CPR Summer 2018 (XVII, 6)

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

MIDTERM ELECTIONS: WILL THE DEMOCRATS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE - What do the 115th special elections indicate?

-Interview with Professor Gregory Wawro

SUMMER 2018 Volume XVII, No. 6

Also see: Romney’s candidacy for the Utah Senate pg. 18 Climate Change spotlight: Capetown’s Water Crisis pg. 4 1

Masthead & Editor’s Note Editor-in-Chief Publisher

Bani Sapra Isabelle Harris

Design Editor

Theresa Yang

Art Editor

Peyton Ayers

Web Editors

Marketing Director Managing Editors

Copy Chief Senior Editors

Copy Editors

Iris Frangou Matheiu Sabbagh Christian Gonzalez Dimitrius Keeler Anamaria Lopez Vivian Casillas Audrey DeGuerrera Daniela Apodaca Benjamin Sachs Hannah Wyatt Sheena Qiao Alex Siegal Jake Tibetts Kinza Haq Caroline Kelly Dimitri Vallejo Helen Sayegh Sanam Jalinous Song Rhee Sonia Mahajan Henry Feldman Grace Protasiewicz

Dear readers, The Columbia Political Review has been busy this past spring. CPR held a high school essay contest, co-sponsored a panel with Core and published some fascinating pieces on both our website and seasonal print magazines. In our latest summer print edition, we feature two exclusive interviews alongside articles analyzing events in the US and beyond.

Recognizing the increasing impact of climate change on global affairs, we begin with Antara Agarwal’s poignant argument on Cape Town’s struggle with water conservation. Citing causes such as increased urbanization and sluggish governments, Agarwal suggests that other major cities such Beijing, Karachi, Istanbul and Bengaluru may soon face similar problems unless governments begin to seriously factor climate change into their policy making decisions.

We then pivot toward domestic politics, where this edition focuses on the upcoming midterm elections. CPR editor Dimitrius Keeler interviews Professor Wahro, a specialist in American politics and quantitative methodology to get his take on the prospects for the Democrats this November. In a similar vein, Sonia Mahajan draws trends from the 2017 Congress special elections to forecast whether the Democratic party is able to take back the house. Lastly, Emma Tueller Stone zeroes in on a particular candidate, Mitt Romney, as she discusses his politics, the politics of Mormon faith, and the delicate balance between the two.

Finally, we wrap up our summer edition by focusing on themes of democracy and human rights in different case studies. Fresh from her semester abroad, CPR editor Poorvi Bellur interviews a leading Moroccan human rights activist on the role of NGOs in protecting human rights and democracy in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. Lal Karaarslan examines the use of hunger strikes as a last resort to protest in the wake of the Erdogan administration’s emergency decree, and questions its effectiveness. We wrap up with Iqra Bawany, lead organizer of the Columbia Pakistan Symposium, who uses unique insights from her conference panelists to compare minority rights in Pakistan during partition versus today.

Happy reading!

Bani Sapra Editor-in-Chief

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this magazine belong to their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Columbia Political Review, of CIRCA, or of Columbia University.

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW 4: Parched: Why Capetown is Running Dry

by Antara Agarwal 8: The Liberal Judiary is Now Dead. Long Live the Liberal Judiciary

by Eric Scheuch 11: Will the Democrats Take Back the house? An Interview with Professor Gregory Wawro

by Dimitrius Keeler 16: What the 115th Congress’ Special Elections Say About the 2018 Midterms

Published by CIRCA

Summer 2018 Volume XVII, No. 6

18: Romney - A Nuanced Candidacy for the Utah Senate

by Emma Tueller Stone 22: A Balancing Act: An Interview with Mr Mohamed Elboukili A conversation on democracy under the Morrocan monarchy, human rights and activism.

by Poorvi Bellur 26: Hunger Strikes: Symbolism or Symptom

by Lal Karaarslan 29: Azadi - The Fight for Religious Freedom in Pakistan

by Sonia Mahajan

by Iqra Bawany

04 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

PARCHED: WHY CAPE TOWN IS RUNNING DRY Antara Agarwal For decades, Cape Town has been one of the most popular tourist destinations in the world. Nestled at the very tip of the African continent, Cape Town is home to a pleasant, Mediterranean climate and an enviable coast that skirts the Atlantic. It boasts remarkable socio-economic development relative to the rest of Africa, contributes around 10% of the national GDP, and has a steadily growing economy that is dominated by the rise of financial and manufacturing goods and services. For those who did not look too closely, Cape Town was South Africa’s crown jewel, an anomaly in a continent riddled with poverty and conflict. Yet, in January 2018, the Cape Town government declared that the city would approach Day Zero—the day all municipal water supplies would be cut off due to an acute water shortage— in mere months.

Cape Town’s water crisis instantly catapulted onto the international stage, and its government and people have since become the subject of intense global scrutiny. While climate change might be the most obvious cause of the crisis, a closer look reveals a government plagued by partisan politics, a society entrenched with inequality, 4

and a bureaucratic system plagued with inefficiency-- all of which have exacerbated a disastrously mismanaged civil crisis. Although the government recently postponed Day Zero to 2019, the situation in Cape Town remains dire. As important industries and citizens face debilitating cutbacks on water, the question arises: Who is to blame? While fingers point at local and national governments, the oppositional parties governing South Africa are playing their own blame game, and the loser stands to potentially forfeit not just national credit, but also the 2019 elections.

The African National Congress (ANC), South Africa’s national governing party, governs all of the nation’s provinces except one. The Western Cape, the province where Cape Town is located, is governed by the centrist Democratic Alliance (DA). Having won the Western Cape with a high margin in 2016, it is extremely probable that the party is set on expanding its power in 2019.

From the ANC’s perspective, one way to effectively discredit the DA would be to put them at the center of a debilitating crisis, such as the one currently underway in Cape Town.

As the province’s citizens increasingly blame the government for failing to predict and prepare for the crisis, the likelihood that the DA will be able to

substantially increase its voter share in the Western Cape and in other provinces in 2019 has fallen.

The DA is already facing heavy criticism from the national government and local organizations about its mismanagement of the crisis. In a detailed defense of its efforts to prepare for the crisis, the DA argued that a combination of factors—mainly a consistent lack of funding, unwilling cooperation from the national government, and insubstantial efforts from civilians—is to blame. It is unsurprising that the DA attributes part of the cause to financial constraints; the Western Cape Province has received less than half of the requested seven million dollars for disaster relief, a not altogether unanticipated consequence of the infamously corrupt South African government being strapped for cash in general. Where the DA must be held accountable, however, is in how it decided to spend what little money it did receive.

The first time the Water Research Commission predicted Cape Town would run dry was in 1990. As a result of rapid urbanization and population growth, the demand for water skyrocketed. Consumption far outpaced the rate at which rainfall could replenish water, even given normal rainfall patterns. Since then, Cape

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 05 Town has faced multiple periods of severe water shortages, most notably in the early 2000s. In 2007, the city government approved and implemented a 10-year water demand management strategy. Its primary goals were to reduce water loss, curb demand growth, and increase efficiency of current water management systems.

In 2009, the National Department of Water and Environmental Affairs informed the Western Cape government that despite the construction of the Berg River Dam, the Western Cape would run into water shortages by 2012 unless sufficient “demand management controls” were put into effect. These controls primarily relied on a public agreement to start using less water. Given that the DA was informed of this report, the lack of public awareness they raised is alarming. Civilians were made to seriously implement conservation methods only in 2017, when the reality of the drought could not be avoided. Even then, pecuniary penalties were enforced in 2018, only after the government declared an impending Day Zero. Much of what the DA attributes to civilian negligence of rules, therefore, can be chalked up to the party’s own delay in implementing these rules. Financing enforced, sustainable water conservation projects, and awareness campaigns over a period of years could have better

have helped curtail the magnitude of the current crisis, but they treated merely the symptoms of the problem rather than the problem itself.

prepared the population for such a sensitive crisis.

At the peak of the 2018 crisis, water levels in the Western Cape dams were dropping at a rate of one percent every day, with little replenishment.

Cape Town currently receives 99 percent of its water from dams that rely on rainfall despite facing increasingly erratic, climate-change driven rainfall patterns.

Over the past four years, the overall water levels dropped to a fourth of the dams’ full capacities.

An oncoming drought, therefore, was hardly news to South Africa.

In spite of this, most of the current solutions presented by the DA are predicated on the largely unchanging assumption that the primary source of water for the Western Cape province is rainwater. Once rain fills the dams, the DA’s solution focuses on more efficient collection and transportation of water to mitigate the effects of scantier rainfall. Desalination was supposed to tackle the remaining fallout; however, the glaring caveat to the DA’s efforts of the last decade is what happens when severe drought strikes.

This approach exemplified the fundamental, willful misunderstanding of the crisis on the part of local and national governments, which ultimately undermined the success of the program. Most of the water conservation measures that national and city governments sought to enact focused on reducing water pressure, fixing piping leakages (that often account for over 15% of lost water), installing desalination plants, and increasing the capacity of dams. National reports claimed this program was largely sucThe Western Cape government and cessful, noting a marked increase in the national government should have water savings. These solutions may instead implemented long-term water supply projects that provide provART CREDIT: PEYTON AYERS

5

06 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW inces in South Africa with alternative sources of water. The construction of such sustainable infrastructure is the responsibility of the Department of Water and Sanitation, a body of the national government that has failed astronomically at its job. Rather than focusing on sustainable, alternative water sources, the Department focused heavily on desalination, an expensive and largely energy-inefficient, stop-gap measure. Sustainable agriculture practices, like micro-irrigation and organic farming, are also solutions worth investing in that have gone largely ignored.

Planning for a water crisis in the long term necessarily involves economic and social shifts far greater in magnitude than the DA government is currently enforcing. Civilian use accounts for the largest share of water consumption in Cape Town, followed by agricultural use, which accounts for roughly a third of the city’s use and 80 to 90 percent of the province’s water supplies. Due to pressure from the government, farmers have cut back on water used for irrigation by 60 percent. Wine and citrus fruit exports, which account for a majority of Cape Town’s thriving foreign trade, are bound to be adversely affected. In 2016, Cape Town exported 113 million gallons of wine to Europe and the US. The restrictions on water consumption will not only strangle output, but also drive up the price of exports internationally, encouraging foreign importers to look elsewhere for their goods.

Similarly, food prices within the nation are projected to rise. This will affect middle and low-income citizens, who are already facing pressure from the government to cut back on water 6

consumption. DA leadership asserts that civilians have been flagrantly violating the 23 gallon/day limit and thereby accelerating the rate at which Cape Town is losing water. To put this into perspective, Americans on average use about 80 to 100 gallons of water a day. Asking civilians to make such drastic cuts to their daily water consumption is asking them to make significant lifestyle changes for which they have little to no time to prepare. To make matters worse, the population is not bearing the brunt of cutbacks on water equally.

restrictions and a lack of protection from rising food prices. Under such circumstances, the DA’s allegations of consumers irreverently flouting rules have understandably faced a lot of public backlash. Most of these people come from poor areas where they have been facing restricted access to water for years and are practiced in frugality with this precious resource.

Those with unrestricted access to water must be the focus of the DA’s conservation campaigns and penalties. As South African columnist Suné Payne puts it, “give the Big Spenders in the ‘burbs a 25-litre water bucket….

Inequality in Cape Town today re- Maybe then Day Zero won’t happen.” flects the city’s colonial past. Some parts of the city, usually predomi- There are several possibilities for the nantly white, boast enviable levels of delay in implementing more strindevelopment similar to those of the gent policies. Cape Town is one of US and Europe. Other parts can be the most popular tourist destinations considered ‘developing’ at best: dev- in the world, so spreading awareastating poverty, cheap infrastructure, ness about an impending water crisis and limited access to public goods and could damage that sector of the econservices plague the city. Enemies of omy. A far more concerning reason is the DA accuse it of perpetuating ‘eco- the differing political agendas of the nomic apartheid,’ an allegation that national and provincial governments. springs from the DA sanctioning the Public awareness of a looming crisis construction of unsustainable devel- would affect not only tourism, but opment projects in rich, white-pop- the DA’s reputation within the provulated areas that consume a grossly ince and the country as well. The DA disproportionate amount of the city’s has had to juggle a heavily restrictive water supplies. For all the DA’s belli- budget, an uncooperative national cose rhetoric against the various ac- government, and a generally slow butors exacerbating the crisis, some see reaucratic system that plagues many it as having deliberately done little to third-world democracies. It is possicut supplies to such large, water-con- ble that the provincial government suming projects, primarily in order to anticipated a highly-impeded road maintain its alliances. to long-term disaster management.

In such a case, publicizing a probInstead, the government’s creation of lem they knew they could not solve military checkpoints for water col- in time would be political suicide. A lection targets consumers from the more reasonable trade-off would inwrong socioeconomic strata. The volve working to mitigate the problower-middle and lower classes cur- lem behind the scenes until the crisis rently face the most severe conse- hits and then exercising damage conquences of the crisis in terms of water trol. After all, a well-managed crisis

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 07 will always reflect better than a pre- which members of government are dicted and then mismanaged one. functioning through party alliances and structures over government ones.

How, then, have the politics played out since the advent of this crisis? Marius Pieterse, a law professor at the For some, it has proved more of an University of Witwatersrand, argues opportunity than a liability. Such is that “When party structures become the case for Mmusi Maimane, the in- the most efficient way to solve local cumbent leader of the DA, and the government problems, shadow govface leading the party’s charge against ernments are created.” It then “bethe water crisis. In January, Maimane comes easier for internal party poliaddressed the national government tics to infiltrate city affairs” and “also about its lack of responsibility in deal- creates opportunities for corruption.” ing with the crisis. Many have been By circumventing government strucimpressed with the resistance posed ture and officials, Maimane has, inby Maimane and the local and pro- tentionally or not, further undervincial governments, lead by Western mined the perceived independence of Cape Premier (and former leader of governing institutions. As the united the DA) Helen Zille. Mayor Patri- front between Maimane and Zille riscia De Lille has been stripped of re- es to the occasion, it will be the DA, sponsibility concerning the crisis and an individual party, that receives credMaimane is now in charge of the gov- it, which detracts from people’s faith ernment task force assigned to deal in intra-governmental bodies and the with the issue at hand. Maimane’s governance system as a whole. It is new and aggressive #DefeatDayZero not inconceivable to see, then, how campaign has indicating to citizens the balance of power between the DA that the DA is taking concrete steps and the ANC might change over the toward solving the crisis. rest of the year, inevitably influencing the 2019 elections.

Maimane has a lot riding on his shoulders, but if he plays his cards right, Regardless of how Maimane and the this crisis could be the key to consoli- DA’s actions are interpreted constidating a powerful position within the tutionally, the creation of some sort Western Cape’s government as well of shadow governance is one of the as within the DA. Constitutional- many pertinent and concerning conly, there exists a clear delineation of sequences of the Cape Town water duties between the local, provincial, crisis. Deepening partisan politics in and national governments that may the current situation might sway the be contravened by higher-level or- public’s favour one way or another, gans in specific circumstances, such but it does nothing in the way of enas when a municipal government fails suring that various national and local to provide basic facilities according bodies cooperate to prevent such a to national law. As a Member of Par- crisis from arising again. Ideally, the liament, Maimane should ideally not united front should be one between be leading the government task force the national, provincial, and local on the crisis. These constitutional re- government. Such cooperation would strictions were put in place to avoid not only promote the legitimacy of situations exactly like this one, in the already discredited governance

system but also open and streamline channels of communication between various governmental bodies so that they may efficiently and cohesively deal with the current crisis and implement sustainable solutions for future droughts.

Day Zero threatens more cities than just Cape Town. The Centre for Environment and Science think tank in New Delhi lists other metropolitan cities on the brink of Day Zero, including Beijing, Karachi, Istanbul and Bengaluru. Most of these share similarities with Cape Town: increasing urbanization, heightened dependence on rainfall for water, and sluggish governments that are simply too slow in responding to the accelerating pace of climate change. Unfortunately, the reality of climate change is irrefutable. If there is anything to take away from Cape Town, it is that political parties, governments, and citizens must first publicly acknowledge the threat they face before working together to implement sustainable practices.

Antara Agarwal is a sophomore at Columbia, and is interested in policy-setting and sustainable development. You can contact her at aa3941@columbia. edu.

7

08 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

THE LIBERAL JUDICIARY IS DEAD. LONG LIVE THE LIBERAL JUDICIARY? Eric Scheuch Donald Trump’s animosity toward judges is a matter of public record.

In 2016, after a federal judge in Texas refused to dismiss a lawsuit against him, Trump took to Twitter to suggest that the judge’s Mexican heritage introduced bias into his ruling. In early 2017, after a District Court in Washington blocked his travel ban on visitors from certain countries, Trump tweeted, “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned.” After the 9th Circuit upheld the ruling, he called the decision “ridiculous.” And when a federal judge in San Francisco blocked his executive order on “sanctuary cities,” the President declared that, “the San Francisco judge’s erroneous ruling is a gift to the criminal gang and cartel element in our country, empowering the worst kind of human trafficking and sex trafficking, and putting thousands of innocent lives at risk.”

Given his distaste for the federal judiciary, President Trump must relish the massive opportunity that history has handed him: a record number of vacancies on the Federal District

Courts and Courts of Appeals, and a Senate eager to confirm his nominees. In addition to filling Antonin Scalia’s Supreme Court seat with Neil Gorsuch and maintaining the conservative majority on the Supreme Court, according to Time Magazine, President Trump has had more nominees —12— confirmed to the Federal Court of Appeals (FCA) in his first year than any other President in history (President Obama, for comparison, had three).

has called it “a gift from God.”

At the end of Barack Obama’s presidential term, Democratic appointees held wide majorities over Republican appointees on both the Federal District and Appeals Courts. The political impact of this liberal judiciary has been clear throughout the first 15 months of the Trump presidency: federal judges have repeatedly struck down or stayed major policy actions from the White House, including the travel ban, an executive order regardMoreover, the President is far from ing sanctuary cities, multiple regudone. There are currently 145 va- latory rollbacks, and the end of the cancies across all levels of the feder- DACA immigration program. Most al judiciary—over 16 percent of the or all of the judges in those rulings total number of seats—and more were Democratic appointees. vacancies are likely to emerge. In late March, Judge Stephen Reinhardt, a According to Russell Wheeler of the liberal legend on the 9th Circuit re- Brookings Institution, if the Presisponsible for the “ridiculous” ruling dent manages to fill the pending vaon the travel ban, passed away and cancies, the majorities on the District gave the President an opportunity Courts and Circuit Courts will flip to reshape the most liberal Court of from Democratic to Republican. It Appeals in the country. This is like- is difficult to overstate the political ly not to be the last appointment of implications of this change. Policy a Trump nominee to the Supreme rulings against the Trump adminisCourt: political blog FiveThirtyEight tration are less likely to occur at the estimates that given the current ages District Court level, and more likeof the Justices, there is a 67 percent ly to be overturned by the Courts of chance that one or more will leave the Appeals. In the long run, a more conbench before the end of Trump’s first servative federal judiciary could also term. The magnitude of this opportu- serve as a check on future Democratic nity is not lost on the President, who administrations, blocking and staying

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 09 policy initiatives just as liberal courts have done in the Trump presidency.

This new judiciary would also be likely to produce traditionalist rulings on hotly contested legal issues, ranging from abortion to affirmative action.

federal judiciary are under grave threat, the opposite is happening at the state level. Liberal candidates are winning races for state supreme courts across the country, placing longtime Republican majorities under threat and potentially forming a An example of the latter is a lawsuit political and judicial counterweight currently pending in Massachusetts to an increasingly conservative federDistrict Court, that accuses Harvard al judiciary.

University of discriminating against Asian American on account of affir- In fact, November 3, 2015 may well mative action. Should the court rule go down in history as one of the against Harvard, the appeal would most consequential days for Donald be heard by three judges from the Trump’s presidency. On that day in First Circuit Court of Appeals, which Pennsylvania, more than a year before currently has a Democratic majority. the President took office, Democrats However, by the time such an appeal won three open seats on the Pennreaches the First Circuit, it is possible sylvania Supreme Court, and with that the Circuit would be split 50-50 them, the majority. In January 2018, along Democratic-Republican lines, in a 5-2 decision, the Democratic according to calculations by Russell, justices struck down the Republimaking it more likely that the Ap- can-drawn state congressional map as peals Court will rule against Harvard an unconstitutional gerrymander, a and issue a precedent-setting decision district map purposely drawn to benon affirmative action. efit one party. In February, after the Republicans failed to fix the problem, But while liberal majorities in the the court drew a new map, upend-

Source: CNN POLITICS

ing the November midterm elections and, with them, the future of Donald Trump’s Presidency.

The political consequences of the court’s redrawn map have already surfaced. Two Republican House incumbents, Ryan Costello and Pat Meehan, have already announced their retirements, and their seats are seen as potential Democratic pickups in November. Overall, the new map could lead to a Democratic gain of three to five congressional seats, according to calculations done by Daily Kos Elections. In an election where control of the House will likely be decided by the narrowest of margins, should Democrats take the majority in November, they might very well owe that majority to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The influence of state supreme courts does not stop at gerrymandering; they also hold what is arguably the more important role of setting much of the legal precedent that impacts Ameri-

14 20172018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW 10 // // FALL SUMMER // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW cans’ daily lives. For the vast majority of cases, the state supreme court is the final court of appeal, after which the outcome of the case is settled. The only court higher than state supreme courts is the Supreme Court of the United States, which, historically, has been reluctant to overrule state decisions. In 2007, for example, just 22 cases from state supreme courts were reviewed by the Supreme Court out of the thousands of cases reviewed annually at the state level. As a result of this custom, much of the judicial policy in America is determined by state supreme court justices. State supreme courts can set civil and criminal judicial standards, review public policy, and strike down state laws as unconstitutional.

the country with remarkable success.

Pennsylvania was not a lone Democratic success. In a 2016 race in North Carolina, Democratic challenger Michael Morgan beat incumbent Republican justice Robert Edmunds by almost 10 points and flipped the North Carolina Supreme Court. And on April 3, 2018, liberal candidate Rebecca Dallet beat Michael Screnock to a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, endangering the longtime Republican majority that has consistently upheld key conservative legislation such as right-to-work laws.

All of these races are notable because they took place in states with congressional maps heavily gerrymandered to favor Republicans. The changing political composition of those courts threatens a replay of the Pennsylvania case: redrawn district maps, Democratic gains in the House, and significant changes to the nation’s political landscape. The Democratic establishment seems to recognize this opportunity: the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, (a group formed by former Attorney General Eric Holder, with the backing of former President Obama, to fight Republican gerrymandering in midterm elections), spent $165,000 on the Wisconsin race. And future Democratic targets are not limited to Wisconsin: five states that President Trump won by fewer than ten points (Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia and Texas) have both a Republican gerrymandered map considered as “extreme” as Pennsylvania’s, and a Republican majority on their state supreme court, according to the New York Times.

tem. While much of the coverage of this year’s midterms has focused around races for federal and state legislatures and governors, the future of both federal and state courts will be decided in this November’s elections. If Democrats manage to retake the Senate, they can block President Trump’s judicial nominees and halt the conservative takeover of the federal judiciary in its tracks. If they make gains on state supreme courts, they can change policy on the state level and threaten the gerrymanders that protect Republican majorities in the House and state legislatures across the country.

If, on the other hand, Republicans manage to maintain their Senate majority and keep Democratic gains in judicial races to a minimum, they can cement their control over the third branch of government. Because state supreme court justices have long terms and federal judges have lifetime tenure, whoever wins this November will likely control both the state and federal judiciary for years to come.

And with legislative and executive systems gridlocked on all levels, policy in recent years has increasingly been shaped through the judicial system.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties have a historical opportunity this November to control the judiciary for a generation. We will see who takes it.

Judicial elections are not unique to Pennsylvania: 22 states elect judges of their highest court in an either partisan or nonpartisan election. The election of judges has been heavily criticized over the years for a number of reasons, not least of which is that the practice allows political parties to have too much influence over the composition of the high courts, and makes the courts too political. This is even the case in nonpartisan elections, where the candidates often run with the support of a political party.

For several decades, judicial politics has largely been a Republican game.

It started when a little-known Texas political operative named Karl Rove flipped the Texas state supreme court Eric Scheuch is a rising sophomore at from entirely Democratic to entireColumbia College. You can contact him ly Republican, and has culminated at egs2161@columbia.edu with Republican majorities that form more than half of elected state high courts. But in recent years, Democrats, recognizing the potential political impact of state supreme courts, We are approaching a pivotal mohave begun to invest in races across ment for the American judicial sys-

FEATURE

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 11

WILL THE DEMOCRATS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE? Professor Gregory Wawro specializes in American politics and political methodology at Columbia. In light of the upcoming midterm elections this November, CPR editor Dimitrius Keeler decided to sit down with Professor Wawro to discuss his thoughts on the Trump administration, the Mueller investigation, and the recent upheavals in the Republican Party, as well as the future political composition of Congress.

CPR: After over a year under the Trump administration, what are your general impressions of his presidency thus far? And how would you characterize his relationship with Congress?

GW: Wow, where do I even start? I think this administration has been one of the most unusual we’ve seen in American history. From the very beginning, the way the administration has been run, the issues it’s faced, the problems it’s created—there’s really nothing like it in American history. You can look back at other scandal-plagued administrations but in the modern period, there’s nothing that compares to this. You can see that the administration has largely followed the path that the campaign has set out before it. It’s chaotic and unorthodox, and does things that

most political actors would never do.

surprising.

With respect to the administration’s relationship with Congress, I think it’s been pretty strange. I’m mostly surprised at the degree to which members of Congress have deferred to Trump. I think this reflects that the congressional leaders appreciate how difficult it is to actually win the presidency. After eight years of Obama, the outlook of Republican leaders in Congress has changed. The fact that they controlled the House, Senate, and Executive made them think, ‘now we can accomplish all these things that weren’t possible when Obama was in office, but to do so we have to follow in line behind the person who actually won.’ This view helps explain why many have remained relatively loyal. But given the political liability that Trump poses, I’ve been surprised at the extent to which they’ve stuck by him. My sense was that as it became clear that his approval ratings were going to remain extremely low, and that he was going to do eratic things, make controversial statements, change positions on policy, and leave members of Congress to twist in the wind, that they would really start to distance themselves from him. That hasn’t really happened which I find

Just look at the upcoming elections- I mean the writing is on the wall that the Democrats will take back the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterms. The odds are much longer in the Senate, but it’s not out of the question. It’s surprising that Republicans have not done more to try and insulate themselves from what I think will be a tsunami, not just a wave, but a tsunami that will really damage Republicans’ opportunities to enact their agenda.

CPR: Short of the tax bill, we have seen few bills passed by Congress.

How much do you think this lack of productivity will hurt Republicans during this election cycle?

GW: It may hurt them a fair amount, though there is not enough social science knowledge on the relationship between electoral success and productivity. A lot of political scientists think the two are related, the thinking being that you have to run on something of a record, but I’m less convinced of this than others. I think you can be just as effective at winning elections by running against things. The 2010 and 2006 midterms 11

12 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

“But overall, you know that the ordinary voter doesn’t really know about what Congress does or what it has or has not achieved.” are good examples of this. That said, the Republicans’ inability to deliver on campaign promises like repealing Obamacare is a problem. You know, tax reform is the one thing they have been productive on but I’ve been reading accounts that show that it’s likely to be more of a liability for them this election. Voters don’t seem all that impressed with it. It may help them with donors. By every indication, wealthy individuals will do better under the new tax regime, and perhaps they will be willing to spend some of the additional wealth they’ll have by donating to Republican candidates. But overall, you know the ordinary voter doesn’t really know much about what Congress does or what it has or hasn’t achieved. The people who are more knowledgeable about this thing, they’ll like the tax cuts if they’re Republican constituents, but at the same time they’re not going to be happy about all the other promises on which the Republicans have not been able to deliver.

To compensate for this lack of productivity, I think what we’re likely to see is that the Republicans’ strategy will trend more towards making the case that they need the voters’ support or else the Democrats will come

FEATURE passed, so naturally they’ll turn to the executive action.

I think what really separates the Trump administration in this area is simply that they’ve executed these executive orders poorly. The travel ban was clearly suspect, as indicated by the courts. What they’re doing isn’t that out of the ordinary, but how they are is. This raises questions about competence, reflected in the responses to [the Trump administration’s] actions, whether it’s public outrage in and reverse a lot of what Trump has or judges simply saying ‘what you’re been able to do through unilateral ac- attempting is illegal.’ tions, like his judicial appointments and executive orders. But overall I CPR: You mentioned how you think don’t think lack of productivity will the scandals of the Trump adminisbe a prevailing factor in this election. tration will be a strong determinant Scandals will be more influential, just of this upcoming election- to what because it’s easier for people to grasp extent do you think the Mueller inand it’s easier to cast a vote against vestigation will become an major issue for the administration? things than for them.

CPR: Speaking of unilateral action, many people have been highly critical of Trump’s use of the executive order thus far, saying he’s overstepping his authority and so on. What have been your impressions on the matter?

GW: Well I think it’s entirely within his power to do these kinds of actions and it demonstrates a degree of hypocrisy between the parties. You know, your position on executive orders largely depends on whether your party controls the presidency or not.

When Obama was using a lot of executive orders, Republicans were up in arms and now that they control the White House, they’re fine with Trump’s unilateral actions. I don’t think what Trump is doing here is that far out of the ordinary. Even though his party controls both houses, they’re still struggling to get things

GW: I think this is a pretty big deal.

Relative to other investigations like this, I think the Mueller investigation has already produced a lot more than what we’ve seen in comparable investigations. Take the Ken Starr investigation during the Clinton administration. That took years for them to find anything, and in the end what they did find wasn’t even what they were looking for in the first place.

Starr’s investigation was sprawling, and while they did unearth some misdeeds of Clinton’s, they found nothing on the original targets in the Whitewater case.

Mueller, on the other hand, has already seemed to find transgressions that are centrally related to the core focus of the investigation. The indictments he’s served and the guilty pleas he’s secured are really quite signifi-

FEATURE cant. It certainly gives the impression that there’s too much smoke for there not to also be fire. Even so, at the end of the day the campaign might be cleared, but the way the administration has responded makes it seem like there’s a lot more left to be uncovered.

I don’t think we should speculate too much about the eventual outcome of the investigation, but I think it’s important to note that at this point it is incorrect to say there is no collusion simply because Mueller hasn’t found it yet. It’s still very early, it’s a complex investigation with lots of players, and the stakes are very high. I don’t think Mueller will issue a report until he’s absolutely sure.

Though I must say, I think the raid on Cohen’s offices is a truly stunning development in this investigation.

Historically, it really puts us in same kind of situation as what transpired during the investigation of the Nixon administration. I mean, to be able to do something like that, the people you’d have to convince that such an action would hold up under legal scrutiny and to secure those warrants, they would have to have really compelling evidence of crimes committed. It’s quite alarming.

CPR: Not to get too far ahead of ourselves, but in the event that the investigation does conclude that there was in fact collusion, what could the fall out look like?

GW: Well, I agree with most legal scholars that the President can’t be indicted. I think there could be something like censure, but the ultimate question is ‘does this lead to impeachment?’. And then will that lead to conviction in the senate? If there’s

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 13 evidence that members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russians but the President was not involved, or they can’t find evidence that he was, then I think ultimately this will be decided in the court of the elections. We’ll see what else comes out between now and the midterms, but my sense is that Republicans will pay dearly like they did in 1974 election when the Nixon investigation was ramping up. If there’s evidence that Trump was involved, or that the President has been compromised by past actions, they figure out that the russian intelligence has compromising material on him or something, then I think that would inevitably lead to impeachment. It’s really hard to see conviction in the Senate, unless there’s this overwhelming evidence where the only way to save the Republican party would be to exercise Trump. In this scenario, I think we’re more likely to see resignation than anything. Trump is no quitter but he’s someone who knows when to cut his loses and would likely prefer that option to the alternative proceedings.

though their chances have definitely improved.

There’s still a lot of time for us to get a better sense of these races and lots can change between now and November.

Suppose Trump negotiates a deal with North Korea, that could have an impact. It won’t reverse a giant wave but it could set the tide some—I guess I’m mixing metaphors at this point! But that said, you can point to plenty of examples of giant foreign policy accomplishments that didn’t really end up helping the President much. The best example here is that of George H.W. Bush. The First Gulf War was viewed as a huge success and he recorded some of the highest approval ratings ever, but subsequently he lost his reelection bid. The public had more or less forgotten about it by the time the 1992 election rolled around.

CPR: I’ve seen some early ads and messaging coming out of the RNC that seems like they’re trying to make this race about none other than Nancy Pelosi—what do you make of this CPR: I know you’re predicting a tsu- strategy? If you were the Republican nami, not just a wave, in favor of the National Committee, how would Democrats, but they face a tough you approach this election? map in the Senate. How do you see their odds right now?

GW: Ha that’s a tough question! The RNC has a problem and it’s really GW: You know, I haven’t sat down about this notion of tribalism, where and gone race by race yet to do all the Republican voters have fractured into math, but the political geography is two distinct camps. The test for Rejust really unfavorable to Democrats. publican voters has become “do you That said, they won in Alabama, and support Trump or not?” There are they’ve been winning these special these ardent Trump supporters, who elections. To win in the Pennsylvania are not going to vote for just any 18th district is pretty striking, and it Republican, and then you also have suggests that they can win in deep red more moderate supporters who are territory. I can’t give you an exact fig- unhappy with the way things have ure, but I still think it’s unlikely that been going thus far. If it’s that tribthe Democrats recapture the Senate, al and the party is split into a Trump 13

14 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW wing and an establishment wing, the question is how to negotiate that in the upcoming elections? I don’t know to what extent this is really true: this view is based primarily on journalistic reporting about what’s going on in the electorate, but in the past a party’s strategy in this situation would be to simply distance themselves from the President. And that strategy has worked in the past. But it seems like there’s a different dynamic here created by Trump’s ascendancy in the Republican party. Trumpism has become to define a good deal of what the Republican party is about. The party has experienced this schism for a while now, between the more extreme bloc and the more moderate or establishment bloc, but Trump seems to only have exacerbated that.

As a result, it’s really hard to devise a strategy to adequately navigate this divide. One possibility might be for candidates to simply avoid talking about the president, but even that could backfire for supporters who want to see him at their rallies and have him at the forefront of the race.

Tou mentioned the Nancy Pelosi ads and it’s starting to seem like that’s the only thing they can do at this point.

An age old strategy is tieing candidates to unpopular national figures.

They don’t have Obama anymore but they still have her. They tried to make the race in the Pennsylvania 18th about Pelosi and, by the measure of who won the election, they failed.

It’s also interesting to note that the ads you mentioned were not run by the Republican candidate, but by the national party. I doubt they’ll realize much more success if this Pelosi line is a broader strategy that they’re going to pursue in the national campaign.

CPR: The RNC has been rocked by 14

FEATURE

“We’ll see what else comes out between now and the midterms, but my sense is that Republicans will pay dearly like they did in 1974 election when the Nixon investigation was ramping up.” several scandals lately, including the resignations of Michael Cohen and Elliott Broidy. Do you anticipate this having any impact on their abilities this election?

GW: It’s never good to lose people, but from what I’ve seen from Michael Cohen, I don’t have a lot of faith that he was going to be a great leader anyways for the RNC. I don’t know much about what Broidy was contributing to their efforts. Having your organization plagued by scandal can have negative effects on donor confidence, and can make it challenging to execute some of the organization’s responsibilities with respect to voter mobilization, etc.,but the bigger issue is the significant momentum on Democrats’ side. It’s more about the overall unhappiness at the current state of affairs, so I don’t think the issues within the RNC will be a prevailing factor here.

CPR: A recent Quinnipiac poll has Beto O’Rourke trailing Cruz by only 3%, do you think he has a decent a shot at unseating Cruz?

GW: I think he’s got a shot, but I must say polls like this really should

be taken with a grain of salt. People really aren’t paying attention to the election at this point, and most won’t start tuning in until after Labor Day. I think it would be really hard to lose someone as senior as Cruz, but you have to look at trends. If trends keep going against Cruz in the coming months, then that’s informative, but a single poll taken at a time when people aren’t paying attention isn’t a good indicator. It’s definitely still too premature to call it a toss up, but we need to pay attention.

CPR: What do you make of Paul Ryan’s retirement?

GW: This is a pretty major event. On the one hand, I appreciate Ryan being forthright rather than going through a campaign that his heart is not in. But at the same time it’s hugely deflating for the Republican party. Here is one of your top leaders, top fundraisers, one of the people best positioned to raise money and to motivate constituents, and he’s basically saying “I’m done with this”. He claims he’s going to campaign just as hard but it’s’ going to be a lot more difficult when he can’t present to donors as the leader of the institution. All of his promises

FEATURE

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 15

become less credible because he is no some deserved- but overall I think longer in a position to make these de- she’s been a very effective leader for cisions. This really is a big deal.

Democrats. She’s done what she needs to to make the party successful.

CPR: Many people might not be Anyone who the Democrats would very familiar with Kevin McCarthy, put forward would be controverif he does in fact secede Ryan, what sial. Steny Hoyer would presumably can we expect of his leadership? be next in line, but I don’t think he would be above the type of controGW: That’s a good question. I think versy Pelosi seems to attract. He cer[we can expect] more of the same tainly wouldn’t embody a younger to be honest. There’s basically a line leadership that some are calling for. of succession in the House when it What the Democrats can do is potencomes to leadership, and he’s been tially bring younger, more ideological part of the current inner circle for diversity within the leadership itself. a while now. I don’t think we’ll see But having Pelosi step aside would much change. I think the bigger not be the best move for them, espequestion - and this goes back to how cially considering her ability to fundRyan’s decision makes it difficult or raise. Also it’s worth noting that in Republicans- is the speakership race today’s climate, it really is something could end being wide open actually. special that the only female speaker in Suppose Republicans end up holding history has been a Democrat. That’s a reduced majority. The election for inspiring to a lot of folks. You wonder speaker takes place in the House at to what extent large-tent Democrats large and the way a party controls the and their commitment to diversity speakership is by getting pretty much would be hindered by turning on her. everyone in their party to vote for one candidate. If the Tea Party wing enters a candidate who steals a portion of the votes, that could actually lead to a democratic becoming speaker despite still being in the minority.

Even though McCarthy is the heir apparent, I don’t think they can make any promises that he’ll be the leader or come out on top in an election.

The dynamics are so crazy right now, all bets are off.

CPR: Nancy Pelosi remains one of the most divisive figures in the country —if the Democrats take the house can we expect her to return as Speaker or is it time for someone new to take over?

GW: That’s a tough question. I think Nancy Pelosi has taken a lot of heat15

16 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

FEATURE

WHAT THE 115TH CONGRESS’ SPECIAL ELECTIONS SAY ABOUT THE 2018 MIDTERMS Sonia Mahajan On March 13, 2018, Democratic candidate Conor Lamb won a special election that earned him a House seat representing Pennsylvania’s 18th district, a heavily Republican area of the state that overwhelmingly voted for President Trump in 2016. Lamb’s victory comes on the heels of Democrat Doug Jones’s narrow victory in an Alabama Senate race to replace the seat vacated by current Attorney General Jeff Sessions in December 2017. Like western Pennsylvania, the state of Alabama is historically a Republican stronghold. Jones is the first Democratic Senator to hail from Alabama since 1994, when incumbent senior Senator Richard Shelby (RAL) switched from the Democratic to the Republican Party.

Democrats are interpreting these victories—along with several other Democratic victories in various special elections for state legislatures—as a good omen for the upcoming midterm elections, which will take place on Tuesday, November 6, 2018. After the Alabama special election results were announced, data journalist Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight declared, “special elections so far point to a Democratic wave in 2018.” Jones’s and Lamb’s victories have helped shift the balance of power in Con-

gress toward—though not to—the Democrats. At the beginning of the 115th Congress, created on January 3, 2017, Democrats held 194 House seats to the Republicans’ 241, and 48 Senate seats to the GOP’s 52. By March 2018, Democrats held 196 House seats compared to the Republicans’ 239, and 47 Senate seats compared to the GOP’s 51. However, the party gap in the Senate is even smaller than it may initially seem, as two independents caucus with the Democrats. Yet despite buzz around several special Congressional elections— such as Georgia’s 6th district in June 2017, where Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff narrowly lost to Republican candidate Karen Handel— and Jones are the only two special-election candidates who have managed to flip previously Republican seats for national office.

are significantly more Democrats up for re-election in the 2018 midterms than Republicans. This means that the Democrats have to focus not only on keeping 12 of the 26 seats up for re-election that aren’t “solidly Democratic,” but must also campaign in Republican territory to flip at least two seats. And even if Democrats pull off winning a whopping 28 seats out of the 35 seats up for election, they will be left with only a slight 51-49 majority. As Jasmine Lee and Alicia Parlapiano of The New York Times conclude, “It is numerically possible, but there is little room for error.”

Others are not so sure that Democrats can win in November without a change in strategy. Many have been quick to note that special circumstances surrounded both Lamb’s and Jones’ victories. Current Senator Doug Jones ran against Republican Roy Moore, an accused sexual predator who preyed upon young women and girls. Despite multiple allegations of sexual assault, Moore still received 48.3% of the vote and the endorsement of the President of the United States. Jones’s victory is widely credited to large African-American voter turnout, especially among African-American women, who were especially outraged by Roy Moore’s sexual misconduct and ties to white supremacy.

The Democrats will likely remain the minority party in both the Senate and the House for the rest of the 115th Congress; however, they hope to emerge as the majority party in the 2018 midterm elections. This election cycle presents a challenging map for Democrats in the Senate. According to a New York Times analysis, the Democrats need to win 28 seats to control the Senate, compared to the 9 seats that the Republicans need.

These difficult odds are compounded given the state-by-state context of each individual race. By chance, there The uniqueness of Lamb’s election

FEATURE

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 17 creating an electoral map far more favorable to Democrats. In February 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declared the state’s current district boundaries unconstitutional and drew new district lines. While this is generally considered a victory for Democrats, as the preceding map heavily favored Republicans, this new map also completely eliminates the Pennsylvania 18th district, which Conor Lamb had just won, in time for the 2018 midterm elections. The New York Times reports that Lamb’s residence will end up located in the slightly-less-Republican Pennsylvania 17th, where many have speculated he may make a bid for re-election.

did not lie so much in his opponent—the barely-noted Republican Rick Saccone—as in his own opinions which sometimes strayed from Democratic orthodoxy. Lamb served as a Marine and hinted that he owns guns. Although he strongly supports background checks and mental health screenings for new gun owners, he does not support banning certain firearms such as the AR-15. He is also a former federal prosecutor who was tough on crime and believes “life begins at conception,” but respects women’s right to choose. Lamb’s conservative leanings likely appealed to Trump supporters in western Pennsylvania without offending most mainstream Democrats (although some progressives have taken issue with his middle-of-the-road stances).

However, many seem to think that Lamb’s success is a result of his specific situation rather than a nationally applicable strategy. As the Brookings Institution notes, Conor Lamb was

nominated internally through Pennsylvania Democratic Party leadership, not through a primary as is usual.

Jonathan Rauch of the Brookings Institution thus suggests that the Democratic Party’s strategic selection of Lamb may have also contributed to his win.

However, an increased number of young people—like Lamb—running for office across the country seem to point to an increased likelihood that Democrats can take back the Senate, the House, or both in 2018. Statistical analyses from FiveThirtyEight support this projection. In addition, multiple cases are scheduled to come before the Supreme Court and various other state and federal courts challenging the boundaries of districts that are gerrymandered along racial or partisan lines. Depending on how these courts rule, this could change the makeup of some districts and eliminate others entirely, ART CREDIT: PEYTON AYERS

While statistical analyses and trends, along with many political pundits, suggest that the Democrats may have a real shot at taking back the House and Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, it is not clear what strategies and types of candidates will help them get there. Democrats can only hope that whatever lessons they gleaned from the special elections of 2017 and 2018 are well-applied during the 2018 midterm elections.

Sonia Mahajan is a first-year in Columbia College studying Political Science and Sustainable Development. She is from a small town near San Francisco, California, and is a copy editor for the Columbia Political Review. She is also a writer and an editor for the Columbia Undergraduate Law Review.

She can be reached via email at sonia. mahajan@columbia.edu.

17

18 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

ROMNEY: A NUANCED CANDIDACY FOR THE UTAH SENATE Emma Tueller Stone How is Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, allowed to run for a seat on the Utah Senate? The former Governor of Massachusetts is not an immediately obvious choice to represent the midwestern state. However, the constitutional requirements for running for Senate are minimal. To qualify, Romney only needed to “be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen” upon election (U.S. Constitution, Article 1, section 3, clause 3). Thanks to a summer home in the Wasatch Mountains, Romney is not only permitted to run in Utah—he is, upon second glance, a nearly perfect candidate.

Currently, Romney has an approval rating that fluctuates around 64 percent. In 2012, during his presidential bid, he won Utah with 72.8 percent of the vote, a 10.5-point increase from John McCain’s victory in 2008, giving him all of Utah’s six electoral votes. Significantly, in the 2012 election, Romney also received a higher proportion of the vote than Orrin Hatch, the incumbent senator whose seat Romney is now trying to fill, who only received 65.2 percent of votes.

This difference is significant, as Utah

is one of nine straight-ticket voting states, meaning that Utah allows its voters to check a box and vote for all of a single party’s candidates on the ballot. The variation between Senator Hatch and Romney shows that there was a group of voters who opted not to vote a straight-ticket, for a variety of reasons. In his current campaign, Romney’s staff is likely hoping that one of those reasons was his unique appeal to Utah voters.

since as of 2016, the Utah State Legislature was stacked 91-12 in favor of Mormon legislators. Romney is the highest-profile Mormon politician of his generation, joining a long legacy of Mormon political aspirants, including the church’s founder, Joseph Smith, Jr., who ran for US President in 1844. As a Mormon well-known for espousing family values, Romney has gained the devotion of many pious LDS voters. His state loyalties, then, are proving much less importUtah’s demographics, on a surface ant than his cultural ones. level, seem to be those of a typical red state. The majority of both the State Yet, the LDS church has complicatHouse and Senate are Republican; ed issues by taking several surprising the voting districts look like jigsaw stances for a conservative church in puzzle pieces, shaped around the rare the past few years. Most notably, it blue island in a sea of red. Utah is has worked with Utah politicians to massively pro-life and has vehement- make refugees a major religious and ly opposed same-sex marriage, and political concern. For example, the “I has recently brought these concerns Was a Stranger” initiative encouraged to court. According to the most re- LDS church membership to reach cent census, Utah is about 90 percent out to and work with refugees, and as white. a result, Utah has more refugees than any other state. Why a traditionalThat being said, Utah is unique ly conservative party might choose among red states in that 60 percent to make such a progressive move is of its population are members of worth questioning: from a cynical the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter standpoint, this LDS church policy Day Saints (also referred to as LDS plays into a push to make the Moror Mormons). Romney is a lifelong mon church more “global,” now that member of the Mormon church the majority of its adherents live outwho served as a bishop in Belmont, side of the US. Massachusetts. This might be his best qualification for inserting him- Similarly, the LDS church has taken self into the Utah Republican party, a strong position on immigration is-

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 19

REFUGEE ARRIVALS TO UTAH PER YEAR

Source: REFUGEE PROCESSING CENTER sues. It condemned the debates over DACA that occurred earlier this year, saying that “we call upon our national leaders to create policies that provide hope and opportunities for those, sometimes referred to as ‘Dreamers,’ who grew up here from a young age and for whom this country is their home. ” These are statements that would not sound out of place in a Democratic senator’s statement on the DACA debate.

ers once the LDS church issued this statement. Similarly, it would be inaccurate to say that Romney’s Mormon faith dictates everything he does in the political world. Still, a Mormon image is critical to election in Utah and, in this current moment, the Mormon image includes some positions that seem to border on outright liberalism.

For these reasons and others, Romney seems to have cultivated an image Of course, the LDS church making a of opposition to the Trump Adminstatement doesn’t always dictate what istration. He spoke out against some Mormon senators or congressmen of then-candidate Trump’s positions, and -women will do, as evidenced by calling him “a fraud” and calling for the fact that Orrin Hatch and Mike Trump to release his tax returns. Since Lee did not immediately abandon then, Romney has called on Trump their party to defend the Dream- to take stronger positions opposing

racism after the violence in Charlottesville, and to extend more empathy toward immigrants. Additionally, he has spoken out against sexual assault.

Romney also has reasons for opposing Trump based not in politics, but in faith. Powerful members of the Trump team, specifically Steve Bannon, have made anti-Mormon comments that did not receive much press in the mainstream media, but are well known in Mormon circles. Bannon once accused Romney of using a Mormon Mission in France to avoid serving in the Vietnam War, while also saying that Roy Moore, a former Alabama senate candidate who was accused of sexually assaulting minors, “has more honor and integrity in a pinky finger” than Romney and his 19

20 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW family have in their DNA. Romney is not the only Mormon senator to take a strong anti-Trump stance: Arizona Senator Jeff Flake has regularly condemned the immorality of the current administration and famously refused to vote for the president, documenting his ethical qualms in his book, Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle. Both Romney and Flake have been posited as possible 2020 Trump challengers. Flake spoke out against Trump’s executive order prohibiting immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries in 2017, causing many Mormons to speculate that he was taking the church’s positions on immigration straight to Washington.

Similarly, Flake publically donated $100 to the current Democratic Alabama senator, Doug Jones’, campaign, in order to openly oppose Roy Moore; Flake posted about this donation on Twitter, saying “country over party.” This donation was made after Steve Bannon’s anti-Mormon comments. However, in contrast to Romney’s current political success, Flake is leaving his Senate seat in 2018, due in part to opposition to the anti-Trump positions he has taken.

Romney and Flake are part of a long Mormon tradition of making their faith political. As mentioned before, Joseph Smith ran for president on a platform of religious freedom. Smith also spoke of something called the “White Horse Prophecy” that gained national attention during Romney’s 2012 Presidential run. This prophecy, in essence, states that Mormons will eventually save Washington from corruption like the white horse from

the New Testament’s Book of Revelations. This prophecy is apocryphal and is not mainstream doctrine in the LDS church by any means, but is part of a long tradition of Mormon leaders speaking out about politics.

Brigham Young, the first governor of Utah and second president of the Mormon church, once said that “if the Constitution of the United States is to be saved at all, it must be done by this Mormon people.” In the most recent meeting of the general LDS church body, the current president, Russell M. Nelson, made a point of encouraging all Mormons to vote and participate in their government, while also maintaining a non-partisan stance. Some Mormons, particularly liberal Mormons, use this history to speculate that individuals like Flake and Romney might just “save” the United States from the presumed evils of a Trump presidency.

This hope has not become a reality because, in spite of all of the reasons liberal and moderate Mormons and Utahns want to think of LDS legislators as saviors, Romney has also tried to work with the Trump administration. He somewhat infamously interviewed for the Secretary of State position that eventually went to Rex Tillerson. The entire process resulted in little more than a bad photo op at a dinner where a chagrined Romney posed with a smirking Trump, generating a plethora of memes about Romney’s lack of spine. Romney’s website for his Senate campaign expresses support for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is unsurprising given that Paul Ryan was his 2012 vice-presidential nominee. His website also announces Romney’s opposition to the Affordable Care Act

(ACA), which he would like to see repealed and replaced by something that escapes “one-size-fits-all bureaucracy.” And, defying his former stance in support of immigrants, Romney said in February that he would be even more of a “hawk” on immigration than Trump, much to the frustration of the liberal Utah Mormons who thought Romney might be a moderate voice. In March, Romney accepted Trump’s endorsement for his Senate campaign, tweeting his thanks in true presidential style.

This pattern of flip-flopping typifies Romney’s political record. As Governor of Massachusetts, Romney created something very similar to the ACA, then dubbed “Romneycare,” but condemned Obamacare while campaigning in 2012. In 1994, Romney said that “abortion should be safe and legal in this country,” but is now staunchly pro-life. In 2002, he supported tough gun laws in Massachusetts, but his website puts him firmly on the pro-gun end of the spectrum for the 2018 Utah Senate race. While changing one’s mind is absolutely possible and really ought to be encouraged within a healthy government, Romney’s position changes often seem too politically expedient to be the result of a genuinely repentant heart.

Much of Romney’s right-wing opposition in his Utah race comes from critics who say that Romney is one person in Massachusetts and another in Utah, such that his constituents have no idea who he would be in Washington. Mike Kennedy, Romney’s most prominent opponent in the Republican primary, is currently a prominent state legislator in

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 21 Utah’s Republican party. His campaign website describes him as “a lot of things—State Legislator, Doctor, Lawyer, Eagle Scout, Father of eight, and Self-made man.” His Mormon faith features prominently, though not explicitly, on his campaign page.

Cutting federal spending, jumpstarting the economy, securing the border, and protecting life are also front-andcenter. Apart from the irony of Romney running against another Kennedy (Romney lost to Ted Kennedy in a 1994 Senate bid), there isn’t anything particularly surprising about his candidacy.

Further right, Craig Bowden is a Libertarian who consistently runs in Utah elections without much success. Upon Googling “Craig Bowden Utah” to find his campaign, a web address for a 2014 House race comes up before the page for his current Senate campaign. A Marine Corps veteran, a self-proclaimed “supporter of liberty,” and a father of six children, he wants to protect the Second Amendment, advocate for non-interventionist foreign policy, and promote economic liberty. In a deviation from typical Utah politics, Bowden also wants to end the War on Drugs and proposes leniency for the non-violent drug offenders that make up a third of Utah’s prison population. As a part of this platform, he also wants criminal justice reform.

While both Bowden and Kennedy, in other circumstances, could be notable candidates, Romney’s biggest obstacle is likely Jenny Wilson, the Democratic frontrunner. She is from Salt Lake City, the liberal bubble in an otherwise deeply red state, and proclaims on the front page of

her website that “Utah is where I’m from, and where I’ll stay.” She was the first woman elected to Salt Lake’s City Council in 2005 and has spent much of her life in public service. In her biography, she emphasizes that she graduated from East High School in Salt Lake City and attended the University of Utah. Her father, Ted Wilson, was a popular mayor in Salt Lake from 1976 to 1985.

Wilson’s policies echo the sentiments of Utah’s moderate left; she dwells on DACA and immigration, appealing to the popularity of immigrants in Mormon culture. Healthcare and economic well-being for all Utahns also make the top of her priority list.

Her first project, however, will be to “make Washington work again.” Wilson opposes the recent Republican tax bill and wants more decency from the people governing the country.

She also points out that she would be the first female senator from Utah, a point of particular interest in what many are calling the “Year of Women.”

What is most clear from Wilson’s candidacy, however, is that it plays directly off of Romney’s perceived shortcomings as a candidate. She promises to remain in Utah and emphasizes her Utah origins; Romney’s harshest critics claim that he is an absentee politician who cares more about the opinion of GOP big-wigs in D.C. than of those he represents.

Wilson emphasizes supporting immigrants; Romney has changed his mind several times. Romney is publicly and prominently LDS; Wilson neither mentions nor alludes to her faith on her website and will only say that she was “baptized Mormon”

when questioned about her beliefs.

Wilson—and Romney’s other opponents—present an alternative to a man whose political positions are far less important to most Utah voters than the political reputation he holds.

While nothing is certain until election night, Mitt Romney will probably win the Utah Senate seat without much competition, meaning that distilling his political history and values becomes an important task for those curious about how the Senate will shift after the upcoming, tumultuous midterms. Romney’s political position, at the end of the day, is far too complicated to be boiled down to simple partisanship, a penchant for having the right opinions at the right time, or even the connection between his politics and his faith. If anything can be concluded from examining Romney closely, it’s that, in spite of hopes on both sides of the aisle, he likely will be neither a white horse nor a white knight. If elected, he will likely be another Mormon senator from Utah, bringing “Utah’s values” to Washington while balancing the realities of electoral politics and deep-seated religious sentiment.

Emma Tueller Stone hails from Utah and is a rising senior at Columbia College. You can contact her at ets2131@ columbia.edu

22 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

A BALANCING ACT: A CONVERSATION ON DEMOCRACY UNDER THE MOROCCAN MONARCHY, HUMAN RIGHTS AND ACTIVISM WITH MR. MOHAMED ELBOUKILI One of the oldest continuously reigning monarchies in the world, Morocco has been ruled by the Alaouite dynasty since the 17th century. After colonization by both the French and the Spanish empires, Morocco became a constitutional monarchy in 1956 under Sultan Mohamed V. Although this was a precarious form of independence, the Sultan sought to strike a compromise with the diverse political voices that emerged post-independence while preserving the political clout of the crown. However, Mohamad V’s successor Hassan II dashed any hopes for further opening up the political system once he came to power.Morocco entered the infamous ‘years of lead’, a period from the ‘60s to the ‘80s characterized by harsh political repression and state violence against dissidents.

East and North Africa commonly known as the Arab Spring in 2011.

The recent crackdown on freedom of the press and non-governmental organizations has led several wellknown journalists and activists to seek asylum outside the country, and the future of Morocco’s tenuous and complex relationship with democracy has never appeared more uncertain.

Determined to gain further insight into the the relationship between democracy, human rights, and the state in Morocco, I sat down with Mr. Mohamed Elboukili one afternoon in the offices of the Association Marocaine des Droits Humaines (AMDH) in Rabat. A founding member of the AMDH and a committed activist himself, Mr. Elboukili shared his thoughts on the role of NGOs in protecting human rights and demanding After the death of Hassan II, activists democracy in Morocco post-Arab and journalists looked to a future of Spring. He also shared his own own change and democratic transition as personal experience of state represpolitical prisoners were released and sion, recounting over eight years of the Independent Commission of Ar- his life spent in a Casablanca prison. bitration/Indemnity Commission was established by the new king Mo_______________ hamed VI in 1999 to investigate state crimes against civilians. However, this CPR: Thank you so much for agreetrend of state liberalization has shown ing to share your thoughts! Could signs of faltering as of late, especially you please tell me a little bit about in the aftermath of the swath of dem- your career in human rights activism? ocratic revolutions across the Middle

ME: I’ve been in this NGO since it was created in 1979, when I was a student, and I worked with many activists, teachers, doctors and lawyers to create this NGO. I’ve worked inside it defending and promoting human rights in Morocco since then.

Personally, all my life has been doing this work, defending human rights in their globality and their universality.

I know the upsides and downs of this NGO, along with the background of Morocco, historical and political. As you know, this country has been searching for democracy since its independence in 1956, when the French left Morocco. In a different country where there isn’t a monarchy, it is easier. The Moroccan monarchy is different from modern European monarchies; here, it is ruling in the name of religion. In the constitution and laws, it is written that the king is the descendant of the prophet. None of the governments that have existed in Morocco have accepted genuine democracy to be established here. We have seen steps towards progress however we have also seen steps regressing backwards.

It’s a fragile state of democracy. Morocco of the ‘60s is not the Morocco of today, but we hope for more, for genuine democracy, separation of powers, etc. I believe that protecting

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 23 years.” We know this is a message, we know here in Morocco that when the Minister of Interior names you and points you out, it means that you are under their fire, and you should expect worse times to come in the future. We knew better days before 2011, we knew a large margin of democracy and liberties here in Morocco, there wasn’t that tension that we live now.

CPR: Why was 2011 a turning point?

Has there been a significant regression of democratic values erasing the progress made since Hassan II’s reign?

ME: In 2011, there was the Arab Spring but it has disappeared now.

We hoped at that time for a new democratic constitution as a first step and the next steps would be genuine democracy and perhaps a real separation of powers, less power for the monarchy. We had a new constitution but it’s not a democratic one, inside it we don’t find separation of powers and the monarchy is everything in this new constitution. We hoped that the next steps would have an impact on the life of Moroccans.

Documents, constitutions, laws don’t mean anything if they have no impact on our daily lives, meaning our to France, the US and elsewhere in economic situation, our rights, equalthe ‘80s. Up to now we have had to ity between men and women. fight for our existence as an NGO which is a pity. Since there should CPR: Does the constitution as a dochave been some roots towards build- ument have much impact in the day ing democracy in Morocco. Perhaps to day life of Moroccans? you are the first American to learn it, but on Monday morning, the minister of interior named us by the name ME: No! Even the positive articles as an NGO, saying, this is in the in it, they are not respected by offiparliament, “this NGO has not said cials here. So we hope for more, for a good word about the state for ten a better standard of living. However now there is more repression, since ART CREDIT: PEYTON AYERS

“In the constitution and laws, it is written that the king is the descendant of the prophet. None of the governments that have existed in Morocco have accepted genuine democracy to be established here” human rights is a part of the progress towards achieving democracy.

CPR: In what ways has your work with this NGO been affected by state repression?

ME: The government and the state initially didn’t accept our existence and that meant repressing this NGO. Some were imprisoned among us, and some left Morocco as refugees

23

24 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

“...on Monday morning, the minister of interior named us by the name as an NGO, saying, this is in the parliament, “this NGO has not said a good word about the state for ten years.”

2014. You know there are particular points of repression, with the Rif in the North and Jerada in the East and they are centered on economic claims, for work, hospitals, roads and so on, which I find completely right!

If there was a state which respects itself, this is its job to create infrastructure for the population, but it is not, it is not so! On the contrary we find young people in prison, on trial and so on for their demands.

CPR: Your activism took place at a time when the regime was especially repressive. What was it like to live through state persecution and imprisonment?)

I spent quite a long time in prison, from November 2, 1985 to 1994 continuously. I was sentenced to 15 years but I spent just 8 years and 9 months. I was given amnesty by the other king, father of the current king, with other prisoners of opinion here in Morocco. This was done under pressure as we were supported by Amnesty International and other international NGOs. We were released one night, July 22. They came to us 24

saying, “gather your bags and things, you are going to leave this place.” We looked at each other and we gathered our clothes and books mainly.

They began opening our cells and said, “you are free you can go.” We went until the big door of the prison in Casablanca, and we didn’t know about everything outside. Our families and journalists, they knew before us that we were going to be released.

So there were procedures, signing papers, getting our things—this watch was one of them! [Signals to watch on his wrist]. They took it away from me when I was arrested and that’s why I stick to it now. When I was freed I looked for it, and asked the guard for my watch! We went out to find our families and journalists. In other prisons, such as Kenithra, other prisoners were released. We received amnesty due to pressure from international public opinion and because the father of this king was dying, very ill and was preparing a transition for his son.

Hassan II died in 1999, and when the new monarch came to power, he was faced with a transition phase. [The state]tolerated many things from NGOs, civil society, democratic po-

litical parties, and individual citizens.

We knew from that time till 2011 a margin of democracy and it was not a genuine margin as it was a state in transition. The transition now is done. For us in our jargon here in Morocco, the bracket is closed.

CPR: Do you think that it is even possible for the state to move backwards, considering the fundamental changes undergone by Moroccan society?)

ME: Yes, I am afraid that our society is going backwards. It is not just the will of the state, but I believe there are other factors. There has been a religious transformation due to the influence of Wahabbi-Salafi way of religious rule. Another factor is the widening economic gap. There is a high percentage of poverty in many postcolonial states, and the rich in Morocco are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. But I hope that the democratic forces here in Morocco manage to convince the state to move forward for an open democratic society, where there are more chances for equality between

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 25 men and women, more chances for people to better their standards of living. If the percentage of poverty rises, then illiteracy rises as well, and I believe that these factors are pushing people to join Salafist groups and commit to extremism.

a very bad impact on our democracy.

The Islamist Moroccan political party has executed the worst economic programs since the ‘80s, when there was a structural reform, [a demand from the World Bank], and Morocco had resisted it initially but when the Islamists came to power, they exeCPR: Considering the long and cuted all the demands and raised taxcomplex history of neo-colonization es—very obedient students to World tied in with the construct of human Bank. rights, do you think that universalism could be dangerous?

CPR: Finally, do you have any advice for future generations of journalists ME: I personally believe that univer- and activists who will have to deal salism means respecting human rights with state repression? everywhere on the same level, but superpowers use this card of human ME: I believe that all democracies rights to intervene whenever they like. in the world have known sacrifices.

They don’t listen to NGOs, but they They (the next generation) should listen to states.e are publishing hun- have courage and be careful about dreds of communiqués about what’s what they write. They should be very going on and no embassy here in professional and verify and contact all Morocco contacts us to acknowledge possible sources so as to get a comour communiqués—nothing. There plete picture. Without courage and is a change. Just before, in the ‘90s, sacrifice, nothing can be done in a states in Europe reacted differently country like ours. I have big hope in than they do now:they were more these young journalists, even though critical of the Moroccan state on the they are frightened when they are tarissue of human rights, and they were geted for writing the truth. sensible of reports from local NGOs. The colonial powers are colonizing in other ways across Africa and the Middle East, via multinational firms. We can do nothing, as our regime has the support of the superpowers. During the Arab Spring, France, the US and others were present to preserve their interests in the region. Just an example: United States was making a lot of efforts to make the Moroccan state let the Islamists be in power. They wanted to promote a certain moderate model of Islam—they don’t want leftist democratic forces to take over, and moderate Islamists would respect the interests of superpowers. This has

26 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

HUNGER STRIKES: SYMBOLISM OR SYMPTOM? Lal Karaarslan Over the past two years, the Erdogan administration has fired over 150,000 state employees, cracked down on critics and — unwittingly— brought the hunger strike as a form of protest back into fashion.

The dismissal of government employees is part of a series of emergency measures undertaken by the Erdogan administration in the aftermath of a failed coup on July 15, 2016. After the coup, President Erdogan declared the nation to be in a state of emergency, and imposed a set of safeguards to prevent future upheaval. But the declaration was even more opportunistic than meets the eye; Reuters reported that “human rights groups and the European Union say [Turkish President] Erdogan is using the crackdown to stifle dissent in Turkey and persecute his opponents.”

Two of the sacked state employees — an academic and a teacher — vehemently objected to their dismissal.

Nuriye Gülmen and Semih Özakça took to the streets to dissent against the government decision. However, their protests were of little avail — the government rejected their appeals and even briefly placed the pair under arrest.

The pair were arrested again in November 2016, once they resorted to the hunger strike in an attempt to get their jobs back. While they maintained that this protest was intended to draw attention to the fates of all the sacked employees, the government stuck to a different story. Claiming that they were part of FETÖ/PYD, the organization that supposedly masterminded the coup, the Erdogan administration rejected the pair’s requests to gain their jobs back.

In a country where the line between the judicial and executive branches of government has become increasingly ambiguous, most of the avenues for protest are clogged up. Almost all institutions in Turkey have become highly corrupt and justice has become nothing more than a distant dream. Gulmen and Özakça found solace in hunger striking, a form of civil disobedience with which Turkey is more familiar.

The connection between hunger strikes and Turkey emanates from the the flaws of a deeply polarized societal structure. Although hunger strikes have a long history in Turkey, dating as far back as the 1930s, a unique form of hunger striking has become popular in recent years. The death fast, also referred to as indefinite hunger strikes, is only terminated once the government meets demands. The

prevalence of the hunger strikes is understandable considering Turkey’s cultural values: hunger strikes, especially death fasts, invoke religious fasting during Ramadan, solidarity, and martyrdom. Even the usage of the word “fast” is a synthetic connection between the protest and Islam.

However, there is an alarming degree of glory attributed to death and being a “martyr,” reinforced by the rituals surrounding death fasts in Turkey.

For example, after the death of a faster, people march in a neighborhood called Kucukarmutlu, the home for many rebels, with torches in their hands. In her book, “They Died So Others Will Live,” Senay Donmez relays the tradition as a desire to illuminate the darkness with the faster’s light.

Although Gulmen and Özakça were in a hunger strike, the strike’s transformation into a death fast was always a possibility. It was this potential transformation, merged with the deadly history of hunger strikes, that gave their protest power. While they were in jail, citizens in Istanbul were arranging protests on the streets in their names, and ensuring that their strike remained in the spotlight.

Back in 1996, death fasts had been enough to crush the barriers between factions. At the time, the government proposed a new type of prison layout for political prisoners. But prisoners

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 27 night, it culminated in thirty deaths: two soldiers and 28 prisoners. After the operation, the prisoners were taken to F-type prisons and death fasts continued. After a while, the public’s attention dwindled away: neither side was willing to compromise, and the coverage was soon non-existent. Most of the death fasts ended soon after; however, a notable exception was the DHKP-C, which only agreed to end the fasting once the government gave the prisoners the right to step out into a common area.

and several members of the public were concerned that the cell-type prison would facilitate the tortures of prisoners by the guards as there would be no one for the prisoners to communicate their plight to. A series of local organizations started a hunger strike, demanding the government forgo the construction of the new prison.

Their hunger strike soon turned into a death fast, and ultimately ended after the deaths of 12 prisoners prompted the government to meet the faster’s demands.

However, the resurgence of death fasting in the 2000s ceased to be covered by news outlets toward the end.

The protest was also initiated to curb the building of a new prison layout

called F-type prisons. Similar to the tabutluks, the government’s aim was to separate the political prisoners from each other, positing that the prisoners validated their “terrorist mindset” by talking to each other. Still, the previous fear lingered: seclusion would facilitate the torture of prisoners. Once again, the organizations commanded the onset of hunger strikes and, once again, the hunger strikes were followed by death fasts. Many intellectuals tried to strike a deal between the government and the prisoners; the events were extensively covered.

However, when negotiations were still ongoing, the government instigated an operation called “Operation Bring Back to Life,” which could be crudely described as raids. Although the operation lasted for only a single ART CREDIT: PEYTON AYERS

In the case of Gulmen and Özakça, only certain news outlets chose to cover their story, and only certain people chose to sympathize with them. Their protests were repurposed to suit both the dissidents of the government, who turned Gulmen and Özakça into representatives of their own opinions, and the supporters of Erdogan and AKP (Justice and Development Party), who declared them to be “traitors.” In either version of the story, Gulmen and Özakça were no longer able to get their jobs back, thus defeating the original purpose of their hunger strike.

Hunger strikes have thus lost their ability to allow individuals to assert their democratic rights, a fact that is evident in becomes apparent in Gulman and Özakça’s polarized trials.

The fallacies that should have been immediately spotted– why they were released, or why they were prevented from returning to their jobs– were ignored. Supporters of the two protesters were also guilty of oversight, ignoring the visit paid by Gulman to the funeral of a known member of the DHKP-C, who was guilty of attacking the Agile Force Branch in Istanbul Bayrampasa. Even the 27

28 // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW decision to hunger strike is now as- both organizations was an absurd alsociated with the DHKP-C, casting legation. a shadow over their professed innocence.

But it is difficult to hold the Turkish government accountable, even Polarization caused the trial to be so through international bodies of aufar from objective that there is still thority. Gulmen and Ozakca’s request no clear perspective on what trans- to The European Court of Human pired. As the trial progressed, it got Rights was denied as their detention increasingly personal for the govern- “did not pose a real and imminent ment. According to Veli Sacilik, who risk of irreparable harm to the life or was one of the biggest supporters of limb of the applicants.” In fact, seekGulmen and Özakça, the govern- ing out international support only ment was “trying to show that people caused supporters of the government can’t win their rights by struggling,” to band together and solidify the adding that “if we win, then it will “otherness” of those who stood beside encourage others.” This perceived Gulmen and Özakça. The power of government perspective caused sup- civil disobedience relies on numbers, porters of Nuriye and Özakça to feel yet the controversy generated by the justified in their cause; they were able trial of Gulmen and Ozakca ensured to hold onto the belief that their he- that these numbers would never maroes were, in fact, innocent. terialize.

A weak justice system bolstered the claims of the dissidents. The Ministry of Interior went as far as releasing a book while the trial was ongoing, condemning Gulmen and Özakça named: “An Endless Script of a Terrorist Organization: The Truth About Nuriye Gulmen and Semih Ozakca.”

Yet, as a secular newspaper named Cumhuriyet pointed out, the book included trials that had not yet ended, and portrayed the duo as ter- rorists without any substantial evi- dence against them. For instance, the book claimed Gulmen and Özakça were involved in both FETÖ, an Islamist organization held responsible for the coup, and DHKP-C (a militant leftist terrorist organization. Yet the ideologies of the two organizations clash– FETÖ is an Islamist organization while the DHKP-C is Marxist-Leninist. Cumhuriyet thus insinuated that any individual’s involvement in 28

Death fasting, and, by affiliation, hunger striking, draw their power from their association with death, which is what makes these two acts so worrisome; the protests can only be successful if enough people desire to end them. The aim of death fasts and hunger strikes is to burden the public’s conscience enough to break their obedience to state laws. However, the flaws within the trials of Gulmen and Özakça showcase grave issues within Turkish democracy. Gulmen and Özakça chose hunger strikes because the only protest instrument they were left with was their bodies; the only power they had left was through appealing to public opinion. The uptick in hunger strikes in the country can be perceived as more than just a symbol; it can also be seen a symptom of a democracy backsliding.

Lal Karaarslan (CC’21) is planning on majoring in neuroscience. She is interested in philosophy, politics, and movies. You can contact her at lk2722@ columbia.edu

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 29

AZADI: THE FIGHT FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN PAKISTAN Iqra Bawany

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed -- that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” - Muhammad Ali Jinnah These are the seminal words that rung out out in Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s first Presidential Address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11 1947, days before Partition was to formally take place. After years of fighting for a home for India’s battered religious minorities, Pakistan – meaning landing of the pure in Persian – was to finally come to fruition.

Rather than a state run under Muslim law, Jinnah and his colleagues at the Muslim League envisioned a secular state, hospitable to all South Asian Muslims. In this new state, the founders of Pakistan imagined members of all creeds and religions could come together as equal citizens.

As Pakistan marks the 70th anniversary of Partition, we are forced to ask whether Jinnah’s vision of a sanctuary for India’s marginalised religious minorities will ever be realized in a

country still marred by sectarian vi- hind Islamisation in Pakistan. Most olence against what little is left of its importantly, the movement changed religious minorities. the foundations for the Pakistani state through the Objectives Resolution in At the time of Partition, non-Muslim 1949, which underlined Islam and citizens had made up almost 23% of Islamic law as the heart of the federal the population in 1947. Since then republic. Quickly, Pakistan adopted minority communities in Pakistan Islam at its raison d’être and measures have faced constant persecution and were taken in 1974 to proclaim Ahmigration due to wars such as the madis as non-Muslims as well as forcBangladesh War of Independence ing Shias to adopt to Sunni norms. in 1971, which have completely changed the makeup of minority In 1977, with the advent of the milpopulations in Pakistan. Today only itary dictatorship of General Zia Ul approximately 5% of the population Haq, Islamisation became the order of Pakistan is made up of religious of day. Haq led a top down policy of minorities with around 1.8% Chris- Islamisation that transformed Pakitians, 1.6% Hindus and 2.2% Ah- stan into an Islamic Republic not just madis, a Muslim community often in name but in practice. Through the persecuted due to a series of diverg- introduction of the Hudood Ordiing beliefs with mainstream Islam in- nances, which reformed large swathes cluding their belief in founder Mirza of Pakistan’s colonial era Penal code, Ghulam Ahmad .

Haq introduced a number of strict new laws for zina (extra-marital sex), This quasi-quest for purification in theft, consumption of alcohol and Pakistan goes hand in hand with the most infamously, Pakistan’s blaspherapid Islamisation of the country in my laws. State-mandated Islamisathe Post-Partition political climate. tion has thus opened the door for Despite, the original intentions of increasing attacks on members of Pakistan’s founding fathers, Islamism minority communities ranging from took a hold in the the newly formed mob violence in blasphemy cases to state of Pakistan. The Jamaat-e-Isla- large scale terror attacks by Islamist mi movement, the Pakistani equiva- militant groups. lent of the Muslim Brotherhood, was founded by Abul Ala Maududi in In the last five years, 3 major terror 1941 and was the driving force be- attacks targeting religious minorities

3230 // WINTER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW National Assembly (the lower house of the federal bicameral legislature in Pakistan) are reserved for representatives of non-Muslim communities.

This quota system is mirrored on the Provincial level with 3 reserved seats in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), 8 seats in Punjab and 9 seats in Sindh.

have take place in Pakistan. In September 2013, more than 100 were killed and injured in a twin suicide bombing at the All Saints Church in Peshawar. In March 2015, two churches in Lahore were attacked by Taliban suicide bombers, killing 15 people. As recently as March 2016, Jamaat-Ul-Ahrar, a splinter group Tehreek-e Taliban (TTP) bombed Gulshan-i-Iqbal Park in Lahore on Easter Sunday killing more than 70 people. Whilst reports show that the victims of the attack were mainly Muslims, with only 14 of the victims identified as being Christian, the attack was clearly targeted towards low-income Christian families who usually celebrated Easter in the park.

In addition to terror attacks, extra-judicial killings of religious minorities have become commonplace in Pakistan with attacks on homes and individuals on the basis of rumours.

One such example is the treatment of Christian couple Shama and

Initially, minorities were able to vote directly for these seats, but under the military dictatorship of General Pervez Musharraf, a joint electorate system was reintroduced in 2002 such that that seats for Non-Muslims were now allocated on the basis of proportional representation according to the total number of general seats won by a party in the Assembly. Whilst in theory, the reserved seating system is the best model to ensure minority representation, the system has today become a charade that serves as superficial indicator of representation on a national and provincial level. Moreover, the re-introduction of the joint electorate system alongside the existing system has made the struggle for basic political representation for religious minorities in Pakistan infinitely harder and the problem of minority disenfranchisement infinitely greater.

Shezad Masih. On November 2014, a mob of 400 people in the town of Kot Radha Kishan in Punjab beat and tortured the Misahs, alleging that the couple had desecrated the Quran by burning it in the brick kiln where they worked as bonded labourers. The mob held the five policemen that tried to rescue the couple and dragged the couple of the kiln where they were then burnt alive. Two years later, five men were sentenced to death and a further eight men were sentenced with two years in prison by Firstly, reserved seats are not allocated the Anti Terrorism Court for their in- geographically, based on constituenvolvement in the death of the couple. cies or population statistics. Since the seats reserved for minorities are not A number of Pakistani laws that en- region specific, minority communishrine the mistreatment of religious ties cannot contact their representaminorities still remain in place; tives directly or voice complaints spehowever, nothing quite runs the cific to their region.. Moreover, the gamut like the quota system of mi- meager number of seats– 10– comnority political representation at the pared to the 342 general seats in the national and provincial level. Under Assembly only stands to minimise the provisions made by the Constitution political voice of religious minorities of 1973 (Article 51), 10 seats in the in Pakistan. As a result of the quota system, very few non-Muslim canART CREDIT: PEYTON AYERS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2018 // 31 didates stand for election in their local elections to contest general seats, particularly as these candidates are often not backed by party tickets and run as independents. For example, in the 2008 election only 8 non-Muslims contested 6 general seats.

The lack of transparency and accountability of the joint electoral system have spurred voter apathy and disinterest. Too often, non-Muslims are banned by local clerics and gang members from actually voting. In the case of the Ahmadi community, the Election Commission of Pakistan keeps separate lists of registered Ahmadi voters which are then published to the public. Thus many Ahmadis avoid registering to vote, in fear of persecution and sectarian violence.

In a country with an already low voter turnout of 54% , such mistreatment of religious prevents effective representation of minority voters on a national level. Therefore it is essential for the electoral process to be amended to bring minority communities into the political mainstream.

The question of the treatment of religious minorities in Pakistan, ultimately comes down to the role of secularism in South Asia. Secularism is the liberation of state from the organised domination of a religion from its function. Secularisation is an evolutionary process and not anti-religious movement or an identifier. However, the South Asian context, secularism has become conflated with westernisation and another brutal reminder of Western imperialism. As a result, resistance to any such propagation of secular values in Pakistan is viewed with deep mistrust and fear. In recent years, secular voices such Benazir Bhutto, Salman Taseer among others,

who dared to speak out against the Islamisation of Pakistan have slowly but surely disappeared from the public domain.

Part of this mistrust lies with the failure of the Western framework of secularism to translate to the South Asian context. Firstly, Urdu lacks an sufficient translation of the word secular, using the term ‘la deeni’ for secularism, meaning ‘irreligious’ which fails to accurately reflect the full scope of the term in English. The term instead fosters suspicion as an anti-religion movement, which is difficult to stomach for Pakistan’s 96% Muslim population, instead of simply a separation of Mosque and State.

Moreover, the lack of non-Western, contemporary examples of secularism fail to provide an adequate model, especially for countries such as Pakistan where religiosity is the unifying force of national identity. Where traditional European examples of the nation are rooted to ideas of soil, culture and language, Islam was propelled to be a unifying force to bring together Muslims from all over the Indian subcontinent that previously had had nothing in common that has unfortunately been turned into a demising force. Religion and the State are now two facets of the same coin.

and yet it continues to violate the covenant with its institutional biases against religious minorities. Similarly, in January the U.S froze security aid to Pakistan and placed Pakistan on a watchlist for ‘severe violations of religious freedom’ under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. Therefore, it is crucial that Pakistan takes steps sooner rather than later to protect its most marginalised and persecuted communities, whilst also rebuilding its reputation on the international stage.

The picture is not all that bleak – in March of 2017, the Parliament finally passed the Hindu Marriage Act , recognising and regulating marriages of Hindus by allowing Hindu marriages to be registered for the first time.

However, without a general shift in the attitude of the public towards not just minorities but other sects of Islam coupled with easing of the country’s penal code, the fight for survival of Pakistan’s religious minorities is still a losing battle. Instead of using blasphemy law as a method of eliminating discourse surrounding the treatment of the religious minorities, it is essential that Pakistani elite society breaks its silent pact with religious clerics to initiate long overdue discussions about secularism, religious freedom and simply just tolerance. Before Pakistan’s draconian treatment of its it’s too late, Pakistan should ask itself, religious minorities goes above and how far will the Land of the Pure go beyond the Constitution of 1973 and with its quest for purification? to its position in the international community. In 2010, Pakistan signed Iqra Bawany is a rising senior at Coand ratified the International Cov- lumbia College and the former chair of enant on Civil and Political Rights Soch: Columbia Pakistan Symposium. which enshrined freedom of religion You can contact her at iab2126@coas well as the right of all citizens to lumbia.edu be equal in the eyes of the law, the right to take part in public affairs and freedom from religious hatred

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW