Podcasts about Micronesian

Dr. Van Jackson was invited to speak at the first Security of Micronesia Group, hosted by the Pacific Center for Island Security in Guam.I debuted a number of new arguments here, covering how to think about China's desire for “strategic space” in the Pacific and its surplus labor problem compared with US declining hegemony and Washington's desire for exclusionary control of the Pacific. I also try to explain why the Micronesian region's “sovereignty deficit” imperils its neighboring regions of Polynesia and Melanesia, as well as why strategic autonomy is the only solution that addresses everyone's interests.Subscribe to the Un-Diplomatic Newsletter: https://www.un-diplomatic.comCatch The Un-Diplomatic Podcast on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@un-diplomaticpodcastSubscribe to the Pacific Center for Island Security Newsletter: https://pcisguam.substack.com

In this captivating episode of Mythlok, we travel to the mystical Caroline Islands to uncover the powerful legend of Isokelekel, the divine warrior-god who forever changed the fate of the Pohnpei people.Isokelekel's story is one of vengeance, divine prophecy, and a battle to free a land from tyranny. Born to a goddess and destined by the gods, he led a historic rebellion against the Saudeleur dynasty, toppling an oppressive rule and ushering in a new era for his people. But what made this legendary hero so powerful? Was he a mere mortal or a god among men?Join Nitten Nair as we dive deep into the life, powers, and lasting legacy of Isokelekel. From his mysterious birth to his dramatic conquest, this episode uncovers the mythic tale that continues to inspire Micronesian culture today. Prepare for a story of warriors, gods, and an empire's rebirth!

This is Money Smart Week, so we're going to look at what exactly money is and what it means, by looking at a kind of money on a Pacific island made out of huge stones. Plus: a shopping plaza in Greenfield, Massachusetts includes an ATM nestled inside a large fiberglass tree. The Island Of Stone Money (NPR)WOW: You Can Get Money Out of a Tree in This Massachusetts Town (WSBS)It only takes a little money on Patreon to make a big difference for this show

From massive storms to green future vision: Laura and Elizabeth Streb explore South Australia's rapid shift from fossil fuels and the inspiring actions of local festivals and government leaders.This show is made possible thanks our members! To become a sustaining member go to https://LauraFlanders.org/donate   Thank you for your continued support!South Australia has become a global leader in green energy transition, getting off fossil fuels faster, and to a greater extent than almost any other country. How did they do it, and what can we learn from them? In this special report, Laura goes Down Under with her partner, Elizabeth Streb, and her extreme dance company, and discovers how the region's culture and its many world-class festivals have helped pave the way for transformation. Helping to unpack it all is a range of impressive guests, including Susan Close, deputy premier of South Australia; Anoté Tong, the former President of the Micronesian island, the Republic of Kiribati; Ruth Mackenzie, former Artistic Director of the Adelaide Festival, now Program Director of Arts, Culture and Creative Industries Policy within the South Australia state government; Rob Brookman, the co-founder of WOMADelaide, the capital's premier outdoor festival; MacArthur “Genius” Award winner, Elizabeth Streb and the action heroes of her company STREB — and a WHALE. As you'll hear, it's taken politics, policy, science and culture to shift public practice in this extreme-weather-vulnerable area. Over the last decade, South Australia has faced massive storms, brush fires, and extreme heat that have put people, wildlife, and even the festival at risk. Now South Australia is leading the way and using art to help people envision a green future, but they can't solve the climate crisis alone. In this Climate Week special, we ask, how can the rest of the world follow suit?“I'd say that WOMADelaide is creating a tiny version of the planet as you would like it to be . . . If you've listened to music from Iraq or if you've listened to music from Vietnam, or if you've listened to music from Palestine and Israel, it's more difficult to say those people, we don't understand them, so we can't deal with who they are.” - Rob Brookman, Director, WOMADelaide Foundation“We don't get exempted from climate change because we've got a green electricity grid . . . It is globally caused and has to be globally solved. So part of what we do is not to boast about what we've done, but to hope that our leadership will show others that you too can do this. Come and learn from us.” - Susan Close, Deputy Premier, South Australia“We've got the arguments, we can tell you the facts, but people don't feel it . . . [Artists] reach into your head, into your heart, they dig in and then they motivate you to action. And of course if you can also motivate the artist in every single child in South Australia, then we really have a force to change the world.” - Ruth Mackenzie, Program Director Arts, Culture & Creative Industries Policy, South Australia Government“For the [Adelaide] festival to go to young people and be like, ‘Hey, we want to hear from you. We want you to be a part of this. What works do you want to see? What works do you want to make and what do you want them to be about?', is something that doesn't happen very often . . . Hopefully it'll mean we can get more people involved.” - Caitlin Moore, Artist, Activist“The science doesn't seem to be making an impact no matter how precise. Maybe the hard facts of science do not ring a bell as much as the emotional language of the arts . . . Maybe the arts can put it in a way that it touches the hearts of your political leadership.” - President Anoté Tong, Former President, Republic of KiribatiGuests:• Rob Brookman: Co-Founder, WOMADelaide; Director, WOMADelaide Foundation• Susan Close: Deputy Premier, South Australia• Cassandre Joseph: STREB Co-Artistic Director & Action Hero• Ruth Mackenzie: Former Artistic Director, Adelaide Festival; Program Director Arts, Culture & Creative Industries Policy, South Australia Government• Caitlin Moore: Director of Create4Adelaide, Adelaide Festival• Elizabeth Streb: STREB Founder, Co-Artistic Director & Choreographer• Anoté Tong: Former President, Republic of Kiribati• Bart Van Peel: Chief Navigating Officer, Captain Boomer Collective Watch the broadcast episode cut for time at our YouTube channel and airing on PBS stations across the country  Music Credit:  "Steppin" & "Curious Jungle" by Podington Bear. And original sound production and design by Jeannie Hopper.Recommended book:Undrowned: Black Feminist Lessons from Marine Mammals” by Alexis Pauline Gumbs, *Get the Book Here(*Bookshop is an online bookstore with a mission to financially support local, independent bookstores. The LF Show is an affiliate of bookshop.org and will receive a small commission if you click through and make a purchase.)Related Laura Flanders Show Episodes:•. Jubilee Justice Regenerative Farming: Tackling Racism with Rice. Watch / Listen•. Survival Guide for Humans Learned from Marine Mammals with Alexis Pauline Gumbs, Watch / ListenThe Future of Energy is Indigenous (and it won't involve pipelines!), Watch / ListenRelated Articles and Resources:•  South Australia's stunning renewable energy transition, and what comes next, by Giles Parkinson, RenewEconomy.com. Read Here•  Urban Ecology and Christie Walk setting the pace for low carbon urban precincts, by Carbon Neutral Adelaide• Extreme weather is wreaking havoc on Australian music festivals. Can they survive? By Nell Geraets, The Sidney Morning Herald, Read Here•  Playlist of Adelaide's sustainability efforts on Youtube, Watch HereFull Episode Notes are located HERE. They include related episodes, articles, and more.   Laura Flanders and Friends Crew: Laura Flanders, along with Sabrina Artel, Jeremiah Cothren, Veronica Delgado, Janet Hernandez, Jeannie Hopper, Sarah Miller, Nat Needham, David Neuman, and Rory O'Conner. FOLLOW Laura Flanders and FriendsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/lauraflandersandfriends/Blueky: https://bsky.app/profile/lfandfriends.bsky.socialFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/LauraFlandersAndFriends/Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lauraflandersandfriendsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFLRxVeYcB1H7DbuYZQG-lgLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lauraflandersandfriendsPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/lauraflandersandfriendsACCESSIBILITY - The broadcast edition of this episode is available with closed captioned by clicking here for our YouTube Channel

In this episode of Mythlok, we unravel the fascinating tale of Nareau, the Spider God from Micronesian and Kiribati mythology. Known as the weaver of the universe, Nareau's story is one of creation, wisdom, and balance. Discover how this divine spider shaped the cosmos, connected the heavens to the earth, and influenced the culture and spirituality of Pacific islanders.We'll explore Nareau's physical traits, his intricate web of powers, and the rituals performed to honor him. Plus, we'll dive into the common threads shared with other spider gods like Anansi and the Native American Spider Woman.Join your host, Nitten Nair, as we uncover the symbolic and cultural significance of Nareau's web, both in ancient myths and modern interpretations.Don't miss this captivating journey into the world of Pacific mythology! Like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell to stay updated with more mythical tales from around the world!

Rich lodes of valuable metals lie on the seafloor. Will a global rush to mine them be allowed – and will doing so damage the world’s oceans? Synopsis: Every first and third Tuesday of the month, The Straits Times analyses the beat of the changing environment, from biodiversity conservation to climate change. Scattered across the sea bed are trillions of potato-sized lumps brimming with lucrative metals vital to making electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines, smartphones and much more. This is sparking a “blue rush”, as some countries and companies are eager to cash-in on them. Yet the mining of polymetallic nodules remains banned and there are growing concerns that scooping them off the sea floor risks disrupting one of the most important, but still poorly understood, parts of the planet. In this episode, hosts Audrey Tan and David Fogarty speak with The Pew Charitable Trusts’ project director of ocean governance Julian Jackson on the risks. Highlights of conversation (click/tap above): 2:12 Three different types of deep sea mining 6:42 Environmental impacts of deep sea mining 12:21 Why countries are pushing for deep sea mining 14:58 Implication of Micronesian country Nauru announcing intention to start sea bed mining. 17:02 Is deep sea mining necessary? Follow Audrey Tan on LinkedIn: https://str.sg/848W Read her articles: https://str.sg/JLM2 Follow David Fogarty on X: https://str.sg/JLM6 Read his articles: https://str.sg/JLMu Hosts: Audrey Tan (audreyt@sph.com.sg) & David Fogarty (dfogarty@sph.com.sg) Produced and edited by: Hadyu Rahim Executive producers: Ernest Luis & Lynda Hong Follow Green Pulse Podcast here and get notified for new episode drops: Channel: https://str.sg/JWaf Apple Podcasts: https://str.sg/JWaY Spotify: https://str.sg/JWag Feedback to: podcast@sph.com.sg --- Follow more ST podcast channels: All-in-one ST Podcasts channel: https://str.sg/wvz7 ST Podcast website: http://str.sg/stpodcasts ST Podcasts YouTube: https://str.sg/4Vwsa --- Get The Straits Times' app, which has a dedicated podcast player section: The App Store: https://str.sg/icyB Google Play: https://str.sg/icyX --- #greenpulseSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rich lodes of valuable metals lie on the seafloor. Will a global rush to mine them be allowed – and will doing so damage the world’s oceans? Synopsis: Every first and third Tuesday of the month, The Straits Times analyses the beat of the changing environment, from biodiversity conservation to climate change. Scattered across the sea bed are trillions of potato-sized lumps brimming with lucrative metals vital to making electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines, smartphones and much more. This is sparking a “blue rush”, as some countries and companies are eager to cash-in on them. Yet the mining of polymetallic nodules remains banned and there are growing concerns that scooping them off the sea floor risks disrupting one of the most important, but still poorly understood, parts of the planet. In this episode, hosts Audrey Tan and David Fogarty speak with The Pew Charitable Trusts’ project director of ocean governance Julian Jackson on the risks. Highlights of conversation (click/tap above): 2:12 Three different types of deep sea mining 6:42 Environmental impacts of deep sea mining 12:21 Why countries are pushing for deep sea mining 14:58 Implication of Micronesian country Nauru announcing intention to start sea bed mining. 17:02 Is deep sea mining necessary? Follow Audrey Tan on LinkedIn: https://str.sg/848W Read her articles: https://str.sg/JLM2 Follow David Fogarty on X: https://str.sg/JLM6 Read his articles: https://str.sg/JLMu Hosts: Audrey Tan (audreyt@sph.com.sg) & David Fogarty (dfogarty@sph.com.sg) Produced and edited by: Hadyu Rahim Executive producers: Ernest Luis & Lynda Hong Follow Green Pulse Podcast here and get notified for new episode drops: Channel: https://str.sg/JWaf Apple Podcasts: https://str.sg/JWaY Spotify: https://str.sg/JWag Feedback to: podcast@sph.com.sg --- Follow more ST podcast channels: All-in-one ST Podcasts channel: https://str.sg/wvz7 ST Podcast website: http://str.sg/stpodcasts ST Podcasts YouTube: https://str.sg/4Vwsa --- Get The Straits Times' app, which has a dedicated podcast player section: The App Store: https://str.sg/icyB Google Play: https://str.sg/icyX --- #greenpulseSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Craig Santos Perez is a poet, essayist, university professor, and American publisher born in Mongmong-Toto-Maite, Guam (Guåhan) Island, formally considered a U.S. territory. His literary distinctions are many. In 2023 he won the National Book Award for poetry,  2015 American Book Award and the 2011 PEN Center USA Literary Award for Poetry. He immigrated to California when he was fifteen, thus sparking his life-long exploration into what it means to be of a tropical and culturally rich place, and then separated from his CHomorro  homeland. His poetry and scholarship settles into the question of identity, navigating place and also challenges many of the contemporary notions of geography and American poetry traditions. Find out more about FROM UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY [ÅMOT] here, and watch his acceptance speech and his reading of the extraordinary poem "ginen ars pasifika" here.

Part II of a two-part conversation with Jermy Uowolo, who was born and raised on the island of Fais in the State of Yap, in the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). Jermy's background is as a Micronesian cultural practitioner, anthropologist, historian and Hawaiian ecosystem restoration specialist for the Mauna Kea Forest Restoration Project. He shares with us the value of gathering and recording knowledge from Micronesian elders and culture keepers, as well as the challenges and opportunties of his own immigration story--from Yap to Guam and eventually Hawai`i Island. 

In Pacific Waves today: Pacific advocates call for more climate finance at COP29; 'Miracle baby' reveals critical gaps in Cooks healthcare; The need to find other occupations for Porgera illegal miners; NZ early childhood books translated to Micronesian languages.

Art meets climate action in South Australia! Learn how creativity and community have driven a pioneering green energy transition, with insights from influential voices like Susan Close and Ruth Mackenzie. Climate Week Special Report.This show is made possible by you! To become a sustaining member go to https://LauraFlanders.org/donate Thank you for your continued support!Description: South Australia has become a global leader in green energy transition, getting off fossil fuels faster, and to a greater extent than almost any other country. How did they do it, and what can we learn from them? In this report for Climate Week, Laura goes Down Under with her partner, Elizabeth Streb, and her extreme dance company, and discovers how the region's culture and its many world-class festivals have helped pave the way for transformation. Helping to unpack it all is a range of impressive guests, including Susan Close, deputy premier of South Australia; Anoté Tong, the former President of the Micronesian island, the Republic of Kiribati; Ruth Mackenzie, former Artistic Director of the Adelaide Festival, now Program Director of Arts, Culture and Creative Industries Policy within the South Australia state government; Rob Brookman, the co-founder of WOMADelaide, the capital's premier outdoor festival; MacArthur “Genius” Award winner, Elizabeth Streb and the action heroes of her company STREB — and a WHALE. As you'll hear, it's taken politics, policy, science and culture to shift public practice in this extreme-weather-vulnerable area. Over the last decade, South Australia has faced massive storms, brush fires, and extreme heat that have put people, wildlife, and even the festival at risk. Now South Australia is leading the way and using art to help people envision a green future, but they can't solve the climate crisis alone. In this Climate Week special, we ask, how can the rest of the world follow suit?“I'd say that WOMADelaide is creating a tiny version of the planet as you would like it to be . . . If you've listened to music from Iraq or if you've listened to music from Vietnam, or if you've listened to music from Palestine and Israel, it's more difficult to say those people, we don't understand them, so we can't deal with who they are.” - Rob Brookman“We don't get exempted from climate change because we've got a green electricity grid . . . It is globally caused and has to be globally solved. So part of what we do is not to boast about what we've done, but to hope that our leadership will show others that you too can do this. Come and learn from us.” - Susan Close, Deputy Premier, South Australia“We've got the arguments, we can tell you the facts, but people don't feel it . . . [Artists] reach into your head, into your heart, they dig in and then they motivate you to action. And of course if you can also motivate the artist in every single child in South Australia, then we really have a force to change the world.” - Ruth Mackenzie“For the [Adelaide] festival to go to young people and be like, ‘Hey, we want to hear from you. We want you to be a part of this. What works do you want to see? What works do you want to make and what do you want them to be about?', is something that doesn't happen very often . . . Hopefully it'll mean we can get more people involved.” - Caitlin Moore, Artist, Activist“The science doesn't seem to be making an impact no matter how precise. Maybe the hard facts of science do not ring a bell as much as the emotional language of the arts . . . Maybe the arts can put it in a way that it touches the hearts of your political leadership.” - President Anoté TongGuests:• Rob Brookman: Co-Founder, WOMADelaide; Director, WOMADelaide Foundation• Susan Close: Deputy Premier, South Australia• Cassandre Joseph: Streb Co-Artistic Director & Action Hero• Ruth Mackenzie: Former Artistic Director, Adelaide Festival; Program Director Arts, Culture & Creative Industries Policy, South Australia Government• Caitlin Moore: Director of Create4Adelaide, Adelaide Festival• Elizabeth Streb: STREB Founder, Co-Artistic Director & Choreographer• Anoté Tong: Former President, Republic of Kiribati• Bart Van Peel: Chief Navigating Officer, Captain Boomer Collective Full Episode Notes are located HERE.  They include related episodes, articles, and more. Laura Flanders and Friends Crew: Laura Flanders, Sabrina Artel, David Neuman, Nat Needham, Rory O'Conner, Janet Hernandez, Sarah Miller, Jeannie Hopper, Nady Pina, Miracle Gatling, and Jordan Flaherty FOLLOW Laura Flanders and FriendsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/lauraflandersandfriends/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LFAndFriendsFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/LauraFlandersAndFriends/Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lauraflandersandfriendsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFLRxVeYcB1H7DbuYZQG-lgLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lauraflandersandfriendsPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/lauraflandersandfriendsACCESSIBILITY - The broadcast edition of this episode is available with closed captioned by clicking here for our YouTube Channel

In this episode of "The Environment and Your," host Tori Manley Speaking discusses the most common modes of transportation, their obstacles, possible solutions and calls to action. Here's a message from Tori about this episode: "The main thing I want you to know about this episode is that you are trying your best with what you have, and I hope this episode sparks ideas, conversations and connections with others with transportation. Our sustainable development within Guam and other Micronesian islands look like a connection of Your knowledge, ideas and personal experiences. These all have a helping hand when it comes to creating a present that will help us in the future. This episode was hosted by Tori Manley Speaking and premiered on August 1, 2024. Support the Show.

Devan Jensen is the executive editor and social media manager at the BYU Religious Studies Center. He and Rosalind Meno Ram are editors of Battlefields to Temple Grounds: Latter-day Saints in Micronesia and Guam. I wanted to speak to Devan about the establishment of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Micronesia and Guam, considering its unique history during wartime and the geographical layout of so many different islands, I'm so intrigued to hear the stories of the pioneers there and the logistics of the Church in the area!Some highlights from this episode include travelling to Stake Conference by boat, the best food in Micronesia, and the key figures in the early Micronesian church.--You can find Devan's book at the following link:- https://rsc.byu.edu/book/battlefields-temple-groundsFollow For All The Saints on social media for updates and inspiring content:www.instagram.com/forallthesaintspodhttps://www.facebook.com/forallthesaintspod/For All The Saints episodes are released every Monday on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVDUQg_qZIU&list=UULFFf7vzrJ2LNWmp1Kl-c6K9Qhttps://open.spotify.com/show/3j64txm9qbGVVZOM48P4HS?si=bb31d048e05141f2https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/for-all-the-saints/id1703815271If you have feedback or any suggestions for topics or guests, connect with Ben & Sean via hello@forallthesaints.org or DM on InstagramConversations to Refresh Your Faith.For All The Saints podcast was established in 2023 by Ben Hancock to express his passion and desire for more dialogue around faith, religious belief, and believers' perspectives on the topics of our day. Tune into For All The Saints every Monday on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and more.Follow For All The Saints on social media for daily inspiration.

We look at the final results from the Micronesian Games in the Marshall Islands.

Competition heats up as Micronesian Games medal tally rises.

Micronesian Games get underway in Majuro

Micronesian Games returns since 2018.

Ray and Jim examine why we should care about the seemingly insignificant islands scattered across the Pacific region with former U.S. Ambassador to Palau John Hennessey-Niland. They highlight the strategic importance of these islands in terms of their supply routes and military access. John explains the Compacts of Free Association by which the U.S. guarantees the security of three Micronesian countries in exchange for exclusive access. They also discuss the rapidly expanding role of China in these island countries and the challenges of "elite capture" and corruption. The conversation emphasizes the need for the United States and its allies to avoid the temptation to ignore these countries and allow them to slip into China's orbit through benign neglect.Finally, in the latest edition of "There I was...", Ray recounts how he and Jim were able to navigate a tricky international dilemma in Australia with the help of a very good military lawyer.

Tuesdays and Fridays are special days for a small group of students from Lac qui Parle Valley Schools near Milan. That's when the Milan Kids Club is in session at the former Milan Public School building.Rosalia Iowanes and Justleen Ponun, two teens employed by the program, have set up the volleyball net in the gym. Some students play barefoot. The sport is immensely popular in the Micronesian community.Justleen explained the volleyball connection.“Most of us would say it's our favorite sport because some of us grew up playing volleyball and yeah, volleyball is also like a favorite sport back in Micronesia,” she said. Justleen's family moved from Micronesia to Milan. However, Justleen was born in Willmar, 43 miles east of town.Her family is not alone. From Micronesia to MilanFamilies have been relocating from the Federated States of Micronesia in the Pacific Ocean to this southwest Minnesota town for more than 20 years. The small but steady stream of Micronesians arriving in this rural town, founded in the 19th Century by Norwegian immigrants, is a big change, explained program director Ann Thompson.The Micronesian community has boosted Milan's once declining population and brought a new energy to town, she added. Their presence has boosted the economy and infused youth into an aging populace. Charthttps://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/18102929/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/18102929“Milan went from the oldest community in Chippewa County, oldest average age … a little bit of diversity, but not much to being the youngest community, growing population and really diverse,” Thompson said. “It's a big change.”Thompson said longtime residents have realized over time there are benefits to having an immigrant community in Milan: More kids in schools and more kids to clothe and feed.According to data from the 2020 U.S. Census, Micronesians made up 57 percent of Milan's population of 428. The town's numbers peaked in the 1940 census with 624 residents and trended downward until it hit its lowest number, 326, in 2000.Datahttps://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/18102809/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/18102809Between 2000 and 2020, Milan's population grew by 31 percent, according to census data. Micronesia is a region of about 2,000 islands in the Pacific Ocean. The region also includes the island nation of the Federated States of Micronesia, which is nearly 7,000 miles away from Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Chuuk is one of the country's four states. Romanum is an island in Chuuk. And almost every person of Micronesian descent living in Milan, is from Romanum.How did Micronesians know about Milan, whose motto is “Norwegian Capital U.S.A.”? The connection begins with former Milan area resident, Erik Thompson, who served in the Peace Corps in Chuuk.  Thompson continued his Micronesian friendships after he left service. One of them visited Thompson in Milan. Thompson's friend later decided to settle in Milan with his family. Milan is roughly the same size as their island, Romanum, Erik Thompson told MPR News in 2010.“He thought he wouldn't be overwhelmed by the size of the place, and that I could speak his language so I could help him make a transition,” Thompson said of one of his friends from Romanum. “But he said he also wanted to bring his family over so kids could get a good education.”Afterward, others from Romanum moved to Milan as well.An agreement between Micronesia and the U.S. allows for citizens from both countries to work and travel freely between the two nations. Community cohesion can be noisyAnn Thompson says there were challenges for residents and newcomers.For example, Micronesians play music in the town park which might be too loud for some residents. They, in turn, may decline to directly ask for the music to be lowered, Thompson said, because of what she calls ‘Minnesota passive aggressiveness.'“There's angst,” Thompson said.Erika Raymond, the co-owner of E and J Micronesian Mart on Main street, says the park is packed every day with Micronesians.She says community members like to meet up at the park to play volleyball or basketball and they bring speakers to play music.“Some people just want peace and quiet but we're there every day making noises, but that's just how we are,” Raymond said. “We're a community that loves to hang around everyday. We're just very family-oriented. Not all of us are related. But if you're from somewhere and you come in and look, you'd think we're all related.”‘That's what I love about Milan'In 2007, Ann Thompson said a group of concerned citizens formed a nonprofit called the Greater Milan Initiative. The nonprofit paid $1 to the Lac qui Parle Valley School District for the former K-12 school which had been closed since 1990.The initiative manages the building and offers programs such as the kids club and a 4-H club. The WIC Clinic and other social service providers come by regularly to serve residents. The school district provides the funding for the kids club, Thompson said.  “They see this as a kind of an extra support group for the kids, kind of reinforcing what they're learning at school,” she said. “They have choices. They can play in the gym, or they can do art. We've been doing a lot of art exploration. We're working on this movie. That was their idea.”Nelisa Raymond is from Romanum. She's married and has a daughter in high school. She also works for the Appleton Milan Elementary School. Raymond remembers the day she arrived at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.“I came in April. And it's still cold over here. But there's no snow on the ground. So I open the door from the airport. It's like, whoa, it's cold and it's sunny,” Raymond said. “So I went back inside and I was like, ‘Oh my goodness.'”Erika Raymond said she is torn about returning to Romanum. She wants to return, but she has four children, ages 8 to 15, to think about.“As I'm getting older and older, I prefer back home. But then I have my kids so that's why we're here. I want them to get a good education,” she said. Raymond hopes they finish college and secure good jobs.Still, there's something about Milan.“It's a peaceful town. It's not crowded. And you feel safe with your kids roaming around town, and we feel safe,” Raymond said. “Yeah, that's what I love about Milan.”Correction (May 29, 2024): An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated who paid Lac qui Parle Valley School District for the school building. The story has been updated.

The Shulbros get an inside perspective on the Micronesian national soccer team's march to the World Cup.

Rescue workers cooperated to help two men stranded on an island in Micronesia. Teamwork was necessary because a widespread health crisis required them to limit their exposure to each other. The pilot who first spotted the castaways radioed a nearby Australian Navy ship. The ship sent two helicopters which provided food, water, and medical care. Later, the US Coast Guard arrived to check on the men and deliver a radio. Finally, a Micronesian patrol boat taxied them to their destination. We can accomplish a lot when we work together to achieve a common goal. The Philippian believers pooled their efforts to support the apostle Paul. Lydia and her family welcomed him into their home (Acts 16:13-15). Clement and even Euodia and Syntyche (who didn’t get along) all worked directly with the apostle to spread the good news (Philippians 4:2-3). Later, when Paul was imprisoned in Rome, the church gathered essentials for a care package and delivered it via Epaphroditus (vv. 14-18). Perhaps most importantly, the Philippians prayed for him throughout his ministry (1:19). The examples of believers serving together in this ancient church can inspire us today. Cooperating with fellow believers to pray and serve others as God leads and empowers us accomplishes much more than we could ever do on our own. It has been said, “Individually, we are one drop. Together we are an ocean.”

Shulbros bring back the head coach of the Micronesian National Soccer team who shares an update that can change your life. Shulbros then play a new game of guess the monkey video popularity.

Why would you travel to the other side of the world to play football in a rainy toad habitat? This is what Paul Watson, journalist, author and football enthusiast, found himself having to answer when he ended up in Pohnpei, a Micronesian island, with the mission to bring them the joy of football. It's a story that involves calling on the Mormons, trying to win just one game of football and ending up in a bank in London with a suitcase full of money! There is so much to Paul's story that we will have to do a second episode soon!Buy Paul's book here:Up Pohnpei: Leading the ultimate football underdogs to glory https://amzn.eu/d/iFpIDkhPresented and Produced by Neil Delamere and Dave MooreEdited by Cathal MinogueMusic by Dave MooreArtwork by Ray McDonnellTo listen to Dave on the radio it's: https://www.todayfm.com/shows/dave-moore-1499732 For more info on Neil's gigs see: www.neildelamere.com/gigs Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This edition of Sista's Let's Talk was a repeat of the program broadcast on 15th June 2023Casting a light-skinned woman to play a brown character in a Disney movie is one version of colourism, but in the Pacific it's just the tip of the iceberg.Polynesian voices have managed to find their way to the mainstream - even though it is still problematic - but has that been at the expense of people from the Melanesian and Micronesian regions?Surely there's space for all of us to represent and tell our stories.

How is the delicate balance between recording Micronesian cultural heritage, addressing community needs, and gaining international acknowledgment for preservation endeavors managed?Ashley in Micronesia collaborates with communities to identify research topics, stressing adaptability during fieldwork. Navigating linguistic intricacies, ethical dilemmas, and community preferences is essential while also promoting global recognition. In this episode of This Anthro Life, we delve into the intricate duties of a cultural anthropologist in Micronesia. Using ethnographic approaches, cultural heritage is documented and safeguarded while meeting community requirements. Remaining flexible during fieldwork is paramount, adjusting to local timetables and events. The complexities of language, including bilingualism, demand careful interpretation. We explore the intersection of historical preservation and conservation, highlighting how ethnography informs comprehensive project planning. Qualitative data's significance and interpretation are underscored, advocating for anthropology's broader accessibility. Furthermore, we discuss the importance of international acknowledgment in cultural heritage preservation, emphasizing ethical considerations and community involvement. Through this endeavor, the necessity of prioritizing communities and ensuring their active participation in preservation endeavors is exemplified.Timestamps1:24 Ethnographic approach and community involvement in research14:34 Language and code-switching in Micronesian cultures24:58 Ashley's switch from applied linguistics to anthropology32:20 The value of anthropology as a holistic discipline and the need for more examples of its integration37:22 The need to consider the human component in metadata and the limitations of AI in capturing human interaction42:33 Surprising aspects of being a cultural anthropologist in Micronesia46:03 Bringing together various interests in anthropology49:45 The systematic process of preparing UNESCO nominations54:01 Ethical considerations in community involvement for UNESCO nominations1:03:05 The impact of a dedicated Historic Preservation Officer and the importance of documentation Key takeawaysUnderstanding community needs informs culturally sensitive research and enhances the impact of preservation efforts.Recognizing and promoting the diverse cultural heritage of Micronesia is essential for its preservation and promotion.Prioritizing storytelling and knowledge transmission preserves Micronesian culture and fosters intergenerational understanding.Balancing international recognition with indigenous sacred lands requires careful ethical engagement with local communities.Effective cross-cultural communication and understanding cultural nuances are critical in navigating linguistic diversity during research.Flexibility in fieldwork schedules ensures meaningful community participation and engagement in preservation activities.Integrating tangible and intangible cultural elements in preservation strategies ensures comprehensive conservation efforts.Prioritizing qualitative data allows for a deeper understanding of cultural contexts, enriching preservation initiatives.Engaging in international recognition ethically involves ensuring community involvement and understanding for balanced preservation outcomes.About This Anthro Life:This Anthro Life is a thought-provoking podcast that explores the human side of technology, culture, and business. Hosted by Adam Gamwell, we unravel fascinating narratives and connect them to the wider context of our lives. Tune in to https://thisanthrolife.org and subscribe to our Substack at https://thisanthrolife.substack.com for more captivating episodes and engaging content.Connect with Ashley MeredithWebsite: https://nach.gov.fm/ Linkedin: https://fm.linkedin.com/in/ameredith1 Connect with This Anthro Life:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thisanthrolife/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thisanthrolife LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/this-anthro-life-podcast/ This Anthro Life website: https://www.thisanthrolife.org/ Substack blog: https://thisanthrolife.substack.com

Micronesian leaders have warned the United States against further delaying Congressional approval for federal funding arrangements to their respective countries.

Micronesian leaders warn the US against further delays to federal funding; South Auckland students put their education on the backburner to help their families; Home is where the heart is for a group of Kiwi-born Niueans who are preparing for their trip to the island.

Last time we spoke about Operation Flintlock, the invasion of Kwajalein. The Americans had unleashed an incredible amount of air, sea and land forces against the Marshall Islands. The amphibious invasion of most of the islands saw little resistance, but on Kwajalein they would meet a determined enemy. The Americans achieved strategic surprise; artillery preparation, naval gunfire, and aerial bombardment had successfully softened up the target in a fashion unexcelled at any other time in the Pacific War; the ship-to-shore movement had been conducted expeditiously and without too many hiccups; supplies flowed ashore and to the front lines relatively smoothly and without interruption; the infantry-engineer teams assisted by tanks moved steadily clearing the enemy from shelters and pillboxes; and American casualties had been fairly light. Altogether, the battle for Kwajalein represented the ideal for all military operations. Then we covered a bit of the Burma front where the allies unleashing an offensive, while the Japanese unleashed Operation HA-GO. This episode is Operation Hailstone: the Smashing of Truk Welcome to the Pacific War Podcast Week by Week, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about world war two? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on world war two and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel you can find a few videos all the way from the Opium Wars of the 1800's until the end of the Pacific War in 1945.  For those who came rushing over to see the scene at Kwajalein descriptions given were comically noted as “a hell of a Spruance Haircut, with some Mitscher shampoo”. Looking down at Roi and Namur a F6F pilot recalled “ it looked like “the moon,” or “plowed ground.” The beach and roads were strewn with the charred and misshapen remains of equipment, tanks, and armored vehicles. I don't think there was a stick of anything standing. It looked just completely beaten up.” A sailor who visited one of the captured atolls had observed “palms were shredded where shells and bomb fragments had made direct hits, leaving stumps that looked like old-fashioned shaving brushes stuck, bristles up, in the sand”. Holland Smith was greatly annoyed by the number of sightseers who came to Kwajalein stating. a “regular tourist haunt. . . . The big army and navy brass from Pearl Harbor descended on us like flies. The photographers had a gala day snapping pictures against the background of shelled buildings, while visiting brass hunted for samurai swords and other souvenirs.”  Meanwhile a single battalion was assigned to capture Majuro, and their battle would consist of walking up some beaches completely unopposed. The Japanese garrison had pulled out a week earlier. Admiral Hill declared the atoll secure only 2 hours after landings were made. Its huge anchorage would accommodate all the mobile floating logistical assets of Service Squadron 10 and for the time being became the principal advance base for the 5th fleet. Jaluit, Mille, Wotje and Maloelap, which had sizable Japanese garrisons, would not be invaded by the Allied forces. Since the Japanese were cut off from outside assistance, the garrisons were doing no harm to the Allied effort, so they would be left alone, thus saving many American and Japanese lives by not forcing the issue.  But Eniwetok Atoll would not be bypassed, because she held the second largest lagoon in the Marshall Islands. As Admiral Nimitz and his commanders considered the repercussions of their surprising quick and low cost victory, they soon elected to accelerate the schedule of future operations in the region. Eniwetok had been originally slabbed for May, but it seemed obvious the Japanese power in the Marshalls was crumbling a lot faster than anticipated. Consequently, Admiral Nimitz knew it would be necessary to capture the atoll to give shelter to all the ships he intended to deploy westward in the drive against the Japanese inner empire. Since it now seemed Brigadier-General Thomas Watson's 8000 reserve troops of the 22nd Marines and the 106th Regiment would no longer be required, Admirals Spruance and Hill began preparing them for the invasion of Eniwetok. However Eniwetok was within Truk's air combat radius, thus to hit Eniwetok, they would first have to neutralize what was called the Gibraltar of the Pacific, Truk. Prior to WW2, Truk was neither well developed nor well defended. Although the US feared the Japanese had been fortifying Truk for nearly two decades; in truth, the Japanese largely ignored Truk after capturing it during WW1. When the Pacific War started on December 7, 1941, only a few coastal batteries and naval minefields added since November 1939 covered the passes into Truk Lagoon. Few other defenses, including inadequate anti-aircraft artillery, protected it. To the US Navy, Truk appeared impregnable and sailors spoke the name in awe‑struck tones. This was because Truk needed few artificial defenses to make it virtually impregnable to surface invasion. Truk was a naturally sheltered and easily defended anchorage, large enough to accommodate the entire IJN and out of range of enemy naval guns. Their defense, however, depended on the air garrison, one of the strongest in Japan's Southeast Pacific theater. Dangerous long‑range reconnaissance flights flown by B‑24s from bases in the Gilberts in December 1943 managed to bring back photos that allowed intelligence officers to map out the air bases and the various anchorages in the lagoon. Analysts thus began to realize there was not as much there as expected. And thus Operations Catchpole and Hailstone were born. Catchpole would be the invasion of Eniwetok while Hailstone would be the neutralization of Truk and as a secondary objective, to discern if Truk could be bypassed similarly as Rabaul or Maloelap  was. Operation Hailstone would be bigger than December's raid against Kwajalein. Vice-Admiral Raymond Spruance's 5th fleet would deploy Task Group 50.9 and three of Task Force 58's four fast carrier task groups. Task Force 50 was under Spruance himself while Admiral Mitscher had command over the carrier task force. Spruance would also had overall command over the operation. Fleet carriers Enterprise, Yorktown, Essex, Intrepid, and Bunker Hill and light carriers, Belleau Wood, Cabot, and Monterey would be launched aircraft in the operation. Admiral Lea would control a fast striking force consisting of light carrier Cowpens, and battleships Iowa, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Alabama, South Dakota and North Carolina. 10 submarines would be lurking like sharks around Truk independently seeing if they could possibly intercept some IJN forces or rescue down US pilots during the attack. To prepare for the operation, on February 4th a lone PB4Y Liberator launched off Torokina's airfield to carry out reconnaissance of Truk. The photos indicated that Truk Lagoon held a battleship, two aircraft carriers, six heavy cruisers and four light cruisers, 20 destroyers, and 12 submarines. The PB4Y was spotted and fired on by warships in the harbor and several fighters were launched to intercept, but only one, a floatplane fighter, came close enough to open fire. The pilot managed to high tail it out of there safely.  The American reconnaissance flight alerted Admiral Koga that they could expect a heavy raid at any moment, so he ordered all his warships to depart the lagoon before February 21st, the date they predicted the Americans would hit. The departure was extremely hasty. 2 auxiliary aircraft carriers had just arrived at Truk the previous month. When the departure order came, they haphazardly unloaded their aircraft in order to leave quickly. The aircraft were left parked nose-to-tail on airport aprons and taxiways. Cargo ships equally hastily unloaded stores so they could leave. Fuel barges were drained to top off the tanks of the Combined Fleet's major units. They had to be tediously refilled from tankers, a task made difficult by choppy seas kicked up by rough weather between February 13 and 15. On February 12, most of the Combined Fleet's major units left Truk for Palau. The light cruiser Agano, previously damaged and under repair, could not depart until February 16. Its departure was so late that it would be caught and sunk by the newly arrived US submarine screen. Other ships were still preparing to leave, their departure delayed by bad weather and slow refueling. Of those ships trapped still at Truk were the 4th fleet of Vice-Admiral Kobayashi Masami, consisting of light cruiser Naka; destroyers Maikaze and Oite, alongside some units of the 8th Fleet and several transports. There were also various auxiliary, destroyer, repair ships, transports and the 6th Fleet of Vice-Admiral Takagi Takeo headquarters. On February 5th, Admiral Hill learnt he would be commanding the Eniwetok expeditionary forces and have less than two weeks to prepare them. Moving up the invasion of Eniwetok required stripping the new garrisons of Kwajalein and Roi-Namur of manpower and supplies. The landing boat crews were green and had no real training with the troops. As recalled by General Watson “the infantry, amphibian tractors, amphibian tanks, tanks, aircraft, supporting naval ships, and most of the staffs concerned had never worked together before.” Yet we will be talking about Eniwetok in the next episode so we will be diving straight into Hailstone. Operation Hailstone had been long on American drawing board. On December 26, 1943, Admiral Nimitz had informed King that he thought the operation would become feasible by the following April, but he pledged to do it earlier if circumstances allowed: “Much depends on extent of damage inflicted on enemy in all areas in next 2 months.” Located 669 miles southwest of Eniwetok, Truk was a colossal atoll, it held a cluster of around a dozen islands near the center of its lagoon. Around 2000 Micronesian natives lived on the islands, mostly in thatch huts on grassy plains and beaches. There was a sense of dread amongst the aviators and crewmen of the task forces assigned to the operation. They were to attack the “mystery base”, Truk had acquired a reputation as an unassailable fortress. It was thought to be a major hub of Japanese airpower, defended by hundreds of crack pilots in Zeros. The task forces sortied westward on February 12th and no Japanese would bother their approach. The carriers got to their assembly point 90 miles northeast of Dublon before sunrise on February 17th. AT 4:43am the operation kicked off when 5 fleet carriers launched 72 Hellcats to go knock out the enemy air power prior to sending in the bombers. This was a new technique Admiral Mitscher had concocted himself. The Japanese were caught completely unprepared, no Japanese aircraft were in the air when radar picked up the incoming aircraft. The IJN's 22nd and 26th Air Flotilla's were on shore leave and their radar had difficulty detecting low flying aircraft, a weakness allied intelligence exploited. Despite this, the Japanese tossed 90 aircraft, half of which attempted to intercept the US fighters without coordination.  Within minutes of combat, 30 Japanese fighters were shot down, by the end of the engagement a total of 55 would fall. The Americans lost 4 Hellcats, and at least one according to VF-6 pilot Alex Vraciu was a victim of friendly fire. “There were dog fights all over the place. I even saw one of our Hellcats shoot another Hellcat down. It was a great deflection shot but . . . one of our guys just shot first before being sure and this other poor pilot was forced to parachute out. In the course of the action, I saw a number of Japanese parachutes in the air.” The American pilots had expected to be facing 200 Japanese aircraft. According to estimates given in postwar interrogations, the Japanese had 68 operational airplanes on the Moen field; 27 on the Dublon field; 20 on Eten and 46 on Param, for a total of 161. Parked on the big field at Eten were some 180 aircraft that were damaged, most grounded for lack of spare parts, or immobilized for lack of aircrews. Most of these would be destroyed on the ground. Although Admiral Koga anticipated the American move against Truk, air and naval forces were not on the alert when the American planes suddenly appeared overhead. According to Masataka Chihaya, a staff officer with the 4 Fleet, the pilots, ground personnel, and ships' crews had been kept in 24hr readiness since the overflight of the 2 marine PB4Ys two weeks earlier, and had reached a state of collective exhaustion. Another factor to the catastrophe was that of morale and even discipline had eroded since the withdrawal of the heavy warships. Pilots had refused to climb into their cockpits when ordered, many had gone absent without leave. The atoll's commander, Vice Admiral Masami Kobayashi, had apparently concluded that the American fleet was still engaged in the Marshalls, and authorized a downgrade in the alert level. On February 16, many pilots and other personnel had left their barracks for R&R. The morning of the American raid found a large proportion of Truk's aviators asleep in the atoll's largest town, on the island of Dublon, having partied pretty hard into the night at local drinking establishments. Their only means of returning to their airfield on the island of Eten was by ferry, and the ferry could not accommodate all of them at once. Many aircraft, both on Eten and on the airfields of Moen and Param islands, had also been disarmed and drained of fuel. Kobayashi's ignominious failure to keep his forces on alert put an end to his naval career; he was relieved of command and then forced to retire from active service. Having swept the skies of opposition by 6:00am, the Hellcats began strafing the seaplane base at Dublon and the airfields on Moen, Eten, and Param, successfully destroying another 40 aircraft on the ground. As the fighter sweep was ending, 18 Avengers emerged dropping their payloads onto the airfields,  neutralizing Truks air power. As such, the living hell created by strafing and bombs saw a total of 125 operational aircraft and 110 air arsenal aircraft get destroyed or seriously damaged on the ground. With Truk's air power neutralized, the next American objective was to hit the shipping in the lagoon, so the carriers then began launching full deckload strikes, staggering the launches so that there were aircraft over Truk virtually continuously for the rest of the day. James D. Ramage, flying a VB-10 Dauntless, noted that several Zeros flew by him without offering combat. He assumed that they were dispirited by the one-sided results of the air fight and were determined to survive it. It was a syndrome that had become increasingly common during the later stages of the South Pacific air campaign.  Due to the lack of air cover or warning, many merchant ships were caught at anchor with only the islands' anti-aircraft guns for defense. At 07:30, the first shipping began to be attacked. Yorktown's bombers rapidly sinking the cargo ship Fujikawa Maru and then bombing the submarine tender Rio de Janeiro Maru was hit by 1,000lb bombs dropped by Yorktown SBD Dauntlesses east of Uman. It stayed afloat, but sank the next day. Another submarine tender, the Heian Maru, headquarters of Vice-Admiral Takagi Takeo was hit twice , but the ship would successfully survive the relentless American attacks, then offloading Takagi on Dublon after sunset. By 9:23am, Lee's battleships, heavy cruisers and destroyers came in to try and catch escaping ships. Some Japanese vessels attempted to flee via the atoll's North Pass; but were bottled up by the aerial attack and by Lee's warships, most of them would be successfully sunk by 13:00.  The famed marine fighter ace Major Gregory “Pappy” Boyington, of the Black Sheep squadron VMF-214, had been shot down and captured off Rabaul a week before Hailstone. Alongside other POW's he was flown into Truk while the raid was developing. As the Betty bomber carrying them rolled to a stop, Pappy and his fellow prisoners were thrown out onto the airstrip. They looked up and were shocked to see an F6F Hellcat flying low over the airfield, walking .50-caliber fire across  parked planes. The bomber from which they had just been ejected went up in a sheet of flame. The Americans were shoved into a pit by the side of the airfield, and watched the action overhead and cheered for the attackers. Pappy recalled this “There was so much excitement I couldn't do any differently. I just had to see those Nip planes, some of the light planes like the Zeros, jump off the ground from the explosion of our bombs and come down “cl-l-l-lang,” just like a sack of bolts and nuts. The planes caught on fire and the ammunition in them began going off. There were 20-mm cannon shells and 7.7's bouncing and ricocheting all around this pit. Some of these hot pieces we tossed back out of the pit with our hands”. Enterprise dive-bombers dropped 1,000-pound armor-piercing bombs on targets chosen from the aerial photos taken earlier. The planes hurtled down through flak bursts and smashed the stationary ships. A bomb hit the stern of the 13,000-ton Hoyo Maru. The 7,000-ton aviation stores ship Kiyozumi Maru and lit her up. A VT-6 Avenger flew low over the ammunition ship, the Aikoku Maru, and landed a bomb dead-center amidships. The target went up in a huge, rolling ball of flame that engulfed the plane and destroyed it. The shockwave was powerful enough to rock Lieutenant Ramage's aircraft, more than 2,000 feet overhead. “It was, I think, the biggest explosion I've ever seen, other than the atomic bombs. It was just an enormous blast.” 5 ships managed to escape the carnage within the lagoon. The light cruiser Katori, auxiliary cruiser Akagi Maru, destroyers Maikaze and Nowaki, and the small trawler, Shonan Maru. Unfortunately for them they ran directly into Lee's force at 1:30pm. Only the destroyer Nowaki managed to outrun the Americans as she fired a spread of torpedoes trying to keep the Americans at a distance. Spruance was ultimately the one who ordered the surface ships to come into the combat area and this resulted in close calls for friendly fire. Mitscher would continuously order pilots to hold back their payloads against fleeing ships and wait for identification first. Many of the aviators would accuse Spruance of seeking to have “the big guns” get their taste of the blood. But the big guns would basically only finish off some crippled ships. Minneapolis and New Orleans sank two immobilized ships with 3-4 salvos. Meanwhile the USS New Jersey nearly took two torpedo hits from a sinking IJN destroyer. American ships came to the ailing IJN vessel trying to pick up survivors, but almost all the Japanese sailors took their own lives. The Iowa would take a bomb hit from a Japanese aircraft, but suffered little damage. If one or more of the American surface ships were hit by torpedoes, it may have very well cost Spruance his command. The ordinarily conservative fleet commander had behaved with impulsive bravado, and it seems for no better reason than a blackshoe's inborn desire to claim a piece of the action for the big guns. Admiral Sherman's tactful conclusion was that “this expedition accomplished little and only complicated the attacks by the carrier planes.” Lieutenant Ramage was less gentle: “So the big battleships finally drew blood against a cruiser that was almost dead in the water. It must have been a great victory.” The death toll for the first day of Hailstone was more than 20 Japanese ships sunk, but the fun was not over. 6-7 Radar-equipped B5Ns capable of tracking ships at night launched perhaps from Rabaul or Saipan, hunting for the US carriers. They were spotted on radar as they approached the US ships. Night fighters attempted to intercept them, but were unable to find them in the darkness. The task force maneuvered to avoid the incoming bombers, which would have worked if the Japanese were using aircraft blindly flying a standard search pattern. However, the radar-equipped Nakajimas detected the course change and continued to home in on the carriers. Between 7:00 and 10:00, the aircraft made several approaches to the US ships, but were kept at a distance by heavy radar-directed anti-aircraft fire. The Yorktown launched a night fighter F4U Corsair at 9:20 to intercept a particularly persistent Nakajima, vectoring the fighter towards the torpedo bomber. But for once, the Japanese used radar to better advantage than the US, so the Corsair never made contact with the Nakajima. The Nakajima was then able to press its attack, launching a torpedo at the USS Intrepid. It struck near the starboard quarter, jamming the rudder, killing 11 aboard, and wounding 17. The B5N that dropped the torpedo apparently escaped unharmed. Intrepid was in no danger of sinking, but made her way to Majuro to be safe. The Americans then launched their own night attack on Japanese shipping in Truk Atoll. At 2:00 am, the USS Enterprise launched a flight of 12 radar-equipped Avengers to attack the surviving Japanese ships in Truk Lagoon. Each aircraft was armed with 4 500-pound bombs. The concept of performing a low-altitude night attack, with the planes guided to the targets by radar alone, had been studied and discussed but never attempted before. It required the pilots to navigate to Truk on instruments alone. Once over the lagoon, they circled over the anchorages until radar echoes provided an image of the targets. The mission would be a tactical breakthrough, unprecedented in the annals of aviation or naval history. Lieutenant Commander William I. Martin, who trained the airmen, recalled “Radar displays at that time required an operator to do a great deal of interpreting. It was like learning a new language. Instead of it being a polar plot, looking down on it like a map, the cathode ray tube just gave indications that there was an object out there. After considerable practice, a radar operator could determine that there was a ship there and its approximate size. You related the blip on the radar scope to the image of the ship”. In about 30 minutes, the Avengers made 25 passes over Dublon and Eten, scoring 13 direct hits on ships, two on rocky islets mistaken for ships and seven near misses. As a result, around 12 vessels were sunk during the attack, including the Heian Maru. It was a remarkable performance by a dozen aircraft in the US Navy's first carrier-launched night attack.  The following dawn, Mitscher sent another fighter sweep, though it would not be very effective as the Japanese had basically no surviving aircraft in the area. 200 aircraft met negligible air opposition over the atoll as they worked over the remaining targets at their leisure. Hundreds of incendiaries were dropped on smoking airfields, parking areas, and hangars. The bombers paid special attention to the fuel tank farms, which had been spared on the first day in order to prevent smoke from obscuring visibility. By noon, Japanese resistance was almost non-existent and there were no more worthwhile targets, so Spruance and Mitscher decided to call a halt to the attacks, as it was considered that Truk no longer posed a threat to the Eniwetok invasion.  Hailstone cost the Americans 12 fighters, 7 torpedo bombers, 6 dive bombers and 2 floatplanes. 29 aircrew died; and 28 sailors died aboard the Intrepid. The operation had been one of the most smashing carrier raids of the Pacific war. Though most of Japan's heavy naval units had fled the lagoon, the Americans had sunk three light cruisers, four destroyers, three auxiliary or training cruisers, and six other naval auxiliaries. In addition, around 30 merchant ships were sent to the bottom of the lagoon, including 5 precious oil tankers. The total shipping losses approached 200,000 tons and many of those vessels had been laden with munitions and other supplies that could not be recovered. 17,000 tons of fuel went up in the attack, at a time when fuel was running very short for the Japanese. The Japanese lost 249 aircraft, most on the ground. As Rear Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison would later write, “Courage and determination the Navy had shown from the first, but in the Marshalls it demonstrated mastery of the art of amphibious warfare; of combining air, surface, submarine and ground forces to project fighting power irresistibly across the seas. The strike on Truk demonstrated a virtual revolution in naval warfare; the aircraft carrier emerged as the capital ship of the future, with unlimited potentialities.” The IJN Combined Fleet would never return to Truk; the 4th Fleet headquarters remained at Truk, but its warships left; and the transports carrying the 52nd Division to Truk, some of which had arrived on February 19, hastily unloaded and quickly departed. Vice-Admiral Kobayashi Masami was held responsible for the defeat and would consequently be relieved of his command, never to return to active duty. But that's it for the Marshall Islands campaign for now as we are shifting over to the south pacific.  In preparation for the invasion of the Admiralty Islands, the allies first would need to seize the Green islands, situated 117 miles southeast of Rabaul. Admiral Halsey had been tasked with landing General Barrowclough's 3rd New Zealand Division consisting of the 14th Brigade; Special Army Tank Squadron; 17th Field Regiment; 29th Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment; 144th Independent Battery; 53rd Anti-Tank Battery; 967th Coast Artillery Battalion; Naval Base Unit No. 11 and other supporting units. Halsey assigned Admiral Wilkinson to command the operations. He would transport the men in 3 echelons using a plethora of Destroyers, Destroyer Transports and countless landing crafts. AirSols would be providing coverage alongside Admiral Merrill's Task force 39 consisting of light cruisers Cleveland, Columbia and Montpelier; and destroyers Charles Ausburne, Dyson, Stanly, Spence and Converse. There would also be Admiral Ainsworths Task force 38. Wilkinsons echelons departed Vella Lavella and the Treasury islands On February 12th and 13th. They met near Bougainville and together advanced towards the departure line off Barahun Island. The Americans expected Rabaul's airforce to be greatly depleted by this point, but the convoy was still harassed by 15 Vals and 17 Zeros during the night of February 14th. 10 vals managed to score a hit and 3 near misses against cruiser St Louis, killing 23 men and causing moderate damage. The bombers also tried attacking the landing craft, but apart from a near miss on LST-446, the landing would proceed quickly and smoothly. The landing craft began taking off on the morning of February 15th as AirSols fighters gained air supremacy over the skies of Nissan Island. 32 fighters form Squadron 14, RNZAF, commanded by Squadron Leader S. G. Quill, and Squadrons 1 and 18, commanded by Squadron Leader J. A. Oldfield, both kept 18 aircraft continuously over the island until dusk, flying sorties from the airfields at Empress Augusta Bay.  12 Japanese bombers would be reported shot down. This was the last air opposition encountered during Operation Squarepeg. With such a numerous  fleet sending thousands of troops ashore with impunity only 115 miles from Rabaul proved AirSols was a force to be reckoned with. Ferried ashore in LCIs and LCVPs, into the lagoon in southern Barahun Island, the troops would disembark at several landing beaches around the Pokonian and Tangalan Plantations.  Within just 2 hours, about 5800 New Zealanders were ashore. Patrols were then sent out, and carrying parties began moving stores off the beaches further inland. As the beachhead was established, there was only a brief resistance from several Japanese barges around Sirot Island, before a perimeter was established. By nightfall, in addition to the aforementioned troops, Wilkinson had also landed 58 jeeps, 67 trucks, 44 guns, 8 Valentine tanks, 426 tons of petrol in drums, 2000 gallons of fresh water in tins, and 267 tons of rations. The following day, as the Kiwis fanned out along Nissan Island, about 21 Japanese were encountered on Sirot. Late that afternoon, natives reported that an unspecified number of Japanese had taken refuge on the densely wooded island of Sirot, and the task of clearing the island was assigned to B Company, led by Captain D. Dalton. The Japanese were swiftly dealt with, but the Kiwi's would suffer 5 deaths and 3 wounded in the firefight. On February 18, patrols from the 37th Battalion reached the northern tip of Nissan Island and reported it clear while the 30th and 35th Battalions dealt with a large group of Japanese at the south point of the island. The Kiwis accidentally came upon the remaining Japanese garrison on 20 February, in an area previously declared clear by patrols. It was along the coast near a few deserted native huts passing as the village of Tanaheran on the map. On February 19, the remaining 100-man Japanese garrison signed off on their radio ‘We are charging the enemy and beginning radio silence'.The Kiwi's suffered 3 deaths and 11 wounded. The Japanese had been overwhelmed and annihilated. The next day the second echelon of Admiral Fort arrived. Organized resistance had ceased. In total, 120 Japanese had been killed against the 13 killed and 24 wounded of the Allied forces.  With the Green Islands under their control, the Allied forces now needed to do something about the 1200 friendly native Melanesians whose taro gardens and coconut groves were about to be turned into airfields. The answer was a temporary evacuation to Guadalcanal. This was explained to the natives' head men, and, as the Melanesians are born rovers, the prospect of a boat ride to the Solomons and free food there was highly pleasing. Accordingly, "Grandpa" Roger Cutler's LSTs of the Second Echelon took on the function, new even for Love-Sugar-Tares, of evacuating natives; and so well was this done that by the time the flotilla of Melanesian Mayflowers reached Guadalcanal the 1147 embarked had increased to 1148. The Green Islands would prove to be a very useful link in the strangling of Rabaul, with a PT base immediately opening on February 17 and with a new fighter strip being completed by March 4, which for the first time put Kavieng within range of AirSols fighters and bombers. But now we have to shift over to the boys in New Guinea. The last time we were in New Guinea, the Australians were in hot pursuit of General Nakano's men. On February 3rd, the 30th battalion of Lieutenant-Colonel William Parry-Okeden had set off from Singor to take over for the 4th battalion at Crossington. The next day, the Australians reached Nemau and the day after that established a new supply beach at Butubutu. On that same day orders came in stating all commanders must make every endeavor to capture prisoners. This prompted Cameron to call off the Papuans from leading the advance and sent the leading Papuan platoon to reconnoiter the inland trails while the infantry led the advance on the right. The men advanced sluggishly as a result of the mixture of muddy tracks and enemy corpses. They reached Roinji 1 on the 6th then Roinji 2 on the 7th. During the afternoon the Papuans reached Gali 1 where they managed to kill 24 Japanese stragglers and captured 3 prisoners. Each day the Papuans killed on average 10-15 Japanese, but it was not until the 8th when they encountered a real Japanese rearguard at Weber Point. The Papuans performed a frontal assault killing 53 Japanese and captured another 4 prisoners. By the night on February 9, the leading company was 2000 yards west of Malalamai and 3500 yards from the American's most forward outpost at Yagomai when they fought another larger group of Japanese. 61 Japanese were killed and 9 prisoners taken in the day; and on February 10, the 30th Battalion at last reached Yagomai. Here they finally linked with the American force at Saidor. It was decided that the 5th Division would not operate west of the Yaut, so Brigadier Cameron was instructed to mop up the Tapen and Nokopo areas. Meanwhile, the 35th Battalion advanced towards Bwana, where they killed 31 Japanese. On the 18th, the Australians killed 40 Japanese at Gabutamon and another 142 in the Tapen area; 3 days later, they attacked Wandiluk, where they killed 57 Japanese. After the 22nd, the pursuit was largely carried on by the Papuans towards Nokopo. During this time until March 1st, the 8th Brigade reported killing 734 Japanese, found 1793 dead and took 48 prisoners. The Australians and Papuan had suffered 3 deaths and 5 wounded. Despite his losses, General Nakano and his men had yet again cheated death. In a letter on 21st March Lt General Frank Berryman wrote: "About 8,000 semi-starved, ill equipped and dispirited Japanese bypassed Saidor. It was disappointing that the fruits of victory were not fully reaped, and that once again the remnants of 51st Division escaped our clutches." Meanwhile General Morshead had been planning to relieve the 7th division with the fresh 11th division Major-General Allan Boase. But General Vasey convinced him instead to let him take over the drive on Madang by the end of January. Now the 58th/59th Battalion relieved the 2/10th in the right-hand sector from 4100 through Crater Hill and Kankirei Saddle to Cam's Hill, with the task of patrolling the area east of Cam's Hill, the headwaters of the Mosa River, and forward along the upper Mindjim River Valley to Paipa 2. The 57th/60th relieved the 2/9th on the left with positions on the 4100 Feature, the Protheros and Shaggy Ridge, and the task of patrolling forward from Canning's Saddle along the high ground west of the Mindjim. The 24th Battalion relieved the 2/12th in reserve.  Now Brigadier Hammer had the task of patrolling forward from the Kankirei Saddle. As typical for New Guinea, the terrain facing them would be formidable. Hammer had this to say in a report "The country in the Finisterre Ranges is rugged, steep, precipitous and covered with dense rain forest. It rains heavily almost every day thus making living conditions uncomfortable. By day it is hot, by night three blankets are necessary. There is, therefore, a constant battle with mud, slush, rain and cold. To allow freedom of movement over this mud it was necessary to corduroy every track in the area." By late February Hammer dispatched a number of small patrols towards Amuson and Saipa 2. On the right flank Lt Brewster with a patrol from the 58th/59th investigated the valley of the Mosa River as far as Amuson, and returned after 4 days reporting the area was clear. In the central area a patrol from the 57th/60th brushed with an enemy patrol near Saipa 2, with some support from the guns of the 4th Field Regiment. On the 28th a patrol from the 57th/60th, led by Lt Besier, attacked Saipa 2 three times with supporting artillery fire, but all attempts to enter the village were repulsed. On February 26, the 58th/59th Battalion was instructed to establish a company patrol base on Amuson and send out a platoon reconnaissance patrol to the coast in the Mindjim-Melamu area, which managed to establish some observation posts overlooking Astrolabe Bay in early March. Hammer also sent the 57th/60th Battalion to the Paipa area in preparation for an attack on Saipa 2.  Meanwhile, after the conclusion of Operation Dexterity on February 10th General Krueger handed command to Major-General William Gill over the Saidor area and he began to bring the remaining elements of his 32nd division.  Gill then began plans for a secondary landing at the Yalau Plantation, around 30 miles west of Saidor. He hoped to establish a new forward base there and possibly intercept enemy stragglers trying to bypass the Saidor area.The 2nd battalion, 126th regiment led by Lt Colonel Oliver O. Dixon successfully landed on March 5th. 54 landing crafts unloaded 1348 within 9 waves, seeing little to no opposition. As men patrolled east and west from Yalau, they encountered and killed a few Japanese and found many already dead. They would reach Bau Plantation on March 9th, where they ran into a detachment of General Nakai's 3rd battalion, 239th regiment. But yet again we must not shift our attention somewhere we have not been in quite some time, the Indian Ocean.  The Commander in Chief, Southwest Area Fleet, Vice-Admiral Takasu Shiro had decided to dispatch heavy cruisers Aoba, Chikuma, and Tone, under the command of Rear-Admiral Sakonju Naomasa, to raid Allied shipping on the main route between Aden and Fremantle. Departing the Lingga Islands on February 27, the heavy cruisers were escorted by light cruisers Kinu and Ōi and 3 destroyers through the Sunda Strait. The raiders were also supported by 10 medium bombers and 3-4 seaplanes based in Sumatra and west Java which conducted patrols in the direction of Ceylon. 3-4 submarines from the 8th Flotilla also monitored Allied shipping movements near Ceylon, the Maldive Islands and Chagos Archipelago. On March 6th the allies detected the force near the Lombok Strait. Fearing a possible attack, Western Australia was reinforced and the British Eastern Fleet was diverted. On the morning of March 9th, Sakonju's cruiser came across the 6200 ton British steamer Behar between Fremantle and Colombo. Upon sighting the Japanese ships, Behar's Captain Maurice Symons, ordered that his radio operator transmit the "RRR" code in order to notify other ships and Allied bases that the merchant ship was being attacked by surface raiders. Tone's signals room picked up the message,. The Tone then began signaling repeatedly to the Behar to surrender, but the Behar continued to flee, prompting the cruiser to open fire. Behar was hit a few times to her prow and stern, killing 3 crewmembers. Within 5 minutes Behar's crew and passengers began abandoning ship as she sank. 104-108 survivors were rescued by the Tone. Following the attack, Sakonju believed it was too dangerous to continue raiding as Behar had sent out a distress signal. So he turned back, reaching Tanjung Priok on March 15th.  Shortly after the Behar survivors were rescued, Sakonju sent a radio message to Tone's commanding officer, Captain Mayuzumi Haruo, reprimanding him for taking non-essential personnel prisoner and not capturing the merchant ship. In this message Sakonju ordered that the survivors be killed. Mayuzumi was unwilling to do so, however, as he felt that this would violate his Christian religious beliefs. His executive officer, Commander Mii Junsuke, also opposed killing the prisoners deeming it dishonorable. Mayuzumi radioed a request to Sakonju that the prisoners be put ashore, but this was rejected. The captain then visited Aoba to argue his case, but Sakonju remained unmoved and told Mayuzumi to "obey my orders". Despite his misgivings, Mayuzumi ultimately decided to kill the prisoners. On the night of March 18, all the prisoners on board Tone were beheaded by several of the cruiser's officers. Mayuzumi watched the killings from the ship's bridge but Mii refused to take part. The number of the crew to be executed was between 65 and at least 100. Following the massacre 15-36 survivors were transferred to Aoba. The party sent to Aoba included Symonds, the Behar's chief officer and several of the senior officers as well as both of the ship's female passengers. All of this group were later landed at Tanjung Priok. After the war, the Allies prosecuted the officers responsible for the murders on board the Tone. Vice Admiral Takasu died from disease in September 1944, but Sakonju was tried by the British in 1947 at Hong Kong and sentenced to death and executed 21 January 1948. Mayuzumi was convicted for his role in the killings and sentenced to 7 years imprisonment. Sakonju stated in his affidavit that he was 'retaliating against the execution and inhuman treatment of Japanese prisoners by the allies in Guadalcanal'. Mayuzumi stated in his defense that he was following Sakonju's orders. Mayuzumi received a light sentence due to his repeated requests for clemency for the prisoner's lives. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Operation Hailstone saw what was once called the Gibraltar of the Pacific, Truk nearly annihilated. She could no longer be counted upon to thwart allied sea and air units in the region. The Australians on New Guinea were not letting up on the retreating Japanese and a terrible and needless massacre took place in the Indian Ocean.  

Kennedy discusses the future of atolls, ahead of a visit to the Micronesian nation of Palau. 

The Chinese communist regime has been aggressively seeking to expand its control of the Pacific Islands through political warfare, bribery, and “gray-zone” activities, says David Panuelo, the former president of the Federated States of Micronesia.During his tenure, which lasted from 2019 to 2023, he penned a number of letters to other leaders in the region to raise awareness about the Chinese regime's belligerent tactics.“I wasn't doing it because I wanted to be bold. I wanted to do it to protect our citizens and the sovereignty of our nation,” Mr. Panuelo says.So why is this region so important? It's part of the “Second Island Chain” of defense in America's military strategy, and is critical to deterring a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

News

Ep.176 Gisela McDaniel is a diasporic, Indigenous Chamorro artist who explores the effects of trauma, displacement and colonisation through portraiture and oral histories. Interweaving audio interviews, assemblage and oil painting, she intentionally incorporates the portrait sitters' voices in order to subvert the traditional power relations of artist and sitter. Working primarily with women and non-binary people who identify as Black, Micronesian, Indigenous to Turtle Island, Asian, Latinx, and/or mixed-race, her work disrupts and responds to the systemic silencing of subjects in fine art, politics and popular culture. McDaniel received her BFA from the University of Michigan in 2019. Recent solo and group shows include: The inescapable interweaving of all lives, Kunsthalle Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf (2023); Tender Loving Care, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, Boston (2023); Thinking of You, FLAG Art Foundation, New York (2023); Manhaga Fu'una, Pilar Corrias, London (2022); A Place for Me: Figurative Painting Now, ICA Boston (2022); The Regional, Kemper Museum of Contemporary Art, Kansas City (2022); Sakkan Eku LA, The Mistake Room, Los Angeles (2021); How Do We Know the World?, Baltimore Museum of Art, Baltimore (2021); The Regional, CAC Contemporary Art Centre Cincinnati (2021); Dual Vision, MOCAD (2021); Making WAY/FARING Well, Pilar Corrias, London (2020); Dhaka Art Summit, Dhaka, Bangladesh (2020); On the Road II, Oolite Arts, Miami (2019); Save Art Space, Playground Detroit, Detroit (2019); Lush P(r)ose, Playground Detroit, Detroit (2019); Virago, Detroit Art Babes Collective, Detroit (2019) and Theotokos: New Visions of the Mother God, The Schvitz, Detroit (2018). Photo Credit: Gisela McDaniel in her studio, 2023, Photo by Rachel Stern. Courtesy the artist and Pilar Corrias, London Artist https://www.giselamcdaniel.com/ Pilar Corrias https://www.pilarcorrias.com/artists/53-gisela-mcdaniel/ Perez Art Museum Miami https://www.pamm.org/en/artwork/2020.216/ MFA Boston https://www.mfa.org/article/2022/tiningo-si-sirena-a-conversation-with-gisela-charfauros-mcdaniel-and-antoinette i.D Vice https://i-d.vice.com/en/article/akvywb/gisela-mcdaniel-art-interview Elephant https://elephant.art/gisela-mcdaniel-gauguins-paintings-of-pacific-islanders-felt-like-theft-to-me-18022022/ Artnet https://news.artnet.com/art-world/chamorro-painter-gisela-mcdaniel-interview-2064002 Playground Detroit https://playgrounddetroit.com/portfolio/gisela-mcdaniel/ Galleries Now https://www.galleriesnow.net/shows/gisela-mcdaniel-manhaga-fuuna/ Washington Informer https://www.washingtoninformer.com/armory-week-contemporary-art-dc/ Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gisela_McDaniel Kresge Arts in Detroit https://kresgeartsindetroit.org/artist/gisela-mcdaniel/ Kadist https://kadist.org/people/gisela-mcdaniel/ She Curates https://www.she-curates.com/interviews/artists/gisela-mcdaniel/ Metro West https://metrowestcle.org/community-art/ Guam Pacific Daily News https://www.guampdn.com/lifestyle/gisela-mcdaniels-portraits-of-chamoru-diaspora-shown-in-london-gallery/article_c149e9ac-8e05-11ec-8f91-333179b3d301.html The Hopper News https://hopperprize.org/gisela-mcdaniel/ Seen https://www.seenthemagazine.com/culture/arts_entertainment/the-power-of-a-paintbrush-gisela-mcdaniel-transforms-trauma-into-art/article_c071f946-0477-5e8a-a116-6e6adc2605cf.html

In this episode, Anousha invited Beatrice Zovich, program manager at the Hepatitis B Foundation along with Rensely and Kenson, who are members of the Micronesian community and reside in Hawaii. As part of the Liver Cancer Disparities Project, Rensely and Kenson shared details about their experience with participating in the focus group discussions of the project.Support the showOur website: www.hepb.orgSupport B Heppy!Social Media: Instagram - Twitter - Facebook

Ready to start. The Red Hill Joint Task Force are set to formally announce the beginning of defueling operations. But there are new concerns about safety inside the facility. How the issues are being addressed. More Lahaina burn zones are set to reopen today and into next week. The residents who will soon be granted access. Our Hope for Hawaii series continues. Today, an inspiring story of the first Micronesian to ever be accepted to Columbia University. How his volunteer efforts in Hilo helped push his towards an ivy league education.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jackie Leung, PhDc, JD, MS is the Executive Director of the Micronesian Islander Community as well as being a PhD candidate in Public Health at Oregon State University. She has an interest in global health and public health, particularly healthcare access, utilization, and policy research. She has a background in human rights and immigration law and nonprofit leadership. She conferred a Bachelor English at California State University, Los Angeles. She then got her Masters in Community and Behavioral health at University of Iowa. then went on to get her Juris Doctor (JD) in Law at Willamette University College of Law.  She currently works as the Executive Director of the statewide nonprofit, Micronesian Islander Community and is an Assistant Professor at Linfield University.Jackie Leung, PhDc, JD, MS on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/profjackieleung/Join my 800+ member email blasts: http://thephmillennial.com/signupThe Public Health Millennial on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/thephmillennial/Omari on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/omari-richins-mph/Support The Public Health Millennial: https://ko-fi.com/thephmillennialChapters:@0:00 Episode Start@2:51 Jackie Leung, PhDc, JD, MS Introduction@4:00 Identity & background@5:16 Human rights, law, and public health@9:10 Public health law and nonprofit leadership@14:19 What is public health?@15:12 Bachelors in English at California State University@17:41 Undergrad takeaways@20:15 Masters Degree in Community & Behavioral Health at University of Iowa@28:49 Community Engagement with invisible and voiceless community@33:55 JD, Law at Willamette University College of Law@37:40 Experiences during JD@41:40 Fellowships after JD@44:00 Not passing the bar@47:37 Writer in Residence at Ms. JD@49:17 Advice for people going through Domestic Violence@52:12 Project Manager at Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon@1:02:08 City Councilperson at City of Salem@1:07:30 Advice on running for city council@1:16:06 Executive Director at Micronesian@1:23:30 Assistant Professor at Linfield University@1:25:08 PhD in Public Health@1:26:09 Connect with guest@1:26:56 The Furious Five@1:32:02 Support usSupport the showThanks for tuning in. Let's all work together towards a culture of health, wellbeing, and equity for all. ⭐⭐ SUBSCRIBE & Leave a 5-STAR REVIEW! ⭐⭐ Follow & Support:- Contribute to the show (one-time or monthly)- The Public Health Millennial on IG - The Public Health Millennial on LinkedIn - The Public Health Millennial Website- Omari Richins, MPH on LinkedIn- Support on The Public Health Store

It's time for another episode of The Sweeper with co-hosts Lee Wingate & Paul Watson, who has penned the first chapter of his sequel to the hit book 'Up Pohnpei' - all about his adventures in Micronesian football. We talk all about it in Part 1 of this episode, before discussing the Indonesian team travelling in a tank and the Slovenian club president scoring goals in a desperate situation. Part 2 starts off with a couple of stories from Sweden: lower-league Torns IF have discovered a loophole in the offside rule, while AIK supporters are telling police where to hit them with batons. Ladders (but no snakes) are being thrown around in France, while an Austrian club president is making headlines for handing out cash to quench fans' thirst - at a game Lee attended live. Finally, in Part 3, we expand our focus to cover the whole continent: there's a preview of the European group stages and the biggest away days faced by the 96 teams in question, plus a look ahead to the international break and the chances Kazakhstan, Luxembourg and Moldova have of making it to EURO 2024. RUNNING ORDER: Part 1: The sequel to 'Up Pohnpei', the Indonesian team travelling in a tank & the Slovenian club president scoring goals (00:46) Part 2: Offside rule loopholes and baton-wielding police in Sweden, snakes and ladders in France & drinks for the fans in Austria (17:01) Part 3: The biggest away days in the European group phase & a look ahead to the international fixtures (32:18) VIDEO: The loophole to the offside rule discovered by Torns IF: https://www.theguardian.com/football/video/2023/aug/30/swedish-third-tier-team-torns-if-find-offside-rule-loophole-video

The Sweeper crew have been to Liechtenstein and San Marino in recent months – but the 26,000km round-trip to Micronesia was by far our biggest off-the-beaten-track football adventure. Having now overcome the jetlag, Paul has the full story on the Pacific nation's first-ever futsal tournament and its newly assembled Football Association. Part 1 sees us reflect on Paul's past in Micronesia as the world's youngest international football coach, the Twitter DM from Kenny that changed everything, the tournament format, the lost suitcase of futsal shoes, Kosrae's controversial path to the final, Yap's victory, the trophy flown in from Guam, an emergency wood carving and much more besides. Then, in Part 2, we talk about the establishment of an FA, the constitution that Paul wrote on the plane, the importance of futsal to Micronesia's football strategy and whether the AFC or the OFC offers the likeliest route to membership in a FIFA Confederation. Lastly, we chat about the upcoming sequel to Paul's popular book “Up Pohnpei” and where you can read it. Finally, in Part 3, it's time for our usual European football round-up. Faroese side KÍ Klaksvík pull off a huge shock in the Champions League qualifiers, Glentoran and Gżira United play out the highest-scoring penalty shootout in UEFA history, there's a night to remember for Andorra and two Crimean clubs are incorporated into the Russian football pyramid. RUNNING ORDER: Part 1 – The first-ever Micronesian futsal tournament: the Twitter DM that changed everything, Kosrae's controversial path to the final & Yap's victory (00:45) Part 2 – The first-ever Micronesian futsal tournament: the establishment of an FA, routes to membership in a FIFA Confederation & the sequel to “Up Pohnpei” (20:23) Part 3 – The European football round-up: KÍ Klaksvík's UCL upset, the highest-scoring shootout in UEFA history & the contested fate of two Crimean clubs (33:48)

Historian writes about complex history between China and Russia in new book; HPR's Cassie Ordonio reports on inequity of health care for Micronesian veterans; Army seed bank funded by DOD budget; Researchers share Hawaiian Monk Seal updates

Were Mike Lee and John Eastman behind all the fake elector plots? Can the GOP ever win an election honestly? As to the Debt Ceiling bargain, changes to food aid will cost money, but not the savings the GOP envisions. Also Good News! Clean energy is winning!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This season, the goal is to go back to personal interviews talking with Micronesian community members. Some of the most valuable feedback that the podcast has received is that many children of the diaspora, adoptees, adoptive parents, and allies have utilized the podcast to learn about and feel connected to Micronesian heritage. Most of that was done through simply asking community members about the culture and their relationship to it. The space will be honored again by going back to this format for the new season. On today's episode, I speak with the vivacious, Stephanie Takamaru. Stephanie is a Marshallese advocate who works in Northwest Arkansas educating, advocating, and providing resources with and to the Marshallese community. Listen in to learn more!

About Jeremy Shepherd, Hisano Shepherd and Pearl Paradise: Jeremy Shepherd is a leader, innovator, and a disruptor. From an early age he struck out on his own to satisfy his fierce independence, need for adventure, and a more satisfying way of life. As a teenager, he traveled to Japan alone and stayed to attend high school. He is self-taught and fluent in Japanese, Spanish and Micronesian. Through college, Jeremy worked for Passport to Languages as an interpreter of all three languages. To continue his world travels, became a flight attendant in 1996 and soon began importing pearls during his runs to Asia. In a sector dominated by generations old family businesses, Jeremy endeavored to become a first generation, self-taught pearl importer, dealer, and internet reseller. Over the past 20 years, he has traveled to pearl producing areas all over the world creating relationships with pearl producers, exporters, and people dedicated to support the pearl industry. He is an entrepreneur and e-commerce expert who has spent more than 25 years in the digital space. My experience includes developing, curating and launching direct-to-consumer, televised deal segments for NBCUniversal and TelevisaUnivision, and building one of the largest direct-to-consumer pearl brands in the world. Hisano has been fascinated by the art of jewelry making since early childhood. In pursuit of this passion, she graduated with a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree in Jewelry and Metalsmithing from California State University of Long Beach and then followed this with a Masters of Fine Arts in Jewelry at State University New York at New Paltz. After graduation, Hisano put her passion and education to work in the jewelry industry as a designer and educator, finding a part time position at PearlParadise.com, Inc, and teaching metalsmithing and jewelry design at two separate colleges. Today, Hisano is a permanent, full time member of the team and has since become the Chief Creative Officer overseeing all design, production and purchasing. Hisano also launched her personal line, little h, in 2012. Her pieces have won tremendous acclaim and have found fans from the First Lady of the United States to superstar Taylor Swift and many others. Founded in 1996 and brought online in 2000, Pearl Paradise has grown into the world's largest online pearl company. With a custom-built, 1,300-cubic-foot vault filled with pearls, we offer a selection of pearls unlike any other pearl seller, online or off. Our commitment to offering prices 80 percent below retail has accelerated our growth. With more than a quarter million satisfied customers to date, we have benefited greatly by word-of-mouth advertising. Our commitment to quality, customer service and unbeatable pricing and selection has helped us become the Internet's premier source of pearl jewelry. The reputation we have built based on the quality of our merchandise has attracted the attention of journalists around the world. We have been blessed with glowing articles in The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, USA Today, Entrepreneur Magazine, Investor's Business Daily, and Inc. Magazine, to name just a few. The pearl and jewelry industry has followed our growth and featured us in respected industry publications like Modern Jeweler, Jewelry News Asia, and JCK.At Pearl Paradise, we are all world-class pearl experts. Every team member is required to complete the Gemological Institute of America's pearl diploma program. In addition, our entire team has completed the Pearls as One, Cultured Pearl Association of America's Pearl Specialist Certification. This course was written and created by our own CEO, Jeremy Shepherd.

Legends from the Pacific: Book 1 is available on Amazon. Get your copy today. https://amzn.to/3CIYo6m (Amazon Affiliate link) Discover possibly the craziest of trickster gods. Featured Song: "Thunder" by Christian Yrizarry, courtesy of HI*Sessions Join our email list https://legendsfromthepacific.ck.page/32ca50bd23 *We respect your privacy. We will not share your email. You can unsubscribe at any time. Visit our store: https://legendsfromthepacific.com/store Theme Song: "Mystery" by Tavana, courtesy of HI*Sessions Sound Effects: Sound Effects Factory Music Coordinator: Matt Duffy AKA DJ TripleBypass Link to this episode on our website: https://legendsfromthepacific.com/123-olifat Please give us a rating, write a review, subscribe, follow us, and share us with your friends and family. ***** Join our email list and claim your exclusive unaired episode today: "Hawaii's Faceless Ghost - Mujina" (Unaired Episode) https://legendsfromthepacific.ck.page/32ca50bd23 *We respect your privacy. We will not share your email. You can unsubscribe at any time. Listen to Kamu's unaired paranormal experiences by becoming a Patreon supporter today: https://www.patreon.com/legendsfromthepacific Send your unusual Pacific experience to be shared on a future episode. https://legendsfromthepacific.com/feedback  Visit our Fan Art Section: https://legendsfromthepacific.com/fan-artwork Instagram: legendsfromthepacific Twitter: LegendsPacific Follow Legends from the Pacific wherever you listen to audio. → Follow via Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/legends-from-the-pacific/id1501091122 → Follow via Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/search/legends%20from%20the%20pacific → Follow via Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5qhdkYUl8R7hSw6OZYJLye → Here's our RSS feed: https://legendsfromthepacific.libsyn.com/rss www.LegendsFromThePacific.com

• Shows how the archetypal symbols of the Pohnpaid petroglyphs have exact counterparts in other ancient cultures throughout the world• Provides evidence that Pohnpaid is closely related to--yet predates--neighboring Nan Madol• Includes hundreds of Pohnpaid petroglyphs and stone circle photos, many never before seenWhile residing on the small Pacific island of Pohnpei in the 1990s, Carole Nervig discovered that a recent brush fire had exposed hundreds of previously unknown petroglyphs carved on gigantic boulders. This portion of the megalithic site called Pohnpaid was unknown even to Pohnpei's state historic preservation officer. The petroglyphs were unlike others from Oceania, so Nervig began investigating and comparing them with petroglyphs and symbols from around the world.In this fully illustrated exploration, Nervig documents her discoveries on Pohnpei, revealing how the archetypal symbols of the Pohnpaid petroglyphs have exact counterparts in other ancient cultures and universal motifs throughout the world, including the Australian Aborigines, the Inca in Peru, the Vedic civilization of India, early Norse runes, and Japanese symbols. She provides evidence that Pohnpaid is closely related to--yet predates--neighboring Nan Madol and shows how Pohnpaid was an outpost of the sunken Kahnihmueiso, a city of the now-vanished civilization of Mu, or Lemuria.Discussing the archaeoastronomical function of the Pohnpaid stones, the author examines how many of the glyphs symbolize celestial phenomena and clearly reveal how their creators were sky watchers with a sophisticated understanding of astronomy, geophysics, geomancy, and engineering. She shows how the scientific concepts depicted in the petroglyphs reveal how the citizens of Mu had a much deeper understanding of the living Earth than we do, which gave them the ability to manipulate natural forces both physically and energetically. Combining archaeological evidence with traditional oral accounts, Nervig reveals Pohnpaid not only as a part of a geodetic network of ancient sacred sites and portals but also as a remnant of the now submerged but once enlightened Motherland of Mu.Carole Nervig has spent more than four decades researching Micronesian traditional culture and oral history as well as the sacred sites of Micronesia and Hawai'i. She first moved to Micronesia as a Peace Corps volunteer in 1969. In the 1990s she discovered a previously unknown megalithic portion of the Pohnpaid petroglyph site on the Micronesian island of Pohnpei. Creator of the Nan Madol Foundation, she now lives in Ecuador.

This week on A Podcast About Catholic Things, Eric (The Ambassador of Common Sense) and Dan (The Ambassador of Nonsense) talk about sports, the modern sports culture, sports history, and how a the Catholic church fits into this… or rather, how the Catholic Church ought to fit into this. Some questions stemming from this: how important is 'play' and how important is entertainment? In current events, News Max is reporting that Pope Francis is dying, but doesn't give any sort of time-line. The US Senate passes a resolution canceling Biden's vaccine/testing mandate. Woman is found near Niagara Falls, dead in her car… in the river. Micronesian president levels accusations against major countries in the renewable fuel push. New Zealand helps restore order in Solomon Islands after riots stemming from China's influence over local government. Parents of Ethan Crumbley are arrested and charged. Volcano in Indonesia. US boycotts Winter Olympics--UK, Canada, and Australia join us. Conversion therapy almost outlawed in Canada. Biden says he won't put troops in Ukraine. In the land of nonsense, a camel escapes a nativity scene. Crowd is snow-stuck in Ikea store. Tattoo artist does terrible job. A semi drags a car down highway. Store clerk tries to sell a core charge.VIEW ON APPLE PODCASTS VIEW ON GOOGLE PODCASTS VIEW ON AMAZON VIEW ON AUDIBLE VIEW ON CASTBOX VIEW ON PODCASTADDICT VIEW ON STITCHER VIEW ON BITCHUTE VIEW ON RUMBLE VIEW ON TUNE-IN VISIT US ON FACEBOOK

Chris Li, director of research of the Asia-Pacific Initiative and fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, leads the conversation on U.S. strategy in East Asia. FASKIANOS: Thank you. Welcome to today's session of the Winter/Spring 2023 CFR Academic Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach at CFR.  Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic, if you would like to share it with your colleagues or classmates. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.  We're delighted to have Chris Li with us to discuss U.S. strategy in East Asia. Mr. Li is director of research of the Asia-Pacific Initiative, and a fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, where he focuses on U.S.-China relations, Asia-Pacific security, and technology competition. Previously, he was research assistant to Graham Allison in the Avoiding Great Power War Project, and coordinator of the China Working Group, where he contributed to the China Cyber Policy Initiative and the Technology and Public Purpose Project, led by former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.  Chris, thanks very much for being with us today. I thought we could begin with you giving us your insights and analysis of the Biden administration's foreign policy strategy in East Asia, specifically vis-à-vis China.  LI: Great. Well, first of all, thanks, Irina, for the invitation. I'm really looking forward to the conversation and also to all the questions from members of the audience and, in particular, all the students on this seminar. So I thought I'd start very briefly with just an overview of how the Biden administration's strategy in the Indo-Pacific has shaped up over the last two years, two and a half years. What are the key pillars? And essentially, now that we're about halfway through the first term—or, you know, if there is a second term—but President Biden's first term, where things are going to go moving forward?  So as many you are probably familiar, Secretary of State Tony Blinken laid out essentially the core tenets of the Biden administration's Indo-Pacific strategy, of which China, of course, is a focal centerpiece. And he did so in his speech last summer at the Asia Society, where he essentially described the relationship between the U.S. and China as competitive where it should be, cooperative where it can be, and adversarial where it must be. So sort of three different pillars: competition, cooperation, a sort of balance between the two. And in terms of the actual tenets of the strategy, the framing was three pillars—invest, align, and complete.  And so briefly, just what that meant according to Secretary Blinken was really investing in sources of American strength at home. Renewing, for example, investment in technology, investment in STEM education, infrastructure, and many of the policies that actually became known as Build Back Better, a lot of the domestic spending packages that President Biden proposed, and some of which has been passed. So that first pillar was invest sort of in order to o compete with China, we need to first renew our sources of American strength and compete from a position of strength.  The second element was “align.” And in this—in this pillar, I think this is where the Biden administration has really distinguished itself from the Trump administration. Many folks say, well, the Biden administration's China policy or its Asia policy is really just Trump 2.0 but with a little bit—you know, with essentially a nicer tone to it. But I think there is a difference here. And I think the Biden administration's approach has really focused on aligning with both traditional security partners—our allies, our alliances with countries like the Republic of Korea, Japan, the Philippines—but also invigorating those nontraditional partnerships, with India, for example.   I think another part of this strategy, another part of this dimension, has also been reinvigorating U.S. presence and U.S. leadership, really, in multilateral organizations. Not only, for example, taking the Quad and reestablishing some of the leader-level summits, the ministerials, proposing, for example, a COVID cooperation regime among new members of the Quad, but also establishing newer frameworks. So, for example, as many of you have read about, I'm sure, AUKUS, this trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the U.S. when it comes to sharing of nuclear submarine technology. That's been a new proposed policy. And I think we're about to see an update from the administration in the next couple of weeks.  And even with elements of the region that have been unappreciated and perhaps under-focused on. For example, the Solomon Islands was the focal point of some attention last year, and you've seen the administration propose the Partners in the Blue Pacific Initiative, which seeks to establish greater cooperation among some of the Pacific Island nations. And there was actually a summit hosted by President Biden last fall with leaders of the Pacific Island countries. So that alignment piece I think has really been significant as a cornerstone of the Biden administration's Indo-Pacific strategy.  The third element, of course, competition, I think is the most evident. And we've seen this from some of the executive orders on semiconductors, the restrictions on advanced chips, to elements of trade, to even sort of advocacy for human rights and greater promotion of democracy. You saw the Summit for Democracy, which has been a pillar of the administration's foreign policy agenda. So that's basically what they've done in the last two and a half years.  Now, in terms of where that's actually brought us, I think I'll make four observations. The first is that, unlike the Biden—unlike the Trump administration, where most of the policy pronouncements about the People's Republic of China had some tinge of inducing change in China—that was the phrase that Secretary Pompeo used in a speech on China policy—I think the Biden administration largely has said: The assumption and the premise of all of our policy toward China is based on the idea that the U.S. government does not seek fundamentally to change the Chinese government, the Chinese regime, the leadership, the administration, the rule of the Chinese Communist Party.  So that is both a markedly important difference, but it's also a part of the strategy that I believe remains ambiguous. And here, the problem is, you know, invest, align, and compete, competitive coexistence, where does that all actually take us? And I think this is where analysts in the strategic community and think tank world have said, well, it's great to invest, of course. You know, there's bipartisan support. Alignment with partners and allies is, of course, a pretty uncontroversial, for the most part, approach. And competition is, I think, largely a consensus view in Washington, D.C. But where does this actually take us?  You know, for all of its criticisms, the Trump administration did propose a specific end state or an end objective. And I think the Biden administration has just sort of said, well, it's about coexisting. It's about just assuming to manage the relationship. I think there are, of course, valid merits to that approach. And on an intellectual level, the idea is that because this is not necessarily a Cold War 2.0, in the words of the Biden administration, we're not going to have an end state that is ala the Cold War—in essence a sort of victory or demise, you know, the triumph of capitalism over communism, et cetera. In fact, it's going to be a persistent and sustained rivalry and competition. And in order to harness a strategy, we essentially need to manage that competition.   So I think that's—it's an intellectually coherent idea, but I think one of the ambiguities surrounding and one of the criticisms that has been proposed is that there is no clear end state. So we compete, we invest, we align, but to what end? Do we just keep—does the administration continue to tighten up and enhance alliances with partners and allies, and then to what end? What happens next? And sort of where does this lead us—leave us in ten years from now? So I think that's the first comment I'll make about the approach to the Indo-Pacific.  The second is that one of the tenets, of course, as I describe, is this compartmentalization of compete, cooperate. In essence, you know, we will compete—we, being the United States—with China on issues of technology, issues of economics, but we will also cooperate on areas of shared concern—climate change, nonproliferation. I think what you've seen is that while the Biden administration has proposed this idea, we can split—we can cooperate on one hand and also compete on the other—the People's Republic of China, the Chinese government, has largely rejected that approach.   Where you've seen statements from senior officials in China that have said, essentially, we will not cooperate with you, the United States, until you first cease all of the behavior, all of the negative policies that we don't like. In essence, if you will continue to sell arms to Taiwan, if you continue, the United States, to restrict semiconductors, to crackdown on espionage, to conduct military exercises in the region, then forget about any potential cooperation on climate, or forget about any cooperation on global health, et cetera.   So in essence, being able to tie the two compartments together has prevented a lot of what the Biden administration has sought to achieve. And we've seen that very clearly with Special Envoy John Kerry and his relentless efforts to conduct climate diplomacy. And I think largely—for example, last summer in the aftermath of Speaker Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, you saw a lot of those collaborative efforts essentially derailed. That's the second comment I'll make, which is while this approach, again, logically to most Americans would seem sound, it's actually met a lot of resistance because the Chinese reaction to it is not necessarily the same.  The third is I think we've seen increasingly, even though there has been an increased alignment since the Trump administration with allies and partners, there's still a degree of hedging among countries in the region. And that makes sense because from the perspectives of many of those leaders of countries in the region, the United States is a democratic country. We have an election coming up in 2024. And there's no guarantee that the next president, if President Biden is no longer the president in 2024 or even in 2028, will continue this policy.   And I think all of you, as observers of American politics, know the degree to which American politics has become largely one that is dysfunctional, is almost schizophrenic in a way. And so one would imagine that if you are a leader of a country in the Asian-Pacific region, to support the Biden administration's engagement, but also to maintain a degree of strategic autonomy, as this is often called. And so what I think we'll continue to see and what will be interesting to watch is how middle powers, how other countries resident in the region approach the United States in terms of—(inaudible). I think India will be key to watch, for example. Its defense relationship with the United States has increased over the years, but yet it still has close interests with respect to China.  The final comment I'll make is that on the military dimension I think this is another area of concern, where the Biden administration has said that one of its priorities is creating guardrails, constructing guardrails to manage the potential escalation in the event of an accident, or a miscommunication, miscalculation that could quickly spiral into a crisis. And we needn't—we need not look farther than the 2001 Hainan incident to think of an example, which was a collision between a(n) EP-3 aircraft and a Chinese intelligence plane. And that led to a diplomatic standoff.  And so I think the United States government is very keen on creating dialogue between militaries, risk reduction mechanisms, crisis management mechanisms. But I think they've encountered resistance, again, from the People's Republic of China, because the perspective there is that much of the U.S. behavior in the region militarily is invalid, is illegitimate. You know, the Chinese government opposes, for example, U.S. transits through the Taiwan Strait. So the idea therefore that they would engage and essentially deconflict and manage risk is sort of legitimizing American presence there militarily. And so we've encountered that obstacle as well.  So I think going forward on all four elements, we're going to continue to see adjustment. And I think, as students, as researchers, I think these are four areas where there's fertile room for discussion, for debate, for analysis, for looking at history. And I look forward to a conversation. Hopefully, many of you have ideas as well because there's no monopoly on wisdom and there are many creative proposals to be discussed. So I look forward to questions. I'll stop there.  FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you, Chris. That was great. Now we're going to go to all of you.  (Gives queuing instructions.)  Our first written question comes from Grace Wheeler. I believe a graduate student at the University of West Florida. Kissinger proposed the future of China-U.S. relations be one of coevolution instead of confrontation. Is it still realistically possible for the future of China-U.S. relations to be one of cooperation instead of confrontation?  LI: So terrific question. Thank you for the question. It's a very interesting idea. And I think Henry Kissinger, who I know has long been involved with the Council on Foreign Relations, has produced through his many decades,strategic frameworks and new ways of thinking about cardinal challenges to geopolitics. I have not yet actually understood or at least examined specifically what the concrete pillars of coevolution entail. My understanding on a general level is that it means, essentially, the United States and the People's Republic of China adjust and sort of mutually change their policies to accommodate each other. So a sort of mutual accommodation over time to adjust interests in a way that prevent conflict.  I think on the face—of course, that sounds—that sounds very alluring. That sounds like a terrific idea. I think the problem has always been what would actually this look like in implementation? So for example, on the issue of Taiwan, this is an issue where the Chinese government has said: There is no room for compromise. You know, the refrain that they repeat is: Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory. It is part of sovereignty. And there is no room for compromise. This is a red line. So if that's the case, there's not really, in my view, much room for evolution on this issue, for example. And it's an intractable problem.  And so I don't necessarily know how to apply the Kissinger framework to specific examples. And, but, you know, I do think it's something worth considering. And, you know, I would encourage you and others on this call to think about, for example, how that framework might actually be adapted. So I think it's an interesting idea, but I would—I think the devil's in the details. And essentially, to think about how this would be applied to specific issues—South China Sea, human rights, trade—would be the key to unpacking this concept.  I think the second part of your question was, is cooperation possible? And again, I think, as I stated in my remarks, the Biden administration publicly says—publicly asserts that they do seek to maintain a space for cooperation in climate, in nonproliferation, in global health security. I think, again, what we've encountered is that the Chinese government's view is that unless the United States ceases behavior that it deems detrimental to its own interests, it will not pursue any discussion of cooperation.   And so I think that's the problem we're facing. And so I think there are going to be discussions going forward on, well, given that, how do we then balance the need for cooperation on climate, in pandemics, with, for example, also concerns about security, concerns about military activity, concerns about Taiwan, et cetera? And I think this is the daily stuff of, of course, the conversations among the Biden administration and senior leadership. So personally, my view, is I hope cooperation is possible, of course. I think there are shared issues, shared vital interests, between the two countries and, frankly, among the global community, that require the U.S. and China to be able to work out issues. But I'm personally not optimistic that under this current framework, this paradigm, there will be a significant space open for cooperation.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. Going next to Hamza Siddiqui, a raised hand.   Q: Thank you. Hi. I'm Hamza Siddiqui, a student from Minnesota State University, Mankato.   And I actually had two questions. The first was: What kind of role does the U.S. envision Southeast Asian states—especially like the Philippines and Vietnam—playing in their U.S. strategy when it comes to Asia-Pacific security issues, specifically? And the second is that for the last few years there's been some discussion about Japan and South Korea being formally invited to join the Five Eyes alliance. And I wanted to get your take on that. What do you think are the chances that a formal invitation would be extended to them? Thank you.  LI: Great. Thank you for the question. Two terrific questions.  So, first, on the role of countries in Southeast Asia, I think that under the Biden administration they have continued to play an increasing degree of importance. So you've seen, for example, even in the Philippines, which you cited, I think just last month Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin made a visit there. And in the aftermath of the visit, he announced a new basing agreement. I haven't reviewed the details specifically, and I'm not a Philippines expert, but in short my understanding is that there is going to be renewed American presence—expanded American presence, actually, in the region.   And the Philippines, just based on their geostrategic location, is incredibly important in the Indo-Pacific region. So I think that the administration is very active in enhancing cooperation on the defense element, but also on the political and economic side as well. So with the Quad, for example, in India, you've seen cooperation on elements of economics as well, and technology. I think there's an initiative about digital cooperation too. So I think the answer is increasingly an important role.   On Japan and Korea, there have, of course, been discussions over the years about expanding the Five Eyes intelligence alliance to other countries in Asia as well. My assessment is that that's probably unlikely to occur in a formal way in the near term. But I could be wrong. And that assessment is primarily based on the fact that the countries that currently are part of the Five Eyes agreement share certain elements of linguistic convergence. They all speak English. There are certain longstanding historical ties that those countries have. And I think that to necessarily expand—or, to expand that existing framework would probably require a degree of bureaucratic sort of rearrangement that might be quite difficult, or quite challenging, or present obstacles.  I think what you will see, though, is enhanced security cooperation, for sure. And we've seen that even with Japan, for example, announcing changes to its military, its self-defense force, and increased defense spending as well in the region. So I think that is a trend that will continue.  FASKIANOS: Next question I'm taking from Sarah Godek, who is a graduate student at the University of Michigan.   What do guardrails look like, from a Chinese perspective? Thinking how China's foreign ministry has consistently put out lists of demands for the U.S. side, I'm wondering how guardrails are formulated by Wang Yi and others.  LI: Great. Thanks for the question.  So I guess I'll step back first and talk about what guardrails, in my view, actually entail. So I think the idea here is that in the event of a crisis—and, most of the time, crises are not planned. (Laughs.) Most of the time, crises, you know, occur as a result of an accident. For example, like the 2001 incident. But an accidental collision in the South China Sea between two vessels, the collision accidentally of two planes operating in close proximity. And as Chinese and American forces operate in closer proximity and increasing frequency, we do have that risk.   So I think, again, the idea of a guardrail that essentially, in the military domain, which is what I'm speaking about, entails a mechanism in place such that in the event of an accident or a crisis, there are ways based on that mechanism to diffuse that crisis, or at least sort of stabilize things before the political leadership can work out a solution. In essence, to prevent escalation because of a lack of dialogue. And I think for those of you who've studied history, you know that many wars, many conflicts have occurred not because one power, one state decides to launch a war. That has occurred. But oftentimes, because there is an accident, an accidental collision. And I think many wars have occurred this way.  So the idea of a guardrail therefore, in the military domain, is to create, for example, channels of communication that could be used in the event of a conflict. I think the easiest parallel to imagine is the U.S. and the Soviet Union, where there were hotlines, for example, between Moscow and between Washington, D.C. during that era, where the seniormost national security aides of the presidents could directly reach out to each other in the event of a crisis.   In the China context, what has been difficult is some of those channels exist. For example, the National Security Council Coordinator for Asia Kurt Campbell has said publicly: We have hotlines. The problem is that when the Americans pick up the phone and call, no one picks up on the other side. And in short, you know, having just the structure, the infrastructure, is insufficient if those infrastructure are not being used by the other side.   I think with respect to the U.S.-China context, probably, again, as I mentioned earlier, the largest obstacle is the fact that guardrails help the United States—or, in the Chinese perspective—from the Chinese perspective, any of these guardrails would essentially allow the U.S. to operate with greater confidence that, in the event of an accident, we will be able to control escalation. And from the Chinese perspective, they argue that because the United States fundamentally shouldn't be operating in the Taiwan Strait anyway, therefore by constructing that guardrail, by, for example, having dialogue to manage that risk, it would be legitimizing an illegitimate presence in the first place.   So that's always been perennially the problem. And I think the argument that the United States has made is that, well, sure, that may be your position. But it is in your interest as well not to have an accident spiral into a conflict. And so I think we've seen not a lot of progress on this front. I think, for example, in the aftermath of Speaker Pelosi's visit, there—you know, a lot of the defense cooperation ties were suspended.   But the last comment I'll make is that that doesn't necessarily mean that all dialogue has been stayed. There are still active channels between the United States and China. We have embassies in each other's countries. From public remarks, it seems like during moments of enhanced tension there are still ways for both governments to communicate with each other. So I think the good news is that it's not completely like the two countries aren't speaking to each other, but I think that there are not as many channels for reducing risk, managing potential crises, in the military sphere that exist today, that probably should exist.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Michael Long. Let's see. You need to unmute yourself.  LI: It looks like he's dropped off.  FASKIANOS: It looks like he put down his hand. OK. So let's go next to Conor O'Hara.  Q: Hi. My name is Conor O'Hara. And I'm a graduate student at the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy.  In one of my classes, titled America's Role in the World, we often talk about how America really does not have a comprehensive understanding of China. Not only China's military and state department, but really China as a society. How can Americans change that? And where does America need to focus its efforts in understanding China? And then also, one other thing I think of, is, you know, where does that understanding begin? You know, how early in someone's education or really within, say, the United States State Department do we need to focus our efforts on building an understanding? Thank you.  LI: Great. Well, thanks for the question. It's a great question. Very hard challenge as well.  I think that's absolutely true. I think the degree of understanding of China—of actually most countries—(laughs)—around the world—among senior U.S. foreign policy practitioners, I think, is insufficient. I think particularly with respect to China, and also Asia broadly, much of the diplomatic corps, the military establishment, intelligence officers, many of those people have essentially cut their teeth over the last twenty-five years focusing on the Middle East and counterterrorism. And that makes sense because the United States was engaged in two wars in that region.  But going back farther, many of the national security professionals before that generation were focused on the Soviet Union, obviously because of the Cold War. And so really, you're absolutely correct that the number of people in the United States government who have deep China expertise academically or even professionally on the ground, or even have the linguistic ability to, you know, speak Mandarin, or other countries—or, languages of other countries in East Asia, I think is absolutely limited. I think the State Department, of course, has—as well as the intelligence community, as well as the Department of Defense—has tried to over the last few years reorient and rebalance priorities and resources there. But I think it's still—my understanding, today it's still limited. And I think there's a lot of work to be done.  I think your question on how do you understand China as a society, I think with any country, number one, of course, is history. You know, every country's politics, its policy, its government is informed by its history of, you know, modern history but also history going back farther. And I think China is no exception. In fact, Chinese society, and even the Communist Party of China, is deeply, I think, entrenched in a historical understanding of its role in the world, of how it interacts compared with its people, its citizens, its foreign conflicts. And so I think, number one is to understand the history of modern China. And I think anyone who seeks to be involved in discussions and research and debate on China does need to understand that history.  I think the second point is linguistics is actually quite important. Being able to speak the language, read the language, understand the language is important. Because so much of what is written—so much of our knowledge as, you know, American think tank researchers, is based on publicly available information in China. And a lot of that primarily is in Mandarin. So most speeches that the senior leadership of China deliver are actually in Mandarin. And some of them are translated, but not all of them. A lot of the documents that they issue, a lot of academics who write about—academics in China who write about foreign policy and international relations, write in Mandarin.  And so I think that an ability to be able to read in the original text is quite important. And in fact, you know, a lot of the nuances, and specifically in the Communist Party's ideology, how it sees itself, its role in the world, a lot of that really is best captured and best understood in its original language. Some of the—you know, the ideology, the campaigns of propaganda, et cetera.  And I think the last part of your question was how early. I am not an education scholar. (Laughs.) I don't study education or developmental psychology. But, you know, I imagine, you know, as with anything, linguistics, language, is best learned—or, most easily learned early on. But I think that does not mean that, you know, someone who's in college or graduate school can't begin to learn in a different language. So I'd answer your question like that.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next written question from Lucksika Udomsrisumran, a graduate student at New York University.  What is the implication of the Biden administration's three pillars of the Indo-Pacific strategy on the Mekong and the South China Sea? Which pillars do you see these two issues in, from the Biden administration's point of view?  LI: OK. I think, if I'm understanding the question correctly about South China Sea, you know, I think in general the South China Sea probably would most easily fall into the competition category. There are obviously not only the United States and China, but other countries in the region, including the Philippines, for example, are claimants to the South China Sea. And so I think there's always been some disagreement and some tensions in that region.  I think that that has largely been—the U.S. response or U.S. policy in South China Sea is just essentially, from the military perspective, has been to—you know, the slogan is, or the line is, to fly, sail, operate, et cetera—I'm not quoting that correctly—(laughs)—but essentially to operate wherever international law permits. And so that means Freedom of Navigation Operations, et cetera, in the South China Sea. I think that, of course, raises objections from other governments, mainly China, in the region.   So I would say that probably belongs in the competition category. And we spoke about earlier the idea of managing some of the risk that occurs or that emerges when the PLA Navy and the United States Navy operate in close proximity in that region. So from that perspective, if you're talking about risk reduction and crisis management, that actually could fall into collaboration or cooperation. But I think primarily it's competition.   FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Joan Kaufman. And, Joan, I know you wrote your question, but if you could ask it that would be great.  Q: Yes, will. Yes, certainly. Hi, Chris. Really great to see you here during this talk.  LI: Yeah, likewise.  Q: A proud Schwarzman Scholar.  I wanted to ask you a question about Ukraine and China's, you know, kind of difficult position in the middle almost, you know, as sort of seemingly allied with Russia, or certainly not criticizing Russia. And then just putting forth this twelve-point peace plan last week for—and offering to broker peace negotiations and a ceasefire for Ukraine. You know, there's no love lost in Washington for China on, you know, how it has positioned itself on this issue. And, you know, frankly, given China's own kind of preoccupation with sovereignty over the years, how do you see the whole thing? And what comments might you make on that?  LI: Right. Well, first of all, thanks so much, Joan, for joining. And very grateful for all of—all that you've done for the Schwarzman Scholars Program over the past. I appreciate your time very much.  The Ukraine problem is an incredibly important one. And I think absolutely China is involved. And it's a very complicated position that it's trying to occupy here, with both supporting its security partner, Russia, but also not directly being involved in the conflict because of U.S. opposition and opposition from NATO. So I think it's—obviously, China is playing a very delicate balancing role here.  I think a couple points. So the first is that I think my view is that, for the Chinese leadership, Ukraine—or, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a deeply uncomfortable geopolitical situation, where there is essentially not a—there's no good outcome, really, because, as you mentioned, Ukraine is a country with which China has diplomatic recognition. It recognizes it. It has an embassy there. And the Chinese foreign ministry, Chinese foreign policy, has long very much supported the concept of sovereignty, and being able to determine your own future as a country. And I think, in fact, that's been one of the pillars and one of the objections to many American actions in the past. So on one hand, it says: We support sovereignty of every country, of which Ukraine is a country that is recognized by China.  And on the other hand, though, Russia, of course, which has had long complaints and issues with NATO expansion, is a partner of China. And so it's obviously supporting Russia. It has alignment of interests between Russia and China in many ways, in many dimensions, including objections to, for example, U.S. presence in Europe, U.S. presence in Asia. So it's a delicate balancing act. And I think from what we've seen, there hasn't been sort of a clear one-sided answer, where you've seen both statements, you know, proposing peace and saying that, you know, all sides should deescalate. But on the other hand, the U.S. government, the Biden administration, is now publicly stating that they are concerned about China potentially lending support to Russia.  So, you know, in short, I think it's very difficult to really understand what exactly is going on in the minds of the Chinese leadership. But I think that we'll continue to see sort of this awkward back and forth and trying—this purported balancing act between both sides. But I think, you know, largely—my assessment is that it's not going to go very clearly in one direction or the other.  I think the other comment I would make is that I think, from Beijing's perspective, the clear analogy here is one for Taiwan. Because—and this has been something that has been discussed in the think tank community very extensively. But the expectation I think among many in Washington was that Ukraine would not be able to put up much resistance. In short, this would be a very, very easy victory for Putin. And I think that was a—you know, not a universal consensus, but many people believed that, in short, Russia with all of its military might, would have no issues subjugating Ukraine very quickly.  I think people have largely found that to be, you know, a strategic failure on Russia's part. And so today, you know, one year after the invasion, Ukraine is still sovereign, is still standing, is still strong. And so I think—from that perspective, I think this—the war in Ukraine must give many of the leaders in China pause when it comes to thinking about a Taiwan continency, especially using force against Taiwan. Because, again, I think the degree of support, both militarily, politically, economically, for the resistance that Ukraine has shown against Russia among NATO members, among other Western countries, I think has been deeply surprising to many observers how robust that support has been. And I think that if you're sitting in Beijing and thinking about what a potential response to a Taiwan contingency might be, that would absolutely inform your calculus.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Lindsey McCormack, a graduate student at Baruch College.  How is the Biden administration's compete, cooperate, limited adversarial approach playing out with climate policy? What are you seeing right now in terms of the Chinese government's approach to energy security and climate?  LI: Yeah. It's a great question. Thanks for the question.  You know, we mentioned earlier, you know, I think the Biden administration's approach has been, you know, despite all of the disagreements between the United States and the Chinese government, there should be room for cooperation on climate because, as the Biden administration says, the climate is an existential risk to all of humanity. It's an issue of shared concern. So it's one that is not defined by any given country or constrained to one set of borders. I think it's largely not been very successful, in short, because China has not seemed to display much interest in cooperating on climate with the United States. And, again, China has largely coupled cooperation, linked cooperation in climate—or, on climate to other issues.  And so, you know, I think it's been reported that at several of the meetings between Secretary Blinken, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and their Chinese counterparts, the Chinese officials had essentially given the American officials a list saying: Here are the twenty-something things that we object to. Why don't you stop all of these, correct all of your mistakes—so to speak—and then we'll talk about what we can do next. And so I think, again, that—you know, that, to me, indicates that this framework of compartmentalizing cooperation and competition has some flaws, because the idea that you can simply compartmentalize and say: We're going to cooperate at full capacity on climate, but we're not going to—you know, but we'll compete on technology, it just—it actually doesn't work in this situation.  I think the other comment I'll make is that what the Biden administration has done is—which I think has been effective—is reframed the notion of cooperation. Where, in the past, cooperation was sort of viewed as a favor that the Chinese government did to the Americans, to the American government. That if we—if the United States, you know, offered certain inducements or there were strong elements of the relationship, then China would cooperate and that would be a favor.   And I think the Biden administration has reframed that approach, where cooperation is now presented not as a favor that any country does to another, but rather sort of is shared here. And that this is something of concern to China, to the United States, to other countries, and so all major countries need to play their part, and step up their game, to take on. I think, unfortunately, it hasn't been extremely successful. But I think that there—I hope that there will be future progress made in this area.  FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to go next to Jeremiah Ostriker, who has raised—a raised hand, and also written your question. But you can ask it yourself. And you have to accept the unmute prompt. Is that happening? All right. I think I might have to read it.  Q: Am I unmuted now?  FASKIANOS: Oh, you are. Fantastic.  Q: OK. First, I'll say who I am. I am a retired professor from Princeton University and Columbia University and was an administrative provost at Princeton.  And our China policies have puzzled me. I have visited China many times. And I have wondered—I'll quote my questions now—I have wondered why we are as negative towards China as we have been. So specifically, does the U.S. foreign policy establishment need enemies to justify its existence? Is it looking around the world for enemies? And why should we care if other countries choose to govern themselves in ways which are antithetical to the way that we choose to govern ourselves? And, finally, why not cooperate with all countries on projects of common interest, regardless of other issues?  LI: Great. Well, first of all, thank you for the question—or, three questions, which are all extremely important. I'll do my best to answer, but these are very difficult questions, and I think they touch on a more philosophical understanding of what is American foreign policy for, what is the purpose of America's role in the world, et cetera. But I'll try to do my best.  I think on the first part, does the United States need enemies, is it looking to make enemies? I think if you asked any—and these are, of course, my own assessments. I think if you asked any administration official, whether in this current administration or in previous administrations—Republican or Democrat—I don't think anyone would answer “yes.” I think the argument that has been made across administrations in a bipartisan fashion is that foreign policy is fundamentally about defending American interests and American values. In essence, being able to support the American way of life, which obviously is not necessarily one clearly defined entity. (Laughs.)  But I think, therefore, all of our policy toward China is sort of geared at maintaining, or securing, defending U.S. interests in the region. And where the argument about your question comes into play is that I think a lot of—the Biden administration, the Trump administration, the Obama administration would argue that many of the concerns that the United States has with China are not fundamentally only about internal issues, where this is a question of how they govern themselves. But they touch upon issues of shared concern. They touch upon issues that actually affect U.S. interests.   And so, for example, the South China Sea is, again—is a space that is—contains much trade. There are many different countries in the region that access the South China Sea. So it's not necessarily just an issue—and, again, this is Secretary Blinken's position that he made clear—it's not just an issue specific to China. It does touch upon global trade, global economics, global rules, and global order. And I think this is the term that has been often used, sort of this liberal international rules-based order.   And while that's sort of an amorphous concept, in essence what I think the term implies is the idea that there are certain standards and rules by which different countries operate that allow for the orderly and for the peaceful and the secure exchange of goods, of ideas, of people, of—so that each country is secure. And I think this—again, this broader concept is why I think successive U.S. administrations have focused on China policy, because I think some of, in their view, China's behaviors impinge on U.S. interests in the region.   I think the second question is why should we care about how other countries govern themselves? I think in a way, the answer the Biden administration—this current administration has given to that question is: The U.S. government under President Biden is not trying to fundamentally change the Chinese system of governance. And I think you've seen Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken say that publicly, that they are not seeking the collapse or the fundamental change in the Communist Party's rule of China. So I think in that sense, they have made that—they have made that response. I think, again, where there are issues—there are tensions, is when actions that the Chinese government take then touch upon U.S. interests. And I think we see that in Taiwan. We see that with economics. We see that with trade, et cetera.   And then finally, why not cooperate with every country in the world? I think obviously in an ideal world, that would be the case. All countries would be able to only cooperate, and all concerns shared among different nations would be addressed. I think unfortunately one of the problems that we're seeing now is that large major powers, like China and Russia, have very different worldviews. They see a world that is very different in its structure, and its architecture, and its organization, than the one that the U.S. sees. And I think that's what's led to a lot of tension.  FASKIANOS: So we have a written question from Julius Haferkorn, a student at California State University and Tübingen University, in Germany.  Ever since the escalation of the Ukraine war, there are discussions about the risk that, should Russia be successful with its invasion, China might use this as a template in regards to Taiwan. In your opinion, is this a realistic scenario?  LI: Great. Thanks for the question.  I think there are definitely analogies to be drawn between Ukraine and Taiwan, but I think there are also significant differences. The first is the relationship between Russia and Ukraine is one of two sovereign nations that the United States and international community recognizes. I think with Taiwan, what has—going back to our history question—Taiwan is a very complicated issue, even with regard to U.S. policies. The United States does not recognize Taiwan formally as an independent country. The United States actually does not take a position on the status of Taiwan. Briefly, the One China Policy, as articulated in the three communiques, the three joint communiques, essentially says that the United States government acknowledges the Chinese position that there is one China, and Taiwan is part of China, et cetera, et cetera.  And that word “acknowledge” is pretty key, because in essential its strategic ambiguity. It's saying, we acknowledge that the PRC government says this. We don't challenge that position. But we don't necessarily recognize or completely accept. And, obviously, the Mandarin version of the text is slightly different. It uses a term that is closer to “recognize.” But that ambiguity, in a way, permitted normalization and led to the democratization of Taiwan, China's economic growth and miracle, its anti-poverty campaign. So in essence, it's worked—this model has worked for the last forty-something years.  But I think that does mean that the situation across the Taiwan Strait is very different, because here the United States does not recognize two countries on both sides of the strait. Rather, it has this ambiguity, this policy of ambiguity. And in short, the only U.S. criterion for resolution of issues across the Taiwan Strait is peace. So all of the documents that the U.S. has articulated over successive administrations essentially boil down to: As long as the resolution of issues between Taiwan and the PRC and mainland China are peaceful, then the United States is not involved. That the only thing that the United States opposes is a forceful resolution—use of military force, use of coercion. And that's what is problematic.  I think what you've seen increasingly over the last few years is a sort of—it's not a formal shift away from that policy, but definitely slowly edging away from that policy. Now, any administration official will always deny that there are any changes to our One China Policy. And I think that's always been the refrain: Our One China Policy has not changed. But you've actually seen within that One China Policy framework adjustments, accommodations—or, not accommodations—but adjustments, recalibrations. And the way that the successive U.S. administrations defend that or justify it, is because it is our—it is the American One China Policy. Therefore, we can define what that One China Policy actually means.  But you have seen, in essence, greater increased relations and exchanges between officials in Taiwan, officials in the United States. I think it was publicly reported just a couple weeks ago that some of the senior national security officials in Taipei visited the United States. Secretary Pompeo at the end of his tenure as secretary of state changed some of the previous restrictions on—that were self-imposed restrictions—on interactions between the government in Taiwan and the government in the United States. So we're seeing some changes here. And I think that has led to—or, that is one element that has led to some of the tensions across the Taiwan Strait.   Obviously, from Beijing's perspective, it sees that as the U.S. sliding away from its commitments. Now, on the other hand, Beijing, of course, has also started to change its policy, despite claiming that its policy is exactly the same. You've seen greater military incursions in Taiwan's air defense identification zone, with planes, fighter jets, that are essentially flying around the island. You've seen greater geoeconomic coercion targeted at Taiwan in terms of sanctions. So you've seen essentially changes on all sides.  And so the final point I'll leave here—I'll leave with you is that the refrain that the United States government articulates of opposing any unilateral changes to the status quo by either side, to me, is actually quite ambiguous. Because there's never been a status quo that has truly existed. It's always been a dynamic equilibrium between Taipei, Beijing, and Washington, D.C. Where Beijing is seeking to move Taiwan toward unification. Taiwan, at least under its current leadership, under Tsai Ing-wen, is obviously seeking, in a way, to move from at least—at least to move toward de facto or maintain de facto independence. Whether it's moving toward de jure is a topic of debate. And then the United States, of course, is enhancing its relationship with Taiwan.  So there's never been a static status quo between the three sides. It's always been a dynamic, evolving and changing equilibrium. Which is why the concept of opposing unilateral changes to the status quo, in my view, is almost paradoxical, because there has never been a status quo in the first place.  FASKIANOS: There has been some talk that Kevin McCarthy, the speaker of the House, is planning a trip to Taiwan. Given what happened with Speaker Pelosi, is that a—what do you think of that musing, to go to Taiwan, to actually do that?  LI: Mhm, yes. I think that's obviously been reported on. I think it's an area of close attention from everyone watching this space. I haven't seen any reports. All I can say is based on what I've seen reported in the media. And it seems like, based on—because of domestic preoccupations, that trip, whether it happens or not, is right now, at the moment, on the back burner. But I think that if he were to go, I think it would certainly precipitate a quite significant response from China. And I think whether that would be larger or smaller than what happened after Speaker Pelosi's visit, I think is something that is uncertain now.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. We'll go next to Autumn Hauge.  Q: Hi. I'm Autumn Hauge. I'm a student at Minnesota State University, Mankato.  So my question is, since a focus of the Biden administration's foreign policy is the relationship between the United States and China, and another focus is to invest and grow a presence in the Indo-Pacific region, specifically looking at the relationship between the United States and the Micronesian country of the Republic of Palau, whose government has openly shared their support for Taiwan, do you think that the United States' long history with the Republic of Palau, and their connection to their support—the Republic of Palau's support to Taiwan, halters the ability for the U.S. to grow a positive relation with China? Thank you.  LI: Great. Thanks for the question. It's a great question.  I am not an expert on Palau or its politics. I do know that Palau has enhanced its exchanges, it relationship with Taipei, over the last few years. I think we saw Palau's president, I think, visit Taipei. I think the U.S. ambassador to Palau actually visited Taipei. And there have been increasing—during COVID, there was a discussion of a travel bubble between Taiwan and Palau. So there's definitely been increasing exchange.  I think in general this has always been a key obstacle to U.S.-China relations, which is any country that still recognizes the Republic of China—that is the formal name of the government currently in Taiwan—I think presents a significant issue. Because for the PRC, recognition of the One China—what they call the One China Principle, the idea that there is one China, Taiwan is part of that China, and the legitimate government of China is the People's Republic of China, is a precondition for any diplomatic normalization with Beijing. And so I think certainly, you know, there are a small handful of countries that still recognize the ROC, but I think that they—you know, for those countries and their relationships with the PRC, of course, that's a significant hindrance.  In what you've seen in the U.S. government in the past few years is that for countries that derecognize Taipei and sort of switch recognition to Beijing, the PRC, there's been discussion—I think, there have been several bills introduced, in essence, to punish those countries. I don't necessarily think that those bills have ended up becoming law, but I think there is, given the current political dynamics, the sort of views on China in Washington, D.C., there is this sense that the U.S. needs to support countries that still recognize Taiwan, the ROC, and be able to provide support so that they don't feel pressured to switch their recognition.  My personal view is that I think that that is, on the whole, relatively insignificant. I won't say that it's completely not significant, but I think that in general issues around the Taiwan Strait, cross-strait relations, I think military issues, I think political issues related to exchanges between Taiwan and Beijing, I think those issues are much more important and much more critical to driving changes in the relationship across the Taiwan Strait.  FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to try and sneak in one last question from Wim Wiewel, who's a student at Portland State University.   Given your pessimism about cooperation combined with competition, what do you think is the long-term future for U.S.-China relations?  LI: OK. Well, thanks for the question. I'm not sure that I can provide a satisfying answer. And, in fact, I don't have the answer. You know, I think if anyone had the answer, then they should immediately tell the Biden administration that they've solved the problem.  Even though I am pessimistic about this current framework, just because of its demonstrated effects, I still think that in general the likelihood of a real war, which I think people have floated now—you know, Professor Graham Allison, who I used to work for, wrote a book called Destined for War? I still believe that the probability of all-out great-power conflict in a kinetic way, a military way, is still relatively low. I think that there are significant differences today compared to the era during World War I and World War II era.   I think that the degree of economic interdependence between China and not only the United States but the rest of the world, I think is a significant gamechanger in how countries position themselves vis-à-vis China. I think Europe is the great example here of how there are many countries that invest, have business relationships, have trade with China. And so therefore, their policy on China has been a little bit more calibrated than what the United States has been doing.   And so on the whole, I think most people still recognize that any great-power war between the United States and China would be utterly catastrophic. And I think that despite all the tensions that exist today, I think that that recognition, that consensus is pretty universally held, that a great-power war between the U.S. and China would be extremely bad. I think that is—that is probably something that is understood by Republican administrations, Democratic administrations, folks in Beijing, folks around the world, in the region. And so I think that, hopefully, that idea, that despite disagreements, despite political tensions, the need to prevent all-out global conflict is quite important, is a vital interest, I think, hopefully, to me, provides some optimism. And hopefully we'll be able to continue to carry our relationship with China through.  And I'm hopeful especially that all of you students, researchers, who hope to study, and write about, and even perhaps participate in American foreign policy, will continue to think. Because so much of the future of the U.S.-China relationship and U.S. foreign policy is going to be determined by your generation. So with that, I guess this would be a perfect place to stop. And I thank you for the question.   FASKIANOS: Absolutely. Well, Chris, this has been fantastic. I apologize to all of you. We had many more—many questions in the written part and raised hands. And I'm sorry that we could not get to all of them. We'll just have to have you back and continue to cover this issue. So we really appreciate your insights, Chris Li. So thank you again.  The next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday, March 22, at 1:00 p.m. (EDT). Brian Winter, editor-in-chief of Americas Quarterly will lead a conversation on U.S. relations with South America. And in the meantime, please do learn more about CFR paid internships for students and fellowships for professors at CFR.org/careers. You can follow us at @CFR_academic, and visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. And I'm sure you can also go to the Belfer Center for additional analysis by Chris Li. So I encourage you to go there as well.  Thank you all, again, for being with us, and we look forward to continuing the conversation on March 22. So thank you, all. Thanks, Chris.  LI: Thank you.  (END) 

Chef AJ interviews Dr. Wes Youngberg about his work with Alzheimer's Disease research as a plant-based clinical nutritionist. Hear about the causes, symptoms and treatments. Find out how you can prevent Alzheimer's and reverse cognitive decline. Here is how to get the book. It is not available on Amazon and he can sign it if you like: https://store.dryoungberg.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=Book%2D3 Here is how to book a private consultation: https://store.dryoungberg.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=1839 Dr. Wes Youngberg is a practicing clinical nutritionist and lifestyle medicine specialist in Temecula, CA. He was trained at Loma Linda University where he earned a doctorate in clinical preventive care and a master's degree in nutrition. He is on the clinical faculty of Loma Linda University and serves as assistant clinical professor for both the Department of Preventive Medicine at the School of Medicine and the Department of Health Promotion at the School of Public Health. Dr. Youngberg is a board Certified Nutrition Specialist, and is a founding director and fellow of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine. Dr. Youngberg is the lead presenter in the Diabetes Undone Program – an interactive, video based series designed to support the doctor and the patient in achieving diabetes reversal. He has trained with Dr. Dale Bredesen (the director of the Center for Alzheimer's Disease Research at UCLA) and is certified in the Bredesen Protocol – a comprehensive, lifestyle medicine based, assessment and intervention model, documented to reverse up to 88% of MCI and early Alzheimer's. Currently, Dr. Youngberg is conducting 4-Day Bredesen Protocol Intensives at resorts in San Diego and Laguna Beach. Prior to opening his lifestyle and nutritional medicine clinic in Temecula, Dr. Youngberg spent 14 years on the island of Guam, researching the diabetes epidemic on the Micronesian islands of the Western Pacific region and directing the Wellness Center at the Guam Seventh-day Adventist Clinic. He traveled throughout the islands, providing public health education, screenings, and professional training for diabetes prevention and care. Dr. Youngberg was honored twice with the Heroes of the Pacific award by the Guam chapter of the American Diabetes Association. In 2007, he was awarded the Ancient Order of the Chamorri—the highest honor given by the governor of Guam for extraordinary contributions to the island community. Returning to California in 2008, he spent three years as medical nutritionist and Director of the Lifestyle Medicine Clinic and Wellness Center for Rancho Family Medical Group in Temecula. He has lectured to medical conferences throughout Europe, Asia and the Americas. His passion is the full integration of physical and emotional risk factors in the assessment and intervention of health concerns. Dr. Youngberg has done post doctoral studies with the Institute for Functional Medicine and the Australasian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine. He is the co-host of the Hope Channel's “Naturally Gourmet” with Karen Houghton, and has produced various DVD video series, including: “Transforming Sickness into Health” and “Controlling Cravings with Contentment”. He has published several books including, The Path to Health & Healing, Goodbye Diabetes – preventing and reversing diabetes the natural way, and most recently, Hello Healthy. Dr. Youngberg has over 30 years of clinical nutrition and lifestyle medicine experience using integrative therapies for diabetes control, depression recovery, cardiovascular disease reversal, optimizing digestive health and effective management of many chronic health conditions. Wes and his wife Betsy live in Temecula California (near San Diego) where they work at the Youngberg Lifestyle Medicine Clinic.

• Shows how the archetypal symbols of the Pohnpaid petroglyphs have exact counterparts in other ancient cultures throughout the world• Provides evidence that Pohnpaid is closely related to--yet predates--neighboring Nan Madol• Includes hundreds of Pohnpaid petroglyphs and stone circle photos, many never before seenWhile residing on the small Pacific island of Pohnpei in the 1990s, Carole Nervig discovered that a recent brush fire had exposed hundreds of previously unknown petroglyphs carved on gigantic boulders. This portion of the megalithic site called Pohnpaid was unknown even to Pohnpei's state historic preservation officer. The petroglyphs were unlike others from Oceania, so Nervig began investigating and comparing them with petroglyphs and symbols from around the world.In this fully illustrated exploration, Nervig documents her discoveries on Pohnpei, revealing how the archetypal symbols of the Pohnpaid petroglyphs have exact counterparts in other ancient cultures and universal motifs throughout the world, including the Australian Aborigines, the Inca in Peru, the Vedic civilization of India, early Norse runes, and Japanese symbols. She provides evidence that Pohnpaid is closely related to--yet predates--neighboring Nan Madol and shows how Pohnpaid was an outpost of the sunken Kahnihmueiso, a city of the now-vanished civilization of Mu, or Lemuria.Discussing the archaeoastronomical function of the Pohnpaid stones, the author examines how many of the glyphs symbolize celestial phenomena and clearly reveal how their creators were sky watchers with a sophisticated understanding of astronomy, geophysics, geomancy, and engineering. She shows how the scientific concepts depicted in the petroglyphs reveal how the citizens of Mu had a much deeper understanding of the living Earth than we do, which gave them the ability to manipulate natural forces both physically and energetically. Combining archaeological evidence with traditional oral accounts, Nervig reveals Pohnpaid not only as a part of a geodetic network of ancient sacred sites and portals but also as a remnant of the now submerged but once enlightened Motherland of Mu.Carole Nervig has spent more than four decades researching Micronesian traditional culture and oral history as well as the sacred sites of Micronesia and Hawai'i. She first moved to Micronesia as a Peace Corps volunteer in 1969. In the 1990s she discovered a previously unknown megalithic portion of the Pohnpaid petroglyph site on the Micronesian island of Pohnpei. Creator of the Nan Madol Foundation, she now lives in Ecuador.

In this episode, da bois sit down with our very very special first guest Mr. Ben jones. We answer some questions from the fans for Mr. Jones, talk a bit of CNMI and Micronesian baseball legends and experiences, unku Ben's experience working as a principal for Kagman High School, and the typical off topic nonsense  that our fans cherish. As always, we end the show with our tradition and a new champ rises from the dust!!!-

Ashely Meredith serves as the National Cultural Anthropologist and Deputy National Historic Preservation Officer for the Federated States of Micronesia. Micronesia is a sovereign island country in Oceania situated north east of Australia and Papua New guinea. consists of 600 islands covering a massive area of around 1 million square miles. There are 18 languages spoken across the islands. Echoing what we might call a traditional fieldwork approach, Ashley works with a team to document, preserve, and establish cultural pathways for different Micronesian communities. This includes work like demographics, surveys, linguistic studies and observational fieldwork. Her work also is applied anthropology. She talks with communities to understand what they want in terms of infrastructure, tourism, education, or heritage development and works with them to find resources, generate funding and support. Beyond this, she interfaces between communities, government and international relations including with the United States and UNESCO. Ashley's breadth of experience provides a key perspective for rethinking how we use data. This includes why we need qualitative data in a world obsessed with numbers, but also how transmission matters. As we explore in this conversation, transmission has to do with cultural practices like storytelling as much as with technological limitations such as internet speed across the islands.

Olifat was the Micronesian equivalent of the Norse god Loki, M'ii the coyote, the African Anansi or the Korean Seokga who were known as trickster gods in their respective mythology. In the myths of the people of the Pacific island nation of Micronesia, the adventures of a trickster known as Olifat were common. He was often cruel to the gods, made fools of men, and caused death and injury to humans. Despite his harmful behaviour, he sometimes helped people by giving them advice on love and other personal matters.Olifat was considered to be unconventional looking which made him think he was unattractive and made him jealous towards all living beings. Olifat was a precocious baby who matured miraculously fast and demonstrated feats of strength.Read more at https://mythlok.com/olifat/