America's Street of Greed

This is a blog post, a write-up more precisely, I did for a event by The Century Foundation and World Policy Institute a week ago. It's a panel talk between Jeff Madrick and Herb Allison on Financial Regulation and the Future of Wall Street (brief bios for the two speaker can be found by clicking the link). The video recording for this talk can be found here as well. There was a New Yorker article by John Cassidy titled What Good is Wall Street (subtitle: much of what investment bankers do is socially worthless) which inspired me and I strongly recommend if you are interested in the greed in Wall Street as well as Occupy Wall Street.


America's Street of Greed
By Yinan Hu

With the U.S. trade deficit reaching the highest levels in three years, the unemployment rate hovering at 9.1 percent, and President Barack Obama announcing the second stimulus plan in two years, Americans are terrified of their country’s fiscal future. It should be no surprise that young protesters have camped out on Wall Street, venting their anger at the financial system. Against this backdrop of widespread discontent, the same financial institutions continue the same risky strategies that led to the crisis in the first place. If this continues, say World Policy Institute senior fellow Jeff Madrick and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability Herb Allison, these firms will keep finding ways to fail. For the U.S. to recover and avoid further financial disaster, the government needs to find a way to re-regulate Wall Street.

As the country struggles to get back on its feet, hostility and blame fall on Wall Street as the root cause of the banking crisis. Now, many Americans are demanding reregulation and the removal of Wall Street’s lobbyists’ hold on Congress. Madrick and Allison echoed these sentiments in a The Century Foundation and World Policy Institute talk on Sept. 16 where they discussed what the role of Wall Street really is, and what can be done to fix its dangerous shortcomings. Madrick, who wrote The Age of Greed: The Triumph of Finance and the Decline of America, 1920 to the Present, raises an important question in his book and in the discussion: What good is Wall Street? It’s a question “we should ask, and we were being afraid to ask,” Madrick says.

As the size of the financial industry grows, the original purpose of banking to allocate capital to its most productive uses has been forgotten not only by the bankers but by the public as well. According to Madrick, the current system that pushes the socially beneficial goals of the industry to the periphery only encourages greed. Now, banking shifts money around while rarely increase market efficiency.

Allison, who wrote The Megabank Mess on financial reregulation, takes a bolder step, claiming, “Trading has never made money on Wall Street.” Allison points to proprietary trading, where banks bet their own capital on movements in the markets, as a financial activity with no economic benefits. The profits, he claims, are illusory since they always will disappear, usually all at once in downturn. It can take months or years to find out whether the profit is real or the temporary result of excessive risk.

Before directing the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the government’s $700 billion financial bailout program, Allison worked as President and CFO of Merrill Lynch. At the financial firm in the 1990s, he once saw a trading desk lose more money in a day than the company had made in more than 100 years. Allison says the payment structure is partly to blame. “Traders are getting paid on a basis of carrying risks,” he says.

As Wall Street continues to evaluate profits and losses every afternoon based on the closing prices, traders are motivated to think in the short-term, ignoring uncertain or pessimistic long-term growth predictions. Defending their activity as an obligation to make profits for shareholders, banks actually fail shareholders when the market collapses. Traders are left with huge personal bank accounts, while shareholders and taxpayers pick up the losses.

Though the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill came out to prevent banks from taking too many risks, its effect is limited, according to Madrick and Allison. Some banks now issue bonuses in the form of restricted stock that can’t be sold immediately or cash that cannot be used for a certain number of years. Still, with continued loose regulation, the previous model focused on short-term profits is too lucrative for traders to stop.

On Wall Street, there is a widely held belief that “Greed is Good.” Allison says, “These banks had one goal, and they still do. Their goal is measured in profitability. If there is only one goal, there are no limits.” The pressure to generate profits immediately while ignoring long-term outcomes will continue to drive excessive risk taking.

Deregulation of Wall Street was once necessary for growth, Madrick says, but that need is long gone. Now that firms have consolidated into just a few players—many arguably too big to fail—the government needs to return to Wall Street with real regulations so they can’t ignore their social role of allocating resources efficiently.

But before the government can do this, Allison argues, officials will need to break free of Wall Street’s grip on the government. Major investment firms turn their money into power when their lobbyists go to Congress, preventing any government attempt at regulation. Only after the conflict of interest is resolved can there be any hope for the reregulation of Wall Street.

--Yinan Hu

Scapegoats of Normality

Click here to read this article

I kind of reeled when I read this article. I understand the idea that single mothers could be a drain on the economy but to attack them as scapegoats is horrendous. Blaming some part of the riots on the fact that single parents were unable to provide a moral background and nurture their child is sick. Single parents do not have the support network that a “normal” family does (at least that’s what I assume coming from a “normal” two-parent family).

The fact that a style of home life can be labeled “normal” is in itself bad; it immediately places concerns and pressures on anyone not from the mainstream.

Perhaps single parents have become scapegoats because Britain does not wish to admit that social mobility is not as simple as the country would like (as the article brings up). So then the misfortune or informed decision of a parent becomes the problem of a nation that does not want to see it as the country’s issue but more as a personal one.

What could be done about this particular scapegoat any if the idea is perpetuated? Will Britain simply stop supporting such a sizeable chunk of its population and watch people die? Not only the parents but also the children they seek to support?

As a woman who one day hopes to have children, by myself or with a partner, I cannot imagine living in a system where my decision was vilified. What does this mean for the single mothers and fathers living in Britain right now? Not to mention their children who are now labeled as part of the issue?

-Rosie Limburg

How Clear is the Law?

Being a Canadian currently living in the United States and interning at Human Rights Watch, this story was very interesting to me.

Even more so was the lead up.

The gist of the story is that rights activists and just concerned memebrs of society in general were urging Canadian officials to arrest former US vice president Dick Cheney when he visited Vancouver as part of the book tour for his recently published memoir.

Vancouver is the first city outside of the US that Cheney is visiting as part of this tour. This is significant according to the article, Human Rights Watch says that, "Canadian law provides for jurisdiction over an individual for torture and other crimes, even for offences commited outside of Canada."

In Cheney's memoir, and in many recent interviews, he has admitted to his authorization of the use of controversial interrogation techniques such as waterboarding and sleep deprivation, and his continued support of them.

There are many people throughout the world who think that Cheney, as well as many others, should be arrested for war crimes because of the use of such techniques. This is why protests were sparked against the venue in Vancouver who hosted Cheney as well as the guests who paid $500 to attend the event.

However, even if Canada has the authority to make such an arrest, I do not think that it is that simple. Even if the authorities agree with the protestors, and think that Cheney should be prosecuted, if they were to do so, what would the state of Canadian/American relations become? Is there any country that would arrest Cheney upon his arrival?

- Danielle Foster

It is so much easier in Russia!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/26/vladimir-putin-russia-president

This is an article I found on the Guardian website, reporting that on Saturday Vladimir Putin announced that he will “run” again for the Russia’s Presidency. A rather bemused Luke Harding, explains how this announcement“was, somehow, a bombshell and no surprise whatsoever”.

Harding explains how this expected announcement of Putin running for another term for the Presidency after stepping down to become the Prime Minister four years ago, only, because of constitutional constraints. This not only highlights the farcical state of Russian Politics at the moment, but also Putin’s almost, total dictatorial rule. Prime Minister Putin is standing for a third Presidential term, zigzagging the Russian Constitution.

“Dmitry Medvedev (the current President), is to become Russia's prime minister. “It's time to switch! At the Putin-led United Russia party conference, Medvedev endorsed Putin's triumphant return; the two men hugged, Medvedev's grin, admittedly, somewhat strained”. When Medvedev initially became the President, many thought it was just because Putin couldn’t and that Putin would still pull the strings. This interpretation seems to have been true. Leaked US cable showed last year Eric Rubin, US deputy ambassador, suggested that, “Medvedev played Robin to Putin’s Batman”, confirming the widely held notion that Putin is in fact in charge.

The article notes how Putin’s dominance over state TV, makes his Presidency almost a certainty. Harding explains how, “Putin recently turned up to a convention of bikers, dressed in black and riding a Harley – merely one of a succession of stunts that has seen him ski down a volcano, pose with a polar bear and dive to the bottom of Russia's Lake Baikal in a submersible.”

It’s true that some commentators suggested that Putin is tired of being Russia’s leader and would prefer to retire to vast collection of assets, from palaces to luxury yachts. However, Harding claims that the “the logic, of Putin's corrupt vertical state, is that he is forced to carry on. Putin is the only person capable of arbitrating between the Kremlin's rival factions, who are locked in a permanent and exhausting battle for money and influence. Without him, the system would fall apart.” Putin may also face the prospect of corruption investigations into his vast wealth, if he was to step down.

However, all this just means that Prime Minister Putin will be in charge of the Russian state for at least a few more years. It’s interesting to note how one man can dominate an entire supper power, when in America the entire press is watching at assessing countless Republican debates, full of politicians they had never heard of, trying to beat the “most powerful man in the world” in an election next year. It is so much easier in Russia!

- Roy.

Double Feature! : A Cold Enterprise For “Kinjervinn”

Chinese businessman Huang Nubo, the chairman of the property-development company Zhongkun has made a bid of a billion krona ($8.8 million) for a sizable plot of land in Iceland. Mr. Huang proclaims a fondness for the country, and the intention of expanding his tourism business, but the deal is thus far unpopular in Iceland and his motives are seriously in question.

For one thing, the location of the land plot is conveniently located near several of Iceland’s “most remarkable natural sites”. For a nation with only two very viable natural resources, one of which is unable to be exported (geothermal energy; the other is fish), this could be more impacting upon Iceland than on a country more heavily endowed.

The land plot would constitute 0.3% of the Island’s land mass, 155 square miles, and a seemingly insignificant number, but of primary concern not only for its location in Iceland, but also the location of Iceland itself. Iceland holds a pivotal geographical position between North America and Europe, an area China thus far has no property in whatsoever. The strategic implications of this are enormous, especially considering the political ties “Kinjervinn” (the Chinaman) has in China, having formerly serviced in the Chinese Communist bureaucracy and reportedly enjoying various political business contacts. Although more extreme and hopefully implausible, there is also talk that China could capitalize on a navigable North-west passage if Arctic ice continues to melt.

Many Icelandic officials, including the Foreign Ministry, have welcomed the offer due to the plan to link up the Vatnajokull and Jokulsargljufur national parks without claiming water rights, and the possibilities of further investments stimulating the bruised and bloodied state of the economy after its grand 2008 catastrophe. Mr. Huang has been said to expect investments of over 20 billion krona in the future.

- Liana


http://www.economist.com/node/21530165

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14714524

Not So Sweet.

With the myriad of civil wars and severe economic crises occurring throughout the world, it’s easy for a global problem like childhood obesity to lose its immediacy. The severity of the problem, however, has not been touched: the current generation of children are the first throughout history living with the very near danger of achieving shorter life spans than their parents.

There are many factors responsible for the steady rise in childhood obesity; generationally, the ever-increasing technological advancements are producing more sedentary childhoods, both in necessity (walking to school) and in play (such as with the prevalence of video games). Socioeconomic factors give less affluent children a far poorer range of foods to choose from, with the cheapest foods often being the most calorie-dense and laden with sugars, saturated fats, and a wealth of preservatives that can wreak havoc on the growing bodies in children.

Although there are many other factors, adding biological factors into this confluence of problems is arguably the most disheartening of all in the fight against obesity. The reason here is sugar: apparently, children are hardwired at birth to have a love affair with sugar. Julie Manella studies the affect of sugar on children, and how it biologically lessens their pain. As a natural

She conducted a study with children and adults of all ages, testing their preferences for sugar solutions of varying strengths. While adults tended to prefer a solution fairly equivalent to a can of soda, children generally preferred solutions twice that strength.

According to Ms. Manella, children are, “living in different sensory worlds” than adults. They have a much higher preference for sweet and salty foods, and are more sensitive to bitterness. This preference often halts or slows as the child reaches adolescence. In adolescents whose bodies were still growing, the sugar preference prevailed, while childrens’ bodies whose growth had slowed had lost the preference.

Though still highy unexplained, this is due in part to hormonal effects within the body. Growing bones secrete hormones that can influence metabolism, and other well-known metabolic hormones such as leptin and insulin affect the brain areas that control craving and appetite, even binding to the tongue to affect the child’s response to sweet things.

While these cravings are natural, they make a child living in this age of evolutionary decadence much more susceptible to serious health problems. Foods are laden with sugars, and at least for children in America, its frightening how much cheaper and more easily soda can be found than a piece of fruit. I don’t know what’s happening in Malta, but the United States should be worried.

- Liana

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/09/26/140753048/kids-sugar-cravings-might-be-biological

http://www.stop-childhood-obesity.com/wp-content/uploads/obesity_chart.jpg

cultural and moral commentary

Click here to read this article

The important role of the internet in this case intrigues me. The fact that such a public avenue made possible the delivery of justice (on such a personal issue) gives me hope that other such cases can be aired, drawing attention to similar situations.

However, the teacher (whose name is never given) should not have needed to pursue such action. She went to the people you’re told to in such cases but was pushed aside, no one was going to prosecute a government official for rape so why bother ruffling hairs by helping her? But once she spoke out and her story, originally dispersed online, was printed in a paper then action was taken and the official who attacked her was arrested. Justice was served.

However, the point is that no one was willing to help is disturbing and that many women do not come forward at all with such cases. There is mention that one man raped a hundred women and not one of them came forward. First of all, if none of them came forward, how do we know it happened? Were there witnesses that did nothing? How could someone be aware of the violation of another human being and do nothing? Maybe I’m just a little worried about what this says about society and our interactions with each other.

The fact that this case is a published story in the New York Times indicates the significance of the outcome and the case. It is “A Rarity in Chinese Justice System”. In other words, “that’s not how we do it in America so it’s double-plus good that China has dealt with the situation and we hope that it will provide precedent for other cases.” There is a cultural commentary as well as a moral one.

-Rosie Limburg

Western diplomats left the GA

What an exciting week at the United Nations Headquarters… General Assembly, general debates, speeches from heads of state, standing ovation and protest inside and outside of the building.

During the General Debate, besides the president of the Palestine National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, Mahmoud Ahmedinajad stirred up the public with his speech.

The Iranian President repeatedly impeached the United States with the terror attack of 9/11, but he did not mention the Arab conflicts and the Tehran atom program in his speech. He stated that the US used 9/11 as a peg to attack Afghanistan and Iraq.

Being present at the GA when Ahmedinajad spoke, it was very interesting to see how other delegations experienced his points. The representatives of the United States were not present from the beginning of his speech. The member states of the European Union decided to leave when in the middle of the speech he denied Israel justification of being a state. While he was continuing his speech in front of only a few people, outside the building, the public was protesting against him.

It is known that Ahmedinajad expresses the same ideas every year when he has the chance to give a speech in front of the General Assembly. What are his intensions with his repetitive statements? Is it pure épater le bourgeois or does he really have goals with these speeches?

- Barbara Hanis

Women suffrage in Saudi Arabia

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/26/world/middleeast/women-to-vote-in-saudi-arabia-king-says.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=todayspaper

Being a woman myself, I can be very surprised when I read news like the article in the New York Times about Saudi Arabia granting the right to vote to women. Being born into and brought up in a society where women have suffrage and can run for office, this issue is not necessarily something that I think about every day; therefore, I am taken aback when something makes me remember that there are countries where this is not the case.

Saudi Arabian women were granted the right to vote and nominate themselves in future elections on Sunday. The catalysts of this reform were the Arab Spring, social media, the women of Saudi Arabia, and the fact that this issue made the country a source of international joke, as Hatoon al-Fassi, a women history professor claimed.

However, they will not be able to live with their rights till the 2015 elections, as municipal elections are scheduled for this coming Thursday and the act will not be in effect by then. Other critiques of the reform claim that by making women members of the Majlis Al-Shura does not give them real power. The Majlis Al-Shura is an advisory body, which only deals with public policy.

Nevertheless, it is still an important step in a country where women need a man in their lives to arrange any public affair. Women see this as an important first step to greater freedom, but they still want to have more rights. They are very hopeful about more possible changes and reforms in the future.

- Adrienn Szlapak

Possible Malaria Vaccine Brings Hope

A preliminary Study done in Burkina Faso has shown that children vaccinated with a new drug have higher levels of immunity to the Malaria virus. The new vaccine, discovered by Dr. Pierre Druilhe from the Pasteur Institute in Paris, uses a key protein, MSP3, that provokes the body into producing antibodies which can kill the Malaria parasite. The study, which originally wasn't aiming at testing immunity but rather safety, showed that children who received the vaccine had an incidence of the disease that was three to four times lower than children who didn't receive the vaccine. The MSP3 vaccine is very unique in that an individuals immunity remains constant despite the varying strains of the Malaria disease. The potential vaccine is only the second to show promising results out of about 100 other previous candidates.

The next step for the vaccine is to expand the trial to see if immunity holds up in a larger test group. Although early results look very promising Dr. Druilhe says we can't get ahead of ourselves, "There have been too many claims of effective vaccines so we have to remain very cautious."

However the trial does raise some hope. As an intern at a global public health organization, Malaria No More, I have learned how crucial the development of a vaccine is. With annual deaths from Malaria totaling over 781,000 people, a child dying every 45 seconds from the disease, and children under the age of 5 accounting for 85% of Malaria deaths, the creation of a vaccine would be incredible.

-Gabrielle Melton

India Tests Ballistic Missile

India has successfully test fired a ballistic missile with long range capabilities. The government announced that it was purely for self-defense. The missile has the potential to carry nuclear warheads and can target Pakistan and China.

Three days prior to this at the UN General Assembly, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moo urged the nine essential countries that have not yet signed and ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty to do so, as the UN has a goal of bringing it into force by 2012. These nine nations are China, North Korea, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, and the United States.

The power struggle between countries seeking nuclear disarmament and those actively trying to develop nuclear weapons is an interesting one, as both are attempting to "even the playing field" with opposing methods. President Obama supports the nuclear test-ban treaty, but then again a lot of the things President Obama supports fail to manifest. Debates over the nuclear test ban will be interesting to follow, as nuclear warfare is a huge global issue (and of the main issues we outlined last week for the Politik theme).

- Ysabel Yates

The world rallies together to say Rest In Peace Troy Davis

So these past couple of days have been very interesting. I have been following the Troy Davis story for a while now and it came to an end September 21, 2011 when he took his last breath at 11:08. If you don’t know what happened with this story, you must not have been watching the news this month because it was EVERYWHERE.

Troy Davis was accused of murdering police officer Mark MacPhail in Savannah, Georgia on August 19, 1989. During the trail the nine witnesses, (seven who claimed they witnessed the murder first hand, and two who said that Davis admitted to them that he committed the crime among 34 witnesses), recounted stories pinning Davis as the killer of the off duty officer intervening in a altercation between two individuals, while Davis (along with six other witnesses) held strongly to his innocent plea. During the investigation, no murder weapon was ever found but because of other charges that Davis held, they found him guilty and sentenced him to death.

Since the 20 years that Davis has been awaiting his death sentence, he continued to claim his innocence. Since then, according to Amnesty International “...all but two of the state's non-police witnesses from the trial have recanted or contradicted their testimony. Many of these witnesses have stated in sworn affidavits that they were pressured or coerced by police into testifying or signing statements against Troy Davis.” After these findings he tried to receive clemency which is “disposition to be merciful and especially to moderate the severity of punishment due” according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, but was denied it.

On Wednesday night, after eating his last meal, strapped to the execution table, Davis stated that he was not carrying a gun on the night of the murder and urged Mark MacPhail’s brother, who was present at the execution, to “...look deep into this case so you can really find the truth.”

The thing that made me upset was the fact that MacPhail’s family said that Davis’s execution finally gave them peace. First off, who get’s peace from the injustice seen in this case that resulted in the death of an innocent man. Their was NO real evidence that linked Davis to the murder of Mark MacPhail that night in 1989. The whole trial was entirely based off of “eye-witness” accounts that were forced on by police and that were in time recanted. The fact that NONE of our elected representatives intervened sickens me to know that these are the officials that are suppose to be representing the people, but when the people spoke out against what was going on in this case, where was the support from them??? NO REPLY.

This injustice not only triggered the emotions of the people of Georgia and the rest of the United States, but also the people of the world, including France, London, and Italy where hundreds protested and rallied against what was going on in the Savannah, Georgia courtroom. Not only have people come together physically in opposition of the current justice system but the social media outlets have been going crazy about this case from people from all over the world. This is a direct call out for change!!!

Alexis Roe

Palestinian Statehood Bid- US Says No Substitute for Negotiations

For Palestinians, U.N. statehood would legitimize territorial claims over Israel. It is a means to end. Statehood means recognizing that land in dispute since the turn of the 20th century is part of the sovereign Palestinian authority. But in his address to the U.N. General Assembly this morning, President Obama asserted that Palestinian statehood could not provide the automatic solution the Palestinians were looking for. It could not substitute direct negotiations between the two parties.

In his "pursuit of peace" themed address, the President highlighted the difficulties in multilateral cooperation and made it clear that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could not be solved through any "short cuts" or single U.N. resolutions.

"Ultimately, it is Israelis and Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is Israelis and Palestinians – not us – who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and security; on refugees and Jerusalem," the President stated.

Obama assured the Assembly that the United States still shares the Palestinian desires for statehood, but the conflict must be resolved before that can be a reality.

He did not mention U.S. plans to veto the Palestinian bid in the Security Council, but rather stated, "Peace is hard. Progress can be reversed. Prosperity comes slowly."

Another year has passed and progress continues to move at a glacial pace. It's undeniable that U.N. statehood wouldn't resolve the conflict. However, would it be a step towards progress to deal with two legitimate states? Can the bifurcated Palestinian authority even be considered a viable candidate for statehood? What are your thoughts?
-Rachel

The State of Peace in Afghanistan

News aggregators are currently being overwhelmed with the story of the assassination of former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani, which just happened earlier today.

Because this story is so recent, it is likely that more details will be released as time passes. Although there are many reasons why this is an important story, the first thing that came to my mind was a story that we read for class last week. That one was about some al-Qaeda members who the Americans thought were on their side but were actually just feigning coversion to get in close enough to kill some top American officials.

Today, Rabbani apparently knew that the men who were coming to his house had been insurgents but they had set up the meeting to 'talk peace.' Security was likely a concern for the former president and other top officials, so you would assume that proper measures were in place, however the article does say that "turbans are a symbol of reverence in Afghanistan and are rarely checked, but have been used in recent high-profile assassinations."

Although no group, as of yet, has taken responsibility for that attack, Rabbani was likely targeted due to his role as the official in charge of the government peace talks with the Taliban.

As a result of this bombing, current Afghan President Hamid Karzai chose to cut short his trip to the US for the UN General Assemby in order to return home. This makes you wonder if the timing of the attack was symbolic since the US has been helping Rabbani with the peace negotiations, or if the timing was just a matter of convenience.

Either way, the incident shows that the Taliban and its supporters are not going to willingly work with the Americans or anybody else promoting peace in their name or associated with them in any manner. It is not a promising sign for the state of the country, especially with the "anticipation of the withdrawal of most US forces from the country in 2014."

- Danielle

Let's have some opinions

My new book's cover is out. Thought you'd like to see it, and I'm interested in your take on the cover art. (Book coming in February from Palgrave Macmillan).

-MM

Behind the scenes in the UN

This time of year has been a particularly important period in diplomacy since 1945 when the United Nations was founded as a descendant of the League of Nations. Its goal has been to create field for discussion regarding international law, security, human rights and world peace.

In 2011, the General Assembly (GA) started 13^th September and will last till December. The streets of New York City are infested with police and fire brigade, whose presence provides a fairly strange atmosphere to the city. Getting from A to B in the Big Apple has been time consuming for me so far, and now it takes even more time to reach my destination.

In the first two weeks of the GA, the 193 member states’ Presidents and Prime Ministers will represent their countries in the general debate where they can state the views of their Government. Average people think that the main diplomatic discussions happen during the meetings and conferences but it is not always the case.

Networking is always easier in a bit “unofficial” environment. Supposedly, behind the scenes there are plenty of receptions and luncheons. A whole group of people work on these events for months, day and night. They take great responsibility by deciding the seating arrangements at the state luncheon. What are the main points which help them decide….? I think there are two possibilities. The person either seats neutral countries’ heads at the same table, in this case there is the chance to have a calm, nice chat between them or organize the conflicting heads of state around the same table. The question is, which is more productive?

-Barbara Hanis-