Few other administrations have been born into a time as trying as this one. Action on multiple problems is needed as President Obama has said, “from day one.” I’ll take a quick look at the most pressing “big-picture” crises facing the new administration.
“Crisis” is derived from the Greek krisis, or decision, which came from krinein, or decide. In our vernacular we most often use “crisis” to denote a time of extreme stress or conflict. Inherent in the idea is that many different futures branch out from the present, and which future we end up in will depend on the crucial decisions we make during that point of crisis.
So ultimately, a crisis is a very stressful set of decisions. We do not make the best decisions under pressure; we are often blinded by biases or prejudices that predispose us to certain courses of action, we lack adequate information, or we are simply overwhelmed by the magnitude and immediacy of it all.
International crises are therefore crucial crossroads in our collective path, full of obstacles and pitfalls. The dialogue we engage in and the decisions we make will shape our future: be it political, environmental, economic, social, or religious. From these decisions will emerge sometimes clear and sometimes imperceptible patterns, causal relationships that we would do well to study.
There are many crises to be found in today’s world, the current financial crisis being foremost in our minds. In this column, though, I want to address the broader crises that threaten us as a generation and as the human race.
The first is one that I have written about repeatedly and so I treat here only briefly. Globalization is arguably the most wide-ranging and consequential crisis we find ourselves in. The decisions made regarding its path and progress will impact countless successive generations in innumerable ways. If you pursue further discussion and debate in only one crisis, let this be it.
Another issue of international concern is global warming. Surveys show that most ordinary citizens, scientists, and politicians alike believe that the earth is indeed warming up. In this decade the contentious issues are how fast it is warming and, most crucially, what can be done to slow the process.
Whether any action will be taken is questionable. The spectacular lack of international co-operation on the Kyoto Protocol by America and major developing countries during the Bush administration was telling.
But even if a will is found, the way is still unclear. The European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme, formally established in 2005 but debated and formed for years before that, is a good example of what not to do.
Though most academics believe that the notion of a market-based carbon trading design is spot on, they also agree that its execution has been a dazzling flop. Everything from incorrect forecasts to bureaucratic red tape has completely stalled the process. In addition, it is neither mandatory nor advantageous for corporations to buy into the scheme. These problems will most likely be worked out in time, if the experience doesn’t disenchant companies from taking part.
These issues are important now, and decisions have to be made, but they will be even more pressing in the coming two decades. By that time a new generation of leaders, hopefully wiser from the mistakes of the past and possessed of a unified will, will have to shape the future. Let’s hope that they realize they have to live in it, too.
John Jose is a junior finance and economics double major. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
