The Future of Global Energy

We've often heard the familiar warnings that the world's natural resources dwindle year after year, inching humanity closer to a point of no return. Damage to earth's forests, oceans and atmosphere, however, may not be enough to persuade policymakers to take bold steps toward cleaner, alternative energy sources and carbon emission reductions goals. Such steps shape global energy markets and trends, as does energy diversification, supply and demand. Unpredictable events, such as the Fukushima nuclear disaster, can also mold the energy markets of the future. Thus, it is critical to examine the various moving parts involved in world energy markets in order to accurately assess the future of these markets.

A few characteristics of global energy markets give some context for what we should expect in the future. The rise and fall of energy prices have ripple effects across other energy and energy-related industries. OECD countries, including  the United States, are demanding less and less oil, while burgeoning economies in East Asia see an increase in demand for petroleum that drives an expected overall increase in global demand for oil in the coming decades. Countries such as China and Germany are heavily subsidizing solar power, and new technologies in wind and solar could enable more efficient harnessing of these energy sources. And finally, much of the predictions for the future of global energy markets depend on two critical points: bringing Iraq's vast oil reserves online and the potential of unconventional oil and gas extraction (by fracking, for example), especially in the United States.

North Korea: The Soap Opera

Making headlines again today is good old North Korea, after their decision yesterday to shut down the last military communication hot line that connects the two Koreas. This is the most significant and hostile move to come from Kim Jong-un since he succeeded his late father as leader of North Korea in 2011. Up until now, Mr. Kim has primarily stuck to harsh dialogue, rarely acting on his threats up until the nuclear test that came earlier this year. And as I wrote about earlier this year, North Korea consistently and steadily ramps up their aggression, using their words and actions intermittently with one another. Their nuclear test this year was the third since 2006, and was by most accounts successful - clearly North Korea has developed nuclear technology and may be capable of producing small, yet still powerful nuclear weapons. After sanctions coming from the UN, Mr. Kim threw a hissy fit and threatened combat with not only the U.S., but South Korea and Japan. Threats coming from the country have been so extreme as to actually receive condemnation from China, who traditionally sticks up for North Korea in these types of situations. Now, North Korea has begun prepping its arms for a possible strike, which could reach as far as Hawaii and Guam (and maybe even California), and has prepped its forces for possible combat with South Korea and Japan. There is no room left for threats, and no further actions the North could theoretically take short of armed aggression. So what is going to happen?

"My army's bigger than youuuurss"

Well, I'm sure everyone reading this is tired of hearing me write about North Korea. And, believe me, I am tired of writing about them. North Korea is, in the most accurate metaphor, the drunk friend we all have (if you are saying "I don't have that friend," then it is probably you) who has lost touch of the reality when it comes to their size and power, and picks fights with the biggest dudes at the bar. It almost always blows over after much drama ensues. And usually, that person's friends are there to back them up, albeit reluctantly. But sooner or later, the drama gets old, the recipient of the aggression fights back, and there are no friends to back that person up. North Korea has reached the end of the line here, and it seems to me that Mr. Kim truly has no sense of reality when it comes to international order, and North Korea's relative size and strength compared to the rest of the world. The incessant drama and belligerence was funny at first, but it is starting to grow old.

I am not going to attempt to predict what will happen next, because Mr. Kim has proven to be unreliable and outrageously erratic - even more so than his wacko father. Maybe he will go through with his threats finally, and attack South Korea. If this happens, North Korea will fight a losing battle, and they will likely fight it alone; China will not come to their rescue. Japan would probably assist South Korea in effectively wiping North Korea off the face of the earth, and it would surprise me if there were many nations that would condemn the action.

Or, North Korea will back off once again. But in doing this, Mr. Kim will have once and for all demonstrated that he is all talk, and is incapable of ever taking action against other countries when he knows it will end in disaster for him and his people. While this evokes rationalism on Mr. Kim's part, it also will be met with a huge, collective sigh from the rest of the world, as it means we are in for a long era of drama and unwarranted aggression from North Korea. I don't support war - I am a firm believer that armed conflict should be the absolute last action to take place in any circumstance. However, part of me wants North Korea to go through with their threats, the same way Saddam Hussein did in taking over Kuwait in 1991. Perhaps a quick and effective war would help remind Mr. Kim of his place in the world. On the other hand, the less violence the better, and while the drama will continue to annoy the rest of the world, perhaps it is better than the alternative.

My colleague Vicky and I have set the over-under for armed conflict at 72 hours. Which do you take?

At Bagram Prison, US leaves behind legacy of cruelty

On the tail end of Pres. Obama’s trip throughout the Middle East, Secretary of State John Kerry made his first trip to Afghanistan in his new position, during which he announced the turnover of Bagram Prison (or Parwan Detention Center, as it’s now known) to Afghan control. The detention center has been a hotspot in US-Afghanistan relations since President Karzai began his repeated demands for the prison and associated air base to be placed under Afghan jurisdiction during President Obama’s first term. Yet during Pres. George W. Bush’s terms in office, Bagram was infamous for more than causing political tensions: it was known as the “Afghan Guantanamo,” a stopover spot for suspected terrorists to be vetted before they went to Cuba. Allegations of torture and other inhumane treatment abounded from prisoners, many of who were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

Prisoners and guards inside Bagram. Source: AP

The New York Times brought national attention to the mistreatment of prisoners in Bagram when it published a 2005 investigation into the 2002 deaths of two detainees: Habibullah and Dilawar. Both men suffered extreme beatings at the hands of US service members who were both undertrained and undersupervised as they reached beyond the bounds of acceptable interrogations. Their methods of full-body suspension, threats with attack dogs, sleep deprivation, peroneal strikes, and more would later turn up in the case files at Abu Ghraib. In many ways, Bagram appears to have been the staging ground for many interrogators' later careers in the Gulf. While Habibullah was almost certainly guilty of supporting terrorists, Dilawar turned out to be a hapless taxi driver who was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, and died for it. Several US military personnel were charged for the deaths, yet if the torture was systemic (as it appears to have been), it will take more than uprooting a few bad seeds to fix the problem.

The Truce of the Year

In a moment reminiscent of Ireland in 1994, or Spain in 2011, the nation of Turkey made a giant leap forward yesterday when the leader of the Kurdistan Worker's Party, or the PKK, announced from prison his intentions to establish a ceasefire between his ethnic rebellious group and the Turkish authorities. Calling on his fighters to abandon their weapons and begin participating on the political battleground instead, Abdullah Ocalan effectively initiated the end of conflict that has lasted for nearly 30 years and claimed over 40,000 lives. The implications this will have for Turkey, and the region overall, are virtually immeasurable; furthermore, if the ceasefire is legitimate and remains unbroken, Ocalan's announcement yesterday marks the beginning of a new chapter of history for Turkey, one that is remarkably promising.

The scene yesterday in Turkey

Cyprus Balks at Bailout

Patrick Baz / AFP - Getty Images

Today, on this International Day of Happiness, few Cypriots have reason to smile.

In what appears to be yet another chapter in the Eurozone's financial mess, the Cypriot parliament on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a bailout for the small European nation's financial sector, an unsurprising reflection of the public's outrage with the bailout package. The troika's--a triad of international lenders comprising of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund--unprecedented proposal to tax bank deposits on account-holders in Cyprus met fierce public outcry, as pictured above. Cypriot officials seek €10 billion (roughly $13 billion) to help alleviate illiquidity and revive the country's banking sector. Remarkably, the much sought after bailout package represents more than half of Cyprus' €18 billion economy, pointing to the severity of the present crisis.