Summer Institute, Week Eight: Libya

As all good things must come to an end, this week marked the last meeting of the Summer Institute. To review all that we had learned over the past weeks, and prepare for meeting Ambassador Gene Cretz, we played a lively game of Jeopardy. Topics included Libya, World Leaders, Ambassador Cretz, former WAC speakers, News Round Up and … the Summer Institute.

Here are some of the clues (answers are at the bottom of the post):

• Libya for $500: A former government official that defected, he is the leader of the National Transition Council.
• World Affairs Council for $500: This is the year the World Affairs Council of Northern California was founded.
• Arab Spring for $300: King Hamad of Bahrain called in soldiers from these two countries to help clamp down on protests.
• World Leaders for $600: Elected to her post last month on the strength of a campaign forged on reconciliation and issues of poverty, her brother was driven from power in a 2006 military coup.
• Summer Institute for $600: This speaker served as Howard Dean’s Domestic Policy Adviser and President Clinton’s Deputy Domestic Policy Adviser.
• Past WAC Guests for $1000:  This US Senator gave a private address to Council members about her policy on Afghanistan in June 2011.

Inside Libya: Remarks with Ambassador Gene Cretz

After Jeopardy, the next big order of business was meeting with US Ambassador Gene Cretz before his public lecture at the Marine’s Memorial Association. Ambassador Cretz spoke to the students both about his experiences in the Foreign Service and being on the ground in Libya as well as his expertise on the country.

Students meeting with Ambassador Cretz

Thank you to everyone who participated in this year’s Summer Institute. It was quite an enjoyable summer and we look forward to seeing you all at future Council events!

Jeopardy answers: Mustafa Abdul Jalil, 1947, Saudi Arabia and UAE, Yingluck Shinawatra of Thailand, Jeremy Ben-Ami, Barbara Boxer. How did you do?

 

Summer Institute, Week Seven: “Israel & Palestine: A Path to Peace”

Map Courtesy of Mideastweb.org

In week seven of the Summer Institute, we returned to the Middle East, this time moving our sights away from the Arab Spring protests engulfing the region to an even more complex and controversial issue: Israeli/ Palestinian conflict. Since the 1967 Six Day War, in which Israel found itself at war with all of its Arab neighbors, it has taken a much greater foothold in the Palestinian territories through blockades in Gaza and settlement construction in the West Bank.

We ultimately decided to tackle the first of these problems in our activity for the day, a crisis simulation entitled “Overcoming the Blockade.” In the fictional situation, the Gaza Strip faced a severe drought, and the Israeli government faced extreme international and domestic pressure to ease its blockade of goods to the Gaza Strip. To learn more about the conditions Gaza faces, please visit this link.

In order to combat the crisis and attempt to improve relations, the students were split into four different teams, comprising Hamas, Fatah, Yisrael Beiteinu and Likud. The first two are the Palestinian-led groups who govern the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, respectively, while the latter two are the Israeli political parties who form the governing coalition.

Right from the start, the differences between the groups were clear: Yisrael Beiteinu and Hamas refused to speak, largely because of their radical stances.  Hamas refuses to recognize Israel while Yisrael Beitenu supports settlement activity and views Hamas strictly as a terrorist organization.

The crisis, however, evolved quickly, forcing the groups into action. First, a spat between North and South Sudan over their co-managed pipeline caused the price of oil to skyrocket, forcing the Israelis to abandon any aid in the form of heating oil. Then a group of Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank took an Israeli family hostage, killing one.

Intelligence and public sentiment also played a role: the groups were forced together by hostile Gazans, who began protesting Hamas’ irreverence in the discussions, and Israelis, who had hoped the talks would lead to more substantive debate over a two-state solution.

As pressure grew for both sides, a shaky ceasefire and peace agreement was drawn up. A prisoner exchange was set up to secure the release of Israeli hostage Gilad Shalit, the Israeli blockade was partially lifted (with plans for it to be fully lifted in the coming years), and the Palestinians agreed to recognize Israel’s right to exist. However, due to Hamas’ failure to maintain control in the Gaza strip, rocket fire into Southern Israel led the Israeli’s to walk away from the peace deal.

Although the students weren’t able to bring peace to the region (perhaps next time), this exercise highlighted the multifaceted, emotional and complicated issues deterring peace in the region.

Public Program

After another short activity, the students joined the sold-out public program to hear Jeremy Ben-Ami speak. As President of J-Street, a liberal pro-Israel lobbying organization, Mr. Ben-Ami spoke about the role of US Jews in promoting the peace process, the Arab Spring, and the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict. He also promoted his new book, A New Voice for Israel.

If you are interested in checking out the World Affairs Council’s program with Jeremy Ben-Ami, please click here.

 

Summer Institute 2011, Week Six (8/4): “Maya Roads: A Journey through the Rainforest”

Week six took the Summer Institute to a place which was, thus far, uncharted territory in our studies. The Petén Department of Guatemala, once at the heart of the Maya Civilization, is currently experiencing deep social, psychological, economic and political tremors, as it has become a key transit area for South American drug traffickers hoping to move their product through Mexico and into the United States. This problem is not just isolated to the urban areas of the country, but it is having ripple effects throughout indigenous communities, who now are forced to deal with the violence and corruption firsthand, while attempting to maintain their way of life.

Similar to other areas, narco-traffickers are able to buy influence from the poor quite readily given the high level of profitability associated with the drug trade.  Traffickers promise roads, new school buildings, parks and soccer fields for the children to play in, as long as citizens cooperate with drug traffickers. Impoverished governments often can do little to reverse this: politicians within their own cabinets often have close ties with the drug trade too.

Students were forced to take all of these factors into account during this week’s activity. Students were divided into groups representing the indigenous peoples of Mexico and Guatemala, as well as the national governments, in order to negotiate a policy to combat the drug trade along the border regions. Complicating an already difficult negotiation, students were also forced to deal with other issues that inevitably impact governments: how would they pay to establish greater border security and how would the groups deal with rampant corruption and international sentiment? Was decriminalization of drugs actually viable?

Ultimately, because of the great rifts that divided the groups, they were unable to come to discrete domestic settlements. However, the activity sparked an interest in drug policy that lead to greater understanding of the challenges facing Latin America.

Meet the Speaker – Mary Jo McConahay

The Participants of the Summer Institute pose with Journalist Mary Jo McConahay, author of "Maya Roads"

After the activity, author and journalist Mary Jo McConahay, who wrote Maya Roads about her experiences living with the indigenous people of Southern Mexico and Northern Guatemala, visited the Summer Institute to speak to the students.

Ms. McConahay fielded questions regarding her experiences as a war correspondent and journalist as well as her expertise in Central America. Students were particularly curious about her experiences as a war correspondent in Guatemala and whether or not she supported decriminalization of narcotics.

After an enjoyable and engaging meet the speaker session, we finished the day with Ms. McConahay’s public lecture at the Council.

To listen to the public program, please click here.

 

Summer Institute 2011 Week Five, Part two: Sports and International Relations

During the second half of the Week Five session, we decided to explore a completely different topic: the role of sports in international relations. To best facilitate this discussion, students each explored a well-known case study. Some were examples of sports acting as a bridge between cultures and peoples, others highlighted sports ability to amplify violence or alternative political agendas. Below are the cases we studied:

Blood in the Water Match: In 1956, the  Hungarian Men’s Water Polo team faced the Soviet Union at the Melbourne Summer Olympic games merely weeks after the Soviets quelled a peaceful demonstration rejecting Soviet influence in Budapest. Many of the Hungarians felt that this match was there only chance to show their defiance towards oppressive Soviet influence.  Click here to learn more about this match or here to watch the trailer for “Freedom’s Fury”, a Quentin Tarantino documentary about the match.

Ping Pong Diplomacy: When a member of the American ping pong team accidentally stumbled onto the Chinese bus, he unknowingly helped open up relations between the two countries. Click here to watch a short clip about ping pong diplomacy.

Munich Massacre: The 1972 Olympic games were supposed to be the “carefree” games; however, the taking, and eventually killing, of members of the Israeli team forever changed security measures at the games. Additionally, it also brought the world’s attention to the plight of the Palestinian people. To learn more about the Munich Massacre click here. To watch the trailer for the documentary “One Day in September,” click here.

Miracle on Ice: The shocking fall of the Soviet ice hockey team to an extremely young and inexperienced US team served to inspire the country during the height of the Cold War. Click here to learn more and here to watch the gripping final seconds of the game.

The 16th Man: Emerging from decades of Apartheid, Nelson Mandela and Springbok Rugby team worked together to heal ages of rift and distrust by hosting and winning the 1995 World Cup. Click here to learn more and here to watch the trailer for “Invictus,” starring Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman.

By looking at these diverse case studies, we recognized the power sport can play in the international arena. In some instances it can be a strong form of public diplomacy, but in others, it can be violent and mimic warfare.

A special thank you to Dr. Tim Sisk, Professor at the University of Denver, for inspiring this lesson!

 

Summer Institute 2011 Week Five: “Battle of the BRICs”

Image Courtesy of Isa Burak GONCA

As there was no public program for the Summer Institute to attend, we decided to explore two different, but equally interesting topics for Week Five’s session.

Battle of the BRICs:

India competes for foreign investment in the "Battle of the BRICs" activity.

Much has been made in the IR community about the phenomenon of the “rise of the rest,” the rapid growth of developing countries in comparison to the United States. This has largely been led by the BRIC countries: Brazil, Russia, India and China, each powers in their own region hoping to extend their reach on the global stage.

Given the competitive nature of this relationship, we decided to put the participants of the World Affairs Council to a test. Dividing the students into BRIC country groups, we challenged the groups to create a proposal to facilitate the creation of numerous factories for the fictitious WidgetCorp, which would in turn create 40,000 jobs and generate $2.1billion of annual revenue for the economy of the winning country. Each group competed to convince the CEO and CFO of Widgetcorp that their country was the best place to invest.  Each team highlighted their country’s strengths in the following categories: governance, labor force, economy, business environment and infrastructure.

Here is how the BRICs stacked up:

CHINA: Widgetcorp was greatly impressed with China’s high growth rate (9.9%), Special Economic Zones, ability to attract Foreign Direct Investment (2nd biggest recipient), and developed infrastructure.  Conversely, China scored low in governance as it is an authoritarian regime.

INDIA: India scored well all around, but could not beat out China for the contract. Widgetcorp was particularly impressed with India’s commitment to democracy, skilled labor force, and energy policy.

RUSSIA: Russia scored highest in business environment as it has a low corporate tax rate of 13%. Widgetcorp was hesitant to invest due to an oil reliant economy and the country’s lower GDP growth rate compared to the rest.

BRAZIL: Widgetcorp was attracted by Brazil’s strong democracy, infrastructure and large internal market; however, the CEO and CFO were reluctant to award Brazil the contract due to a low ranking in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Rankings.

After hearing convincing arguments on all sides, Widgetcorp made the difficult decision to award the lucrative contract to China.

Read more tomorrow about the second half of our session, in which we discussed sports and international relations.

 

Student Ambassador Applications Now Available

As the academic year falls upon us, the Education Program is gearing up for our eighth class of Student Ambassadors.  This program allows high school and college students to dive in to international affairs through research, advocacy and action. Students serve as Ambassadors for one academic year and represent the World Affairs Council in their communities. Besides gaining access to Council programming, Ambassadors work together in Global Issue Groups to identify an international development issue and work to find solutions by raising awareness and involving their communities. Examples of previous projects can be found here. Student Ambassadors also have an opportunity to present their Global Issue projects at the Take Action event at the Council’s annual foreign policy conference.

Student ambassadors will:

• Attend two meetings per month at the World Affairs Council
• Gain access to the Council’s public programing
• Engage with like-minded peers
• Gain leadership, advocacy and project management experience
• Receive a one-year membership to the Council upon successful completion of the program

Applications are due Monday, September 19 at 5:00 PM. They are available on the World Affairs Council website, or simply click Here.

We look forward to receiving your applications!

 

Summer Institute 2011, Week Four (7/21): “Assessing the Arab Spring: A Cairo Perspective”

Source: The Economist

Last week at the Summer Institute, we celebrated the halfway point of our programming calendar in style, as the World Affairs Council of Northern California welcomed Dr. Lisa Anderson, President of the American University in Cairo, which has a campus on the now-famous Tahrir Square.

For the week’s readings, students were required to look at Dr. Anderson’s article from the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs magazine, entitled “Demystifying the Arab Spring: Parsing the Differences between Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya.” Here’s an excerpt from the article:

The important story about the 2011 Arab revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya is not how the globalization of the norms of civic engagement shaped the protesters’ aspirations. Nor is it about how activists used technology to share ideas and tactics. Instead, the critical issue is how and why these ambitions and techniques resonated in their various local contexts. The patterns and demographics of the protests varied widely. The demonstrations in Tunisia spiraled toward the capital from the neglected rural areas, finding common cause with a once powerful but much repressed labor movement. In Egypt, by contrast, urbane and cosmopolitan young people in the major cities organized the uprisings. Meanwhile, in Libya, ragtag bands of armed rebels in the eastern provinces ignited the protests, revealing the tribal and regional cleavages that have beset the country for decades. Although they shared a common call for personal dignity and responsive government, the revolutions across these three countries reflected divergent economic grievances and social dynamics — legacies of their diverse encounters with modern Europe and decades under unique regimes.

In the spirit of Dr. Anderson’s comparative approach, our activity challenged the Summer Institute participants to examine the similarities and differences of the important uprisings of the Arab Spring. We looked at the countries of  Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, and Yemen and answered the following questions about each:

1. Was there a regime change?
2. Was there violence and, if so, to what degree?
3. Who is the current leadership of the country?
4. What is/ was the role of the national military?
5. What was the US reaction?
6. What are the challenges moving forward?

This exercise further convinced us that each country had a unique experience in the Arab Spring.  We hope that those making policy decisions will take this into account as a one-size-fits-all response the Arab Spring will not work.

After this we had the pleasure of hosting Dr. Anderson for a question and answer session before her public program. The students asked a variety of questions drawing upon both her expertise and experiences living through the Arab Spring. One student commented:

I was amazed by how much the country of Egypt was like a community during the uprising. Even when the police disappeared during the height of the protests and it was predicted the country would go into chaos, the opposite was proved true. The citizens of Egypt stepped up to protect their neighborhoods and country. Dr. Anderson explained how in her own community she saw neighborhood watches form, as ordinary citizens stepped up to protect the neighborhood from criminals that may have escaped the prisons.

She was very honest, engaging, and informative in her answers and we thank her again for speaking to us!

Meet the Speaker: Dr. Lisa Anderson

The 2011 Summer Institute Participants pose with Dr. Anderson

After our private Meet-the-Speaker session, we concluded our session by attending the public program. Audio for the speech is available here.

 

Summer Institute 2011, Week Three (7/13): “Migration: A Trip to the Museum of the African Diaspora”

Image Courtesy of The Economist

On July 9th, 2011, the world’s community of nations swelled to 193 members, welcoming South Sudan.

As it is not every day that a new country joins the international community,  we felt it imperative to discuss this noteworthy event. After a brief lecture encompassing the history of Sudan, the students discussed the challenges to South Sudan’s development. South Sudan enters as one of the poorest and most underdeveloped countries in the world; therefore, typical development challenges such as infrastructure, health care, education, and energy needs are predicted to exacerbate the already challenging process of state building. Of particular interest was the role of oil in the country’s future. South Sudan has the majority of oil reserves in the area, but the North has the pipes and coastal access to export it. Quite a predicament, indeed!

To tie South Sudan back the week’s theme of migration, we dove into the topic of internally displaced people (IDPs) and refugees. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Sudan has over 1.6 million IDPs. How will these people return to their homes? What logistical problems does this create? Additionally, Sudan has nearly 400,000 refugees, including the “The Lost Boys of Sudan.” Will they return to an independent South Sudan?

Although South Sudan has many difficult questions to answer on its path to development, its leaders can be comforted by its tremendous oil reserves, a broad flow of remittances into the country from diaspora communities, and the  overwhelming acceptance of African leaders that it has received thus far, including from Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Omar al-Bashir, the current President of Sudan. Both attended independence festivities in Juba on July 9th in a sign of good faith. But will the new nation be able to sustain these relationships with ethnically, culturally, and politically diverse partners?

Students were also asked to reflect upon the greatest challenges facing migrants in leaving their home countries and arriving in the new world. Their responses ranged from conceptual and spiritual to monetary and political. Migrants leaving their home, they noted, may face persecution (political or otherwise), danger in crossing the border, and will likely be forced to relinquish their professional status. Migrants arriving face a different set of challenges, according to the students, including finding a new job, adjusting to cultural norms, and securing legal residency.

Our discussion on Migration was complimented by a visit to the Museum of the African Diaspora, in which students learned about African migration to the Americas through the multimedia exhibits on display.  Students created Caribbean-style rhythms, learned about traditional African-American dishes such as okra and gumbo, and watched videos which depicted the flows of migration and the struggle for civil rights throughout world history, including the stories of Nelson Mandela and Toussaint L’Overture.

In week three we attempted to tackle a very broad subject, which is also a major driver of global affairs today (as we well know in California, where a diverse immigrant community has become an important part of our dynamic community). Sudan is just one piece of the puzzle, but within it, we can find most of the reasons why people choose to leave their homes in the first place: violence, persecution, economic opportunity, and conflict.

Thanks for reading. Be sure to check out our summary of our discussion with Dr. Lisa Anderson, President of the American University in Cairo, regarding the events of the Arab Spring.

 

Summer Institute 2011, Week Two (7/07): “Taiwan: Global Challenges, Local Solutions.”

Image Courtesy of The Lonely Planet

As it turns out, we didn’t have to go far (geographically speaking) from our discussion in the first week to find a topic for the ensuing lesson. However, the significance of the problems we tackled were equally as engaging as those we encountered in the previous week.

In Week Two of the Summer Institute, participants delved into the subject of Taiwan, an island in the South China Sea under Chinese dominion which has nonetheless managed to build its own unique cultural heritage and economy (currently experiencing robust annual growth of 8-10%).

The island has become a stumbling block in Sino-American relations, as the U.S. supplies Taiwan with annual weapons supplies worth more than $6 bn. Because of this impasse, students were challenged to assume the roles of actors on the National Security Council. In an activity called “Rethinking U.S. Foreign Policy towards Taiwan,” a mock session was convened to discuss the relationship between the United States and Taiwan. The teams included the White House, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the Department of Commerce.

The premise was loosely based on (and takes the name from) an article by Foreign Policy magazine columnist Daniel Blumenthal. In a nutshell, here were the objectives we outlined for each team in the simulation:

The White House

– You are the main representative of the President on the National Security Council and will report back to him on the meeting’s outcome. The White House believes Taiwan should remain a facet of U.S. foreign policy in East Asia and thus wishes to continue engaging diplomatically with Taipei.

– You strongly believe that weapons sales quotas should be reduced in order to sustain a strong economic partnership with China. The current number of $6.3 billion (source: World News) is unacceptable and you’d like to see it reduced to no more than $2.7 bn.

– Although you’d prefer not to, you would be willing to support deploying up to 2,000 troops to help train the Taiwanese Army and a logistics support package.

– You do not support a bid for Taiwanese independence. You would be willing to support Taiwan’s ascendance into international organizations, but only as an observer and only if Taiwan specifically asks the United States for its support.

Department of Defense

– You believe that the status quo is unsustainable in East Asian security, as China has recently developed over 150 ballistic sea missiles with a range of over 1,000 miles, as defense spending has risen to 4.3% of GDP (source CIA World Factbook).

– You would be willing to pare down sales from $6.3bn (in 2010) (source: World News) to $2.5bn if you can get your colleagues to agree to the deployment of 2,000 U.S. troops to assist in training of the Taiwanese army, and a comprehensive logistics package.

– You would not support Taiwan’s ascendance into international organizations as full participants. However, you would not object if Taiwan specifically asked to join a non security related UN body as an observer.

Department of State

– You represent the United States in all of its consular and diplomatic endeavors overseas. Washington does not currently recognize Taiwan independently of the People’s Republic of China and does not plan to.

– You support economic activity with both Taiwan and China. Specifically, you are hoping to plan a summit to encourage small business owners to look at Taiwan as a new investment opportunity.

– You support the current status quo on arms sales to Taiwan ($6.3bn worth of weapons in 2010) (source: World News), but would be willing to pare down the commitment if your colleagues agree to allow Taiwan’s ascendancy in international organizations.

– You supported Taiwan as it gained observer status in the World Health Organization, and would like to see it gain similar status in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Department of Commerce

– American business relations with China, in your opinion, are far too valuable to squander and must be protected. This would mean rolling back arms sales to Taiwan; last year’s $6.3bn in sales (source: World News) is simply too risky to be repeated. You would like to see this reduced to $2.5 billion.

– You would be willing to “look the other way” on troop deployment, and logistical support as long as arms sales are reduced.

– You do not support a bid for Taiwanese independence, as it would threaten bilateral commercial activity with China. You would support increased business ties with Taiwan; but strongly believe that any program of this nature should be implemented in China as well.

– You are willing to support Taiwan’s induction into international organizations, but only as an observer and only if Taiwan specifically asks the US.

The Department of Commerce plans their opening statement before the National Security Council

With these issues in mind, the teams began to plan, and issued their opening statements and rebuttals. As expected, the Department of Defense and Department of Commerce brought forth hardline positions for and against, respectively, increased U.S. military ties with Taiwan, while the White House attempted to facilitate the argument on economic grounds, with the Department of State, a more natural ally of DoD in this simulation, remaining largely silent.

As the activity shifted into a moderated caucus, pieces of a deal began to emerge: the United States would cut weapons sales to Taiwan, albeit slightly, in favor of a multi-pronged regional policy that would enable Washington to deliver greater logistical support to Taipei, while deepening economic ties with both nations through global small business conferences, and bilateral tourism and student exchanges, among other concessions.

Cultural Exchange with the Taiwanese Youth Delegation

After finishing up with the activity, we were eager to proceed to the main event of the day: a cultural exchange with our friends from Taiwan’s International Youth Ambassadors program, who we hosted for a meet and greet at the World Affairs Council.

After the Youth Ambassadors were briefed on the history and mission of the World Affairs Council, they came upstairs to give a presentation to the Summer Institute participants and present gifts, including Travel guides and business card holders from the delegation’s University.

Luckily, in our brief time together, the Summer Institute participants and the Taiwanese Youth Delegation were able to touch upon some of the fascinating differences between our two cultures. Particularly noteworthy were culinary customs: the Taiwanese students noted their fondness for the “thousand-year egg,” a raw egg which is buried underground for at least two weeks before being consumed with Tofu, and pig’s blood cake, a dish which foreigners often enjoy before they learn exactly what they are eating. The Summer Institute participants also brought up their fondness for clam chowder in a bread bowl, and enthusiastically recommended that the delegation experience this San Francisco staple before leaving.

Check out USA Today’s Taiwan Travel Tips to learn more about some of the island’s unique cultural traditions.

The Summer Institute Participants and the Taiwanese Youth Delegation smile for the camera

All and all, it was an enjoyable and educational session. We wish the Taiwanese Youth Delegation an enjoyable stay in San Francisco and thank them again for sharing their culture with us!

 

Summer Institute 2011, Week One (6/29): “Japan: Looking Ahead”

Image Courtesy of the Economist.

The Summer Institute got off to an exciting start last week, as our seventeen new students finally joined us to kick off the eight-week program.

After a short logistical discussion we jumped into the fray. Based upon their assigned readings and our discussions, the students were challenged to explore and decide upon the five greatest challenges facing Japan in its journey to reconstruction from the March 11th earthquake and tsunami.

• Economic Development: Citing evidence from Dr. Stephen Vogel, who addressed the Summer Institute participants as part of our “Meet-the-Speaker” Program, Peter Ennis of the Brookings Institution suggests Japan will return to normal levels of growth by the year’s end, but will face challenges in sustaining those prospects in the long-term.
• Infrastructure Recovery: As satellite photos demonstrate, Japan’s basic infrastructure suffered serious injury as a result of the earthquake and tsunami. Japan needs to repair it quickly in order to avoid disruptions in commerce and remain economically vital.
• Psychological Recovery: As The Economist recognizes, the unity of the Japanese people, and the emergence of local governments as major players in the recovery has become a major factor in the success of efforts thus far. However, as students begin to return to school for the first time since the Earthquake, it is clear that the healing of the nation has only begun.
• Nuclear Radiation: In reading assigned for the course, Wade Allison from BBC News notes that the issue of radiation has been overemphasized by the media. However, nobody doubts the severity of the nuclear crisis in Japan.  How much will this crisis affect reconstruction efforts on a whole?
• Political Stability: The resignation of the recently appointed Reconstruction Minister, Ryu Matsumoto, this week, demonstrated that Japan’s  politics remain in turmoil. With Prime Minister Naoto Kan clinging to power in Tokyo, will the standoff between the DPJ and LDP continue to escalate?

Most of the student groups rallied around the issues of Economic Development, Infrastructure Recovery, and Psychological Recovery as the key issues facing Japan in its period of recovery. However, these conclusions were not reached easily, as students had a diversity of well-founded opinions.

Next, Dr. Steven Vogel, Professor of Political Science at the University of California Berkeley, and an expert on the politics of East Asia, stopped by to answer student questions, which ranged on topics from baseball to Dr. Vogel’s experience as a foreign exchange student in Japan.

Finally, Dr. Vogel was joined by Dr. Tsuneo Akaha and Dr. Barnett Baron for the World Affairs Council public program “Japan: Looking ahead.” We encourage you to check out the program recording here.