| Volume 8, Number 1, January 2011 |
| |
社论‧ Editorial |
| |
Crossing Leaks, Global Links
WITH the beginning of the year 2011, one would hope that the long series of natural disasters and tragedies generated by human negligence, that have plagued the several past months, will not repeat itself in the days to come. As we said in concluding the Editorial of the preceding issue of this quarterly: “By not heeding what is happening, there is no way to heed what has to come: a better world.” Some positive signs or some renewed awareness for greater human cooperation in this world may open new perspectives and hopes for the future.
Here are a few instances. Remembering the global deception that followed the fiasco of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference (7-18th December, 2009), most world media have celebrated the initial positive conclusions of the following 16th session of the Conference held in Cancun, Mexico from 29th November to 10th December 2010. An agreement, rather than a binding treaty, was reached between wealthy countries that would reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and developing countries that would plan to do the same, thanks to a “Green Climate” fund that would assist poorer countries to finance such adaptation. On the economic front, a few member countries of the European Union, due to the debts incurred as a consequence of the lingering financial crisis, are risking bankruptcy and the exposure of the so-called Euro zone to excessive currency pressure. In a recent emergency meeting held in Brussels on 17th December 2010, the 27 leaders of the European Union agreed to build a “Permanent Euro Zone Rescue Fund” open to the 16 member states of the zone, in case of the need for financial help, through a simple mechanism but under strict conditions. Practically at the same time, in a kind of “première” after so many years of no contacts, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao visited India. Discussions were held in order to rebuild trust between the world’s most populous two nations. Contracts were signed to the benefit of both parties who have more to gain from exchange than from confrontation. Even sensitive questions were examined like India’s eventual membership of the United Nations Security Council or boundary disputes and irrigation issues related to the damming of the Yarlung Zangbo River in Tibet, which enters India as the Brahmaputra.
But excessive optimism would be out of place: outstanding questions remain unsolved. The first and most burning one is the tension in the Korean peninsula. The media has clearly mentioned how prudent neighbouring and concerned countries have made some diplomatic or other moves in order to prevent the eventual conflict from flaring up but without being directly involved as was the case in the 1950s. The seas are neither deprived of occasional frictions—the case of the Senkaku or Diaoyutai Islands—or lingering disagreement concerning the appartenance of the Paracels and Spratly Islands. On the African continent, in recent years until now, not a few in principle “democratic” presidential elections turned out to be a test of honesty and fair play, as it has recently been the case in Ivory Coast!
Positive or negative, the instances will, for the best or for the worst, continue to be part of our life horizon in the coming months. But who would have thought, a few weeks ago, that beyond that horizon, another one, formerly ignored by ordinary citizens, would have been widely open through plenty of electronically obtained diplomatic “leaks”! A great part of them, we are told, can be considered “diplomatic gossip”, a fact that is already quite strange in itself. Yet the most important ones have been duly classified by dates or topics or regions, etc., so much so that important world media have duly and without excessive hesitation provided them to the public at large. Responsibility for the “leaks” should basically be attributed first to the poor management of the source that had unfortunately become a trap for the apprehended “leaker” or “leakers”. But they made a point and debates continue: if diplomacy needs secrecy, how can diplomats be accountable to their co-citizens for what they promote? Instead of crossing leaks freed of all secrecy, should we not have rather global public links?
With the hope that 2011 lead us closer to such a goal!
Yves Camus 赵仪文
Editor
back to top ▲ |
|
|
| Issue 8.1 |
|
Hukou Reforms Debate
|
|
|
