Re: ~e; EM observations #5

From brian carroll <>
Date Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:08:16 -0600
In-reply-to <>

  something became a bit clearer since i wrote the
  last newsletter comments, and i wanted to extend
  a thought. secondly, there was a short article in
  the mac web about cellphones that i also wanted
  to comment on so instead of making the next news-
  letter top-heavy with comments i share them here...

  1) whether or not one agrees about the value of an
  electromagnetic context, it sometimes can offer a
  unifying perspective and in relation to issues of
  the middle-east right now, a few pieces of the geo-
  political/strategic puzzle almost seem to be moving
  further out of abstraction into a tangible realm,
  where shared interests could emerge from several
  different strands of actions, i.e. 'win-win-win'...

  two thoughts came to mind: peace in the middle-east
  is largely tied to what happens with Iran's nuclear
  program in relation to the issues related to it,
  both in terms of peaceful and rightful generation
  of nuclear power, and in containing proliferation
  of nuclear weapons programs and nuclear weaponry,
  which the entire world has a stake in honoring.

  that is, whatever advances may be on the horizon
  for Israel and Palestine, a cosmic breath of fresh
  air and ideas and hope of a great future for all
  peoples of the region, there is a stake that not
  only Iran can self-determine its development in
  terms of its own vital interests, but also that
  it's word is good in regard to the nuclear issues
  for if it is not-- that would jeopardize all of
  the current and future advances in the regional
  peace processes, its cultivation and nurturing,
  by throwing things into another, illegal, war-
  context should the situation with nuclear aims
  be misrepresented either by officials or by an-
  other network. it is not just about state-state
  issues but also a state in the world community
  in which so many things are balancing upon the
  stability that could and should be developed--
  yet could also be lost to deceit and deceptive
  practices which seem to be commonplace in most
  things related to the high-risk nuclear realm.

  that is, peace in the middle east hinges on the
  ability and accuracy of Iran to ensure it does
  not have programs, will not have them, for if
  it does it would jeopardize advances being made
  in the middle-east. maybe these are closer to
  the actual stakes of any misrepresentation or
  potential for 'surprise' to change strategic,
  security, and stability outlooks for the region.
  it would recontextualize the development of a
  peaceful foundation with the development of a
  war context, and further polarize a situation
  that is just now beginning to transform itself.

  this is not really about Iran it would seem,
  as a specific place, but rather about security
  of a world community, of regions too long held
  in the chaos and miasma of world developments
  and casualties of 20th century industrialization
  where human beings seem secondary to the larger,
  machinic, often inhumane aspects of states in
  various modes of evolving, adapting to changes,
  while retaining very particular connections to
  identities and necessary traditions to stay
  grounded and 'real' in this new shared context.
  (which i would argue is an electromagnetic world
  which is based in science and technology and is
  being mediated around the world, and could stand
  as a common reference to organize shared goals
  around, yet also a cultural, secular autonomy,
  so that the private, traditional views are held
  apart from more abject trends, such as massive
  western commercialism as substituting for lessons
  learned from elders and centuries of adaptation.)

  what became a clear possibility given that the
  situation in Iran (and not to ignore Syria and
  Lebanon, though this is a different context from
  this though related in the same way to outcomes
  in the Middle-east) -- there was a stalled and
  critically important initiative by Senator John
  McCain in the .US Senate which sought to bring
  massive support to secure Russia's nuclear waste
  and the shoring up preventative nuclear measures
  so that the threat can be limited to the really
  difficult problems, rather than being overwhelmed
  by the mediocrity of the laissez-faire for-profit
  security industry to act after the fact on what
  are in hindsight the most critical security issues:
  nuclear proliferation and nuclear black markets.

  (that the .US Vice President has a job on the side
  of supplying nuclear weaponry to all the trouble-
  spots on the globe should not go disregarded for
  undermining of such critical initiatives, either.
  this double dealing negates open public policies
  and until this is remedied it is impossible for
  the public to know the .US position is represented
  accurately if the VP is doing .biz in the process.)

  That said, Russia has always had and maintains a
  vitally important role in two ways to potentially
  being able to rearranging the locked-in situation
  by transforming the context into one based on a
  shared security and responsibility in a way that
  neither the .US nor .EU (nor possibly the .UN in
  the sense of peacefully immediately constructive)
  could do -- if Senator McCain's  (Hilary Clinton
  may have also weighed in on this at one time, too)
  program for funding in Russia were enacted, it is
  a way to extend these same shared principles into
  the Middle-East context in which Russia is one of
  the honest brokers who could not only transform
  the situation, but also is a cosigner should any-
  thing change with regard to the facts-- that is,
  nuclear weapons programs are said to be off-the-
  table, to not exist, and much hinges on this being
  the case-- both internally and externally for Iran
  and everyone else involved. if the securing of the
  nuclear materials from reactors in Iran was part
  of a solution, or maybe another approach in which
  these complex issues could be resolved in a shared
  agenda, and the nuclear material 'recovered' by
  way of the McCain funding, to create a new global
  nuclear material recovery infrastructure in which
  stability and security could be found within the
  most dangerous conduits of unfettered power today,
  then Russia's ongoing nuclear recovery situation
  of managing materials could be spearheaded as a
  shared strategy for developing nuclear peace, and
  Russia's pivotal role in ensuring the aims of the
  Iranian nuclear program could be equalized into
  a similar shared framework of principles so that
  the outstanding issues of domestic nuclear plants
  could be pacified and made as secure and stable
  as possible, with critical checks and balances.

  the flipside is that any deceit or deception in
  the accounting of the nuclear situation in Iran
  would be placed in checkmate by this approach,
  including within the Iranian government should
  a clandestine network operate the nuclear gears.
  it would isolate Iran's public principles which
  are the basis for diplomacy and nuclear treaties
  from what are dicey times where nuclear power is
  capable of trumping nuclear truth by playing a
  game of nuclear-chicken (going head to head in
  a very MAD (mutually assured destruction) rush
  to, say, develop and detonate a weapon anywhere
  in the world, as a cause for world deterioration
  in nuclear terms; e.g. issue of nuclear terrorism.)
  As with Pakistan's internal isolation of Mr. Kahn's
  nuclear network, which internally is transforming
  at the same time as developing a new peace with
  India, and hopefully long-term stability in nuclear
  and other developments (world IT markets, others.).

  IF a treaty could be established which ensured a
  line-in-the-sand and a contract between the world
  body and individual states which respected and
  represented this situation in a win-win (and win,
  if taking into account the paradoxes of multiple
  views, that the synthesis may transcend the binary
  logic and actually be the best outcome of a given
  situation if represented fairly and accurately...)
  outcome that could establish a firm foundation for
  other middle-east developments to establish peace.

  In this case, Iran would be covered against any
  internal surprises, too, for its legitimate needs
  and shared goals could be separated out from the
  inner- and under-workings of the nuclear equation
  which acts upon all states (notice, for instance,
  the destabilization the laissez-faire approach
  has on all things in the .US, from global warming
  to diplomacy, where private business interests are
  able to divert resources or attention from pressing
  issues, and the extreme costs this is having from
  disabling initiatives which could transform these
  networks into ones with global oversight and public,
  governmental goals that precede those of private
  monetary or political or revolutionary profit, etc.)

  Russia's role could be to help shape a mutually
  reasonable framework for cooperation within the
  schema outlined by .US Senator McCain with regard
  to nuclear materials issues and Iran's domestic
  nuclear production. It would also be able to offer
  a third axis in addition to the .US and .EU with
  regard to signing a treaty, then adding the .UN's
  nuclear diplomatic framework, and in addition it
  would have the official support of the Iranian
  government which would further isolate any nuclear
  program that should arise in this context, so that
  should anything threaten this treaty it would not
  be the Iranian state, but only actors within it
  who are separated out from a larger accountability
  of some type of complicity, so that Iran also would
  be able to distance itself from unforeseen changes.
  security, stability, and transforming the context
  to one where the forces that need peace achieve it.

  * it should be noted that this seems to be also an
  approach with North Korea and China's crucial role
  in terms of transforming the area through opening
  up while maintaining stability and security over
  the long term, though fostering the adaptation and
  growth while potentially, hopefully, establishing
  a peaceful and also innovative context, also in
  relation to issues such as securing nuclear fuel
  supplies in the previously mentioned infrastructure
  which Sen. John McCain has been proposing all along.
  If a shared outcome could be agreed upon, and goals
  realized as to where interests overlap, cooperation
  may trump competition in things related to nuclear
  weapons, nuclear power, nuclear waste, nuclear war.

  i do realize it is incredibly naive to be writing
  about this, though the mass media never really gets
  into the actual situations enough to know if any of
  it is actually part of the deliberations, so making
  a public statement at least gives voice to ideas,
  however naive, against sometimes dangerous silence.

  2) i was going to write about mobile radiation in
  a similar way but will do it in another e-mail now.
  again, in a sense of compromise, win-win-win, etc...

  the electronetwork-list:  electromagnetism and culture...