2014年10月11日 星期六

Latest News Clips 2014.10.13

                         
1.A Sense of Where You Are 
The New York Times     April 29, 2013 






 

TRONDHEIM, Norway — In 1988, two determined psychology students sat in the office of an internationally renowned neuroscientist in Oslo and explained to him why they had to study with him. 

Unfortunately, the researcher, Per Oskar Andersen, was hesitant, May-Britt Moser said as she and her husband, Edvard I. Moser, now themselves internationally recognized neuroscientists, recalled the conversation recently. He was researching physiology and they were interested in the intersection of behavior and physiology. But, she said, they wouldn’t take no for an answer. 

We sat there for hours. He really couldn’t get us out of his office,” Dr. May-Britt Moser said. 

Both of us come from nonacademic families and nonacademic places,” Edvard said. “The places where we grew up, there was no one with any university education, no one to ask. There was no recipe on how to do these things.” 

And how to act politely,” May-Britt interjected. 

It was just a way to get to the point where we wanted to be. But seen now, when I know the way people normally do it,” he said, smiling at the memory of his younger self, “I’m quite impressed.” 

So, apparently, was Dr. Andersen. In the end, he yielded to the Mosers’ combination of furious curiosity and unwavering determination and took them on as graduate students. 

They have impressed more than a few people since. In 2005, they and their colleagues reported the discovery of cells in rats’ brains that function as a kind of built-in navigation system that is at the very heart of how animals know where they are, where they are going and where they have been. They called them grid cells. 

I admire their work tremendously,” said Eric Kandel, the Nobel laureate neuroscientist who heads the Kavli Institute for Brain Science at Columbia and who has followed the Mosers’ careers since they were graduate students. 

John O’Keefe of University College London, who in the 1970s identified the so-called place cells in the brain that register specific places, like the corner deli or grandma’s house, and who was one of the Mosers’ mentors, said that the discovery of the grid cells was “incredibly significant.” 

The workings of the grid cells show that in the brain “you are constantly creating a map of the outside world,” said Cori Bargmann, of Rockefeller University, who is one of the two leaders of a committee set up to plan the National Institutes of Health’s contribution to President Obama’s recently announced neuroscience initiative. 

2.American and 2 Japanese Physicists Share Nobel for Work on LED Lights 
The New York Times   OCT. 7, 2014 

 

Three physicists have been awarded the Nobel Prize for revolutionizing the way the world is lighted. 
The 2014 physics award went to Isamu Akasaki and Hiroshi Amano of Japan and Shuji Nakamura of the University of California, Santa Barbara, for “the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes, which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources.” 
The three scientists, working together and separately, found a way to produce blue light beams from semiconductors in the early 1990s. Others had produced red and green diodes, but without blue diodes, white light could not be produced, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said on Tuesday morning in its prize citation. 
They succeeded where everyone else had failed,” the academy said. 
Their work has spurred the creation of a whole new industry. The committee that chose the winners said light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, would be the lighting source of the 21st century, just as the incandescent bulb illuminated the 20th. 
The three scientists will split a prize of $1.1 million, to be awarded in Stockholm on Dec. 10. 

Dr. Akasaki, 85, of Meijo University and Nagoya University, and Dr. Amano, 54, of Nagoya University, are Japanese. Dr. Nakamura, 60, is American. Awakened by a phone call from the Swedish academy, he described it in a news conference as “unbelievable.” 
In its announcement, the academy recalled Alfred Nobel’s desire that his prize be awarded for something that benefited humankind, noting that one-fourth of the world’s electrical energy consumption goes to producing light. This, it said, was a prize more for invention than for discovery. 
Frances Saunders, president of the Institute of Physics, a worldwide scientific organization based in London, agreed with those sentiments. Noting in an email statement that 2015 is the International Year of Light, she said, “This is physics research that is having a direct impact on the grandest of scales, helping protect our environment, as well as turning up in our everyday electronic gadgets.” 

In Africa, millions of diode lamps that run on solar power have been handed out to replace polluting kerosene lamps. 
For the same amount of energy consumption, LED bulbs produce four times the light of a fluorescent bulb and nearly 20 times the light of an incandescent bulb. 

LED bulbs are also more durable, lasting 10 times as long as a fluorescent bulb and 100 times as long as an incandescent bulb. 

3.China’s Balancing Act 
The Project Syndicate     OCT 8, 2014 3  
       
NEW YORK – China’s slowdown is the biggest short-term threat to global growth. Industrial value added fell in August, credit growth has slowed dramatically, and housing prices are falling, with sales down 20% year on year. Given stagnation in the eurozone and Japan’s uncertain prospects, a Chinese hard landing would be a big hit to global demand. 
Much attention is focused on likely GDP growth this year relative to the government’s 7.5% target. But the bigger issue is whether China can rebalance its economy over the next 2-3 years without suffering a financial crisis and/or a dramatic economic slowdown. Some factors specific to China make this outcome more likely, but success is by no means certain. 
Faced with the 2008 financial crisis, China unleashed a credit boom to maintain output and employment growth. Credit soared from 150% of GDP in 2008 to 250% by mid-2014. Multiple forms of shadow bank credit supplemented rapid growth in bank loans. 
The strategy worked, and China continued to create 12-13 million new urban jobs per year. But with investment rising from 40% to 47% of GDP, growth became dangerously unbalanced and heavily dependent on infrastructure construction and real-estate development. Narrowly defined, these activities account for 12% of Chinese value added. In fact, recent research shows that 33% of China’s economic activity relies on the real-estate sector’s continued health. 
China is now struggling with a dilemma common to all advanced credit booms. The longer the boom runs, the greater the danger of wasted investment, huge bad debts, and a major financial crisis. But simply constraining new credit supply and allowing bad loans to default can itself provoke crisis and recession. 
This year has been one of seesawing policy responses. The discipline of default has been much discussed, but never quite applied. Despite a significant slowdown, the People’s Bank of China has resisted across-the-board cuts in interest rates or reserve requirements. But, in the second quarter of the year, Premier Li Keqiang reiterated the 7.5% growth target, which was then underpinned by several “targeted” stimulus measures – mainly new lending focused on railways, smaller banks, agriculture, and small businesses. Constraints on the property market, such as limiting multiple purchases or highly leveraged investments, have been tightened and then relaxed. 
At least for now, the arguments for constraint and market discipline appear to have won the debate. That may partly reflect a subtle shift in emphasis about the most crucial objective. Recent speeches by both Li and policy experts have downplayed the importance of a specific growth target, focusing instead on job creation and low unemployment. 
Fortunately, demographic changes are about to make it easier to rebalance the economy and boost employment enough to avoid social tension. The Chinese working-age population is now slowly shrinking. More dramatically, the number of 15-30-year-olds will fall 25% from 2015 to 2025. The rural workforce is still above 300 million, implying that large numbers could still migrate to urban areas. But as the rural workforce ages, the pace of migration will slow. 
As a result, China’s labor market will tighten more rapidly than many expect. Rising real wages will support the shift to a more consumption-driven economy, and declining worries about unemployment will reduce reliance on credit-fueled construction to soak up labor supply. 

Latest News Clips 2014.10.06

                   
  1. Obama’s opportunity with India and its new leader 
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options 





Washington Post    September 28, 2014 

The writer, a professor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, was U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs from 2005 to 2008 and lead U.S. negotiator of the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement. 
When the new Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, visits the White House this week, President Obama should seize the opportunity to revive and rebuild an important relationship with a key Asian partner that has fallen on hard times in recent years. 

In strategic terms, there are few countries more important to Washington than India, the dominant power in the Indian Ocean region and, with Japan, the most important U.S. partner in Asia seeking to limit Chinese assertiveness in the region. But, from the start of the Obama administration, India has never been a top priority and the long-term U.S. project to cement a strategic future with India is currently adrift. To be fair, Obama has had a multitude of critical short-term crises — Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Russia — to contend with. But overlooking India has had a price. Seeming U.S. indifference and an Indian government under former prime minister Manmohan Singh in domestic gridlock combined to put the two countries at odds on global trade, climate change, Iran and Russia. 

All that could change with the arrival of the charismatic and strong-willed Modi this week. After one of the most decisive electoral victories in India’s history, Modi has become a presidential-style leader with striking power and credibility to lead India in new directions. One of his primary ambitions is to renew relations with Washington. 

More than anything else, he is seeking greater U.S. investment and trade to further his top priority — to get the Indian economy moving again after alarmingly low growth rates during the past two years. Modi and Obama can begin by agreeing to conclude a long-sought bilateral investment treaty and to jump-start collaboration on science and technology, space research and the environment. 

Modi’s key question in Washington, however, will be whether Obama sees India as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. Many Indians fear the United States ultimately will limit its strategic political and military engagement with Delhi in deference to a paranoid Pakistani leadership. They predict the United States will fall short of a full strategic partnership with India to avoid stoking resentments in China as well. India, after all, was never really described by the Obama team as a key partner in the Asia pivot. 

Modi, however, has made clear from his first day in office that he intends to cement a security partnership with Japan — a positive for America’s own strategic ambitions in the region. He will look to Obama for assurances that the United States will accelerate growing U.S.-India security ties to balance China’s growing military power. At the same time, Modi will want further U.S. help in confronting terrorist threats from Pakistani-based groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and in dealing with multiplying cyber-challenges. 

Obama has learned, as did his predecessors, that, despite all the promise of strategic engagement with India, that country can also be a difficult and sometimes disputatious friend. India has been a consistent spoiler in global trade talks and overly protectionist at home. Its environment minister said at the United Nations last week that India would not join the United States in undertaking a major effort to diminish its rising carbon emissions (now third highest in the world). India has also been an irresolute supporter of U.S. efforts to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions. And Obama would be within his rights to ask Modi to repeal India’s discriminatory nuclear liability law, which scuttled the historic U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement. 

Despite these differences, the upside of future U.S. strategic ties to India is obvious. With Modi’s arrival in Washington, Obama has a rare second chance to get India right after this country’s ties with Delhi atrophied over the past two years. A U.S.-India renaissance would bring the added benefit of clear bipartisan support at home. Bill Clinton began the U.S. effort to define a more practical foreign policy partnership with India at the end of his time in office. George W. Bush had great success in molding close security and counterterrorism connections to the Indian government. There is a Republican-Democratic consensus in Washington that India can be one of our central 21st-century partners. Now it is time for Obama to make his mark with India. 

  1. Who Loves China? 
   OCT 2, 2014 
  
Thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators gathered in Hong Kong on Monday to continue calls for free and open elections for the city's chief executive in 2017. CreditChris Mcgrath/Getty Images 

NEW YORK – Tens of thousands of people have been “occupying” the tear-gas-filled streets of Hong Kong’s Central district to fight for their democratic rights. Many more may soon join them. Though some businessmen and bankers are annoyed by the disruption, the demonstrators are right to protest. 

China’s government has promised Hong Kong’s citizens that they can freely elect their Chief Executive in 2017. But, given that candidates are to be carefully vetted by an unelected committee of pro-Chinese appointees, citizens would have no meaningful choice at all. Only people who “love China” – that is, love the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) – need apply. 

One can almost understand why China’s leaders should be baffled by this show of defiance in Hong Kong. After all, the British simply appointed governors when Hong Kong was still a crown colony, and nobody protested then. 

Indeed, the deal that Hong Kong’s colonial subjects appeared to accept – leaving politics alone in exchange for the opportunity to pursue material prosperity in a safe and orderly environment – is not so different from the deal accepted by China’s educated classes today. The common opinion among British colonial civil servants, businessmen, and diplomats was that the Chinese were not really interested in politics anyway; all they cared about was money. 

Anyone with the slightest knowledge of Chinese history knows that this view was patently false. But, for a long time, it seemed to be true in Hong Kong. There was, however, a significant difference between Hong Kong under the British and under China today. Hong Kong was never a democracy, but it did have a relatively free press, a relatively honest government, and an independent judiciary – all backed by a democratic government in London. 

For most Hong Kong citizens, the prospect of being handed over in 1997 from one colonial power to another was never an entirely happy one. But what really invigorated politics in Hong Kong was the brutal crackdown in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square and in other Chinese cities in 1989. Huge demonstrations took place in Hong Kong to protest the massacre, and massive commemorations of the event are held every June, keeping alive a memory that is repressed and fading in the rest of China. 

It was not simply humanitarian rage that galvanized so many people in Hong Kong to act in 1989. They recognized then that under future Chinese rule, only genuine democracy might safeguard the institutions that protected Hong Kong’s freedoms. Without any significant say in how they were to be governed, Hong Kong’s citizens would be at the mercy of China’s leaders. 

From the point of view of China’s Communist rulers, this seems perverse. They regard Hong Kongers’ democratic demands as a misguided effort to mimic Western politics, or even as a form of nostalgia for British imperialism. Either way, the demonstrators’ agenda is considered “anti-Chinese.” 

  1. Turkey’s ISIS Crisis 
Project Syndicate     OCT 2, 2014 0 

ISTANBUL – Following the recent safe return of 46 Turkish hostages held by the Islamic State, hopes were raised in the United States that Turkey would finally commit to joining the US-led coalition now fighting the group. But Turkey’s willingness to contribute to the coalition remains constrained by the legacy of its ill-fated Syria policy, as well as by a fundamental strategic disconnect between President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government and US President Barack Obama’s administration. 
 

Since Syria’s civil war began three years ago, Turkey has provided logistical and financial support to virtually all elements of the Syrian opposition, while allowing them to use Turkish territory to regroup after launching military operations across the border. Committed to regime change in Syria, Turkey turned a blind eye to some of these groups’ brutal tactics, radical ideologies, and big ambitions. The fear now is that this benign neglect has allowed the Islamic State to embed itself in Turkey and build the capacity to conduct terrorist activities on Turkish soil – and thus to retaliate for Turkish participation in the US-led coalition. 
But there is more behind Turkey’s reticent response to the coalition. Turkey fundamentally disagrees with the US in its interpretation of the threat that the Islamic State poses – and how to address it. Simply put, whereas the US is approaching the Islamic State as the Middle East’s most pressing problem, Turkey views the group as a symptom of deeper pathologies. 
According to this view, any campaign that focuses exclusively on destroying the Islamic State will do nothing to prevent the emergence of similar threats in the near future. And, unlike the US, Middle Eastern countries and their neighbors cannot decide to pivot” away from the region when the consequences of their poorly designed interventions become too unruly. 
In this context, Turkey’s leaders believe that the international community’s response to the Islamic State should be far more ambitious, seeking to redress the underlying causes of the current disorder. Such a strategy would have to include efforts to compel Iraq’s new government to break with the sectarianism of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, while supporting the new leadership’s efforts to provide basic health, educational, and municipal services to all of Iraq’s citizens. 
As for Syria, the only plausible route to normalcy begins with forcing President Bashar al-Assad to cede power. To this end, the US and its allies should consider striking Assad’s strongholds in Syria, while establishing safe havens for the moderate opposition under the protective cloak of a no-fly zone. 

Given that the Islamic State poses a graver threat to Turkey than to any other Western country, Turkey has no choice other than to participate in the campaign against it. This means, first and foremost, adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward the Islamic State at home, aimed at preventing the group from fundraising and recruiting on Turkish soil. Continued improvement of border security and deeper cooperation with Western intelligence agencies on the issue of foreign fighters are also essential. 
But Turkey’s imperative to fight the Islamic State does not trump – much less invalidate – Turkish leaders’ concerns about Obama’s long-term goals. If the US and Turkey are to work together to eradicate the Islamic State, they will first have to agree on a longer-term strategy for restoring some semblance of order to a crisis-ravaged region.