Month: April 2016

To what extent is poor governance responsible for the increasing insecurity in many countries today?

Prime Minister of Singapore, Mr Lee Hsien Loong, once said, “Leadership is key,” and this was one of the four guiding principles in which he believed would lead to good governance. It is true; governments require people with great intellect and leadership to run a country effectively. That said, the reverse is also very true as well: a poorly run country is due to poor governance that stems from poor leadership. Poor governance also leads to a whole host of problems that will threaten the security of not just that one country, but also every single country in the world. This security refers to not just one’s safety from wars and gunfight, but also secure in terms of sustaining one’s life, being able to roam about knowing you have a job and a stable flow of income, as well as knowing that you would not have someone crazy shouting “Allahu Akbar!” then blowing himself up. As such, I would feel strongly for poor governance being largely responsible for the increasing insecurities in many countries today.

A sign of poor governance is clearly seen from a failing economy, in which comes from ineffective leadership and is completely responsible for the increasing uncertainty of one’s job prospect. A person’s employment status is mainly due to the health of the economy, in which the more flourishing the economy is, the more jobs citizens would have; vice versa, there can also be massive unemployment when the economy fails, as evidently shown in the Great Depression back in the 1930s, as well as the 2008 US Subprime Crisis that occurred not too long ago. A country’s citizens would lose their jobs if a country were to experience a recession, in which the government would then need to attempt rectify it, by spending its government reserves in attempts to start the recovery process. It might sound like the government is doing something to help the people, but it is not the case when the government does not have a thorough understanding of the economy, whether certain options are appropriate or not. The government would have completely failed their job if the country’s economy is unable to recover after so many years; just look at Greece! Their economy has stagnated for such a long time and they owe such huge debts, and even after being bailed out several times, the situation remains as such. This is clearly the government’s ineffectiveness in helping the country recover, and the one’s suffering the most is the people as they would have to live with the rising insecurities of not having a job or fear of losing their jobs if they have one. Hence, the government is very responsible for their own insecurities.

Also, governments are also clearly the ones who are responsible when it comes to the extreme suffering of its people, when their people are uncertain their own lives and fate. People, who are experiencing poverty, do not have access to a constant supply of food and water with some not even a shelter over their heads. A person is considered to be in absolute poverty if he or she lives on under US$1.90 a day, and it is a really miserable amount compared to most of us in affluent societies. It is undeniable that these countries experiencing poverty are receiving help, it is clearly seen that these countries are experiencing poverty even with international help. This would then raise questions about whether the aid received is actually delivered to the citizens, and who is the prime suspect? Without a doubt, it is the government. The government is the first to receive help, as they are expected to distribute it to its people so that their lives can be improved. However, this expectation is not a reality in many cases; for example, Ethiopia receives so much support that almost 90% of their government spending is funded by international aid, but a vast majority of their population is still experiencing poverty. This would be obviously due to corruption going on in the government, as the government is free to usurp as much as it wants. Who is there to check and stop the government? As such, the government is clearly to be blamed, and they are the ones mainly responsible for the suffering of its people due to poverty, due to corruption that leads to poor governance.

However, sometimes an unstable situation in a country may not be completely due to the government itself, as they might not be able to control what is happening hence some might posit that the government is not responsible for the ever growing threat of attacks. When it comes to security in terms of one’s physical safety, a government is obviously a main protector. However, a government can only control what occurs within the country, and not what comes in from other countries. The increasingly globalized world today gives terrorism an easier passport to create chaos in many countries. Terror groups are usually developed and grown under the radar of the government, as evidently seen by the spew of terror groups that have appeared over the last few decades. Governments are unable to deal with them as these groups are just so elusive. The terror groups then carry out their attacks not just in their own country, but also in foreign countries as well. In the case of the Paris attacks in November 2015, the French government is obviously not at fault, as they are neither belligerent nor incapable. The group responsible for the attacks was the Islamic State or more commonly known as ISIS; they came from Iraq and Syria, in which they were able to develop and was also due to poor governance, but rather foreign intervention. In Syria, ISIS was able to rise due to the falling significance and power of their president Bashar al-Assad, which was due to the United States oppressing him. As such, it was not due to poor governance that led to these terror groups rising, but rather it was due to uncoordinated intervention efforts by other countries. Therefore, poor governance is said to be not responsible.

Even though it can be said that foreign intervention led to these rising insecurities, and not poor governance, the very fact that foreign intervention was needed shows that the government was somewhat incapable, hence poor governance is responsible for the rising insecurities. The requirement of countries coming in to help in terms of military aid would already show that the government is ineffective in terms of managing internal conflicts. This would be even more so when foreign military involvement is for the purpose of going against the incumbent government, supporting the people that have been unhappy with government. One responsibility of the government is to take care of the well-being of its citizens and to keep them happy and prosperous. This may not occur in some countries, in which the ineffective government, laden with only thoughts of fulfilling their own personal desires, does not care for its people at all. These governments turn to authoritarian governance, which seeks to completely rule its people. However, try as they might, there is always a possibility of an uprising, that would lead to a civil war. This would be prominently shown in what happened in South Sudan, where the authoritarian government was taken down after fighting against its people during the Arab Spring. What comes after that was even worse, where an attempted democracy for its government did not work out well, and resulted in more civil wars. These fightings claim the lives of not just those directly involved, but also innocent ones, due to the indiscriminate bombings and shootings. These innocent people would live in constant fear as they do not know when a hail of bullets would come raining down on them. These insecurities came from the very fact that it all started with poor governance, which caused unhappiness and led to this whole chain of disastrous man-made events. It is not just South Sudan alone that face such an insecurity, but also countries like Somalia and Iraq that it all began with poor governance. Therefore, incapable governments are to be held responsible for the insecurity in countries around the world today.

Governments are expected to, at the very least, ensure that their people are safe. The security of knowing one can stay alive would be the most crucial and assuring one, as one would know that there is still a tomorrow that can be worked on. If an incapable government cannot even ensure this, then the government can be considered useless and ineffective. Yet sadly, these horrendous governments tend to stay in power for a long time, due to corruption and who knows what other reasons. Therefore, I feel that poor governance is to be held responsible, as they are the ones who have the ability to make a significant change, but they just simply refuse to, due to their own personal agenda, incapability and corruption as well.

Efforts to save the environment will not yield positive results. Do you agree?

There is a quote that goes “The world is your oyster.” Indeed, in today’s globalised world, we are free to travel and explore almost any part of the world. As we savour and immerse ourselves in the beauty of our environment, have we ever stopped to consider that given Man’s current pace of urbanisation and actions, this beautiful environment we have now will soon be gone? Environmentalists may argue that it is not futile to try and save the environment because they believe in the hope that when Mankind mends its ways, saving the environment would be possible. However, I am of the view that efforts to save the environment will not yield positive results due to the nature of our world at large today.

Naturally, in the 21st century, where the majority of the countries are developed and globalised, people will look towards short-term goals to satisfy their needs. As consumers aiming to maximise utility and welfare, we accomplish tasks and do things which we feel will benefit us in one way or another. Some corporations which desire to profit-maximise may also see the futility of trying to save the environment. Though outwardly, consumers, households and corporations alike may claim to try and save the environment, more often than not, many forgo the environment in order to pursue their own interests and motives. For example, the Kyoto Protocol is a case in point that highlights even though countries may have agreed to a particular standardisation of what they will do for the environment, such as reducing carbon emissions and decreasing their carbon footprint, some countries, have broken their word and have continued with their rapid pace of industrialisation to further increase output. Thus, it is clear that Man, in order to meet and satisfy each others’ needs, will likely give up whatever they have promised to do to help the environment, making it futile to try and save the environment.

Moreover, it is futile to try and save the environment because, in reality, our actions have resulted in our environment’s tipping point. This means that we have reached a point of no return and no actions or efforts no matter how redeemable can save the environment, thus rendering these efforts futile. For instance, NASA has already ventured into the Moon to discover and find out more about its environment and deduce the likelihood of its inhabitation by Man. Reports on the Moon’s surface having droplets of water, an essential to life, sparked hope in people globally that there is a chance for us to inhabit the Moon. This mindset comes about because the majority of us acknowledges the dire straits our environment is currently in – that is reality. Hence, given that the probability to save the environment is slim and the outlook and prospects of redeeming the environment that is dim, it can be said that it is indeed futile to try and save the environment.

However, environmentalists argue that it is not futile to try and save the environment. These advocates of our environment consistently emphasise that the effort of every individual count towards saving the environment. In Singapore, the BioGaia organisation advocates for its cause through various channels like social media. Music videos based on the theme of “Save My World” featuring citizens doing their part for the environment can be seen in the video. Other organisations like the World Wildlife Fund also advocate for the saving of our environment through the reduction of deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest. Truly, to these pro-environment groups and organisations, saving the environment might not be such a dim prospect after all.

However, though this view holds true for some groups of people, it is not true for everyone. Though the efforts of these individuals are important and are valued, it is vital to note that the effort from everyone outweighs individual efforts. Some people like environmentalists do their best to try and save the environment as they see the value of it. On the contrary, many of us do not wish to inconvenience ourselves to recycle our drink bottles simply by dropping them into recycling bins. These seemingly small acts to us are the complete opposite of what we perceive them to be. On a larger whole, if everyone recycles, then our recycling rates will surely increase drastically. Singapore’s landfill island, Pulau Semakau, will be completely filled up by 2025, in eight years’ time. This is largely due to low recycles rates in Singapore. Hence, it is evident that everyone’s efforts to save the environment counts towards saving the environment more. This is provided we, as individuals, put in our effort and play our part to save our environment.

In conclusion, there is still some hope that things may change, people may change and become more environmentally-friendly.  However, mindsets take a long while to change, actions take time to cultivate and habits require time to instil. Given the fast-paced nature of our world today, saving the environment is a second priority to many. Thus, given our current state, I feel that it is indeed futile to try and save the environment to a large extent.

We worship the young and scorn the old. What is your opinion?

In today’s world media plays an important role in shaping one’s thoughts and perception. The media today constantly focuses on the young and it is often seen that due to this the older generation is disdained and completely disregarded. Though this is true that this is the case in many scenarios, a closer analysis reveals that this trend is prevalent in the industries where profit-making is the only goal. These industries worship the young so that they can maximize their profits from them.

It is evident that society is fixated with the young; young people are idolized and are seen in many spheres of our lives. The media is filled with young people; they are seen in advertisements, television and are also rule the music industry. The dominance of young people in these areas results from our admiration for the young to the extent that the older generation is completely side-lined. The media is filled with advertisements featuring the young and Apple iPod advertisements are an example of that wherein youth are seen grooving to today’s music. The fashion industry is crammed with models that are barely in their 20s. These examples are a reflection of today’s society which shows that we worship the young

On the contrary, when the question is of the older generation, there are preconceived notions about them in our minds. Old people are often considered to be mentally less acute and are deemed to be unfit in the work sphere. They are often perceived as crabby and difficult people and these perceptions sketch a negative picture of the older generation. These ideas about the old have taken roots in our mindset and therefore, In Singapore, many older people are not offered jobs because people think they are less alert and productive. It’s true that the older generation is not as adept in using technology as the younger generation and technology is an important part of today’s work sphere. One might argue that it is due to the skills that the older people are being denied jobs. However, it is also true that along with our notions about the old, people also believe that the old do not contribute towards society at all. This is also evident from the fact that many elderly are sent to old age homes as they are considered an inconvenience in their own families. Hence, the aforementioned examples reflect our contempt for the older generation in society.

It would be completely wrong to believe that we worship the young over because of their youth and our attitudes towards them are unjustifiable. For example, in the sports field athletes’ youth is desirable because it is the peak point in their careers. It is completely unfair to believe that we worship the youth because there are many instances where the young are subjected to harsh treatments from society. As we celebrate their youth we also criticize their naivety and immature behaviour. For instance, the ‘Yob’ culture in Britain is condemned because of their disruptive acts and is disapproved by people all over the world. When young celebrities indulge in wrong activities they are not worshipped but are harshly disparaged by the media and society. Therefore, Believing that we only worship the young is a flawed statement because when the youth commit any mistakes they are also ruthlessly reproached by us.

Similarly, it is an intense exaggeration when we say that we disregard the older generation. A major part of society understands and considers the fact that someday we will pass through the same ageing stage in life. Many cultures value the significance of the older generation and the importance of respecting them. In Singapore, respecting the elderly is central to its values and was even encouraged by our minister Lee Kuan Yew. The older generation is vital to society because they have experience and years of accumulated wisdom. In the Film industry names like Maggie Smith and Judi Dench are still taken because of their strong acting skills. Many advertisements today have started featuring the old and this has helped in sending across the message that the old are as important as the young of the society.

In conclusion, it is a rushed assumption to believe that only the youth is worshipped in the society while the old neglected. These are extreme views that do not hold true in today’s society where age is just a number. There are some aspects of the young that are celebrated and there are other characteristics of the old which are celebrated. Both the generations’ importance cannot be denied in society.

‘Modern transportation has brought the world closer together.’ How far is this beneficial?

In 1962, when the U.S President John F. Kennedy spoke to the American people and the rest of the world on the American Space Project which aimed to put Americans on the moon and begin a new form of travel, he helped to revive the sense of unbridled opportunity and hope in a tumultuous world arena plagued by Cold War politics. He famously said, “We (the USA) choose to go to the moon and do all the things we do, not because they are easy but because they are hard.” It was indeed amazing to see that something as simple as a new means of transportation being generated by the space race could rally a nation like America, and usher in a revolution upon the already existing modern transportation methods and infrastructure, connecting people, businesses, governments and more, together in ways people never thought was possible just a few centuries ago. Arguably, the latest advent of modern transportation has been drawn into one of the greatest conflicts of modern human history: transnational terrorism, which has in many cases brought the world to its feet. Thankfully, that pessimistic outlook is overshadowed by transportation developments in defense. Also, we should not forget that modern transportation has developed trade, tourism and even systems for commerce, through the effect of bringing the world closer together than ever before. It may very likely be the case that modern transportation is largely beneficial, although we must first dig deeper in order to come to a conclusion.

Undoubtedly, modern transportation has made the world so close, such that transportation itself has become both a target for terrorism, and a vehicle for it. Terrorism is certainly one of the greatest worldwide concerns at present, regardless of whether current approaches are effective or not. Modern methods of transportation such as mass transit through trains for instance, have proven to be alluring targets for terrorists. In an enclosed, moving space, people are put at their most vulnerable. The first thing that one may think of when getting on a train or plane, is not whether terrorists will mount an attack within the vehicle, but rather about simply getting from point A to point B. Too many times, have radical extremists taken advantage of this, as seen for example, in the 1995 gassing of the Tokyo Subway by a cult group known as Aum Shinrykyo, killing 12 and injuring thousands. Modern transportation has actually made the idea of mass transit scarier than ever before. After all, practically everyone will recall the events of 9/11 whenever they pass through airport security today. 9/11 was the most deadly set of attacks on U.S soil thus far. Al Qaeda agents hijacked United Airlines and US Airways planes and deliberately crashed then into the World Trade Center towers in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington DC and into a rural field in Pennsylvania. Certainly, modern transportation methods have brought terrorists closer to us. Despite this, the above effects have motivated governments to step up security throughout transport networks, such as that of stringent security checks at ports of entry and exit. Indeed, while one incident is one too many, transportation in itself has helped to guard against such attacks by creating increased vigilance, and arguably has also contributed to a rise in new methods of warfare against terrorism.

New methods of transportation have helped greatly in the war on terror, providing a safer and more collaborative method of warfare. Many of such transportation methodologies have existed prior to the outbreak of international terrorism, while other are more recent developments. Take drones, unmanned artillery vehicles as an example. By being able to transport weapons and use them remotely has arguably saved a lot of the costs incurred by flying F-35 jets into war zones, although the latter is still being used frequently. It reduces the potential for casualties by targeting specific areas or people that should be eliminated. B-52 bomber planes have also returned to the Middle East zone of conflict in a bid to sustain the war efforts. Unlike commercial jets, these military jets not just transports military personnel, they can also hold great amounts of ammunition, weapons, bombs and other military equipment. Couple this with the international resolve to defeat terrorism by countries like Britain and France, and even to some extent, Russia, militaries have been able to execute their missions more effectively than having boots on the ground. This resolve shows the hope of all countries to finally putting a stop to terrorism can be put into efficient action. In that light, international terrorism has become less of a problem when we know that there are also good stewards of modern methods of transportation.

Moving on to the economy, modern methods of transportation has most certainly helped to forge new business ties between countries, and even between countries and firms themselves. This can ultimately be linked back to the globalization of economic activity, where transportation technologies have increased global connectivity and are still slated to continue improving. We see this manifesting thorough the growth of international trade and flow of Foreign Direct Investment. The European Union for example, allowed the free movement within the 27 countries that it is made up of. The elimination of border checkpoints allows a smoother commute either via air or train, allowing businesses to move their staff ever more easily from country to country to maximize productivity. Modern transport methods have essentially made the possibility of various countries becoming cores of economic activity a reality. Singapore itself is a transportation hub with the world’s best airport, as rated by Skytrax, and one of the busiest maritime ports in the region and the world. Even methods of transporting commodities, such as undersea oil pipelines or oil tankers have given rise to the oil refining industry in Singapore, which generates a huge part of our GDP. All these methods of transportation bring long-run benefits, as business will continue to develop wherever it is conducive and physically connectable to do so. Hence, we are seeing that modern methods of transportation are indeed beneficial to a large extent.

Modern transportation has likewise created or improved new commerce systems that create a more personal connection between customers and firms, thereby bringing about greater consumer experiences that fuel the growth of the retail industry, particularly online. The rise of e-commerce is perhaps, another phenomenon of this increasingly close world. With methods like airfreight and containerized shipping, transactions have become more efficient, cheap and fast. Take Amazon.com, the world’s largest airline retailer for example. As a result of business deals with air freight carriers like UPS and DHL, Amazon is able to get their products into the hands of their international customers in as little as 2 days. This inevitably creates greater efficiency and productivity for the firm. Recently, Amazon even introduced its own brand of air freighters known as “Prime Air”. Such a development was meant to improve shipping reliability for its “Prime” customers, just one of the many modes of transport that they are taking advantage of in order to provide a better and more competitive customer experience. As modern methods of transportation further connect the world, ecommerce is likely to keep booming, and that has a profoundly positive impact on the world economy.

Finally, modern transportation has transformed the tourism industry, bringing people across the world to learn and experience the different faces of the world, thereby leading to both economic and social benefits. The development of tourism not just has to do with improved aircraft, but also maritime vessels, which serve as means for holiday cruises. Now, people can get up close with the glaciers of Alaska, or the majestic coasts of South Australia, places which are generally harder to get to on foot or via automobile. With ports of call at many locations, it increases the accessibility of many more locations. Moving on to commercial jet aircraft, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is one of the most fuel-efficient planes in the world at present, and has grown to be to backbone of many airline carriers’ long-haul operations. Greater fuel efficiency and customer-centric amenities have not only made unconventional air routes more profitable, but also enabled the connection of culture. In 2016 alone, U.S-based United Airlines has launched a plethora of new routes from their hub in San Francisco, California, to places like Xi’an, China, Singapore and Auckland, New Zealand. This is enabled the phasing out of stopovers, transforming the way people travel long haul. We could still argue that tourism “broadens one’s mind”, but ultimately, the onus of that is on the tourist, not the method of transportation. Certainly, tourism may not always be beneficial for all. Take African Savannah vacations and their effects on natives as an example. Nonetheless, new transportation methods have still managed to make that trip more sustainable, from increased consumer experience, to lower carbon emissions. Hence, it could very well be the case that modern methods of transportation bring the world closer than ever before is indeed beneficial.

In conclusion, modern methods of transportation have greatly affected all of our lives, in one way or another, and the world has never been brought closer together than before. From a pessimists’ point of view, this would open the door to threats unimaginable. Still, as history and reality have also proven to an even stronger extent, the effects of new methods of transportation have brought tremendous economic and social benefit, and from the way, transport is still developing now, a new sustainable future of transport awaits on the horizon.