Monthly Archives: February 2018

“The slow-motion civil war: America’s three-way fight” The Korea Times

The Korea Times

“The slow-motion civil war: America’s three-way fight”

February 10, 2018

Emanuel Pastreich

We are so accustomed to a functional political system in the United States that sets standards for the world that in this transitional period it is quite difficult for many to conceive that massive institutional decay is taking place in Washington, D.C. , that will only accelerate and, if not handled well, risks both global war and domestic conflict far beyond what we have seen so far.

That means we had better get serious about an accurate interpretation of current events in the U.S.or risk having events overwhelm us.FullHouse_Trump

First, we must move beyond the simplistic opposition between conservatives and liberals in American politics. We have to stop trying to shoehorn the contradictory information that we observe into this meaningless dichotomy. The Trump administration is a radical, not a conservative, political movement and its opposition, in that it exists in Washington, is not liberal.

We are witnessing a “three-way fight” in the U.S. that defies assumptions about politics over the past 70 years. A complex battle has reached a peak and it is what has allowed Trump to become president, and to remain in power thus far. Read more of this post

“ ‘빅터 차 미스터리’ 의 해부” 다른백년

다른백년

“‘빅터 차 미스터리’의 해부”

2018년  2월 6일

임마누엘 페스트라이쉬

 

빅터 차(Victor Cha)가 트럼프 백악관과의 논의에서, 북한에 대한 이른바 “코피(bloodynose)” 타격에 관해 우려를 표명했으며  그 결과 주한 미국 대사 후보에서 탈락했다는 내용의 기사와 사설이 한국 주류 언론을 도배하여 왔다.

그러나 지극히 기본적인 조사만 해 보아도 이런 설명의 신빙성이 떨어진다는 점이 드러난다. 또한빅터 차가 세련되고 신망 높은 북한 전문가라는 주장 역시 타당하지 않다.

우선 그는 지난 1년간 완전히 침묵을 지켰다. 미국이 먼저 도발 당하지 않더라도 북한을 (핵무기를포함하여) 공격할 수 있다고 트럼프가 공언하고, 자신의 외교 방식에 따라 여러 조치를 취하면서 국무부를 유명무실하게 만들고 대다수 고위 외교관의 사직 혹은 해고를 불러왔던 지난 1년간 말이다.또한 그는 트럼프가 내뱉은 노골적인 인종주의적 발언과 법무부 권한의 불법적 행사에 관해서도 침묵해왔다.

그러나 실제로 어떤 일이 벌어지고 있는지를 구체적으로 살펴보기 이전에, 트럼프 행정부가 출범한지 1년이 넘도록 주한 미국대사를 임명하지 못했다는 사실의 중대성을 따져보도록 하자. 일부 전문가들은 여전히 공석으로 남아 있는 여타 대사직도 있음을 지적한다. 그러나 사실상 동아시아와 세계 주요국의 대사직은 채워졌다. Read more of this post

“Cracking the Cha mystery” Korea Times

Korea Times

“Cracking the Cha mystery”

Feburary 5, 2018

 

Emanuel Pastreich

 

Korea’s mainstream media have been plastered with articles and editorials that repeat the storyline that Victor Cha expressed concerns about the so-called “bloody nose” strike on North Korea in his talks with the Trump White House and was dropped as a candidate for ambassador to Korea as a result.

But such a narrative does not hold up to even the most elementary scrutiny. Nor does the claim that Victor Cha is an urbane and highly respected expert on North Korea hold much water.

To start with, Cha has been silent over the past year as Trump advocated for an unprovoked (possibly nuclear) attack against North Korea and took numerous steps in his approach to diplomacy that have destroyed the State Department and led most senior diplomats to resign, or be dismissed.

Cha has also been silent regarding the blatantly racist comments made by Trump or other illegal uses of the Department of Justice’s authority.

But before we get into the details of what might actually be going on, let us consider the significance of this failure to appoint an ambassador to South Korea for more than a year after the launch of the administration.

Some pundits note that other ambassadorships remain open, but, in fact, the major positions in East Asia, and the world, have been filled.

Moreover, granted that Trump is talking about North Korea practically every week, saying that it is the most important security issue, the slight is obvious.

The failure to appoint an ambassador, or even to start the nomination procedures at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, should be interpreted as a major insult.

Mysteriously, the Moon administration has been silent about this Lese-majeste. The conservatives, who ought to be standing up for Korea’s sovereignty, are rather attacking the progressives for failure to be blindly loyal to the Trump administration.

In fact, it is the longest time that Korea has been without an American ambassador since Edwin Morgan was sent back to Washington D.C.

Wait a minute ― who is Edwin Morgan?

Well, the last time that we witnessed such a delay in replacing the US ambassador was when Theodore Roosevelt turned a blind eye on the Japanese absorption of the Korean Empire of Emperor Gojong and ordered Secretary of State Elihu Root to telegraph Ambassador Edwin Morgan instructions to “withdraw from Korea and return to the United States” on November 24, l905. The next US ambassador to arrive was John Muccio ― 45 years later.

Korea has not become a colony this time, but its relationship with the U.S. has clearly been downgraded by this action. Moon is being smothered in kind words from Trump about an end to “Korea passing” while Korea was all so politely kicked down the stairs and forced to act like a loyal ally even as tariffs were imposed unilaterally and demands were even made that it follow a security policy in which Korea had no voice in formulating.
Read more of this post

Call for a Global response to the oil spill in the East China Sea

Call for a Global response to the oil spill in the East China Sea

 

The oil spill in the East China Sea is evolving into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever to hit East Asia, and it will destroy much of the fragile ocean ecosystem that we so depend on over the next year. This is happening at a time when we are distracted by North Korea and the decay of government, media and other institutions that we previously counted on to respond to this sort of a crisis. We must quickly reinvent citizenship, Earth Citizenship, and reinvent government, real government, to respond to this crisis. It is also an opportunity for the United States to do something that is actually helpful in the region.

We must immediately draft a long-term plan for a global response to this catastrophe which will engage people at all levels of society in Korea, China, Japan the United States and Southeast Asia so that we can create a team to investigate the crisis according to the scientific method and put forth a long-term strategy for first rebuilding the ecosystem, warning citizens of the region of the dangers and helping those whose careers are destroyed. Working with scientists and other experts we will come up with a long-term system to respond and finally lay down clearly that we will move beyond oil and conquer our addiction to fossil fuels in a short period of 2-5 years. We must also change our culture and our habits so that we move beyond consumption and growth and embrace meaningful lives based on the search for truth and to promote cooperation between citizens of the community at the local, national and global levels.

Finally, we must admit that the expensive hardware that the militaries of the region have procured are useless in addressing this crisis. We must decisively redefine “security” for our time, move beyond the limited and confrontational concept of “alliance” and embrace the United Nations charter once again as we move to transform our militaries into transparent and effective parts of society which respond to the ecological crisis, above all, to climate change.

The Earth Management Institute and the Asia Institute invites all concerned citizens of the world to join us in this effort.

27544761_1571681766248941_2301581744845113371_n

Reference

 

Please contact:

 

Emanuel Pastreich

President

The Earth Management Institute

(Director of the Asia Institute)

epastreich@asia-institute.org

https://www.facebook.com/epastreich

 

 

“比起模仿西方,中国智库更应重视自己的传统” 观察者

观察者

“比起模仿西方,中国智库更应重视自己的传统”

2018年 2月 3日

 

贝一明

 

 

目前智库(think tank)在全世界范围成为政策讨论的核心空间,智库是专家、政府和民间部门代表以及市民讨论社会、经济问题的平台。位于华盛顿的布鲁金斯学会以及传统基金会一直以来以讨论政策的传统而引以自豪。华盛顿既是美国权力中心,又是智库林立的地方,更是国际情报中心,这里每天汇集着来自世界各地的智库机构的研究成果。权力怎么用,重大决策怎样做出,智库发挥着重要的作用。

当我们言及中国智慧的时候,有两个来源不可忽视,一个是来自民间的智慧,一个是中国传统文化的智慧。《尹文子•大道上》曰:“所贵圣人之治,不贵其独治,贵其能与众共治”。圣人有治世之才固然可贵,更可贵的是他能调动大众共同治理国家。

许多中国学者似乎从开始就认为智库本质上是西方的东西,因此在中国建立自己的智库之前,应当不遗余力地对CSIS等华府智库加以模仿。他们认为中国智库需要不加分辨地从模仿西方智库开始,随时间推移,中国智库日趋成熟、日渐完善,自然也就会拥有中国特色。

但这是建立新一代中国智库的最佳方法吗?毫无疑问,倘若我们先入为主地认为先进的智库只存在于西方,中国智库必须以西方智库为榜样,那么就会陷入一种等级观念:中国落后于西方,将自己看作必须效仿发达国家的人群。

中国智库有自身的传统,不应该认为中国智库是全面落后的而需要完全采用西方智库的习惯与模式。看看特朗普时代的美国的乱七八糟政策,中国的行政分明是走在前面,在国家治理方面,中国已经大大超越美国。

明确中国的国家本质后,我们即可将西方智库的方方面面去粗取精。倘若对中国的智库传统不甚了解,我们就很难判断西方智库各个方面孰优孰劣、是利是弊——尽管我们对“西方智库”这一提法时有耳闻。如果我们不清楚中国的需要、中国的传统,就很难评价西方智库哪些是重要的,那些只是表面上很有名气。 Read more of this post

宾大发布权威智库榜单 资深智库专家热议新格局下全球智库的价值和使命 CCG

宾大发布权威智库榜单 资深智库专家热议新格局下全球智库的价值和使命

 

2018年1月30日,全球最具权威性的智库排名报告–美国宾夕法尼亚大学“智库研究项目”(TTCSP)研究编写的《全球智库报告2017》在全球100多个城市的170多个组织盛大发布。亚洲研究所(韩国)所长贝一明教授,清华大学国家战略研究院资深研究员、中国世界经济学会副会长丁一凡,中国发展研究基金会副秘书长、国务院发展研究中心研究员方晋,中国民生银行研究院院长黄剑辉,中国世贸组织研究会副会长、商务部经济研究院原院长霍建国,经济学人集团大中华区总裁刘倩,国家发改委宏观经济研究所处长左传长等智库领袖及专家学者出席发布会并就“新格局下全球智库的价值和使命”进行探讨,发布会由CCG副秘书长苗绿博士主持。


丁一凡

  清华大学国家战略研究院资深研究员、中国世界经济学会副会长丁一凡表示,就目前的全球格局来看,智库现在面临巨大的挑战。首先是世界范围内民粹主义高涨,尤其是在美国。美国总统特朗普在民粹主义的呼声中当选,特朗普对智库不信任,使得现在美国智库的政策建议无法被采纳。其次,在民粹主义高涨的情况下,专家的分析经常被拍砖。智库的权威性受到了极大的挑战。但是值得庆幸的是,中国现在对智库的需求越来越大,领导人也是如此。智库现在在中国呈现爆发式的增长,是因为现在高校都在成立各种各样的研究中心,这些研究中心扮演了重要的智库职能,这也得益于国家的政策。这些研究中心为智库的发展奠定了良好的基础,这是一个新的发展趋势,也证明中国领导人开始重视全球研究,这也是未来智库发展的新基点。

方晋

  中国发展研究基金会副秘书长、国务院发展研究中心研究员方晋强调,民粹主义不仅在美国,在全球,包括在中国都是普遍的发展状态,民粹首先是反制的,反政治精英、反经济精英、反知识精英,所以民粹领导人很可能不会听取专家的意见。但是刚刚也看到了,智库在很多关键的节点为国家和世界做出了卓越的贡献,像是在二战、金融危机等时间点。这恰恰证明智库在越是关键的、转折的危机时期越能体现其作用。民粹主义的兴起,新技术的兴起给全球生产方式、生活方式带来很多的挑战,这个时候更能凸显智库的作用。从另一个角度来说,现在需要关注的是智库能不能坚守自己的研究领域、不忘初心。

苗绿

  对于民粹主义这个问题,CCG副秘书长苗绿博士认为,民粹主义兴起的时代,全球和地区都存在潜在的风险,在这个情况下,智库学者应该更有定力。真正智库不仅仅要研究目前的现状,而且要研究长远的战略性的应对。目前,智库的权威性受到挑战,主要是网络的崛起、知识扁平化以及知识获取容易度的程度的提升这三个方面造成。因此,作为智库,既要有智,又要有库。

贝一明

  亚洲研究所(韩国)所长贝一明则认为,智库虽然是美国战后开始兴起的,但是可以说中国历史悠久,实力雄厚。所以他来中国,不是要宣教美国式的智库,而是要学习中国的长处。所以希望未来能同中国智库加强交流。

霍建国

  中国世贸组织研究会副会长、商务部经济研究院原院长霍建国认为,智库的主要特点是思想性、独立性和科学性。但是在中国,不同的智库可能会服务于不同的领域。首先,库多智少是很明显的现象。全世界是双重问题重叠之后导致的一方面智者也很难把握当前世界风云变化的格局,因为这个世界在变,不仅仅是政治、经济、文化各个方面交错的复杂变化,更关键的是人的思想在变。值得注意的是,一些传统的主流的思想,似乎不断在遭到挑战,但是新的思想又很难形成主流的观念影响大家。现在很多人写点段子就在网上受到热捧,古人云,谣言止于智者,现在也是如此。智者的看法带有社会趋势性,符合社会发展的规律,它是有生命力的。而一些炒作性的语言可能有振奋人心的效果,但没有生命力。在这一点,智者还是应该负起责任的。

刘倩

  经济学人集团大中华区总裁刘倩说到,做好的智库需要三个I,即independence、influence、insight。这三个里面最重要的就是insight,因为越是现代化、节奏快速的时代,越是要把自己的东西做好。因此,influence在很大程度上取决于insight,毕竟insight做好,影响力自然就有了。而independence的意思就是编辑做的东西完全不会受到运营的影响。对智库来说意味着能不能守住底线,毕竟很多资金的支持可能会影响决策。智库一定要做到透明性,说明资金来源和立场,这样公众才会了解一个智库做的内容是不是客观的。

黄剑辉

  中国民生银行研究院院长黄剑辉从新格局的五个层面来分析了智库的价值和使命,这五个层面分别是全球层面,国家层面,地方政府层面,金融机构、工商企业和高校层面以及个人层面。从这五个层面可以看到,智库需要回答的问题还很多。改革开放40周年以后,十九大已经描绘了美好的目标,未来的30年、40年,如何去更好的实现这样的蓝图其实就是智库的使命。

左传长

  国家发改委宏观经济研究所处长左传长表示,在新格局下,现代智库有三大使命,首先,智库应该用建设性的理念来提建议;其次,要解决国内的问题,不能回避;第三大使命就是国际语言的沟通和交流,讲好中国故事。同时,也要加强国际交流,达成共识。

 

“Seven Chinese think tanks ranked among the world’s best”

I had a chance to participate in this extended discussion on the future of think tanks as the director of the Asia Institute which was held in Beijing. The event, which was conducted in Chinese, was hosted by the Center for China and Globalization whose President Wang Huiyao was invited me to join the discussion. See the article below in China Plus.

pastreich at think tank conf beijing 2018.01.30

 

China Plus

January 30, 2018

“Seven Chinese think tanks ranked among the world’s best”

 

http://chinaplus.cri.cn/news/china/9/20180130/84907.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0#

 

Seven Chinese think tanks have been included among the world’s top think tanks in the 2017 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report, published by the Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania.

Wang Huiyao is president of the Center for China and Globalization, one of the Chinese think tanks to make the list.

An advisor to the State Council, Wang Huiyao suggests more think tanks – as well as upgrades to the existing ones – are needed to help the government and the public make informed decisions amid unprecedented economic challenges.

“Think tanks will not survive if they don’t innovate. Think tanks are ‘idea factories’ that can influence’ public policies, which I think is very important. We are not consulting firms. Think tanks are non-profit and are supposed to provide better ideas for the public and the making of public policy.”

 

Ding Yifan is a senior researcher with National Strategy Institute with Tsinghua University.

He says think tanks today are faced with huge challenges amid mounting populist sentiment.

“Think tanks need to find ways to provide rational and comprehensive ideas to decision-makers. Decisions on public policy cover a wide range of aspect. Rational ideas can be hard to accept when there is an explosion of populism. Many global think tanks are faced with just such challenges.”

In China, most think-tanks are backed by the government or run through the country’s university system.

 

And while the rise in social media has seen these institutions faced with a new level immediate public scrutiny for their concepts, Liu Qian head of Greater China for “The Economist,” says its up to these institutions to rise above the noise to provide sound advice to policy makers.

” I think the most important thing for researchers is insight. The development of new media does have an impact on us. But we’ve found that while the public usually notes the latest news on twitter, facebook and other social media outlets, they invariably turn to us to see like what ‘The Economist’ says. In an era of information explosions, we spend a lot of time and energy on doing researches and investigation for a report. Although the public may sometimes be affected by various sentiments, they almost always realize the importance of insight and rational thought.”

 

Selected from a list of over 170 top think tanks around the world, seven Chinese think tanks on the list include China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, which is the best performer, ranking the highest among the Chinese groups on the list at 29.

The report shows the United States has the largest number of think tanks, at over 18-hundred, while China sits second with over 500, followed by the UK and India.