[Radix] Re: Chinese experts involved in international school safety
guideline creation???
George Kent
kent at hawaii.edu
Thu Jan 29 15:04:16 PST 2009
Garry and Fred make important points about the need to do a better job
of working with experts and specialists who are involved in school
construction. As a human rights specialist, I say that consideration
should also be given to ways in which the general public could be
involved.
Clearly, there are some construction standards that require expertise
to understand and to assess. However, there are always some standards
that even ordinary people can understand, such as, say, the thickness
of walls. For ordinary people who are interested, it might be possible
to provide some sort of training and tools that would help them to
assess the less visible dimensions of the quality of school
construction.
On this basis, it is possible to imagine laws that say people are
legally entitled to safe schools for their children. Ordinary could
be given assistance in making their own assessments of the quality of
schools, and they could be given means through which to submit
complaints when they believe the standards are not met.
This rights-based approach should be linked to efforts to increase
transparency. There should be clear standards for construction, and
the general public should be informed about these standards, in ways
that are appropriate for non-experts.
When Fred voices his concern that “we may not be reaching key people,”
we should include in that the need to reach ordinary people, the
children who go to the schools and their parents.
Maybe China would not be the most receptive place to begin this
innovation. Are there other places where pilot projects along these
lines could be tried out?
Aloha, George
On Jan 29, 2009, at 6:29 AM, Frederick Krimgold wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
> Thanks Garry for your constructive approach and range of
> engagement. I am concerned that we may not be reaching the key
> people and organizations in the sort of conferencing that has gone
> on in the past. Disaster meetings include disaster people. Inter-
> governmental meetings include inter-governmental people. We need to
> reach the people with direct authority and responsibility for school
> construction quality. We need the heads of the school building
> organizations. We need to reach the people in charge of procuring
> school buildings, the ones who pay the contractors. We need to find
> the effective points of leverage in the school building procurement
> process. Those people probably don't attend international
> conferences on disaster management or education. They probably don't
> speak English. We need to establish a network of school construction
> and facilities managers in disaster-prone poor countries. These
> people know the problems and they know the limitations of their
> context. These are the people who need to champion the cause of safe
> school construction. These are the people we, from the outside, need
> to support. The organization of school procurement, design and
> construction varies significantly around the world. However, in most
> cases, someone pays and someone builds. The one who controls the
> payment has the opportunity to control the quality. How do we reach
> the people who have the authority to reject shoddy costruction? How
> do we ensure that they have the ability to recognize shoddy
> contruction and the incentive/motivation and authority to reject it.
> Safe schools are the result of long chain of right decisions. Is it
> possible that, to date, we have missed some key links in that chain.
> Fred
>
> Dr. Frederick Krimgold
> Director
> Disaster Risk Reduction Program (DRR)
> Virginia Tech
> Advanced Research Institute (ARI)
> 4300 Wilson Blvd., Suite 750
> Arlington, VA 22203 USA
> Main: 703-528-5500
> Direct: 703-387-6033
> Fax: 703-528-5543
> Email: krimgold at vt.edu
> Web: www.ari.vt.edu/DRR
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Garry de la Pomerai wrote:
>
>> Dear colleagues,
>> Ben has included me into your conversation. Being on the periphery
>> of several initiatives for School safety, my thoughts would be the
>> softly approach, but from two/three directions.
>> One: by being inclusive of the various Chinese based specialist who
>> are active within Global or regional networks. The IDRC 09 will be
>> an excellent opportunity to meet with some face to face. I am
>> intending to to attempt to hold a session purely on school safety
>> to include global updates on initiatives and prioritisation and
>> assessments.
>> Two: would be through the continuous efforts of the UN ISDR BK
>> office and others within UNESCO and UNICEF, ISDR Geneva/Paris, with
>> whom we are collaborating on a session at the world ESD conference
>> later in March. Aimed at Governmental level discussions and
>> collaboration.
>> Third might also be though the UNCRD Centre for Regional
>> development in Japan, who are very active within the Asia Pacifc
>> Regional and have been steering their SESI pilot project for the
>> past three years in four regional countries. Fiji, Indonesia, India
>> and Uzbekistan. It is hope to extend this within the region and may
>> well be very appropriate to the Chinese as a format with some vital
>> areas of learning curves and success areas.
>> I would be affraid that if we become bullish then the doors will
>> simply shut to us, and more importantly the gates locked to those
>> from within who are able and willing to collaborate.
>> So peer inclusivity , to develop some of the policy initiatives, to
>> cover a ssessments, prioritisation's and principles of design , so
>> then we have something to present as a well thought and globally
>> collaborated approach. rather than just individuals trying to make
>> a difference,(which i admire and am not against in principle)
>> regarding the causes, i tend to agree with Ben. I was in Pakistan
>> at their School safety Conference when the earthquake happened, and
>> the NYT sent me some photos to comment on for an interview, from
>> what i saw it the methods and understanding of the rheology of
>> concrete use. wrong types of materials, too small reinforcing bars,
>> not tied in, and incorrect type of ballast used, all of which was
>> identifiable in the pictures. yes cost cutting, ignorance,poorly
>> trained workforce, material availability & speed of operation, but
>> expect ignorance is the main problem. Even with poor materials a
>> craftsman can adapt.but i saw no hint adaption.
>> regards
>> Garry
>> de la Pomerai
>>
>> "There is no competition only the need for urgency and commitment
>> to the long haul"
>>
>> COGSS-DPE (Coalition for Global School Safety-Disaster Preparedness
>> Education) to join go to: http://cogssdpe.ning.com/
>> Workgroup co-leader responsible for structural design and retrofit
>> collation
>> email: cogssinfo at aol.com
>> UN-ISDR Thematic Group for Knowledge & Education member http://www.unisdr.org/eng/p
>> artner-netw/knowledge-education/knowledge-education.htm
>>
>> email: gdp at saraid.co.uk
>> AGNDR - UK Advisory Group for Natural Disaster Reduction
>> email: gdpsaraid at aol.com
>> Tel: +44(0) 7703 337 946
>>
>> "Disaster Prevention for Schools: Guidance for Education Sector
>> Decision-Makers" published by the ISDR
>> http://www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/trainings-events/edu-materials/v.php?id=7344
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: bwisner at igc.org
>> To: George Kent <kent at hawaii.edu>; Frederick Krimgold <krimgold at vt.edu
>> >
>> CC: bwisner at igc.org; Cannon Terry <t.g.cannon at greenwich.ac.uk>;
>> Marla Petal <mpetal at imagins.com>; radix at ecie.org
>> Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:36
>> Subject: Chinese experts involved in international school safety
>> guideline creation???
>>
>> Good idea about conference or workshop with Chinese participation.
>> In fact, a technical expert group exists that is supporting an
>> initiative by SPHERE, World Bank's Global Fund for DRR, and the
>> International Network on Emergency Education (INEE) to develop
>> guidelines for school safety (broader than just seismic safety).
>> They will be meeting face to face for the first time in March. I
>> don't know if there are Chinese experts involved, but I will try to
>> find out and encourage their inclusion.
>>
>> Cheers, BEN
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: George Kent
>> Sent: Jan 28, 2009 9:42 PM
>> To: Frederick Krimgold
>> Cc: bwisner at igc.org, Cannon Terry , Marla Petal , radix at ecie.org
>> Subject: Re: [Radix] Re: Radix Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1
>>
>> Fred, sure it would be good to have an effective building quality
>> control system. The question is, what kind? What would meet all the
>> requirements, including political acceptability?
>>
>> Any approach that would get their people into a sustained
>> conversation about this question would be a good way to get
>> started. A bad way would be to have outsiders formulate some pet
>> idea and then try to push it on them. The local experts need to be
>> active participants in shaping the remedies.
>>
>> Can someone find funding to organize a small conference on quality
>> control for school building architecture? Then maybe some Chinese
>> could be invited into the planning committee. And maybe the
>> conference itself could end up somewhere in China, maybe Sichuan?
>>
>> Aloha, George
>>
>>
>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Frederick Krimgold wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Safe Schoolers,
>>> On the constructive side, would it not make good sense to support
>>> development of an effective building regulatory/quality contro l
>>> system. Building regulation is the core of the developed world
>>> approach to earthquake mitigation. Would it not be reasonable to
>>> focus on a form of regulation that might function for the benefit
>>> of the people in a place like Szechuan? Free market ideology and
>>> deregulation have been an obstacle to serious thinking about
>>> creative, appropriate, competent, honest regulatory systems. They
>>> may be local. They may represent the population's right to safety.
>>> Fred
>>> Dr. Frederick Krimgold
>>> Director
>>> Disaster Risk Reduction Program (DRR)
>>> Virginia Tech
>>> Advanced Research Institute (ARI)
>>> 4300 Wilson Blvd., Suite 750
>>> Arlington, VA 22203 USA
>>> Main: 703-528-5500
>>> Direct: 703-387-6033
>>> Fax: 703-528-5543
>>> Email: krimgold at vt.edu
>>> Web: www.ari.vt.edu/DRR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 6:17 PM, George Kent wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree that the causes of the school structure failures probably
>>>> were mixed, and not entirely knowable to us. However, we
>>>> shouldn't be too preoccupied with identifying causes. Some
>>>> remedies, such as increasing transparency and the rights-based
>>>> approach, are sensible regardless of what the details of
>>>> causation might have been. Unlike prosecutors who need to know
>>>> the history in detail, I think our work needs to be more forward-
>>>> looking.
>>>>
>>>> Aloha, George
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 1:08 PM, bwisner at igc.org wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Fred, Marla, George and Terry,
>>>>>
>>>>> Having been in=2 0Sichuan in November and talked about the
>>>>> school problem extensively with many Chinese experts (engineers,
>>>>> geographers, journalists, social workers), I am convinced that
>>>>> the situation is very complex and the causes mixed. There may
>>>>> well have been some cost cutting in come cases. However, I
>>>>> think some of the poor construction was due to the extreme speed
>>>>> with which schools have been built over the past decade or so,
>>>>> ironically in compliance with a national policy of providing
>>>>> more infrastructure and investment in the western and
>>>>> northwestern parts of the country that have not benefited from
>>>>> the the bonanza of export oriented growth as the coastal zones
>>>>> have. When I was in Bejiing in 2005 the central government had
>>>>> just announced a lifting of school fees in the West of China,
>>>>> another part of the of the policy to redress spatial
>>>>> inequalities that have grown as a result of economic
>>>>> globalization.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be very reluctant to attribute the tragedy to any one
>>>>> cause (e.g. "corruption" or "authoritarianism") as blanket terms.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>
>>>>> BEN
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Frederick Krimgold
>>>>> Sent: Jan 28, 2009 1:32 PM
>>>>> To: Marla Petal
>>>>> Cc: radix at ecie.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radix] Re: Radix Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Marla,
>>>>> I applaud you passionate comment on the failure of school
>>>>> consttuction in Szechuan. However, "shoddy" construction can
>>>>> result from ignorance, incompetence, poor judgement and/or
>>>>> corruption. Terry seems to lay it all to corruption of an
>>>>> authoritarian system. Is that what the courageous journalists
>>>>> found to be the case? Was the shoddy construction the result of
>>>>> criminal intent? Was material stolen or adulterated, knowingly?
>>>>> Was there and inspection system that was corrupted?
>>>>> In cases that I am familiar with, the problem is often ignorance
>>>>> or poverty as much as corruption. Poor design, poor construction
>>>>> and poor materials are often the consequence of ignorance and
>>>>> poverty rather than criminal intent. i feel that it is our job
>>>>> to attack the ignorance and poverty as well as the corruption.
>>>>> Public support and active involvement in safety and regulation
>>>>> of construction is a force that needs to be mobilized in
>>>>> parallel with more formal regulatory approaches.
>>>>> 0A
>>>>> Dr. Frederick Krimgold
>>>>> Director
>>>>> Disaster Risk Reduction Program (DRR)
>>>>> Virginia Tech
>>>>> Advanced Research Institute (ARI)
>>>>> 4300 Wilson Blvd., Suite 750
>>>>> Arlington, VA 22203 USA
>>>>> Main: 703-528-5500
>>>>> Direct: 703-387-6033
>>>>> Fax: 703-528-5543
>>>>> Email: krimgold at vt.edu
>>>>> Web: www.ari.vt.edu/DRR
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Marla Petal wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Terry - Thank you so much for bringing up a painful and
>>>>>> important issue. On the one hand I share your pessimism. On the
>>>>>> other hand I think that even the most authoritarian regimes
>>>>>> respond to pressure from their populations (witness significant
>>>>>> progress in school saf ety in Uzbekistan). So it seems to me
>>>>>> that it is our ethical obligation to find ways to express our
>>>>>> solidarity with the grassroots efforts to contribute to
>>>>>> disaster prevention. Surely we cannot be of real professional
>>>>>> or expert support if we use the guise of diplomacy to justify
>>>>>> total silence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first time this hit me between the eyes was at IDRC in
>>>>>> Davos this past year is when the Sichuan earthquake experience
>>>>>> was being reviewed. Amidst a good deal of congratulatory
>>>>>> remarks about the earthquake response, there was NO MENTION of
>>>>>> the terrible toll taken by shoddy school construction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It wasn't until the last day of the conf. in a special session,
>>>>>> with only 100 people left, that our Chinese colleagues and
>>>>>> others finally took the stage. One of the presenters had a
>>>>>> couple of slides of disinformation on school impacts which he
>>>>>> hurried through with obvious embarrassment (one hopes because
>>>>>> of the transparent lies they contained).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could well understand the horrible quandry and vulnerability
>>>>>> of our Chinese colleagues, and had no desire to put them on the
>>>>>> spot. But I was livid with the rest of our colleagues for
>>>>>> completely failing to raise questions or make any kind of
>>>>>> diplomatically worded or even condolence statement of any
>>>>>> kind. Their total silence struck me as either total
>>>>>> indifference or crass livelihood protection. The silence of our
>>>>>> "professional" and "expert" colleagues in the face of blatant
>>>>>> disinformation, the collusion with the re-writing of history by
>>>>>> the authorities strikes me as a betrayal of all of the bereaved
>>>>>> parents and their dead children.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that Walter Hays and myself were the only ones to break
>>>>>> the silence. Both of us, independently, did exactly as you
>>>>>> suggest - we tried to put our shame into a collective and
>>>>>> universal context of failure to prevent disaster. We said that
>>>>>> this has happened and will happen elsewhere. (It isn't hard
>>>>>> coming from the U.S. to cite our failures in Katrina or to
>>>>>> refer to the worst earthquake - the one yet to come in
>>>>>> California). And we tried in some modest way to value truth-
>>>>>> telling a pre-requisite for involving communities in the hard
>>>>>> tasks that they must take on (like monitoring school
>>>>>> construction). (While in China, I also tried to invoke their
>>>>>> own historic strengths to suggest that bereaved parents could
>>>>>> be engaged as "barefoot architects and engineers" becoming
>>>>>> partners in monitoring school construction practices -
>>>>>> providing an opportunity to turn anger and grief into a
>>>>>> commitment to the next generation.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed we do need people to live and fight another day - and we
>>>>>> do need some of us to remain persona grata and to visit China.
>>>>>> And when we get there we need to meet parents and school
>>>>>> principles and support their advocacy efforts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to suggest, that in s ome kind of 'diplomatic' and
>>>>>> subtle means of redress that we collectively nominate and
>>>>>> campaign for School Principle Ye Zhiping to be given the
>>>>>> Sasakawa Award next year. In addition to validating his
>>>>>> courageous leadership and the importance of school safety, it
>>>>>> would also validate the tremendous service done by just a
>>>>>> couple of courageous journalists who took great risks to
>>>>>> uncover the truth, even while bulldozers were fast at work to
>>>>>> plow it under.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So as a result of this posting, I may never be granted a visa
>>>>>> to visit China again. Hopefully someone else who goes will
>>>>>> convey our collective condolences to parents and assure them of
>>>>>> our solidarity in making sure that every new school is a safe
>>>>>> school
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>> Marla
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2009, at 9:00 PM, radix-request at ecie.org wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send Radix mailing list submissions to
>>>>>>> radix at ecie.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>>>> http://ecie.org/mailman/listi nfo/radix
>>>>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>>>>> radix-request at ecie.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>>>>> radix-owner at ecie.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>> than "Re: Contents of Radix digest..."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Follow up & thanks on China disaster meeting
>>>>>>> (T.G.Cannon at greenwich.ac.uk)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Message: 1
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:29:43 +0000
>>>>>>> From: T.G.Cannon at greenwich.ac.uk
>>>>>>> Subject: [Radix] Follow up & thanks on China disaster meeting
>>>>>>> To: radix at ecie.org
>>>>>>> Cc: terrycannon at blueyonder.co.uk
>>>>>>> Message-ID: <20090127152943.a2ufkztu28swgwgw at skye.gre.ac.uk>
>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
>>>>>>> format="flowed"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear RADIXers
>>>>>>> This letter is main ly for those who responded to my call for
>>>>>>> advice on
>>>>>>> how to deal with the presentation I gave last week on the
>>>>>>> Chinese
>>>>>>> earthquake. The meeting was co-hosted by Fondation Madariaga
>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>> Chinese embassy to the European Union, and the Chinese
>>>>>>> ambassador was
>>>>>>> there along with many other officials. Two Chinese disaster
>>>>>>> specialist
>>>>>>> also spoke. You can see the programme and presentations at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.madariaga.org/events/events-2008/46-2008/159-chinas-ability-to-cope-with-natural-disaster
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and see my Powerpoint.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because the issues are of general interest to RADIX, I am
>>>>>>> sharing
>>>>>>> these thoughts, but I do especially want to thank Ben Wisner,
>>>>>>> George
>>>>>>> Kent, Terry Jeggle, James Lewis and John Wiener for their
>>>>>>> substantial
>>>>>>> messages to me. (Apologies for not responding individually to
>>>>>>> you, and
>>>>>>> I hope I have not left anyone out).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It really helped to have your thoughts, though I think it
>>>>>>> would open
>>>>>>> up a very good if we were to discuss on RADIX the issue of how
>>>>>>> we deal
>>>>>>> with our approach to governments that have significant
>>>>>>> authoritarian
>>>>>>> tendencies. That is why I am sending my response to the list:
>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>> a very general issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I came to the view (as a result of most of the comments
>>>>>>> from the
>>>>>>> above) for this meeting that I should be ‘diplomatic9 and
>>>>>>> "engage"
>>>>>>> with the officials in Brussels, and that the approach should
>>>>>>> be one of
>>>>>>> supporting reform and reformers, I still have very serious
>>>>>>> doubts
>>>>>>> about whether that will actually have an effect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I realise that part of the problem with the Chinese regime is
>>>>>>> that it
>>>>>>> does not respond to external pressure, seeing it (in a
>>>>>>> parallel way to
>>>>>>> Mugabe and some South African ANC ministers) as imperialist
>>>>>>> attacks.
>>>>>>> So how should outsiders comment on Chinese repression?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of my approaches at the meeting was to make it quite clear
>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>> am not criticising China in isolation from critical comments
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> could be made about many other countries. I started by talking
>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>> Hurricane Katrina as an example of bad government, and when I
>>>>>>> spoke of
>>>>>>> corruption (re schools that were not constructed properly) I
>>>>>>> emphasised that this has to be seen in much a wider context.
>>>>>>> For this
>>>>>>> I mentioned the recent global financial crisis as a product of
>>>>>>> (in
>>>>>>> effect) corrupt behaviour in western banks, the British
>>>>>>> Aerospace
>>>>>>> corruption (linked to the UK government) over arms sales, and
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> Common Agricultural Policy as an example of a policy designed
>>>>>>> to deny
>>>>>>> development to the poor and support the already rich –
>>>>>>> institutional
>>>>>>> corruption if you like.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I mentioned rights, and the essential need for civil
>>>>>>> society to
>>>>>>> be enabled in r elation to community-based disaster
>>>>>>> preparedness, I
>>>>>>> emphasised that this was in order to allow citizens to HELP the
>>>>>>> government to ensure that the government fulfils its remit of
>>>>>>> protecting its own citizens. Civil society can therefore be
>>>>>>> part of
>>>>>>> the process by which government achieves its goals against
>>>>>>> corruption
>>>>>>> at lower levels, rather than a threat to government.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All this came after a rather positive account of the emergency
>>>>>>> response effort of the Chinese government (AND ordinary
>>>>>>> people), so
>>>>>>> that it was in context.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don’t share the optimism of most of my advisors that
>>>>>>> engagement is
>>>>>>> the best (or only) route. While many Chinese may themselves be
>>>>>>> uncomfortable about repression (including that related to the
>>>>>>> earthquake and other disasters), what has engagement achieved
>>>>>>> over the
>>>>>>> past two decades? See below on the Olympics; the doctor who
>>>>>>> blew the
>>>>>>> whistle on SARS has regularly been placed under house arrest
>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>> June 4 each year in case she makes some other kind of protest.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The bereaved parents who started a law case against local
>>>>>>> governments
>>>>>>> that oversaw school construction have had their case
>>>>>>> dismissed. The
>>>>>>> human rights lawyer Huang Qi who acted for some parents to
>>>>>>> make other
>>>>>>> claims was imprisoned last May, and is still in prison,
>>>>>>> accused of
>>>>>>> betraying state secrets (a catch all and indefensible
>>>>>>> accusation). He
>>>>>>> is seriously ill, and has been offered release only if he
>>>>>>> gives up his
>>>>>>> human rights activities.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Relating to the Olympics, the government had agreed to
>>>>>>> improve its
>>>>>>> reputation to allow civil society activities during the Games.
>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>> designated four areas in Beijing parks for people to hold
>>>>>>> demonstrations – for which they had to make an application. As
>>>>>>> far as
>>>>>>> I know, none were ever permitted. Two women in their 70s who
>>>>>>> applied
>>>>>>> to hold a protest about the demolition of their homes were
>>>>>>> arrested
>>>>>>> and held without charge. Others were harassed.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of my advisors argued that I should not make links
>>>>>>> between the
>>>>>>> collapse of schools and corruption and repression with other
>>>>>>> recent
>>>>>>> issues (toxic baby-milk, Amur river chemical discharge, SARS,
>>>>>>> AIDs
>>>>>>> scandals
>>>>>>> ). I understand that this approach would have made it
>>>>>>> difficult or impossible to make a supportive engagement to
>>>>>>> “work with
>>>>>>> reformers” in the system who also share these doubts. BUT the
>>>>>>> issues
>>>>>>> are all linked by the type of power that is operating in
>>>>>>> China, and I
>>>>>>> cannot see how we can avoid analysing and criticising this
>>>>>>> form of
>>>>>>> power and how it links to disasters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Given that part of our role (our duty) in RADIX is to make such
>>>>>>> analysis, how should we then relate it to action (and words)
>>>>>>> to make
>>>>>>> the analysis have an effect? This for me is the ke y missing
>>>>>>> link, and
>>>>>>> I am not convinced that “engagement” is an effective
>>>>>>> translation of
>>>>>>> our analysis into action.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So this is where we need a debate on RADIX at least, to fathom
>>>>>>> out how
>>>>>>> we should do this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not against the idea of engagement if it can be shown
>>>>>>> that it
>>>>>>> works, and that it is preferable to making loud critical
>>>>>>> remarks (in
>>>>>>> order to achieve reduced vulnerability). But I am far from
>>>>>>> convinced.
>>>>>>> Engagement and support to reform and reformers is very similar
>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>> position of the British (and other western)government on
>>>>>>> countries
>>>>>>> like China, and in my view it is in danger of becoming a cop-
>>>>>>> out. Is
>>>>>>> there a RADIXal version of engagement?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At the end, the Ambassador commented that he enjoyed my
>>>>>>> presentation
>>>>>>> very much!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> best wishes
>>>>>>> Terry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by
>>>>>>> guarantee,
>>>>>>> registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office:
>>>>>>> Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> This mailing list is provided by ECIE.ORG for RADIX
>>>>>>> To post a message, send it to: radix at ecie.org
>>>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe:
>>>>>>> http://ecie.org/mailman/listinfo/radix
>>>>>>> See more information about ECIE: http://www.ecie.org/
>>>>>>> Radix - Radical Interpretations of Disaster:
>>>>>>> http://www.radixonline.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> End of Radix Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1
>>>>>>> *************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marla Petal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mpetal at imagins.com
>>>>>> Home +41 22 740 2704
>>>>>> Mobile +41 76 240 8474
>>>>>> Skype: shmarla
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> This mailing list is provided by ECIE.ORG for RADIX
>>>>>> To post a message, send it to: radix at ecie.org
>>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>> http://ecie.org/mailman/listinfo/radix
>>>>>> See more information about ECIE: http://www.ecie.org/
>>>>>> Radix - Radical Interpretations of Disaster:
>>>>>> http://www.radixonline.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> This mailing list is provided by ECIE.ORG for RADIX
>>>>> To post a message, send it to: radix at ecie.org
>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>> http://ecie.org/mailman/listinfo/radix
>>>>> See more information about ECIE: http://www.ecie.org/
>>>>> Radix - Radical Interpretations of Disaster:
>>>>> http://www.radixonline.org/
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This mailing list is provided by ECIE.ORG for RADIX
>> To post a message, send it to: radix at ecie.org
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
>> http://ecie.org/mailman/listinfo/radix
>> See more information about ECIE: http://www.ecie.org/
>> Radix - Radical Interpretations of Disaster:
>> http://www.radixonline.org/
>>
>> AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on
>> the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited
>> storage today.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ecie.org/pipermail/radix/attachments/20090129/688a4dd6/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Radix
mailing list