London Part II

DSCF2076

In addition to the British Museum, we also visited a prestigious think tank and the Director of BBC World Service.

Visiting with researchers at the prestigious think tank was probably the most interesting educational experience I’ve had outside of school. Like I told my professor, I have spent the past year researching Persian Gulf politics, which entails reading dozens and dozens of academic papers. But never has any of these scholarly papers included such detailed information as the researchers did at the London think tank. I admired how detail oriented their research is and how well they were able to convey such information to us in only one hour. We discussed substantive issues such as the border dispute between China and India (including the recent flare-up), the Iranian nuclear issue (what happens if Israel strikes), and the potential for nuclear proliferation in Saudi Arabia. The researchers also discussed how they conduct their research, what sources they typically exhaust, how important foreign language and area expertise is for their jobs, and the differences between think tank research and academic research. Since my dream career is to do research, this opens a new potential career outlet that I hadn’t given much thought to. To improve job marketability, they suggested mastering a foreign language and focusing on a particular region. Since my foreign language doesn’t match my area of interest, I have a lot of thinking to do. They suggested focusing on South Asia, since this region is becoming increasingly important in world politics.

We also visited with the Director of BBC World Service. The most interesting take-away for me was his discussion of the danger facing war correspondents. One BBC war correspondent was reporting from Syria. She left for Northern Syria to investigate a battle that was supposedly ending in the favor of the Syrian government. When she reached the city, she noticed there were several Hezbollah militia fighters, which turns out is why the Syrian government’s fighting has been improving the past month. She was able to take photographs and report the story. But she and her team were racing against time – the sun sets at 6pm, but they were still in the war-torn city nearing sunset. They had to race back to Damascus where UNICEF had set up camp in one of the hotels. Fortunately they made it, and she was able to access the internet to report to Twitter first, then to her team back at the BBC. It was really a gripping story, and it’s kind of amazing that people put their lives at risk to report on war and conflict.

On Thursday, we received a guest lecturer who discussed negotiations between Iran, the UK, the European Union, the United States, Russia, and China. It was an enlightening lecture that detailed how painstakingly slow negotiations can be, especially when multiple levels of stakeholders are involved. The United Kingdom must first negotiate among the E3 (Uk, France, and Germany). Then it must run these ideas past the EU+ 3 (U.S., Russia, and China), which consists of diverse views on the Iranian nuclear matter, to say the least. Then, if these talks end in agreement, the E3 must negotiate with Iran, which can start successfully and end in failure if any one country’s domestic politics decide so. If the talks end in failure, and the Iranian government proceeds with its nuclear program (as it has done and is doing), the E3 must go through the UN Security Council to obtain authorization to sanction Iran. But, this requires that all five permanent members (the U.S., UK, France, China, and Russia) either vote in favor or abstain and that four other non-permanent members on the Council vote in favor. The talk was a fascinating insight into how long the negotiation process can go on, how many stakeholders are involved, and how difficult it is to get anything substantive done when so many stakeholders are of different opinions.

In addition to learning in class four hours every day, these talks have cemented my interest in international security, conflict studies, and international relations. All three experiences outside the classroom were eye opening, and I can’t wait for next Wednesday. We’re either going to Bletchley Park, the War Rooms in Whitehall, or the House of Commons Prime Minister question time (which I REALLY HOPE WE GET TO DO!!).

2 comments

  1. Prime Minister’s questions, available by television broadcast here in the US, are absolutely fascinating. Although somewhat orchestrated, it is the pinnacle of democratic accountability to have one’s local elected representative publicly pose unfiltered questions directly to the government’s leader (often dripping with thoroughly British sarcasm) and for the leader to be obligated to respond. Here in the US, the land of separation of powers, we have the news media perform this function (generally without the sarcasm).

    I do have a soft spot for the woefully under-appreciated accomplishments at Bletchley, but I consider Prime Minister’s questions to be good politics and good theater (you know- something the Bard of Avon would appreciate).

    Hope you get to go. We need a first-hand impression.

    1. So unfortunately we can’t go to question time because the wait is around 2 hours without a guarantee we’ll get in. Instead we visited Bletchley Park and will visit the War Rooms next Wednesday.

Leave a comment