Hi there, let's make friends!

So it seems that Russia and Venezuela are getting closer together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7636989.stm

Sure, you here all sorts of different countries boosting their ties with each other. However, what are their reasons for doing so? Their reasons are surprisingly enough, not much different from why we establish relationships and make new friends. We can use communication theories to better understand why people, from individuals to whole nations, choose to establish or dissolve a relationship.

Venezuela has a huge reserve of oil.

In my opinion, this deal is a good example of the exchange theory in relational formation and development. The article states that one of the aims of the deal is for better cooperation between the 2 countries in the energy sector. Venezuela has large reserves of of natural resources such as oil and gas. But it is the Russian oil firms who have the technical know-how and resources to abstract the oil for maximum efficiency. Thus, strengthening the relationship between these 2 countries in the energy sector will provide economical benefits for both sides. Venezuela will definitely give Russia a discount on its oil extracted or some other perks.

A Russian strategic bomber - a show of force!

Another example of the exchange theory is the fact that Venezuela is an important customer of the Russian defence industry. By boosting ties, Venezuela may be able to purchase more high-tech military hardware from Russia at greater discounts. Russia on the other hand, is able to receive more money from its sale of military hardware. Both countries will benefit from this sale of military equipment. The competence theory may also be relevant here. Venezuela chooses to purchase military equipment from Russia because Russia is one of the best producers in the world when it comes to military products.

The last part of the article mentions the similarities between Igor Sechin, the Russian deputy prime minister, and Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela. Interestingly enough, they are both anti-American. This brings into mind the similarity concept in relational formation and development. Having the same attitude against the United States would no doubt, be beneficial to both parties. This is because each country would be able to understand each other better and thus, easier to come to an agreement on policies and related matters.

All in all, each country has its own reasons on boosting their relationships. We can see how communication models stay relevant from the individual scale to the global scale. In this case, one of the more subtle reason is to limit the power and influence of the United States in the South American region and to re-establish Russian presence in South America after the Cold War ended. What do you people think? Is the world gearing up for a second Cold War?

Hey look, I can see the Great Wall from here!

It looks like China is going to do the spacewalk....if you can actually call it "walking".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7602968.stm

The gist of it is that China will launch its 3rd manned space flight soon. This time is special because the astronauts will be doing the spacewalk. In other words, they will be leaving the relative safety of their spacecraft and going to into cold space. The event will be televised and broadcast live throughout the entire country.

In 2003, China launched its 1st manned space flight, making it the 3rd country in the world to send humans to space. At this period of time, the world was witnessing the power of the growing Chinese economy. The West started to see China as a potential candidate for the next superpower to challenge the United States. To top it off, China successfully completed its 1st manned space flight. In this case, China is flexing its muscles, ready to prove that it is rising superpower not to be reckoned with.

I feel this is an example of how countries can engage in non-verbal communication. The fact that China is able to send a man into space tells a lot about the country. Having a successful space program requires a lot of investment. First of all, you need the money to fund the space program. Secondly, you will need the technology required to build the spacecraft. Lastly, you will require the manpower and technical know-how to actually build the spacecraft. Not to mention, train the required workforce such as the astronauts and engineers.

More than just a rocket, the Shenzhou is the pride of a nation.

All in all, this is no easy feat. The fact that China can pull this off shows that China has the money, technology and expertise to match those of the West. Remember that the only 2 other countries who have their own successful manned space flights are the United States and Russia. For countries, outer space is one of the few privileged frontiers. The ability to go to space is seen as a status symbol. It is similar to how people use flashy cars like Porsche and Ferrari to flaunt their status, which comes under the Artifacts type of non-verbal communication. In this case, they are showing off their Shenzhou spacecraft.

Thus, this is an example of non-verbal communication on China's part. They cannot declare to the world that they are an upcoming superpower, they have to show it through their actions. Thus, they chose to go into space. Note in the last part of the article that China sent a probe into space in response to the Japanese launching their own probe. This shows that China sees Japan as a rival to be the leading nation in space exploration for the Asia-Pacific region. This kind of response action and muscle flexing can be considered as the Kinesics type of non-verbal communication.

What other examples of non-verbal communication among nations can you find? The Olympics? The Russian invasion of Georgia? The Iranian cruise missile tests?

Get out of my yard!

This is something which struck me as interesting.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7609886.stm

I feel that this sentence from the article is worth mentioning.

"There's no doubt Pakistan is facing a huge problem of Islamic militancy. But many are convinced it can't tackle this if it's seen to be acting at America's behest."
By Barbara Plett
BBC News, Mardan, North West Frontier Province

This is where the issue of perception comes in. There are loads of problems if Pakistan is seen as acting as America's henchmen. First of all, it makes it look at though Pakistan is simply a servant of the United States. The view of the people is that the Pakistani government is simply being a pawn for the United States, mostly due to US president George Bush's rhetoric on his "War on Terror".

Thus, the battle against Islamic insurgency is not seen as being waged by Pakistan but instead, by the USA. Why should Pakistan waste resources and sacrifice Pakistani lives for a foreign country? This will undoubtedly undermine the government support from the public and the military.

Furthermore, it makes the Pakistani government look weak and pathetic. Many Pakistanis are unhappy with the continued US airstrikes on Pakistani soil. They perceive that their government is unable to assert its on sovereignty in its own territory. After all, it would not look good to have a foreign nation launching missiles into your country, would it?

Thus, the solution proposed by Pakistan's newly elected President, Asif Zardari, is to change the perception of both the public and the military. Their mindset has to be changed from "America's War" to "Pakistan's war". Only then, can the Pakistani government garner enough support for the war effort to make a lasting impression on the Islamic militancy.

The support of the military is important for any government in Pakistan.

There is a difference between Pakistan helping the United States in an American war and the United States helping Pakistan in a Pakistani war. In one, it looks like Pakistan is merely being cannon fodder. In the other, it seems like Islamabad is waging its own conflicts with assistance from Washington.

When it comes to governments running a country, communication plays an undoubtedly important role, even though it is not as explicit as talking face to face. The government regularly communicates with the public not only through verbal means like official announcements, but by also using non-verbal means like their military actions.

A failure in communication between the government and its people can result in misunderstandings and the government being seen in a negative light. This is when the public and government perception of certain issues start to differ.

In this case, Islamabad's silence against Washington's continued missile strikes have led to many Pakistanis seeing Islamabad's impotence against Washington's violation of Pakistani borders. Lack of proper communication has also led the public to believe that the war against Islamic militants is not their war.

This goes to show that the concept of perception is extremely important when running a country. How are you going to gain the support of your subjects if they perceive you as simply a puppet of a foreign power?

Communication, the Internet and....Trolls???

The advent of the Internet is without a doubt, one of the most significant milestones in human history, in my opinion. In terms of communication, one can consider the Internet to be the next stage in human evolution. Humanity has surely come a long way. From the early stages of the spoken language, to the development of writing and now, the ability for people to communicate with each other over vast distances at almost instantaneous speeds.

Despite recent trends like blogging and participation in online forums, the many theories of communication still hold true. In fact, it is even more relevant as the Internet is really just a new way of communicating. Communication through the Internet is of little difference to talking to another person in the physical realm. For example, one must still bear in mind how he wants to bring across his message to the other party, or lexis. He would still use the different types of persuasion, such as logos, which is the appeal to one’s logical reasoning. In fact, online communication such as forum posting may even be described as an example of an Interactive model of communication. After all, there is a message from the original poster, which may be replied to by another poster. As such, there are both senders and receivers of messages.

However, there are times when the failure of communication is apparent. I have seen forums where its participants do not seem to follow any rules of communication .They may have posts, which are made up of utter nonsense and gibberish, totally devoid of any of the Canons of Rhetoric. Many of these people do nothing but just spam the forums with nothing but…well…. spam. In certain forums, such abusers of the Internet are given the term of “Trolls”. The reasons behind them posting absolute nonsense are still unclear. They are usually characterized with using Internet slang or “1337 speak” in their posts, which only serve to confuse others and cause miscommunications in those who are polite enough to try and decipher their message, or lack of it. In the rare occasion that they utilize normal speech, it is apparent that they have the mentality of a young child.

I suspect that people do not behave like this in the physical world, as one would be too ashamed to do childish stuff like this. With the anonymity enjoyed by Internet users, I suppose one can throw all his inhibitions out of the window and act inappropriately, without any fear of consequence.

Testing

Initializing starting procedures.....Successful
Status pending.....Online
Commencing systems check.....
Systems all green
Test run complete
Mission accomplished
Shutting down....