January 22 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

Originally published in The Walsingham Papersby The Walsingham Institute. 

A recent report from the Ontario government’s SARS Commission slammed the system.

This is a curious pointing of fingers – although we believe our current system includes a strong measure of responsibility - representing and in many ways protecting its citizens – one has to wonder if this point of view isn’t entirely outmoded for the problems we face. In a world where everything seems to be inter-connected, a serious disease outbreak, be it pandemic or not, will cause an enormous strain on the existing social and economic network – one that already finds itself overburdened. Indeed, microbes don’t care about systemic procedures – is focusing on the role of the system really the best tactic we have in the wake of a pandemic?

The SARS outbreak itself was found to have not been preventable. Although outbreaks of some known microbes can be averted – outbreaks of emerging disease seldom are. However, in most cases the further spread of disease or infection from the initial outbreak is very much preventable – and sometimes through the most basic means - maintaining proper hygiene, avoiding hospitals unless absolutely necessary, understanding the weaknesses in our systems and refraining from panic can all help prevent the spread of viruses. Focusing heavily on large health or government systems that require years to respond and then investigate the errors of their ways seems unlikely to provide the immediate and necessary measures against the problems we will inevitably face.

Indeed, it would seem more reasonable that each and every individual accept responsibility for their own health and that of their family. This does not entail the abuse of antibiotics and other medications that should be left to fight serious illnesses or over-application of anti-bacterial soaps and lotions – both decrease our chances of fighting dangerous viruses as a result. Yet to measure our own reactions – we must begin to understand that all we can really control in the wake of a pandemic or any other emergency for that matter are our own reactions to events and dangers.

SARS was a small reminder from nature that we have not conquered microbes or viruses. It was a wake up call that although we have had apparently few highly contagious illnesses affect us in the western world (indeed Ebola, Lassa and Bolivian Hemorrhagic fevers have not blinded other areas of the globe) we are not permanently immune or sheltered. Continued human encroachment on remote areas, which may contain viruses (Africa, Amazon basin etc) as well as advancing climate change may all influence the spread of diseases to new areas. New thinking around how we approach disease must be fostered – and how we as a society prepare in the wake of an outbreak. It may very well become the norm that individuals, businesses or local communities will become the initiators (and thus responsible for) those programs that once were the offering of governments in the preparation and mitigation of pandemics and other disasters.

Posted in Health Preparedness, North America | No Comments »

January 11 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

The following article was written by Prof. Dr. Dieter Spethmann and was originally published in The Walsingham Papers by The Walsingham Institute.

The litmus test to determine the EU’s capability to carry out urgent reforms has at last arrived with the recent Eastern enlargement. What are the two possible results of this test? Either the EU realizes at the eleventh hour that the current concept of integration is doomed to failure given the realities of an expanded Europe (subsequently developing a timely new understanding) or, the EU will dissolve under the weight of its own rules.

The precursors of demise are always the same. In the EU example they have been obvious for a long time: common rules are no longer seriously observed. Thus the bureaucratic apparatus, although inflated, sinks into insignificance and inefficiency. As a result politics will be reverted to its constitutional and democratically legitimized anchor: the European capitals where national intention building is wrought and national interests are attended to.

Predicting and anticipating this is not meant to pay homage to some antiquated nationalism. Neither globalization nor the European integration – where the abolition of national borders merely embodies the other extreme of market globalization – can suspend the state’s indispensable functions and duties to guarantee legal protection and social care for its citizens. On the contrary, globalization and integration enforce these duties. The more exclusive economic markets operate the more rises the imperative of the state’s moral obligation to advocate the rights of the socially disadvantaged and to comply with society’s demand for cultural assets – from infrastructure to universities, from museums to Goethe institutes.

The EU cannot refrain from taking seriously and respecting its members’ particular interests with regards to economy and culture. Consequently economic and cultural interests have to be attended to and governed on a national and not on a supranational level. The EU has demonstrated in the past that supranational public welfare or collective interests are non-existent in Europe. All assertions to the contrary are sheer verbalizations of a fiction and only aim at serving the interests of a redundant number of EU commissioners and their officers.

Least of all is it feasible to look after the interests of citizens in their currency (the most vital interest of all) or to defend these collectively. This is clearly demonstrated by the disability of the ECB (European Central Bank)to protect the majority of its member countries from increasing inflation which is likewise striking and alarming. It was a far-reaching error to transfer the protection of the currency to a stateless institution like the ECB. To whom does the ECB report? Is the ECB held liable for the consequences of its policy such as using the EURO for its “silent debit financing”? No. It is with good reason that all previous attempts to protect a currency in such a way came to rest in the cemetery of World and money history.The current planning does not equate itself with the current situation if the planning of the Eastern enlargement is conducted according to the principles and rules of a time when the Cold War was still waging, forcing Western Europe to protect itself from Soviet communism. Instead countries nowadays have to care for themselves. This is absolutely doable if markets and supranational institutions are not assigned far-reaching rights while at the same time curtailing the rights of the single states. These states must also not be saddled with overwhelming burdens – like Germany for instance. When Cesar crossed the Rubicon he knew exactly what he was doing. The EU has already crossed its Rubicon but it is not even aware of it. The Eastern enlargement forces the EU to reflect on this situation and to furnish itself with a new statute, increasingly accounting for more national autonomy. The earlier, the better for Western and Eastern Europe.

Based on an article written in German with Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Hankel

For more information please visit www.eurospethmann.de or www.hankelspethmann.de

Posted in Economic Issues, Europe | No Comments »

January 7 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

The following article was written by Prof. Dr. Dieter Spethmann and originally published in The Walsingham Papers by The Walsingham Institute.

The EU Commission is “expected to call for a break-up of integrated energy companies, where the supply of energy and the distribution networks are managed by the same company” in a January 10th report. All in a bid to boost competition, lower energy prices, reduce reliance on imported energy and push EU countries into developing renewable energy sources.

Yet is forcing the break-up of successful European energy suppliers really the best direction for an “industrial revolution” in the energy sector? What sort of impact will this have on the already burdened economies of surplus producing EU countries in the long run - such as Germany which already commands the highest level of competitive capacity of all EU member countries despite allegations of collusion.

Perhaps Mr. Barroso, the current president of the EU Commission should consider other action plans that might be more effective. For example why not turn attentions from Germany and France to the Mediterranean? Cost efficient energy in the form of LNG (liquefied natural gas) is increasingly available in the region from an ever-growing number of facilities throughout the Gulf States, Libya and Algeria. Why not encourage these countries in their process of industrialization through the development and sale of cheap gas? Adding another low-cost energy option to the European market would surely drive energy prices down across Middle and Northern Europe (not to mention strengthen European security, since stable economies in the Mediterranean basin lead to stable societies.)

Such a plan would also offer the Mediterranean EU countries a means to surmount their notoriously high foreign trade deficits – possibly allowing for equalization of trade balances. Turning towards the Maghreb Countries for LNG would invariably require establishment of receiving terminals in the EU Mediterranean region. This role would boost these struggling economies too. In turn, the ‘EURO surplus countries’ would be relieved of the burden to subsidize deficit producing countries – leaving surplus producing countries to spend their surpluses on their own development, subsequently improving the Terms of Trade for the entire EU.

Indeed, strengthening the competitive capacity of the current ‘deficit countries’ in the short term will prove essential down the road. As exporters of gas, oil, coal and uranium increasingly move away from the US Dollar or Euros as their currency of choice for energy transactions, (instead opting for others such as the Russian Ruble, the Gulf Dinar and the Australian Dollar) deficit economies will find themselves in an impossible situation. Unable to allocate funds from already constrained budgets for the purchase of energy – continued (and possibly increased) subsidies from surplus producing countries might become the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Ultimately, leading to the break-up of the EU. It will be interesting to see how the anticipated January 10th report will answer such forecasted problems.

Pressuring European energy companies to break-up just might lead to dissolution of a wider sort. Alternatives must be sought.

For more information please visit www.eurospethmann.de or www.hankelspethmann.de

Posted in Economic Issues, Europe | No Comments »

January 7 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

Originally published in The Walsingham Papersby The Walsingham Institute.

It would appear that with the changing of another year comes a change of a different sort –specifically a shift of focus from terrorism to the environment. Although it is wonderful that the very real and serious changes our planet is undergoing are being acknowledged, it is curious that the topic of climate change would be given so much attention by key decision makers almost over night.

In fact it is unfortunate that it took this long to turn such concentrated attention towards the changes in our environment. Granted, climate change has been covered in the media over the last decade, however, usually in a very different manner. The focus to date has been widely on the debate over whether or not (and if so to what degree) human induced greenhouse gases have caused these changes in our environment. And yet suddenly climate change has managed to steal the spotlight – not just from the debate over global warming, but also from the enduring international focus on terrorism.

This is even more peculiar considering that the European heat wave that killed thousands in 2003 didn’t manage to redirect focus from fighting terrorists to the changes in the environment. Nor have melting glaciers the world over or the unfortunate situation in Tuvalu been able to garner such attention. It seems highly unlikely that an unusually balmy winter was all it took to change the focus to climate change for this year.Could it be that changes are happening at such an unexpected rate that the self-centered arguments of mankind’s responsibility are now trivial? If so, what can we expect in the coming years? Is this finally enough to cause humans to rethink the way they consume energy? Are the decision makers who only recently continued to engage in the global warming debate prepared for a situation they seemed eager to ignore? What should our roadmaps in the face of these changes look like?

Certainly, 2007 is shaping up to be an interesting year, full of change at least in one arena.

Posted in Environment | No Comments »

January 3 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

The following article was written by Prof. Dr. Dieter Spethmann and originally published in The Walsingham Papers by The Walsingham Institute.

In 2002, after 11 years of a continued 1 to 1 commitment, Argentina detached its Peso from the US Dollar and devaluated its currency at a 70% rate. The Argentinean economy has been prospering ever since and unemployment rates have steadily declined. Investors, however, foot the bill.

Monetary arrangements built on paper currencies have always been short-lived, a fact which is continuously dismissed by German and other European politicians. In the ninth year of its existence the EURO is experiencing rising tensions. Despite Germany’s sizable interest subsidies (upwards of 2 % of its gross domestic product) other EU currencies are still inflated – in fact since the introduction of the EURO their inflation rates have been significantly exceeding that of Germany: Ireland +17.0%, Greece +14.2%, Spain +13.9%, Portugal +12.5%, Netherlands +6.6%, Luxemburg +6.5%, Belgium +4.4%, Austria +2.6%, France +1.8%, and Finland +0.6%.

Inflation increases costs and diminishes a country’s competitive capacity especially with regard to foreign trade. Deficit producing countries whose currencies are permanently inflated predominate in the European Monetary Union, constantly drawing subsidies from the Union’s surplus producing countries. Unfortunately, the problem shows no signs of abating but is actually growing worse as continued globalization causes current deficit producing countries to lag even further behind.The impact of these subsidies on surplus producing countries is staggering: What an incredible difference to the German economy it would make if Germany were able to apply its recent surplus of roughly $115 billion US to itself rather than to subsidies for other countries. Germany has been considerably slowed down. Since 1999 its rate of economic growth is only half of what it had been under the DM. Indeed, The Economist quotes the following placement on the “Quality of life index”: Ireland (1), Switzerland (2), Norway (3), Luxemburg (4), Sweden (5), Iceland (7), Italy (8), Denmark (9), Spain (10), Finland (12), Netherlands (16), Portugal (19) – Germany is ranks a pitiable 26.The same is true for the per capita income. In 2004 the World Bank quoted a per capita income for Germany of $30,120 US, whereas Luxemburg had achieved $56,230, Norway $52,030, Switzerland $48,230, United States $41,400, Denmark $40,650 and Japan $37,180. Germany has drastically fallen behind its former EU lead in 1989 – now a shadow of what it once was.

Quo vadis Europe? The aforementioned German ‘sacrifices’ – altogether 8% of its annual gross national product – clearly support its neighbours, but in the long run how will this help Europe survive? Without considerable changes in perspectives this imbalanced approach could have serious implications on the European economy at large and as a result its security.

For more information please visit www.eurospethmann.de or www.hankelspethmann.de

Posted in Economic Issues, Europe | No Comments »

January 3 2007 by The Systemic Analyst.

Originally published in The Walsingham Papers

by The Walsingham Institute.

The case of the alleged Russian Spy picked up in Montreal over a week ago is an exciting one in a country otherwise quiet (at least in the minds of the masses) and far removed from oft-glamorized international espionage. However, this incident - regardless whether the allegations against Paul William Hampel (insert link) are found to be true or not – should raise some important issues when contemplating Canadian national security.

Hampel is accused of “expropriating” a Canadian identity – meaning he took over the existing identity of another individual. In many cases this entails assuming the identity of a deceased individual – as opposed to stealing the identity of a living person. Assuming an identity in this manner is nothing new – particularly in the world of international spies.

In a bid to answer this dilemma and others many nations are turning towards national identity card systems that employ cutting edge technology – such as biometric identifiers, RFID tags and contactless integrated circuits. The first question this case should raise is the effectiveness of such reactionary measures in answering this sort of security breach.The Hampel case highlights one of the key deficiencies of expecting identity card systems to have an immediate impact on increasing security – how are identities stored in such a system to be firmly established? Existing supporting documents (birth certificates, driver’s licenses, citizenship cards etc.) would be required to initially establish identities as being genuine. Anyone born into the social system before the implementation of such a national identity card system would be required to use these documents to prove that they are in fact who they claim to be – this includes anyone born today and living. Hampel, in essence, would have just as much claim to his current identity as I do to mine by holding a Canadian birth certificate.

Stepping back from our western penchant to view this case through Cold War lenses we might also ask why Canada might be an alluring place in which to operate for foreign spies? What is it that we have to offer that spies or terrorists might find useful?Of course, we must acknowledge that we are not the only country in which international spies rings, terrorist groups and organized crime syndicates operate. Like pandemics – these operations know no state boundaries. However, these groups often have far better intelligence and understanding for how our social systems work than we do of their organizations.

What is it that might most attract operatives to Canada? Canadian citizenship. Although foreign spies are operating in Canada in order to gather “trade secrets” or engage in other forms of industrial espionage – it is likely that Canada is seldom the end target in cases such as Hempel’s. Canadian citizenship, however, offers passport holders ease of travel through much of the world – including entry into the U.S. As Canadians we enjoy few issues or questions at most international border crossings (although, this has been changing for a number of reasons recently.) Assuming a Canadian identity is in some aspects like acquiring an open ticket to the world.

Canadian citizenship is also relatively easy to obtain legally – never mind the more nefarious ways being presented to us in the case at hand. Indeed, this openness is what has garnered Canada it’s respected and loved position it continues to enjoy on the world stage – if that image is currently precarious.

Answering the problems that the Hampel case presents is complicated to say the least – how do we increase security measures in our immigration and citizenship processes and systems without compromising our current world image and national goals for being an open and accepting country? How do we consider identity and identity documents as a security measure? What can we take from this story that might help us understand what Canada’s role is and can be on an international stage? How should this understanding affect the way we approach our own security now and down the road?

There seem to be more questions at present than answers.

Posted in Identity Management, North America, Europe, Politics | No Comments »