Empire – BRIC: The new world order
Brazil, Russia, India and China are booming whilst many other countries are struggling economically, or even crashing. When their leaders recently convened in Brasilia for their second BRIC summit, they all underlined their commitment to a more democratic global governance. Will the emerging powers change the way the world works, or merely grab a bigger share of it? And what future for Brazil on the world’s summit?
Duration : 0:47:5
Churchill’s During World War II and Its Aftermath
The growing rapacity of German gluttony forced Hitler to take over Austria in 1938 and threaten Czechoslovakia. In Britain this produced a national crisis which resulted in Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s meeting Hitler in September 1938 at Berchtesgaden. Chamberlain returned from the meeting announcing ‘peace in our time’ which was abruptly smashed when Hitler invaded Prague in March 1939. Soon after given Western weakness and hesitation to work with the Soviet Union Stalin formed a pact with the Nazi’s guaranteeing Russian security and the partitioning of Eastern Europe between the Bear and the Hun. There was nothing to stop Hitler from destroying Poland and then turning his malevolence towards the West.
Public anger which had exploded after the subjugation of Prague had forced Chamberlain to give the improvident pledge to guarantee Poland’s security. Militarily and rationally this was an impossibility. The British did not possess a large enough standing army to lend help to Poland to stem a German advance and the logistics of transferring military relief to Poland was never calculated. Only the Navy was possessed war making power and there was little the Navy could do to defend Poland. She was invaded on the first of September and the Second World War began. Churchill was immediately recalled into power as First Lord of the Admiralty – the very same post he had assumed control of 25 years previous on the eve of the First World War.
From day one of the war Churchill was the true Leader of Britain. Chamberlain was defeatist and broken hearted remarking bitterly how his life’s work was now tragically sundered. He did not have the capability to rouse a nation and persevere to the bitter end. Winston as Naval War Lord was not only attacking the enemy on the seas but combating defeatist elements at home and trying to prod the blind neutral nations into action. Only Churchill could utter with true conviction and spirit, “Now we have begun; now we are going on; now with the help of God, and with the conviction that we are the defenders of Civilisation and Freedom, we are going on, and we are going on to the end.”
The Royal Navy was the only strong force that Britain possessed and from the opening bell the naval squads were on the offensive. Churchill worked at least an 18 hour day. Plans were drawn for a blockade of the German coast, convoy arrangements were made; mine-sweeping was instituted, enemy raiders harassed and submarines sunk. By the end of 1939 the Royal Navy had sunk half of all German submarines. However the war was only in its infancy. Great battles loomed.
On May 10 1940 the Germans began their vicious assault on the West. The Hun streamed into Holland and Belgium. That night the King of England sent for Churchill and asked him to form a government. Thus began the creation of the Churchill legend and his enshrinement into history. The story of the British war effort under Churchill falls into two distinct categories – the struggle to survive and the establishment of the alliance with the USA and Russia and the ultimate destruction of Germany and Japan.
The battle to survive covers the twelve or so months that Britain fought Germany completely alone in 1940-1. This period covered the dazzlingly quick disappearance of France under the heel of the Gestapo in June of 1940 to the German attack on Russia in June of 1941. This grim year brought horrible highlights; the partition of France, the formation of the pro-Nazi French Vichy government, the battle of Britain, the blitz on London, the beginning of the North African desert war, the defeat of Greece, and the British Commando raids along the Norwegian and French coasts.
It was during this sombre episodic current of ruin that Churchill became the most inspirational Leader of the Western world in the 20th century. He portrayed the towering, implacable fierceness of a proud nation, and of liberty, and expressed every free man’s tenacity to fight in words that no other could have summoned forth. Winston’s knowledge of military matters and his close operational vigilance over all affair animated and excited the British war effort with a boldness that astonished. British prestige in this desperate hour reached its highest ever pitch. The world over prayed for its salvation and success.
The immense energy and illimitable skill that throbbed and turned in his heart and mind was at last released from its bondage and given full scope of use. Churchill no longer knew the frustration of ideas that could not be brought alive, vitality that could not be expended, or ingenious approaches that could not be tested. The supreme challenge was met by a man of supreme stature. The Government was turned upside down. Routine was destroyed. Twenty four activity the rule with Churchill as the master organiser. All knew their place and role. Churchill immediately established a small War Cabinet to make effective and quick decisions. At first the membership was four which grew during the war to seven. This tiny all powerful directing force was supported by sixty or seventy other ministers of all parties who formed the core membership of the Coalition government but responsible only for their own departments. As Churchill pointed out, it was only the members of the War Cabinet, “who had the right to have their heads cut off on Tower Hill if we did not win.”
Never before in modern history did one man have so much power. Churchill was everywhere. He not only controlled the government but the operational side of the conflict as well. He was not only the King’s First Minister but Leader of the House of Commons and, even more important Minister of Defence also. The military Chiefs of Staff instead of reporting to their own ministries reported instead directly to Churchill. The Joint Planning Committee – a body of professional staff officers of all three services – worked under Churchill as part of the Ministry of Defence rather than under the Chiefs of Staff. Thus by permission of the War Cabinet and Parliament Churchill became the penultimate democratic Leader.
No one can study Churchill’s part in the war without being staggered by the colossal output of interests, dictation’s, orders, speeches, broadcasts, plans, promotions and prunings. In military matters he covered an almost incomprehensible range of activity. When Britain stood alone and the nation was bracing itself for the storm of invasion Churchill was racing about the government demanding attack plans, offensive action and targets of British incursions. He demanded the end of the passive war. Thus the commando raids were born. He participated during the war in every operational plan and strategy demanding full technical elaboration’s and missives to be sent to his attention. “During the war,” the American General Eisenhower later testified, “Churchill maintained such close contact with all operations as to make him a virtual member of the British Chiefs of Staff; I cannot remember any major discussion with them in which he did not participate.”
Churchill’s power was dependent upon the War Cabinet. It is a tribute to his skill of persuasion that unlike Roosevelt or Stalin, who were by their constitutions absolute military leaders of their nation, Churchill exercised his authority only by the permission of the War Cabinet who were willing to grant this authority only so long as Winston commanded the confidence of Parliament. Much of Parliament’s confidence was bolstered by Churchill’s impassioned, humanised and soaring orations. No man or women in the British Commonwealth who heard on June 4 1940 that France was being devoured by the German beast, will forget the tingling of emotion and courage when Churchill uttered in a strange, hoarse voice: “We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and the oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever he cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle until in God’s good time, the new world, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”
Another Leader may have uttered, “We will do what is necessary to win this war and persevere in its struggle until it is won. This government believes in the ultimate ability of our nation to come through to victory.” Or something to that effect. Very few would have evinced the crescendo of emotional “We shall’s” in a peroration. Churchill gave the roar to the British lion and heart to the British public. Romance, history, philosophy and leadership all running in the cloud-burst of Churchill’s speeches and leadership of the war effort. But though he carried his role with pride, prompt execution and relish in no way implies a cold heart or an acceptance of war’s carnage. The suffering that he saw, and he saw a lot with his own eyes as he inspected damage through Britain, on more than one occasion pushed him into tears. When Churchill saw a small shop in ruins and wondered out loud to his private secretary the anguish that the owner must feel to have his whole life exploded and ruptured so completely, he became so visibly upset that he resolved at that moment to compensate all damaged property with state payments. Thus the policy of war damage for private assets came into effect. If Churchill enjoyed the waging of war he certainly suffered from the anguish it induced and endeavoured to share its destruction with the common man and woman.
The second phase of the war lasted from the infamous Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on December 7 1941 until the end of the war. Until 1944 the British and Russian armies bore the brunt of the struggle against the demented German race. From early 1944 onwards the Americans assumed a greater share and responsibility of the war effort and began to relegate the British to a supporting role in the drive to victory. Roosevelt and Churchill met nine times during the war establishing a strong if short lived friendship. The Americans including Roosevelt were incorrectly convinced that Churchill and the British wanted to expand their Empire.
This calamitous suspicion allowed the Russians more freedom in Eastern Europe than the British would ever have tolerated. As early as 1943 with victory a matter of time and logistics Churchill implored the American leadership not to let Soviet ambition run unimpeded in Eastern Europe. The American reply was incredibly purblind and vague. It appears in scouring the documents and American communiqués that they trusted the Soviets to behave themselves more than their close allies the British ! Eisenhower and many of his chiefs remarked in letters and in meetings that they could not understand why the British constantly mixed politics and military affairs.
To the British this represented reality and the best hope to avoid another world war with the Soviets after the defeat of Germany. Churchill and his advisors even preached that upon the war’s closing everything necessary should be attempted to revive Germany as a bulwark against the pending Soviet menace. The Americans felt that such targets as Prague, Berlin and Vienna were unnecessary military ventures that would endanger the lives of their men. If the Soviets wanted to shed more life in attacking these seemingly remote locations than the Americans were content to let them. The British just shook their heads in dismay unable to impress the Americans with their superior logic. Victory was attained but it set the stage for the Cold War.
The fact that the British survived the early years of the war when Germany swept all before it and that the British evaded a complete national disaster at Dunkirk and defeated the Nazi’s in the air during the Battle of Britain, issued during the remainder of the war and for a short period after it, an inflated sense of self destiny and strength and even an isolationist mentality. The collective suffering and emotional agony endured by the entire British nation also gave express an imbued spirit of egalitarianism. The depth of this communal desire was the most profound in British history and exercised a new faith in social planning and cohesion. During Churchill’s premiership in the war the most celebrated social reconstruction document of the period was the report by William Beveridge which outlined a radical scheme of comprehensive social security, financed from central taxation. This new state aided social plan included maternity benefits, child allowances, universal health and unemployment insurance, old age pension and death benefits – an entire cradle to grave policy. From 1940-45 Britain moved more rapidly to the left than at any time in history a move marked by the important positions Labour ministers occupied in the war government.
At the end of World War II in 1945, Britain was still one of the Big 3 powers, indeed it was ranked as a great power, an illusion that held until about 1963. The British still had their empire in 1945 and in the ensuing years they could still produce great artists and Nobel prize winners, but much to the chagrin of Churchill and the leadership class British glory was long past. The rapid decolonisation of most of its empire — India, Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka — and parts of Africa shedded from British finance much unneeded expense and worry, and solidified Britain’s secondary role in world affairs subordinate to the USA and Russia.
Success in conflict notwithstanding the British electorate in the 1945 general election shockingly kicked Churchill and the Conservatives from office by an overwhelming share. For the third time the Labour party was called forth to govern. Churchill after leading the democracies to attain the supreme glories and garlands of success instantly found himself shorn of privilege and casted into opposition. It was a role he obviously did not appreciate. For Churchill defeat was only explained by the plain fact that people believed his government to be a war council, unprepared for the extended restructuring of society that peace demanded. Labour presented a sharper and more intelligent platform and catalogue of change. The Conservatives were quite content to rest upon Churchill’s name and ignore the organisation and deliverance of a viable alternative to the Labour programme.
Whilst Churchill harried the Labour government and began the rebuilding of the Conservative party to respond to public and peace-time pressure he began the personal memoirs of the great struggle and in the absence of anything else offered by the other leaders – Stalin, Roosevelt, Truman, or Hitler – Churchill was able to dictate on the best terms and in the most convincing language possible, his and Britannia’s exalted position in the struggle against evil. It was an incomparable success, ensuring that in times forward, historians would favourably compare the works of Thucydides and those of Churchill. Both men represented and recorded their times and events on an unparalleled scale.
What Churchill was able to offer the reader was a glimpse into the details of history’s most horrible man-made disaster. The wicked folly of the conflict was evident at the war’s end. Whole nations lay in ruins. Towns, cities, industrial plants and transportation facilities were erased. Food and life essentials were unavailable to great migratory populations. Cynicism and disillusionment in Europe and elsewhere bred the shift to the political left. Marxism replaced Fascism as an acceptable form of social order. Communism erupting from poverty, spread like an open wound across Asia and Europe. With the complete eradication of Nagasaki and Hiroshima the nuclear age dawned. Moral questionings loudly divided those in the West over the usage of weapons of such finality – especially against a prostrate Japan. Dropping two bombs three days apart on a nation that was in the process of trying to negotiate an exit from the war seemed to many morally reprehensible. It was an inauspicious beginning to the scientific era.
The United States and Russia emerged from the rubble of the war as opponents. Russia was mauled and mutilated by the war with over 20 million dead and whole sections of her country raped. The USA stood at war’s end possessing a massive ego and the greatest economic supremacy in history. The big two were joined by the little third – Great Britain – and the three during the war and after drove the discussions regarding the build up of the United Nations. Most vexing to the Allies in the construction of the United Nations Assembly was whether members were obliged to surrender part or all of their own independence to the new body in order to maintain peace. How would it be possible to invest such a supranational body with enough force to enforce decisions ? How would the large powers relate to the smaller in the decision making of such a forum ? At Moscow in 1943 the Big Three resolved many of these issues and in Washington in 1944, joined by China, hammered out the shape of the new international body. At the Yalta conference in 1945, the Big Three came to terms on the matter of securing for each of the major powers the right to veto decisions of the new international body. This allowed the creation of the UNO charter at San Francisco in April 1945 which clearly identified the principles and responsibilities of the new organisation. Fifty one founding nations signed the document and in September 1945 the UNO opened its headquarters in New York.
Comprising the UNO were principally the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the International Court of Justice, and the Secretariat. Most power resided in the Security Council which was given the task of maintaining the peace. Five permanent members sit in the council; the United States, the Soviet Union, Great Britain, China and France and six other nations are elected for two year terms as non-permanent members. The permanent members retained veto power with all resolutions needing the consent of the five permanent nations before passing.
In contrast to the Security Council the UNO General Assembly was shaped by all the member states each wielding one nation one vote rights. International problems are to be solved in an open forum and mandates need to be passed by majority vote. This effectively gives the smaller nations more voice in international affairs. The Secretariat acting as the permanent secretary of the UNO concerned itself with internal operations with its Secretary General the highest profiled member of the UNO, exerting wide diplomatic powers emanating from the prestige of the office.
Thus the founding of the UNO was an expression of hope by the survivors of the Second World War. Quickly this vision was marred and jaded by political ineptitude and quivering resolve by the UNO in major affairs. There was little effective work during the Cold War that could be resoundingly accomplished. This war which was contested by two sides that viewed the other as monolithic or controlling inimical forces, could never have been settled via diplomatic channels. The mental straitjackets of both sides; with the Soviet Union believing that the capitalist West controlled by a few monied financiers who desired the destruction of communism and especially the Soviet Union and which would never grant the Russians fair credit in defeating Hitler; and the West believing that Russia controlled the communistic movement world-wide and that communism and especially Russia wanted to overthrow the better functioning liberal states, could only end with the breakdown of one of the combatants. The demise of Marxism gave spring to the hope of a liberal-democratic world.
The major events since 1945 can be summarised in a short list;
- The Collapse of Communism
- The Triumph of Capitalism
- The beginning of the High Tech Era
- The Decline of the USA and the re-emergence of Europe, Japan and China
- The Fragmentation of parts of the world into tribes
- Ecological dislocation
- Growing disparity between the have and have-not nations
- Emerging militant Islamism
- Questioning over the role of the UNO
The most momentous and important event however has been the spread of globalism. Economically, morally, and spiritually people are viewing themselves regardless of race, kin, geography or circumstance as belonging to the entire human race and not a limited defined tribe. Though tribalism in some areas of the world is taking hold even within these identified units a greater consciousness is emanating out to the rest of the globe that though distinct there resides a desire and need to be integrated into a global framework. Economics, peace and ecological salvation commonsensically dictate this. So do the various images from space capturing a small blue ball in the surroundings of space. Somehow this humbles even the largest of egos. So even as, in some parts of the world, balkanisation is shattering mature states, the pieces will still be forced to bond not only together but somehow they will need to align themselves to the greater puzzle that resides outside their narrow borders. It is only by collective effort that the solutioning of poverty, ecological rapine, and the stoppage of war can be peacefully effected.
Churchill died just after the Cuban missile crisis during a bitter period of Cold War strife, which almost pushed the world into a nuclear confrontation. Though he felt certain of liberal-democracy’s triumph he did not see the maturity of his concept. And though he sustained an undying faith in the ability of man to overcome his worst problems we can be sure that without using the leadership skills presented through his example we will have a very difficult time indeed.
C. Read
http://www.articlesbase.com/business-articles/churchills-during-world-war-ii-and-its-aftermath-700338.html
Are We Really One World? German Au Pairs and Cultural Differences
With the rising costs of childcare, American families are hosting au pairs in staggering numbers. There has been an increase in the number of au pairs with nearly 22,000 young women residing in the USA last year, up 44% from 2004! This is a dramatic increase and the trend appears to be growing despite the weak economy.
The French term, au pair, denotes a young woman who “lives as an equal” with her host family. Au pair agencies recruit young women from over 55 countries, with China as the newest “hot” placement for sophisticated American families seeking to expose their children to Mandarin.
Despite global connections between countries and the politcally correct phrase “we are all one world” cultural differences exist across Europe, Asia and South America - top areas au pair agencies recruit from. These cultural differences add flavor and spice to the host family’s year with their au pair and both benefit from cross-cultural experiences.
Knowledge of cultural differences is critical to a host family’s success with their au pair -American behavior may be viewed as rude or insulting to an au pair, and Americans can often misinterpret an au pair’s interactions with their children, etc.
One of the more popular countries that Americans prefer when hosting an au pair is Germany. Let’s take a look at why this is true:
The idea of traveling to the United States to become an au pair is a very familiar concept in Germany. These young women are motivated by several factors including a desire to become more independent, to improve their English skills, and to experience American culture. German youth are fascinated with American music, TV programs, Hollywood stars and movies. In addition, young German women know that a year abroad that improves her English is a significant plus on her resume, greatly increasing her job potential once she returns home. Therefore, the au pair program continues to be a highly popular gap year for young women who usually return to Germany to continue at University. Approximately 37% of all au pairs who arrive in the United States are from Western Europe and 23% of that number are from Germany (although in recent years, that trend seems to be declining).
German Culture
- Young people in Germany have much more freedom from their families to socialize and date compared to their American peers. Socializing with friends is very important and German youth go out to pubs from the early age of 16. If your German au pair likes to go out and socialize, do not misinterpret this as ”party girl” – she will most likely be sitting in a Starbucks talking with other German au pairs or visiting our nation’s famous sights to expand her knowledge of America.
- Curfews are not common and there is generally a relaxed and accepting attitude between parents and their adolescent children.
- German youth are generally open-minded, well mannered and tend to be ambitious regarding their careers.
- Germans take family life very seriously and most German families eat together for all meals, including lunch. Government rules allow all shops and businesses to close each day for from 12 noon to 2 o’clock so the family can come together for lunch. No one is late for meals.
- Germans are very private people and greatly value their time alone. It would not be unusual for your German au pair to keep her door shut while she is on her time “off” and during these times you should make sure the children are not barging in and bothering her. She may interpret this behavior as very rude and intrusive.
Childcare
- Discipline techniques include talking to the child, taking sweets away, taking away television or video privileges, or sending the child to their room.
- Corporal punishment is forbidden in Germany
- German au pairs tend to be highly organized and responsible and catch on quickly to the family’s routine.
- Applicants obtain their childcare experience through formal training (in kindergartens, etc.) and babysitting for friends and family.
- German parents (either mother or father) typically stay home with their young children at least until they are old enough to attend kindergarten. Working at home is very common for German parents.
- Your German au pair will expect the children to treat her with respect, to comply with her instructions and to follow the house rules. Unruly or bad behavior is a sign of disrespect and a child who is overly indulged by parents (with toys, sweets, privileges not earned) is considered spoiled as result of poor or failed parenting.
Driving Skills
- Most West German au pairs are excellent drivers. They receive their license at age 18 and the test is much more demanding and time consuming compared to their American peers. Most driving pupils need 20-30 lessons in order to pass the test and there is an hour practical driving test! If any German fails the test more than 3 times, a psychological test is then required by the state.
- Most parents have a car for the teen to practice on and they support their teenagers in getting the license and becoming good, safe drivers.
- German au pairs are exclusively sought out by host parents for their excellent driving skills making them one of the most popular au pairs.
English Skills – West German Au Pairs get an A+
- English is a compulsory subject at the age of 10, but many children start as early as kindergarten. As a result, German youth have competent English skills with many having no or a very slight German accent.
- German au pairs are popular with host parents for their English skills. Host parents typically expect them to help the children with homework and German au pairs are generally very competent in this area.
- West Germans’ proficiency in English is generally better compared to Germans from East Germany – East Germans get a C- in English!
Health
- Germans are typically very healthy. They have good medical and dental insurance.
- Most young women are not inoculated or tested for TB (tuberculosis).
- Eating disorders are not very common in Germany.
- Most young people in Germany eat meat and lots of vegetables and fresh foods are preferred to fast foods/processed foods. A growing number of German youth are becoming vegetarians and you should ask your au pair if she eats meat.
Religion
- The two most common religions in Germany are Catholic and Protestant
- Most young people in Germany do not practice their religion on a regular basis
Other Useful Information
- Most German families have at least one computer with access to the internet and most young Germans have their own cell phones; contacting prospective au pairs is relatively easy during the interviewing process
- Family members usually speak English and can take messages from you if the au pair is not home which is a great plus for you as a host parent.
- German students end their academic year in June and most of the young women apply to arrive in the USA during the summer months but before our school term starts here in the USA so plan to have your German au pair arrive in early or mid August so she can sign up for fall courses at your local college.
- German au pairs are typically serious students and will expect to sign up for courses immediately upon arrival. German au pairs will expect flexibly from her host parents so she can attend her classes without interruption.
- West Germans are generally more educated, are more experienced drivers and possess better English skills compared to East Germans.
- Generally, German au pairs have less trouble assimilating into American culture and do not generally suffer from culture shock. They genuinely like American culture and look forward to their year abroad.
- Most Germans will not extend beyond the 12 months – they will return home to continue their education, start a business or look for a professional job.
With the growing trend of using au pairs as their #1 childcare option, American families are competing with one and another for au pairs who are responsible, mature, good drivers and who speak good, competent English. German au pairs generally meet all of these criteria while adding old world charm mixed with a youthful and modern perspective. Germans are proud of their culture and are usually delighted with our America experience – a wonderful combination for any host family!
Edina Stone
http://www.articlesbase.com/parenting-articles/are-we-really-one-world-german-au-pairs-and-cultural-differences-712711.html
International Company and Ethics
International Company and Ethics
The issue of business ethics is engaging companies more and more – both domestically and internationally. This trend is accentuated by high-profile examples of breaches of accepted standards of ethical behavior. For example, the recent Enron case where inadequate checks and balances within the firm enabled unethical behavior to occur, a development made easier by the failure of the external auditor to fulfill its role properly. Assumptions about ethics and business are influenced inevitably by fundamental beliefs about the role of business in society. On the one hand, there are those who believe that the sole social responsibility of business is to generate profit. For some proponents of this view, profit generation itself takes on a moral dimension whereas others see profits as the key to wealth generation – the main way of addressing social issues (Davies, 1997, p. 88). On the other hand, others believe that the role of business is much broader than that of profit generation and that all those who are affected by the way a company operates – shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, the local community, future generations (especially in relation to environmental issues) – have a legitimate interest and stake in the way a company conducts itself.
Many of these concerns are relevant to business whether it is domestic or international in nature. However, international business poses particular challenges and questions over and above those facing purely domestic business. In order to reconcile doing business internationally and remain ethical, the company should follow the main principles of human rights, comply with legal norms related to labor, avoid corruption and correspond to standards of environmental protection. Even though it is not easy to combine making profit and adjusting to ethical principles, sometimes failure to comply with legal norms and standards my result in negative public image for the international company and loss of customers. Therefore, international company can suffer even more damages if it decides not to follow the ethical principles.
The first issue related to ethics is human rights. It is a generally accepted principle that international company should not engage in direct infringement of human rights the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is commonly taken as the appropriate benchmark. However, some people would go further, preferring companies to refrain from doing business in countries known to infringe human rights on a systematic basis. Opponents of this view argue that if an international company abstains from conducting business in a country with an ethically dubious regime, the only concrete result is to hand over business opportunities to companies without such reservations (Barlett and Ghoshall, 1998, p. 110).
On coming to office in 1992, for example, President Clinton proposed to withdraw MFN status from China as a result of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 in which many pro-democracy demonstrators were killed (Kepstein, 2001, p. 108). Such action would have provoked retaliation against US companies operating in China and US business lobbied hard to persuade the president to change his mind. They argued that US business interests would be irrevocably damaged in a rapidly growing market and that the outcome would not be an improvement in human rights in China but a boost to the business prospects of American business rivals in China. The lobbying campaign was successful: the link between trade and human rights was broken and replaced by the doctrine that the possibility of bringing about change is greater if business and other links and contacts are maintained.
International labor issues can be linked with human rights, especially regarding matters of forced labor and child labor. Ethical labor issues also occur outside the framework of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in circumstances where certain labor practices may be legal and commonplace in the host country but do not necessarily represent fair and equitable treatment of the workforce. The issue facing an international company is: does it maximize its competitive advantage by locating in a low-cost/low-regulation country and adopt local practices or does it refrain from reaping all the labor cost benefits by adopting higher standards and more ethical practices than strict compliance with local legal norms requires? A firm may choose to take the latter path and still experience significant competitiveness gains.
Corporate codes of conduct governing general corporate behavior and treatment of the workforce in particular are not new. Their modern manifestation began in the mid-twentieth century in the form of codes from the International Chamber of Commerce and other collective codes (Donaldson, 1989, p. 55). Their popularity surged once more in the 1990s in response to pressure from NGOs, the emergence of corporate social responsibility as a key consideration for firms and the phenomenon of socially responsible investment and shareholder action. Additionally, discussion of the possible inclusion of labour regulation under the WTO umbrella encouraged international firms to assume greater responsibility for their own labor standards, if only to demonstrate that international regulation was unnecessary. Corporate codes of conduct take many forms. Many international firms have developed their own individual codes to cover their own employees and those of their contractors and suppliers. Some industries have developed their own codes. Whatever form they take, codes are necessary for the positive public image of international company and they demonstrate that the company reconciles doing business and acting ethically. Codes need to comply with a number of conditions before they can be said to operate equitably and with credibility (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 88):
1.the contents of the code must be clearly worded and, at a minimum, comply with core standards;
2.the company adopting the code must be committed to it and be prepared to provide the resources to ensure its implementation, including training, information systems for monitoring and compliance and staff to implement new procedures;
3.knowledge of the code throughout the organization is essential to its implementation: in particular, employees of the firm and its subcontractors and suppliers must know of the contents of the code and a reporting system must be established that enables workers to report infringements without fear of reprisals;
4.the code should be subject to verification by independent assessors who have access to the site unannounced at any time.
The application of such codes can enhance internal governance and facilitate internal management across geographically dispersed sites. There is some evidence to show that real commercial benefits can be gained from the proper application of fair and equitable labor standards, although more widespread research needs to be done on this (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 111). Provided the code of conduct adopted by a firm has external credibility, it can both protect and enhance a firm’s reputation, particularly important these days when more is expected of firms in terms of corporate social responsibility.
Levi Strauss is one of the world’s largest brand-name clothes manufacturers and also one of the first international companies to adopt a corporate code of conduct to apply to all contractors who manufacture and finish its products and to aid selection of which countries in which to operate (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 118). The Code of Conduct has two parts:
1.Business partner terms of engagement: Levi Strauss uses these to select business partners that follow workplace standards and practices consistent with its policies and to help identify potential problems. In addition to meeting acceptable general ethical standards, complying with all legal requirements and sharing Levi Strauss’s commitment to the environment and community involvement, Levi Strauss’s business partners must adhere to the following employment guidelines:
-Wages and benefits: business partners must comply with any applicable law and the prevailing manufacturing and finishing industry practices.
-Working hours: partners must respect local legal limits on working hours and preference will be given to those who operate less than a 60-hour working week. Levi Strauss will not use partners that regularly require workers to work in excess of 60 hours. Employees should also have at least one day off per week.
-Child labor: use of child labor is not permissible in any of the facilities of the business partner. Workers must not be below 15 years of age or below the compulsory school age.
-Disciplinary practices: Levi Strauss will not use business partners who use corporal punishment or other forms of physical or mental coercion.
-Prison/forced labor: no prison or forced labor is to be used by business partners nor will Levi Strauss use or buy materials from companies using prison or forced labor.
-Freedom of association: the rights of workers to join unions and to bargain collectively must be respected.
-Discrimination: while respecting cultural differences, Levi Strauss believes workers should be employed on the basis of their ability to do their job
-Health and safety: Levi Strauss undertakes to use business partners who provide a safe and healthy working environment and, where appropriate residential facilities
2.Country assessment guidelines: these are used to address broad issues beyond the control of individual business and are intended to help Levi Strauss assess the degree to which its global reputation and success may be exposed to unreasonable risk. It was an adverse country assessment that caused Levi Strauss to cease its engagement in China in the early 1990s, largely on human rights grounds – a decision that has subsequently been reversed. In particular, the company assesses whether:
-the brand image will be adversely affected by the perception or image of a country among customers;
-the health and safety of employees and their families will be exposed to unreasonable risk;
-the human rights environment prevents the company from conducting business activities in a manner consistent with the global guidelines and other company policies;
-the legal system prevents the company from adequately protecting trademarks, investments or other commercial interests;
-the political, economic and social environment protects the company’s commercial interests and brand corporate image.
Levi Strauss is the example of the company that successfully combines doing business and following ethical practices. As we see, the company code of ethics demonstrates that Levi Strauss complies with the most labor norms and environmental standards; at the same time such actions of the company do not have any negative impact upon its business. On the contrary, since Levi Strauss has positive public image the customers should be more attracted to its products.
Some of the other important ethical issues that the company should consider is bribery and corruption. Bribery/corruption is not as clear-cut an issue as might first appear; indeed it can be rather a grey area. In some cultures, it is regarded as perfectly normal to give an official or host a gift (Asgary and Mitschow, 2002, p. 245). In others, only minimal value token gifts or no gifts at all are allowed. A problem arises when it is the norm for a contract to be signed only after the payment of a ‘commission’ to a key official or officials (Asgary and Mitschow, 2002, p. 240). Such circumstances place international companies in a difficult position: without payment of these commissions, the contract will not materialize and, if they do not make the payment, many other companies will (although that is not an ethical justification for going ahead with the commission). The position of the US is unequivocal about this: it regards all such payments as bribes and, as such, they are both unethical and illegal. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Law forbids US companies from making improper payments to foreign governments, politicians or political parties to obtain or retain business. Therefore, the only choice that American companies have regarding bribery is not to make any payments regarded as bribes; otherwise, it can be considered that a company violates the law.
The last ethical challenge that international companies face is related to environmental protection. Firms can encounter damaging publicity as a result of the environmental outcome of their activities as pollution attracts more and more media attention (Barlett and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 98). For many, environmental protection and corporate responsibility in this field has a clear ethical dimension. This debate is couched in terms of the ‘global commons’ in which all human beings have both a stake and a responsibility to ensure the well-being of the environment for future generations (Donaldson, 1989, p. 211).
In order to reconcile doing business and meeting environmental ethical standards an international company should comply with the following underlying principles in environmental policy.
The first norm refers to the “polluter pays principle.” It stipulates that polluters should pay the full cost of the environmental damage they cause (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 100). Environmental costs are often referred to as ‘externalities’ (for example, damage to health, rivers, the air, etc. arising from economic activity) that are not incorporated into the costs of a product but are borne by society as a whole (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 100). By making the polluter pay the full cost of its activities, including externalities, this principle provides an incentive to make products less polluting and/or to reduce the consumption of polluting goods. This internalization of external costs can be met through the use of market-based, policy instruments.
The other principle refers to prevention. If the company decides to follow the prevention principle it changes to products and processes to prevent environmental damage occurring rather than relying on remedial action to repair damage after it has taken place (Davies, 1997, p. 108). This implies the development of ‘clean technologies’; minimal use of natural resources; minimal releases into the atmosphere, water and soil; and maximization of the recyclability and lifespan of products.
In conclusion, international business adds an extra dimension to ethical issues within the firm. All organizations have their own culture based on common language and terminology, behavioral norms, dominant values, informality/formality, etc. This inevitably becomes more complex when an organization has a presence in more than one country. Some companies believe a strong corporate culture is a means of overcoming diverse national cultures whereas others evolve different cultures in different organizations and incorporate cultural diversity in their management strategy. Many organizations like Coca-Cola and McDonald’s do use core brands but still adapt their products for local markets and follow ethical standards, either out of necessity or to maximize returns. Ethics and corporate social responsibility are closely related. Debates about corporate social responsibility have been dominated by labor and environmental issues but a growing number of corporate governance scandals involving multinationals is increasing pressure for stricter regulation. International companies can reconcile doing business internationally and remaining ethical if they comply with labor and environmental norms enacted at the international level and establish and follow the code of ethics. In the long run, corporate commitment to sound ethical principles and socially responsible behavior is good for business.
Produced by ProfEssays ( www.professays.com ) – professional custom essay writing service: custom essays, custom term papers, custom academic papers, custom research papers, compositions, book reports, case study. No plagiarism, high quality, prompt delivery.
Andrew Sandon
http://www.articlesbase.com/ethics-articles/international-company-and-ethics-67615.html
High Housing Costs in Asia Criticized by International Research Group
Exceptionally high tax, transaction and other costs discourage the provision of housing in Asia, according to a report released today by the Global Property Guide. These are seen to lead to urban slums and unaffordable housing units.
There are about 250 million slum dwellers in South and South East Asia, 178 million in China alone. Countries with serious slum problems include Indonesia (with 21 million slum dwellers), Philippines (20 million) and South Korea (14 million). These are the same countries that have serious housing affordability conditions.
“The market cannot efficiently provide housing, if it is saddled with unnecessary costs,” says Prince Cruz, senior economist at the Global Property Guide. “Total transaction costs in Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia the Philippines and South Korea are above 10%. In the Philippines, the round-trip transaction costs of buying and selling a property can easily reach 35% of the property value because of the 12% VAT. This is on top of the 6% capital gains tax and 5% agent’s fee. For these countries, the bulk of the costs are real estate agents’ fees, and sales and transfer taxes.”
On the other hand, round-trip transaction costs on property purchase-and-sales are generally below six per cent in China, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia and Singapore.
In a study involving a detailed comparison of housing purchase costs in Asia, the Global Property Guide finds a clear correlation between high transaction costs, and unaffordable housing (measured by house-price-to-income ratios). House-price-to-income ratios are generally regarded as the best measure of housing affordability. (See: http://globalpropertyguide.com//articleread.php?article_id=78&cid=)
Condominium prices are high compared to average incomes in Shanghai, Jakarta, Manila and Seoul. Countries with the least affordable housing are the same countries that have high ratios of urban slums.
“These high housing prices can be traced to high transaction costs and several policies that discourage property owners from participating in the real estate market. Reducing transaction taxes can lead to more efficiency and transparency in the market,” says Cruz.
Aside from high transaction costs, corruption is also a major factor in most countries in Asia. In China, bribes to government officials and bureaucrats for property transactions are considered standard business practice. These corruption costs are transferred directly to homebuyers, leading to higher house prices.
Other highlights of the study:
• Countries with high transaction costs tend to have expensive houses – and large slum populations.
• Countries with less transparent markets and more registration procedures have higher real estate agent fees (particularly the Philippines and Indonesia).
• Developing countries in Asia do not provide sufficient protection of property rights. Poor governance and weak control of corruption are also observed in China, Indonesia and the Philippines.
• Foreigners face several ownership restrictions in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines. On the other hand, the real estate markets of Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea are general open to foreigners.
• Tenant eviction is a serious problem in some Asian countries, generally because of cumbersome and inefficient court systems.
To access the report:
http://globalpropertyguide.com//articleread.php?article_id=78&cid=
The Global Property Guide
http://www.articlesbase.com/business-articles/high-housing-costs-in-asia-criticized-by-international-research-group-90080.html
Paul Watson on The Alex Jones Show 2/3:Kim Jong il ” The Globalist Best Friend!!”
Alex covers the latest developments on hostilities between North and South Korea. Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet editor and journalist, will join Alex to discuss the issue.
http://www.infowars.com/
Paul Joseph Watson
http://www.prisonplanet.com/
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
A state of war officially exists again between North and South Korea for the first time since the end of hostilities in 1953 following North Koreas announcement that they would henceforth refuse to abide by the terms of the peace armistice.
The Korean Peoples Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer, the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with prompt and strong military strikes. South Koreas military said it will deal sternly with any provocation from the North, reports Bloomberg.
As we have highlighted, any North Korean attack on South Korea will be countered by the United States, which is allied with South Korea. North Korea is allied with China, and Chinese military forces will support North Korea in any conflict just as they did in the 1950s before the armistice was signed.
North Koreas renouncement of the peace armistice follows yesterdays threat by a Japanese ruling party minister that Japan should change the terms of its pacifist constitution in order to conduct cruise missile strikes on North Korea.
Meanwhile, Russia has warned that the conflict could go nuclear and has made preparations to safeguard its far eastern regions.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/state-of-war-between-two-koreas-after-armistice-ended.html
.
Duration : 0:9:31
If there is a new world order or an Illuminati why do people think the members are only Republicans?
First I am not into grand conspiracies. In fact I find most of them just plain silly. However, everytime I see mention of these groups it seems they are almost always equated with Republicans. If there is a New World Order or an Illuminati isn’t it much more likely that these groups would non specific in party affiliations and corrupt all politicians equally in order to achieve their goals.
roady42: Where exactly did you me placing any blame on anyone in this question?
The previous statement should read see me placing blame.
G51044 & GTR: That is not an answer, it’s a commercial for a conspiracy website. I seen the site already. I’ll pass thanks.
the liberal patriot: I am not speculating one way or the other whether there is a New World Order. I am merely stating that in a preponderous of posts which I see on the matter it is often associated with Republicans exclusively.
Well, not that I myself buy this particular conspiracy hypothesis–really, "theory" is the wrong word for it, as theory implies that it’s something with substantial evidence to back it up–but, to Answer your Question here, I really think it’s obvious.
This whole "Illuminati" business is about taking over the world via money, by way of Big Business and its connections. And….in the 20th century at least, in the United States, *much more* often than not your conservative, Republican elements have been *about* being pro-big-business, they’ve been *about* putting the interests of Big Oil (Halliburton? Iraq war?) and Big Banking (severe and recent changes to bankruptcy laws putting *most* ordinary people *one* crisis away from being de facto indentured servants) above those of ordinary voting citizens.
You can call it an accident of history really. In what remains of the old Soviet Union, the people who would be most aligned with "Illuminati" interests aren’t even politicians, but rather the "oligarchs" or big businessmen whose interests border on organized crime and racketeering. And in what *was* the United States before the Civil War, one could argue that the pre-Lincoln Democrats were once closer to "Illuminati" interests.
This is why I think the hypothesis fails to some degree. The whole conspiracy operates on one *simple* heuristic–follow the money, more specifically the Old, Landed Money. Problem is….that heuristic fails to take into account that "Old Landed Money" has a habit of changing with the passing of decades and centuries….even Big Banking has changed the way it does business in so many ways that bankers in the 1950s would have trouble recognizing some features of today’s landscape (trading in derivatives versus stocks, emphasizing the *buying and selling* of debts versus keeping people *in* debt). It also fails to take into account the changes in technologies (no, not the internet–that was stifled pretty effectively. I’m talking about the rise of Big Oil itself.), or the market shifts that can take place (people didn’t see the rise of Asian economies–Japan, then China, then Southeast Asia, then China *again*–and they likely *won’t* see the rise of India or Russia either when that hits) from nation to nation and culture to culture.
In very plain terms: The hypothesis is *too* simple to be as all-encompassing as it claims to be. Only *one* conspiracy? Only *one* group of wannabe-all-mighty-then Muckety Mucks who want to take over the world? Ok….
And if they’ve been active all this time, and so rich and powerful…where are their successes? Really, why haven’t they taken over completely yet? It’s not just a question of timing or agenda here–the lack of world conquest at this late date forces me to ask the question: If the Illuminati Hypothesis is true at all…then why are people still free? Does this mean that *no one* in on the conspiracy is *competent* at all? ^_^ Reduction to absurdity. The world conquest doesn’t happen according to plan because the hypothesis is itself absurd.
But I digress. Point is, if you take the hypothesis at face value, you do have a "follow the Old Money" mindset, and that means you look for the political party that caters to Old Money first.
Which is a mistake if there actually *are* any conspiracies afoot, just because for all we know, the conspirators may well have it in their best interests to *have* a sold-out, ineffective version of "mainstream liberalism" at their beck and call (they do, it’s called creating a false division to draw attention away from the real ones). They may have it in their best interests to *underfund* critical social services when the need for them is on the *rise*, things like the police, public schools, and healthcare (they do…it’s called keeping the peons *desperate*, ignorant and terrified).
My take on it is that there are at *least* five or six *different* conspiracies afoot at any given moment, and these days, they’ve all had one horrid effect: To sabotage the way the United States works, in an attempt to weaken Western Civilization. And I doubt it is from these multiple conspiracies working together so much as it is that nobody’s really paying attention to the *needed* things and in so doing, every plotter gets at least a *brief* free ride.
Essentially it’s like a stray dog that’s been out in the alleys too long: fleas alone won’t kill a dog, but if the dog already has ticks, worms, lice, an infected wound and a leech already to deal with, then yes, *one more* parasite will drag it down.
I hope this was helpful. -_- Thanks for your time.
How many times will we defeat the tyranny before everyone is forced to accept the mark of the beast?
I have hope that we will defeat the tyranny of global government at least once more. The NWO may fail this time but will we have enough truth speakers and critically thinking minds left to defeat them next time?
No more times. Let me tell you how it will play out. Your national health care will bankrupt the United States, mainly because you will insure all illegal aliens. Then we will bail out California and other states. Once the U.S. is broke, China will call in its debts. Unable to pay and with the dollar as worthless, America will go to the Euro. When you have no money you have no power. One world monetary system in place, the UN will gain more power. Then comes the UN leader who will rule as the NWO leader. And people will not be chained down and forced to take the mark. They will be standing in line to get it. Wanting it as though it were the new iphone.
A Sky News video of what really goes on in ChinaPaul Watson on The Alex Jones Show 1/3:Kim Jong il ” The Globalist Best Friend!!”
Alex covers the latest developments on hostilities between North and South Korea. Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet editor and journalist, will join Alex to discuss the issue.
http://www.infowars.com/
Paul Joseph Watson
http://www.prisonplanet.com/
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
A state of war officially exists again between North and South Korea for the first time since the end of hostilities in 1953 following North Koreas announcement that they would henceforth refuse to abide by the terms of the peace armistice.
The Korean Peoples Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer, the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with prompt and strong military strikes. South Koreas military said it will deal sternly with any provocation from the North, reports Bloomberg.
As we have highlighted, any North Korean attack on South Korea will be countered by the United States, which is allied with South Korea. North Korea is allied with China, and Chinese military forces will support North Korea in any conflict just as they did in the 1950s before the armistice was signed.
North Koreas renouncement of the peace armistice follows yesterdays threat by a Japanese ruling party minister that Japan should change the terms of its pacifist constitution in order to conduct cruise missile strikes on North Korea.
Meanwhile, Russia has warned that the conflict could go nuclear and has made preparations to safeguard its far eastern regions.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/state-of-war-between-two-koreas-after-armistice-ended.html
Duration : 0:10:57