QIO 12.1 - The Summer in Review by The Observer

Q bl ati e eQ Q Th rver ( un pu in the ssoci omot s r A ir h -r se Ob udent s wit ffairs and pal affa st ction nal A plore tion ston g a fun natio to ex ter n Kin ng a s a in nd s er di Int O aim on of en’s a provi of ideand QI cussi Que es by ange mics i e h s e t i c h i d in t un x ad m he e s, ac ike. com for t udent als al er.org m n st sion u erv r o s f wee ofe obs pr ueens bet w.q w w

nal atio n r te ’s Inservernrationtaelrly, n e e b te ar t Qu Oueen’sIOIn) is aicqatuionutehean’s on.

QUEEN’S INTERNATIONAL OBSERVER

THE SUMMER IN REVIEW

September 2015 Issue 12.1

QUEEN’S INTERNATIONAL OBSERVER

A LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

ISSUE 12.1

Dear reader, Welcome to the debut issue of Volume 12 of the Queen’s International Observer. An entirely student-run magazine, the QIO has been in publication at Queen’s University since 2003, recently incorporated as an initiative of the Queen’s International Affairs Association. We seek to be a creative outlet for students to provide a wide range of critical perspectives on topics in world politics. To begin Volume 12, “The Summer in Review” seeks to take a glance at some of the major events and trends in world politics over the past summer. In the realm of international security, Yoni Belete discusses the implications of the Iran Nuclear Deal for U.S. foreign policy while Rachel Tung looks at how the Internet has become one of the primary battlegrounds for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Meanwhile, Kiran Waterhouse critically assesses what has been called a “global refugee crisis” and the role of outdated policies in exacerbating it. Focusing on the recent murder of Shira Banki at Jerusalem Pride, Casey Coleman exposes how the Israeli government has failed to adequately protect minority groups. With the approach of national elections in Canada and the United States, Alexander Green points to the potential for the ideological pendulum to swing in both countries. In light of Pope Francis’ recent encyclical, Kayla Maria Rolland considers how religious leaders can mobilize positive action to address climate change, while Matthew Scoon investigates the role of shale oil extraction in advancing the United States’ geopolitical interests. Through her review of The Full Catastrophe: Travels Among the Greek Ruins by James Angelos, originally published by the Mckenzie Institute, Assistant Editor Georgina Giannopoulos explores the multiple narratives that surround Greece. As Editor-in-Chief, I attempt to understand how racism and white supremacy prevail in America’s ‘post-racial’ era, with the one-year anniversary of the death of Michael Brown. The QIO is also pleased to showcase the contributions of external writers. Bethlehem Solomon provides a critical perspective on the current political discourse surrounding migration to industrialised countries. Meanwhile, Michael Molyneaux puts forth an argument on the unfairness of the International Olympic Committee’s bidding process, following the designation of Beijing as host to the 2022 Winter Olympics. Finally, Lauren Craik, President of the Queen’s International Affairs Association, brings to light the role of subnational parties in spearheading global efforts to combat climate change. The “Summer in Review” is merely a glimpse of the diverse insights and creative ideas that the QIO team has to offer. If you share our passion for journalism and world politics, consider writing for the QIO–external submissions are always welcome. Until the next issue, we hope that “The Summer in Review” leaves you wanting to learn more. Sincerely, Emerson Murray, Editor-in-Chief, Vol. XII Georgina Giannopoulos & Julia Milden, Assistant Editors, Vol. XII

THE TEAM EDITORIAL BOARD

Emerson Murray Editor-in-Chief Political Studies 17’

Julia Milden Assistant Editor Medicine 20’

Georgie Giannopoulos Assistant Editor Political Studies 17’

Raine Storey Layout Editor Fine Arts 17’

STAFF WRITERS Yonatan Belete Political Studies 16’

Casey Coleman Political Studies 17’

Kayla Maria Rolland Political Studies 18’

Rachel Tung Political Studies 18’

Madeleine Ciuffetelli Applied Economics 16’

Alexander Green Political Studies 18’

Matthew Scoon Political Studies 15’

Kiran Waterhouse Political Studies 16’

EMAIL: CONTACT@QUEENSOBSERVER.ORG The views expressed by the WEBSITE: WWW.QUEENSOBSERVER.ORG authors are their own, and do

not necessarily reflect those of the editorial board or the Queen’s International Affairs Association.

SEPTEMBER 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ENGAGEMENT: The Iran Deal is More Than Just a Nuclear Agreement, Yonatan Belete

ISIL: The Online Battleground, Rachel Tung

MIGRATION: The Forgotten Stories, Bethlehem Solomon

THE REFUGEE ‘CRISIS’: Outdated Solutions, Kiran Waterhouse

14 15

LGBT RIGHTS: A Step Backward for Israel, Casey Coleman NORTH AMERICAN ELECTIONS: At a Crossroads, Alexander Green

ISSUE 12.1

LAUDATO SI: Pope Francis as an Agent for Environmental Progress, Kayla Maria Rolland

CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION: The Rise of Subnational Parties, Lauren Craik

RESOURCE POLITICS: I Shale,You Shale, We (well, kind of) All Shale for U.S. Shale!, Matthew Scoon

BEIJING 2022: Failure in the Olympics’ Bidding Process, Michael Molyneaux

24 26

GREECE: A Nation of Superlatives, Georgina Giannopoulos POLICE BRUTALITY IN AMERICA: Racism in the ‘Post-racial’ Era, Emerson Murray

SEPTEMBER 2015

Engagement:

The Iran Deal is More Than Just a Nuclear Agreement “President Barack Obama Campaign Headshot” by Tyler Driscoll via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

Yonatan Belete, Political Studies 16’

This July, the United States finalized a comprehensive nuclear agreement with Iran, with the support of Germany, the European Union, and the United Nations Security Council. Under this deal, Iran has committed to reducing its number of first-generation centrifuges and its stockpile of low to medium enriched uranium. In return, Iran will be relieved of international sanctions that have crippled its economy. As a result of this deal, the time in which Iran could accumulate the necessary materials to build a nuclear weapon – otherwise known as breakout time – has increased from two or three months to a year. For many, the deal marks a massive victory for nuclear non-proliferation and diplomacy. On the other hand, those who oppose the agreement have condemned the deal as a historic mistake. To sceptics, the deal not only paves Iran’s path to a bomb– the funding that Iran will receive from sanctions relief could make it easier to fund terrorist networks across the region. While the debate over whether the Iran nuclear agreement was a good or bad deal is

ISSUE 12.1

necessary, it’s equally important to take a step back and discuss what it means for the future of U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East. For many, the Iran deal represents more than just a nuclear agreement. The deal signifies a drastic but measured shift in U.S. foreign policy, specifically toward countries considered to be outcasts of the international community. By employing the will to negotiate with Iran, President Obama is sending a powerful message to friends and foes alike that “we [The United States] will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.” In other words, under Obama’s administration, the U.S. is now more committed to giving diplomacy a chance to resolve challenges that otherwise would have succumbed to military force. For President Obama, engaging the Iranians through meaningful negotiations is an effective way to achieve peace without war. While many critics have accused President Obama of being naïve about the dangers Iran poses to both the region and the world, the President has remained

confident that engagement is almost always a better option than force, and that it can “more durably lift suspicion and fear.” In order to contextualize this shift in U.S. policy toward engagement, a brief overview of American involvement in the Middle East is necessary. At the conclusion of the First World War in 1918, President Woodrow Wilson addressed a joint session of the United States Congress in which he outlined a fourteen-point plan designed to reconstruct the international system to prevent the outbreak of a future global conflict. The President called for transparency in public diplomacy, open markets to facilitate international trade, and–more importantly–collective security in order to foster coalition building. Toby Dodge, a professor in international relations at the London School of Economics, has indicated that the President’s twelfth point that promoted self-determination would have a direct and lasting impact on the Middle East, where the forces of European and Ottoman colonialism persisted. The right to self-determination gave rise to nationalists across the

“Iran in the World: Hassan Rouhani” by World Economic Forum via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

region–particularly in Egypt and Iraq–and, in turn, U.S. prestige in the Middle East. Unlike Wilson’s Fourteen Points, U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East since 1945 has been driven by geostrategic, economic, and domestic concerns. The introduction and escalation of the Cold War forced U.S. policy makers to abandon Wilson’s idealist principles to confront and counter the growing threat of Soviet encroachment in the region. U.S. prestige began to decline as economic crises and proxy wars consumed the Middle East. In his State of the Union Address, a mere four months after the attacks of September 11, President George W. Bush declared a global war on terror. President Bush explained that the U.S. faced two enemies in this global conflict: the terrorists responsible for 9/11 and rogue states attempting to acquire or develop weapons of mass destruction. For President Bush, the best way curb the threat of nuclear proliferation was to “restrict the sovereignty of errant Middle Eastern states.” Simply put, war was the tool of choice for the Bush administration.

While President Wilson’s policy was celebrated by the Middle East, thereby increasing U.S. prestige, President Bush’s policy was met with widespread hostility and increased anti-American sentiment across the region. With the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, a shift in both rhetoric and policy emerged. President Obama criticized Bush for his lack of leadership and misguided policies that severely damaged U.S. relations with the Middle East. If President Obama were to mend fences with the Muslim world, he would require a fresh strategy to deploy across the region. On June 4, 2009, President Obama delivered his A New Beginning speech at Cairo University in Egypt. He called for improved relations between the U.S. and the Muslim world by seeking common ground through enhanced communication. The President’s speech signified a strategic reversal in U.S. foreign policy that emphasized the importance of inclusivity over isolation and of diplomacy over war. Over the next eight years, the Obama administration worked toward a policy that reflected the President’s words in Cairo and the need to use diplomacy to resolve problems whenever possible. As George Parker of The New Yorker explains, “if there is one idea that sums up Obama’s approach to foreign policy, it’s engagement.” For President Obama, isolating Iran through exclusion isn’t a form of punishment. Instead, it fuels mistrust and suspicion, feelings that have become all too prevalent in both the U.S. and Iran. The immediate and short-

term goal of the Iran deal is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. As The Economist notes, “this is an arms control deal between adversaries, not a friendship hug.” However, by re-engaging Iran and integrating their economy into the community of nations, the U.S. hopes to serve a long-term goal of influencing hearts and minds across Iran. There’s faith that Iran may change its aggressive behaviour and conform to international norms in the future. On the surface, the Iran deal is a nuclear agreement, but its underpinnings signify an opening to Iran and the re-discovery of the power of U.S. diplomacy. Most importantly, the deal embodies the continued shift in U.S. foreign policy toward an idealism of world reconciliation by which “engagement can more durably lift suspicion and fear.” In an interview with Thomas Friedman of The New York Times, Obama explained that the U.S. has the power to test diplomacy while preserving the military option. The President sees this as a more realistic policy approach to the Middle East, a stark contrast to the interventionist policies of the previous administration. The Iran deal represents more than just a nuclear agreement. It signifies yet another concerted effort to reinvigorate U.S. diplomacy and re-establish U.S. prestige in the Middle East. With his deal, the U.S. has provided future administrations with an alternative to war, promoting a culture of reconciliation, cooperation, and engagement.

SEPTEMBER 2015

ISIL:

The Online Battleground

“Sheikh armed with knife & pistol teaches with outstretched index recruits in IS-Boot-Camp” by Karl-Ludwig Poggemann via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Rachel Tung, Political Studies 18’

“It is obvious that the media war in this century is one of the strongest methods; in fact its ratio may reach 90 percent of the total preparation for the battles.”- Jytte Klausen, Even back in 2002, Osama bin Laden correctly foreshadowed ISIL’s current stronghold on social media. He predicted the crucial role that platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube

ISSUE 12.1

play in today’s war driven by Islamist extremism. Now ISIL poses a greater international threat other than just its conquest of Iraqi and Syrian cities. In its mission to build a unified Caliphate under an extreme interpretation of sharia law, the organization has also recruited citizens from Western states through its sophisticated use of social media.

As of early 2015, there were 25,000 foreign fighters from 100 different states in the ranks of ISIL, and that number has only increased since then. Through broadcasting high-definition videos and images on social media, ISIL’s leading fighters have depicted themselves to followers and potential recruits as disciples of a sovereign faith and agents of social justice. In tan-

dem with this façade, they further ly 2015, a French journalist was riences as well as exposure to exattract foreigners by preaching quickly drawn into going un- tremist ideology may also sway that joining the fight is a religious dercover as a jihadi girlfriend. a person to join a terrorist group. duty in Islam. Of the most fol- She only had to retweet a video At the same time, while being lowed Western foreign fighters, posted by an ISIL fighter for him Muslim isn’t a predisposition to 58 percent of their tweets are for to contact her, with a promise of joining ISIL, pressure by foreign sharing the glories of battle, re- marriage and a life of luxury. fighters on Twitter and feelings of cruiting new members, or comForeign fighters play a key persecution and isolation in the municating with other fighters. role in the recruitment process. West may radicalize individual There’s no shortage of propagan- They speak the same language beliefs over time. da to share. as those they are trying to recruit Clearly improved efforts To Muslims abroad who and can share mutual experiences can be made to prevent ISIL from feel disillusioned and alienated in turning away from Western sin recruiting Westerners by the thouin Western societies that sands. Educational initiaare ripe with hostility to tives should be launched Islam, they may be drawn that delegitimize ISIL to ISIL’s promise of camaas the champion of a raderie and divine pursovereign faith and sopose. At the same time, cial justice. Moreover it however, Muslims around should be aimed at all the world have denounced demographics, not just the terrorist group’s claim Muslims, as religious afto be champions of their filiation isn’t the only prereligion. They argue that requisite for extremism. ISIL’s actions contradict Additionally, carethe direct teachings of the ful attention must be paid prophet Mohammed, parto the recruitment and ticularly with the group’s radicalization of young treatment of women and Westerners on social meprisoners. dia. Audio-visual propaStill, joining radiganda is the most powercal ranks in Syria and Iraq ful method by which they through online indoctrican be exposed to ISIL’s nation isn’t implausible. false vision and be lured Information about how to to the battlefield; these travel to the battlefield is websites should therefore “ ‘We don’t believe in the Sykes-Picot Agreement’ “ by Karl-Ludwig Poggemann via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY 2.0. readily available from conbe carefully monitored to vincing ISIL recruiters across nu- in favour of the glory of jihad. mitigate the efforts of recruiters merous platforms. Yet Western governments and recruits alike. A notable case is that of Ca- are failing to effectively combat The only way to dissolve nadian André Poulin. In a recruit- domestic radicalization to pre- the threat of ISIL is eradication. ment video for ISIL, he re-assures vent their citizens from joining Governments can initiate that by viewers that jihadis need not be terrorist groups. In the United cutting off their global recruitsocial outcasts, having been an Kingdom, United States, and Aus- ment tools. ordinary Canadian teenager who tralia, counterterrorism laws have There are two battles being loved hockey before joining the targeted religious groups–namely waged by ISIL: in the Middle East fight overseas. Muslims–in preventing terrorism and on the internet. While the Indeed, it’s eerily easy to while ignoring other causes. war in Iraq and Syria cannot be get into contact with jihadi fightWhile religion is a factor understated, there’s an even largers and become a recruit. In ear- in radicalization, personal expe- er battle online.

SEPTEMBER 2015

Migration:

The Forgotten Stories “Old boat” by Charles Roffey via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Modified from original.

Bethlehem Solomon, Political Studies 16’

What do the Islamic State, Ukraine, Somalia, Rohingya, and Eritrea have in common? Migration. Conflicts in these areas have intensified migration this year, creating a humanitarian emergency. While international efforts have sought to help those within conflict zones, they are not always effective, giving people no other choice but to leave. Migration is the movement of people from one place to another, a phenomenon as old as humankind. As W. R. Böhning phrases it, “the history of mankind is the history of migration.” Today, there are emigrants, immigrants, refugees, internally displaced persons, and many other types of migrants that take part in such movements. Charles Tilly, the founding father of 21st-century sociology, noted that one of three things can explain migration trends at present: 1) the distribution of employment opportunities; 2) demographic imbalances; and/or 3) actions of states such as war, sectarian clash, etc. There are polarizing responses to migration. The extreme right stands for harsh government control and regulation, with some opposing free movement other than for business ventures and leisure. On the other end of the spectrum, advocates encourage

ISSUE 12.1

freedom to migrate and multiculturalism. Regardless of where one lies on the spectrum – acceptance or rejection – there’s a harsh truth we must face. Contemporary debates largely focus on whether migration is helping or hurting social cohesion, economic prosperity, or development. However, this distracts us from a concerning issue migrants face – racism. Ethnic and cultural diversity around the world has increased against a backdrop of stigmatization, discrimination, and racism. Migration is politicized and made as a tool of defense. Many shift the blame for domestic concerns to this globalized phenomenon, framing migrants as a burden, a problem, and an infestation. Individual attitudes, political actors, media, and social norms shape the climate in which discrimination against migrants emerges. For example, a Pew Research Center study showed that 55% of Europeans surveyed wanted to limit immigration. Countries that were struggling with domestic matters had a higher number – as high as 80% of Italians and 86% of Greeks that were surveyed. These numbers are concerning, as studies show that people with hostile attitudes toward immigrants are more likely to excuse discrimination against them or

behave in a discriminatory fashion themselves. Furthermore, myths about migrants are one of the primary agents of the negative social climate around migrants that prevails today. A common myth is that mass migration occurs primarily from developing countries to high-income countries. However, the truth is that there are more or less equal shares of migrants in South-South and South-North movements. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) revealed that developing countries host 80% of refugees, meaning four-fifths of the world’s refugee population–ironically, the greatest resistance to refugees has come from industrialized countries. Regardless if governments have a pro- or anti-migration policy, what’s further hindering migration is its media coverage. The media dehumanizes migrants, naming them “cockroaches,” “undeserving leeches,” a “security menace,” an “existential threat to national values,” to create a negative social narrative. Indeed, the Declaration of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001 noted that the media promotes false images and nega-

tive stereotypes of migrants, contributing to xenophobic and racist public sentiments. Consider the words of Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s National Front, one of many right-wing populist parties in Europe that’s experienced surging popularity over the years. She’s criticized Europe for its “dogma of free movement,” stating that it benefits terrorists and that “hundreds of jihadis move freely around Europe.” She’s even gone so far to suggest that Ebola could solve the “global population explosion” and Europe’s immigration problem. Le Pen isn’t the only politician with such rhetoric. Nigel Farage, the leader of the UK Independence Party, has said that Britain has become unrecognizable and looks “like a foreign land”. He’s also said that the National Health Service was under strain from migrants, and has even suggested barring migrants with HIV. Furthermore, he’s blamed migrants for taking jobs away from “our own people.” The discourse of mainstream politicians is equally concerning. British Prime Minister David Cameron has recently warned of a “swarm” heading for Britain. Furthermore Philip Hammond, the U.K. Foreign Secretary has dubbed the thousands of desperate people gathered in Calais a “marauding” threat to Europe. Migrants described by such language is not unusual – but for those words to come from the mouths of the Prime Minister and his Foreign Secretary marks a shift in the politics of fear. Fear is a reoccurring tool, as seen with the “War on terrorism.” The fear of terrorism has led to racialized and discriminatory practices against migrants, par-

ticularly Arabs and Muslims. The UK’s anti-terrorism bill, like other Western countries, is “ideological extremism masquerading as British values”. In a familiar pattern, every terrorist act is exploited for strengthening executive powers, extending punishment without trial, widening powers of the security services, eroding fundamental freedoms, and further targeting Muslim communities. Anti-terror powers are about protecting U.K. foreign policy from dissent, rather than protecting the public from violence. More importantly, these laws are yet another act to bar the free movement of people, framing immigrants, refugees, foreign workers, and naturalized citizens as terrorists or criminals that need to go back to their “home countries.” The migrant situation across Europe is indeed alarming, but not for the reasons that politicians such as Le Pen, Farage, or Cameron have put forth. The number of migrants to Europe has peaked, with more than 224 000 migrants and refugees arriving in Europe in the first seven months of 2015, exceeding the 219 000 that had made their way to the continent a year ago. More importantly, the United Nations Refugee Agency has said that Europe is failing to respond to this influx of migrants. According to the International Organization for Migration reports, over 2 000 have died trying to cross the Mediterranean this past August. Part of the failure to respond is not due to the lack of resources, although that plays a big role–it’s the lack of initiative by politicians and governments. Did the UK forget that the failed state

of Somalia is linked to their colonization? Yet Somali refugees are discriminated against. Did France forget that North African migrants built their beloved cities? Yet racism towards Arabs plagues the country. Did Italy forget their attempts to colonize Ethiopia led to the divisive effects with Eritrea? Yet Eritrean asylum seekers are struggling for acceptance. The politics of migration is multifaceted. We can look at the economic impacts, the social effects, the cultural consequences, or environmental influences. But migration should not be seen as a problem that needs a solution. Migration is a problem because we have made it so. People often migrate against their will: families don’t want to separate, people don’t want to leave their businesses, and kids don’t want to leave their friends – but they must. Whether it is to escape poverty, to leave environmental catastrophes, or to find refuge and security, migration is a last resort. It is not the problem.

“A sailor from HMS BULWARK hands out water to rescued individuals on a Royal Navy Landing Craft” by JJ Massey, Royal Navy Media Archive via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. Modified from original.

SEPTEMBER 2015

The Refugee ‘Crisis’:

Outdated Solutions Kiran Waterhouse, Political Studies 16’

To walk into Milan, Italy’s central train station is to be greeted by a curious sight: a waiting area packed full of people, with masses of bodies huddled in corners and with camping setups outside. Italian train stations are infamous for their crowded conditions, but this scene is symptomatic of a different phenomenon altogether. These groups of people have travelled long and far, sometimes through very dangerous conditions, to reach Milano Centrale and train stations just like it all across the country. For them, reaching these stations is both the beginning and the end of their journey. Who are they? They are families and groups of refugees fleeing conflict in the Middle East and Africa. They’ve made a long and perilous journey in the hopes of finding a better life in Europe. A wave of such refugees has washed over the continent this year and the last, with the influx beginning in the summer of 2014. According to the Economist, 219,000 migrants crossed the Mediterranean in 2014; a fourfold increase from the previous year. That figure is likely to increase in 2015. The numbers are overwhelming, a feeling matched only by the scope of the conflict that some leave behind. A refugee crisis like the one that’s currently

ISSUE 12.1

playing out on a global scale has not been seen for decades, and it’s raised a host of complicated questions for European countries that many are failing to adequately answer. To understand the “global refugee crisis”, one must understand the many individual refugee crises that are occurring across Eastern Europe and the Middle East. The war in Ukraine has spurred many Ukrainians to request asylum in Poland, Germany and Italy. The war in Syria, though a continent away, has had even more drastic effects. Eight million people inside the country and four million outside of it have been displaced by conflict, according to the International Organization for Migration. And that’s to say nothing of the refugees fleeing Afghanistan and Libya, two other significant sources of current migrants. The majority of these war refugees have remained in their respective regions, but a significant number have chosen to sail across the Mediterranean by boat and enter Europe. Most have reached the mainland by docking on the Greek and Italian coasts, to the consternation of those governments. Their dream? To successfully reach Germany or another country in Northern Europe and settle there in the proverbial land of economic milk and honey.

The reality of the situation, of course, has been quite different: the European refugee crisis has sparked a variety of overlapping and conflicting responses from the European Union and from individual countries within it. What’s emerged has not been a cohesive or adequate response, but rather a mixture of goodwill and fear coalesced into policies that are arguably inadequate and absolutely contradictory. Academic scholarship examining migration responses and immigration policy gives some context for the situation on the ground. Nadine El-Enany provides a critical perspective on the attitudes behind the European responses thus far. She argues that the restrictive nature of European immigration law comes from a combination of xenophobia, excessive protectionism and legal idolatry. This is to say that she sees European immigration policy as innately and unjustly concerned with the desire to protect the demographic sanctity of wealthy western countries over the provision of welfare for refugees. To be fair, policy in practice is never as straightforward than El-Enany makes it out to be, and there have been strong efforts by most countries to deal with the refugees in humane and appropriate ways, whether they be by installing coast guard services to

watch for migrants or by providing refugee resettlement centers and semi-permanent aid. Not all efforts to aid the crisis should be tarred with the same brush. Where El-Enany’s analysis is astute, however, is in her criticism of the ways in which certain existing legal frameworks have been manipulated in the interests of receiving countries, first and foremost the UN Convention on Refugees. As Bonita Sharma explains, it’s deeply problematic that a document written with the purpose of resettling European refugees immediately post-WWII is still being used over 60 years later for a different purpose. The document is still the foremost piece of international law guiding states on the proper procedures for dealing with refugees. However, the kinds of refugees that comprise those currently seeking asylum are very different than those that the document was meant to help. The Convention was written with

the purpose of helping refugees, primarily Eastern European ones, find new homes or voluntarily repatriate themselves after the war. At the time, countries were eager to increase the power of their workforces and thus welcomed refugees as new citizens. In contrast, many of the refugees involved in the current crisis are stateless and seeking asylum on the grounds that they are in danger within their country of origin. Their means of travel speaks to their desperation; most reach mainland Europe by using the services of human smugglers. The trade is not without its fair share of casualties. Over 25,000 died doing so in 2014 alone. Upon reaching Italy or Greece, refugees try to escape detection and registration by travelling as far inland and northward as possible; prime destinations being France and Northern Europe. And thus, the problems with this lack of organizational structure are easily seen in the

present chaos resulting from this haphazard travel system. While many regional organizations have tried to help by updating relevant policies and the EU has held multiple summits to discuss the crisis, no workable long-term solutions have been found. The problems with the current refugee crisis exist on multiple levels. The urgency with which some of these refugees are fleeing their countries demonstrates their desperation and need for international aid. And so, Europe is trying to respond as rapidly as possible to a tricky and delicate situation. However, the lack of cohesive responses - motivated, it must be said, in part by a bit of a “not in my backyard” attitude – is exacerbating the severity of the situation. There are no easy solutions, but in order for long-term progress to be made, updates to the UN Convention on Refugees and the formulation of new, standardized policy within Europe must occur.

“Italian Navy Rescue Asylum Seekers” by LetsAllStayCalmHere via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Modified from original.

SEPTEMBER 2015

LGBT Rights:

A Step Backward for Israel Casey Coleman, Political Studies 17’

“People celebrating their freedom and expressing their identity were viciously stabbed. We must not be deluded, a lack of tolerance will lead us to disaster. We cannot allow such crimes, and we must condemn those who commit and support them.” This statement, from Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, was a public apology following the brutal murder of sixteen-year old Shira Banki. Banki was rallying alongside friends at the annual Jerusalem LGBT Pride Parade on 30 July 2015 when Yishai Shlissel, an extremist orthodox Jew, stabbed her numerous times. Despite being rushed to hospital, Banki succumbed to her wounds and passed away two days later. Six others were also stabbed and wounded in the attack, but are slowly showing signs of recovery. Following Shlissel’s arrest, it was revealed that this was not his first offense – 10 year prior, he had been convicted and imprisoned for the same crime after stabbing three individuals at the 2005 Jerusalem Gay Pride Parade.” Nonetheless, this hasn’t been the only attack on a minority group in this year alone. Even more recently, on 9 August 2015, a group of Jewish extremists attacked the home of a Palestinian family, killing an eighteen-monthold child. Roy Wagner argues that the Israeli government limits its protection of minority groups to the point that they’re left vulner-

able to violence by extremists and the dominant group. He comes to this conclusion by comparing the amount of “visibility and mobility” that these minority groups have. Visibility refers to how a person is perceived in a public or social space, particularly within the context of markers such as gender, race, religion, and sexuality. The visibility of group members, in turn, impacts their mobility, which Roy Wagner describes as their capacity “to move through space and take place in it.” Visibility and mobility can, therefore, either enhance or limit the citizenship of minority group members. More importantly, they can shape the environment in which minorities can be targeted. Wagner argues that a perpetual lack of legal repercussions against those who commit violence against minorities in Israel creates the impression that these acts are acceptable. Shira Banki was both a women and a supporter of LGBT rights, being a part of and identifying with two groups in Israel who remain marginalized. It was Yishai Shlissel’s contempt for her cause–of LGBT rights and equality–that led to Banki’s fate at Jerusalem Pride. The Israeli government should have done more to protect those who attempted to challenge dominant social forces. Some scholars argue that different forms of mobilization could be more effective for citizens than marching or protesting.

“Flying proud” by the Advocacy Project via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Modified from original.

ISSUE 12.1

Finding an alternative that decreases vulnerability and physical harm could encourage more participation and, in turn, promote social change. For example, Jennifer Gerarda Brown notes that “citizens look to and sometimes struggle to obtain legislation or court rulings that clearly articulate their rights”. She suggests mediation as one way to facilitate dialogue between private actors. Although perhaps difficult on a larger scale between governments and minority groups, the theory behind it is still worth considering. Another option could be to harness–or, in many cases, to continue to harness–the power of social media. Sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram empower citizens to call for political change across the globe. Social minorities can express their views and opinions beyond state borders without the threat of being physically harassed or abused. The murder or Shira Banki was devastating not only for her family and friends, but for a broader community of social minorities in Israel; at the same time, her death was one among a long and tragic list of many others. To put an end to these attacks, the Israeli government must enforce its legal protections for social minorities and undertake a greater role in enhancing their citizenship within Israeli society.

North American Elections:

At a Crossroads Alexander Green, Political Studies 18’

On August 2, 2015, Prime Minister Stephen Harper asked Governor General David Johnson to dissolve parliament, sparking the beginning of a long and gruelling campaign in advance of the October 19 election. This 78-day long marathon is the longest campaign for a single day election in Canadian history. The only election to surpass its length is the 1872 election, in which John A. Macdonald secured a victory for his Conservatives. Coincidentally, this election also runs parallel to an American presidential election. However, while Canadians bemoan the length of their election campaign, the United States’ is decidedly longer. Republican Ted Cruz was the first major candidate to declare his candidacy, 596 days before the upcoming election on November 8, 2016. Hillary Clinton was the first Democrat to step forward, 576 days in advance. While most people argue over which debate to watch on a given night, the implications of both elections are far reaching. For Canada, this election could see a real challenge to the stranglehold that the Conservative Party has had on parliament in years past. Moreover, with President Barack Obama having served his second and final term in the Oval Office, the American election is open to a new candidate and a new ideology. In Canada, this long election means a long time away from

lawmaking, at least at the federal level. Indeed, while President Obama is locking horns with Congress on legislation, Canadian federal lawmakers are in their constituency offices rallying support rather than on Parliament Hill. For pressing Canadian issues, this is undoubtedly problematic. Dealing with Canada’s slumping economy will not only have to wait, but Elections Canada, the nonpartisan agency en-

trusted with facilitating the election, could also use up to $500 million of taxpayer dollars. Furthermore, matters such as the environment and foreign affairs are replaced with proclamations of “this-is-what-I-would-do-aboutit-if-elected,” rather than any concrete action. South of the border, presidential primaries have raged on while public and media perceptions of the Obama administration have become more and more

“Peace Arch Park – 26” by David Chilstrom via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. Modified from original.

critical. Apart from the theatrics, economic and social concerns continue to be hot topics, as some argue that the onset of an ‘American decline’ is imminent. Some theorists see the onset of “[a] fiscal crisis…due to rising spending on social programs [and] increases in military spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.” Concerns abroad relating to ISIL, the Iran Nuclear deal, and conflicts with Russia and China have the potential to weaken American strategic interests further. On the home front, contentious debates over immigration laws, healthcare, and reproductive rights prevail. Depending on a candidate’s social leanings (and more often than not, party leanings), this election will have major implications for American citizens. Meanwhile in Canada, an ideological shift could also be imminent: most political analysts see the NDP, rising under Thomas Mulcair, as the main challenge to the Conservatives. Despite a recent drift toward the centre by the NDP, their ideology differs greatly on many key issues from the Tories. The NDP sees a much less active foreign policy than the Conservatives, preferring humanitarian aid to military action. Trudeau’s Liberals parallel the NDP thinking on this issue. How each country’s foreign policies align with each other will also be an important consid-

SEPTEMBER 2015

eration. For example, the United States, though spearheading much of the international effort against ISIL, could see a policy shift with the election of a new President in stark contrast to Canada’s approach to the conflict. Furthermore, matters such as Bill C-51 and the Iran Nuclear Deal will be crucial. The NDP vows to repeal C-51 in Canada, and all Republican Presidential nominees–with some Democrats (led by Jim Webb)–opposed to the Nuclear Deal.

Domestically, these elections matter too. Changes in taxation, government budget, interprovincial/state trade, and other affairs are inevitable. As well, the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline, which would transport oil from the Alberta oil sands to the U.S., may face different prospects after this election. While Harper is a staunch advocate for the pipeline, Mulcair is fervently against it, citing both economic and environmental concerns. In the U.S., Obama has

stalled on his policy vis-à-vis the Keystone XL, while Republican nominees such as Jeb Bush and Donald Trump have issued clear favour towards its development. Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton has notably distanced herself from President Obama’s view. When landmark elections like these occur, the question to ask is not who will win, but what idea will.

Laudato Si: Pope Francis as an

Agent for Environmental Progress Kayla Maria Rolland, Political Studies 18’

“I urgently appeal, then, for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our planet.” - Pope Francis With the publication of his encyclical Laudato si this past June, Pope Francis joined the call for action on climate change. The Pope addressed a broad scope of environmental matters including resource management, pollution, and global warming. He cited apathy, consumerism, and weak political leadership as root causes of environmental challenges today. Furthermore, he called for the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics to push their political leaders to engage in climate change action. The document has faced numerous criticisms, most strong-

ISSUE 12.1

ly from those who believe that the environment–the subject of a deeply divisive debate–is out of bounds for the Church to take a strong political stance. The release of Laudato si drew the attention of media outlets worldwide, which had anticipated the document’s release after the leak of an early draft online. A myriad of reactions from high-profile political figures followed the release of Laudato si, particularly in the United States. In the run up to the 2016 presidential election, the often blurred line between religion and politics in the U.S. is deeply contested. Republican candidate Jeb Bush voiced his disapproval of the encyclical, stating, “I don’t get economic policy from my bishops or my cardinals or my pope.” Meanwhile, across the country, President Obama gave his ap-

plause, optimistic that the Pope’s words would resonate on the global stage. He went so far as to declare, “As we prepare for global climate negotiations in Paris this December, it is my hope that all world leaders--and all God’s children--will reflect on Pope Francis’s call to come together to care for our common home.” There’s speculation about whether the release was timed for maximum impact by Pope Francis. The publication comes before his scheduled addresses to the United States Congress and United Nations General Assembly in September. What’s become clear is that modern religious figures can be effective agents of change when they devote themselves to global political challenges. A comparable example of this impact is Pope John Paul II’s

“The Inauguration Mass for Pope Francis” by Catholic Church England and Wales via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

diplomatic work to expand human rights and religious freedoms internationally. Having faced religious oppression while living under communist rule, Pope John Paul II began diplomatic relations with President Ronald Reagan to counter the grasp of communism. The Vatican went on to swiftly recognize the newly independent post-communist states, helping to bolster their legitimacy and progress. Pope John Paul II was unafraid to publically denounce repressive dictators, and he engaged in development initiatives for impoverished states. Pope Francis is neither the first nor last Pope to cross into the political arena, and he’s merely joined the calls of many others to address the current environmental crisis. In February 2006, for example, 86 evangelical leaders in the U.S. signed a statement

declaring that “human induced climate change is real,” calling for a reduction in carbon emissions. Their discourse was similar to that of Pope Francis, citing the need to care for God’s creation and concerns over the effects of climate change on people throughout the world. More recently, the Church of England made substantial divestments from fossil fuels last April, a move also motivated by concerns for the poor. Bill McKibben, a prominent environmentalist, approved of the divestments and spoke to the benefits of religious groups bringing a moral dimension to the climate change debate: “Churches are, or should be, specialists in identifying that other kind of risk, where human beings don’t pay enough attention to the poorest and most vulnerable among us. When the Church of

England acts, or the pope speaks, it’s a potent reminder.” Pope Francis serves as a religious leader to over one eighth of the world’s population, who turn to him for guidance on how to conduct their lives. Within Laudato si, Francis not only explained the importance of caring for the environment in a faithbased, moral framework, but he also emerged as a global agent for change. In a world that’s facing unprecedented environmental challenges, his words have great potential to make a positive impact. As global leaders prepare for the Paris 2015 UN Climate Change Conference, his will be a voice difficult to ignore.

SEPTEMBER 2015

Climate Change Action:

The Rise of Subnational Parties Lauren Craik, President of the Queen’s International Affairs Association, Applied Economics 17’

With the 2015 Conference of Parties climate summit fast approaching, international media is focusing on heads of state as they prepare for the Paris talks. Yet while presidents and prime minsters will attempt to draft the first universal agreement on climate change, a new crop of global leaders has already come to consensus on a plan of climate action, and is taking aggressive steps to implement it. In recent years, sub-national parties such as the governments of Tokyo, California and Catalonia have been at the forefront of the fight against global warming. The Climate Summit of the Americas, held this July in Ontario, demonstrates how far the tide has shifted from the national to the sub-national or regional levels in climate change diplomacy. The Summit welcomed delegates from over 20 regions across North and South America to discuss policy and practices such as carbon pricing and transparent target reporting. Delegates came from a diverse array of countries and levels of government, including U.S. governors, regional governments from Mexico and Brazil, and Canadian mayors. The delegates concluded the conference by signing the first ever Pan-American statement of action on climate change. This statement included a commit-

ISSUE 12.1

ment to implementing and supporting carbon pricing, keeping public records of emissions, and meeting past carbon reduction agreements. While this conference marked a milestone in sub-national climate action, it was neither the first nor most aggressive action a sub-national or sub-sovereign government has taken. States and regions might just be the actors the increasingly globalized world needs to lead the fight against global warming. Since the mid 20th century, regions have been implementing climate programs to reduce emissions. In 1947, Los Angeles County was the first place in the United States to establish an Air Pollution Control District, marking the beginning of sub-state climate regulation. More recently, Tokyo was one of the first actors, of all sub-nationals and states, to implement a carbon-pricing regime. Since then, regions such as Quebec, California and a number of provinces in China have implemented systems, and others, such as the case in Ontario, have agreed to implement such programs. While the carbon system of the European Union has been deemed largely ineffective due its over-capacity of permits and lack of political will, the state of California has managed to sell out of carbon permits, expand the program to include the transpor-

tation sector, and maintain a GDP growth above national average. Carbon pricing mechanisms are far from the only steps being taken by sub-national actors. The recently inaugurated Compact of State and Regions is a collective agreement of regions to keep public records of emissions data. Participating governments include Brazilian cities, Australian states, and the devolved governments Wales and Scotland. The twenty governments in the Compact make up US$8.3 trillion and all have set stringent emissions reduction targets, some as ambitious as 100% by 2060. According to the UNDP, this trend is not a one-off–an estimated 50% to 80% of actions necessary to tackle climate change are, or will, be implemented at the subnational level of governance. Contrasting these achievements to initiatives such as the failed Kyoto protocol and the recent G7 proclamation to eliminate fossil fuels by 2100, it’s clear there’s still a lot to ask of national leaders. Yet maybe the perceived notion that all global problems must be solved by national governments should be reconsidered. In many ways, regional governments are better suited to implement the necessary policies for global warming mitigation. Their structure often allows for a quicker policy turn around, programs

tailored to local environments and demographics, and greater transparency out of a concern for public legitimacy. Regional governments can also avoid a lot of the political manoeuvring often required at the national level of government, such as having to pass legislation through the House and the Senate or negotiating jurisdictional conflicts with sub-states. Emissions and environmental policy is also very location dependent. In China, where roughly 82 million people still live in poverty and national climate policy is, therefore, a low national priority, the state has launched pi-

“

lot cap and trade systems in some of the most prosperous regions. This carbon market covers three large cities and four provinces, accounting for almost four million tonnes of carbon. As C40 Large Cities Group points out, targeting only cities can still lead to large reductions, with cities accounting for roughly 75 percent of the world’s energy usage. In many ways, subnational politics can describe the best of both worlds. In the words of Hari Osofsky, subnational politics happens in a localized arena with localized policy mechanisms yet its “actors and claims represent a multi-scalar geography.” Or, in

other words, these sub-national parties are effective because they are able to “think global but act local”. This is not to say that states shouldn’t engage in environmental diplomacy or strive to find innovative programs to reduce emissions. Rather, the international community and subnational governments themselves should acknowledge the impact they can have as global actors. As Paris approaches, the world will be looking to subnational governments as much-needed inspiration and motivation.

...with cities accounting for roughly 75 percent of the world’s energy usage

”

“Tokyo Smog” by Romain Guy via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

SEPTEMBER 2015

I Shale, You Shale, We (well, kind of) All Shale for U.S. Shale! Resource Politics: Matthew Scoon, Political Studies 17’

America’s shale oil and gas reserves have been well known among geologists for years, but until recently any means of extracting the liquid energy from rock formations was economically unfeasible. However, the affordability of hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) today has given the United States the ability to realize its energy capabilities. It has imbued the U.S. government to pursue a bolder foreign policy in the short and long-term, specifically in securing influence in Europe and Asia through trade-partnerships (such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership) and de facto military alliances. The U.S.’ emboldened energy situation will benefit domestic business, international trade, and geopolitics. Increased domestic production of oil and gas has secured the U.S.’ position to continue projecting the West’s influence. Despite the U.S.’ evident improvement in energy security, sceptics of its newfound ‘energy-cow’ argue that it risks negatively impacting Western hemisphere oil exporters. Nonetheless, the potential economic harm to Canada, the Persian Gulf states, and Mexico is negligible, and at best only conjecture when compared to the improved geopolitical position the U.S. has achieved due to shale excavation. Consider the swift annexation of Crimea in early 2014,

ISSUE 12.1

which reinvigorated discussions of a Russian threat to international security. Throughout his administration, Russian President Vladimir Putin has leveraged the country’s hydrocarbons to fill government coffers, modernize military projects, and create an energy dependency among neighboring European states. Now, the U.S. will have the full capacity to wean Europe from its harmful energy dependence after constructing liquefaction facilities to export shale gas to Europe, according to a study conducting by Harvard’s Michael Porter, David Gee, and Gregory Pope. In August, Nick Butler argued that the energy sector is the fulcrum of Russia’s economy, and plummeting oil prices, combined with global excess supply of oil, will continue to wane at Putin’s domestic and international writ. Given its domestic conditions and international prestige, Russia hasn’t been in such a weak position since the demise of the Soviet Union at the end of the 20th century. Shifting towards the world’s largest energy consumer, China cannot help but feel the impact of U.S. shale preeminence. China’s heavy reliance on coal amounts to 70% of its energy consumption, burning half of the world’s coal. The continued discovery of shale is causing coal stations to close and investors to distance themselves from the

dirty energy. While the decreasing popularity of coal will hasten China’s transition to cleaner energy, in the short-run, China will have to try frantically to satisfy its massive thirst for energy if it hopes to maintain its economic trajectory. Compared to the U.S.’ currently vigorous economy, China’s is finally slowing down after years of robust growth. This doesn’t bode well for China, as regional tensions with neighboring Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines have grown. For the U.S., its objective of containing China through the support of Southeast Asian states is becoming increasingly manageable. While there’s no single factor to explain the respective economic circumstance of the U.S. and China, there’s no doubt that energy plays a contributing role. Although the U.S has been at the forefront of shale energy, many countries lay on top of their own vast deposits. However, opening up the rock is difficult and expensive, requiring sophisticated equipment and immense capital. A fortuitous string of events and circumstances have made it exceptionally hard for both Russia and China to access their shale energy. In the case of Russia, James McBride and Mohammed Sergie explain that U.S. sanctions have barred American firms from sharing fracking technology, while China’s mountainous terrain and water shortages

obstruct progress. States closely aligned with the U.S. are fortunate to benefit from the shale revolution, while those in the respective camps of Russia and China must look onward. While shale oil and gas has benefited (and will continue to benefit) the U.S.’s geopolitical position, the country’s own energy dependence has been nearly lifted, as shown by a 40 per cent drop in foreign gas imports between 2006 and 2014. As pointed out by Joseph Nye in a recent Wall Street Journal article, it was only ten years ago when critics described the world in a state of “peak oil,” or a leveling-off of global oil reserves. Even in 2008, President Obama made the reasonable predication that the U.S. would need to double its imports of liquefied natural gas over the next five years. Now the United States is an exporter of gas, and is expected to export oil by 2035. The shifting tides of oil availability will undoubtedly

shape the international relations in the coming decades. What remains to be seen, nonetheless, is how advances in technology will give rise to the present dark-horse of energy: renewables. With solar and wind energy expected to grow, feuds over the world’s hydrocarbons may, in fact, subside by the end of the century.

“I Felt Like I Could Fly” by Thomas Hawk via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0.

SEPTEMBER 2015

Beijing 2022:

Failure in the Olympics’ Bidding Process

Michael Molyneaux, Applied Economics 17’

I’m an Olympic fiend. I live for every two years when commentator Brian Williams appears on television. I know exactly where I was and what I was screaming when Canada scored the equalizer to take the game to overtime and win Olympic gold in 2010. I even slept on my couch and set my body clock to Beijing time during the 2008 Olympics. So yes, I love the Olympic games. But it’s becoming harder. Recently, Beijing won the bid to host the Olympic Winter Games in 2022, and many were quick to show their disapproval of the decision by the International Olympic Committee (IOC). In the bidding process, the better city did lose out to a lesser one– Almaty lost to Beijing. Almaty is the quintessential mountain city in a very un-

ISSUE 12.1

“Winter Olympic Torch Relay Revelstroke” by Chris Frape via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Modified from original.

traditional locale, one that would benefit the city greatly if the games were to be hosted there. What bothered most about this decision was not even that Beijing or China won the bid, but the lack of competition for one of the world’s greatest winter sporting events. There’s anger with the international body that made this decision, one that was best for the bottom lines of powerful people and organizations rather than sporting itself (UCI, IOC, FIFA etc.). The only two cities that made it to the final round of voting were Almaty, Kazakhstan and Beijing–a coin toss rather than a competition. Incidentally, the voting was close 44 – 40. While the close vote suggests that the decision wasn’t taken easily, neither China nor Almaty would have

won if any one of the other four countries had chosen to remain in the race. Consider that there were 6 original bids; Sweden, Poland, Ukraine, Norway, China and Kazakhstan. All but two dropped out before voting began, three because of internal unease with hosting the games and one because of a revolution–a dire lack of a competitive bidding process for one of the world’s greatest sporting competitions. Sweden, Poland, and Norway cited the huge cost it would take to host the games, which is unsurprising after the 51-billion-dollar cost for Sochi. What’s unfortunate is that the IOC has set a precedent of focusing more on the size of a country’s budget rather than its desire to host the games.

The Olympics need not be overly burdensome for host countries. Budgets should be evaluated for their long-term economic potential. Some of the most successful games in Olympic history–such as Calgary and Los Angeles–were, in fact, profitable. These cities won the bidding process because they proposed the idea of executing the Olympics on a budget while ensuring that athletes had the best place possible to perform–a much more practical goal than national spectacles meant to impress visiting leaders. The legacies of the 1984 Summer Olympics and 1988 Winter Olympics are visible in both Los Angeles and Calgary, respectively. For example, every single facility that Calgary built for the Olympics is still in use today–it’s a well-known fact in the speed skating world that the best ice to race on is still from 1988. Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, not a single facility was built from scratch except for the Velodrome (being one of the best in the world), and the use of Olympic facilities continues to the present. The games left their mark on the city in an incredible way with the sporting culture they brought, not to mention the much needed infrastructure spending. That being said, the IOC needs to analyze what a successful Olympics means, seeming to have lost its way in voting on the future of the games. Every member of the IOC is allowed to vote for the city to host the winter games. Unsurprisingly so, a good deal of those countries who voted in the first place fail to attend the games because they‘re unin-

volved in winter sport. What the examples of Calgary and Los Angeles suggest is that the Olympics can be run without an extremely high price tag. The IOC should make it a prerequisite that a country with a love for sport host the event, not one with extremely deep pockets. Many countries would love to host the games because of what sport means to their country on a cultural basis, but the IOC has done a poor job of selling the prospect of hosting the games. Almaty had a great slogan for their bid: “Keep it Real.” It’s a relatively small city compared to Beijing. Almaty’s located in the mountains, it has facilities already built from hosting other world sporting events, and it also enjoys natural snow– why, then, was their bid rejected? Simply put, the IOC has to reinvent their bidding and voting process. Despite their effort to reform the process for 2024 by allowing cities to submit their bid in multiple parts, the IOC has failed to deal with the core issue: the cost of hosting the games. How much money a city is

willing to put into the games from a financial perspective should no longer matter. The IOC must begin to give the games to countries that can do it right, on budget, and in their own unique way. You probably don’t remember the pool where Michael Phelps won 8 medals in 2008. I guarantee you remember watching him do it however, and it was the story that makes it worthwhile, not the venue in which it happened. It’s not about the money or even the host city–it’s about the athletes. As an Olympic fiend, I’m disheartened.

“Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games” by Megan Cole via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. Modified from original.

SEPTEMBER 2015

“HELLAS (221 von 432)” by Frederik Rowing via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. Modified from original.

Greece:

A Nation of Superlatives

Georgina Giannopoulos, Assistant Editor

Greece, in both the past and present, is a nation of superlatives. Whether it be the infallible heroes of Greek mythology, the foundational philosophers of Ancient Greece, or the fat cat politicians, mediocrity has never defined Greece on the global stage. Over the past few months, the words Greece and debt have been inseparable in public discourse. Beginning in 2009, creditors began to identify Greece as being at risk for default. Austerity measures and spending cuts began to increase under Prime Minister Papandreou, invoking mass protests and strikes across the country. The largest protest occurred in 2011, when tens of thousands of protesters marched upon parliament and launched a 24-hour general strike. In April 2010, the crisis merely deepened, prompting

ISSUE 12.1

Eurozone countries to approve a €145 billion rescue package in exchange for an even more stringent round of austerity measures. This was accompanied by a major bailout of €109 billion in 2011 from European Union (EU) leaders. At the same time, all three main credit rating agencies cut Greece’s rating to a level associated with a substantial risk of default. In October 2011, Eurozone leaders proposed a 50% debt write-off for Greece in exchange for further austerity measures. Prime Minister Papandreou put this plan up for referendum, but under heavy criticism he withdrew and resigned. In February 2012, Greece received another bailout from the EU and subsequently reached a “debt swap” deal with its private sector lender, enabling it to halve its debt load. By January 2013, un-

employment in Greece reached 26.8%, and youth unemployment hit almost 60%. A turning point in Greece’s domestic politics occurred with the election of the radical leftist Syriza coalition in May 2014. Syriza’s power was confirmed once again with the election of Prime Minister Tsipras in January 2015. The climax of the Greek debt crisis occurred in June. The European Central Bank ended emergency funding while Greece closed banks and imposed capital controls. Only a month later in a decisive referendum, however, the Greek populous rejected EU bailout terms. The denouement of the crisis occurred only weeks after when Greece and its creditors agreed to a third bailout, imposing further spending cuts on the country to avoid bankruptcy and exit from the Eurozone.

In his book The Full Catastrophe: Travels Among the Greek Ruins, author James Angelos uses personal anecdotes collected while travelling around the Greek islands to not only describe, but also to contextualize, the current crises in Greece. While mainstream new sources report heavily on the debt crisis, Angelos outlines several other crises that are slowly weighing down on the picturesque blue and white islands. When one fits them together like a puzzle, only then does Greece’s present situation begin to make sense. Through a discussion of the themes of history, corruption, and migration, Angelos explains the current situation in Greece. Given his Greek-American heritage, he’s able to interact with locals in their first language in order to expose the true feelings of the Greek people. The elimination of a language barrier helps to distinguish Angelos’ research from others. Angelos begins with history, as he believes that “a people who forget their history, have no future.” In the first chapter, he makes a crucial distinction between disloyalty to the state and disloyalty to the nation. The feeling of Hellenic superiority that many Greeks hold can be tied to the fact that Greeks feel immense national pride. Tellingly, this pride falls short of extending to the state. The Greek people, like many other groups throughout the world, have suffered through centuries of foreign domination - most notably the Ottoman Empire - and this experience now informs the anti-government hostility imbed-

ded in their culture. Taking history into account, it becomes easier to empathize with the disdain that Greek society holds for the “Troika”–the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund, and the European Central Bank. To many Greeks, the Reserve is yet another foreign occupation. What makes this occupation worse, however, is that Greek politicians willingly agreed to it. In this sense, the state betrayed its people. Given Angelos’ account of Greek history, it’s unsurprising that the referendum on the European bailout conditions was defeated by 61% of the Greek populous. The second theme Angelos explore is corruption, a reality that’s become inseparable from both the Greek government and civil society. At the core of this section is the question Angelos seeks to answer: were the Greeks actors in the so-called poverty lie, or were they suffering the effects of austerity policies and economic ruin? Ultimately, he concludes that it’s a mixture of both. Angelos notes that many people he saw rummaging through dumpsters in Athens were old and decently dressed people who had given their pension money to their children and grandchildren. On the other hand, political heroes such as Akis Tschatzopoulos were able to embezzle millions of euros through the department of defence and the procurement of second-hand German submarines. Tschatzopoulos was only caught due to an EU-inspired crackdown on corruption. Angelos astutely notes that less money may mean

less consumption of goods and services, but when Greek people do consume, they make more of an effort to avoid paying taxes. To them, this is justified because they feel no loyalty to the state; rather they feel loyalty to the people who make up the Greek nation. The idea of a Greek nation parallels with the third theme Angelos discusses: migration. While migration refers to the movement of people from one part of the world to another, Angelos also discusses the migration of ideas that have affected Greece. The most crucial observation Angelos makes is that Hellenism was never defined in terms of culture - it was defined in terms of race. Therefore, migrants coming to the Greek islands are seen by nationalists (particularly Golden Dawn sympathizers) to overrun not only the fragile economy, but also the ever-fragile definition of Hellenism itself. Angelos, while explicit in his anecdotal discussions, leaves one last piece of the puzzle for the reader to connect – without it, one cannot fully understand Greece’s situation today. The crises in Greece are neither solely due to tax evasion nor an influx of migrants nor Hellenic racism. Indeed, Greece may no longer resemble the romantic image denoted in The Republic. It remains a country, however, whose history has prioritized the nation of Greek people above the state borders it occupies. What we see today is not a state struggling under the weight of debt and obligation, but a nation struggling to define what it will become.

SEPTEMBER 2015

Police Brutality in America:

Racism in the ‘Post-racial’ Era Emerson Murray, Editor-in-Chief

It’s been just over a year since a white police officer fatally shot Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri. To mark the one-year anniversary of Michael Brown’s death, residents in Ferguson took to the streets in protest. Once again, they were met with resistance from the police. A state of emergency was declared in and around the city. It was a reminder that little has changed. The deaths of black civilians, either killed by the police or killed while in police custody, only continued to make headlines this summer. Among the most recent was Sandra Bland, who went from being pulled over for a routine traffic stop to being found hanged in a Texas county jail cell–the reasons for which remain unclear. In fact, research by VICE News shows that from the night of Brown’s death to the one year anniversary in Ferguson last month, 1 083 people died at the hands of the police. Notably, the statistics showed black people were killed “3.28 times more often than white people” and “2.28 times more often than all other races combined.” Despite these deaths occurring in the thousands, an analysis by the Washington Post in

ISSUE 12.1

April 2015 found only 54 officers had been charged over the past decade. Eleven were convicted. That police in the U.S. can kill black civilians without consequence is merely one reality that exposes the myth of “post-racial America”. The numbers on racial inequality in other parts of U.S. society are only telling. While black citizens amount to less than a quarter of the U.S. population, they represent forty percent of the country’s inmates. According to a study by the D.C. non-profit The Sentencing Project, one in three black men will go to prison in their lifetime in contrast to one in seventeen white men. On economic inequality, the Pew Research Center found the median wealth of white households surpassed that of black households by thirteen times in 2013–the widest gap there’s been since 1989. Despite the end of formal segregation in the Civil Rights Era, the U.S. entered the age of what Eduardo Bonilla-Silva calls “racism without racists.” Indeed, racial injustices persist today, whether it be through the prison-industrial complex, the schoolto-prison pipeline, the War on Drugs, or the killing of people of colour by the police.

These injustices remain invisible to White America, however, where the prevailing belief is that race no longer matters, that racism is no longer a serious concern. That Americans would “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”–a famous line from Martin Luther King Jr.’s I Have a Dream Speech in August 1963– would underpin this post-racial society. Indeed, many white Americans took this idea of a post-racial society to heart, but it merely obscured reality. In a study by the Pew Research Center to mark the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, only 37% of white respondents thought the police treated blacks “less fairly” while only 27% thought blacks were treated unequally to whites in the justice system. Meanwhile, a study by Michael I. Norton from Harvard University and Samuel R. Sommers from Tufts University showed white respondents saw “anti-Black bias’ in significant decline from the 1950s to the 2000s. To the point, notably, that “anti-White bias” was now the greater concern. White America forgot what

“Ferguson Protest NYC 11-25-2014 DSC01986” by Christian Matts via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.

Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in a Birmingham county jail cell just a few months prior to his famous speech: “The Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’“ The mobilization of #BlackLivesMatter was a testament to King’s words from more than fifty years ago. Media coverage on Ferguson and the string of high-profile incidents that followed brought out an array of reactions among whites. These ranged from outright denial and victim blaming, to outrage over violent and destructive protests, to withdrawal and silence. To Robin DiAngelo, Professor of Multicultural Education

at Westfield State University, these reactions were all too familiar. Her theory of white fragility explains that white people in North America, who do not experience racism and live largely in isolation from people of colour, have a limited understanding of the role of race today. When people of colour mobilize to protest against racial injustice, white people of all backgrounds, whether liberal or conservative, urban or rural, educated or uneducated, sense this as an affront to their privilege and– in the words of DiAngelo–“racial comfort.” But for more than a decade, scholars such as Charles Mills have argued that a shift in thinking about race and racism is also needed. To Mills, instances of racism are neither isolated from nor contrary to American democracy. Rather, American democracy was founded upon a racial contract, an agreement between whites to subordinate non-whites under a “different and inferior moral status.” To Mills, racism forms the basis of American society. It is normal. It is expected. However, he stresses, “All whites are beneficiaries of the Contract, though some whites are not signatories to it.” But those whites who dis-

agree with racism in principle need to do more than to stay silent as people of colour continue to face violence, poverty, and injustice. As they, in the case of Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, Sandra Bland, continue to die needlessly in the hands of the police. Racism is more than just individual prejudice and discrimination, or the actions of the ignorant and uneducated. All white people benefit from white privilege in 21st century America. Race still matters, and has real consequences for the lives of people of colour. To step aside and ignore the racial injustices that continue today is an exercise of such privilege. As a settler Canadian writing this at Queen’s University, an institution built over traditional Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee territory, I acknowledge that it would be wrong to overlook how the same critiques of racial inequality in the United States are also applicable to Canada. If racial justice is the aim, we need to consider how the life chances of people of colour and Indigenous peoples are too at stake in Canada today.

SEPTEMBER 2015

Registration Now Open

Join us from November 12-15th for Canadaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s premier fall term Model United Nations Conference