Enlightened Conflict

iroquois and democracy (and the American constitution)

March 1st, 2013

Well.iriquois eagle-dollar-bill

The American Constitution is one of my favorite well written documents … so when I read in a book the idea that much of it was ‘borrowed’ from the Iroquois Indians … in fact that “we the people” was borrowed … that lit a fire under my ass to do some research.

I knew it had borrowed significantly from the ‘best of the best’ European & Greek/Roman democratic principals but I had not heard about the Iroquois.

In initial research I actually discovered a physical symbol first.

The 13 arrows <for the 13 colonies> bound together in the eagle talons.

 

-          Iroquois constitution Article 57:

Five arrows shall be bound together very strong and each arrow shall represent one nation. As the five arrows are strongly bound this shall symbolize the complete union of the nations. Thus are the Five Nations united completely and enfolded together, united into one head, one body and one mind. Therefore they shall labor, legislate and council together for the interest of future generations.

 

iriquois arrowsThe Iroquois used the arrows bound together. And they refer to ‘nations’ as we would ‘states.’

Well.

Further research showed that the committee tasked with developing the constitution struggled with how to formalize so many items being discussed into one document that would satisfy one and all. Samuel Rutledge proposed they model the new government they were forming into something along the lines of the Iroquois League of Nations which had been functioning as a democratic government for hundreds of years.

While there were many desirable  models <and aspects within> from ancient and modern histories in Western & Eastern Europe and the Middle East it seemed that the Iroquois had a system which provided a basic national/state construct to meet most of the demands espoused by the many parties to the debates.

<I did not know this>

Now.

I never did find “we the people” backed up in what writings there are concerning the ancient Iroquois.

But.

I DID find enough evidence to convince me that the Iroquois certainly influenced the drafting of the American Constitution … and we present-day Americans owe these Native Americans big thanks.

Some background on the Iroquois and their Constitution.

In about 1715, the Tuscarora Nation, once part of the Iroquois peoples in a much earlier period of their history, moved up from North Carolina to avoid warfare with the invading white settlers, and were adopted into the Confederacy. At this point in time, the Iroquois controlled many parts of our now eastern states from their homelands in what is now New York state. The original Five Nations were:

 

Mohawk: People Possessors of the Flint

Onondaga: People on the Hills

Seneca: Great Hill People

Oneida: Granite People

Cayuga: People at the Mucky Land

Tuscarora: Shirt Wearing People <became the Sixth Nation>.

 

I am including the most relevant aspects of their original Constitution <as best it can be reconstructed from legend and spoken history> which is titled: The Constitution of the Five Nations – or – The Iroquois Book of the Great Law.

Well.

It is pretty amazing. You can find close parallels to our Executive, Legislative and Judiciary branches of government as originally described in our U. S. Constitution as well as many of the ‘freedoms’ and some verbiage. In addition if you assume their Nations as our current States the parallels increase significantly. I have not included the entire thing <I believe it has close to 100 articles> but just some relevant portions that make for good reading.

Oh.

I included the first section hoping that maybe someone in our current government would read this. It is a good reminder for what should be expected of elected officials <one could only hope they would actually follow some of the thinking … sigh …. Article 27, in particular, should be posted everywhere in Washington DC>.

 

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE IROQUOIS NATIONSamerica one heartbeat

 

24. The Lords of the Confederacy of the Five Nations shall be mentors of the people for all time. The thickness of their skin shall be seven spans — which is to say that they shall be proof against anger, offensive actions and criticism. Their hearts shall be full of peace and good will and their minds filled with a yearning for the welfare of the people of the Confederacy. With endless patience they shall carry out their duty and their firmness shall be tempered with a tenderness for their people. Neither anger nor fury shall find lodgement in their minds and all their words and actions shall be marked by calm deliberation.

 

25. If a Lord of the Confederacy should seek to establish any authority independent of the jurisdiction of the Confederacy of the Great Peace, which is the Five Nations, he shall be warned three times in open council, first by the women relatives, second by the men relatives and finally by the Lords of the Confederacy of the Nation to which he belongs. If the offending Lord is still obdurate he shall be dismissed by the War Chief of his nation for refusing to conform to the laws of the Great Peace. His nation shall then install the candidate nominated by the female name holders of his family.

 

26. It shall be the duty of all of the Five Nations Confederate Lords, from time to time as occasion demands, to act as mentors and spiritual guides of their people and remind them of their Creator’s will and words.

Every Confederate Lord shall speak words to promote peace.

 

27. All Lords of the Five Nations Confederacy must be honest in all things. They must not idle or gossip, but be men possessing those honorable qualities that make true royaneh. It shall be a serious wrong for anyone to lead a Lord into trivial affairs, for the people must ever hold their Lords high in estimation out of respect to their honorable positions.

 

-          Freedom of Religion

99. The rites and festivals of each nation shall remain undisturbed and shall continue as before because they were given by the people of old times as useful and necessary for the good of men.

 

-          Rights of the People

93. Whenever a specially important matter or a great emergency is presented before the Confederate Council and the nature of the matter affects the entire body of the Five Nations, threatening their utter ruin, then the Lords of the Confederacy must submit the matter to the decision of their people and the decision of the people shall affect the decision of the Confederate Council. This decision shall be a confirmation of the voice of the people.

 

-          Rights of states <Nations>

Before the real people united their nations, each nation had its council fires. Before the Great Peace their councils were held. The five Council Fires shall continue to burn as before and they are not quenched. The Lords of each nation in future shall settle their nation’s affairs at this council fire governed always by the constitution american-flag-all-rights-reserved-by-jade-leyvalaws and rules of the council of the Confederacy and by the Great Peace.

 

-          Commander in chief: Rights and Powers of War

79. Skanawatih shall be vested with a double office, duty and with double authority. One-half of his being shall hold the Lordship title and the other half shall hold the title of War Chief. In the event of war he shall notify the five War Chiefs of the Confederacy and command them to prepare for war and have their men ready at the appointed time and place for engagement with the enemy of the Great Peace.

——–

Well.

This is good stuff. Research well worth the time I invested <the entire Constitution is fascinating in it’s detail>.

Native Americans <or Indians> not only were the original settlers in America but helped provide some of the original founding father thinking. And, frankly, some good thinking for us today if we actually were to pay attention to it.

This is continuing proof that I still have a lot to learn.

year of elections

August 21st, 2012

“two of the most basic propositions of contemporary international relations are that world politics is a realm of inherent uncertainty and that is characterized by a natural absence of harmony. Practically every one knows that nothing in world politics is inevitable and harmony is virtually nonexistent.” – Robert Keohane (professor International affairs Princeton)

Well.

Let’s call 2012 the year of the elections. Or maybe we should call it the year of uncertainty.

Elections inevitably create inherent uncertainty. New ‘management’ <politician leadership> translates into undoing or stopping predecessor initiatives <which even if it is a good idea creates inefficiencies and uncertainty>, initiating new initiatives and while most often not implementing a completely new ideology they bring in new ideas and thinking.

Oh. All that is called ‘inherent uncertainty.’

Regardless. With an election looming in the good ole USofA  it is easy for us Americans to be thinking me, me … and … well … me. and maybe we should take a minute to look at the bigger global picture and reflect on the fact we are closing in on the end of the year of elections <which inevitably will crete the ‘year of the election aftermath in 2013’ but that is a separate post>.

And because I have had this discussion with several friends … some elections are more elections than other elections <huh?> … but regardless of how democratic an election is, or is not, it represents change in governments (and the discussions that take place along with governmental changes).

A third of the world’s nations will be holding local, state, or national elections in 2012.

What does that really mean? <reprise the quote>

It is a realm of uncertainty and nothing is inevitable <and I imagine harmony is a wishful thinking>.

Where are the elections?

Several Middle East, “Arab Spring” countries, will be testing democracy and where that actually leads, and eaves, them ideologically.

59 countries will have elections local, state or national). There are 193 countries in the world so that’s about a third of the world’s nations. 26 of these may see a change in national leadership. Altogether, these elections affect over 50% of the world’s population which also represents about half of the world’s GDP.

And a lot of the change is concentrated in the world’s most powerful countries.

Four out of the five U.N. Security Council members will see changes … some at the top … all within the government infrastructure.

Russia, China, France, and the U.S. These four countries alone represent 40% of the world’s GDP.

Of all of them, China will not have democratic elections, of course, but it will see the biggest, wholesale change at the top. 70% of the country’s leadership will be new.

All have major implications for international affairs.

As I stated in the discussion with a friend (who debated that China “wasn’t really having elections”) politics & elections have several levels.

There is the immediate, pragmatic level of the struggle of those vying for power.

There is also the underlying struggle of ideas … between left and right, between liberalism, pluralism, conservatism and autocracy <and  number of other things which I am sure I have missed>.

Occasionally, this type of political activity concludes dramatically <ideologically> …. like France in 1789, Russia in 1917, eastern Europe in 1989 and the Arab world in 2011.

More often, though, the faces change more quickly than the ideologies, especially in democracies, and the pattern is obvious only in retrospect.

For example, few in Great Britain realized how important Margaret Thatcher would be when they elected her in 1979.

Even fewer Americans spotted the arrival of a new brand of conservatism when Barry Goldwater was resoundingly defeated in the 1964 presidential election.

2012 stands a good chance of being pivotal, both in terms of people and a clash of ideas.

Some of these elections and leadership changes involve nothing more than personnel shifts.

Others will create the foundation for fundamental debates about the future course of a country.

In the end?

It could mean a shift so that we will see a different Europe, a different China, and a different America in the next few years.

So while things have seemed pretty chaotic up to this point I would suggest we all buckle up because all that chaos is going to create a different spin as this year comes to a close and 2013 arrives.

Why do I feel so strongly about this <beyond the obvious personnel changes and what comes with that change>?

There is a lot in play … even more so if you consider the battle for ideas.

In the 1990s, with the Soviet Union vanquished, it was fashionable to talk about the end of history, and the inevitable triumph of Western liberalism, both economic and political. But the past decade has been more difficult for those who foresaw a freer, more open world.

September 11th 2001 was a shocking reminder that a violent minority had always dissented from the West’s creed of liberal democracy.

More recently, the West’s financial crisis has raised doubts about the worth of liberal capitalism coinciding with the continuing rise of undemocratic China which creates the perception <or reality?> of  the supposed strengths of one-party efficiency.

In addition, authoritarian regimes in the emerging world have plenty of excuses for ignoring Westerners lecturing them about privatization and human rights.

Asian autocrats are once again talking about Asian values being different.

And it seems that idea is gaining momentum among some Western business leaders as they become increasingly fed up with the partisan gridlock in Washington, DC and the dysfunction of the euro zone. In fact many business leaders look enviously at the swift decision-making in Beijing … the rapid permission given for their new factory, the road built speedily to their new software center.

That all means that in 2013 ideas of all sorts are likely to clash and create inherent uncertainty … because no one is completely right … nor is anyone completely wrong.

Ah.

But in the end.

We in the US have an election coming up.

Maybe more than 40% of all registered voters will actually vote.

Oh.

By the way.

That is less than 50% <or less than half the people who could vote to any of you challenged by percentages>.

Isn’t that why people get a vote?

All I can say as we near the end of the year of elections is that if you do not vote than you cannot say anything in 2013 … the year of the election aftermath.

ukrainian music (2000)

June 21st, 2012

Ok.

This isn’t really about Ukrainian music per se. This is more about the music I discovered on my first trip to Ukraine in 2000.

While it may seem odd … my first trip to Kiev was probably defined by music. As a music lover I was in heaven. And, no, I am not talking about traditional Ukrainian music (which I admit I kinda put in the same category as death by polka).

This was contemporary music I hadn’t heard before.

Anyway.

At that time only 2 television stations were English language – bbc and mtv – therefore I saw a boatload of European/Russian music videos I had never seen before (I was also able to catch up on my world news).

Ah. But beyond the music videos … there were the nightclubs. And the club music.

I wish I could remember the one club that made the biggest impact.

This club was unfindable for me after that one night. Off a side street. Old cobblestone alley. The door was actually below street level (you had to walk down a small staircase).

Big spetnaz-looking bouncer at door.

But once inside?

A basement the size of a house. Massive dance floor on one side and a U shaped bar surrounding a non dance section. Seemed like hundreds of people and masses of dancing people.

And the coolest mix of music I have ever heard.

By the middle of the night I had given up the dance floor for a stool in the dj’s booth drinking an amazing great tasting Ukrainian beer – which I have never discovered since – tapping the shoulder of the dj every time I heard a song I wanted to know about.

As he maybe spoke 10 words of English <of which 5 are inappropriate to share on a public site> it was an unspoken sharing of love of music and the club energy it inspired.

If I knew how to upload music from my own music library I could share a couple more but, sigh, I do not … so these are the songs I could find publicly to share. while it is a mix it is skewed toward club music so if you don’t like that kind of stuff you may just want to come back for another post.

Here you go.

This song seemed like it was everywhere.

Italian Eurodance band Eiffel 65: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ6HBbyJR34&ob=av2e

And I saw this video on MTV and fell in love with Chicane.

Chicane – Autumn Tactics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFgHvMV21zI&feature=related

But.

This was the Chicane song that I heard in the clubs (it was an odd experience to be hearing club trance music and then all of a sudden hear a familiar voice … Bryan Adams):

Chicane – Don’t give up (short version official video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teBj7tigJsE&feature=related

And this one stopped me when I first heard it. It slowed the dance floor down and I had never heard such a silky smooth voice. Just a teen at that time … Craig David.

Walking away: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Mp-Wb4yBUw&feature=related

Oh. Who would have thought an ex-Spice Girl would be dominating the club scene. Sporty Spice had a 10 minute club mix (this is original on cd).

I Turn to You: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7E24eKJvs0

Oh. And this cd was playing everywhere … Television by Paola & Chiara. I am not sure there is a bad song on this album and I bet they played 4 songs off it in the club on one night.

Viva El Amor!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3V1mimj9vA&feature=fvst

Vamos a Baillar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WLLJEj53GU

(the only song that filled the dance floor faster as the opening vocals rang thru the speakers was a Craig David song)

Buona Stella: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AByQdgmTVyU

Next. An all girl band from England All Saints had this catchy song playing everywhere.

Black Coffee: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2WP1yNypHo

Lastly. This was also when I was introduced to 4 Strings. It was an okay song but a good club dance song. I kept them on my radar and about 3 or 4 years later they put out a cd that was amazing

(2000) Daytime: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noSsyKFNyR4&feature=related

(2004) Diving: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU1vfRc3KjQ&ob=av2e

Those are just my highlights. And I must have picked up 5 cds on that trip that still sit in my music library. It is a big music world out there my friends. And while American artists seem to get picked up globally for some reason non-American music doesn’t seem to get picked up as easily in America.

We are missing out on some good stuff.

the turmoil of Ukraine

June 21st, 2012

So.

I have some friends going to the Euro Futbol <soccer> tournament in Ukraine and I just traded emails with a good friend who lives there and just sent an email to a pretty good agency in Kiev … well … all that mean is that Ukraine was on my mind.

Quick note. I love the capital of Ukraine – Kiev. To me it is one of the most charming cities in Europe. If you want to know about Kiev this is a nice straightforward site (and I liked it because they include popular music videos): http://www.ireneskiev.com/Ukraine_general_info.html.html

But.

This isn’t about charming Kiev.

This is more about pointing out some uncharming things happening in Ukraine <which permits me to point out that there are other things happening in the world beyond Occupy Wall Street and the Middle East>.

This also permits me the opportunity to talk about how difficult it is to establish a “democracy” (a good lesson for us to ponder as the middle east has elections and the USofA battles its way through another set of brutal elections). Ukraine, twenty years after gaining independence from the Soviet Union, is still struggling to establish a democracy.

And it is still struggling despite the fact people want something other than a totalitarian/authoritative system (proof that just because you want something doesn’t mean you will get it).

Ok. Before you dismiss Ukraine as maybe the Rhode Island of Europe. Ukraine is landsizewise equal to France, has a population of 52 million, a location bordering both Europe and Asia, large agricultural and high-tech industries, and extensive natural resources.

Ukraine is key to the stability of that part of the world and uncertainty has repercussions throughout Europe. In addition, a successful independent, democratic, and reform-oriented Ukraine could provide a model for the establishment of other democracies.

So my next topic … change … matters.

Whenever I doubt countries can make massive change (good and bad) I look at Ukraine. It’s been about 13 years since I visited for the first time.

At that time you had to apply for a visa. Foreigners were often stopped by police for passports. I am not sure there was a supermarket (as we know one) there. There were 2 coffeehouses in the entire city of Kiev (tea is their thing).  I believe the only two non Russian/Ukrainian stores downtown were puma and benneton (there were many other differences).

Change has not been easy. And it has been interesting to see the cultural shift between generations where older generations didn’t know anything but communism and found some comfort in it and younger generations seeking a ‘western way’.

As younger generations have a habit of doing … they had a desire <for democracy> but a lack of true understanding <what democracy really takes to be successful>.

So while there were non-free elections and free elections and then quasi free elections (in that order) it all created turmoil at a high level but it also created turmoil within generations.

And ultimately it means that Ukraine is currently in a turmoil.

Now. If you doubt that the turmoil is happening … watch this recent video from their parliament session.

Ukraine parliament brawls over language bill … violent scuffles broke out among deputies in Ukraine’s parliament during a debate over a bill to allow the official use of Russian. The brawl erupted between those loyal to President Viktor Yanukovych and legislators from pro-western opposition parties, who want to preserve Ukraine’s cultural and political independence from its powerful neighbor (the video):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/may/25/ukraine-parliament-brawl-language-bill-video

Crazy stuff huh? Seems wild to americans but European parliaments are kind of known for their open craziness.

Regardless.

Turmoil, or chaos as I pointed out in an earlier post, creates opportunity. The opportunity for those in the West to help them thru transition, but also learn.

It would be silly of us to focus on the cultural differences (as a means of disregarding what is happening) but rather focus on the actions as they occur. Watch the stops and starts of a large productive country and how a democracy stubs its toe despite good intentions and a desire to do that which is right.

Here is a truth we should get in our heads.

The path to a productive democratic country is a long and winding road (despite the fact we all would like to believe it is straight and narrow) and the road can be rocky at times.

Ok. Back to Ukraine.

I was lucky enough to be in Kiev during the 2004 Orange Revolution and what I believe was a huge step politically and socially and economically for a great country.

It was exciting and you could feel the hope-like electricity among the people walking the streets.

But Victor Yuschenko (first real democratic president) squandered the opportunity.

But Yulia Tymoshenko (second democratic president) squandered the opportunity.

And now the Yanukovych government (which is debatable as a truly qualified democratic government) has squandered the opportunity to rebuild a country that has clearly lost its way.

<yikes … when I type that I begin thinking of the past three American governments>

It seems like Ukraine has been in constant turmoil since gaining its independence.

Today? The current president has failed to deliver on any of his campaign promises — economic reform, increased prosperity, and an end to corruption — and instead has rolled back democracy and the rule of law <the latter being really the only difference between this presidency and the other presidents>.

They appear to be going backwards.

All that has happened since the Orange revolution is a deepened political, regional, and linguistic division throughout the country (for those who believe other countries are always one culture/one voice … it is better to think of Ukraine as multi-faceted not unlike the United States).

former PM yulia tymoshenko

All three democratically elected presidents have only succeeded in creating a large gap between the population and the government. And, not unlike America’s lower middle class, the Ukrainian lower middle class is beginning to slightly yearn for “what was” (yesteryear).

Beyond the parliament video I shared there is also the recent display of government mismanagement of “abuse of power” of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko  (she is the extremely well liked and feisty female politician who almost won in 2010 and remains the principal political competition).

The charges against her are absurd, obviously political and the trial galvanized her support, despite her obvious flaws, and Ukraine looked idiotic to the West <all the while Russia lurks to one side seeking an opportunity for itself> all this political play taking place just as it has sought to move toward the West by signing a free-trade agreement with the European Union.

Now.

To be fair … I pulled an article from the Pravda to make a point: http://english.pravda.ru/world/ussr/17-02-2012/120541-tymoshenko-0/

My own point of view is skewed from what I like, and what I believe is “right” (which is certainly a Western world perspective).

It becomes easy to select Tymoshenko as ‘hope’ mostly because the array of alternatives appears quite limited these days.

In this there are some similarities to what we are currently seeing the US elections … at some points it seems like we are selecting the lesser evil (sorry … poor choice of words because no candidate is truly evil …) … ok … maybe better said … the least objectionable candidate.

And all that said.

Despite all the turmoil the Ukrainian economy grew by about 5%, up from 4.2% the previous year. And private consumption was one of the main drivers of growth as it expanded by about 14% over the first nine months of 2011. In addition thanks to a record high harvest of grains (56.7 million tons) and other crops, agricultural sector output was up by 17.5%. The record high harvest caused a decline in consumer price inflation to 4.6% at year-end, the lowest level in the last 9 years.

I share that information because it is a shame that the government couldn’t use some foundational growth success to solidify some positive initiatives. Instead, even with growth, there are concerns with internal management… which creates some stress because the growth makes the prize looks very shiny to the world and to the ‘political players’ in the country.

The scary part to me … Ukraine’s governmental bureaucratic crisis appears to be on a path to only deepen … and ultimately that translates into a more increasingly authoritarian, impoverished, polarized, and unstable country.

By the way … none of those words include ‘healthy’ or ‘democratic.’

Now.

I wrote this because Ukraine is one of my favorite countries (to visit and study historically).

But also because I have been writing some about imbalance and global unrest … and how unrest in one country can transition to another country.

Think about this.

With 50+ million people … situated in a strategically important space between the EU and Russia. Ukraine’s instability:

-          undermines the normalization of relations between the West and Russia

-          threatens Europe’s ongoing efforts at economic stabilization (Ukraine was considered the breadbasket of the Soviet Union has a massive agricultural output)

-          <and maybe most scary> encourages Russia to consider some form of intervention.

Yes.

#3. I typed ‘intervention’ (that can be defined in many ways).

None of those things are good … #3 is a massive domino of which if it falls tumbles into a variety of other disturbing dominoes.

This troubling governmental trend needs to be reversed … because democracy, or the hope of it, began well in 2004.

Ukraine needs to ‘refind’ the principles of the 2004 Orange Revolution and implement more effectively. Maybe they need to ask for assistance or maybe they need to be offered assistance.

I am not a government expert but some of the issues just seem silly … if not incredibly easy to resolve.

For example. The current government is setting up restrictions inhibiting the success of small and medium sized businesses (which seems incredibly silly because they are always the main growth engine of capitalistic democratic economies).

Here is an example of what is going on … in November 2010, up to 20,000 business owners <not left wing nutcases> staged a two-week rally in Kiev’s Independence Square <which was also the site of the Orange Revolution rallies>. Eventually, a delegation of business owners was invited to meet with the administration <let’s call that the ‘power of the people>. When the group asked one of Yanukovych’s advisers what the president thought about the code, they were told that he had not read it (excellent politics … imagine that in the good ole USofA).

The business protesters were then evicted from the square. Some minor changes were made … and … well … it has all led to the closure of many small and medium-sized businesses <let’s call that the ‘power of an authoritarian government just to bookend the original power of the people thought>.

I admit. When I see things like this I have to wonder who the hell is in charge (and what have they been smoking).

Regardless.

Unsurprisingly, social unrest has increased; 43% of those responding to a poll in April 2011 said that they were ready to join “legal protest actions” against inflation, 34% would do so to protest the nonpayment of wages, 22% would protest against the excesses of local authorities, and 15% would do so in support of human rights.

Unsurprisingly (just as in many other countries) people are taking positions of extreme.

Intellectuals, students, and Ukrainian-speaking democrats are already taking part in recurring protests against the anti-Ukrainian policies and the growing authoritarianism and pro-Russian tilt of the Yanukovych administration.

In addition, a self-styled “new left” has emerged, reminiscent of the student movements of United States and Western Europe in the 1960s, demanding the abolition of social inequality, capitalism, and oligarchic rule.

At the same time, a formerly insignificant Ukrainian right-wing nationalist movement has been galvanized by some anti-Ukrainian policies and now talks of revolution and Russian imperialism.

Entrepreneurs and business owners are vocal against economic stagnation and lack of business opportunities.

2012 is key.

The 20th anniversary of Ukraine’s independence is on August 24.

Up to a million foreign soccer fans are expected to visit the Ukrainian cities of Donetsk, Kharkiv, Kiev, and Lviv for the UEFA soccer tournament currently being played.

In addition parliamentary elections are held in October 2012.

With the popularity of the current government leaders falling there will be multiple reasons for Ukrainians to take to the streets.

civilian count versus military count (using terms I see in the press)

March 24th, 2010

Let me begin by saying I have never served in the military. I have good friends who have served and have a relatively extensive knowledge of the Marine Corp through work association.

Does everything you count count? Sure. Especially when it comes to lives. When trying to win a war what counts more? Your own, theirs or the uninvolved? This is a tricky one. but. In general I see the press (media) kind of letting perspective get outa wack.

I don’t condone killing civilians in war (I guess that is kind of a given for everyone). But where do we do draw the line between letting someone do their job and risking their own lives? It is unfortunate but I guess politics and military have to coexist. And to be honest while I like some political “watchdog” over military (just to keep everyone on the straight and narrow) in general I believe the military is quite aware of their responsibility to “people & environment” and from what I have seen and heard take it quite seriously.

But they also have a job to do. Win a war. Minimize their own soldier casualties. Maximize the other soldier losses. So when do we draw the line on politically careful restrictions when it starts costing us our soldier’s lives.

It must be tough to be in the military and try and win a war these days. Once again I certainly don’t condone ‘civilian deaths’ (or “collateral damage”) in war but at some point don’t people need to be realistic?

To what extreme do we hinder soldiers from doing their job? At the expense of their own lives?

The job of a military commander in battle seems like it should be to win the battle at minimal cost (time, people, material) in order to proceed to the next battle with “the most” to engage at the maximum level time and time again.

Frankly, protecting our own soldiers benefits the final objective.

How far does it seem to be out of whack? Here we go. A recent example in a newspaper. Afghanistan.

“Insurgents pledge to disrupt elections and dramatically increase usage of roadside bombs.”

Combine that with US/NATO saying (in the same article) “protecting civilians is our highest priority.”

SoldiersBurdenI am not a military guy but something seems out of whack here. The bad guys are dialing up violence. The good guys (that is us in this case) are suggesting our priority isn’t getting the bad guys but rather minimizing risk to non combatants. Gotta tell ya. I would be happier if the good guys said something like “our priority is to minimize our good guy casualties and maximize the bad guy casualties.” Am I the only one who is concerned over this?

War has changed. I realize that. We see 40 casualties in one month now as unacceptable while 50,000 in one day at Gettysburg should maybe give us a moment to reflect on cost to win. Am I suggesting we go out and lose 50,000 of the good guys? Nope. Never. Just suggesting that war is .. well .. war. People die. And more people need to die if you want to win. I give you these numbers to try and give perspective (because not fighting wars on your own land causes some lack of reference).

Am I advocating “bigger losses”? Nope.

Do I know what a “reasonable” death loss would be in victory?  Nope. I am not a military guy. As a non military guy 1 is unreasonable (or how about even 1 is a high cost). But even I know that is unreasonable if we seek success.

So you know what?  I think it’s stupid for people like me (or the press) to be counting. I want the military counting and doing what it takes to win. Because I tend to believe they would like to win at the lowest count possible. And I sometimes think we diminish their military training and certainly are not showing the respect they deserve by questioning that fact.

But this rant isn’t about that. This rant is more how non military people dictating actions, by demanding overprotection of civilians, ultimately comes at the expense of our own soldiers lives (and winning I would guess).

And that is just damn stupid.

It just seems to me that by everyone making the focus individual soldier deaths and civilian losses we are losing sight of the fact our military is there to do a job. Our guys are trained. And trained to such a level that I have a hard time envisioning they are ineptly wandering around shooting anything and everyone in sight. I also have to be honest, I personally believe if I were in a situation where someone was shooting at me from a number of different directions I may be a little indiscriminate with regard to my own firing when trying to stay alive and keep my fellow soldiers alive.

And here is a further wacky thought. I am not sure the military would ever make it through the media gauntlet unscathed if it happened this way but if I had the choice of 480 casualties in one day and win versus 40 casualties a month and “maybe win”?  I gotta tell ya, I would let the military do their job and win in one month.

Okay. Maybe this rant is simply to make a point that I wish we could let the military do their job. They know what they are doing. Yes. We can always find exception examples if we dig hard enough. I could find exceptions in everything if I look hard enough. But these people have signed up and trained, and are very very good, to do a job. At some point we need to get out of their way and let them do it.

That said. Once again. Let me state I am not for indiscriminate killing. I just get frustrated when I see media story after media story repeating “25 soldier deaths this month the highest this year.” For god’s sake. People are shooting at each other. Is 25 too much? Heck. One is bad. But having met a number of these guys … they signed up to do a job. They fully understand the possible repercussions of their job. And trust me .. they are doing everything possible to not be on that list.

Bottom line. In my mind. Get politics out of the way, suggest media have some perspective and allow the military to do its job. Because our good guys are pretty good at what they signed up to do.

The Anniversary of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution

December 26th, 2009

orange_revolution

December 26, 2004. I was there. On that day Ukrainians went back to the election booths and a majority of them again voted for true democratic candidate, Viktor Yushchenko (an earlier “politically managed” election had his opposition – Russian supported – winning a very close, corrupt election). This time the election successfully voted Yushchenko into office.

Viktor Yushchenko

Viktor Yushchenko

This was the culmination of an amazing 17 days (I was only there for 4 of them), through harsh cold and sleet, where millions of Ukrainians staged nationwide nonviolent protests that came to be known as the “Orange Revolution.” The entire world watched this outpouring of the people’s will in a country whose international image had been warped by its Russian-supported corrupt rulers. By the time victory was announced–with Viktor Yushchenko’s electoral triumph–the Orange Revolution had set a major new landmark in the post communist history of Eastern Europe.

Election Night in Kiev

Election Night in Kiev

It was a win for democracy. It was exciting. And it reminded me that:

(1) I think we sometimes take democracy for granted here in the good ole US of A.

(2) Democracy is tough.

(3) Significant change – complete overhaul – is even tougher.

But first let me say. It was an amazing place to be at that time. The political parties’ supporters were defined by orange and blue respectively. Throughout the city people wore their colors proudly. Streams of cars would drive the streets, horns blaring and colors streaming from their windows and antennas. There was pushing and shoving and yelling and the entire city just crackled with energy. It became even more special to me when that day I stepped into the elevator at my hotel and found myself sharing the space with Kofi Anan (who was pleasantly cordial…and interestingly – we Americans should note – he recognized me as an American even though I said nothing and addressed me in English).

That night into the following morning, Independence Square was filled with people, with music playing and speakers addressing the crowd. Khreschatyk Boulevard, the main street, was closed off and filled with street vendors and food and musicians. I am fairly sure the city did not sleep that night. And I was in the midst basking in their excitement.

bruce in kiev

But as I remember that spectacular experience, back to the three things it reminds me of:

Taking democracy for granted

“Razom nas bahato! Nas ne podolaty!” This was the chant I listened to in the crowd of hundreds of thousands that filled Kiev’s Independence Square on December 26th. “Together, we are many! We cannot be defeated!” Emerging from a sea of orange, the mantra signaled the rise of a powerful civic movement, a skilled political opposition group, and a determined middle class that had come together to stop the ruling elite from falsifying an election and hijacking Ukraine’s presidency. (maybe a precursor to the Obama campaign).

These people fought for democracy. And these people fought against communist memories. The majority of voters had lived under a communist regime at one time or another. They knew exactly what they didn’t want. And maybe that is what we forget having lived within only a democracy…what we don’t want. We have only had democracy and sometimes it is easy to overlook what you have. We shouldn’t.

Democracy is tough.

Democracy is about pluralism (I know that is simplistic but throw me a bone). Inherent in pluralism is being open and listening. Let’s face it…listening is difficult. Even in your own small world in business or life how many good listeners do you know? They are in the minority. People are so busy talking or shouting out their point of views they forget we are a country of “freedom to.” But that is tough. And that underlying belief foundation makes it not only tough for us (who have lived, ate and breathed it for 200+ years) but think about how tough it is for someone in which it is new.

For anyone out there who simply suggests countries are better off with democracy, make sure you think very hard about that. Yes. Democracy is powerful and good in intentions. But it is tough. And it is tougher than simply saying “we are now a democracy.” The Orange Revolution is five years old and they are still struggling to get their arms around the democracy thing. But they won’t quit (and that is the power of democracy).

Significant change – complete overhaul – is even tougher.

Let’s say the Boston Red Sox bought the Yankees and the Yankees ceased to exist and had to become part of the Red Sox nation (or vice versa if that pained you too much). Okay. I don’t mean to diminish the democracy of an entire country but you get the point.

I don’t care if you are a small company, a person trying to change habitual behavior or an entire country…wholesale change is tough. As a guy who has managed business transition I do know I like some of the old incorporated into the lot of the new when transitioning. In this case I am not sure they could…or maybe they tried but I couldn’t see it…or even if it is applicable here. What I do know is that wholesale change is never seamless.

And change, transition, requires people with resilience to ‘stay the course.’ I am pretty sure Victor Yushchenko, the Orange winner and current president, won’t make it past this point. And in a way it is a shame and in a way that is the way change works. People play roles. His was to forge the initial structure to make way for the next person to take it to the next level.

As I conclude this story and thought: I love Kiev. It is one of my favorite cities in the world. I love the Ukrainian people and their culture. But I truly respect Ukraine having experienced the height of the Orange Revolution. It was an amazing experience. I would like to think I am a slightly better person for that experience. I do know for sure that I take our democracy and country a little less for granted because of that experience.

So pull out The Constitution one day. Scan The Bill of Right
s
. We are a lucky group of people who had some pretty damn smart and resilient people who started this thing we call America. Don’t take it for granted.

Enlightened Conflict