Skip to content

Jan 21

Commercial Space Industry Blasts Off

The federal government’s decision to cut NASA’s funding by over 20% was no doubt one that received much critical response. But that’s old news. What’s new, though, is the resulting stimulation and advancement in the US commercial space industry. In light of their decreased budget, last year NASA discontinued its space shuttle program. However, in order to continue innovative design and advancement in space shuttle development, NASA invested $1.1 billion in three privates space exploration companies: Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), Sierra Nevada Corporation, and The Boeing Company.

NASA’s has two primary goals for distributing these funds. First, it seeks to continue its program for developing US human spaceflight capabilities. Second, because of the budget cuts, NASA is currently relying on Russian spaceships for travel to the International Space Station, where seats per US astronaut are priced at $63 million. With that in mind, funding private shuttle development will hopefully result in commercialized spaceships with cheaper seats for astronauts.

            This privatization of the space industry provides an opportunity to look at how technologies develop differently under state-sponsorship versus private companies. During the Cold War, under state-sponsorship, space technologies were developed at a rapid pace and amazing innovations were made. The government kept pouring money in, and artificial satellites, Apollo missions, and images of the earth resulted. However, today, with the lack of international political competition the urgency to develop new technologies has significantly dropped off. That is not to say that NASA hasn’t been doing great things since then, but the governmental emphasis on space exploration has certainly decreased. And, as a result, when the government found no practical and immediate use for NASA, space innovation suffered.

With commercial space companies now in the spotlight, though, rapid developments are being made with far less funding than what NASA received. Just recently, SpaceX made headlines with its Grasshopper rocket, a vertical take off and land launch vehicle that they aim to develop into shuttle that can launch humans into space, and return to earth full intact. This is an example of the benefits of technological development under the wing of private companies. Commercializing technologies results in products that are cheaper to produce. The Chief of NASA, Charles Bolden, stated, “By investing in American companies and American ingenuity we are spurring commercial companies to deliver more bang for the buck.” This is exactly right. Internal competition among space exploration companies fosters efficient and relatively inexpensive production.

Though it is true that a government-sponsored industry often flourishes at a faster rate than a privatized one (look at supercomputers in China, for example), it is also true that if there isn’t external international competition motivating some sort of technology “race” then that industry will suffer. Commercialization of the space industry in this day and age may actually be more beneficial than a government-funded NASA, as there will always be internal competition motivating further innovation. Watch out world, we may be closer to vacationing on the moon than we think.

 

Neena Kapur is a Sophomore at Tufts University.Image

Dec 12

Greenland’s Climate Change

Amongst the vibrantly colored houses and the ice choked fjords of Greenland lies a distinct problem. While climate change is not a new issue, this coupled with the receding polar ice cap have been steadily destroying Greenlanders’ traditional jobs.  Fishermen are having to travel father and farther north to find the cooler waters that fish prefer. Canneries are shutting down or relocating, leaving thousands of Greenlanders’ jobless. Due to a lack of industry and little or no tourism, the majority of the 57,000 inhabitants rely on jobs that are extremely vulnerable to climate change.

Interestingly enough the Greenlandic government has long relied on a substantial (588 million dollar) yearly subsidy from Denmark, in order to render necessary services to their citizens. Technically Greenland is classified as an semi-autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark and in 2008 nearly 75% of the population voted for a referendum encouraging further steps towards total autonomy. The Greenlandic government viewed this passage as a major step towards independence.  One of the most interesting points included in the referendum was regarding the countries takeover of complete oil and mineral rights from the Danes. For many years companies have been eyeing the immense land mass, looking specifically for oil and rare minerals. Up until now, the ice cap has covered the majority of land rendering mining operations almost impossible. The amount of permits given to mining companies to probe areas for minerals is steadily increasing, with more and more areas being deemed fit for exploitation.

While the Greenlander’s old way of life is slowly being destroyed by climate change, new possibilities are being discovered. With large mining operations come increased revenue for the government and perhaps less of a reliance or all together doing away with of the Danish subsidy. One of the factors holding back immediate mining is the government’s strict stance on the mining of radioactive materials. Many of the deposits of rare metals are intertwined with veins of radioactive materials, slowing preliminary steps. However, experts undoubtedly agree that many millions of tons of ore are hidden under the surface and their exploitation would be very beneficial.

Hopefully the Greenlandic fishermen and hunters will be able to adapt to the mining industry and the influx of foreign workers that are sure to follow. Also with these newly discovered resources comes political leverage on issues that affect the country. Many citizens hope to have the EU’s ban on importing seal skins lifted seeing as there is a backlog of some 300,000 (nearly 5 per person) waiting to be sold. Hopefully these new mining operations will not smother traditional ways of life and the two can go hand in hand.

Turner Willet is a student at Tufts University.

Image

Photo courtesy of National Geographic.

Dec 12

Syria Still A Quagmire

The increasingly complicated situation in Syria recently developed a new element of complexity. As rebel troops battle the forces of Bashar al-Assad across the Syrian countryside and in population centers such as Aleppo, the strength of the civil leadership is being criticized by international leaders, media sources, and the United States. Secretary Hillary Clinton has expressed serious concern over the perceived lack of civilian leadership in Syrian opposition forces. Secretary Clinton highlighted the lack of political diversity in the Syrian National Council (SNC), the group which represents the strongest Syrian civil opposition, stating that the diverse ethnic and religious groups fighting in the armed opposition are not adequately represented in civilian leadership. 
 
Although these concerns may look distracting when seen in context of the constant bloody reports emerging from Syria, the Secretary raises an important concern. SNC is likely to be a leading party in the aftermath of this military struggle. Without adequate civilian representation, Syria risks falling into a country dictated by an ethnic majority or a nation torn apart by factions. Yet as the State Department wishes for better representation, Syrian rebel leaders and international news organizations are warning of possible radicalization of rebel forces. Multiple reports have stated increasing “jihadist elements” and international influence in the conflict. Given this information, the United States may be asking for more than reality can provide. 
 
The Syrian situation offers an unique opportunity to see the mechanisms of statecraft in real time. In this present day test case, students of international relations can see how states use a multitude of foreign policy tools including public diplomacy, private negotiations, economic leverage, and international institutions to secure objectives ranging from the protection of human rights to the creation of a friendly regime. Also, it vividly displays that “international relations” is much more than a collection of state interactions but is a network of tremendously complex realities which play out not in theory but on human bodies.
 
Jacob Clark is a Sophomore at Tufts University. 

Nov 26

Future of Afghanistan

US and NATO troops are set to leave Afghanistan in 2014. After more than a decade of war, this departure comes as a relief to many in the United States, since it will be the first time, in a very long time that our country is not at war. The view in Afghanistan is not so optimistic. The withdrawal of US and NATO forces by 2014 will have a profound effect on the country’s economic and political development. Progress since 2001 has been mixed. While there have been some major achievements such as improvement in basic health and education, Afghanistan remains one of the world’s least developed countries and more than a third of the population live below the poverty line. Although aid, totaling $16 billion for the next four years was pledged at the Tokyo Conference this past summer, there are doubts about what this money will achieve, considering the country’s past. International donors provided $35 billion in aid to Afghanistan between 2001 and 2010, but the return on that investment has been mixed. Prior funding has been linked to corruption, fragmented delivery systems, poor aid effectiveness and weakened governance.

With violence increasing in regional areas of the country outside of Kabul, the renewed growth of the opium trade, and reports daily about Afghan civilians and NATO troops being killed, the future of this country is still up in the air. There are a number of troubling variables that could determine what post-2014 Afghanistan will look like. A peaceful solution with the Taliban has not yet been achieved and their resurgence is palpable. Additionally, institutional rivalries, conflicts over local authority and clashes over Islam in governance have put more pressure on Afghanistan. With these problems, the political challenge of organizing a credible presidential election and transfer of power in 2014 seems all the more daunting. With institutions still weak, and corruption virulent within government, the continued violence and re-emergence of the Taliban make it difficult to be optimistic about Afghanistan’s future.

Photo courtesy of The Guardian

Image

 

 

-Maxine K. Jacobson is a Junior majoring in International Relations.

 

Mar 29

kony_2012_by_ads2142-d4s21oe

Kony 2012 and the “White Savior Industrial Complex”

The legacy of imperialism and a newfound global consciousness in the 20th century has made the idea of trans-national humanitarian impact an issue of much contention and has created an identity crisis in the west about its role in the post-colonial world. The polarity of the debate regarding Kony 2012 has revealed this crisis like no other.

An article critical of the movement by Teju Cole, “The White Savior Industrial Complex” was posted in the Atlantic Online last week and is still among the top five articles receiving the most traffic. It opens with seven tweets previously made by Cole, each a quotable statement bashing the integrity of humanitarian efforts and the west’s attitude towards developing countries. The article continues to bash away, going beyond Kony 2012 and clearly identifying all the wrong reasons for anyone to be an activist or an aid worker in Africa. Cole’s most brutal point is to suggest that NGOs and development organizations have maintained the same attitude as previous Imperialists, “From the colonial project to Out of Africa to The Constant Gardener and Kony 2012, Africa has provided a space onto which white egos can conveniently be projected.” In the 19th century, it was the burden of the Europeans to civilize Africa. In the 21st century, it is the burden of the privileged west to amend for past colonialism . . . by civilizing Africa.

Is Cole being too harsh? Aren’t there people with a good heart who care about global human rights and strive to see a world with more equitable opportunity for all? There probably are, but people need to ask themselves what matters more: The well-being of those they are helping or the ascension of their own status to poverty fighting heroes? This question is very relevant in light of an interview with Jason Russell, co-founder of Invisible Children and narrator of the viral Kony 2012 video. He explains, quite literally, that people in America grow up watching movies with villains and that Joseph Kony is a real world villain that needs to be defeated. If Kony is the villain, what does that make Invisible Children?

But perhaps the discussion of real impact should outweigh that of personal motivation. Despite personal reasons for getting involved in a particular cause, it is a good thing that people are being made aware of the issues and are taking responsibility for their fellow man. As quoted in Cole’s article, the prominent journalist Nick Kristof commented on the “savior” question, “it seems even more uncomfortable to think that we as white Americans should not intervene in a humanitarian disaster because the victims are of a different skin color.” Clearly, his judgment is weighed towards impact.

The problem with this, however, is that the more weight you put on impact, the less time you devote to reflecting on your actions. With less reflection, one’s motivations become streamlined into something simplistic and without substance. This can be dangerous because personal motivation is a key determinant of what real impact is going to look like. If the true motivation is personal gain and heroism, then the activist is far less likely to get his or her hands dirty into the complex issues that allow Joseph Konys to be bred and children to be vulnerable to abduction. In reality, the line between who creates problems, who the victim is, and who at the end of the day emerges as the savior is far more blurred than Russell’s Hollywood analogy.

It is fair to say that the mass awareness of a thug like Kony is a good way to put pressure on policy makers whose job it is to get their hands dirty and do something. But this makes people comfortable solely with the satisfaction that they have been part of an effort to instigate a change in policy that they ultimately have little say in and won’t necessarily lead to a better situation. People should really think about their motivations and relate them to what it means for actually helping others. This way, people will adopt a way of thinking that works with complexity, a necessary step in tackling the issues and letting go of false “good guys” and “bad guys” constructs of the world.

 

-  Shehryar Nabi is a sophomore majoring in History

Mar 1

Breaching the “Great Firewall of China”

Internet users in China temporarily slipped passed web censorship via Google+ and performed a mass spamming of President Obama’s wall, showering it with Chinese characters. Despite the hilarity of this situation, the posts themselves make an important statement. According to MSNBC, the posters made comments critical of China’s internet controls. One poster went all out against the government, “It is important to persistently let the world know about CCP’s evil deeds against China and Chinese people”. Global awareness of discontent within China is exactly what the Chinese censors fear.  Read more

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.