My first flight was to Antalya (a city in southern Turkey) and I’ve been flying since then. Now I don’t know when the safety information announcement things started to make sense for me but there’s one thing I know for sure about those: Your own safety comes first. You first put on your oxygen mask and then you help your child or whoever else is in need. I believe the same applies for the home country- world conflict. In the case of the necessity for choosing between the two I would’ve chosen my country.
Just because I would choose the country where I was born over the world in general might suggest that I’m being selfish and do not really care about the others (other people and other countries) but this is not a correct allegation. Homo sapiens are multifunctioning creatures with intricate-working minds (alright, maybe except some) and these characteristics enable them to value a vast number of things at the same time- I try to do that. In my humble opinion no person or no country can leap up and be the best without a supportive or at least steady environment. Therefore it is virtually impossible for any country to invest only for the advancement of itself and face no problems. Take Germany during the last economic recession in 2008, for example. It has the European Union’s largest economy and in the beginning it seemed that Germany would not have to deal with momentous problems caused by economy- its economy is the third strongest in the world. However when its trade buddies (such as Belgium) failed to supply Germany’s demands in the market because of the problems in their own countries, Germany hit the wall of desperation with them. Mutual support is fundamental in world politics, otherwise “The moist pieces of wood will burn along with the dry ones, too,” as a Turkish proverb puts it. My own country’s priorities come first, but this does not mean that I will not work hard for the better of this world that we are living in.
“Mutual support is fundamental in world politics” is an excellent point. Asli’s example involving Germany and Belgium clearly shows how deeply one country may impact another. Thus, all the countries of the world are interconnected. A single nation, no matter how strong, is unable to stand completely alone. The global economy, prosperity, and intelligence are all composed of hundreds of subsequent webs; if an integral member of a network fails to play its role and support the others, the entire system is at risk of collapsing. This can be compared to a sports team; in order for a player to shine individually, he must be a good team player and support the others. This, I think, was Asli’s point: in order for a country to do well itself and advance its own interests, diplomats are sometimes obliged to help others, its supporters, before they reap the benefits themselves.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the U.S. has stood as the global superpower with the strongest economy for years, it could not hold this title without the countries that supply it with vital resources. Each month, the U.S. imports around 253,260 thousand barrels of crude oil from dozens of foreign countries, with Nigeria as one of the largest suppliers (Energy Information Administration). If Nigeria cut off supplying the U.S. with energy, then gas prices would spike up and the States’ economy would suffer. In this way, Nigeria holds a certain measure of authority over the U.S., even though the States are viewed as much more “powerful”. Thus, when Nigeria faces trouble, the U.S. would most likely rush to its aid. For example, in 2010 the U.S. spent approximately $614 million in aid in Nigeria, while they spent about $464 million in Tanzania, an African country about the same size (US AID). Although the economic and social state of Tanzania may be more stable than Nigeria, and less aid is needed, the USAID website specified, “USAID focuses on the impoverished Muslim north and the oil-rich Niger Delta.” Even though it seems as if the United States is selflessly helping Nigeria, the U.S. most likely is advancing its own national interests as well, indirectly benefitting from its own aid.
Sometimes it may be difficult for countries to freely aid others, even if they are motivated by benefits; the potential for betrayal usually exists. If a country helps another, who is to guarantee the help will be returned? In March of 2010, “20 African countries, including Ghana, appear[ed] to have betrayed the interest of the Continent by associating with the Copenhagen Accord” (All Africa). Many did so because “The accord embodies useful elements that set the stage for future international negotiations and provide a solid foundation and a sound political direction over the coming months” (All Africa). Thus, over 20 countries defied their union and did what they believed to be best for their own country. Although betrayal is very likely, diplomats should still continue helping others and trying to get the best outcome for the world; that way, they’d build up trust, which is the first step to truly solving global issues.
First, I would like to start by complementing Asli on her creative comparison between the difficult decisions between both a diplomat and an individual in a crisis on a plane. In that situation though, both parties are facing the exact same crisis which rarely occurs in real world circumstances. Although during a crisis on a plane you may initially help yourself, once you have the minimum necessities, you wouldn’t sit there and watch your neighbors struggle until the plane landed. By then, your neighbor could be hurt or even dead. Instead, you would help yourself and then you would help as many neighbors as you could.
ReplyDeleteAlthough most of Europe still faces an economic downfall, many European countries helped Greece when they were in an economic crisis. If Greece had been the neighbor ignored on the plane, their financial ruin would have affected the entire European economy. Many countries in the European Union, including Germany, chipped in to help Greece during this difficult time because even if their own country’s economy was not fully recovered, they needed to help their neighbors. In the near future, all of the European Union countries would have regretted not helping during the crisis because eventually they too would have been affected.
In conclusion, even if countries are not in the greatest domestic position, they still need to join together to help the weakest link, because you are only as strong as your weakest ally.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete