The Hill
Chapel Hill Political Review March 2013 studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill
How Safe Are We?
Al Qaeda in Africa, Increases in Mass Gun Violence, Illegal Immigration, Emerging Nuclear Powers, & The China Threat
The Hill
UNC’s Nonpartisan Political Review
Volume XII Issue III studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill
MANAGING EDITORS Sam Hobbs & Radhika Kshatriya
Dear Readers,
SECTION EDITORS Brendan Cooley & Jon Buchleiter
It is no secret that we live in a dangerous world, but it is critical that we understand these dangers in order to defeat them. Accordingly, for our first issue of 2013, we decided to focus on the various threats to US security, both foreign and domestic.
WRITERS Carol Abken, Lyndsey Bernal, Brian Braytenbah, Chris Brown, Jon Buchleiter, Dain Clare, Casey Crow, Brendan Cooley, Sam Hobbs, Radhika Kshatriya, Sarah Lunenfeld, Tess Landon, Nikki Mandell, Nick Neuteufel, William Perlmutter, Walker Swain & Eishante Wilkes DESIGN Radhika Kshatriya HEAD OF ART Robert Bridgers TREASURER Christie Blazevich HEAD OF PR Brian Braytenbah FACULTY ADVISOR Ferrel Guillory PHOTO CREDITS Flickr: Cover, Peter D. Blair; pg 15, Thomas Hawk; pg 19, Bryant Avondoglio Wikimedia: pg 12, Magharebia
This Magazine was paid for, at least in part, by Student Activities Fees at a cost of approximately $1.10 per copy.
Abroad, we discuss the French military invasion of Mali and explore the growing threat of Islamic extremism in North Africa. In addition, we analyze the rise of China and its effect on the balance of power in East Asia. Another threat is the relentless pursuit of rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea to acquire nuclear weapons. Here at home, we follow the most recent effort to confront the threat of gun violence as our country considers measures for gun control. In a rare moment of bipartisan collaboration, Congress is also acting to address another long unresolved aspect of our security – illegal immigration and border security. There has been a host of political developments in the US. We explore the changes and internal debate within the Grand Old Party, and evaluate President Obama’s controversial appointments to his cabinet. Furthermore, we consider the new Republican administration in North Carolina, and the latest round of gerrymandering and
efforts to restrict voting laws. Energy policy is also at the center of the news. We discuss the renewed commitment in the Obama administration to address climate change, including articles on nuclear energy and another evaluating the Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules. In international news, we examine the emergence of factions in the Arab Spring, specifically Islamists versus secularists, and continue to follow the long and arduous path to democracy. Additionally, we analyze the most recent crisis in Europe, which is the potential exit of the UK from the European Union. Finally, we consider the case of rape in India that has changed the terms of debate for that issue in India and around the world. Thanks for reading this issue of The Hill. We hope our articles strike your fancy, and we hope you continue reading in the future.
Sam Hobbs Radhika Kshatriya
3
Contents Domestic 5 Working Harder or Working Smarter The Smart Grid
7 Threats to Our Democracy?
The Impacts of Voter ID Laws and Redistricting
11 How the GOP Got Its Groove Back
The Grand Old Party’s Attempts to Win Voters
Cover 12 France’s Involvement in Mali 14 The Immigration Plan A bipartisan moment
16 The Great Gun Debate 17 Nuclear Nuisances: Iran and North Korea
International 20 The UK’s Potential Departure from the EU: Legitimate or Leverage?
22 What’s Happening in Bahrain And Why We Should Pay Attention
23 The Horror of Inequality Women’s Rights in India
4
Hill-O-Meter Nick Neuteufel
Who’s on top of the heap right now? Who’s fallen far? We track the up-and-comers and the down-and-outs.
1
Marco Rubio This rising star is helping craft the Senate compromise on perhaps Washington’s hottest issue: immigration reform. Recently tapped to present the GOP rebuttal to President Obama’s State of the Union address, this Florida Senator has been the subject of much presidential run speculation. Let’s see if his POTUS dreams go down in flames like Bobby “Kenneth from 30 Rock” Jindal’s in 2009.
2
Joe Biden
Uncle Joe has been in the news a lot these past few months. After “fiscal cliff” negotiations with the Republican-led House and President Obama fell apart, “Cup of Joe” and known turtle and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell brokered a Senate compromise that ultimately became law. The “Bice President” also led President Obama’s gun control task force. So I guess you can say things are getting pretty serious for the “Bidenator.” 1
3
Pat McCrory has taken his talents for bashing academic freedom,
liberal arts, and public education to the Governor’s Mansion in Raleigh. It just seems strange since he graduated from a liberal arts college that has acclaimed programs in music and theater (Catawba College). Now he has gone after women’s studies courses. Any misogynist would say that he just doesn’t have the hair line to bash women and then ask for their votes.
4
Mohammed Morsi (An Open Letter) Hello Mr. Egyptian President, In case you didn’t get the memo, a President with unlimited emergency powers to “protect the nation” does not a strong democracy make. You, being the figurehead for the Freedom & Justice Party (cousin of the Muslim Brotherhood), have declared judicial review void. Not cool at all. You’re also not helping yourself by calling Israelis “descendants of apes and pigs.” Stop trying to make dictatorship happen, it’s not going to happen. Sincerely, People of the World
1. All of these are actual names used for VP Biden in the White House
Domestic 5
Working Smarter or Working Harder? Tess Landon
A
s an innovation of the late 19th century, the antiquated electric grid currently used in the United States is not equipped to handle the influx of demand of electricity for a booming population in a more technologically advanced world. Not only are the grid’s technological aspects lagging behind compared to modern-day technology, but the century-old infrastructure is becoming more of a threat than a help. So what is the alternative? The Smart Grid – an environmentally sound, neoteric computer system of enhanced energy distribution.
of consumers to dwindle. Not only will it reduce costs of electric bills for all consumers, but Smart Grid is especially advantageous to consumers with customer-owned power generation systems including renewable energy systems, such as solar panels. The owners of said systems will not require as much power as a typical consumer might, and, accompanied with integration into the Smart Grid, the owner can potentially sell power back to the utility if these home systems generate enough power to sustain the household’s needs. The consumer makes a profit, and the utility gets some
As of now, a single line of exchange is open between the utility and every household, but with the Smart Grid, and the innovative technologies accompanying it, the power usage of the household is transmitted back to the utility as well. The “Smart” comes into play with the new method of communication between households and utilities. As of now, a single line of exchange is open between the utility and every household, but with the Smart Grid, and the innovative technologies accompanying it, the power usage of the household is transmitted back to the utility as well. The efficiency of electricity transmission will be improved immensely, translating into increased resiliency after power outages and an array of reduced costs for utilities – ultimately causing the electric bills
slack on the high demand for electricity – a win-win situation. However, as ideal as the Smart Grid sounds there are some kinks in the plan. For starters, the cost of implementation is estimated between $13 billion and $50 billion, and Smart Grid technology is multifaceted, comprised of numerous computers, controllers and technologies. Execution of the entire grid will be complicated and could take several years to accomplish. With the state of the U.S. economy and the tight purse strings in Washington, funding a
high-cost project – from which major benefits may not be seen for another few decades – would be difficult to say the least. Another issue is “real-time pricing”. This basically implies that a household can maintain regular energy consumption but save money by consuming most of its energy during off-peak hours or by turning off appliances if not needed for a certain period of time. However, hospitals and manufacturers need to keep a consistent flow of electricity even during peak hours and are without the option to pick and choose which appliances to run. As a result, energy costs for these businesses would rise. These businesses’ higher costs would trickle down to the consumer, negating the savings from utility costs through higher costs elsewhere. Smart Grid systems are popping up all over Europe, and thus far have proven beneficial to these communities – but is it a step in the right direction for the United States?
6Domestic
Obama’s New Team Jon Buchleiter
A
s the curtain rises on Obama’s second term, a host of new actors occupy the stage. The foreign policy team has changed considerably with the appointments of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, John Brennan as Director of the CIA, and John Kerry as Secretary of State. These appointments received a range of responses in the Senate: from sharp criticism of Chuck Hagel and a heated confirmation hearing for John Brennan to the 94-3 vote in affirmation of John Kerry, former head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to succeed Hilary Clinton as the chief at Foggy Bottom. How will these appointments shape United States foreign policy over the coming years? Ostensibly a Republican, Hagel represents an interesting choice for the next head of the Pentagon. His staunch anti-war views, stemming in part from his service in Vietnam and reflected in his vocal opposition to the war in Iraq, belie his partisan label. Many Republicans have not forgiven Hagel for his opposition to the Iraq War, and believe he is soft on issues such as Israel and Iran. Hagel’s ideas regarding Israel and Iran align closely with the President’s and he is committed to the ideal of diplomacy-first.
Hagel hopes to reduce defense spending without “undermining national security.” Most analysts agree there is room to trim the defense budget, but ideally these cuts will be made with precision and due consideration rather than a slash across the board. Overseeing this slimming presents one major issue confronting him. Hagel’s affinity with Obama has triggered worries he will not “push back” in cabinet meetings but remain deferential. It is difficult to know how these dynamics will unfold, but Hagel’s previously ardent stances and refusal to tow the line indicate his willingness to hold firm in the face of opposition. Brennan’s confirmation hearing did not generate as much a firestorm as Hagel’s, but he faced tough questions about which direction the CIA may go under his lead. Brennan repeated his uneasiness with “enhanced interrogation techniques” and stated the CIA will need to carefully consider the issue moving forward. The future of drones in US counterterrorism operations has also been under intense scrutiny during the transition period. Brennan has suggested turning over control of the drone program to the Department of Defense, and he advocates for the CIA to refocus on gathering and
The foreign policy team has changed considerably with the appointments of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, John Brennan as Director of the CIA, and John Kerry as Secretary of State.
analyzing intelligence. In light of Brennan’s role overseeing this program during Obama’s first term many question the sincerity of this claim. The least controversial of Obama’s nominations was Kerry, whose vast experience and positive rapport with his colleagues in the Senate made him a shoe-in as the next Secretary of State. Many issues confront him in the foreign policy arena. Having served as a special envoy for Obama in the Middle East, Kerry has shown an eagerness to engage in diplomatic overtures in the region. Turning to the Pacific, Kerry faces the need to improve Sino-American relations. Professor Steven Balla of George Washington University describes this as “a period of uncertainty with leadership changes on both sides.” While it is important that Kerry devote attention to China, the relationship is “is broader than any single appointment” and he will certainly not shape these relations alone. Obama’s nominees exhibit many virtues the President has extolled as paramount qualities in US foreign policy. They are careful and considerate, favor diplomacy first and have a strong aversion to heavy-handed projection of US military power abroad. It is a notable slate of appointments, but it is also important to remember that our foreign policy is broader than any singular appointment.
Threats to Our Democracy?
Domestic 7
Brian Braytenbah
S
tate governments throughout the United States are using their powers to influence national elections. Specifically, state politicians are changing congressional district boundaries through the redistricting process and are considering new voter identification laws. Both of these issues are hot topics in North Carolina. One responsibility that most state legislators in the United States have is redistricting. Every ten years the federal government conducts a national census. Following the census, states engage in the redistricting process in order to reflect population changes. District lines are used as boundaries when people vote for their representatives in the US House of Representatives. Some states may gain or lose a seat, reflecting an increase or decrease in population. North Carolina maintained the same number of districts and representatives it elects to the US House – 13 – after the 2010 census. The NC General Assembly, comprised of the NC House of Representatives and the NC Senate, is responsible for redrawing Congressional districts in the state after each census. During the 2011 redistricting process, the General Assembly had a Republican majority in both chambers for the first time since 1870. The Legislature was accused of gerrymandering, the process of manipulating district boundaries during the redistricting process in order to provide an electoral advantage for a particular party. Unlike other states, North Caro-
lina’s redistricted map does not need approval of the governor to become law. Prior to the 2011 redistricting, North Carolina’s delegation to the US House of Representatives was made up of seven Democrats and six Republicans. With the redistricted map in place for the 2012 election, North Carolina elected four Democrats and nine Republicans. 76,047 more North Carolinians voted for a Democratic House candidate than for a Republican House candidate, making the four to nine party split in favor of Republicans disproportionate. The redistricted map will be used in North Carolina for the next ten years. When asked about the fairness of the redistricting process, John C. Scott, an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at UNC Chapel Hill, said, “Gerrymandering is something that both parties have done over the decades, and there are no clean hands.” Scott also said that redistricting is used to tilt the playing field in a certain direction, and that the timing of the 2010 federal census with a huge shift in the party control of North Carolina’s state government has demonstrated a large tilt in favor of Republicans. Another topic that state legislators around the country have recently debated is voter identification laws. These laws would require voters to show photo ID at polling sites in order to be allowed to vote. Benjamin Mason Meier, an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at UNC Chapel
Hill, says that these laws “limit opportunities for fraud while at the same time disenfranchising individuals who would otherwise vote.” Voter ID laws that require photo ID could limit the opportunity for North Carolina citizens to vote, as a report by the State Board of Elections found that as many as 9.25 percent of voters in the state do not have a state-issued drivers license or ID card. Meier points out that there is very little evidence of voter fraud. In fact, a 2006 Department of Justice study found only 40 voters out of 197 million votes cast for federal candidates from 2002 to 2005 were indicted for fraud. Meier says that voter ID laws “demonstrate the tension between two ethical principles: keeping the process fair and making sure individuals can exercise their right to vote.” Voter ID laws and redistricting in North Carolina alter the ways in which our elections are conducted and the way that individual votes within our state are allocated for representation in the US House of Representatives. Regarding redistricting, Scott says “reform efforts are being proposed to help take this out of the hands of the politicians and make it a nonpartisan issue.” In the end, Scott says that Voter ID laws and redistricting fall within the larger constitutional issue of whether states or the federal government should be making rules for elections.
8Domestic
Climate Change in the Second Term Carol Abken
S
ince President Obama’s second inaugural address on January 21st, many environmentalists have been hopeful that the President will lead the United States toward a more sustainable future in his second term. Obama highlighted in his speech that “some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.� This attitude towards climate change suggests that the second Obama administration will take a more proactive stance against climate change as a threat to national security and stability.
tion currently lacks a comprehensive climate change policy to face the challenges ahead, there have been incremental steps in the right direction. During the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, the President agreed to reduce the levels of American carbon emissions 17 percent by 2020. After a proposed bill to enact a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions was denied by the Senate in 2009, the President used executive powers to circumvent Congress and strengthen the Clean Air Act, which enables the Environmental Protection Agency to impose reductions on carbon emissions in a variety of ways.
The effects of climate change are already visible in the US, as demonstrated by the widespread fires in Colorado this summer and the extreme drought that is endangering agriculture throughout the country, particularly in the Midwest. Though a certain amount of damage due to climate change is inevitable at this point, the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and reforestation of the tropics is necessary to keep the climate at a sustainable lev-
Other measures have been increases in investment in solar and wind energy and the implementation of stricter fuel-efficiency standards for new automobiles. Because of the gridlocked nature of Congress, there is a push from the left for the President to further sidestep Congress in order to pass the environmental legislation necessary to lessen the long-term effects of climate change while still possible.
el. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change suggests that climate change policies are currently insufficient to contain temperature increases to acceptable levels.
One key decision that President Obama faces in the coming year is on the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline. The pipeline would transport vast amounts of crude oil from the tar sands of Alberta down through the Midwest to Texas. The potentially devastat-
The Obama administration currently lacks a comprehensive climate change policy to face the challenges ahead.
Though the Obama administra-
ing effects of the pipeline range from the pollution of the Ogallala aquifer and the disruption of the communities and habitats in the immediate vicinity of the pipeline to accelerating the rate of climate change. According to the EPA, extracting oil from tar sands creates about 82 percent more emissions than extraction from conventional oil. Because the Keystone pipeline would cross international borders, the full construction of the pipeline requires the approval of the White House. In January 2013, the President rejected immediate approval in favor of postponing the final decision until mid-June. Advocates for the pipeline claim that its environmental impacts are overstated and that domestic job creation, lessened dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and potentially lower energy costs would offset its negative repercussions. They argue that Canada is going to produce the oil regardless, so the US might as well be the beneficiary. According to Professor Victor Flatt, director of the UNC Center for Law, Environment, Adaptation, and Resources, the Obama administration has no real criteria for rejecting the construction of the Keystone pipeline, and the most likely outcome in June is more delay on the decision. The administration sees great benefits for domestic energy creation, but deciding in favor of either option would send a clear signal: it is a choice between the economy and the climate.
Domestic 9
The Future of Nuclear Power in America Dain Clare
Most of the country probably does not realize that a good chunk of the electricity that powers our cities and homes comes from nuclear power plants. Nuclear energy production accounted for almost 20 percent of the nation’s electricity last year, with 104 operational power plants. North Carolina is home to three commercial nuclear power plants, which account for almost 35 percent of the state’s energy needs. With nuclear energy playing such a large role in our everyday lives, it is rarely cast in a positive light, because the subject has become taboo in the eyes of the public. The disasters at Chernobyl, Three-Mile Island, and Fukushima have turned nuclear energy into the evil alternative energy source, with wind turbines and solar panels stealing the heart of the public. However, we need not stay awake at night with fears of radiation sickness and nuclear fallouts. The three disasters that have given nuclear energy a bad name are only freak accidents. The meltdown at Chernobyl could have easily been avoided. Operators at the plant decided to test the limits of their system, so they ramped up the core temperature until warning lights were flashing and the master alarm was blaring. Then they decided to push the temperature higher, to see how much energy the reactor could produce. Not surprisingly, the system could not handle the temperatures, and the core melted down.
An equally freak occurrence was responsible for the near meltdown at Three-Mile Island. A “maintenance-needed” tag was covering a warning light, so operators did not know anything was awry until it was too late. Again, this was something that could have been easily avoided. The disaster at Fukushima is harder to put under the “operator-error” category. A freak earthquake and tsunami resulted in the near-meltdown and release of radiation into the water and air. It is certainly hard to plan for a tsunami, but advances in engineering mean we can equip future plants with protection systems that prevent meltdowns in the event of natural disasters. New power plants are very sophisticated, and have safety measures in place that are exponentially more effective than those in place even a decade ago. So what does that mean for public opinion? The fear of meltdowns and glowing babies with three arms is still prevalent, although unfounded. A study done by the Nuclear Energy Institute in 2012 showed that public opinion is
swaying in favor of nuclear proliferation. The truth of the matter is that nuclear energy is a clean, renewable energy source that is very safe when executed properly and with caution. With the supply of fossil fuels dwindling, and emissions threatening to change the natural world as we know it, nuclear energy can be an answer to our prayers. In the past decade, proponents of nuclear power in Congress have pushed bills such as the “Nuclear Power 2010” bill, which started a joint project between the government and private energy companies to develop new technologies and methods concerning nuclear energy in order to meet our growing need for alternative sources. Hopefully, the public will continue to lean towards the expansion of America’s nuclear energy program. With the support of the American people, Congress can continue to create legislation that strengthens our domestic nuclear program. And nuclear energy may just live on to fill our alternative energy needs.
10Domestic
Do We Still Need the Liberal Arts? Lyndsey Bernal
I
n the midst of public outrage for N.C. Gov. Pat McCrory’s comments regarding defunding subsidies for liberal arts education due its inability to yield jobs, some students from the UNC Women’s & Gender Studies Department have responded with success stories about the ways in which a gender studies major has impacted their job outlook. According to Danielle Boachie, a UNC graduate with a bachelor’s degree in Women’s Studies, “I cannot express how much these classes have shaped my life. Women & Gender studies taught me about the beauty of critical thinking, exposed me to the inherent problems of our society, and provided me with powerful literature. I am currently a nursing assistant at UNC Hospital. I will be getting a master’s of Physical Assistant in the next few years, and will eventually be able to center my work in healthcare around women.” Boachie’s comment, along with the responses of other current gender studies and graduate students, have been posted on the UNC Women’s & Gender Studies Department’s website and all emphasize the essential critical thinking and writing skills they have gained from a gender studies major that have enabled them to be successfully prepared them for the real world. The responses from UNC’s gender studies students are a response to N.C. Gov. Pat McCrory’s comments on education reform in an interview last Tuesday on the national radio show,
“Morning in America”. In the interview, the governor commented, “[Gender Studies] is a subsidized course and frankly, if you want to take Gender Studies, that’s fine, just go to private school and take it, but I’m not going to subsidize that. It’s not going to get a person a job.” Furthermore, he said, “It’s the tech jobs that we need right now…I’ve got a lot of unemployment men who typically go into technology or mechanics and if they do, or welding, they could get six-figure payments…” In the interview, the governor particularly expressed his concern about N.C.’s status as having the highest unemployment rate and also about employers not being able to locate enough qualified employees to take positions. Moreover, he emphasized that he does believe in a liberal arts education, but said that with liberal arts, one must “exercise the brain” and “get a skill.” The debate between funding and defunding liberal arts educations comes at a time where state policy makers are opting to promote degrees that offer the career-based skills they feel will land students a job when they graduate. According to the 2011 report entitled, “Degrees for What Jobs?” by the National Governor’s Association(NGA), states such as North Carolina, Minnesota, Ohio, and Washington have chosen to align post-secondary education with the economic goals of the state.
In addition, some policymakers in Florida have recently proposed to cut state spending towards liberal arts to raise the employment rate. In a radio interview on the Marc Bernier Show in 2011, Florida Governor Rick Scott attacked anthropology, commenting, “Do you want to use your tax dollars to educate more people who can’t get jobs in anthropology? I don’t. I want to spend our dollars where people can get jobs when they get out [of college].” Moreover, the Florida governor also advocated a shift in funding to universities that offer degrees in science, technology, engineering, and math because they offer market-based skills. However, while STEM courses might provide students with the technical skills to perform well in the workplace, liberal arts teaches students necessary critical thinking skills and about being innovative so that they will be successful in any field they choose.If subsidies for liberal arts education are defunded, how then will it affect job performance for students going into areas like business, human resources, political science, and journalism where the ability to communicate well is particularly emphasized? So while it can be said that education should prepare students with the vocation-based skills necessary for success in the workforce, we must not forget the critical thinking and communication skills that are gained from liberal arts education.
How the GOP Got Its Groove Back
Domestic 11
Sarah Lunenfeld
I
f you tuned in to Fox News as electoral votes were being called on the evening of the 2012 Presidential election, you inevitably sensed the panic. Mitt Romney’s defeat signaled the end of an era for the Grand Old Party, and has sparked various initiatives to redesign the GOP in order to gain broader popularity. After accusations of being too conservative for a new generation of voters, GOP leaders are diving into the task of revamping their party in order to cater to growing blocks of constituents, particularly minorities and moderates. One of the most contested issues for the GOP this past election was the debate over immigration reform. According to the Pew Research Center Data, Hispanics made up ten percent of the 2012 electorate and overwhelmingly supported Obama. Romney’s “self-deportation” rhetoric throughout the primary debates seemed to parallel the GOP’s official 2012 platform concerning illegal immigrants, which states, “We oppose any form of amnesty for those who, by intentionally violating the law, disadvantage those who have obeyed it.” After the harsh dialogue concerning Hispanic voters and immigration, Republican politician Newt Gingrich spoke out against the GOP, claiming, “A party that appears to ignore people won’t get the chance to make the case for its principles.” After the stunning lack of support from Latinos, the GOP is attempting to become more multicultural. Currently in the Senate, Republicans
John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake and Marco Rubio are working with Senate Democrats on the Bipartisan Framework for Immigration Reform. It includes a “tough but fair” path to citizenship for illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States, a far cry from last year’s GOP platform. The GOP’s changing views go beyond immigration. The Future Majority Caucus, a recent initiative led by the Republican State Leadership Committee, is an organization that seeks to elect Republican politicians, and attract and elect more Hispanic and female representatives to promote diversity. New and diverse leaders are emerging as future
ence at the forefront of immigration negotiations and in the GOP in general might attract more statistically Democratic constituents to re-evaluate where they fit into the Republican Party. Governor Chris Christie has also blazed to the forefront, particularly after his bi-partisan meetings with President Obama after Hurricane Sandy. Christie’s presence as a firm leader has boosted his approval ratings in New Jersey, all while allowing him to become somewhat of a GOP media darling. In an interview with Bloomberg, Governor Christie stated, ““If I can do my job well, I think that will have a positive effect on the ballot for my party.” GOP leaders certainly hope so.
GOP leaders are diving into the task of revamping their party in order to cater to growing blocks of constituents. faces of the party – notably the Cuban-American Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio and the larger-than-life Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie. Time Magazine’s February 18th cover features Senator Rubio with the title, “The Republican Savior.” The son of Cuban immigrants and child of Reagan-era politics, Rubio has added a dynamic perspective to the GOP – and at a critical time. His background lends his support to the typically liberal-supported documentation of illegal immigrants, but only after a series of demands that the final policy reflect conservative values. Rubio’s pres-
While the efforts made by the GOP to overhaul their party seems to be generally well received, it is important to note groups within the party that are critical of deviating from tradition. For example, Rubio and Christie are overwhelmingly popular among the GOP, but have received backlash for their perceived concessions concerning immigration reform and party loyalty, respectively. One must wait and see if the GOP will be able to reconcile its different constituencies or if their intentions to win over the voters will lead to a chasm within their own party.
12Cover
France’s Involvement in Mali Nikki Mandell
T
he French military intervened in Northern Mali on January 11, after the Interim-Malian government requested its presence to help fight Islamist and rebellion groups that had taken over the area. Through ground force and air strikes, the French handily halted the Islamic extremist groups’ expansion. Now, with logistical help from Britain and the United States, their force is bleeding past the region in order to secure Mali. The question is: for whom? The picture painted by the French government is one of philanthropy. President Hollande reasoned
that engaging in northern Mali is not a neo-colonial move, but rather the result of one sovereign nation asking another for help. However, a few years earlier when the Central African Republic asked for the same support in fighting rebels, the request was swiftly rejected. With the refusal to help CAR, it seemed that the invasion of Mali was a 180 from the direction France’s foreign policy was headed. Still, the French government felt so strongly about the potential calamity of the situation that they invaded before any backing from the United Nations.
Maybe, instead, it is a decision stemming from the anti-terrorism rhetoric ubiquitous in the West. The rebellion initially began with the MNLA, the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad, a group made up of a minority people called Tuareg’s who felt ignored by the government. After a coup in March 2012, Mali was left vulnerable to a rebellion, and the MNLA, joined and backed by a few Islamic extremist groups, declared Northern Mali their own. Soon, to the dismay of the MNLA, the extremist groups had imposed Sharia law on the people of the region. The sheer power Tuareg secessionists in Northern Mali
Cover 13
of the extremist groups rendered the MNLA ineffective and the rebellion began to splinter. The MNLA had already cut ties with Islamic groups as they attempted to push Sharia law past northern Mali towards the capital when French troops intervened. There is no question that an Islamic extremist country is no good for France, or for that matter, the rest of Europe. The mere proximity of Mali and its neighbors would bring about significant safety concerns. Still, the same questions arise here as they did when the US invaded Iraq: is it to protect the expansion of terrorism or the influx of goods? Uranium is France’s key energy resource. According to mineral resource analysts, beneath the deserts in Northern Mali and Eastern Niger, territory now exclusively claimed by the rebel groups, exists the world’s third largest uranium reserves as well as considerable oil reserves. The reserves in Mali are essential to France.
investing money in the country and making special donation “agreements.” The China Times reported that Mali and China signed three agreements worth $117.7 million involving energy reserves specifically in the northern Mali region, Gao, now under Islamist control.
The same questions arise here as they did when the US invaded Iraq: is it to protect the expansion of terrorism or the influx of goods?
This is where the third explanation to the invasion surfaces. For almost 40 years, the French company Areya had exclusive rights to uranium in Niger. Recently, Niger opened up its reserves to countries like South Africa, India, and mainly China. Now, China is making plays to monopolize Malian uranium as well,
The French face another steal by China. Their chance to legally get into Mali and manipulate the country’s structure could easily be a neo-liberal tactic based around the need for uranium. Recently, the dialogue has evolved from why is it happening to should it be happening. The
UN refugee agency has estimated that there are about 150,000 refugees outside the country. Malian testimony claims there has been killing akin to genocide, wherein if a soldier sees a person with light skin or an “African-Arab” look, they will be killed immediately just in case they might be with the rebels. Even the MNLA is taking advantage of the tunnel vision of the extremist groups by taking over the land that the Islamists are forced out of. This beast of violence, whether fed by selflessness or selfishness, is now expanding. France claimed originally that they would leave once the extremists left the northern region, but they persisted in the aerial strike toward both the capital and the borders. Troops continue to kill, and they continue to be met with appreciative cheers from Malian citizens along the way.
14Cover
A Bipartisan Moment Sam Hobbs
I
mmigration is one of those painful issues where all sides agree that it desperately needs reform, and yet politicians have long ignored it because of the political challenges. Still, there is cause for optimism - Congress is now closer than ever to comprehensive immigration reform. The most important breakthrough is a bipartisan plan for reform in the Senate. Four Democrats and four Republicans have agreed to the framework of a compromise for reform. The basic substance of the compromise is this: Republicans will allow a pathway to citizenship for the eleven million illegal immigrants currently in the US if the Democrats will agree to delay the pathway to citizenship until certain standards for enforcement and border security have been met. The pathway to citizenship would be long and demanding. Illegal immigrants would have to register with the government, pass a criminal background check, learn English, and then pay fines and back taxes. At this point, they would receive a probationary legal status, by which they are not citizens but are permitted to remain in the country.
Of course, immigrants would not be able to begin this lengthy process until a commission determined we had met certain standards for border security. The commission would be an assembly of governors, law enforcement officials, and community leaders from the border states. In addition, the proposal would require an exit system to be in place to track the departure of foreigners before the pathway began.
of any comprehensive legislation.
In fact, border security is tighter and more effective than it has been in decades. There are twice as many border patrol agents now than in 2004. The Department of Homeland Security spends fifty percent more on border security than it did in 2006. Furthermore, the flow of immigrants across the border has slowed to a trickle: partly because of enhanced border security, and partly because of the weak American economy and an aging Mexican population.
The president’s plan emphasizes several other aspects of reform. He supports creating a federal electronic database for employers to use to verify the legal status of their employees. Additionally, he seeks to make the legal immigration system more efficient, particularly for highly skilled immigrants, investors and family members of immigrants already here. For now, Obama aims to establish some key markers for reform but leave the details to Congress; although he threatened to introduce his own bill if Congress fails.
Another bipartisan plan in the Senate focuses on reforming legal immigration. Most importantly, it proposes to nearly double the number of temporary visas for immigrants with advanced skills in technology and science. It would also increase
Four Democrats and four Republicans have agreed to the framework of a compromise for reform. Only then would they be allowed to go to the back of the line of the naturalization process.
the amount of permanent visas, known as green cards. These proposals would likely be a part
Obama applauds the blueprint of the bipartisan plans in the Senate, but he does have some reservations. He prefers a more direct path to citizenship than the one outlined in the Senate, and he is wary of the enforcement trigger. He fears the trigger would be an arbitrary delay tactic that would ultimately leave illegal immigrants in a legal limbo.
The reason for such sudden bipartisan support for a previously divisive issue is simple –elections. Hispanics are a growing portion of the electorate, over ten percent, and they voted for Obama by three to one margins in 2012. Republicans’ tough talk on immigration is largely to blame for their poor showing among Hispanics, and they are eager to remove the issue from the discussion. As a measure of the issue’s momentum, even the House has a
Cover 15
The reason for such sudden bipartisan support for a previously divisive issue is simple –elections. Hispanics are a growing portion of the electorate, over ten percent. bipartisan plan for reform. The group is secret, but its principles are similar to the Senate proposal. To be sure, conservative opposition to any path to citizenship should not be underestimated, and any legislation will have a tough time passing the House. Discontent among House Republicans is already evident. They prefer a middle ground to amnesty: granting a permanent legal residency to illegal immigrants but no citizenship. They also prefer to break immigration reform into smaller parts as op-
posed to a comprehensive bill. Democrats, however, insist that reform includes a path to citizenship and is comprehensive. If reform were broken into smaller parts, it is likely Congress would quickly pass popular provisions without addressing the larger and more controversial question of illegal immigrants. Economically, immigration is a no-brainer. In an interview with The Hill, a spokesman for Randel Johnson, the Chamber of Commerce’s expert on immigration, said: “We need more highly
skilled workers; it is nonsense to spend time and resources educating foreigners at our universities, only to send them away to other countries once they graduate.” Studies also show immigrants are more innovative and create more jobs than the average American citizen. Experience shows that illegal immigrants become better educated and more productive after becoming citizens as well. The case for reform is strong and the political stars seem to be aligning. However, we came close to immigration reform in 2007 before it fell apart, and it will not be easy. Here is to hoping for a rare moment of bipartisan success.
16 Cover
The Great Gun Debate Eishante Wilkes
A
midst tragedies due to gun violence in recent years like the shooting in Newton, Connecticut that claimed the lives of 20 children and six adults, the great gun debate continues to be a relevant topic of discussion. Since the early nineties, there have been discussions regarding the availability of guns and whether individuals should be allowed to possess them. In September of 1994, former President Bill Clinton signed the controversial Assault Weapons Ban into law. The law essentially prohibited 18 particular weapons from being manufactured and also prohibited ammunition magazines that could hold more than 10 rounds. This law expired in 2004 due to strong opposition from the Republican Party and many Democrats avoiding the issue. Could another weapons ban be the answer to the gun woes
The data also mentioned that eight percent or less of the weapons used during those crimes were actually those listed in the weapons ban. Overall, the data is considered to be inconclusive in determining whether or not a similar ban would be effective. The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 has often been criticized for containing loopholes and being ineffective because only a select list of weapons were banned. In the past several months, the Obama administration has unveiled some key proposals aimed at reducing gun violence. Some of the key elements of these proposals include but are not limited to: requiring background checks for all gun sales, bans on particular types of assault weapons, an increase in the number of school resource officers, and improved awareness regarding mental health issues. Many portions of
Could another weapons ban be the answer to the gun woes of late? of late? The data from the Assault Weapons Ban from 1994 to 2004 has shed some light on the possibility of a decrease in gun violence, but still does not provide 100 percent of the answers politicians are seeking. According to a Study conducted by the University of Pennsylvania in 2004, there was a decrease in the number of individuals killed in mass shootings during the time the ban was in effect. Since the ban expired, the number of mass shootings per year has doubled.
this initiative require Congressional approval. So what does Congress think about these proposals? Many Republicans have chosen to support certain portions of the proposals, but disagree with others. For example, the majority of Republicans oppose the ban on assault weapons but some agree that universal background checks are important. One of the largest conservative based organizations, the Nation-
al Rifle Association (NRA), also disagrees heavily with the proposal to ban assault weapons. The executive vice president of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, stated that instead of banning weapons there should be an increase in school security and measures taken that would ban individuals with mental illnesses from owning guns. LaPierre said in a statement released by the NRA that, “Law-abiding gun owners will not accept blame for the acts of violent or deranged criminals. Nor do we believe the government should dictate what we can lawfully own and use to protect our families.” LaPierre’s viewpoint seems to be echoed by the Republican Party. The Democratic Party has mixed views regarding the effects of a weapons ban. Some Democrats also oppose the weapons ban aspect of President Obama’s proposals as well, and the supporters acknowledge that getting this portion of the proposal approved by Congress is going to be an uphill battle. As the great gun debate continues two things remain clear: 1) It is going to take a bipartisan effort to establish necessary laws to reduce gun violence, and 2) The United States does not need another doubling of the mass shootings per year statistic. And so the great gun debate continues.
Nuclear Nuisances
Cover 17
Chris Brown
I
n recent years, developing nuclear weapons has been a priority for the North Korean and Iranian governments. Efforts have been made to limit both North Korea’s and Iran’s ability to become fullfledged nuclear powers. However, when a country is willing to put its military interests before that of its citizens, any attempts to stop them are merely dilatory tactics. North Korea and Iran have worked together on their nuclear programs and have possibly shared technology. Both countries have shared fates, attempting to emerge with nuclear capabilities in a world that is negatively opposed to new nuclear powers. President Ahmandinejad has stated that Iran has already achieved nuclear capabilities, but does not intend to threaten Israel with them. However, possessing nuclear weapons is enough to change the political landscape of the Middle East. Further, as a result of the leadership changes in Egypt, there is the possibility of increased cooperation among Iran and Egypt. Iran possessing nuclear weapons adds a new bartering chip in the area’s relationships and conflicts.
As a result of Iran’s continued nuclear program, US led sanctions have targeted Iran’s access to banking and aimed to limit their oil income. Unfortunately, these sanctions are adversely affecting the people and not the government of Iran. Despite the Ayatollah’s refusal to consider bilateral talks with the United States, Iran will negotiate with the International Atomic Energy Agency and has engaged in six party talks. The outcome of these meetings will shape the result of a nuclear-armed Iran and the future of the Middle East. North Korean media has stated that a nuclear weapon was successfully tested, and prior nuclear tests occurred in 2006 and 2009. This action will have dubious repercussions for North Korea in regards to its national relations. The UN, which is openly opposed to North Korea’s nuclear program, condemned the test, but more surprisingly China, North Korea’s lone ally, also opposed the nuclear test. The test also sets the tone with South Korea’s new President, Park Geun-hye. The new administration will take office amid a toxic relationship between the North and South. The nuclear
test, in conjunction with North Korea’s recent satellite launch that used a ballistic missile signal a resurgence of actions aimed at antagonizing the United States. The harder stance in Pyongyang is evidence of a need to reassert their authority after Kim Jung Il’s sudden death and of their bitter international relations with the United States and the South Korean administration. After the UN resolution that condemned the December rocket launch, North Korea has stated that they will not enter negotiations concerning denuclearization. China’s support of the resolution is a landmark political shift, as China has long been the only UN Security Council supporter of North Korea. Isolating China could be disastrous for the North Korean people who rely on Chinese foodstuffs to prevent starvation. This nuclear test comes amid increased sanctions due to the North Korean rocket launch. Increased pressure on North Koreas nuclear program has only increased their desperation to become a credible nuclear threat. In response to the UN resolution, the announcement of the third test came with a threat of doing more than just a nuclear test. It is likely that there will be further sanctions in response to North Korea’s most recent nuclear test. North Korea’s threats exceed their current abilities, but a direct strategy for managing North Korea needs to be a priority of the current administration.
18Cover
Power Transition in the Asia-Pacific Brendan Cooley
O
ur generation has come of age in one of the most peaceful periods in world history. Civil and interstate conflict have by no means disappeared, but the last 20 years have been marked by an absence of large-scale war or the threat of nuclear annihilation. Some contend that this period of peace is a result of the overwhelming power of the American military; others argue that it stems from unique characteristics of American-designed integrative institutions, such as the United Nations, World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund. But there is widespread agreement that world politics are beginning a process of fundamental change – a shift from an American-centric system toward one of
power transition will impact world politics is one of the most important questions of international relations and for US foreign policy. The countries that care most about these changes are those in China’s backyard – Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines, Singapore, and others. On one hand, they have benefited from a China-centric East Asian production and trade network that has contributed to high growth rates across the region. On the other, they are wary of a Chinese military that has become more powerful and more active over the last decade. Should relations between the United States and China sour considerably, China’s neighbors may be put in the unfortunate
World politics are beginning a process of fundamental change – a shift from an American-centric system toward one of dispersed power and influence. China is leading this shift. dispersed power and influence. China is leading this shift. After 30 years of rapid economic growth, China now possesses the world’s second-largest economy and second-largest military. While it still trails the United States by distant margins in both of these metrics, China’s current growth trajectory has led some to speculate that its military and economic power will surpass that of the United States in the not-too-distant future. How this
position of having to choose between alignment with China and alignment with the United States. This has led many scholars and policymakers to ask: whom might they choose? First of all, China’s neighbors differ enormously. Japan has a formidable military, while the Philippine Navy’s most capable ship is a retired US Coast Guard cutter. Singapore is a wealthy city-state, while Laos remains trapped in extreme poverty.
South Korea is a thriving liberal democracy, but North Korea is a closed and oppressive autocracy. These idiosyncratic characteristics will play a large role in determining alignments in the region. Structural factors will play a larger role. The international system is anarchic and national intentions are impossible to fully discern. Thus, regardless of the Chinese Communist Party’s true intentions, China’s increasingly powerful military will be seen as a threat by nearby countries. These peripheral countries can opt to pursue one of two strategies to negate this threat. They can either ‘balance,’ aligning with the United States to increase their ability to deter Chinese coercion, or ‘bandwagon,’ aligning with China in hopes that concessions make coercion less likely. Relatively weak countries, like Vietnam, will make this decision by determining whether the United States or China wields more power in the region. Weak countries lack the ability to significantly influence the balance of power, so their best strategy is simply to pick a winning coalition. Alignment with the source of greater power provides better security and side benefits, such as military assistance or foreign aid. For middle powers, such as South Korea, the decision is more complicated. They can usually make a significant contribution to a military alliance, but cannot play a large role in dictating the char-
Speaker John Boehner and Leader Eric Cantor meet with His Excellency Xi Jinping in February 2012 acter of regional or international order. This role is played by the great powers. Middle powers look at which great powers’ dominance will better serve their interests, and to what extent they can influence the foreign policies pursued by either great power in making this strategic decision. For South Korea, the United States’ liberal model of global governance better suits its interests, but China is in greater need of allies, and thus may prove more malleable to South Korean preferences. For larger powers, like Japan, the decision calculus is much more simple. Large powers play a role in upholding the current international system, hold the capacity to unilaterally defend themselves, and thus almost always balance against rising powers.
For now, in the absence of overt US-Chinese antagonism, Asia-Pacific countries are pursuing strategies of hedging. In an attempt to balance the risks and rewards of engaging with China, many of these countries have made diplomatic and military overtures to the United States, while simultaneously deepening their economic integration with China. These strategies could be sustainable. China and the United States are not predestined to come into conflict. The large degree of economic integration between the American and Chinese economies, defensive nature of current conventional military technology, and deterrent impact of nuclear weapons are all forces pushing the United States and China away from conflict and toward cooperation and conciliation.
But as power transitions have historically been some of the most unstable and violent periods in world history, China’s neighbors will watch the US-Chinese relationship closely, and think carefully about how they make alliance decisions. Increasing polarization in the Western Pacific will serve as a bellwether of more combative US-Chinese relations and a more volatile and conflict-prone region.
20International
The UK’s Potential Departure from the EU Walker Swain
O
ne does not need to be a political buff to have seen or heard about the United Kingdom’s latest round of threats to leave the European Union. The UK has had a long and often less than pleasant relationship with two of Europe’s largest and most powerful nations, Germany and France, and also exhibits exceptionally strong national pride and historic tradition. With the respect to these and other considerations, the UK is certainly not without justification for desiring to keep Europe at arm’s length. That said, the economic benefits of EU membership further augment the UK’s economy, providing free trade within the European bloc and the ability to negotiate as a powerful, unified EU voice being the trademark examples. Some argue these benefits alone are reason enough for membership.
Why the sudden stir of controversy about a potential EU departure in the last several months? After all, UK dissatisfaction with the EU is not exactly a new phenomenon, given the haggling that has occurred over the years as the UK has carved its unique, rather piecemeal accession to the union. In fact, the UK’s ability to line item veto certain EU measures it does not wish to adopt – the Euro currency (€) being a glaring example – seems to present an argument for the UK maintaining its member status. Enjoying EU benefits while having the unique ability to cross out unattractive EU elements seems a dream scenario for membership in any type of organization, much less a trans-national union in Europe. Andrew Reynolds, professor of political science and chair of the curriculum in global studies,
suggested an alternative explanation: the stir over an EU departure could amount simply to a political exercise by the current UK government to garner voter support, playing on the nationalistic pride of their constituents. The UK is currently run by its first coalition government since World War II, and Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is no doubt taking heed of the added element of political competition in such a government – not only does the ruling party have to compete against opposition parties, but in a sense the Conservatives must also compete against their coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, for proportional control of the coalition. The UK public already trends towards the “euroskeptic” end of the spectrum for various reasons, especially the perception of an unnecessary level of regulation and loss of sovereignty that many feel comes with EU membership. Based on this public sentiment, it would seem a political gimme for conservatives to make the rather short jump to the nationalist appeal, which is, not surprisingly, already in line with their platform. However deft a political maneuver this may be for the party with the largest share of seats in the House of Commons, one must not treat this potential bluff as such. There is a perfectly good chance that Mr. Cameron’s threats are in earnest, and, if carried out, what they would mean for the UK - notwithstanding the EU as a whole – is another story.
A Long and Hot Arab Summer
International 21
Radhika Kshatriya
A
t first, many champions of democracy were overjoyed at the thought of the Arab Spring. After two years, much of the initial enthusiasm has vanished in the face of wars which drag on and conflicts that seem indefinite. Ethnic tensions have erupted and some authoritarian governments just refuse to budge. The Arab Spring, once a sign of hope, is now a source of disillusionment across the world. But it is important to remember that democracy never comes easy. Emerging democracies of the Arab world have had to grapple with fighting for independence, creating a constitution, building a government, civil war, and granting suffrage to women and minorities. In the US, we have had the luxury of dealing with these issues one after the other, but for the Arab world, all of these problems are to be dealt with simultaneously. And it is important to remember that these revolutions on the path to democracy have shed comparatively little blood, compared with other nations’ bloody struggles during the process of democratization. Of course it is going to be hard, and as humans, we are often myopic in our view of distant history. The problems are not due to the fact that the Arab world is not ready for popular sovereignty. Rather, it is because it is the nature of authoritarian regimes to divide their people in order to maintain power, injecting their subjects’ minds with paranoia at a constant drip in order to main-
tain control-- and we are seeing the result of these societal divisions as regimes start to crumble or fall. The most obvious case of this is in Syria. Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez al-Assad understood how to control different sects of the Syrian people. Bashar al-Assad himself has stayed in power based off of the loyalty within the Alawite clan-- his largest group of supporters. A dictator often draws power from minorities who fear a loss of rights if the majority were to come to power when the dictatorship collapses. The Alawite clan is a clear example of this phenomenon-- Alawites are (generally) a Shiite minority, which makes up approximately 13 percent of the Syrian population. Alawites control the military’s elite units, which are now the regime’s main instrument of repression, and have traditionally been fiercely loyal to the regime. Now, even those Alawites who are sympathetic to the opposition forces cannot speak out, for fear that they will be rejected by their own community, and will not be accepted by the Sunni majority, which demonstrates just how entrenched the tensions between different sects have become. And there have been violent clashes in the past, such as the 1981 Hama massacre, which left approximately 400 Sunnis dead. The Sunni majority does not have clean hands, either: 30 years ago members of the Muslim brotherhood singled out Alawite military cadets for ritual execution.
Under ousted Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak’s regime, a common remark was that the only safe place to open one’s mouth is in the dentist’s office. Egypt is a relatively homogeneous population, yet Mubarak still used many of the same tactics as Assad, by granting economic favors and control of previously staterun enterprise to a select group of elites, with these elites serving as his largest source of political strength. The trend continues in Bahrain, where in a majority Shiite country, a Sunni regime holds power. Shiite mosques and villages have been targeted time and again by the Sunni ruling party, and we have witnessed violent clashes between the police and the religious majority, after tensions due to decades of institutionalized inequality come to the forefront. Similarly, Libyan dictator Colonel Gaddafi stayed in power and maintained support through various machinations, like family ties, threats, paranoia and bribes. Modern day problems in the Arab world are often attributed to the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman empire, when “lines in the sand” were drawn to delineate the borders between nations without sufficient regard to ethnicity. It is important to remember the history of these people, and the means by which ethnic tensions were often stoked by rulers to maintain their own power. In no way does this mean that the Middle East is not ready for rule by, of, and for the people.
22International
Why We Must Pay Attention to Bahrain William Perlmutter
W
hat seems like a small dot on the map now could be the beginning of catastrophe for American foreign policy in years to come. Bahrain, a small country of a little more than one million, saw the emergence of an opposition movement amidst what is now called the Arab Spring. However, whereas opposition movements in Libya and Egypt received broad support from the West, such is not the case in Bahrain. This inconsistency could have unintended consequences in the years to come. Bahrain is a Shi’a-majority country under Sunni rule. Both Shi’a and Sunni groups staged large protests together in 2011, but were put down by the Gulf Cooperation Council, an economic and political union consisting of Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Thousands were arrested, beaten, tortured, and violated of their basic human rights as a means to maintain stability in the region. From an American foreign policy perspective, the lack of interest in Bahrain shows a complete inconsistency with regards to democracy promotion, a pillar of both the Bush and Obama Administrations. Even if America stays out of the mess in the Middle East, action by omission shows commitment to autocratic regimes and economic interests over the respect for human rights. At the same time, America is neither the only one to point a finger towards nor unlimited in capabilities to act.
King Hamad ibn Isa Al Khalifa has deployed what would appear to be an international armed force on his own people; the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR) estimates that the National Security Apparatus (NSA) within the Kingdom is 96 percent non-Shiite, 64 percent non-Bahrainis, and most telling for future turmoil in the country, “treading in the same footsteps as the Iranian ‘SAVAK’ Service, which caused wide violations to human rights in Iran… and the people’s revolution which ended the Shah’s reign in 1979” (BHCR, 2009). The religious tie of Shi’a Islam in Iran and Bahrain certainly show signs of political union
If uprising prevails, which side does America want to be on? We must pay attention to the trends in Bahrain because they mirror the events that occurred in Iran during the mid-1970s: riots, protests, torture, ambivalence from the West. The only thing missing is Islamic Revolution. America can choose to not be caught off guard if events unfold in a similar fashion. However, one must also realize the geopolitical calculations of USA inaction. Our ties with Saudi Arabia and the GCC are great, and undermining their decisions in their backyard would not be taken well. Furthermore, upheaval might do greater damage
We cannot give the Bahrainis people any additional reasons to dislike the West, as history shows us the backlash is certainly untidy. in the future. Furthermore, the Iranian-based Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain (IFLB) in 1981 was accused of staging a coup d’état in Bahrain, where members of the group (whom were also Iranian Revolutionary Guard members) attempted to topple the Al Khalifa regime and establish what Hasan Tariq Alhasan calls a ‘free Islamic order.’ Although the group is now disbanded, to assume that such groups could not be formed again would be a stretch. In short, the people of Bahrain have a common enemy – the regime, sectarian suppression, and the West – and the desire to attain freedom.
than good, as the lessons from Iraqi-Iranian convergence after 2003 provide an illuminating example. However, we can actively promote democracy in the country (while maintaining economic interests with the GCC) by engaging with the Bahrainis regime and banning military contracts which would be used for human rights atrocities. We cannot give the Bahrainis people any additional reasons to dislike the West, as history shows us the backlash is certainly untidy.
The Horror of Inequality
International 23
Casey Crow
O
n December 16, 2012, a 23-year-old physiotherapy student, Jyoti Singh Pandey, left a movie theater in South Delhi where she was watching The Life of Pi with a good friend—a 28-year-old software engineer. The two boarded an unauthorized bus, which they believed to
It is common for Indian families to participate in sex-selective abortions, sons are more likely to be educated than daughters, women’s health care is lacking, and in cases of sexual assault, women are stigmatized, and thus, more vulnerable to committing suicide or being disowned by
This phenomenon has been titled India’s “wake up call” to violence against women. be public transportation, where six men proceeded to gang rape the young woman while driving. The men raped her in rotation, violating her repeatedly with a metal rod, and causing horrendous internal damage that would lead to her death thirteen days later. The young woman’s companion worked to rescue her from her attackers, but was brutally beaten and knocked unconscious. Eventually both were thrown, stripped and bleeding, from the bus and forced to wait for assistance late at night. The horror of this act has taken the world by storm, and cries of justice are being heard far outside Indian borders. The incident perpetuated countless demonstrations and vigils, gathering together thousands of people in New Delhi, Kolkata, and Bangalore. Most importantly, this tragedy has resulted in an increased awareness of gender discrimination and sexual assault, and sparked a debate on the underlying causes of these trends in India—a country ranked as the worst G20 country in which to be a woman.
their families. Victim-blaming is often seen in sexual assault cases, as it is seen in this particular case, in which the perpetrators blamed the young women for not being “respectable” and for being out late at night. While this particular case has incited an undeniable response from the Indian people on behalf of justice and gender equality, rape is not a rarity in India. Over 24,000 cases of rape were reported in 2011, and of the cases reported only 26 percent have resulted in conviction. Rape complaints in India have risen by 25 percent between 2006 and 2011, but many women stay silent due to intense social stigmas. Unfortunately, the numbers of women experiencing sexual assault are not the only numbers rising. Records from 2011 show kidnappings of women going up by 19.4 percent, torture by 5.4 percent, and trafficking by 122 percent in the previous year. This phenomenon has been titled India’s “wake up call” to violence against women.
The Indian legislature is already making changes to laws on this matter. Former chief Justice J.S. Verma is heading a committee to propose amendments to criminal law dealing with sexual assault cases, resulting in suggestions to double the minimum sentence for gang rape—which is currently seven to ten years—or imposing the death penalty if the victim is killed. This horrific event has effectively caught the attention of men and women around the world, and acts as a wake up call not only for India, but our own country as well. A gang rape took place in Ohio less than a year ago, and sexual assault crimes have recently risen for the first time since 1993. Change in the way women are treated is absolutely necessary, that much is clear, but the question is where to begin. Before blame is shifted to and fro between governments, law enforcement, and parents, perhaps we should take the advice of a young Indian demonstrator holding a sign that reads, “Let us look at ourselves first.”
studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill