EA says that in Shang Simla, you’ll explore and uncover ancient relics in the Dragon Cave, encounter Terracotta Warriors, kick back and relax in the Serene Scholar’s Garden, snoop around the Marketplace, journey to vibrant and colorful landscapes and most importantly, hone your Martial Arts skills. Phew, think you’re up for all of that?

You’ve got time to rest up before the journey begins November 17, but for now, enjoy these screens and trailer of the places you’ll go!

China was added, amongst other things, for “increasing natural resource-focused diplomacy and military modernization,” while Russia was singed out because, despite a growing partnership with the US on fighting things like nuclear terrorism, “it may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate US interests,” according to the AFP.

The National Intelligence Strategy (NIS), a report released every four years, calls China and Russia “aggressive” in the cyberworld and while the NIS did not explicitly name either countries as a cyber threat, it did outline cause for concern.

“At the tactical level, they are intent on penetrating our critical infrastructure, information systems, and leading industries,” it said, AFP reports. The report went on to recommend the US employ tactical strategies “across the cyber domain to protect critical infrastructure.”

The report also lists Iran and North Korea, unsurprisingly, as parts of its main opposition. It stressed the possibility of further partnerships with China and Russia to help strengthen relationships, however saw no hope of immediate reconciliation with either countries.

“Iran poses an array of challenges to US security objectives in the Middle East and beyond because of its nuclear and missile programs, support of terrorism, and provision of lethal aid to US and coalition adversaries…North Korea continues to threaten peace and security in East Asia because of its sustained pursuit of nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, its transfer of these capabilities to third parties, its erratic behavior, and its large conventional military capability.”

Its assessment of Iran and North Korea was much harsher than of its two newcomers.

The report also highlighted Al-Qaeda as a continuing threat to both Americans and American interests at home and abroad and said the US’ main objective for the next four years will be to enhance “cyber security”, combat extreme terrorism and ensure weapons of mass destruction are not created or bought by any opposing nations.

The promotion and spread of democracy was not listed as a main priority.

Adam Cohn, courtesy Flickr.

Decades of rapid-fire development and lack of government oversight has meant that China now faces some serious environmental challenges. According to research by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, China surpassed the United States as the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases in 2006—and hasn’t looked back. (While the Chinese emit some eight percent more carbon dioxide than their American counterparts, the U.S. still leads the world in greenhouse gas emissions per capita, due to its significantly smaller population size and higher standard of living.)

Beyond its contribution to global warming, China is also a world leader in other forms of pollution, given its huge population and its ambition to become the next international economic superpower. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), current levels of air pollution in China far exceed international environmental standards. A recent analysis found, for example, that the air in some four dozen Chinese cities contained as much as seven times as much particulate pollution—which can get lodged in human lungs and cause a wide range of health problems—as deemed safe by WHO.

But critics say blaming China for its rampant pollution is unfair, given all the manufacturing the world’s developed countries outsource to Chinese companies. Qin Gang, China’s foreign ministry spokesman, refers to China as the “world’s factory” and says: “A lot of what you use, wear and eat is produced in China… “On the one hand, you increase production in China; on the other hand you criticize China on the emission reduction issue.” Yang Ailun of Greenpeace China agrees: “All the West has done is export a great slice of its carbon footprint to China and make China the world’s factory.”

Despite its efforts to go green, China still depends on coal—the dirtiest of all the fossil fuels—for some two-thirds of its energy needs. Chinese officials have strenuously opposed the binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions set by developing countries, arguing that already industrialized nations are to blame for most of the emissions already in the atmosphere.

According to Isabel Hilton, a journalist with the UK’s Guardian, industrialized countries should feel an obligation to shoulder at least some of the burden of helping China become a greener nation. “This means drastically reducing our own emissions and helping China with the finance and technology required to move to a sustainable, low-carbon economic system.”

There is progress afoot: Meetings between top Chinese and U.S. officials earlier this year led to the creation of a joint research center to address issues related to clean energy, with each country contributing $15 million to pay for initial research efforts.

In a last minute change in posture, President Barack Obama recently decided to go to Russia to “reset” the generally confusing political relationship between Russia and the United States.

Outsiders could perceive that the U.S. State Department attitude has been that Russia can be ignored because it is not in the game and is just another distraction for the U.S. This position is a complete and utter rejection of the world of reality which we live in, including the misuse of the word “distraction.” Russia can never be ignored nor should she be. This general Washington attitude about Russia tends to be an unrealistic assumption , and does not consider what the long-term and potential tragic consequences that this idea could render for the international community. A recent media comment stated a realistic assessment as, “Russia is too big of a country to ignore including the fact that European History has been tied to Russia, sometimes with disastrous results.”

As for the Summit, Andrei Klimov, Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma’s Foreign Affairs Commission said prior to the official Summit meeting, “Unfortunately, our agenda contains too many difficult issues; I’ll be surprised if we can solve any of them.” In the Intel World this is considered a very strong position statement. In another confusing statement, President Obama, on Russian TV said, “It (Russia) remains one of the most powerful countries in the world.” If this is true then how can the State Department ignore Russia and consider it as a weak country not worthy of American attention and/or support. Although, on the other hand America does need Russian support for creating a viable European image including the building of much needed political and public support for America.

Thus, at the end of the meeting, the public was told that two agreements were signed. One agreement involving the cutback in nuclear arms to 1,700 warheads per country within seven years. The second, a mutual agreement which gives the U.S. the right to fly over Russia to deliver troops and supplies to Afghanistan. This is estimated to save the United States $133 million in current day fuel costs.

As a conclusion to the meeting President Obama reinforced Russia’s nuclear arms position during his speech at the New Economic School in Moscow when he stated, “President Medvedev and I made progress,” the word progress does not mean resolution “on negotiating a new Treaty that will substantially reduce our warheads and delivery systems. We also renewed our commitment to clean, safe and peaceful nuclear energy, which must be a right for all nations that live up to their responsibilities under the NPT. We also agreed to increase cooperation on nuclear security, which is essential to achieving the goal of securing all vulnerable nuclear material within four years.”

It is interesting to note that both the Russian and American media understanding from summit is that both parties have reached a major breakthrough in terms of limiting nuclear arms to a new low level where nuclear weapons are not considered a threat to any country. This is hard to believe since the U.S. and Russia together have approximately 95% of the world’s nuclear weapons, which the State Department reported in 2009 as 3,909 Russian warheads vs. America’s 5,576 warheads. Are we to believe that this is the primary subject? Or is the real concern, the proliferation of nuclear arms in Iran and North Korea, a problem which neither Russia or the U.S. want to face directly.

A most interesting analysis of the so-called Arms Agreement has been made by Daryl G. Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association when he called the agreement,“An overdue, if very modest, step toward riding each side of obsolete and expensive cold war legacy weapons.” John Bolton added his thoughts when he said,

“The number they are proposing for delivery vehicles is shockingly low.” Aren’t these comments the main objective that both sides really wanted? To initiate a media program in both countries in order to obtain public credit for eliminating old useless nuclear weapons including unreliable missile systems. This agreement does not preclude the fact that the world needs to realize that it still faces large stockpiles of new high performance, multi-headed nuclear weapons and delivery systems? THINK ABOUT IT. Is this a subject Political Intrigue or Reality?

In terms of an overview President Obama made light of the positive cooperation between Russia and the U.S. in assessing the threat of ballistic missiles from other countries. He said, “I’m pleased that President Medvedev and I agreed upon a joint threat assessment of the ballistic missile challenges of the 21st Century, from Iran and North Korea.” As we can see, this was an interesting comment to make considering just three weeks ago, right after the election of Iran’s new president, Russia and Iran both sat at the same table, as official members, at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) annual meeting. At this meeting President Medvedev officially expressed his support of the newly elected Iranian President. It is also interesting to note that the Charter for this organization says its goal is, “To pursue joint security, energy and development goals, including enhanced cooperation against terrorism, Islamist extremism and separatism.” The word “Separatism” is of real concern in terms of Putin’s vision of a new Great Russia. Therefore it is now official that Russia and Iran support each other in their “security efforts” in an organization that rejected the entrance of U.S. as a mere observer status. How will it be that Russia shares the same ideals for security as Iran while supporting the US in a so called, “Joint threat assessment of the ballistic missile challenges?” One answer comes from the Intel World which states from long experience, “All is not what it appears too be.” Only time will answer questions like these. As Peter Baker in the Wall Street Journal recently said, “They made promises of cooperation that ultimately might prove easier to translate into words than reality.”

This current agreement may be reminiscent of similar ones made in the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and G.W. Bush presidencies. In summary it is oblivious that although agreements were reached on the decision to reduce nuclear missiles many issues have been left open as points to agree to disagree. After President Obama’s meeting with Prime Minister Putin President Obama said, “On areas where we disagree, like Georgia, I don’t anticipate a meeting of the minds anytime soon.”

The second day of the meeting involved President Obama meeting with Russian business leaders to stress better economic ties between the United States and Russia. This is a reasonable subject to open, assuming that the U.S. has an economic system to negotiate with. It is also interesting that the Secretary of Commerce was the only person to accompany President Obama to Russia. Secretary Locke’s remarked at the Business Summit that, “Now is the time to further United States and Russian integration with the world economy.” We continue to hear words like “World Economy” not “American Economy.”

Secretary Locke also commented that, “Likewise, we consider it very much in the interest of Russia to further integrate into the world economy. We support Russia’s accession to the World Trade Organization and encourage Russia to pursue opportunities to increase its bilateral trade and investment with the United States as well as other countries.” Russia had been on the waiting list to enter the WTO for several years although the week before the Summit Prime Minister Putin withdrew Russia’s application. This is a key Russian strategy decision which America should not overlook.

The logical question now would be why did Putin remove Russia from the application process only a week before the Summit with the U.S.? Russia is continuing to give conflicting signs of what it wishes to do. Is no one paying any attention to what Putin is saying?

In summary, one question must be asked: will this Summit have the desired effect of starting the so called “reset” of the long troubled relationship between Russia and the United States? Keep in mind that the U.S. won the Cold War and Russia lost. In winning the Cold War we created a “Big Bad Enemy,” which is not going to be subservient to the U.S. In addition, Russia and the United States have very different cultural views with the result of a distorted view of the U.S. which has become embedded in the Russian public. How will Russia overcome this view that it has had of the United States for so long? Will it happen in a few short meetings, years, or ever? Will it be too much to overcome or will we be able to work through them to have two strong countries who no longer fight for power, but instead share and grow from it.

It has been said by many wise men including Julius Caesar that, “Power is the Name of the Game.”

Think about it.

Chinese president Hu Jintao went to Russia during the week of June 15 to meet with President Dmitry Medvedev and Vladimir Putin. The two countries have had an allied relationship for 60 years, although it has grown stronger over the past thirteen years. China has now become Russia’s top trading country, signing energy bills that have a value of $100 billion dollars

No surprise here that top Washington Analysts say Jintao’s visit to Russia was a strong indication of the continued steadfast support between Russia and China on key issues of national sovereignty, national security, and trade issues. The main topic of the visit were the issues of the financial and trade support between China and Russia. At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting China promised $10 billion dollars to Central Asian countries and Russia to help during this current economic turmoil. The leaders of Afghanistan, Iran, India, and Pakistan were also at the table of the SCO meeting.

In terms of history the SCO was founded in 1996 and has annual meetings. The organizations charter says that it “is not an alliance directed against other states and regions and it adheres to the principles of openness.” It is interesting to note that SCO’s goal is to pursue “joint security, energy and development goals, including enhanced cooperation against terrorism, Islamist extremism and separatism” in the Sino-Russian geographical arena. Most interestingly then, the agreement does have teeth in relation to power and can take independent action without waiting for American or UN approval.

Many intelligence analysts believe that SCO was created to counteract NATO and especially the international strength of the United States. This view is strongly reinforced by the fact that in 2005 the United States applied for Observer status in SCO and was rejected. It should be noted though that the SCO has no strict rule for admittance into the organization, expect that the main consideration for entrance into the organization is the shared border consideration. The fact that, technically, the United States and Russia share the Alaskan border via the Pacific Ocean puts questions to why the United States was rejected Observer status. It does seem to hint at strong political reasons are truly behind the rejection.

It has become clear that China and Russia have also agreed to a closer merging of economies trading directly through the Ruble and Yuan, bypassing the US dollar completely from any transaction. Recently both China and Russia have expressed anxiety about the strength of the US dollar and the effect the current recession in the US is having on world markets. China already directly passes over the dollar when trading with Brazil and Argentina. Although these are only minor markets, the decision to trade in common currencies between Russia and China is a major step forward for Russia and China and a major step backwards for the US. Overall though, this trend supports the idea of either a One World Currency or replacement of the US dollar entirely.

A very good academic question can be stated, “But why does it matter and why do we care if Russia and China pass over the dollar in their $100 million dollar energy trade?” American citizens including the large number of college graduates must understand that the US dollar will continue loosing strength and the US economy will continue to loose its influence and control in the international economic and political markets. This means, among other things, it is getting harder for Americans to find job and pay back loans. Students are the ones most at-risk for receiving this one-two punch for years, if not decades to come.

America’s control of international markets can be related to the saying “I have Good News and Bad News.” The Good News has always been the euphoria relating to America’s control of world markets. The Bad News is that American now becomes a Target for what is called “International Trade” in Washington, which is the new silent war against America and its ability to use the dollar as the basis of international trade, which China and Russia have already started to target.

In the future world, America will have a difficult time surviving as the dominant international economy if its economy continues to drag, and other countries continue to trade in bilateral currencies instead of going through the dollar. The dollar will then loose its tradability as a strong and controlling currency.

The current international financial crisis makes it easy for China and Russia to jointly replace the United States as a World Super Power. What America must face is the fact that China is a major exporter and both China and Russia have an extreme strong-hold on natural resources. Thus Russia and China have the ability when working in cooperation to move their interests forward without the United States, and without taking any US interest into consideration. That is bad for us.

Since 1941, Russia and United States have never been cozy bed partners. The last time Russia made it on to the US Media regularly was during the Cold War. The international question being discussed in the high circles of government power now though is, “What will happen when Russia enters the international political scene as a Super Power supported by one of the largest exporters in the world, China?” What will that mean for the United States and the “Quality of Life in America.”

Personally none of us have any desire to see what will happen within the United States if we loose our status as a superpower or even have to compete for it even more with Russia and China. We agree with Top Washington Analysts when they say that the SCO and especially Russia and China need to be watched carefully not only in economic terms but also nuclear weapons including the fact that they have targeted, San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle and Canada, as confirmed by a Washington Analyst.

The women were arrested in March after apparently crossing the China-North Korea border. Some believe the two, who were working on a refugee story for California-based Current TV (led by Al Gore), were arrested on China’s side of the border.

“We are deeply concerned by the reported sentencing of the two American citizen journalists by North Korean authorities, and we are engaged through all possible channels to secure their release,” said a statement from the U.S. State Department.

Many believe North Korea, during this period of increased global tensions as a result of their nuclear and missile testing, are using the two women as “bargaining chips” with the United States.

What bothers me the most about this, and I’m sure the families of Euna Lee and Laura Ling, too, is the certainty that these two women didn’t and probably weren’t even able to commit a grave crime, hostile act or espionage.

They were journalists armed with nothing but cameras and the resolve to file a story for Current TV.

The sentence is more about North Korea being angry with the world because the world is angry with them. They will no doubt use the women as bargaining tokens because they know the U.S., rightfully so, would never allow two of their citizens to be prosecuted and subjected to more than a decade of “reform through labor” in a foreign, unstable nation for no solid reason.

North Korea hasn’t even specified what the supposed “grave crime” and “hostile act” is.

Why? Because the women most likely didn’t do anything grave or hostile.

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is considering sending an envoy to negotiate Lee and Ling’s release over what she calls a “baseless” detention, the BBC reports.

CNN reports senior administration officials are weighing their options, currently thinking about sending former Vice President Al Gore, who leads the independent media company for which Ling and Lee work, or New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who served as ambassador to the UN during the Clinton administration, to negotiate release.

“What we would try to seek would be some kind of political pardon, some kind of a respite from the legal proceedings,” said Richardson, the Taipei Times reports.

North Korea is expected to allow a visit from one of the men, according to CNN.

Humanitarian aid

What can we really offer them that won’t end up hurting us?

Humanitarian aid is perhaps a good option; North Korea is a poor nation. But they’ve routinely put the strength and welfare of their public image above that of their people, something that may again happen. Hopefully not, since they need the aid bad and have repeatedly demanded it when in situations where they have “bargaining chips.”

They closed their nuclear facilities during the six-party talks in exchange for humanitarian aid.

North Korea is  a strong but rusty machine, they never waver, though sometimes weakness emerges from beneath their guise of absolute strength. That weakness is their lack of money.

This isn’t just the U.S.’s problem either, it’s the world’s. It’s really North Korea that has committed the “hostile act” and “grave crime” by thinking this is OK.

We all wish for the safe return of  Euna Lee and Laura Ling. I can’t imagine a situation where the U.S. would allow North Korea to keep them.

You can do your part by signing the petition to Free Euna Lee and Laura Ling, or follow @liberatelaura on Twitter for all developments.

North Korea is part of the Pacific-Asia region, which is also occupied by China, South Korea and Japan. China is the only other nuclear power in the region; however it is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which attempts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. China’s stance on nuclear weaponry has been fairly steady, though the proximity of this nuclear test could spur China to ensure its own nuclear arsenal is operational.

South Korea has been at odds with North Korea since the early 1950s, and the two are technically still at war even though an armistice was signed more than 55 years ago. Their border is the most heavily armed in the world, and the introduction of President Lee-Myung Bak has served to reignite hostility between the two countries. Bak has publicly called for the nuclear disarmament of North Korea, a demand that has angered Kim Jong-Il. But he’s always pretty angry.

The last regional neighbor is Japan, the only country to have ever been subjected to a nuclear attack and a steadfast supporter of all treaties and attempts to de-nuclearize unstable states. According to Al-Jazeera, “analysts fear that if Japan felt pressured into developing nuclear weapons, it would trigger an arms race across the region.” Personally, after the atrocities faced by their people in 1945, I really don’t see any way in which Japan would seriously consider developing a nuclear arsenal.

North Korea hasn’t always been so defiant. It actually ratified the NPT in 1985, but withdrew from the treaty in 2003 after being accused by the U.S. of operating an illegal uranium weapons program, claims that were later said to be misinformed. Since then North Korea has been the subject of the six-party talks, a series of diplomatic sessions between China, the U.S., Japan, Russia, South Korea and North Korea to try and peacefully resolve all security concerns that stemmed from its withdrawal from the NPT.

Three years after the first six-party talks and just one year after admitting it had nuclear weapons, in 2006, North Korea launched seven missiles into the Sea of Japan and conducted an underground test of a nuclear device, citing “hostile U.S. policy” as the main cause. Following the two events, the UN Security Council unanimously agreed to impose economic and diplomatic sanctions on North Korea as a punishment for its defiance.

Soon after, in 2007, talks resumed and North Korea agreed to shut down its nuclear weapons facilities in exchange for fuel oil and the stabilization of international relations between the U.S. and Japan. The sanctions were periodically lifted by the U.S. and other countries as North Korea met certain requirements.

However, in April 2009, North Korea decided to pull out of six-party talks indefinitely after the UN Security Council criticized and labeled what North Korea claimed to be a failed satellite launch as a long-range missile test. The country then banned all international nuclear inspectors and vowed to continue enhancing its nuclear arsenal and technology, something, it seems by the magnitude of yesterday’s blast, it had been doing all along.

North Korea also tested ballistic missiles yesterday, which has incited some panic among civilians who see it as an indication of an impending nuclear attack. However according to several experts North Korea cannot launch a nuclear attack because it has not weaponized its nuclear arsenal.

So while this is a particularly troubling event, let’s see what comes of the UN meeting and what steps the international body will take to ensure this stops now. Hopefully it is, as many are predicting, just a method of compensation by Jong-Il. His health is rumored to be declining so quickly after last year’s stroke that he is already thinking about his replacement.

The favorite? Why, his youngest son, of course.

UPDATE: UN Security Council releases statement unanimously condemning North Korea’s actions. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon “’strongly deplores’ the latest test as a ‘clear and grave’ violation of past resolutions,” CBC reports.

Stick with Blast for developments.

Labelled as a “national shame” by its own prime minister, India’s malnutrition rates are rising during unprecedented economic growth. Perhaps that is the problem, the middle class and rich get richer, while the poor stay poor and in some cases, get even poorer.

Its neighbor, China, is experiencing a similarly remarkable economic advancement. But they’ve used their new money to help reduce malnutrition in several areas, reducing the number of children under the age of five who are suffering from starvation to seven per cent, one of the major forms of measurement of malnutrition.

In India, a shocking 42.5 per cent of children under the age of 5 suffer from malnutrition, a number that reveals a severe governmental failure.

As Somini Sengupta reports in the New York Times, there is no easy explanation for this problem. There are several contributing factors though: a disconnect between a large democratic government and the people who need it most, a lack of money being spent on children’s nutrition programs, and an overall negligent attitude towards health programs.

The Times reports that while India runs the largest child feeding program in the world, the program is severely flawed. India’s soup kitchens set up in low-income neighbourhoods help, but do not provide the nutrition necessary for pregnant women and children under two.

To its credit, India does ensure all children are immunized for preventable disease, however, malnutrition can make one more susceptible to diseases that could be prevented by nutrition. Malnutrition can also hinder development and growth for life, preventing Indian children from reaching their full intellectual and physical potentials.

India has a lot to do to fix its hunger problem, and it won’t happen soon. The first thing would be to make health a top priority among government again. The prime minister calls the situation a ”national shame.” He can begin to reverse the trend, if only he could make his government operate like a democracy that acts on its words.

The man blew a whistle during the speech, causing Jiabao to look up, after which he began yelling. Police escorted the offender out of the hall, however not before he shouted “how can you listen to the lies he’s telling?” into TV cameras. The man, who is not Chinese, also called Jiabao a dictator before he was removed from the hall.

Witnesses describe the man as a “goateed European in his 20s or 30s speaking foreign-accented English.” 

The altercation took place on the final day of Jiabao’s three-day visit to the UK. Jiabao spoke with Prime Minister Gordon Brown about a possible increase in trade between the two countries.

Human rights groups picketed outside the university before the speech, protesting China’s treatment of Tibet.

On a completely unrelated note, I wrote a post yesterday about some sea explorers who uncovered the remains of a 1744 shipwreck in the English Channel. 

Today, I got an email from a woman named Shelley Kapitulik, who works for a PR firm in New York called Trylon SMR. She informed me that the team who uncovered the shipwreck was the subject of a documentary, which caused some stir in the archeology community.

Apparently Odyssey Marine’s methods of exploration raise some ethical questions in the archeology community.

She invited me to give her a call to find out more, which I will. So that’ll be coming soon.

The package would have given $29,000 to each family that lost a child, $4,400 to each family whose child suffered serious kidney ailments and $290 to each family whose child suffered minor health problems, the New York Times reports.

To give you an idea of how much money this is to Chinese families, $290 is about three month’s pay to the average worker in the Communist nation.

Parents said the compensation package, which is financed by 22 dairy companies, was not enough to quell fears that this could possibly happen again. One father even said the money failed to address the medical needs of the sickened children.

“Our biggest demand is not the compensation, but medical treatment and academic research on the influence that melamine will have on the health of our children,” Zhao Lianhai, the father of a 4-year old sickened by the milk, told the New York Times.

I’m happy the parents turned the money down and rejected the attempt to be bought off. Higher standards and more honesty in this sector is exactly what should be asked for. More power to ya, Chinese parents.

Also, some of the executives at the dairy companies could now face life imprisonment. I know revenge isn’t the way to go, and taking joy in others’ shortcomings isn’t the right thing to do, but this feels pretty damn good, and I wasn’t even directly affected by the scandal.

Imagine how the families who were affected feel about that. At least something is going in their direction.

Liu Jianchao, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, said during a press conference that Chinese officials have the right to block websites that violate Chinese law. Apparently the Chinese version of the BBC’s website falls in that category, along with Voice of America and Asiaweek, a Hong-Kong based newspaper.

Jinchao said that China “needs to do the required management of Web sites based on the law, just as what other countries are doing,” according to the New York Times.

Recently, Britain and Australia started limiting the distribution of child pornography over the Internet. Also, Germany requires all search engines to refrain from linking to sites linked to Nazi activity. Because, you know, that’s the same as blocking BBC.

As Rebecca MacKinnon, a specialist in Internet issues at Hong Kong University (whose blog is blocked as well), put it, China has defined crime in a very broad sense. They are offering barely any explanation to the public, which they aren’t really obliged to, since China is ruled by a Communist party.

Personally, I see the point of blocking some of these websites for China, which has been known to tighten Internet regulations during times of political stress or economic instability.   

Obviously those in charge don’t agree with what is being reported/blogged, but as a child of democracy, I think inflicting those opinions upon the people is ridiculous.  

But in the end, for them it’s all about politics. What you don’t see, you don’t know. And what you don’t know, in some cases, makes you blindly happy. Blind happiness isn’t true happiness, but for the rulers, it makes for a more oblivious crowd, the ideal public for a Communist party.

The melamine contamination, which sickened nearly 294,000 infants and hospitalized nearly 52,000, has seriously hindered much of the credibility behind China’s health inspection agencies.  More than 860 infants remain in the hospital, most receiving treatment for kidney problems and urinary-tract infections, according to IHT.

Because of all the controversy, China’s health ministry ordered new regulations for milk production last month.  The regulations will tighten inspection across the board, ensuring an outbreak like this never happens again.

In response to the scandal, U.S. agencies stalled shipments of food products containing milk from China last month, until they could be inspected thoroughly.  The move, though perfectly sane, garnered a strong reaction from Chinese officials.  Like they wouldn’t do the same.

An outbreak of this magnitude starts with negligence.  Whatever the reason for the melamine scandal, it’s something that has been condemned by every nation that took the time to speak about it. Inspecting foods extra carefully is not an act of disrespect toward China, it’s an act of extra caution by U.S. officials. 

Any other move would have provoked a backlash from the American community, especially from parents. The safety of children is much more important than protecting the feelings of another country’s health agencies.

Despite the United States recent economic woes, there is no doubt amongst serious observers that the country is still, by far the most powerful nation in the world. The United States military budget – which, I think it is fair to say, gets quite a bit of use – is astronomical. The U.S. accounts almost half of the world’s military spending, with the FY 2009 budget allocating more than $650 billion. To put this in perspective, the next highest spender is the United Kingdom with just over $50 billion. And the U.S. figures do not count the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan which are paid for with supplemental bills and have cost the nation hundreds of billions more over the last five years.

Further, the world economy, for better or worse (worse is the popular answer in 2008), is directly dependent on the U.S economy. Even though China, for example, continues to grow, they are only able to do so by sending 80 percent of their exports to the U.S. Now, as American consumers are becoming thrifty, or broke (or both), Chinese growth is in trouble.

Russia – China’s partner in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which many see as a blossoming counter to the US and NATO – is now losing out on all the revenues that they were getting from $147 barrels of oil. And this drop in oil occurred, at least in part, due to the massive deflation that has occurred since the US economy really hit the skids in September. Venezuela and Iran, two other oil-rich nations with hostile relations with the U.S, are facing the same problems as oil prices go down.

So why is this relevant to the 2008 election? It is a reminder of how important this election, and American policy in general, is to other parts of the world.

In Israel, for example, the right has expressed fears over an Obama presidency. While Obama has said all of the right things, and spoke in front of AIPAC when he finally won the primary, some in Israel are not sure he will be 1) as aggressive on Iran as a McCain or Bush Administration or 2) as willing to continue America’s unconditional (and totally unique) package in aid, which is at $3 billion, the most in the world. This is why the right started singing the “Obama-is-anti-Israel” tune when McCain fell sharply behind (as did Hillary Clinton when she was gasping for anything at the tail end of the divisive primary, which gives you a sense of how predictably low politicians can go when in trouble).

It is a fairly empty tale. Obama has toed the Party line with Israel, pledging continued and increased aid, and insisting that Iran poses a grave threat, despite the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has said the opposite.

Nonetheless, this election is watched with great interest from the Israeli right. To follow the coverage in Israel, I recommend, Haaretz, which is widely viewed as the “New York Times of Israel.”

Another country that must be watching with watchful eyes in Pakistan, especially given Obama’s expressed a willingness to bomb the country (which President Bush actually did recently).

Interestingly, Iraqis and U.S. soldiers may have less at stake that one might think. While Obama ran in the primary with anti-war rhetoric , his staff has acknowledged to the Wall Street Journal that he will leave around 35 – 45 thousands troops in the country. Given that a similar draw down is likely under a McCain Administration (though the exact timeline could vary), it appears that the War in Iraq will continue in a lesser fashion, no matter who wins. Still, if anyone wants to read an English language Iraqi newspaper, visit Azzaman in English.

Iranians, too, must be watching with great interest. While both McCain and Obama are willing to talk tough on Iran, Obama has a far more moderate (supported by many Republicans from the Bush I days, such as James Baker and Collin Powell) and reasonable stance on engaging in diplomacy. To read Iranian media visit Press TV and the Islamic Republic News Agency (both state-owned, for what its worth).

And of course, every country has a stake in the U.S. economy. As I listed above, the ramifications of the economic crisis are indeed global, and countries have been scrambling with bailout and stimulus packages, request for aid from the (US controlled) International Monetary Fund and the nationalizing of some banks.

Here, world public opinion is clear: Obama is the favorite for most of the world, which has grown deeply skeptical of U.S. economic policies, and gives most of the blame to Republicans.

Some other foreign news outlets:

The Daily Star (Lebanon)

Russia Today (Russia)

The Independent (United Kingdom)

Dar al Hayet (Saudi Arabia )

]]> http://blastmagazine.com/the-news/2008/11/the-world-is-watching/feed/ 0 http://blastmagazine.com/the-blogs/terra/2008/11/chinas-melamine-scandal-continues/ http://blastmagazine.com/the-blogs/terra/2008/11/chinas-melamine-scandal-continues/#comments Sun, 02 Nov 2008 03:35:36 +0000 Sachin Seth http://blastmagazine.com/?p=5019 It seems like it’ll never end.  China’s ongoing melamine investigation has widened to animal feeding supplies, where reports of melamine-contaminated eggs have surfaced.

According to the International Herald Tribune, the melamine eggs has been reported in three different Chinese provinces.  Melamine-tainted products have been blamed for kidney stones and renal failure in infants.

This hurts China’s struggling agriculture industry even more.  It has been crippled ever since the melamine milk outbreak that affected more than 50,000 children, killing at least four.

People everywhere are frantic, concerned about Chinese foods imported directly from China.  Parents in the U.S. are scared that Halloween candy imported from China could be contaminated, IHT reports.

Various cities around the world are calling for further inspection of agricultural food items imported from China.

Honestly, right now you can’t be too careful.  A toxic chemical responsible for tens of thousands of infant sicknesses is terrifying, and inspecting all Chinese agricultural products in further detail is the right move.

Let’s hope this ends soon.

Let’s also hope that this problem hasn’t been going on since December of 2007, like many media outlets have reported.  According to some, Chinese officials concealed the outbreak to make sure the Olympics went off without a hitch.

Last month, for a radio show here in Toronto, I interviewed a Canadian journalist who’s been living in Beijing for a year now.  He told me that he wouldn’t be surprised if the outbreak was purposely concealed because of the importance of the Beijing Olympics to the Chinese government.

Yikes.

Barbara Bachman suffered multiple cuts and stab wounds in the attack the killed her husband, Todd Bachman, the U.S. Olympic Committee announced in a statement.

She underwent eight hours of surgery Saturday afternoon and evening and remains in critical but stable condition at a Beijing hospital where her family, including her son-in-law, U.S. men’s indoor volleyball coach Hugh McCutcheon, and daughter, former olympic athlete Elisabeth Bachman McCutcheon.

The Olympic Committee said McCutcheon would not coach the men’s volleyball team in their opening game again

Todd Bachman was chairman and CEO of Bachman’s, a home store that goes back over 100 years an four generations in the family.

At a press conference Saturday, Dale Bachman, president of the Minnesota company, explained the management structure — brothers and cousins who have lost one.

The U.S. Olympic Committee identified the American killed Saturday in Beijing as Todd Bachman, 62, of Lakeville, Minn., who died after being attacked by an apparently deranged Chinese man who then took his own life.

Bachman was the father-in-law of men’s indoor volleyball head coach Hugh McCutcheon and father of McCutcheon’s wife, 2004 U.S. Olympic women’s indoor volleyball player Elisabeth Bachman McCutcheon, who was with with her father when the attack took place. His wife Barbara, also 62, was seriously injured in the attack and taken to a local hospital with life-treatening injuries.

Elisabeth Bachman McCutcheon was not injured.

“The United States Olympic Committee is saddened to confirm the death of Todd Bachman,” the committee said in a statement Saturday.

The family was touring Beijing’s Drum Tower in Beijing when they were attacked shortly after noon local time. The Chinese state news agency, Xinhua, identified the attacker as Tang Yongming, 47, from the eastern city of Hangzhou. Yongming killed himself by jumping off a second story balcony after the attack.

The Olympic Committee said that the Bachmans were not wearing apparel that identified them as relatives of members of the U.S. Delegation at the time of the attack.

Bachman is the chairman and CEO of Bachman’s Floral, Home and Garden, a popular store in Minnesota.

“It is impossible to describe the depth of our sadness and shock in this tragic hour,” said U.S. Olympic Committee Chairman Peter Ueberroth in the statement. “Our delegation comes to the Games as a family, and when one member of our family suffers a loss, we all grieve with them. Our thoughts, prayers and deepest condolences are with the Bachman and McCutcheon families.”

The US men’s volleyball team plays its first game at 10 p.m. today against Venezuela.

The pair are relatives of a coach for the US Olympic men’s volleyball team.

“They are deeply saddened and shocked,” Darryl Seibel, a spokesman for the U.S. Olympic Committee, said of the volleyball team, the Associated Press is reporting.

The Chinese state news agency, Xinhua, identified the attacker as Tang Yongming, 47, from the eastern city of Hangzhou.

The attack occurred in broad daylight, hours after the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympics and sent shock waves through the region. China is known for its low rate of violence against foreigners due to tight government controls. The government punishes crimes against foreigners more harshly than crimes against other Chinese.

In March, a hostage taker on a bus in Xi’an was shot and killed by a police sniper.

President Bush said he and his wife were saddened by the attack and offered his thoughts and prayers for the families. He said the U.S. government will provide assistance to the family if needed.

U.S. Ambassador Clark T. Randt is said to have visited the surviving female victim at an area hospital.

The State Department has not issued any warnings to Americans in China.

It’s true that China is using the upcoming Beijing Olympics as a sustainability showcase, going so far as to dub the event the “Green Olympics.” Through a partnership with the U.S. government and the Maryland-based International Center for Sustainable Development, China is giving Beijing a green makeover to make the city a model for net zero pollution, green building and sustainable community development.

According to China’s Technology Minister Wan Gang, the Beijing Olympics are expected to generate some 1.2 million tons of carbon dioxide, in large part because of the flying the world’s athletes will do to get to and from the games. To offset these potent greenhouse gases, China will take a series of measures, Wan says, including planting trees, closing 1,000 small coal mines before and during the games and banning up to a million cars from city streets.

Beijing’s Olympic Village, where the Chinese government has been busy erecting dozens of stadiums and other structures according to rigorous green standards, is emerging as quite an example of sustainable community development. The steel-looped Beijing National Stadium, for instance, includes a rainwater collection arrangement, a natural ventilation system and a clear roof with inflatable cushions made from ETFE (Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene), a kind of plastic that increases light and heat penetration.

Another example is the “Water Cube,” a spectacular-looking structure that looks like a building made of bubble-wrap. Officially known as the National Aquatics Center, it is completely surrounded with ETFE pillows and is expected to cut energy use by 30 percent. And when it has finished serving its purpose as an Olympic venue, it has been built to be converted to a shopping area and leisure center with tennis courts, retail outlets, nightclubs and restaurants.

All seven main Olympic stadiums are equipped with solar generators capable of outputting 480 kilowatts of energy at any given moment. Ninety percent of the lighting outside the stadiums, as well as the entire hot water supply for the Olympic Village will be powered by solar energy. Also, the main stadiums will receive power from Beijing’s first wind farm.

While the Olympic Games will only last for two weeks, environmentalists hope the greening of Beijing will indeed continue beyond the summer ‘08. Some proposals include building 14 wastewater treatment facilities to achieve 90 percent treatment rate in Beijing, and extending potable water to the entire city.

Also, the municipal government of Beijing has invested in expensive energy-efficient heating and transportation equipment that will greatly improve environmental quality for decades hence. Beijing, where 1,000 new cars roll onto the streets every day, also plans to source clean energy from other parts of China and through the purchase of pollution offsets on a quickly expanding international market.

CONTACTS: ICSD Beijing 2008 Green Olympics Initiative, www.solarcities.org/beijingolympics.htm; Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, en.beijing2008.cn.

Dear EarthTalk: How is it said that we are “losing winter” because of climate change? It didn’t seem so last winter, when it even snowed in places for the very first time. — Peter Kim, Duxbury, MA

The effects of global warming manifest themselves differently in different locations, and winter is no doubt getting shorter and warmer across New England, the Canadian Maritimes and Northern Europe.

In New England, average winter temperatures have increased 4.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1970. The years 2006 and 1998 were the first and second warmest years on record in the U.S. since we started counting, with the last eight five-year periods the warmest in history. According to the National Climatic Data Center, that warming has been accelerating over the last three decades, from just over a tenth of one degree Fahrenheit per decade to almost a third of a degree now.

By 2100, temperatures in the Northeastern U.S. are predicted to have risen by 8-12 degrees Fahrenheit, with the number of snow days half of what we are used to now. A recent study by the Union of Concerned Scientists on the effects of global warming in the Northeast concluded that, under some scenarios, “Only western Maine is projected to retain a reliable ski season by the end of the century, and only northern New Hampshire would support a snowmobiling season longer than two months.”

And it seems that as one moves farther north, more and more winter is lost. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment of 2004 reported that Arctic temperatures are now rising at nearly twice the rate of the rest of the world (as much as 14 degrees Fahrenheit over the next 100 years), reducing sea ice and melting frozen soils. It’s been widely reported that Alaska’s polar bears are probably doomed by 2050, but the scale of this climatic shift will likely do much more-completely changing the culture of the Arctic.

Global warming impacts are far from monolithic: Some parts of the planet are heating up and others are experiencing colder than average temperatures and record snowfalls, just as climate models predict. But the overall trend is clear: It’s getting warmer, and winter is losing intensity and duration. “If you’ve ever enjoyed ice skating, sledding, skiing, snowboarding or building a snowman, writes E – The Environmental Magazine, you should know that the future of these enshrined institutions is by no means guaranteed.”

Winter’s retreat may be sad for children intent on sledding, but it also augurs badly for the economy, especially for businesses reliant on snow. New England’s ski industry has experienced sharp declines in the number of days their lifts are shuttling people up the mountain. Snowmaking machines, originally intended to just cover any slack left by Mother Nature, now operate to capacity throughout the winter.

And snowmobile manufacturers report a 50 percent drop in sales over the last decade as the number of snow-covered days diminishes. Yet another business casualty is New England’s maple syrup industry, which has been thwarted in recent years by early thaws which have depleted production capacity by as much as 50 percent. According to Tom McCrumm of the Massachusetts Maple Producers Association, there may no longer be a maple sugar industry in New England by 2100.

CONTACTS: National Climatic Data Center, www.ncdc.noaa.gov; Union of Concerned Scientists, www.ucsusa.org; Massachusetts Maple Producers Association, www.massmaple.org.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.