Yanwen’s blog

12/10/2024

A few days ago, I came across an article by Human Rights Watch titled "Syria: Civilians at Risk Amid Renewed Hostilities." The situation in Syria has escalated, especially in the northern regions, with government forces and opposition groups like Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) intensifying their fights. Since November 27, this fighting has led to significant civilian casualties and displacement, with over 48,000 people forced to flee their homes. Schools, healthcare facilities, and displacement camps have also been impacted, creating a massive humanitarian crisis. International organizations, including the UN, are urging immediate action to protect civilians and ensure access to humanitarian aid.

Just last weekend, global media has been fixated on the dramatic developments in Syria, including the fall of Assad's government and his subsequent escape to Russia. Western media, in particular, is jubilant about these events.

Before the outbreak of the 2011 civil war, Syria enjoyed peace and relative stability under the Assad regime, despite facing economic disparities, religious tensions and other social problems that often plague most modern countries. Syria experienced moderate economic growth, though it was burdened by issues like unemployment, poverty, crimes and corruption. Syria’s rich cultural heritage and thriving tourism sector helped maintain a sense of peace.

In 2011, the country plunged into civil war, sparked by social unrest and exacerbated by various external forces. The conflict quickly evolved into a complex proxy war, with multiple global and regional powers backing different factions:

1. United States and Western Allies: Initially supported opposition groups seeking to overthrow the Assad government, providing arms and training through covert programs like the CIA’s operation.

2. Russia: Strongly backed Assad’s regime, offering military aid, air support, and diplomatic backing.

3. Iran: Supported Assad as a key ally in the region, providing financial aid, weapons, and personnel, including backing from Hezbollah.

4. Turkey: Supported certain opposition factions while opposing Kurdish forces in northern Syria, viewing them as linked to the PKK (a domestic insurgent group).

5. Saudi Arabia and Gulf States: Funded and armed Sunni rebel groups opposing Assad, aiming to counter Iran's influence in Syria.

6. ISIS and Other Extremist Groups: While not directly supported by major powers, ISIS exploited the chaos to seize territory, prompting international intervention.

A country’s internal conflicts create opportunities for foreign forces, as exemplified by the situation in Syria. This foreign involvement turned Syria into a blood-soaked battleground, exacerbating the conflict and leading to untold suffering and devastation for its people.

Now, with Assad’s government overthrown, it is premature to celebrate. Syria’s path to peace is still uncertain. The country remains divided, controlled by various conflicting forces. Rebel groups, including the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army and Kurdish-led forces supported by the U.S. in their fight against ISIS, control large parts of the territory. In the northwest, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an extremist group, holds sway over parts of Idlib.

These divisions promise continued hostilities and a worsening humanitarian crisis, with millions displaced and vital infrastructure in ruins. Some European nations, anticipating a large influx of refugees, have responded by suspending asylum applications, as highlighted by the news: "European countries put Syrian asylum bids on hold after Assad's fall."

As I prepare to go to my son's place this coming Friday to pet-sit while they are away, I’m reminded of the ancient Chinese saying: "宁为太平狗，莫作离乱人" (Níng wéi tàipíng gǒu, mò zuò líluàn rén), meaning, "Better to be a dog in peaceful times than a man in times of chaos." This saying underscores the value placed on peace, stability, and tranquility over chaos, upheaval and turmoil in time of war, even if it means accepting a humbler role.

Seeing the wars and chaos unfolding elsewhere in the world makes me appreciate the peace I enjoy today even more.

12/9/2024

On December 4, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was tragically shot and killed in New York City. The case has sparked widespread reactions, both on mainstream media and on other social platforms. 

I came across an article on the BBC titled "Killing of Insurance CEO Reveals Simmering Anger at US Health System." On social media, theories have emerged that the perpetrator harbored a personal grievance against the company—one suggests his son was denied life-saving treatment by UnitedHealthcare. While the specific motives remain unclear, the case has ignited intense debate and polarizing public reactions.

Perhaps most striking is the sheer volume of negative reactions. According to reports, a post by UnitedHealthcare’s parent company mourning Thompson’s death received more than 82,000 reactions, of which 76,000 were laughing emojis. These numbers are as shocking as they are revealing. It reveals a deep well of public anger at the broader healthcare system Thompson represented.

A Systemic Outcry

Thompson’s role as the CEO of one of the largest U.S. health insurers placed him at the intersection of public frustration with rising healthcare costs, restrictive insurance policies, and profit-driven corporate priorities. The overwhelmingly negative responses to his death are less about personal animosity and more about systemic dissatisfaction. They underscore a collective cry for structural reform in a system perceived to prioritize profit over patient care.

The Personal and the Professional Legacy

At a personal level, Thompson’s story highlights the inseparable connection between an individual’s legacy and the public perception of the role they occupy. As a high-powered CEO in a contentious industry, Thompson was most likely surrounded with wealth and power and was distanced from the everyday struggles of patients navigating the healthcare system. This vast distance—between wealth and power on one side and desperate struggle on the other—determined how his life and death were viewed differently by many.

Had Thompson, during his tenure, actively worked to humanize the industry—publicly championing patient-first reforms, addressing their grievances, or visibly advocating for the public good, even leveraging his role into opportunities for positive change —his passing might have inspired more respect or compassion than negative ones. Would he do differently had he known it?

Lessons from a Tragedy

A Chinese saying that captures the idea of prioritizing profit over benevolence: “为富不仁” (wéi fù bù rén), means, "Being wealthy but lacking compassion." The saying criticizes those who prioritize wealth accumulation over empathy and moral responsibility, highlighting the perceived lack of compassion in Thompson's role as a corporate leader.

As the head of the nation's largest health insurance provider, which is part of UnitedHealth Group, a Fortune 500 company, it can be reasonably assumed that Thompson's compensation package was colossal, positioning him among nation's wealthy elite.

Thompson’s death offers special lessons for individuals in position of power. While society often emphasizes wealth, legacy should not be built merely on this. A meaningful legacy requires ethical decision-making, positive social impact, humaneness and empathy, that particularly should guide those in power, especially in industries impacting people’s lives like health insurance.

True success and meaningful life lie in the memories and respect one leaves behind. And true impact is reflected in the way people remember you.

12/8/2024

On November 25, we passed by Place de la Concorde on our way to the Musée de l'Orangerie in Paris. This iconic public square, located on the north bank of the Seine, holds a significant place in French history. Most notably, during the French Revolution, it was the site of the execution of King Louis XVI by guillotine on January 21, 1793—a pivotal moment marking in French history.

The square was then known as Place de la Révolution, having been renamed from Place Louis XV to reflect the fervent political and social changes of the era. The location was chosen for its centrality and symbolic value. Large crowds gathered at this very site to witness executions, which were seen as both justice and spectacle. Later that same year, Queen Marie Antoinette met a similar fate, reinforcing the square's grim association with the fall of the French monarchy.

The French Revolution (1789–1799) is infamous for its widespread violence, particularly during the Reign of Terror (1793–1794). An estimated 16,000 people were officially executed, with an additional 10,000 dying from mob violence, imprisonment, or summary executions. While the brutality of this period was shocking, it was not unique to France; similar patterns of chaos and violence have emerged in revolutionary movements throughout history.

Such revolutions often spiral out of control as societal structures collapse, leaving a power vacuum. In the case of France, the old monarchy had been dismantled, but the new governance remained unstable. Fear of counter-revolutionary threats pushed revolutionaries toward extremes, with overzealous actions often leading to unnecessary violence. Radical visions of transformation turned into ideological purges, where anyone deemed an obstacle was labeled an enemy.

Despite its excesses, the French Revolution profoundly shaped modern democracy, challenging monarchic power and advocating principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity. The events that unfolded in places like the Place de la Concorde remind us of the volatile nature of such transformations.

Walking through the serene Place de la Concorde today, it’s hard to imagine its tumultuous past. The square, now adorned with fountains and the Luxor Obelisk, serves as a stark contrast to the bloodshed chaos it once witnessed. Perhaps the lesson of the past should be: we should strive for social progress without succumbing to the destructive forces that so often accompany it.

12/7/2024

At the YMCA swimming pool, lifeguards are always present, ensuring everyone’s safety. Among them, one stands out. Every day, he arrives with a green notebook and a water bottle. Perched on his high chair, instead of simply watching over the pool like the others, he’s always intently focused on his notebook, like busy writing something.

Curious about his activities, I often wondered if he might be a writer. Yesterday, I finally asked him. To my surprise, he revealed that he spends his time drawing. He’s a 23-year-old college graduate with a degree in graphic design, aspiring to establish himself as a graphic designer, though he hasn’t landed a job in the field yet.

I shared with him that my daughter is also an aspiring artist, still working her way toward her goals. He nodded knowingly and admitted, “It’s not easy to make a living as an artist. These days, with the internet and social media, it’s easier to sell your art than to get truly recognized.”

He went on to offer heartfelt advice:  

“Don’t worry too much about not being where you wish to be right now. Focus on keeping your passion alive and your heart healthy and happy. 

As an artist, if you pour your heart and soul into your work, you’ll recognize your own worth—even before the world does. Eventually the world will see the talents you have to offer. Lead with your heart, and your dreams will start to come alive. Stay true to your path, and don’t let the doubts of others weigh you down.”

As I left the pool, his words lingered in my mind—a powerful reminder that the journey to realizing one's dreams is often winding and uncertain. His resilience and belief in the transformative power of passion and dedication served as a testament to the importance of staying true to oneself, no matter the odds. In a world that often demands quick success, true fulfillment might not come from immediate recognition, it's from the unwavering pursuit of what lights your soul on fire.

12/6/2024

Today’s focus is on China’s measures to counter U.S. chip restrictions. They highlight an escalating technological and economic rivalry. Recent developments demonstrate that these restrictions may yield unintended consequences, echoing lessons from the U.S. sanctions on Huawei.

Lessons from Huawei’s Resilience

Huawei’s response to U.S. sanctions reveals the limitations of such measures. While the sanctions caused a temporary setback, Huawei swiftly adapted by:

1. Investing in Domestic Semiconductor Capabilities: Producing the Kirin 9000S chip for its Mate 60 series.

2. Shifting Market Focus: Targeting non-Western markets and leveraging telecommunications strength.

3. Maintaining Profitability: Achieving $7.7 billion in net profit in the first half of 2024, despite restrictions.

Ironically, these sanctions spurred Huawei's technological advancements, contradicting U.S. initial policy goals. The Huawei case underscores how restrictions have backfired by fostering self-reliance and innovation.

Strengthening China’s Semiconductor Ecosystem

According to the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), current restrictions have bolstered China's resolve to reduce dependence on foreign technology. Key actions include:

Massive Funding Initiatives: Establishing a 300 billion yuan ($41 billion) semiconductor fund.

Increased Investment in R&D: Strengthening capabilities across the semiconductor supply chain.

These efforts come as no surprise as they align with China’s broader goal of technological self-sufficiency, accelerating its pursuit of domestic innovation.

Retaliatory Measures and Their Impact

China’s restrictions on exporting rare earth minerals like gallium and germanium introduce additional complexities:

1. Semiconductors and Electronics: Essential for advanced semiconductors, LEDs, and solar panels, these materials’ scarcity will increase production costs and delay timelines for U.S. industries.

2. Defense Technologies: Rare earths are vital for radar systems and precision-guided weapons. Restricted access could disrupt the U.S. military’s supply chain.

3. Renewable Energy: The Biden administration’s clean energy goals may face setbacks as solar panel and wind turbine production costs rise.

4. Consumer Electronics: Smartphones, laptops, and other devices could become more expensive for U.S. consumers.

5. Dependency on Allies: The U.S. will need to pivot to allies for rare earths, but most nations lack the processing expertise China has developed.

A Lose-Lose Game

The current tit-for-tat dynamic risks broader consequences for global supply chains. As the U.S. and China deepen their divide, both nations incur significant economic fallout, while global industries and consumers bear the brunt of the collateral damage.

This lose-lose scenario calls for cool-headed diplomatic engagement and innovative trade solutions to mitigate further harm. However, reversing the trajectory demands a rare measure of wisdom and foresight—qualities that seem alarmingly scarce in today’s geopolitical climate, unfortunately.