APEC in PNG and IR theory
Today or rather the morning period (10:30am-12:00pm) was not really a good period for discussing the topic of theories. The hot topical sun and the successive blackouts hampered our continuity.
The reassuring fact is that we have hard drives and we have next week. We hope that next week is better then today and your hard drives are virus free so you can copy the video file from me without infecting my computer. I wish you all had access to YouTube.
Going back to our discussion on theory, all of you highlighted the necessity of theories. Kossie asked whether international relations theories are prescriptive and Abenicah gave us the car analogy. Apart from them, all of you contributed to help us understand the importance of learning about theories.
In relation to Kossie's question, different people who teach and read international relations have different understanding of whether the theories set out to explain, describe or prescribe. Many are of the opinion that international relations theories set out to explain a general phenomenon.
For example, commercial liberals like Moravcsik argues that trade is a less costly means of accumulating wealth in comparison to war. Thus more and more countries are opting to trade with other countries via trade arrangements. China has a free trade agreement with Australia (ChAFTA) and Pacific Island countries have the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA).
Abenicah's car analogy helps us to believe that learning about the different theories of international relations is necessary. We have seen over the last couple of months negative criticisms about the staging of the APEC summit. Social commentators with no understanding of international relations theories are just like a driver who does not know the inner workings of the car engine.
We refer to the theory of commercial liberalism again to give us a good explanation of APEC. Commercial liberalism or douce commerce according to Navari (this book is in the library) focuses on incentives created by opportunities for trans-border economic transactions. The liberal trade doctrine stems from the works of Adam Smith, David Hume and David Richardo.
Wait, what is the liberal trade doctrine and how is it connected to APEC? Nineteenth-century commercial liberals believe that trade among states, like trade among individuals, was mutually beneficial. Richardo's comparative advantage means that different countries in APEC are specialized in producing different goods and offering different services. All member states will benefit from the regional division of labour provided the right conditions.
As part of their mission statement, APEC talks about enhancing human security. One important category of human security is food security. Do we need experts from Asia to help us grow rice? Do we want to sell our Illimo milk and Ramu prawns in other economies in the region? If we do, then APEC is the platform where we meet others from around the region to talk business.
We know that Illimo milk has a long way to go, and we need expertise from the region to help us go into commercialize framing of prawns, in order to meet local and regional demand. The help we need can be sourced through the APEC fora.
Thus, staging the APEC summit in PNG at a time like this might not be right according to some. Many, just by reading their posts on social media, have a sour taste on their lips seeing Port Moresby develop at a rapid pace in comparison to others.
If you look at it from a commercial liberal point of view, it makes sense why the government is investing heavily in this regional meeting. We will open the door for regional powers to come and see what we are doing and what products or services we offer. This peaceful cooperation by all economies will help improve the quality of life for all in the years to come.
So my expectation is with knowledge about international relations theories you will not make such comments like; 'wuss APEC wastim moni ya'. But give a sound comment that is reflective of your area of study and demonstrative of the amount of money spent by your parents to give you this opportunity to sit in my class.
Comments
Post a Comment