Rochesterian in Tunisia is optimistic about nation's future

This is a guest column I wrote for the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, published on February 5th, 2011. Read it at their website here.


I am a Rochesterian currently living in Tunis, Tunisia. I want to express the feelings of hope, as well as worry, that exist among the Tunisian people after their recent Jasmine Revolution led to the peaceful departure of their authoritarian president, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, and hopefully the end of the corruption his regime fostered.


For most of the time I have lived here, Tunisia has been a stable, seemingly prosperous state, with the president and his family dominating both government and commerce. The ex-president ruled for 23 years, and his family demanded ownership stakes in many successful companies. But tourism was booming, agriculture and phosphates provided export goods, and a highly educated population attracted foreign investment from the U.S. and Europe. People were unhappy about the corruption and the lack of freedom of speech, but few would even dare to speak out in a private setting due to fears of the secret police.


On Dec. 17, a young, unemployed Tunisian university graduate, Mohamed Bouazizi, set himself on fire after police confiscated the vegetables he was trying to sell on the street in an attempt to earn a living. His death caused widespread protests that eventually spread to the capital, where thousands of people of all social classes took to the streets. They demanded democracy, an end to corruption and their freedom of speech.


Bouazizi may have committed his act of self-immolation out of frustration, but he could not have realized how much his feelings embodied those of a whole generation of unemployed and underemployed university graduates in Tunisia.


People are hopeful now because they are in the first Arab country to peacefully cause a dictator to resign, and now they are on the path toward elections in six months or less. However, people remain worried because there is not a tradition of democracy here. Also, there are economic concerns as foreign tourists are staying away due to the political instability, and for the same reason many foreign investors are staying on the sidelines.


I am optimistic that the country will move smoothly toward elections. My hope is that this democracy can flourish as an example to other countries in the region.

Engineers and the Rise of China

China is modernizing its military and strengthens ties to Russia through the NATO-esque Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), It also is becoming an increasingly large producer of greenhouse gases with predictions that it will surpass the US in its production of such pollution. And of course there is the issue of producing a plethora of cheap textiles and other low-skill factory produced goods.

However, none of the issues above will cause a risk to US security. The Chinese military has no incentive to start a war with it's largest "customer." Granted France and Germany were each other's biggest trading partners before World War I, but the importance of US-China trade dwarfs that scenario and makes the risk of a military conflict nearly non-existent. The pollution issue is a phase the US and Europe also passed through on their process of industrialization, and government officials in China are beginning the process of strengthening environmental protections. And regarding the factory goods, those low cost goods are equally beneficial as they allow consumers globally to have a higher standard of living (buy more goods for less money).

All of the points above could be discussed in more depth, but the greatest challenge to America's place in the world is less this and more in the realm of ideas and innovation. Specifically, ideas and innovation in math and science will be important in the future as the critical mass of educated engineers and scientists grows at an accelerating pace. A full 20% of the Chinese college-age popular is in higher education now. All the more impressive, in engineering there are 442,000 new undergraduates, 48,000 masters' degree students, and 8,000 Ph.D students each year. True their university system, in most cases, is not up to Western standards. However, currently they are doing their best to attract Western professors and raise the level of their university quality. Eventually they will be the innovators of science if the US does not increase its output of scientists and engineers.

How, specifically, will this impact the US? This is where we get into the Product Cycle Theory. This theory says that when a product is first developed, and needs highly skilled labor to produce it, those countries with more innovators and knowledge workers will be the ones with the ability to create and then continue to produce that product. As time goes on, and the process of making that product is simplified and standardized, the work can be sent to countries with lower-skilled labor pools. So right now, the US, Europe and Japan are creating most of the new technologies that eventually filter their way through the globe. The more developed countries produce the cutting edge products and as such receive the higher profits. When production becomes standardized, it is licensed to a lower-wage, lower-skill country to produce the goods. The risk is that a China, with more innovators, specifically more scientists and engineers, will usurp the place of the US as a world leader in innovation. In contrast to this argument, a far larger globally pool of scientists and engineers would raise global standards of living, and perhaps there would be a larger quantity of wealth for the entire world to enjoy. However, relative to the current US position of being a world leader in technology, geopolitical position could change. The way to win on this intellectually battleground is not bigger ships and stronger tanks, but rather increased spending and quality of US math and science education.

When people think of the "threat" of China, it is not the factory worker "taking" the job from a union laborer in the US. It is not their super-sized land army. And it is not even the huge amounts of pollution they create. It is the risk they will become smarter and more innovative than the US.

Government Stability in Pakistan

This could just be my own general paranoia, but how stable is the government in Pakistan? The Pervez Musharraf is a military dictator who seized power by force from a democratically elected president, and many people from all levels of society are trying to get him out of power. However, he is keeping his nation stable, and is a supporter of US foreign policy.

However, my new worry as to why he could be pushed out of power comes from the terrible damage from the earthquake in Pakistan. I make no claim to be an expert on Pakistan, but Mr. Musharaff's rule seems precarious. Will in the inability to deal with this devastating tragedy be the final impetus that causes his fall? And if he falls, who will be in control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal?