Nikolai, whose true identity is that of a Scotland Yard informer on the Russian Mafia's criminal activities in London. Midway through the film, he fell victim to Kiril's alcohol abuse and was coerced into performing sexual intercourse with a young girl in order to prove his heterosexuality. Mortensen expertly acted the scene, showing the inner struggle of Nikolai in victimising the very person he sought to protect. Paradoxically, although very much a violent and remoreseless beast, even on Kiril, it seems a vestige of humanity lingered - the inner struggle between humanity and bestiality reached its climax when Kiril found the baby girl and planned to drown her to save himself. Cassel deserves plaudits for his portrayal of Kiril and for making the rare display of tenderness from a ruthless thug looked effortless.

Eastern Promises represents a departure from a Darwinian view of violence central in Cronenbergy's previous film A History of Violence. In Eastern Promises, violence is not just a means to survival but also a means to achieve higher virtues like ambition and love. Nikolai had certainly achieved his ambition by outmaneuvering Semyon and Kiril and usurping the Vory leadership, hence dealing a death blow to the detested Russian traffickers. However, this was accomplished at an enormous cost of his ever seeing Anna again. Nikolai's choosing ambition over love hints at the truism that real violence is one that occurs within us, with our myriad of primal impulses struggling to gain primacy underneath the veneer of civility and sanity, much like the scene where Kiril was discussing the Chechen murder against the backdrop of sumptuous festivity and conviviality.

Physical and Cultural Spaces

Access to physical space manifests in human societies as a fundamental right. We need "space" to live, to learn and to interact with others. Unfortunately, space on Earth is finite and with scarcity comes competition, which invariably leads to bloody conflicts. In fact, most if not all human conflicts can be attributed, one way or another, to fight over "living space". One significant aspect of Peace of Westphalia, for example, is that it defined political boundaries. A defined boundary helped give substance to the idea of sovereignty. Now instead of a symbolic scepter or regalia, power becomes just that bit more tangible to its beholders.

The concept of physical space applies to ethnic tension as well. We know from slavery in the United States and apartheid in South Africa that the separation of physical space is a key to delineate access to resources. The act of segregation also demonstrates power and aversion. All these elements come into play in the clash between the  immigrant population, many of whom Muslims, and locals in Europe. Denmark is obviously embroiled in it as well. Danish Hell's Angels see Denmark as the living space for Danes. It's not enough that immigrants are sequestered in their pitiful ghettoised neighbourhoods but they must conform to the "Danish" norms, becoming Danish so to speak.

"What does it mean to be Danish?" A question that is probably on the minds of many Norberro residents. By asking this question, they're adding another layer to the concept of physical space, the cultural space. The gang wars in Norberro are in fact a struggle for the power to define - who gets to define what type of activities are acceptable in the fringe of Copenhaggen? We've moved from the material realm to the spiritual realm. This opens up a fissure, a hopeful one, since the spiritual realm is always more malleable than the material one. Once people are put in a shared physical space, there will inevitably be interactions, be them peaceful or bestial. Perhaps there will be a fusion of identities, fifty or a hundred years from now, in the country called Denmark.

I once had a Danish friend remarked to me that there's no ghettos or unemployment in her country. I was left puzzled. Perhaps I misunderstood her. But if I didn't, she may have the most dangerous form of segregation of all, a segregation in the mind.