This has been an interesting assignment. Good work, everyone.

The project may have ended, but globalization will be going on for quite a while. Everyone should know that by now yes.

So long.

Non-Governmental Organisations

The traditional autonomy of Foreign Policy has also been challenged by the rise of what are known as non-governmental organisations - often referred to in shorthand as NGOs.

Where once, there were a few hundred, now there are thousands working across the world. Good examples are aid organisations, such as Oxfam or Save the Children, or the human rights organisation Amnesty International.

While individual governments cannot control what these organisations do, their opinions can carry considerable weight.

When Amnesty questions a country's human rights policy, its voice is heard around the world. That's not always convenient for foreign policy. Take, for instance, the recent military campaign in Afghanistan. Amnesty was the first to raise questions about events in Mazar I Sharif, where hundreds of foreign Taleban prisoners were killed by the West's allies in the Northern Aliance.

First, it was the MNCs. Now, it's the NGOs. Ahhh. Save us.

Climate change

Protests in Sweden as President Bush tears up the Kyoto treaty on climate change

The global challenge of climate change is one area where the old certainties of international diplomacy have been stood on their head.

Here, you can forget the so-called special relationship between Britain and America: the two disagree fundamentally on how to tackle global warming.

Britain has been at the forefront of climate change negotiations held under the auspices of the UN, while the United States, the world's biggest producer of greenhouse gases, has refused to implement the reductions required by the Kyoto protocol.

As if to underline the point, Britain's place at the climate change negotiations has been filled not by its Foreign Office team, but by its environment ministers. At one memorable meeting in November 2000, a last minute deal hammered out by the environment secretary and Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott fell apart - he said, because the French environment minister was too tired to sign.

In Kyoto, December 1997 the UN brokered the world's first treaty to tackle global warming. Signatories pledged to cut their greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade by just over five per cent from 1990 levels.

But the USA has dragged its feet on implementing the Kyoto protocol and in March 2001, the new president, George W Bush abandoned the Kyoto treaty altogether, saying it is against his country's economic interests.

The Kyoto Protocol. *Sigh* Do we really have to go through this again? Yes, I know what you are thinking. It has been gone over by the other commentators but I simply cannot let go of it. It just so reeks of, I don't know, politics? Hear ye, hear ye. Of all negotiations, the Kyoto Protocol stood out because Singapore is part of this so-called agreement. In this dire situation, the wanting need to save mother earth has taken a back seat while personal interests and politics comes to the forefront. Globalisation has led countries to join forces and handle the problem together as one, as a global community. In this case, it was the serious issue of emission of greenhouse gases especially carbon dioxide. However, big nations like the United States of America has decided that it would affect their economy and therefore, blatantly refuse to adhere to the treaty. None of the nations to do with the protocal could do anything to the US as any wrong move could escalate into a war. It also touhes on the issue of the sovereignty of a nation and how far one can go to engage the other nation. In my opinion, average nation could do anything to any nation bigwigs as it would be total suicide. The furthest you can go is just to engage in more negotiations or call in another bigwig to handle the situation but that would show the world how weak you are, right?

Ever wondered why ‘Global Warming’ was termed ‘Global Warming’? Was it because the effect is Global, or was it due to the fact that everyone all over the world is causing this ‘disease’ Mother Earth now face? Either way, it can be argued that both explanations are close to the truth – Globalization has taught us that we are forever interlinked, and thus, chances are, we do the same thing, and no matter who does what, so long that there’s one who does not follow, the effect will still be the same for all of us.

Globalization is change. Change experienced by everyone, all over the world. If such a principle were to hold, then why is the world not really working together to solve such a great problem that could greatly threaten mankind? Globalization has changed our lives, and it will continue to do so. Yet the idea of the “global village” that comes along with Globalization is simply difficult to imagine. In fact, it seems that the different countries in the world would never put aside their differences and privileges to work together. When faced with problems brought about by industrialization all over the world due to Globalization, it makes sense if everyone were to play a part in solving these problems. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Countries that ratify this protocol commit to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in emissions trading if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases.

(Definition of The Kyoto Protocol taken from Wikipedia)

Kyoto Protocol is a noble intention, a treaty brought about by Globalization. Thanks to Globalization, everyone is given the chance to industrialize, and in turn, the harm to nature is greater. Its effect can be felt regardless of whether a country take part in the pollution, and thus it is important. The Kyoto Protocol targets are reducing emissions in order to combat Global Warming. But firstly, is everybody accepting the Global Warming exists?

The Deniers




The above cartoons are good examples of a group of people known as the Deniers of Global Warming, and if one were to like to narrow the category, America would certainly fit in. America is known to have signed the Kyoto Protocol but not ratify it for various reasons. It is oxymoronic to even think that America was the one who initiated the Protocol in the first place.
The Deniers basically deny the existence of Global Warming. And in doing so, they could very well undermine the movement which aims at saving ourselves from Global Warming. They are not without backing either. Statistics such as those that claims that the climate and temperature change is just part of the natural cycle backs the deniers up. Either they deny that it is not happening, or they feel that it is self-correcting. In other words, it is not due to our actions. Such ideas are open to all of us thanks to Globalization, but imagine if people were to blindly follow such excuses. Is Kyoto Protocol really nonsense?

Kyoto Protocol

Perhaps one of the biggest flaws of the Kyoto Protocol would be that only Annex I countries are required to ratify it. Annex I countries are countries that are already developed. The idea would be that they already have the necessary infrastructure and background which would make things easier. However, like the USA argues, developing countries DO give out emissions. All are effects of Globalization, and Kyoto Protocol is too. Therefore, why should Kyoto Protocol leave out the developing countries? Isn’t it better to nip the problem in the bud? If we are all part of this “Global Village”, then everyone SHOULD be included in this treaty. Whatever the case, USA has no excuse to not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, as it is in fact one of the more influential members of the International Community.


In conclusion, if the Kyoto Protocol is all about combating the major side effect of Globalization, then everyone, regardless of race, size and influence, in the International Community should be part of it as well. If Globalization was the force that brought the world together, it is only right that with Globalization, we ought to remain together to solve the issues brought about by Globalization.

This writer assumes the role of environment and health expert. =)-Teresa