Russia “DID” – Kunle Falae

A case for education REFORM through the prisms of global warfare

The awkward moment when Syria accepts Russia’s proposal to turn over its chemical weapons; while the United States mounts “credible military threat” against Basha al-Assad regime ready to blow someone’s head off to order military strikes on the war thorn country. While President Obama claimed he delayed the military strikes in efforts to allow for a diplomatic resolve, the fact remains the United States failed to come up with a diplomatic resolve. Russia DID. Which leaves me to ask the obvious question “why didn’t or couldn’t anyone in the U.S. states dept. and or at the white house come up with that idea?”


So let’s say hypothetically the United States did come up with the idea of Syria turning over its chemical weapons to international control, would Syria accept?

It’s one thing to be a Harvard educated lawyer with pedestrian appeal to rally the world around what could have been a major foreign policy achievement for his administration, It’s entirely different to be a master strategic leader of diplomacy that successfully averted what could have been catastrophic for the middle east and the United State’s allies.
With the kinds of strains Syria and Russia has shown towards the United States, I would guess the answer to be NO. I may be wrong, if so, I stand corrected. Exactly how does that affect the credibility and leadership of President Obama around the world?  The world he claimed to be a “citizen of” as a presidential candidate in 2008.

Foreign Policy, Culture wars and Cultural relativism are great tools in public diplomacy and negotiations, and will be better understood in my opinion if we encourage more arts and humanities in our education system; an education system that’s been significantly systemically skewed towards STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math) – (That the US is not even excelling in). The question becomes how do we educate ourselves to meet the demands of public diplomacy and the real needs that confront this generation while staying competitive in STEM?


As this event unfolds, I believe we can at least agree on these three (3) things; that

  • We need leaders that not only understand high level diplomacy that’s credible and feasible, yet has the abilities and or the know how to deliver on such types of diplomatic discourse to avert a debacle.


  • We can’t afford a one size fits all education system or a cookie cutter approach to education; we’ve got to be open to new ideas to effectively train, manage and lead with strong understanding of a global environment with ability to connect locally.


  • We lose if we continue to educate and train for a future we can’t predict; of what relevance is that kind of education system? So rather than continuous wastage on failed academic models why not channel substantial resources to teach adaptability? Our failure to adapt or promote our ideals leaves us playing catch up almost all the time. Especially in cases such as this.

One of my favorite Education pioneers once said:

We have to rethink the fundamental principles, on which we are educating our children.” –  (Sir Ken Robinson) [FEB 2006] [How education kills creativity.]

He was right then, and he’s still right now. Our collective failures to relate and understand changing cultures and paradigms, will result in arms race in leadership both locally and most especially around the world.

1101130909_600It’s one thing to be a Harvard educated lawyer with pedestrian appeal to rally the world around what could have been a major foreign policy achievement for his administration, and It’s entirely different to be a master strategic leader of diplomacy that successfully averted what could have been catastrophic for the middle east and the United States’ allies.

How we educate ourselves now will determine how prepared we are to lead the future. So let us broaden the scope of our understanding of global affairs including its complexities through current curriculums; while exploring new academic frontiers to strengten our goal of “Glocalization” through new education frontiers.




  • Anonymous says:

    All of a sudden an impended military strike is now a “credible military threat” I guess that’s military style diplomacy in sense

  • quadry says:

    President Obama does not need the congress approval to go to war with Syria. Didn’t he get the attention of Russia/ International community after that statement? Strategic plan at best. Obama is not going into Syria without UN/Nato approval. Remember this is a president that campaign on been an antiwar candidate…He has no plan to go to war at best.

    • Kunle Falae says:

      He’s the same president that acknowledged that strong presidential rhetoric demands actions. That said, he hasn’t lived up to his rhetoric. Next time he won’t be taken seriously.

      • Quadry says:

        What rhetoric..from day one effective dialogue has been his first option. You think if not for the president saying his going to use force Russia will come to the negotiation table…Its the pressure from President Obama.

        • Quadry says:

          Yea kunle Agreed on your point. But remember Russia is Syria biggest alia and Russia and America are not really on good terms. Meaning Assad will not negotiate with the UN/NATO unless Russia is involved. For like 3 yrs straight America and the outside world have been increasing different sanctions on the Assad regime with the opportunity for dialogue to no avail. But the chemical weapon was the last straw man….This is more of a moral issue tho? Hopefully no war.

          • Kunle Falae says:

            When there’s a flop in diplomacy contrary to what was promised and expectations by this president, den u hold him accountable for his words.

            It’s this same president that said “we will unclench our fist” in efforts to make diplomacy work…

            Why didn’t diplomacy work? Bottlenecks? Compronises… the world is dieing to make deals.

            I get ur point tho.. however the claim of credible military threat just comes off as a crumb off the negotiating table. A claim that needs substantial evidence to back it to make it fit a presidential discourse. Anything short of a substantial evidenden to back that claim up, makes it pedestrian. I.e. anyone could have said that.

          • Quadry says:

            Just remember he said targeted military strike is not yet off the table….but you can hang up to the hope of diplomacy working someday in the future while innocent children die…that is not acceptable. Its a moral judgement thing.

          • Kunle Falae says:

            Fair enough. D end result and history will have more informations to work with. Provided everything is not classified. .. lol…

          • Quadry says:

            Haha….nice ending man.

  • Topsyjohnny says:

    it is highly imperative as a global figure in person of Obama to adhere with the fundamental philosophy of an absolute diplomat or on the other hand exhibit a conspicuous ideology of militarism. instead of this “Hanging and Shaking” methodology. However, i believe that a political sagacity is a symbolic jingoism. but even if the US and Russian govt create a political conglomerate, they might not arrive at the-same diplomatic proximity which could affect the prestigious integrity of America.
    Conclusively, instead of this Volatile Approach, i strongly encourage an obvious Diplomacy to avoid an unbecoming war in this fragile generation.