In spite of the title, it is still difficult to make sense of what is happening in Venezuela. Dr. Canache explained the history of the democracy in the country and its progression to an authoritarian state. However, she pointed out that there is a solid portion of the population that clings to the hope of restoring democratic practices. Since she has family who still reside in Venezuela, she knows first-hand that there are many elements within Venezuelan society that are willing to fight to restore the fragile democracy of its not-so-distant past.
 
However, Dr. Canache also pointed out that the path to the restoration of democracy is rife with economic roadblocks.  Once a thriving economy that enjoyed growth from its vast oil reserves, the leadership of Hugo Chavez and his successor, the current president Nicholas Maduro, led to corruption along with nationalization of the major industries in the country, including the energy resources. With several figures in the upper levels of the military among this privileged group of leaders, it is not surprising that socialism has not produced the egalitarian state it once professed, but rather an authoritarian state where the political power and economic wealth rest in the hands of a few who are supported by the military. 
 
With ten million percent (!) inflation projected for this year, it is not surprising that a growing number of people have fled to neighboring states. The chronic lack of food and medicines and extended electricity outages have raised the rate of infant and child mortality and reduced life expectancy.  In addition, the level of political unrest continues to mount. Juan Guaido, leader of the National Assembly, has attempted to use a clause in the Venezuelan constitution to assume the post of president, but he has not yet been successful. The potential for full civil war is unmistakable, and the potential regional unrest caused by mass migration bears watching.
 
Dr. Canache addressed questions about the influence of Cuba and Russia. She noted that while relations with Cuba are long and deep, Cuba is not in a position today to offer the kind of support they did in the past. Russia’s connection is more nebulous as it is difficult to say whether they have real interests in assisting Maduro or whether they merely want to deter US involvement. While a US invasion would be welcomed by a large portion of the population in her country, she commented that financial assistance would likely be better received by the broader region.
 
Dr. Canache remembered the way Venezuela used to be in the 1970s and 1980s.  She concluded that a great deal of work and time will have to pass before the country of her birth will be able to restore its political and economic footing, but that it is not impossible.

​The Wunderbar Together program, sponsored by the Goethe Institute and the government of Germany, was a terrific format for recognizing the breadth and depth of ties between Central Illinois and Germany.  Her Excellency Helga Barth had a full schedule meeting with the Friends of Friedrichshafen Sister City Organization, the German American Central Society, along with business and agricultural leaders with German heritage.
 
Madam Barth stressed the unique nature of relations between the United States and Germany.  She expressed deep gratitude to the US for “liberating” Germany in 1945 after WWII.  She also stressed the significance of the development of democratic political systems and market economics with the support of the US.  In addition, mutual security agreements, including the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, have allowed Germany to thrive without causing fears about their renewed military strength.  The growth of common values and interests have made the partnership between Germany and the United States truly valuable to our mutual benefit.
 
She did point out a few areas of contention between our states.  First, Germany prefers a more aggressive approach to climate change than the United States.  Second, Germany argues for greater engagement with Iran to reduce fears of nuclear proliferation rather than isolation, as the US prefers.  Finally, while tariffs are a tool employed by all states to accomplish trade objectives, Germany finds the use of tariffs against allies and trading partners to be ineffective, and even counterproductive.
 
Madam Barth answered questions about immigration by noting that the nearly million immigrants to Germany are good for the workforce and are being integrated quickly through educational programs.  She acknowledged that there is resentment for this immigration in some parts of Germany, but that the majority of Germans welcome the immigrants and recognize their value for the workforce.  She discussed Brexit and the challenges posed by the departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union.  She noted that, instead of posing a threat to the EU itself by encouraging other states to leave, there has been a rise in popular views of the EU and the benefits of belonging to the “family of European states.”  She was also asked about UK residents who may wish to apply for German citizenship by noting that they are welcome if they have followed all of the rules for citizenship in her state.
 
Traditional German food, including schnitzel, red cabbage and spaetzle, German beers and wines, and music provided by accordion and Alp horn players created a delightful evening appealing to the senses and the mind.  Although Madam Barth will move onto her next posting at the end of July, we hope we will see her again, either here in Central Illinois or in Berllin.
 

​While the conclusion of the United Kingdom’s goal to leave the European Union is still very much up in the air, the history of the decision and the politics of the arguments are worth learning.  Dr. Cleeton enlightened us all at this program at Barrack’s Cater Inn on May 16.
 
With slides that showed the course of the decision, including the influence of outside voices inserting their influence, Dr. Cleeton sorted out the confusion surrounding the original vote.  However, he was clear in pointing out that, once the referendum was held and the Leave campaign won, the deep confusion over what that actually meant and what would follow was as clear as mud to the people of the UK and the rest of us!
 
Largely as a reaction to the immigration crisis caused by the large number of people from the conflicts in Syria fleeing the warzone, the Leave campaign promised Brits the opportunity to reclaim the right to make all decisions for themselves concerning their borders, their monetary policies, and their lives in general.  But the reintroduction of hard borders and customs are not to their liking.  In particular, the so-called “soft border” with Ireland is a major hurdle for the hardliners in the UK to cross, and it’s not negotiable from the EU side. 
 
Dr. Cleeton pointed out that the on-going battle to define how the UK will eventually leave the EU is a battle happening within British politics.  It is the various political entities within the UK that are keeping them from finding consensus on how they want to leave, in particular because the majority of people and their politician want to dictate the terms of the withdrawal, keeping all the benefits of the common market without any of the responsibilities.  That position is unrealistic in light of the need to negotiate with all of the other members, the other 27 states, who also want to protect their union.
 
The European Union has negotiated with Prime Minister Teresa May, and the terms of Britain’s departure have been set.  As far as they are concerned, it is up to the British parliament to ratify the deal, not to renegotiate it.  The deadline for that to happen has been extended to October 31, and as a result, the UK is obligated to fulfill their commitments to the EU until then.
 
But will the UK crash out of the EU on October 31, or will they be able to iron out the way they will leave by compromising on policies within the British parliament?  The EU has said they will be out on October 31.  The Brexiteers have said they want to leave, no later than October 31.  But it remains to be seen HOW they will leave.  Or will another referendum to undo it all be held?  Cleeton says that is unlikely. 

Thursday, April 18, 2019
​Blog by Angela Weck

With a crowd of hometown friends, co-workers from his days at Caterpillar, and the usual PAWAC members, Michael Maibach regaled the audience with true stories from his days as a corporate lobbyist.  He focused largely on his days at the Intel Corp, a microprocessor company that has grown into a world-wide leader in the industry.

Maibach outlined the style of practice that he and his team employed at Intel, a philosophy that came down directly from the founders of the company, whom Maibach described as humble and honest.  Maibach listed ethics, a results- oriented approach, and a constant focus on the company, the industry and the host communities when dealing with politicians. He noted the importance of staying on focus and not straying to the social or cultural politics of the day.

He also listed a few of “Maibach’s Laws of Lobbying.”  These “laws” include: be respectful and gracious; always tell the truth; always tell both sides as it builds credibility; never threaten but stick to what is at stake; lobby with competitors as one company is a special interest but three companies is an industry; and remember that “people die for their country, not for their company.”

Maibach served the company for 18 years as the VP for Corporate Global Affairs at Intel from 1983-2001 and at Caterpillar from 1976-1983.  He is currently a Senior Fellow at the American Opportunity Foundation, and an outspoken advocate for strong TransAtlantic trade and cooperation.

​

January 31st, 2019
​Bradley Student Center Ballroom

Blog by Angela Weck

The Leadership Crisis in Illinois, America, and the World
John Shaw, Executive Director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University
Author of the PAWAC Reads! Book Club selection: Rising Star, Setting Sun: Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and the Presidential Transition that Changed America


Mr. Shaw led off with several fascinating stories from his time as a journalist and political analyst in Washington, DC.  Comparing the leadership styles of members of Congress, from both parties and from both houses, and those of other political figures, such as diplomats, he noted that all true leaders share the common trait of being able to truly listening and form thoughtful responses.  He also noted that bipartisanship should be the primary choice of policy-making, rather than supporting one's party at the expense of the people.


For the people in the audience, especially the students, he offered a few pointed criticisms of the media to consider.  While he did not venture into the unwinnable debate about "fake news," he did discuss the current practice of some people in the media who seek to grow their audience by chasing the more sensational aspects of a story.  He cautioned the audience to be critical of what they read and hear, and to use multiple sources for their news to achieve the most balanced news.




​

by Nikki Eckland

​Saturday October 6th PAWAC and The Itoo Society partnered in hosting ‘Why Lebanon Matters’, with discussion lead by Ambassador of Lebanon to the United states Gabriel Issa, Advisor to President Michel Aoun Elias Bou Sabb, and Representative of the US Congress Darin LaHood. Walking into the Itoo Hall was nothing short of beautiful, postcards from Lebanon on each table and white gauze fabric draping the ceiling. There was plenty of time to meet the speakers and make introductions before the discussion began, and a deliciously authentic buffet to welcome listeners into Lebanese culture (not to mention some pretty killer desserts). The panel was enthusiastic and moved across topics with ease, keeping the audience engaged for the duration of the night.
 
The conversation started by detailing Education in Lebanon, and Elias Bou Sabb as the former Minister of Education and Higher Education was the perfect speaker for this topic. He introduced to the audience the problem of Syrian refugees, and how Lebanon had become burdened with the responsibility of educating refugee children. There are 4 million Lebanese people in Lebanon, and 2 million Syrian refugees, so Syrian children are substantial in their numbers. This is problematic because of the strain it’s putting onto Lebanese educational institutions, who have been forced to divide the school day into two shifts. Even more concerning is the necessity of education, because not adapting the school day to accommodate these children would leave them out on the streets, easy targets for terrorist group recruiters.
 
The panel moved on to discuss the issue of UN standards of safety for refugees. Lebanon is responsible for providing refugees with important resources and funding. Because of the current state of Syria, Lebanon is required by the UN to cut off these benefits to refugees who have returned to their home country. However, as His excellency Gabriel Issa argues, these UN sanctions are unfairly strict, and require conditions in Syria to be even better than they were before its collapse.
 
Rep. Darin LaHood returned this sentiment by stating his hopes that these standards might change through participation in future UN summits, agreeing that they should be re-evaluated.
 
The floor opened for comments near the end of the discussion, allowing the audience to voice concerns and questions. The war between Israel and Lebanon was brought up, and Ambassador Gabriel Issa remarked that Lebanon has not and never will initiate an attack on its neighbors. They do have the right to defend themselves, but want peace between Middle Eastern nations.
 
Another point that emerged during audience participation was that of Lebanon’s lack of environmental standards, to which the panel responded by explaining Lebanon’s wish to improve.
 
Overall the night was a combination of great food, beautiful setting, and interesting discussion. We hope to see you at the next event, and thank everyone who attended on Saturday!