In recent years, Cuba has begun to open up its borders to tourism through cruises and some plane travel. As an ecological and relatively technologically-untarnished paradise, Cuba is doing much to preserve its beauty and prevent environmental damage from tourism, as well as from industry and lifestyle. As the home to 263 protected areas and six UNESCO biospheres, Cuba has quite the responsibility to maintain its ecosystems and environment. Because of its isolation from most of the western world and status as an island, it is in a unique position to simply maintain what it has, rather than try to revert past bad environmental decisions. Years of limited development have meant that Cuba’s cities pollute less, Cuba’s citizens live more sustainably, and it is less of a ditch than most other countries. It will be imperative for Cuba to keep its ecological serenity in high regard as it begins to open up and allow 100s of times more visitors than ever before, which it may achieve by limiting the fossil fuel usage of tourists by regulating its hospitality and transportation sectors, establishing clearly defined ecological sanctuaries which have very limited tourism or none at all, and limiting the number of flights into the country, as well as positioning airports and other waste magnets far from any bodies of water or easily contaminable areas.
Many countries are facing environmental issues brought on by tourists, and are having to weigh the importance of tourism for their country’s economy to its effects on the country’s environment. A prime example of a country highly affected by tourism is the Philippines which had to close a few of its islands to all visitors to safely resuscitate them after years of extreme environmental destruction. Many countries are strict about how many visas they give out, but tourism is so popular with the global population that billions of trips are taken every year and natural habitats are prime destinations. Possibly the best example of a country taking charge of protecting its environment from the devastating effects of tourism in Costa Rica which has devoted an estimated 26% of its land to national parks, wildlife reserves and protected lands, and its international and national NGOs, local businesses, natives and government organizations also have played a major part in the success of the ecotourism programs. Combination efforts by public and private sectors are likely the most appealing solution, but Cuba has a mostly nationalized economy, which means its government has the brunt of the responsibility to keep tourism in check. Currently, Cuba seemingly prioritizes its economy over its environment, but recently its government has been shifting its narratives towards sustainability. Foreign businesses such as hotel chains are under strict scrutiny from the government and have to go through many checks to be able to operate within the country, which is unlikely to change and goes well with the idea of Cuba imposing more environmental regulations. The action of opening up to the west shows that Cuba is putting its environment on the back burner, but it’s confident that tourism will not contribute to the degradation of its environment and has said it will be prioritizing its natural assets over the long term. Climate change means Cuba is at risk of losing landmass to water levels rising and having its habitats destroyed from ecosystem change and pollution. As stated before some possible realistic solutions are allocating limited fossil fuel usage to tourists by regulating its hospitality and transportation sectors, establishing clearly defined ecological sanctuaries which have very limited tourism or none at all, and limiting the number of flights into the country, as well as positioning airports and other waste magnets far from any bodies of water or easily contaminable areas. All of these solutions could easily garner international support and will likely make Cuba even more attractive to tourists which are environmentally focused, which is a rapidly rising demographic. Hopefully, Cuba will continue to prosper after COVID with its opening up to the world and can learn to mitigate the devastating effects of tourism by protecting its natural havens.
0 Comments
Joining the Belt and Road Initiative would be politically impossible for the United States, given its current standing with China and the rest of the world. Not only that, but it would be unsustainable for the current U.S. to participate, and ineffective given its equal economic stance to China, despite its large debt. Joining the Belt and Road Initiative would also be seen by many in the international community as the United States officially conceding economic and developmental dominance to China. Taking direct action against the Belt and Road would also not be optimal—tariffs, sanctions, annexation, invasion are all too drastic actions, and would paint the U.S. as the needless aggressor, particularly when the issue at hand doesn’t require the amount of overkill. It is also unclear if these options would be successful in the first place. Neutrality, while tempting to take, does not serve the U.S. well in the long term, as it would just be passively standing by as China excels and surpasses us. In order for the U.S to not only keep up with China’s rapid expansion of influence, there is only one viable option for us to take. It's recommended that the United States take the necessary steps to create its own global initiative. The goal of this groundbreaking initiative would be to challenge the PRC’s perceived hegemony on infrastructure projects in developing nations, present the world with an alternative economic future based on American ideals rather than state control, and to greatly aid the U.S. reemergence as a dominant global power willing to shape the future of humanity for the better. Below, I have outlined a plan for the early stages of this initiative. The following are countries and economic blocs I believe would readily join the economic plan and should be approached first: The EU, the UK, Australia, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Canada, Argentina, Panama, Chile, Colombia, Peru, South Korea, Kenya, Brazil, Philippines, New Zealand and Nigeria. This list, however, is only tentative and should be taken as a starting point, able to be changed if wished at any point in time. Similar to previous economic treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and proposed treaties like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the first order of business for an economic operation of this magnitude is to clear the drawing board by abolishing previous tariffs and regulations prohibiting free trade between member countries. The U.S.’s primary motivation should be seeking to embed itself as much as possible into invited countries. Like China, the most effective strategy would be to invest and buy trade rights to key infrastructure in member nations. American institutions, like the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), could be expanded to have a wider range of operations. One of the most important early steps would be to revitalize its foreign diplomacy and insert itself once again on the global stage, this time as an economic ally rather than a military one. After 2016, the United States has seen a shortage of diplomats as key diplomatic positions are left empty. I recommend the United States work immediately to swiftly refill these empty positions to ensure that the country has a voice in important foreign decisions. Despite the grand vision of this initiative the United States does not find itself in the same position that the People’s Republic of China is in. It is not a possibility for America to invest hundreds of billions of dollars to directly counter the BRI. Rather, the United States should focus on key infrastructure investment and presenting developing countries with a powerful economic bloc that promises more freedom and national sovereignty. The United States should also invest in the private sector of developing countries to emphasize local growth and self-sufficiency, which will, ultimately, allow these states to become less reliant on Chinese manufacturing and industry. Rather than divestment and isolation, combating a snake growing as quickly as the Belt and Road Initiative requires quick action and bold moves. The US cannot afford to lose its power stronghold from lack of work: it must move fast but with caution to bring in a new age of blooming economic cooperation. Its initiative will not only paint the US in a positive light, thereby repairing its reputation as an outgoing, benevolent state, and show that it is willing to take risks for the betterment of the world. In the long run, it will be good for its economy as well, as a type of remedying done to heal it post-Covid. South Korea is in a tenuous situation diplomatically due to it being next to two nuclear powers and in one of the most contested regions in the world: on the Korean peninsula and behind both China Seas. Since the Korean War, South Korea has steadily gained power in its region by establishing itself as a strict government-run capitalist state. Its government structure consists of the national government, governmental agencies, and local governments, but external players like private sector companies also have a large sway on policy. Due to its commitment to competing in the global economy, there is a large focus on education, literacy, as well as a strong social hierarchy that enforces its economic structure. As a republic, South Korea has a president and prime minister, as well as many political parties within its national assembly.
Despite some advancements to its military in recent years, South Korea’s diplomatic relations with its neighbors and the rest of the world revolve around economic ties and trade. Its largest industries are electronics, telecommunications, automobile production, chemicals, and shipbuilding, so it serves as both an engineering and manufacturing hub in the region. With 81% of the population living in cities, South Korea is exemplary of modern consumer culture and the prowess of globalization. Seoul is ranked as the 4th largest metropolitan economy in the world, another example of the resources South Korea has put into being economically dominant over militarily. Similar to Germany, Japan, and the wider EU, South Korea leverages home and foreign trade to keep power, which has led to it developing large trade agreements and coalitions with even larger powers like the U.S., Russia, and China. From an outside perspective, Korea is seen as a mediator between East and West, as it both is strongly capitalist but primarily trades with China and has a culture that fits somewhere in between East and West traditions. As a country primarily made up of Atheists and Christians, many of South Korea’s policies fall in line with Western Foreign policy like intervening in foreign nations and being concentrated on trading globally. China, the U.S., and Japan are its largest trading partners, 3 countries deeply tied to the rest of world trade, and 3 that have had a lot of influence on Korea’s development since the 1950s. Ideologically, South Korea is focused on democracy and sustaining its market, unlike China, Saudi Arabia, and Vietnam which make up some of its largest trading partners. The U.S., as an intermediary in the region and as South Korea’s largest military ally, uses South Korea as a base for many of its affairs in the region. Japan is an ally to South Korea and a strong economic partner, but there has been a lot of tension between the two countries since the Japanese invasion. Then comes the issue of North Korea. In recent years South Korea and North Korea have steadily been growing closer to reunification or greater economic integration. The threats of nuclear strikes are less relevant now that North Korea is backing down little by little with its harshness towards South Korea. As its only land border, it is in South Korea’s interests to heavily strengthen its relationship with North Korea and both have practically the same people. |
Check Out the Other Pages
Be sure to press previous at the bottom of the home page and menu at the top right to see writings I've done relating to global topics and a short page on me and why I'm writing this blog Archives
May 2022
|