What I think you are saying is that the U.S. is trying to get the Asian countries to identify their problems and develop a list of "workable contingency plans to perform work-arounds." If so, just how confident are you that they will do so?
Exactly right. There has been this idea that I'm interpreting as an "if you don't stir it, it won't stink" mentality. Certain countries (I can't say which out of confidence) are pursuing the "survey" method which basically involves sending a series of questions to various responsible agencies in each country.
These questions seem to focus upon asking various gov'ts what they feel their level of compliance is with regard to certain industries, agencies, and infrastructures. National coordinators compile the results in a self-reporting manner (we know they won't cheat, right??..:0) and then these results would be presented at the next full meeting of the Asian Pacific council. Basically, this would guarantee (IMO) that there would be little derogatory information since everyone would be at least 80% compliant, whether they were or not.
But the problem is that with this kind of reporting system, FEW people would trust the pollyannish statisics and it could engender a
panic if people feel they are not being told the straight skinny.
Now the other proposal (that I know of), is to have countries to self-assessment of their vulnerabilities, domestic and international, BUT WITH THE ADDITIONAL step of detailing the contingency plans that the gov'ts have been initiating. This plan, if I understand the logic correctly, is aimed at creating a bit more transparency and realism in the results, with countries coming clean on certain vulnerabilities, but calming their people and the markets with detailed working plans regarding contingency plans.
The second plan also has the benefit that all countries will be operating off the same template/toolkit and encouraged to cooperate with each other to work around cross border communications, power, and trade issues.
Essentially, the second route shows that nations realize that they have problems but are being VERY proactive about not letting it shut them down completely.
So what we have here is a battle (IMO), between facing up to reality (probably white-washed so as not to appear to TOO harsh a reality.. :0), or delaying the inevitable to the point where people suddenly realize they have been lied to by everyone.
I could go a bit deeper, but I really don't think some of this information should be made public since I don't wish to get my sources in any "difficulty".
In sum, either way its a psychological matter of playing the "confidence game". The reality is, at a national governmental level, very few Asian nations can tell anyone else exactly what their Y2K status is, and some still can't quite understand why its a problem in the first place... :0)
One other point... I expect that the US policy makers are real leery about getting too involved in Asias Y2K problems since that puts them in a position of being made the scape goat if and when the sh*t hits the fan. I think this was a primary reason that the US wasn't more involved in assisting other nations at a national level over the past 2 years. This is a political hot potato we'd rather not play with.
But now, with less than 6 months left, the pigeons are coming home to roost and the politicians are trying to figure out what they can do without putting the US in the position of being blamed by other nations for their own lack of remediation.
This is just my personal assessment of what I'm hearing and seeing. I'm obviously not getting every perspective (but I getting some interesting ones... :0).
Regards,
Ron
|
