The Algerian: Legacy Edition by The Algerian

ALGERIAN

THE

Venezuelan Voices

Homeland Security

Two students speak out.

You can be too careful.

Legacy.

The Memefication of Activism

Looking back at a new, viral kind of caring.

Germany and Rising China

Lessons of balancing power a century apart.

The Algerian is named in loving memory of Dr. Chadwick Alger (1924-2014).

The Memefication of Activism

Looking back at a new, viral kind of caring. By Max Mauerman 7

9/11: 12 Years Later By Ilhan Dahir

Camille Paglia’s False Feminism

By Sarah Montell

Venezuelan Voices

While the world watched the violence two protesters told us their story. The Algerian Staff 22

Abbas’ Next Move Political divisions in the Knesset could open the way for a Palestinian gambit. By Josh Freedman

You can be too careful. By Paul Peters 12

Inequality: A Burden to Society Societal stratification can do a lot more than limit people’s economic opportunity, it can be the beginning of the end. By Todd Ives 25

Germany and Rising China

Why states balancing against one another caused catastrophe a century ago, but won’t today. By Peter Giblin Cover Photo: Shizao - Wikimedia Commons

May 2014

Interpreting Bo Xilai By Jayan Nair

Hungarian Media Laws By Keegan Scott

‘12 Years a Slave’ and the Evolution of the Black Cinematic Experience

Hollywood’s reluctance to confront the past. By Emmanuel Dzotsi 30

In Memorium: Dr. Chadwick Alger Letter to the Editor. By Kapil Melkote

Photo: Brian Hoffsis - Flickr

The Hidden Cost of Homeland Security

Editor’s Note: Senior Editors: Ilhan Dahir Max Mauerman Jayan Nair

facebook.com/algerianosu

he Algerian as you see it today was little more than a pipe-dream a year ago. It’s given us quite a ride since then. We launched the website in mid-August, Facebook and Twitter pages in February, completely overhauled the site in early-April, and now, finally, have published our first print issue of the magazine. We’ve posted well over 50 articles, volunteered by 30 authors. Surely any accomplishments we claim are a testament to their willingness to dedicate their time to what, even four months ago, was just an idea struggling to take flight. That idea was a continuation of Dr. Alger’s belief that the most important dealings come from outside formal institutions as often as within. The college narrative is so often about mindlessness mixing with mind numbing academics that it’s easy to forget the real magic can come in the space between - in our daily interactions. I think this is where The Algerian can grow. Stephen King said writing was about making the reader forget they were reading a story at all, and perhaps that parallels The Algerian’s potential: it can be an outlet for talking about world affairs without drowning in methodology. It can be an outlet for learning, not studying. It can be an outlet for reading about nuances, not nuanced reading. It can be an outlet for Twain’s distinction between schooling and education. I never met Dr. Alger. I sent him an email in mid-September to let him know about the publication we named after him. He replied to wish us well and mentioned that he had just come out with three new books. That was all I heard from Dr. Alger, but I take pride in the unique nature of our opportunity to advance his legacy. Today, The Algerian isn’t the culmination of a great effort, but the beginning of one.

Associate Editors: Shannon Fillingim Hyeji Kim Robin Smith

twitter.com/algerianosu

Paul Peters Editor-in-Chief

Contributing Authors: Alec Ansusinha Alex Pantich Amelia Spencer Chris Messer Claire Galasso Clayton Sharb Dylan Loh Elisa Roncagli Emmanuel Dzotsi Erik Leiden Erik Thiem

Geoff Nugent Grant Buehrer Joe Staff Jorge Bucki Lopez Josh Freedman Keegan Scott Mariana Lopez Mark Schoenhofer Melissa Prax Miranda Onnen Mudassir Hussain

Natalie Davis Olivia Grosso Peter Giblin Sarah Montell Shawn Picha Todd Ives Tushar Goswami Tyler Parker Yuliya Vanchosovych

A special thanks goes out to Max Mauerman for doing it all from the very beginning, Ilhan Dahir for offering to help out when we needed a hand, and Alec Ansusinha for always encouraging us to make The Algerian a reality. THE ALGERIAN

|3 l

The Memefication of Activism

Looking back at a new, viral kind of caring.

May 2014

Jason Russell had his onanistic mental breakdown in late March. Of course, that didn’t so much serve to renew interest in the campaign as to well and truly kill it. The spectacular and public (not to mention genuinely troubling) failure of Kony 2012’s frontman was the confirmation a weary audience was waiting for – confirmation that this whole slick PR campaign was a sham, a bunch of self-aggrandizing sound and fury from some privileged California kids. That, in my opinion, was the saddest part about Kony 2012 – furor over its leaders’ indiscretions smothered any

chance of having a productive public debate on the practices of NGOs and the ethics of African intervention. Even before Russell’s breakdown, a depressing portion of the criticism against the campaign was aimed at the motives of IC and its supporters: was IC embezzling donation money? Were they a stooge for the Ugandan government? Were its fervent grassroots supporters—few as they turned out to be—merely a bunch of bleeding-heart college kids? I’ll admit that a certain amount of suspicion toward unproven “charitable” organizations is healthy, but these attacks, which often

Photo: William Murphy - Flickr

or me, the most remarkable thing about the Kony 2012 campaign wasn’t its epidemic-like spread but rather how quickly people seemed to forget about it. A cursory look at Google Trends shows that searches for “Kony” plummeted by the middle of March, well before the campaign’s planned day of action on April 20. (ed.: Could Invisible Children have honestly picked a worse day to hold a rally aimed mainly at college students? Surely someone on the planning board must have pointed this out.) A small hiccup of search traffic came when IC founder

by Max Mauerman

Photo: Christopher Dandrow - Flickr

bordered on ad hominem, served to distract from the truly important questions about Kony 2012. The most effective critics, in my opinion, were those like the African Studies Organization and Grant Oyston of visiblechildren.com, who focused on how IC dangerously oversimplified the Lord’s Resistance Army conflict in their videos. What’s more, these critics highlighted how patronizing and stereotypical IC’s rhetoric could be. By portraying Ugandans as a backward group unable to help themselves, denying their agency, Kony 2012 fell uncomfortably close to the “white man’s burden” mindset that’s plagued so many Western aid organizations in the past. Above all, critics pointed out, Kony 2012 claimed that the US doing something was necessarily better than doing nothing – a fundamentally flawed view of international relations. For a brief time, the public debate over these topics felt real, alive. Grant Oyston, an undergrad student from Nova Scotia, was able to reach an audience of tens of thousands with his objections using only a Tumblr blog. Personally, I discovered that a lot of my politically uninvolved friends were suddenly eager to have a discussion on the ethics of aid. It seemed, if only for moment, that IC’s campaign to “build awareness” had worked and the general public was starting to talk about these issues. The tragedy of Russell and co.’s failure was that it undermined all of that. The ad hominem critics attacked with glee after his fall. Almost overnight, Kony 2012 went from a topic of serious debate to a punch line, the kind of embarrassing media event that people dredge up on the Internet years later to make an ironic joke about. In a way, I think IC sowed the seeds of their own downfall. Kony 2012 was a masterful spin piece – the sort of Bonoesque appeal that aims to get viewers reaching for their wallets even as they reach for the tissues. The film’s goal was to hit the audience with arresting images, not present the complex and decidedly “unsexy” reality of the conflict. That’s why we get plenty of scenes of Russell’s adorable son asking his dad about Kony, and none about Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni’s well-documented human rights abuses. IC was going for pathos, not logos – perhaps a good strategy for a PR campaign, but a tenuous foundation for a political movement.

Kony 2012 was a masterful spin piece - the sort of Bono-esque appeal that aims to get its viewers reaching for their wallets even as they reach for the tissues.

IC’s success relied on their emotional appeal, and since their public image was so inextricably tied to their founder, it didn’t take long for them to become very unappealing in the wake of Russell’s breakdown. His downfall cemented the campaign’s. Is this the way public debates happen now – massive spurts of interest followed by disillusion and apathy? Maybe. Many

people seem to think that the 2012 president election heralded the arrival of (ed.: ugh) “viral politics” in the mainstream. This certainly has troubling implications for productive political discourse. But I don’t want to idealize some imaginary past where a well-informed citizenry discussed world affairs in salons over coffee. Public awareness of political issues has improved over the years, helped by the Internet in unprecedented ways. Kony 2012, for all its flaws, got almost a hundred million views, and a Pew poll immediately after its release suggested that more than half of all US youth had heard of it, an astounding success on an issue chronically underreported in the media. That, perhaps, is why the campaign’s failure hurts so much – it promised a public awakening that never really came. u Max Mauerman is a third year Economics and Political Science major from Columbus, Ohio. His interests include international trade and financial policy, developmental aid, the economics of climate change, and agent-based modeling. He is a Senior Editor at The Algerian.

THE ALGERIAN

|5 l

About Us:

The Alexander Hamilton Society (AHS) is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit orginization dedicated to promoting constructive debate on basic principles and contemporary issues in foreign, economic, and national securty policy.

Mission:

AHS is a membership organization窶馬ot a think tank or an advocacy group. Seeking to build anational network of outstanding students, faculty, and professionals, we sponsor debates at colleges and universities, as well as in major cities, and provide other opportunities for our members to flourish intellectually and professionally.

Contact Us Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/osuhamsoc Twitter: https://twitter.com/osuhamsoc Email: osuhamsoc@gmail.com

The Hidden Cost of Homeland Security You can be too careful.

Photo: Light Brigading - Flickr

rofessor John Mueller’s recent work has made an art of criticizing the U.S. counter-terrorism system. Beginning in 2006 with a title on the topic—aptly called “Overblown“—he’s now moved on to research for his next book, “Chasing Ghosts: the FBI and Counter-Terrorism”. I recently had the chance to go to a presentation of some of that research. The work pivots around a statistical model for monitoring the resources used by the FBI and other homeland security agencies (the NSA and NYPD, mostly), and then expands from there, challenging whether the fi-

by Paul Peters nancial and human resources involved in what have become routine counter-terrorism exercises are being used wisely. It’s a remarkably cold process—reducing deadly attacks to dollar signs and percentages—but in dealing with inevitably paranoid institutions we need some means to curb rote expansion. Cost-indexing counter-terrorism isn’t a new concept. Slate explained its basic tenants in an article I read last June, using TSA as an example: “If the Environmental Protection Agency wants to promulgate a new environmental rule, it needs to take that rule

through the cost-benefit analysis process overseen by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs inside OMB. This is a contentious matter, and oftentimes environmentalists and advocates for stricter workplace or consumer product safety standards object to the OIRA process… We ought to be doing something similar for antiterrorism measures. At a minimum, we ought to be doing the analysis. It’s a good intellectual exercise to put agencies through. Various intelligence agencies should produce some kind of estimate of how many terrorist attacks they think the TSA is halting. The THE ALGERIAN

|7 l

Transportation Department and other agencies should attempt to quantify the direct and indirect costs. And whether we keep the measures in place or not, we’d at least come up with an imputed Statistical Value of a Human Life for terrorism purposes and we could see how it compares to the statistical values used for highway safety or atmospheric ailments.” This sort of analysis is a fresh look at a system that desperately needs oversight. Still, a raw fiscal approach to evaluating counter-terrorism tends to trivialize a few of the more pressing issues involved in homeland security—namely the psychological aspect, both on the part of victims and assailants. One of the well-recited proverbs in our International Relations classes is that you’re as likely to be killed by a vending machine as a terrorist, but that sort of pithy truth dismisses the two to some analogous world of chance, when in fact one is meticulously planned for and the other is an accident. Malicious intent drives a considerable wedge between terrorists and vending machines; in considering the worth of our counter-terrorist measures its important to provide consideration to the death toll

May 2014

The very essence of the word terrorism implies a concern with anything but cold, calculating rationality.

that terror groups would like to inflict, not merely the number they do. Would-be attackers are also posed many of the same questions in analyzing their relative abilities as the authorities, so the same fun facts that put some wry punctuation in Professor Mueller’s presentation—”we have three counter-terrorism agencies for every one terrorist ever caught in the U.S.” and “the FBI chases down approximately 5000 leads each and every day”—serve as a powerful deterrent to groups hoping to harm

Americans. As we analyze the success and necessity of our counter-terrorism programs, terrorist cells are most surely weighing their own capabilities as well— estimates informed by their own perception of those programs. On the other hand, the very essence of the word terrorism implies a concern with anything but cold, calculating rationality. Take the Woolwich attack in May of last year—a perfectly chilling illustration of just how impotent statistics can be in the terror forum. Two assailants chose the message they wanted to send, and decided that it could be done without blowing up a building or spraying a crowd with an assault rifle—one casualty would be enough. And they were right. The bloody meat cleaver proved a perfect compliment to the assailant’s iPhone diatribe, and their attack arrested tickers on every major news station for days. The psychology of fear also creates a huge political vacuum; a weak homeland security record is seen as a huge deficiency in candidates for public office—Bush’s wolves seem to be an enduring image in the mind of voters across the US. Despite the placid decade, the fact is, Ameri-

Photo: Light Brigading - Flickr

cans across the country are extremely concerned by the threat of terrorism at home. From TSA to NSA to the FBI, federal agencies serve to provide the American public with a security blanket. Real or imaginary doesn’t much matter. Professor Mueller’s scale was simple— multiply the probability of an attack by the financial losses that might be suffered (life is assigned a dollar amount here), then by the reduction of risk certain security measures provide, and you should come up with how much that security measure is worth. But in a true cost-benefit analysis there are a few more variables to consider; more than just tax dollars go into security. One example, as Slate mentioned, is time. We’ve made the decision that spending an extra half-hour in airport security is worth the benefit it provides us in security. A much more pressing sacrifice, however, is personal freedom—the right of each citizen not to be monitored in his or her daily lives, and parts of Professor Mueller’s presentation made this one all the more unnerving. For one thing, he touched not only on how many leads the FBI follows up each day, but how it’s done as well. In some cases a simple house call will do, knowing that they’ve earned the suspicion of their government is enough to scare many-a-citizen straight. In others, though, more drastic measures are taken. Occasionally, the FBI resorts to the “Al Capone Approach.” Since they couldn’t pin anything bigger on the mobster, they hit him with tax fraud. Some potential threats get this treatment—threats are booked on a petty charge, and even though the intention is mostly to scare the subject as opposed to keeping them imprisoned, it’s still a terrifying prospect. With the growth of the surveillance state, everything gets a little touchier for those of us with a light filter and a heavy sense of humor, especially coupled with a twinge of distain for authority. Maybe the most troubling part of this variable in the cost-benefit equation is its potential to add to the paranoia; as personal freedom gives way to sweeping surveillance the number of potential threats grows. Mueller quoted George Tenet, “you simply cannot sit where I did and read what passed across my desk on a daily basis and be anything other than scared to death about what it portended, you could drive yourself crazy believing

It’s not merely a balance between security and economic costs, or security and an invasion of personal freedom, but between security and the fear that accompanles it.

all or even half of what’s in it.” Agencies where success or failure is determined in the often-imperceptible distinction between the threats they receive and those that pan out see ever-more danger with each passing day. With that in mind, we can start to draw a rough sketch of the people whose lives are colored by the divide. These men and women go to work each day with the

knowledge that they’ve been entrusted with protecting American lives, and if leaving no leaf unturned is what it takes to fulfill that duty, then that’s what they’ll do. Authorities say around 100 terrorists have been caught in U.S. since 9/11. Sometimes they fail to add that most of them couldn’t follow instructions to build a Lego set, much less a fertilizer bomb. Nevertheless, with the rise of advanced surveillance technology, who can blame the 300 agencies charged with finding them for seeing ghosts? The inevitable attitude is, as one agent said in an interview, “I remain very concerned about what we’re not seeing.” Professor Mueller’s research provides a valuable, albeit imperfect, model to check homeland security agencies. Ultimately, the proper scale is unworkable anyway. It’s not merely a balance between security and economic costs, or security and an invasion of personal freedom, but between security and the fear that accompanies it. This much is clear though: we have to develop a mechanism for caging the monster in our minds, because in the age of algorithms and big data it’s so very easy to forget that it’s still the human variable that drives us to our most egregious ends. And how do you quantify that?u Paul Peters is a third year double majoring in Political Science and Arabic. He is the Editor-in-Chief of The Algerian. THE ALGERIAN

|9 l

9/11: 12 Years Later

By Ilhan Dahir

The extra trays and monitors, the machines, the beeps, the pat downs and random checks, these safety measures have become par the course of modern travel. We perform the motions almost ritualistically; nervously checking our pockets, taking off all jewelry, and managing to get our laptops into a separate tray without holding up the line. We make our way through this process disgruntled and exhausted but also, beneath it all… content. We find comfort in this routine; yielding to continuously growing protective measures. Never stopping to ask from whom we are being protected and for how long. This uncertainty is not exclusive to the airport; in the past decade it has found home in our news sources, our political agendas and our national rhetoric. It has found permanent residence within our surveillance programs and ever-loosening privacy laws. Instead of being met with the difficult questions of an engaged and concerned citizenry, these measures have been welcomed with a disconcerting silence. We accept these changes as necessary. In this perpetual fight against an unnamable enemy, uncertainty does not stop us from searching for an evasive safety; we imprison ourselves with the shackles of our own fear. The implications of this fear are striking. Debates concerning new and expansive security operations remain primarily in the “should we?” or “shouldn’t we?” binary, failing to question what the implications of expanding existing battlefields or creating new ones would have on the human condition. We stay silent on larger questions because connections are born from courage. A collective courage found in communities bound by ideas, a distinctly American paradigm that has been shifting dramatically in current years. In the years since the attacks on the Twin Towers, distrust still lingers like a putrid odor. It permeates interactions until we are heavy with the knowledge of it, until we learn to ignore it, until we stop noticing it altogether. Indeed, our rational minds tell us that American was never built to 10

May 2014

be an exclusionary word. We know that it is a banner under which the sons and daughters of pioneering immigrants stand for such radical notions as equality, justice, freedom, unity. But fear, incited by extremists and sketched into our psyches by revenge, keeps us from internalizing the message. In this weakness, we find comfort in separation, in finding those that look, pray or act like us, only to view all others with heightened levels of skepticism. In these moments of distrust, we should remember that it is these fault lines of discrimination and cynicism, and not another terrorist attack, that threatens to strip us of our identity. Each year, the anniversary of 9/11 is cloaked with a curious uneasiness. Somewhere just beneath the surface of silent moments and riveting speeches lies the throbbing truth that tragedy, instead of holding us together, pulled us apart with a furious strength that lingers within us today. Our pain translated into prolonged conflict abroad and skepticism of the spirit at home. Instead of holding on to one another, we chose the easier course of anger and revenge. Today, we live with this hurt, with eyes in the sky because we cannot trust our own, with guns on every street because we cannot trust each other. I hope we can begin to truly see each other in the presence of politicians that believe security waits at the end of a chain of new wars. In one another’s presence, let us no longer be afraid, because our fear is the most potent tool used to control us by our “enemies” and “protectors” alike. It is the greatest threat to our national identity. It is with an intentional and systematic understanding of this fear that we can begin to move past it. Only then can we begin to refuse the disassembling of our civil rights in the name of a fragile security and find the courage to seek out solace in unity.u Ilhan Dahir is a junior majoring in Political Science and English.

Photo: Dov Harrington - Flickr

f you have traveled through an airport lately, you are no stranger to the distinct yet elusive discomfort of added surveillance.

A Defense of False Feminism

by Sarah Montell

Photo: looking4poetry, Steve Rhodes - Flickr

amille Paglia’s dissident feminism and critique on traditional American feminism is delineated in her Dec. 28 interview for the Wall Street Journal, A Feminist Defense of Masculine Virtues. In it, she criticizes society’s attempts to obscure what she deems are crucial biological distinctions between men and women, differences often found missing from the dialogue of modern-day feminists. The contemporary feminist movement, as seen by Paglia, is one that sequesters the role of men, and the social constructs that depict gender roles of modern Western civilization are abated and sterilized to the point of no distinction. According to Paglia, this “war against boys” is sustained by the reinforcement of institutionalized feminine values—sensitivity and cooperation, among others—as young boys are taught to suppress natural aggressive tendencies beginning in their elementary school years. By over-encouraging politically correct gender politics and ignoring seemingly critical biological variations between the sexes, Paglia argues that masculinity—and ultimately the ethos of Western civilization—cannot coexist with the current direction of the feminist movement. While I do admit that the current feminist movement and its pro-female philosophy can often be interpreted as anti-men, many of Paglia’s remarks in this article are contradictory. She states in the beginning that school-aged boys are “neutered” through institutionalized

oppression in the form of shortened “playtime”, but then ends by saying society’s modern feminist movement should focus this attention on combating the severity of sexual violence and address the more extreme delineation of gender roles throughout the world, specifically referencing the honor killings and the gang raping of women. She insinuates that boys are naturally animalistic as

opposed to females, seen through her choice of the word “neuter”, and that this difference is a vital component in how we should be viewing and defining gender, as opposed to neutralizing it. However, she then comments on our lack of attention in combating the atrocities in countries where gender roles are more polarized than ever. How would we go about preventing gang rapes without ad-

THE ALGERIAN

| 11 l

Sarah Montell is a third year majoring in Public Affairs with minors in Public Health, International Relations and a specialization in Health Policy. 12

May 2014

Inequality: A Burden to Society

Societal stratification can do a lot more than limit people’s economic opportunity. by Todd Ives

forthcoming study sponsored by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center has brought to light more evidence on the imminent threat posed by unsustainable resource consumption and growing inequality of wealth. This new study warns of the collapse of global industrial civilization based on current trajectories of wealth distribution and resource use. The ideas presented in this study are certainly nothing new. Unfortunately, such warnings of collapse have been often labeled as radical, fringe, or simply too controversial. This new NASA study, though, will hopefully lend credence to thinking about the serious dangers of inequality and poverty through analyzing historical data. The study’s HANDY (Human and Nature DYnamics) model looks at two important features across collapsed societies: the stretching of resources due to strain on ecological carrying capacity and economic stratification of society into elites and masses.

The study, which has been accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed Elsevier Journal of Ecological Economics, investigates historical cases of civilizational collapse to draw themes on the dynamics between humans and nature. The project identified population, climate, water, agriculture, and energy as the most salient factors in the decline of civilizations. These factors become risks to civilizational collapse when the following occur: “the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the ecological carrying capacity,” and “the economic stratification of society into Elites and Masses (or “Commoners”).” Again, a brief review of political economy literature reveals that these ideas on wealth distribution and resource consumption have existed in different forms for hundreds of years. This recent analysis though may serve to renew the debate on global political economy and the relationships between resources, inequality, and the sustainability of our current social structure. As the

Photo: mSeattle - Flickr

dressing predated gender roles and their influence on rape culture? What’s more, Paglia’s point in reinforcing certain gender roles for the sake of recognizing important biological differences is flawed and, ultimately, perpetuates extremely detrimental social constructs. Men acting more like men, and women acting more like women, is also perplexing; acting “more womanly” for the sake of preserving masculinity leaves little to no room for female agency. The two genders will appear more polarized, and the female role in society will continue to be defined by the role of men. This runs contrary to the fundamental tenets of feminism, foundations I would encourage Paglia to revisit. Perhaps most unsettling, Paglia insinuates that “street-smart feminism” is the only form of feminism compatible with the macho American male—that ultimately, women are to blame for their own sexual exploitation. Accepting that the male carnal urge is merely a product of biology, and that women possess the sole responsibility of avoiding such victimization through conservative clothing choices and shrewd awareness of our surroundings is fueling rape culture in the Western world. If this doesn’t constitute “undermining Western civilization,” I’m not sure what does. In all, Paglia’s critique of the modern day feminist movement—an ideology followed by both men and women, I should note—seems to miss the mark on the primary goals that feminism seeks to accomplish. Advocating for the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes will undoubtedly alter the social construction of gender differences within Western Civilization, but bringing back gender politics of the early twentieth century is a step in the wrong direction. In Paglia’s defense, the empowerment of women should not equate to the disempowerment of men, however. Feminism asks both men and women to think critically about normalized behavior and its impact on both genders; the participation of men and women collectively is required for the feminist movement to realize true progress.u

Though this study presents a highly theoretical model, it does draw upon empirical evidence and historical analysis. Unfortunately, due to the theoretical nature of such projects the warnings are seldom taken seriously. Contributing to this problem is the issue that most scholars who write on the global economy do not come from the margins. The billions of people who suffer from the pandemic of severe inequality and poverty are not well situated to write on these issues, nor do they have access to academic institutions to publish peer-reviewed articles. Perhaps this is why many critiques on the issues of resource distribution fall back to neo-Malthusian arguments that population growth causes human suffering, poverty, and environmental degradation. Such arguments, frankly, are intellectually weak and do not really advance understanding of the issue. The foremost example of this is the often misguided thinking on global hunger. Global hunger, rather than a simple imbalance between food availability and population growth, is almost entirely a byproduct of poverty and inequality. For

the past two decades global food production has outpaced population growth. Currently the world produces enough food to feed 10 billion people, yet 1 billion still go hungry. Ironically, it is the farmers cultivating small unviable plots of land who cannot afford to buy food, a phenomenon that threatens the livelihood of millions of people around the world. As Nobel laureate Amartya Sen spells out wonderfully in his book, Development as Freedom, there is no direct relationship between availability of food and hunger. Famine is caused by inequalities in the power which individuals have to command food distribution. Hunger is mainly an issue in the periphery where poor people live and states have declining capabilities to deliver food and support to rural livelihood. The HANDY model compounds this data and forecasts over hundreds of years. It is decidedly not a radical statement to say that a billion people facing food insecurity while per capita food production has actually increased since 1950 is unsustainable in the long-run. As the study points out, it is the poor who

Photo: Shreyans Bhansali - Flickr

study points out, â&#x20AC;&#x153;accumulated surplus is not evenly distributed throughout society, but rather has been controlled by an elite. The mass of the population, while producing the wealth, is only allocated a small portion of it by elites, usually at or just above subsistence levels.â&#x20AC;? Using the HANDY model, the study finds that greater levels of economic stratification is one element consistently found in past collapsed societies. The report offers several scenarios based on historical data. One such scenario of inequality collapse involves an ever-increasing consumption rate among the elites which results in famine among the commoners. The model terms this a Type-L, or labor collapse. The other modeled collapse is Type-N, or nature collapse, in which the overexploitation of natural resources independently results in collapse. The study is not meant to offer a foregone conclusion for the inevitable decline of humanity. Instead, the report offers a predictive model that draws out four different scenarios based on current trajectories of human inequality and resource consumption.

THE ALGERIAN

| 13 l

Global hunger is almost entirely a byproduct of poverty and inequality. the most developed countries. A 2014 Oxfam study of post financial crisis growth since 2009 found that in the United States alone the wealthiest one percent captured ninety five percent of growth while the bottom ninety percent actually became poorer. As inequality deepens in the wealthiest countries, the issue of growing wealth disparity, may gain more traction worldwide. Still, the fact that over sixteen percent of the population in Ohio is considered food insecure is troubling. In an agricultural state, there is no moral reason that such a large portion

of the population is, in Sen’s terminology, not entitled to the necessary stuff of life. As the Oxfam study points out, “Markets are not autonomous, spontaneous phenomena operating according to their own natural laws. In reality, markets are social constructions whose rules are set by institutions and regulated by governments that should be accountable to the participants and citizens.” Markets are not going to be radically altered to fundamentally address the underlying causes of inequality, poverty, and resource consumption. There is still room for policy change, though. Perhaps then the biggest lesson to take from the Oxfam study and NASA sponsored study is that we have failed to appropriately address these issues for too long. The business-as-usual approach is simply unsustainable, yet the world’s leaders have largely failed to put together a coordinated response to the issues of inequality and unsustainable resource consumption. Aside from advocating for an equilibrium in the consumption of natural resources and the more equitable distribution of resources, the highlighted study offers little in terms of meaningful policy solutions. Perhaps this is beyond the point of the report – the answers are not obvious no matter how sound the empirical analysis. All we can really do is start from the deeply complicated core and work our way out. Movements like La Via Campesina, an international movement that represents 200 million farmers throughout the world, offers glimmers of hope in this regard. The mission of La Via Campesina is to realize “food sovereignty” – “the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through sustainable methods and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems.” To revisit the issue of global hunger, La Via Campesina offers an example of a new way forward – fighting for the ability to enjoy the freedom of access to the necessary stuff of life: food, water, and land to cultivate sustainably. This is not to say that La Via Campesina is the right start to addressing these issues or even offers the correct end, but so long as we try to confront the fundamental challenge of inequality and its effects, nothing attempted is a waste.u Todd Ives is a third year Political Science and International Studies double major.

May 2014

Photo: Toban Black - Flickr

are most vulnerable to collapse, with the elites who historically follow. Also, note well the importance of the report’s Type-N collapse. We already know that no more than one-third of proven fossil fuels can be consumed prior to 2050 if the world is to meet its 2° C goal. We also know that the news of climate change has been categorically bad and is getting worse. The study does well to construct a mathematical model illustrating that the overconsumption of natural resources can lead to catastrophic results. This report is by no means a Chicken Little cry of impending doom for humanity. The study points to policy as a means to combat issues of inequality and resource consumption. It is meant as a wake-up call that the “business-as-usual” approach towards inequality and consumption are likely unsustainable. Too often warnings fall on deaf ears, probably because these issues are not universally experienced across greatly unequal populations. The salience of the inequality problem, though, may be increasing in

Interpreting Bo Xilai

by Jayan Nair

significant hype in the Chinese and global media. With stories of complicated love triangles and Bo’s wife’s old murder investigation, the general story was hard to miss. But media melodrama aside, it might be difficult to interpret the real political and social significance of the legal proceedings, especially from our vantage point outside the Chinese system. The most intuitive interpretation of the trial would be to view it as part of a campaign against corruption. Polls have consistently shown that corruption is a prominent and rising concern of the Chinese population, and Xi Jinping’s relatively new government has expressed an intention to crack down on unscrupulous practices by officials at every level of government. The Chinese Communist Party has a long history of making an example of prominent officials and purging them to send a political message. So in a way it was a very predictable move on the Party leadership’s part to try someone like Bo Xilai on charges of corruption. But I am inclined to think that Bo’s trial and conviction was more than just a perfunctory purge for show, and rather indicates a willingness to actually address the problem of corruption head-on. If the trial had merely been to sooth public opinion without disturbing the system, the proceedings would have occurred in a closed court that would hand down a decision that Bo Xilai would then accept without objection. But that’s not what happened. Instead Bo pleaded not guilty and went on to engage in a surprisingly fair-appearing legal 16

May 2014

Bo’s trial was more than just a perfunctory purge for show, and indicates a willingness to address corruption head-on. battle with the prosecution that we were able to follow closely thanks to the unprecedented openness of the court, which even allowed some unedited transcripts of the trial to be posted online. To me, this gives every indication that the Party wanted the trial to be taken seriously as a decisive move against corruption. Beyond fighting against corruption, I think the fundamental motivation behind prosecuting Bo Xilai was political maneuvering on the part of the Xi-Li government. They could have chosen any high-ranking official whose character could be called into question, but their specific choice of Bo Xilai bears interesting political import. Bo, along with

former President Jiang, is a member of the “Shanghai Clique” and the “Chinese New Left”—both coalitions that have been identified with more conservative ideas in China. Bo himself has voiced markedly neo-Maoist, collectivist, anti-capitalist ideas, as is demonstrated by the “Chongqing model” for development which he implemented during his time as Party Secretary of the city. These positions stand in opposition to the more liberal, reformist stances of current President Xi Jinping and his populist coalition, who advocate the balanced introduction of capitalist economic principles and the development of China’s social safety net. So I think it likely that Xi and other members of his coalition perceived Bo as being too much of a threat to their policies and coordinated to remove him from the political picture while simultaneously pressing forward on their anti-corruption agenda. They appear to have succeeded, at least for now, but many things remain to be seen. How will Xi’s government move forward in their campaign against corruption? Will Bo Xilai, like the great reformer Deng Xiaoping, make a comeback after his purge, or is his career in Chinese politics over? And perhaps most interstingly, will the Xi-Li government continue to purge members of the Chinese New Left and other opposition coalitions in the name of anti-corruption?u Jayan Nair is a second year double majoring in Political Science and Chinese. He is a Senior Editor for The Algerian.

Photo: thierry ehrmann - Flickr

lot of my attention recently has been directed at the trial of Bo Xilai in China. As anyone even cursorily following Chinese news surely noticed, the top official’s trial drummed up

Hungarian Media Laws

Photo: peperoni - Flickr

by Keegan Scott

As the locals gaze upon the newly-paved highways slicing through the gray, derelict industrial zones dotted with soot-covered smokestacks, most Hungarians agree that the decades of authoritarian central government rule, numbing propaganda, and overbearing censorship are better left in the past. However, are the days of media-muzzling really behind them? During the 2010 Hungarian Parliamentary campaigns, the Fidesz party, the leading right party in the nation, was guaranteed a landslide victory. After all, the leftist majority coalition had splintered after exposure of corruption that revolved around the former prime minister himself. Taking advantage of a broken opposition, promising rejuvenated economic success in a downtrodden economy, and appealing to young Hungarian voters, Fidesz and its boisterous leader Viktor Orban found themselves with a two-thirds majority in parliament – a majority large enough to rewrite the Hungarian constitution. Through the course of mid-to-late 2010, Prime Minister Orban heavy-handedly got to work creating hundreds of laws. However, Orban and his government did not simply draft gentle legislation; he made constitutional changes with

hen first entering the outskirts of Budapest, one can’t help but notice the remnants of an age passed.

few checks and balances. Most notable, the National Media Council consisting of handpicked nominees serving nine-year terms was created to regulate Hungarian communication networks. Soon after the National Media Council was formed, the media scene began to change. Vocal opponents to Orban’s majority began to see their media licenses questioned and even revoked. The National Media Council explained that some media outlets had not filled the proper paperwork or that their time slots were best left to networks “better-suited” for larger audiences. As Orban’s opponents, relying on government support and advertisers, began losing funding from frightened contributors and governmental coffers, communications networks started enforcing policies of self-censorship to avoid being similarly shutdown. However, the international community quickly took note of these reoccurring civil liberties violations. The European Union as well as the United States government released several statements condemning the actions of the Fidesz party. But solutions to Hungary’s aggressive media-muzzling may have come in a more grassroots fashion. During my

studies in Budapest, I had the privilege of visiting Tilos (literally meaning “Out of bounds”) Radio Station. A hole-inthe-wall establishment in a residential district on the Pest side of the capital, Tilos has been offering an alternative to the mainstream self-censoring media. Based purely on donations and volunteer efforts, Tilos Radio is comparable to samizdat or underground Soviet-era news networks. However, Tilos works within the framework of government institutions while using its non-profit status as a check against prying government hands. Even as the National Media Council has tried to close the outspoken Tilos, the station has only seen a spike in donations and active listeners. Certainly, there is hope that freedom of the press will continue with the help of an active Hungarian population. However, the 2014 election appears promising for Fidesz. A content and complacent Hungarian population, in addition to a dysfunctional opposition, makes a breakdown of Fidesz’s majority unlikely. In the upcoming year, one can only hope that all voices in Hungary will, quite literally, be heard.u Keegan Scott is a second year Arabic major minoring in Turkish and Int. Studies. THE ALGERIAN

| 17 l

‘12 Years a Slave’ and the Evolution of the Black Cinematic Experience Hollywood’s reluctance to confront the past.

“We always wanted people to know that it's '12 Years a Slave,' not '1 Million Years a Slave'", are words that probably haunt Fox Searchlight co-president Nancy Utley to no end. The comments were first published in an LA Times article written by John Horn some months ago, before the debut of the excellent American Hustle heated up the Oscar race, and when there were no questions about what to do about a film like 12 Years a Slave. We’ve all heard about the film’s incredible acting performances, and the harsh, hold-nothing-back approach that director Steve McQueen has taken. But what is it that makes movies like this so hard for Hollywood to handle? After all, it seems like only yesterday controversy was brewing about Django Unchained. To fully examine such an interesting subject, we have to go all the way back to one of the movie industry’s first legitimate blockbusters—a little production called Gone with the Wind. The southern tale of romance and heartbreak during the civil war was released in 1939 to much clamor and critical praise. Hollywood had never seen anything like it in terms of scale and revenue as the film nearly doubled the gross of previous record-holder—the insidious Birth of a Nation. But Gone with the Wind far outshines its predecessor for the racial issues it brought up more than anything else. Across the country, many black people condemned and protested a film that they felt glorified the practice of slavery, and a groundbreaking Oscar win for a black woman playing a slave who seemed to love her predicament offered little consolation. As Hollywood and America have changed, the films have changed, and yet there has always been a thin line between doing some justice to the black experience and not making white 18

May 2014

audiences uncomfortable. The productions of the late twentieth century were the masters, with films like the extraordinary To Kill a Mockingbird being the gold standard. One scene in To Kill a Mockingbird is particularly skillful. We see white lawyer Atticus Finch standing guard throughout the night at the county jail because his defendant is under real danger of being lynched before his trial. As your stereotypical collection of farmers gather around menacingly, Atticus’ daughter Scout, wondering where her daddy is, runs up and inadvertently shames all of the men into going home. What makes this scene so atypical of the age is that the black experience is still honored through the threat of lynching, white audiences are placated by Atticus’ willingness to defend the black Tom Robinson, and we’re all hopeful for the future because a white child simply didn’t understand why “all those men were being so mean”. Movies dealing with the African American experience have mostly followed the same formula since, with a generation of black leading-actors making memorable performances in movies that have definitely gone further than their predecessors. The only criticism in these films has been that some black characters in them don’t really have clear motivations or fleshed out characters. In fact, there is an unofficial African American lobby in Hollywood that has made its business out of combating the use of the “magical negro” stereotype, wherein a black character’s only aim seems to be to help the white protagonist. Some of these assessments have been true, (Will Smith’s role in The Legend of Bagger Vance), but others have been extremely harsh, such as the attack on The Green Mile. This time last year, however, Django Unchained happened and a very real hell broke loose. Here, Tarantino had created

Photos: Steve Rhodes - Flickr

by Emmanuel Dzotsi

months since the remarkable Fruitvale Station aired, we seem a masterpiece that approached slavery just as M*A*S*H had approached the Vietnam War. The thinking was, cover the audience with humor and then every once in a while stab them with something truly, horrifyingly serious. As a result, Django Unchained ended up being what, at that time, was the funniest and yet most realistic film about slavery that had ever been made. For each devastating image of a whipping, and every usage of the word nigger, there was an equally (albeit somewhat differently) devastating joke. But how does one market such a film? The studio executives decided to advertise a comedy, and prominent black directors, such as Spike Lee, flocked the streets to protest how a truly awful experience had been mocked, all while never having seen the film. What those who did see the movie experienced was a truly unique work that made everyone feel equally uncomfortable. Django was the first film of its kind to raise a particularly distressing notion for the black community; the proposition that even amongst extreme violence and inhumanity, maybe some slaves had loved their masters. Not only that, but as a revenge movie, Django asked serious questions about the scarcity of slave revolt. As the Oscars ended and Tarantino walked away with his first Best Director award, the criticism had stopped, and the mood coming from much of the black lobby was embarrassment. After all, a white director had created something far more powerful about the black experience than any one of Tyler Perry’s movies on his first foray into the genre. It is with all of this history that 12 Years a Slave has entered cinemas, prompting standing ovations at film festivals and leaving its audiences both thoughtful and in need of a stiff drink. While a year has passed since Django Unchained, and a few

only marginally closer to fully accepting what slavery and racism done in the United States. Movies like 12 Years a Slave and Django are tortuous for advertisers because they’re not uplifting and there is no sense of redemption to them. Fox Searchlight was right in their assessment that the story of Solomon Northup’s captivity only covers twelve years of his life, but utterly wrong if they think that his release makes anyone watching the movie feel some sort of closure. Closure on the subject of slavery is something that even today is far beyond anyone when they’re truly confronted with it, and films like 12 Years a Slave unearth that to no end. Even the production and casting of 12 Years a Slave brings insecurities to light—namely that the backbone of the movie’s black acting talent is not African American. What does it say when both the director and the leading actor are British black men not from the African American tradition? What does it say when advertising highlights above almost all else Brad Pitt’s cameo as a Canadian farmhand who, on his second trip to the plantation, realizes that it might be a good idea to help the once free Northup flee his captivity? These are questions that are difficult to answer, but what is clear is that some 150 years after slavery’s end in the United States, self-examination continues. We’ve been weighed, we’ve been measured, and we’ve been found wanting, but perhaps not forever.u Emmanuel Dzotsi is a third year majoring in Political Science and Strategic Communications with a minor in French and a specialization in International Relations. THE ALGERIAN

| 19 l

Venezuelan Voices While the world watched the violence two protesters told us their story.

May 2014

By 2006, Chavez changed his policies from being relatively center-left to what he called a “Socialism for the 21st Century,” leading to a number of economic reforms that may have worked if not for the recession of 2008. Oil sales had become the staple of the Venezuelan economy under Chavez, and they plummeted with the economic downturn, ravaging the country and leading to an extreme shortage in basic goods and services that hurt everyone, especially the poor. With resources scarce, the question of what to do with the country’s oil wealth turned increasingly controversial. Tension between classes has been a big part of the oil debate, with the govern-

ment’s supporters in favor of distributing the oil wealth to programs for the poor, and the protestors – students among them – advocating for it to be used to end socialist policies and fund better policing. In February, the tensions finally boiled over. Colleges and universities have formed the cradle of protests in Venezuela for some time now, aided by laws that prohibit government entities from encroaching on university property. Through these colleges coalitions were formed to protest an increasingly authoritarian government that by 2012 had started regulating everything from elections to TV, wiping out any channels that dared say any-

Photos: andresAzp - Flickr

s university students are assaulted with tear gas and beaten up in the streets and T.V. stations play propaganda messages, the last independent news broadcasts of a withering Venezuela have become a distant memory drowned out by two differing chants: one for Maduro and the status quo, the other for a new Venezuela and the students that demand it. When Hugo Chavez became President of Venezuela in 1998, he rose to prominence as a man of the common people, advocating a mix of socialist and capitalist policies. For a short time, things were relatively stable, but it wasn’t to last.

The Algerian Staff

thing other than government sponsored propaganda. The protests in Venezuela first caught the world’s attention on February 12, the country’s World Youth Day, when thousands of students across Venezuela marched in opposition to President Maduro’s government. That day, The Algerian had the opportunity to speak with two students who were absent from the protests. “What you have to do is keep vinegar and toothpaste handy to stop the pain of the tear-gas”, explained one of the students. She went on to detail the art of protesting in Venezuela, from hiding from police in cars parked in the road, to effectively neutralizing tear gas bombs before they exploded. The most recent elections ushered in the path to protest rather than politics as a tool for initiating change. The students described armed guards standing over their shoulders; according to the students we spoke to, intimidation methods coupled with the destruction of thousands of voter-ID logbooks led to a razor-thin win for Maduro with a vote differential of less than 200,000 votes. There was no

The most recent elections ushered in the path to protest rather than politics. recount. The man who lost that particular election, Henrique Capriles, was initially opposed to the demonstrations, but became involved after a number of protest-related deaths were reported. While Capriles is definitely an influential voice in the conflict, he is no longer the most important leader for the protestors, as the opposition finds itself rather divided. That man is Leopold Lopez, the 42year old leader who believes that expanding the protests, even during the coming festival period, is the most effective way to bring change. Lopez turned himself

in to the police after being charged with manslaughter and terrorism, but has become a pseudo-martyr in the process, using his highly public arrest to encourage the opposition to keep protesting. This message has been in sharp contrast to Capriles’, which has repeatedly called for an end to protests, and urged the public to help build a stronger coalition for the next election. Much of the middle class seems to identify more with the jailed Lopez, and have joined students in the now violent protests, as police throw tear gas and beat people in the streets. The more serious protestors are prepared for a long fight, training each other in the tricks of the trade. When a cause is important, one of the students told us, you have to show you won’t stop, even when the other side has license to do whatever they want. But like many of their peers in Venezuela, the two recognized they were fighting an uphill battle for recognition. “I don’t know whether it is because all our companies have left and we’re giving all our money away, but it feels as though the world doesn’t care”.u THE ALGERIAN

| 21 l

Abbas’ Next Move

Political divisions in the Knesset could open the way for a Palestinian gambit.

ately, the details of the US sponsored framework agreement for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority have been leaking into the news stream. That border issues, the status of Palestinian refugees, and security arrangements have all been major issues discussed should not surprise anyone involved. However, the slow and unreliable release of the specific details of the upcoming framework has inadvertently led to politicians on both sides decrying the terms and

May 2014

publicly refusing to be bound by such an agreement. Now let us play the role of skeptic and say the current talks fail at the point of the official introduction of Secretary of State John Kerry’s framework agreement with either side turning it down, or both. What happens next? The main option for the Israeli government, unilateral withdrawal to a chosen border, has been discussed at length; however there has been little discussion about actions that the Palestinian Authority could take to

force Israel’s hand into a two-state solution on its own terms. In the event that the current peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are unsuccessful, the Palestinians could compel Israel into granting them statehood by issuing an ultimatum for statehood or immediate representation in the Israeli Knesset. First, before any discussion of compulsion in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we must familiarize ourselves with the individual actors in the conflict. Israel

Photo: Rusty Stewart - Flickr

by Josh Freedman

Photo: IsraelinUSA - Flickr

has been facing increasing international isolation over many of its policies and some of their right wing leadership’s statements on the Israeli occupied Palestinian territories. Traditionally dependent on a healthy dose of western, and especially American, diplomatic, military, and economic support, Israel is slowly watching its western allies grow distant and frustrated with the rate of progress in the region. Many on the left blame Israeli policies for the continuation of the conflict and have called for boycotts against settlement products, or, in more extreme cases, boycotts against Israel proper. At the same time, the Palestinian Arab population within the territories continues to grow at a steady pace and will soon surpass the Israeli Jewish population, seriously calling into question of Israel’s ability to be both democratic and a Jewish state. Fatah, as the political party of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), agreed twenty years ago to a two-state solution that would create a Palestinian Arab state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip territories. Thereafter, Fatah has been heavily politically invested in the creation of an independent Palestinian state, and has laid most of its legitimacy on the goal of negotiating a two-state settlement. As talks stalled, however, Fatah has suffered heavily in popular opinion, and US backed elections in 2006 led to a large Fatah loss to Hamas (a radical Islamist organization). The following year, the two parties refused to share power and Hamas executed a coup in the Gaza Strip, leading to split governance over the two Palestinian territories. Since the coup, the Palestinian Authority has not held any elections, and with a defunct legislature, President Mahmoud Abbas rules over the West Bank as little more than a benevolent dictator, leading to questions of his legitimacy as well. Pressure is not only being applied to the Israelis, Europeans have recently grown frustrated with Palestinian corruption and have threatened economic punishment on both sides if the current peace negotiations fail. Thus, Fatah’s political future depends on the creation of an independent Palestinian state, since a gradual fading away of the Palestinian Authority towards a “binational” state would destroy Fatah’s future political prospects. A one-state solution would weaken their political power and largely

The most dangerous option is to do nothing. If the Israeli government disregards the demand Israel will lose its democratic status immediately.

leave them irrelevant amongst Palestinians, many of who already view them as weak for their moderation. This leads to an interesting systemic element to the conflict going forward. While the two-state solution is still dominant on the international stage, many in the intellectual world are starting to abandon the idea as implausible and promote a form of the one-state “solution” as the future settlement in the area, leaving both Israel and Fatah to start to seriously worry about their future. If both could

cooperate and sign an agreement, both sides could preserve themselves, however a variety of problems plague negotiations as they always have since they began 20 years ago. Mainly the problem lies on the Israeli side, where right wing parties dominate the current coalition government, although consistent polls of the membership in the Knesset show that there is a clear majority to approve a two-state solution in the parliament chamber. While the settler party, Habayit Hayudi, will leave the coalition if a peace plan is even put on the table, it can easily be replaced with the Labour party. The bigger problem is Prime Minister Netanyahu’s own Likud party. Israel’s ruling coalition already includes centrist Yesh Atid and center-left Hatnuah. Many believe that the right wing Likud party, already skeptical of Netanyahu, would defect with the addition of Labour, breaking down the government, forcing new elections, and taking up time neither the Israelis nor Fatah can afford. Herein lies the ultimatum. Predicting the defection of the Israeli right wing, Abbas could take a coercive action that would sweep responsibility for saving the two-state solution into Israeli hands. If Abbas were to call for the Israeli government to either commit to a two-state solution on their terms or grant Palestinians representation in the Israeli Knesset, Israel would be forced into a corner. Israel would have to give in to the Palestinian Authority, or risk the future destruction of the state.

THE ALGERIAN

| 23 l

contract states that although Palestinians do not have a say in the government, they will one day have their own state so the status quo can be considered democratic. Hence, since Palestinians are not Israelis, it is not undemocratic to keep them under military rule as long as they are on their way to gaining independence and popular sovereignty. But by refusing statehood, Israel would be proclaiming Palestinians part of Israel. By refusing them the right vote, they would be discriminating against a growing minority because of where they live and their ethnic identity. Israel could no longer be considered democratic. Much of Israel’s legitimacy rests on its democratic character, and its long association with the West has been based on shared democratic values. Ignoring the pressure would place Israel on the path to complete international isolation and the status of a rogue state. Ignoring it would strengthen the currently weak apartheid argument in regards to Israel, and also alienate the young American Jewish community (traditionally Israel’s strongest base of support), which has grown sympathetic to the Palestinian people’s plight

and wish for a fair two-state solution. The boycotts of today that failed would be effective tomorrow, and the blame for the failure of the two-state solution would be pinned entirely on Israel. This threat would be effective because it picks at existential nature of Israel’s greatest fear: the balancing act of trying to be both Jewish and democratic, which the current occupation greatly places at risk. This trap, if set by Abbas, would stick the Israeli right wing between a rock and a hard place. Unable to procrastinate and enforce the status quo, yet not able to dismiss this threat credibly, Israeli right-wingers would be compelled to grant the Palestinians their demands for the sake of self-preservation. In a situation under which the current round of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks fail, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas should seriously consider issuing the final ultimatum, tying his hands, and leaving Israel to write both parties’ history.u Josh Freedman is a second year majoring in Political Science specializing in International Relations with a minor in History.

Photo: Bundesminsterium fur Europa, Integration und Ausseres - Flickr

The Israeli government would have three courses of action following such a demand. First, they could grant the Palestinians statehood on their conditions, however painful land and security concessions turn out. This would be the best course of action since in this case Israel would keep its Jewish majority and remain a democratic state, not challenging their legitimacy and gaining them international good will amongst Western nations and the Arab League. The second course of action would grant the Palestinians the right to vote and be represented in the Knesset, which would effectively undermine Israel’s identity as a Jewish state. Be that as it may, it would preserve the democratic character and the land many Jewish settlers want to continue living on. This course of action would basically create a “binational” state that would soon have an Arab majority. The most dangerous option, however, is to do nothing. If the Israeli government disregards the demand Israel will lose its democratic status immediately, since the Israeli government will have broken the unspoken contract with the world over Israel’s democratic status. This

May 2014

Germany and Rising China Why states balancing against one another caused catastrophe a century ago, but won’t today. by Peter Giblin

from constructive academic discussion in favor of baseless and unproductive arguments. Nonetheless, the fear of a Chinese colossus dominating the U.S. economically or at the very least wresting global leadership from the good ol’ U.S. of A. has imprinted itself on our nation’s psyche. As a student of international relations, the matter is virtually inescapable. In attempting to steer the conversation back towards a more productive dialogue, applying one of international relations theory’s most basic principles, the Balance of Power, has proven extremely useful. While a mere second-year undergrad such as myself may only be slightly

less misguided than your average citizen, the application of simple theoretical principles can certainly make the future a little more transparent. At the very least it affords one slightly more authority on the subject than the baseless Internet articles that are often cited by China alarmists. Furthermore, a look to Europe at the turn of the 20th century will not only put the balance of power into context but will also serve as a useful comparison to present-day Asia. The rising power of early 20th century Europe, Germany, found itself in a similar position to contemporary China, however, the underlying differences between the two countries are

Photo: Michael Garrigues - Flickr

rguably the most important – and certainly most discussed – topic in contemporary international politics is the emergence of China on the world stage. Analysts have been writing about the meteoric increase of the country’s GDP and industrial capabilities relative to the United States’ ad nauseam, and the matter has quickly become a mainstream issue. In fact, take any course even remotely related to international relations, economics, or politics and inevitably someone will feel the need to bring up the rise of China. Oftentimes, unfortunately, the conversation is driven away

THE ALGERIAN

| 25 l

Balance at the Turn

century ago the global nexus of power was centered on the European continent. Historian Paul Kennedy describes the era as “the zenith of Old Europe’s period of predominance in global affairs.” All of the major actors on the global stage were concentrated into an area that comprises only about 7% of the earth’s land area (note: While the United States may have had the appearance of being a global power given its staggering material and economic wealth, the behemoth across the Atlantic had little interest in affairs outside of its hemisphere and thus projected little power in the global system). Obviously, with that much power concentrated into such a small territory, tension was abundant. In fact, tiny principalities of Europe had been warring in near perpetuity for centuries. However, it was not until this era that massive nation states had arisen and global empires had been cultivated. For instance, Germany, arguably the most powerful nation on the continent at the dawn of the 20th century, had only recently come into existence. Germany, as Kennedy notes, “in the [1850’s] was a cluster of insignificant states under insignificant princelings”, but by the turn of the century, ”was the most powerful state in Europe, and still growing.” What was most staggering about Germany’s unification was the industrial expansion that accompanied it. By 1913 the former collection of periphery states had surpassed Britain in terms of share of world manufacturing and its output was higher than that of France and Russia combined. If the manufacturing capabilities of the newest Great Power weren’t troubling enough for its neighbors, its military potential certainly was. For example, German steel production had jumped to 13.6 million tons by 1910 (more than Britain, France, and Russia combined, with the gap only widening by 1913) and its naval tonnage was second only to Great Britain by the same year. The size of its military had risen to 3rd in terms of troop size behind only Russia and France, though in 1914 France was conscripting 89 percent of its eligible youth compared with Germany’s 53

May 2014

What Bismarck was particularly adroit at understanding was the threat German power posed to its neighbors and the consequences of German belligerence. percent. What was even more daunting about Germany’s military might was the speed and efficiency with which it could mobilize and deploy its troops to the frontlines. In the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the Prussian military (army of nascent Germany) put on a veritable clinic in terms of its mobilization by using their extensive railroad system. The Prussian army was able to rout the supposedly superior French army in under a year and consequently established Germany as the preeminent land power on the continent. What proved to be Germany’s tragic flaw, however, was something that was entirely out of its control: stuck in the middle of the continent, Germany’s overwhelming power was viewed as extremely threatening to both France and Russia. During his reign as Chancellor of Germany, master statesman Otto von Bismarck was adamant that German power was benign and that on the whole Germany was a satiated power. Unfortunately for Germany, and perhaps Europe in general, Bismarck was dismissed from his post in 1891 and men with more reckless ambition subsequently took over the helm. What Bismarck was particularly adroit at understanding, and what those who succeeded him failed to grasp, was the threat German power posed to its neighbors and the consequences of German belligerence. By 1900 popular opinion in Germany called for an

overseas empire that was commensurate with its national power. Yet Germany was inauspiciously “born encircled” and any action to expand its influence, whether in Europe or overseas, was perceived as aggressive. France and Russia, though miles apart geographically as well as ideologically, grew closer as German power swelled on the continent. At sea, the rapid buildup of Admiral Tirpitz’s Imperial Navy caused anxiety in Great Britain and resulted in the great Anglo-German naval arms race. What we see in the case of Wilhelmine Germany, put in broad terms, is a state whose command of a significant portion of the functional capabilities in a system was seen as highly threatening to the security of the other actors in the system. Consequently, a coalition to preserve the balance of power was formed. Firstly, the Franco-Russian military alliance was signed in 1892 as a defensive alliance against Germany and its fellow Triple Alliance members Austria-Hungary and Italy. The Franco-Russian alliance was a force to be reckoned with, but it did little to deter Germany’s growing ambition. Expansionist groups such as the Pan-German League and the German Navy League still called for a reordering of the international system to better reflect German power. This atmosphere was much to the unease of maritime power Great Britain. After the Napoleonic Wars Britain

Photo: dogwatcher - Flickr

key to understanding why major power conflict is unlikely in Asia.

forces in order to maintain the balance of power. With this in mind, let us turn our attention to the situation in Asia today.

Imagining A Revionist China

n the last twenty years China has enjoyed a dramatic rise to relevance on the world stage. Once a communist backwater, China now commands the world’s second largest economy. Similar to 1913 Germany, China has blown by its regional competitors in terms of manufacturing output. In fact, China has become the greatest manufacturing nation in the world, surpassing even the United States in 2010. In addition to its impressive growth in recent years, this Asian Tiger has territorial ambitions of its own. There are a plethora of small islands and atolls in the South China Sea that are contested by numerous sovereigns, and China believes they should come under its control. Unfortunately for this emerging Great Power, like Germany, its geography is likely to be its stumbling block. Let us imagine for a moment that China chooses to no longer cooperate with the neo-liberal economic system (status

quo) that has made it so rich and instead decides instead to attempt to revise the regional order in its favor (the likelihood of which will be discussed below). Based on Balance of Power Theory, the combination of China’s functional capabilities and aggression would likely result in the formation of a counterbalancing coalition. At first glance, other nations such as North Korea have been more hostile in recent years, but no countervailing force has formed to check their power. What made German power, according to Paul Kennedy, so daunting, and what will make Chinese power equally so, was that “the country either already had the instruments of power to alter the status quo or had the material resources to create such instruments.” North Korea, while considered a “rogue” state, does not nearly possess the requisite capabilities to revise the status quo. Who, then, would constitute the coalition of regional powers checking Chinese power? Given the strained relationship between the two nations and their geographic proximity to one another, the likely vanguard for any coalition would be Japan. Smaller nations such as South Korea, The Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam all have interests

Photo: United Nations Photo - Flickr

had decided to retreat into “splendid isolation”, concerned not with maintaining allies but only with protecting its interests. Chief among these interests was that no one state should come to dominate the continent of Europe. Not only would an uncontested continental power damage Britain’s commercial interests (the foundation of its global empire) but it would also command the resources and strategic geographic position to threaten British national security. Given the vast material power that Germany possessed, its increasing diplomatic belligerence, and Germany’s insistence on achieving parity with the Royal Navy, it’s unsurprising that Britain broke its diplomatic isolation. The British signed the Entente Cordiale agreements with France (settling disputes in North Africa) in 1904, and in 1907 joined France and Russia in the Triple Entente. The Triple Entente is demonstrative of what international relations theory predicts will happen when one actor has the potential to dominate the system. Prior to Germany’s rise in power, Britain, France, and Russia were fierce rivals. But when they recognized that Germany was far from benevolent and could potentially control Europe, they consolidated their

THE ALGERIAN

| 27 l

in the South China Sea and it would serve those interests to join a coalition to prevent Chinese domination in the area. In addition to action on the part of these lesser powers, the other colossus of the Asian continent is unlikely to sit back on its haunches. India, which up until now has had a peaceable relationship with its neighbor on the other side of the Himalayas, stands to lose much if China could dominate the regional system. Robert Kaplan predicts that if Narenda Modi wins India’s upcoming elections the country “will likely pursue a fiercely geopolitical foreign policy, aligning even more strongly with Japan against China.” The Chinese, of course, would not want to be strategically isolated in the region, so let us examine their possible partners in upsetting the status quo. When one thinks of possible revionist states in East Asia, three states, China being one of them, come to mind as possible disruptors of the status quo. The first of the other two states is the most obvious: the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The Chinese and the North Koreans currently maintain a somewhat close relationship. However, if conflict were truly on the horizon, North Korea would probably be more of a hindrance than a help to China. The North Korean economy would provide little help in the face of any economic blockade and its military leaves much to be desired. Furthermore, North Korea would likely hijack the objective of the conflict, turning the focus towards nuclear weapons and away from restructuring the regional order to reflect Chinese power. The other potential ally for China in the region, Russia, is only slightly more promising. Russia would certainly be a powerful ally, but Sino-Russian relations have been rather unproductive over the past 30 years. Even at the height of the Cold War relations between the USSR and China were cordial at best. A recent article published in the Journal of Contemporary China found that “Sino-Russian relations were much more fragile than often imagined” and that “there seems to be little hope that relations will continue to strengthen over time.” In light of recent events that have shifted Russia’s focus to the west, it is doubtful that Russia would be keen on upsetting the balance of two regions that sit on almost opposite sides of the globe. So with few options for Chinese allies in the region, a coalition could 28

May 2014

not conceivably form.

An Unlikely Flashpoint

he situation that China faces therefore mirrors the one that challenged Germany at the turn of the 20th century. Both states experienced impressive rises in power relative to the other actors in the region and would gain from re-ordering their system to reflect the new power realities. As Paul Kennedy writes, for Wilhemine Germany, as it likely will be for contemporary China, “the question was whether this particular challenger could secure changes without provoking too much opposition.” As we have seen, German attempts to achieve the changes in the system it so desperately desired, and wholeheartedly believed it deserved, resulted in resistance from its fellow Great Powers France, Russia, and Great Britain. Unfortunately for all those involved, the tension between the two sides erupted into one of the most brutal wars in human history. Given the apparent similarities between the two revisionist states, it is easy to see why some China alarmists so boldly predict future conflict in Asia. However, the two situations differ in critical ways. First, China, unlike Germany, is relatively isolated in terms of reliable allies. The Chinese can only realistically guarantee North Korean support in the event of a conflict. In Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria, Germany had reliable and powerful friends. Moreover,as Professor David Fromkin notes, “Germany’s generals were convinced that without Austrian troops holding back the Russians…they might not win.” The fact that Germany thought it could win is precisely why conflict is unlikely in Asia. Countries tend not to launch wars they have no realistic chance at winning. For China, a coalition involving Japan, India and the United States would be overwhelming. The United States is still the most powerful land and naval power in the world and has a vested interest in seeing that no country comes to dominate a region it relies so heavily on for trade, like Great Britain felt toward continental Europe. In contrast, Germany was fresh off a resounding victory over France in 1871, was the greatest manufacturing power in the world, and commanded the finest

land army while simultaneously achieving parity with the great Royal Navy. Furthermore, the Germans believed there was a chance that Great Britain wouldn’t join the conflict at all. Finally, what will likely be the most important reason for the Chinese avoiding conflict despite resembling a revisionist power is the fact that China benefits greatly from the current system it resides in. Under the NIEO (New International Economic Order) China has achieved unprecedented levels of wealth and productivity. Germany, on the other hand, perceived itself as being mired in a system in which it only stood to lose. Germans saw no end to their secondary role in Europe, and despite their strength, they believed that they faced decline in the coming years. Indeed, as Fromkin reasons, “[Germany] wanted to maintain their country’s dominance on the European continent,” and in launching the war they sought to “prevent a future challenge to that position by Russia… while their chances of winning would be greater than in the future.” In the end the Germans were incredibly insecure and “motivated by a fear of Russia’s growing might.” Meanwhile, the Chinese have no reason to fear for their future. The international system is much more stable and institutionalized than it was a century ago. Moreover, China is still rapidly growing relative to the other states in its region. Launching a war would be disastrous for China: not only would the conflict be very costly in terms of blood, it would also lose its most important trading partner, the United States, in the process. China’s rise certainly has geopolitical implications. The country has turned its back on the Maoist principles that dominated its domestic politics for decades and has become one of the most robust economies in the world. Looking to the future in Asia, China will wield immense power. However, any capricious brandishing of that power or antagonism on China’s part will result in a check by the other actors in the region. Outright aggressive action is unlikely, though, as China still benefits from peaceful coexistence and trade with its neighbors and the United States.u Peter Giblin is a second year majoring in International Studies with minors in Spanish and Economics.

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE polisci.osu.edu The Ohio State University Department of Political Science studies governments, public policies and political processes, systems and political behavior. Are you interested in American politics? International affairs? Strategies of war and peace? Political theories of freedom? Gun control, immigration, the environment, civil rights? If so, you belong in political science where you will learn to think critically and globally and acquire the skills necessary to be successful in the world.

AT A GLANCE UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS Major, Political Science Minor, Political Science GRADUATE PROGRAM PhD, Political Science

SPECIALIZATIONS American Politics Comparative Politics International Relations Political Methodology Political Theory

RANKINGS International Relations (8th) American Politics (10th) Political Methodology (10th) U.S. News & World Report, 2013 Michael Ansari, political science alumnus and CEO of MIC Industries, shares his experiences with CCWA students in Washington D.C.

POLITICAL SCIENCE IN ACTION My political science education prepared me for a career in understanding how institutions work. This foundation of understanding is one which any individual can leverage for their respective career paths. If that means management consulting - great, if that means continuing the research of institutions, organizational systems, institutional relations, etc. in political science - even better!

MINORS Public Policy Campaigns and Elections Comparative Politics Judicial Politics Political Decision Making Political Theory World Politics

Michael Cata (BA, political science and economics, 2013), business analytics consultant, IBM

asc.osu.edu Scholarly. Analytical. Real-world.

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

In Memorium: Dr. Chadwick Alger 1924-2014

hen I first met Dr. Chadwick Alger I was just a sophomore. I was elected vice president of CCWA, a young and struggling organization that needed direction and considerable help. Our group had no vision and we needed guidance, fast. It was during this time that I was able to schedule a meeting with a professor based out of the Mershon Center named Dr. Chad Alger. I had heard a lot about the man. A WWII veteran, graduate of the SAIS at

May 2014

Johns Hopkins and Princeton University, professor of Political Science at Northwestern University, world renowned UN scholar and now a professor emeritus at Ohio State, Dr. Alger was an intimidating figure to say the least. It was to my surprise then, that Dr. Alger, a man in his mid-80s, met me with a smile and a friendly disposition. When I first met him I didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have much guidance, either for the club or myself as a student at Ohio State. What Dr. Alger offered was limitless enthu-

siasm. He sat for hours listening to our dreams and ideas for what the club could be and what drew us to the UN as an area of interest. And almost like a grandfather he always encouraged us to pursue our passions. Although that may not have been the direct advice that I, a heady and confused underclassman, wanted, it became clear to me in later years that it was Dr. Algerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s never ending enthusiasm and optimism that would solidify the ethos of CCWA as we know it today. Meeting Dr. Alger was always an

Photo: Mershon Center - Picasas

by Kapil Melkote

Dr. Alger never dictated terms to us, or took a role too overbearing. He chose to remove himself and let us students try, fail, and gain experience. And in that nature he was a paternal figure to our club. His words and presence reminded event. We would trek over to the Mershon Center and wait quietly in the lobby until Dr. Alger himself came out to greet us. His office was tucked in the back corner and he always would walk slowly out to meet us with a smile as he led us back there. I remember explaining to Danniyal that Dr. Alger was quite elderly both in age and in appearance. But as Dan soon found out, none of these were indicative of the Dr. Alger’s energy and ability to engage in discussion. He had a myriad of stories and experiences from his younger days which all led us to the same conclusion: keep doing what we do with passion and it will work out. Perhaps he was right. With each successive meeting, Dan and I would become significantly more excited. These were the days when CCWA was experiencing rapid growth and success and we were always anxious to share the news with Dr. Alger. He would always smile and encourage us to keep pursuing our passion. In fact, Dr. Alger always had a knack of connecting our passion to his young days, when his interested in the UN was ignited. One particular story always came up in conversation. Dr. Alger would explain his first visit to the UN, when he was just a young man. The story goes like this: walking into the building he was dumbfounded quite simply by the truly international nature of the environment itself. How important was it, he wondered, that these separate nations with clashing cultures and interests sit together at a table and eat lunch? He was captivated by the sometimes ironic symbolism of these nations communing in one place. He would always tell us that “International diplomacy happens at the bar”. After so many years, it always brought a chuckle to him that as young man he watched the Israeli and Egyptian

us of his passion, helped recharge us when we reached the low ebb of inspiration, and let us create the success that was to come eventually. After all, what isn’t possible when a diverse, driven group of people experiences the power of proximity?

delegations eating olives next to each other at the bar. For a man who was a serious scholar and published internationally, it was always refreshing how Dr. Alger still had the wonder in his eye when he talked about the UN. He never forgot the magic he felt as a young man. And after so many years he still stood in awe at the simple act of proximity the UN brought to the world. Dr. Alger never dictated terms to us, or took a role too overbearing. He chose to remove himself and let us students try, fail, and gain experience. And in that nature he was a paternal figure to our club. His words and presence reminded us of his passion, helped recharge us when we reached the low ebb of inspiration, and let us create the success that was to come eventually. After all, what isn’t possible when a diverse, driven, and hungry group of people simply experiences the power of proximity? It was that magic that young Dr. Alger saw at the UN and that the older Dr. Alger saw at the nascent CCWA meetings. As time went on and CCWA began to experience success, Dr. Alger became less of an active figure in the club. We knew going forward that Dr. Alger would become more of a symbolic adviser to the club, a representative of the ideas and an icon of the time of our founding. Indeed it was around this time that Dr. Thompson and Alicia joined as our active advisors. However, Dr. Alger became a rallying call for everything that we did. Our club publication, The Algerian was named after him. Our unofficial rallying call “CHAD CHAD CHAD CHAD ALLLLLLLGER” came from him. Needless to say our alumni society, The Chadwick Alger Society, was named for him. Although Dr. Alger became a symbol,

the real man was involved with the club to the end. During the 2011-2012 school year, we were able to invite Dr. Alger to a general body meeting for one last time before the founding members graduated. There was not a trace of reservation that he would have to come to Derby Hall late on a Tuesday evening. When the meeting began, it was a shock for him to see that basement classroom in Derby Hall filled with over 50 people. He, of course, was used to a small but giddy group of students sitting in those tiny desks of Central Classrooms. In fact, Dr. Alger was speechless for a few moments during that meeting, perhaps fully realizing what had come about with little CCWA. For a man that was once a foremost scholar of the United Nations, a world renowned professor, a guest speaker at international conferences till his passing, I can only hope that seeing the creation and success of CCWA was an important and significant event in his late years. At the end of his talk the entire club gave him a standing ovation, and he was able to snap a photograph with all of the graduating seniors. A scholar that believed wholeheartedly in the UN system, Dr. Alger was able to see that night that his legacy would live on. Here’s to Dr. Chadwick Alger, UN scholar, Professor Emeritus, and founding advisor of CCWA.u Kapil Melkote was the Founding President of the Collegiate Council on World Affairs from 2010-2012. He is currently teaching Geology and Theatre at S.R. Butler High School in Huntsville, Alabama with Teach for America.

THE ALGERIAN

| 31 l