This article reports on how scientists from Stanford University helped North Korea develop its first lab capable of detecting drug-resistant tuberculosis. The country did not have the technology to tell which strains were susceptible to antibiotics. This means that dangerous strains could push out strains that are easy to kill, making the dangerous strain dominant. After doctors from the North Korean health ministry visited the American doctors in San Francisco, a Stanford team began to help install a diagnostics lab in Pyongyang, North Korea's capitol. The project was "an unprecedented level of cooperation" between North Korean and American doctors.
This project fits into the liberalist ideology. Although America and North Korea are clearly not allies, they are working together for the common good. In this case, TB could devastate the population of North Korea, and potentially spread to other countries. TB's threat is not just confined to North Korea's border.
Had the American doctors taken the realist approach, they most likely would not have helped develop the lab. It is not in America's interest, because North Korea is not an ally. There is not an immediate threat to the US, because TB does not affect the US in the way it affects North Korea. In fact, from a realist point of view, the North Korean's problem with TB would be a positive thing because there would be a smaller amount of healthy North Koreans to participate in the military and other agencies that could harm the United States.
Is TB a big enough health concern to warrant liberalism between nations, similar to how AIDS is an international risk? If not, should the American doctors still help in the interest of helping other humans? Or should they have refrained, given the current relations between North Korea and the US?
I think that it’s great that the U.S. is helping North Korea develop its first lab capable of detecting drug-resistant strains of Tuberculosis, but why do I think that? I would argue that my perceptions of the situation have constructivist origins. For example, I have been influenced by cultural and societal norms to perceive that one nation helping another is good. Perhaps fifty years ago in the same situation I wouldn't be too fond of this gesture considering North Korea's involvement in the Cold War. However, given their nuclear capabilities even today, I can seemingly look past that to appreciate the benefit of mutual aid and collaboration, which are viewed by the international community as good.
ReplyDeleteThis interesting because North Koreans have been socialized to hate America and Americans. This also shows us that the socialization of doctors to save human life, goes beyond the animosity between states. In a National Geographic documentary, a Nepalese eye doctor restored the eyesight of hundreds of blind Koreans. Their first reactions after seeing for the first time was to thank their "Great Leader" for giving them their sight back, and voice their desire to kill all the Americans. If we view Koreans as a threat to our safety, not helping them would be the better option. However, like Finnemore explains we have stopped helping people similar to us (white-Christians), and have begun to help others regardless of of our differences. Also, by helping North Korea, we can change their perception that the US is the ultimate evil. By changing that perception, Koreans would be less willing to aid in the destruction of America.
ReplyDelete