#Japan impressions of - written in 1981

I have had a new toy for Christmas - a scanner. I was looking through an old documents box and came across a copy of a staff magazine. It carried an article I wrote almost 35 years ago! I could only photo scan it so the quality is poor - but I have decided to put it into my blog because it was a life changing experience for me. (to increase the text size press Ctrl +)

#NewYear resolutions or objectives - and it is good to have a plan.

We are on the cusp of a New Year - an invigorating optimistic time for many - for me.

I hesitate to go overboard with how I feel (and very important to touch wood like mad which I am) because so many in the world are not so fortunate and we should take nothing for granted. For instance many in the north of England and Scotland are currently flooded - homes and businesses lost. Many in the world are facing ill-health, hardship or hunger and cannot see how their lot will change in 2016. Of course many are threatened or affected by war - not of their making - and so desperately sad. So I hesitate.

However back to my original May 2014 opening blog and why I am writing a blog. I am sharing my personal thoughts so here goes!

I have done my early morning bike ride this morning. (I have done so just about every morning for the last several years). There were a few more new faces out jogging this morning. It was the same yesterday at our local sports club - new members. It is the time of year that people resolve to make changes in their lifestyle - to break bad habits - to try and lose weight - to get fitter - to drink less - to be more active - to be more healthy - to watch less TV - to be more thrifty - not to spend so much time on social media etc etc! What is on your list?

This is my thought. The problem with New Years resolutions - or even Monday Morning resolutions is they tend to be all or nothing. Their strength is you enter into an undertaking with yourself and maybe others. It is simple to say and understand. I have given up cigarettes or I am going to stop snacking between meals. The trouble is it is easy to falter and if you do what are you left with? I know someone that starts a diet every Monday morning. Typically something happens in his working week - lets say he is required to attend a business lunch - his diet goes out of the window. His mentality is then - ok I have blown my diet for this week - I might as well continue eating what I want for the remainder of the week and I will start my new diet next Monday! I am suggesting a better way is to dispense with "resolutions" and replace them with "objectives". My objective is - I am going to get fitter, I am going to lose weight, I am going to change my lifestyle. I see objectives as more flexible than absolutist resolutions. I see objectives as long-term and not necessarily lost if you stray off the resolution path. True they do not have the total defined and clear cut strength of a resolution but I think there is strength that comes from realism. Most people fail to see out their resolutions for ever. Too often we revert to type once the resolution has been conceded. With a committed objective - if you have a lapse or fail to run every day etc. you can say to yourself ok - but that does not mean I have lost my objective - all is not lost - I shall keep working towards my objective. I have written it before. Life style change particularly in the sense of getting and staying fit " is a marathon not a sprint". So I look at those New Year joggers and new members to our sports club. I see it every year. They will be out every day for the first week or two weeks or month. They are sprinting! But for the vast majority it leads to burn out. They have been unrealistically intense. They lose their resolve. They have gone too fast. A better more sustainable approach is to realise life style change is a marathon. Think in terms of your long-term objective. Progress might benefit from being slower, more realistic - more sustainable - this is my thought. Run 3 times per week not every day.

My other thought relates to planning your year ahead. This a great time of year. A new diary. A new cycle.

Some people resist structure in their life. They like to live every day as it comes. Maximum flexibility - minimum planning. That is fine - each to his own - but it doesn't work for me. I do two things this time of year in terms of planning for the forthcoming year.

The first is a make a list of objectives - things I would like to do or achieve in 2016. I then put against them a target start date and a target finish date. One might be paint the outside of the house or run a marathon - ha! I find this list helpful - particularly putting it into a time frame. However this list is only objectives. I do not beat myself up over it. It is a flexible working document. It is subject to change. Things will drop off the list - others will be added - but I find it practical, helpful and motivating.

The second thing I do is pencil or in some cases ink in dates in my diary of things I plan/want to do. This has two major benefits. I have found over the years that there is always reasons not to do things. Usually because there are conflicting time pressures. You want to go away - but it clashes with something else you or your family have arranged. It clashes with a work related event. People can't get the time off work because they have thought about it too late. By getting dates in the diary you avoid this. You keep your diary clear. You can say - sorry I cannot do that - I am on holiday etc. The other major benefit is I take pleasure in the planning. It gives you things to look forward to. It is more efficient as it allows you to prepare better - to do the google searches - to make good decisions. My diary for 2016 is already taking shape - and it is a very positive feeling.

May I round off by wishing you and your family a happy and successful New Year (in your own terms of course!)

#Pineapple in the shopping basket for £0.99p! How? (for my son in law Phil)

Today I bought a large (and heavy) pineapple in the local store for £0.99p! The attached label says it was produced in Costa Rica. I have been to Costa Rica - it is a very long way away. I googled it - 5500 miles or 8851 kilometres infact. I remember an 11 hour + flight. (an aside - Costa Rica is an incredible country - one of the most bio diverse in the world. I remember swimming in the wonderfully warm Pacific - with Pelicans diving for fish and Howler monkeys sat on the beach!)

I don't know much about how pineapples grow. I know they do not grow on trees and I know you get one per plant. I googled an explanation :

" Even though pineapples are considered a fruit (and a fruit generally comes from trees — unless it’s a berry), pineapples actually grow on a plant close to the ground. Each pineapple plant bears exactly one pineapple. So where did pineapple come from in the first place? How exactly does a pineapple grow? Pretty easily, actually. A pineapple starts and ends as the same product — that is to say, you need a pineapple to grow a pineapple. Pineapples don’t really have usable seeds, so pineapple plants start from the pineapple itself, or more specifically, from the leafy top. In a tropical climate, a pineapple head can be placed directly into the ground. Just be patient, though. Once the pineapple head takes root, it’ll take two to three years before it starts bearing fruit. It’ll grow to be almost 4 feet high by 4 feet wide. Once it’s matured, a large flower will grow in the middle of the plant and eventually be replaced by the pineapple itself. Once the pineapple is harvested, a new fruit will grow in its place the following year. A lot of work for one pineapple."

Ok - remember I only paid 99p today!

So the plant takes 3 or 4 years to mature. It is nurtured and looked after by the farmer and his staff. Then you get one pineapple per year. (I don't know for how many years thereafter).

It then has to be harvested. It has to be transported. Pineapples are heavy and bulky. I wonder what the terrain is like? I did quite a long journey by bus in Costa Rica - from the airport to the place I was staying. The roads were challenging. Very steep hills and decents, sharp bends - indifferent surfaces. ( The journey took the best part of a day. I flew back in a 10 seater light aircraft - it took less than an hour ).

At some stage the pineapples are labelled and graded and packed. Would this be done on the farm or are they transported to a local distribution centre first?

The pineapple is presumably loaded into a container and shipped to the UK (carefully because they are easily bruised and damaged.) I cannot imagine they are flown for cost reasons.

How many people and machines and vehicles have been involved so far? Don't forget the crane driver loading the container on the ship ! What wages have been paid. What profit has the farmer made out of the 99p!?

How long will it take for a container ship to steam 5500 miles across the wild Atlantic on its way to Felixstowe or Southampton. How much fuel used. Presumably the pineapples have to be chilled throughout. Surely it must take a week to get here at least.

The containers are unloaded. One per massive lorry to the Supermarket distribution centre - where ever that is - or does it go to Covent Garden (Nine Elms) fruit market first?

Eventually the container cargo has to be split and reloaded for shipment by lorry down to the Isle of Wight - with the added expense (and time) of the cross Solent ferry crossing.

It arrives at the local supermarket - more hands to unload - and then out onto the shelves for the likes of me to buy for 99p!

How much money does the Supermarket make out of the 99p. The lion share of the profit I would guess. How does this whole journey hang together. Surely it means subsistence wages for many involved and will there be any real profit at all for the local farmer or cooperative who grew it? And what about the environmental cost - all that diesel fuel - including for the massive container ship!

I guess the answer lies in economies of scale. Thousands and thousands of pineapples grown, transported and distributed at the same time. It does make you speculate about the benefits and efficacy of "local and seasonal sourcing" though!  Stating the obvious - without such ingenuity and enterprise we would not be eating pineapples in the UK and even if we could , they would be much more expensive than £0.99p!

 

#Tradition

I am in the middle of a blog - believe it or not - about pineapples! but it is quite late on Christmas Eve - I am affected by alcohol from a family session in the local boozer -  but my jobs are done - food prepared as far as an amateur can manage - my offspring are home (almost). I am anxious about my 22 year old son - still out on the town - but he will be a doctor in 2 1/2 years time - so do I really need to fret - who would be a parent! I am thinking about my wonderful daughter - a mother of two darling girls. She is a ward sister on an acute medical ward. She is working a full overnight night shift - will not finish until 8am on Christmas Day. What an amazing contribution. So many people take things for granted. My daughter is at the coal face. So proud of you Victoria.

Christmas has been coming in our household for three weeks at least. Every year we have the same discussions. What will we do when. When will we shop. What will we buy. When do we open the presents. What to eat. When to eat it. How shall we shape our Christmas. When will we walk or swim. Maybe a bike ride or play tennis. Monopoly or Newmarket!?

Every year for at least the last twenty years we eventually come to the same conclusion - even if it is by default. We will do the same as we did last year! It is what we want. It is the conclusion we all secretly engineer. We want it to be the same. We love tradition. We love the family tradition. We love the traditions established by our parents. We replicate them - maybe in a different setting yes but essentially the same. It probably helps to define us without perhaps realising it.

More widely. The UK is not a happy place at the moment. There is a sense of anxiety. Why? In my view and in the view of many others - is because our culture and traditions seem to be under siege and are being diminished. My fellow citizens I am sure in the main are deeply conservative (small c). We value our traditions. As our Prime Minister said today in a speech to the nation - it is important we uphold/consider our Christian values as a nation. He is right. While Britain is nominally a church state - in reality it is largely secular. However it is underpinned by the values of Christianity. British people do uphold the traditions we take from hundreds of years of Christianity and they are important and valuable in our sense of well being and continuity (the simple act of singing traditional Christmas carols for instance).

The anxiety comes from the gradual erosion of freedom of speech - ground down by a right of not to be offended (thin skinned intolerance) - a sickening political correctness. The anxiety comes from the impact of immigration from the east. We know mass immigration/migration is having a dramatic effect on our country. I shall not make a response to a good or bad economic effect here/now. The underlying impact is those from the east are not in the main people who subscribe to Christian values. Cut to the chase. The Muslim faith - many would say cult - are not being quietly and reasonably assimilated into our culture. There is a feeling they want to change how we live. Many are zealous - activists - intolerant - superior in their righteousness. We know many despise how we live. Many live quite differently from us. But they want to be here because they are free here. Despite this so many Muslims seem to have little or no humility. They throw the rights and freedoms our traditions offer them back in our faces. They exploit our tolerance as weakness. Ironically we are still going majorly out of our way not to offend them - we tip toe round their sensitivities (of which there are many) at our own expense. They are running rings around us. It is desperately sad and misguided. It is making very ordinary people very wary - it makes us feel we must guard - emphasise the traditions that define us otherwise we will be overwhelmed. We are not very good at it. Sadly it is making ordinary people quietly militant - but at the same time anxious - because actually all we want is to live in peace with our deep rooted traditions and way of life.

How will it end?

#Gandhi "I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet".

As usual. Cycling along for my early morning Seaview to Ryde and back again constitutional. Dark, mild, still - lovely clean sea air. Quality thinking time.

I am recalling some of my recent India trip. In the blogs I wrote about it I mentioned Gandhi several times. I visited Raj Ghat in Delhi where he was cremated and Gandhi Smitri where he was actually shot dead. These were moving and significant places to attend.

But this was not what was in my mind particularly this morning. What was in my mind was a rather scruffy Gandhi quote stenciled on a back street wall in Fort Cochin, Kerala. I had hired a bike to have a look around. I was trying to find my way back through the backstreet maze and came across the quote in a inconsequential narrow road. I read it as I cycled past - it made me smile and then made me think. I got half a kilometre down the road and thought I want a photo of that quote. I cycled back and took the photo below. It was a narrow street, only my mob camera - so getting the perspective was tricky - but it doesn't matter because it is legible and in describes where it was when I first read it.

Subsequently I have done no research into the quote but have thought quite a lot about what Gandhi might have meant and what it means to me.

I guess it could refer to moral rather than immoral behaviour - being lead astray. Being tempted. Polluting an otherwise good moral mind. Resisting it. I am sure it does.

However I have been thinking more about "peace of mind" - contentment - being your own person - shaping your own life - taking responsibility for your own life - rather than being pressured to conform to someone else's ideas and values that do not sit comfortably with you and ultimately disturb and undermine your peace of mind. I am thinking of things like materialism, social media - self promotion, keeping up with the Jones's, following the latest trends and fashions in a vain attempt to conform or impress. Maybe Gandhi meant we should resist that - to resist things that detract from our peace and simple happiness.

The other thing I think it might mean is not allowing mean spirited, judgemental or unreasonable people to undermine us. For example I know someone who is a vocational carer. A very professional and thoughtful lady. She was harangued by the daughter of one of the elderly persons under her care for not being caring enough. My friend was very upset and questioned herself. It is now apparent the daughters attitude - and her taking it out on my friend has its roots in the daughters own self guilt for placing her mother in care rather than looking after her herself. I think this happens a lot in life. People can be horrible to other people - but it very often it says most about them - and maybe Gandhi is saying don't let people upset you or disturb your mind if deep down you know you are leading a good life.

I am smiling writing this - I need to lighten up - ha! I have a Glastonbury ticket. How to approach those mad hedonistic 4 days - I will think about it on my early morning bike ride tomorrow! Oh and Christmas of course!

Raj Ghat

Gandhi Smitri

Gandhi's last steps and where he was assassinated.

     

#Syria the decision by the UK to extend air strikes against ISIS in Syria

I am writing this short blog as an exercise for myself as much as anything - to order my thoughts and to take a position.

The UK parliament has recently completed a 10 hour debate culminating in a substantial majority vote in favour of conditional air strikes against ISIS in Syria. This was a free vote and supported by many Labour MP's including Tom Watson (deputy leader) Hilary Benn (Shadow Foreign Sec.), Alan Johnson and Margaret Beckett.

I would like to start by saying those who claim the UK are warmongers, or have rushed to war, or have no idea what they are doing have not properly followed the process and arguments that led to this significant decision. It seemed to me that our MP's whether voting for or against did so with a great deal of thought and principled moral conviction - with good and proper intensions. It certainly was not a decision taken lightly or easily.

A SUMMARY POSITION

• ISIS is a jihadist fundamentalist cult intent on creating a worldwide "Muslim" caliphate. It recognises no international borders and are sworn enemies of the west and western values. Most would say their practices are medieval and certainly barbaric and cruel.
• ISIS have claimed responsibility for the recent terrorist atrocity in Paris when 132 were murdered. Authorities in the UK claim to have prevented 7 planned ISIS sponsored terror attacks in the last year. We must protect ourselves.
• Left without significant challenge the caliphate spread and was becoming ever more powerful. Less than a year ago it almost secured Iraq totally - including control of it's oil wealth. The democratically elected government of Iraq requested help from the West in countering the advance of ISIS. The UK parliament voted massively in favour of implementing a UN resolution to create a coalition to fight ISIS from the air over Iraq in order to give momentum to the Iraq Army fightback. This has been partially successful.The ISIS advance has been checked in Iraq and at least 30% or the territory lost has now been regained.
• The ISIS main base is in the adjacent Syria. They are fighting the ruling Assad regime and are seeking to take over Syria. It is from Syria that they plan and train for their reign of terror. There is indisputable evidence that they have sent people to attack us in the west from Syria.

REASONS FOR AIR STRIKES

• If we do not confront ISIS they will get bigger and stronger - and even more dangerous to us in the West. As Hilary Benn the Shadow Labour Foreign Secretary who voted in support of the recent House of Commons motion to extend bombing to Syria said "history shows we must fight fascism".
• The House of Commons voted 534 votes to 43 to support bombing of ISIS in Iraq. In the last 12 months a combination of air strikes and Iraqi fighters on the ground has been widely judged as being effective in turning back ISIS and civilian casualties have been reportedly avoided. ISIS does nor recognise borders. ISIS move between Iraq and Syria. It is illogical that our planes have to stop at the Syrian border.
• We have been asked to assist by our allies.
• There is no other practical option. A governments first priority is to protect its own citizens.

ARGUEMENTS/COUNTER ARGUEMENTS USED AGAINST AIR STRIKES

• Bombing on its own cannot defeat ISIS. Ground troops will be required to defeat ISIS and there are no obvious home grown troops in Syria that we can support. Therefore bombing is pointless. It is accepted ISIS cannot be defeated by air power alone. It is also true that unlike in Iraq there is no obvious allies on the ground that the West would naturally choose to support in a ground offensive against ISIS. (there is no proposal to put Western troops on the ground). There is further messy realities - the Russians are supporting the Assad regime for their own reasons. While the Russians are targeting ISIS it is also likely they are targeting other groups that see both ISIS and Assad as enemies. The West's priority is to defeat ISIS but they want the Assad regime gone too because of their human rights abuses including using gas on their own people and dropping barrel bombs on the same.) The West's intelligence gathering report there may be up to 70000 militia men admittedly disparate and not necessarily the allies we would choose, who are against ISIS and Assad. (it is true the Russians might be attacking these groups too). Despite Russian interference it is hoped these men could eventually form the ground force needed to take advantage of the opening created by attack by air strikes. So it is not necessarily true that a potential ground force does not exist that could in the end defeat ISIS. It is certain that these groups could not emerge if ISIS was not attacked from the air. ISIS is currently far too strong. It is accepted that this will be a long haul. and there are no certainties. ( please note David Cameron speaking in Parliament referred to the 70000 as a guesstimate and stated repeatedly that they could not be relied upon as a suitable or effective ally - but there was hope that they might become so in due course and the status quo was not a serious option in his opinion.) 
• Russia is already in there bombing and the crowded airspace could lead to an international incident. Russia and the West are there with the unanimous support of a UN resolution and both are targeting ISIS and to some extent working in cooperation. This extends to a common flight control over Syria.
• Bombing in Syria will cause further radicalisation of Muslims particularly in the West. It is understood that western ground troops however worthy their intensions often cause huge resentment (as occupiers) which might lead to further radicalisation. It is highly unlikely western troops will be used which is why a viable local opposition on the ground is such an important issue. Other Muslim countries are supporting the Western coalition in its attempts to counter ISIS. 
• Bombing in Syria will make our streets even more unsafe. Our streets are not safe now. See 7/7, Corporal Rigby, Charlie Hebdo, Paris. As I have said our intelligence service and police have recently foiled planned terrorist attacks in the UK. We are not safe.
• Bombing in Syria will kill innocent civilians. The lesson has been learned from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is clearly understood by Western Governments that while their publics might support bombing they will only do so on the basis that civilian casualties are avoided. While there can be no absolute guarantees we are assured that a combination of surgical bombing strikes and high quality intelligence and surveillance has demonstrated in Iraq over the last year that air strikes can hurt ISIS without hurting civilians. 
• Bombing in Syria is illegal. There is a unanimous UN resolution in place authorising air strikes and the removal of Assad (which is why the West do not need an invitation from Assad to fight ISIS in Syria.)
• There is no end plan - no plan for Syria if and when ISIS is defeated. This is a fair point  to raise given the mistakes made in Iraq and Libya particularly. The West might be resigned to keeping Assad (as the Russians seem to want) in place but only on a transitory basis. It is hoped the disparate groups will grow into a force for good (and refugees return) once they can see ISIS being pressurised by air strikes from the Western coalition. It is accepted that the future is not clear but that is not an argument against action now - it is just too dangerous to allow a status quo - and even more dangerous to leave ISIS to grow unchallenged.
• War is a mistake - we should be putting our efforts into seeking a political settlement. History shows us that it is naïve and wishful thinking only, that fascists can be stopped by negotiation - (or at least until they are on the brink of defeat.) Just consider Hitler.
• There are plenty of others dropping bombs on Syria - why do we need to get involved? It is practical for us to be involved (as we are one of the countries with the ability to make a difference with target bombing) but it is also hugely symbolic. We are part of G7 and G20 and of course NATO. Our allies like France have asked for assistance. We have an interest in these air strikes because we believe ISIS wants to destroy our way of life. We have a moral obligation to face up to our attackers and to support our colleagues in their time of need.

It seems obvious to me that ISIS are a world threat in their ambition and hatred. They are a threat to us on our streets. If we do not attempt to counter their activity they will expand and become ever more powerful and dangerous. Targeted and surgical air strikes are a practical way forward and I am satisfied the west will make every effort to avoid civilian casualties (while ISIS continue to butcher civilians). I do not believe air strikes will make us more unsafe. I believe we have a battle to win the hearts and minds of young impressionable Muslims who are being drawn to Syria and radicalised by ISIS propaganda. By weakening ISIS in Syria we can stem this flow. It might be a generational battle sadly.