The Olympics in China achieved their ends. The Beijing government treated the event as a major marketing shin-dig with world leaders flying in for the opening ceremony.
Unnoticed in the all the excitement, a group of West African traders struggling to get into the country to sell their goods. The Chinese government carefully denied Africans access to the games.
If only there were an internationally recognised trade organisation that could mediate between states when such disputes arise? An organisation that would ensure that countries don't get to unfairly erect trade barriers to punish some, and benefit others, but that the same rules govern everyone equally.
Well, there is. It's called the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
In the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist outrage and the collapse of the dotcom bubble in 2001, trade ministers representing 123 sovereign states met in Doha, Qatar to agree the basis for a new round of trade talks. That was seven years ago. The most recent last-ditch effort to conclude the talks failed in Geneva.
Imagine you were offered the choice of a rather ordinary coffee mug, or a big slab of chocolate. Which would you prefer?
Now, say you really preferred the chocolate but were given the mug instead, what would you do if offered the opportunity to trade your mug for the chocolate?
This may seem like an odd question but it has even odder results. Economists have, traditionally, believed in the idea of a rational consumer. A person who values chocolate more than mugs should immediately swap. The ownership of the mug should make no difference to the transaction. But a surprisingly large number of people find it hard to swap the mug even though they prefer chocolate. This was named the "endowment effect" by Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago, and explains why you have such a hard time throwing away unwanted gifts.
In much the same way, it shouldn't matter to governments whether they own schools, hospitals or power companies. What governments want is a universal and well-educated workforce, not a bunch of run-down schools.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been kept isolated and under military guard in Burma since she, and her political party, won their 1990 elections. She is currently the most famous political prisoner in the world.
The secretive and isolated military junta that has controlled Burma since 1962 has driven a once-productive nation into the floor. Citizens are subjected to forced labour in military work camps. A popular uprising by Buddhist monks in August 2007 was viciously crushed.
Yet, like Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe or Kim Jong-il's North Korea, the leadership that spurns and denigrates the rest of the world also relies entirely on that outside world to provide relief to their people.
At the beginning of May, Cyclone Nargis struck the coast of Burma. The mangrove forests along the coast that would normally have absorbed massive tides and flooding have all been demolished. Poverty, a lack of electricity for heating and cooking, and direct military intervention, have all resulted in the wholesale destruction of the forests.
The result has been the devastation of the country. Estimates put the death toll at over 100,000 people. More than a million people have been left homeless. Disease and famine have followed.
Learn about the Spyder Curve
