The Copenhagen Consensus (August 10, 2006)

How do you get the world's leaders to realize the world has limited resources to fix its problems and that it needs to prioritize? In 2004, a Dane, Bjorn Lomborg, brought together eight of the world's top economists - including four Nobel Laureates - in Copenhagen, where they were asked to evaluate the world's problems, think of the costs and efficiencies attached to solving each, and then produce a prioritized list of those most deserving of money. The results were stunning and, while the economists were from varying political stripes, they largely agreed.

Lomborg has since held other Copenhagen Consensus events, including one involving eight U.N. ambassadors (including those from the U.S., China and India), and plans more in the future. Prioritization, cost-effectiveness and efficiency are nearly unheard-of concepts among the governments, international bodies and aid groups that oversee good works. Yet, a rational allocation of resources would seem to be the best way to accomplish the most good in the shortest time.

Rick Bruno will moderate IIF's discussion on this topic on Thursday, August 10th. Attached is a recent Wall Street Journal article that provides a little more overview to the Copenhagen Consensus. Also, Wikipedia is a good place to find some initial information on Lomborg's project. And, of course, you can go right to the source to their website at www.copenhagenconsensus.com

Charles Hubert has been following this topic for years and renewed his interest after reading these articles:
How to save the world: Bolton v Gore
Copenhagen Consensus 2006: A United Nations Perspective
Making Money Count: Best Buys to Save Lives

His interest was initially raised by a series of articles in The Economist. Here are some additional links on the topic:
A modest undertaking
Curbing disease
A remedy for financial turbulence?
The price of peace
The learning deficit
The economics of climate change
Fighting corruption
Feeding the hungry
Migration and development
Understanding the global “water crisis”
Liberating trade
Putting the world to rights

China On the Rise (August 3, 2006)

Abe Revitch recently returned from a trip to China and has agreed to lead a discussion on China.

With all eyes currently on the Middle East, we sometimes lose track of the fact that most foreign policy experts believe that the most important issue in U.S. foreign policy is our relationship with China. This ancient nation, the largest in the world, is emerging economically, politically, and militarily, and this will provide us plenty of material for this week's IIF discussion. We will be led by one of our regulars, Abe Revitch, who has just returned from a trip to China.

As usual, I am sending along some background information:
Early last year, Foreign Policy devoted most of one issue to a Special Report on China. Here is the link:
href="http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2754">thisChina Rising
I found this debate between Zbigniew Brzezinski and John J. Mearsheimer particularly interesting:
Clash of the Titans
Here are three recent articles that were sent to me by Rick Bruno, which deal with troubling aspects of U.S.-China relations:
China's Nuclear Diplomacy
Currency Manipulator?
The SCO and China's Reach

This article by Bill Gertz originally appeared as a two part series in The Washington Times:
Chinese Dragon Awakens

Here are three articles, one from Foreign Affairs and the other two from Atlantic Monthly, that present very different views about the future of our relationship with China:
Don't Break the Engagement
Managing China's Rise
How We Would Fight China

Here is an article on the rise of China that was originally published in Foreign Affairs:
China Takes Off

Here is an op/ed piece from the International Herald Tribune that points out some of the problems faced by China and by India, as well:
China and India: Giants unchained? Not so fast!

Middle East Update: Renewed Turmoil in Israel, Gaza, and Lebanon (July 28, 2006)

John H. Kelly, formerly U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon and Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East and South Asia willbe our guest at this discussion.

Suggestions for new topics

We are inviting folks who share in our discussion to suggest some future topics. Please post your suggestions here. Topics already suggested include:

• Iran - an emerging regional power
• Iran - the nuclear standoff
• Somalia; the new Afghanistan under Taliban?
• Russia - the new energy powerhouse?
• The Baltic states
• Uruguay
• The new Mercosur/Mercosul, after including Venezuela
• Venezuela
• When does history start? - longstanding conflicts based on "historic claims" versus "current facts on the ground," i.e. Kashmir, Israel, Kosovo, Ireland, Darfur, Taiwan and many more.
• Iraq
• American foreign policy - the influence and effect of other government policies
• European Enlargement 200 - including Romania and Bulgaria
• Cuba
• Democratization around the world
• The former Yugoslavia

The 2006 G-8 Summit in St. Petersburg (July 20, 2006)

This event is free and open to the public. We meet at the Villa International library (2nd Floor), 1749 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA from 7:30 pm - 9:00 pm.

The Mexican Presidential Election (July 13, 2006)

Teodoro Maus, former consul of Mexico in Atlanta will be out guest and this event is free and open to the public

American Competitiveness (July 6, 2006)

Since around the first of this year, Jacobus Boers and I have been talking about a subject that we both thought would make an excellent topic for one of our Thursday evening IIF discussions: American Competitiveness. There were two things that led us to this conclusion. First was the publication of Tom Friedman's latest book, The World is Flat; the paperback edition, which contains some new material, came out recently. Second was the presentation to Congress last fall of a report from the National Academy of Sciences, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm," prepared by a committee of scientists, academic leaders, and business executives. "It is the unanimous view of our committee," testified one member, "that America today faces a serious and intensifying challenge with regard to its future competitiveness and standard of living. Further, we appear to be on a losing path."

Since the group decided to postpone our discussion on the Mexican presidential election until July 13, so that former Mexican Consul Teodoro Maus would be able to join us as our guest, this presented the perfect opportunity to have the discussion that Jacobus and I had planned about American competitiveness. That will take place this coming Thursday, July 6, and Jacobus will be our moderator.

In case you need some reading material for the long holiday weekend, here are some items that deal with Friedman's book and the National Academy's report:
From The New York Times Magazine, here is an article by Tom Friedman that came out at the time his book was published:
It's a Flat World, After All by Thomas L. Friedman

From the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, here is a compilation of quotes from the book:
The World is Flat

And here is web site where Sabrina DeJoannis told me you can find a "Cliff's Notes" version of the book:
www.latech.edu/coes/assets/flat_world.pptIf the link doesn't work, type World is Flat Engineering in the Google search field and this is the first hit.
Here is the executive summary of the National Academy's report:
Rising Above the Gathering Storm - Executive Summary

Here is the Congressional testimony of some of the members of the committee that prepared the report:
The National Academies Testimony before Congress

This article originally appeared in the journal Physics Today:
'Gathering Storm' Report Urges Strong Federal Action to Save US Science and Technology Leadership
'Rising Above the Gathering Storm'

Tom Friedman discussed his reaction to the report in this article:
Facts and Folly by Thomas L. Friedman

Finally, here is a point of view from an Indian newspaper, The Financial Express:
Rising above the gathering storm

North Korea's Missile Test - (June 27, 2006)

Earlier this month, North Korea announced plans for the test launch of a long range ballistic missile, the Taepodong-2. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated that launching such a missile would be a "provocative act" and warned North Korea to refrain from doing so. South Korea, Japan, Russia, and China have all expressed concern, as well. The Administration has had no shortage of advice about how to react to the situation: from a call by former Clinton Administration officials to launch a preemptive attack and destroy the missile at on the launching pad, to counsel from former Bush Administration officials to take a cautious approach and rely on diplomacy; from suggestions to talk to Pyongyang, not to talk to Pyongyang, and to talk to China. This Thursday, you will have the opportunity to weigh in with your opinion, as we consider North Korea's pending missile test as the topic for our IIF discussion. Curt Coulombe, whom many of you may know from the Southern Center, will serve as our moderator.

As background, here are a number of articles on the subject, mostly editorials and op/ed pieces, that have appeared in numerous publications and web sites over the past couple of weeks:
Concerns Mount over North Korea's Ballistic Missile Testing
Going Ballistic
Grounding Kim
North Korea Flexes Its Muscles
N. Korea's missile ploy
North Korea's Incredibly Bad Idea
North Korea's Threat: Missile test would put world on high alert
North Korea Disavows Its Moratorium on Testing of Long-Range Missiles
Right Where He Wants Us
Missile Defense Test
Shoot It Down
Tested by North Korea
To deal with North Korea, talk with China
North Korea's missile
North Korea: dumb and dumber
If Necessary, Strike and Destroy
No, Don't Blow It Up
U.S. Rejects Suggestion to Strike N. Korea Before It Fires Missile
North Korea and the 'destabilizing' missile defense
North Korean Diplomatic Strategy Mirrors Iran's
Don't Shoot. We're Not Ready
Leaders of Senate Panel Urge U.S. Talks With North Korea
It's Time To Talk to Pyongyang
China Urges NKorea Not to Test Missile
We hope you will join us at Villa for a lively discussion of a subject that should be of major concern to all Americans.