April 2015 by The Chariot

April 2015

VOLUME 11 â&#x20AC;˘ ISSUE 4

The Face of

TERRORISM and its repercussions back home US-Iran Nuclear Deal

AS WELL AS: Indiana RFRA Debate, 6-7 Israel Elections, 11 Russia, 12-13

THE CHARIOT EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Kathleen Xue (‘16) SENIOR EDITOR Maggie Wang (‘17) COPY EDITOR Isha Gupta (‘17) FUNDRAISING DIRECTOR Katina Yong (‘16) SOCIAL MEDIA DIRECTOR Andrew Huang (‘16) CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Gabriel Alon (‘15) Ellaine Chou (‘16) Nicholas Chung (‘17) Alex Dersh (‘16) Dhruv Rajan (‘16) Katie Russell (‘16) Karunya Sethuraman (‘16) Eric Wang (‘17) Shannon Yang (‘17)

DEAR READERS,

ithin the past two months, two events have shaped and defined the differences within demographic groups. From the new Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act to widespread Islamophobia within the Western world as a result of the Islamic terrorist attacks, people now discuss and debate whether each is justified or unjustified. The Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) reinstates the right for businesses to refuse service to customers, sparking heated controversy nationwide. Though the Indiana RFRA no longer states explicitly the right for businesses to discriminate against LGBT, it is still regarded unfavorably and is criticized. Whereas one side argues that this is a blatantly discriminatory act posed as a disguise to allow conservative Christians to persecute against minorities, the other side believes that this is a way to preserve the limited freedoms of business owners. Islamophobia, on the other hand, is a trend seen all across the world in which non-Muslim citizens harbor a fear and hatred against their Muslim counterparts. This is a result of radical Islamic acts of terror that have caused the deaths of many innocent individuals, and has introduced an era of persecution against even the moderate Muslims. In this instance as well, both ends of the spectrum have valid perspectives on the issue: Some say that Islamophobia is an expected reaction to terrorist acts by groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, while others say that Islamophobia has gone too far and is engendering a movement of hatred much like the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide. Though these two items seem very different with one affecting only the US and the other happening across the globe, they reflect a general pattern in current events. We recognize the discrimination of one group in the pursuit of preserving another. And understandably, this imbalance of rights results in both to be contentious in nature, sparking the discussion within this issue of The Chariot. Some of the ideas brought to the table here may seem a bit extreme; however these reflect the true opinions of our writers. In reading this issue of The Chariot I ask you to see each article as one written by a person just like you, and to respect the beliefs published while maintaining your own. Finally, thank you for your support and readership, as a debate is not a debate without its participants. Sincerely,

Kathleen Xue

FOUNDATION/GROUP SPONSORS Adobe Systems • Daughters of the American Revolution • Palo Alto Lions Club PATRONS ($100+) Lauren Michals and Vinod Bharadwaj • Patricia Bruegger • Steven Guggenheim

The Chariot would like to thank Advisor Ethan Halter for his support.

Front cover artwork is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution.

Editor-In-Chief

ABOUT US The Chariot is intended to create and promote political discussion at Gunn and make people aware of issues that matter. We ask that you respect all opinions which are reflected in our publication, and write letters to the editors if you wish to voice your opinion. The views expressed do not reflect that of The Chariot, but rather those of the individual writers. The Chariot was originally founded in 2001 as The Partisan Review by Gunn alumni Ilan Wurman (‘06), Channing Hancock (‘06), and Sarah McDermott (‘05). Visit our website, gunnchariot.com if you wish to view any issues from previous years or for more information about us. Any questions, comments, suggestions, or requests to join can be sent to gunnchariot@gmail.com. If you’d like to make a donation or subscribe, please send checks to: Ethan Halter Re: The Gunn Chariot 780 Arastradero Road Palo Alto, CA 94306 Checks can be made out to Gunn High School with “The Chariot” on the memo.

APRIL 2015

NEWS BITES Jon Stewart leaves “The Daily Show”

OSCARS RECAP This past February, over 37 million international viewers watched the 87th Academy Awards.

Andrew Huang Social Media Director

n February Jon Stewart announced that he will be leaving “The Daily Show”. Since 1999 Stewart has brought comedy and comfort through his news satire, calling out absurdity and hypocrisy on US news channels such as CNN and Fox News. Over the years he has gained a reputation for both entertainment and honesty, and in a 2009 Time magazine poll he was ranked as America’s most trusted news anchor. Stewart has hugely influenced the political views of countless young Americans, and his work has inspired equally influential

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

Creative Commons License

spin-offs such as “The Colbert Report”. His style has even shaped authentic news shows, as many have adopted his style of showing video montages of politicians contradicting themselves. Stewart will be missed by many, and his bold commentary has left a lasting legacy on the nation.

The winner of Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay, and Best Cinematography was “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)”. “Birdman” was made to seem like it was filmed in one continuous shot, which added to its already impressive expression of one man’s struggle to recapture the glory of being a hero.

Police shootings rising in numbers Katina Yong Fundraising Director

ccording to the FBI’s annual Uniform Crime Report, police shootings have risen, typically buffeted by racial tensions that have swept through the nation. Police shootings, in particular those deemed retaliation shootings have shaken police forces nationwide with fears spreading. Many police officers feel as

if communities are turning on them. Retaliation shootings have occurred in Ferguson and Brooklyn, as broadly publicized by the media. In Brooklyn on Dec. 20, 2014, Ismaaiyl Brinsley shot officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos while they were seated in a police car. Among the police force there was widespread scorn for Mayor de Blasio who was accused of fanning racial tensions and encouraging protests. More recently on Mar. 12, 2015, two police officers in Ferguson were shot, and prosecutors have found a ready suspect in Jeffrey L. Williams. Police shootings serve as a sign of the greater fragmentation between a civilian populace who believe abuse is prevalent and law enforcement.

Creative Commons License APRIL 2015

Image taken from Clevescene A depiction of a professor struggling with Alzheimer’s disease in “Still Alice”, won Julianne Moore the academy award for Best Actress. Image taken from IMDB The award for Best Actor went to Eddie Redmayne for playing disabled physicist Stephen Hawking in “The Theory of Everything”. Image taken from Indiewire The Oscars was hosted by Neil Patrick Harris, who filled the show with inside jokes about “Birdman”, “Gone Girl” and “Whiplash”. —Compiled by Gabriel Alon

THE CHARIOT

Monica Lewinsky opens up Shannon Yang Contributing Writer

fter seventeen years of silence, Monica Lewinsky opened up about life after her affair with President Bill Clinton. In a March 2015 TED talk titled “The price of shame,” Lewinsky described the humiliation she faced. “I was branded as a tramp, tart, slut, whore, bimbo, and, of course, ‘that woman,’” Lewinsky said. “I was seen by many but actually known by few.”

Obama’s new immigration plan

Maggie Wang Senior Editor

n Nov. 20, 2014 President Obama took executive action on an immigration plan. Since then, his plan has faced many adversaries, many of whom claiming that his plan is an unconstitutional use of his executive power. According to The New York Times, Obama’s immigration plan will affect up to five million out of 11.4 million unauthorized immigrants. The plan seeks to strengthen borders, deport felons instead of families, and make it easier for high-tech workers to come to the United States. In addition to expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) created in 2012, Obama seeks to start Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA),

NATIONAL C Lewinsky considered suicide because of the harassment and had to be closely monitored. “The public humiliation was excruciating,” she said. “Life was almost unbearable.” Though cyberbullying happens frequently in our society now, it was an emerging concept in 1998. “This scandal was brought to you by the digital revolution,” Lewinsky said. “It was the first time the traditional news was usurped by the Internet for a major news story, a click that reverberated around the world. When this happened to me 17 years ago, there was no name for it. Now we call it cyberbullying and online harassment.” As the Internet continues to evolve, Lewinsky urges others to be aware of another side of humiliation: its commercial-

ization. “The price does not measure the cost to the victim, but the price measures the profit of those who prey on them,” she said. “This invasion of others is a raw material, efficiently and ruthlessly mined, packaged and sold at a profit. A marketplace has emerged where public humiliation is a commodity and shame is an industry.” Lewinsky encourages us to use the Internet responsibly and to make a difference through empathy and compassion: “We talk a lot about our right to freedom of expression, but we need to talk more about our responsibility to freedom of expression. We need to communicate online with compassion, consume news with compassion, and click with compassion.”

which offers three-year work permits to parents of citizens and other legal residents. Many believe Obama abused his power and acted unilaterally in making measures without the approval of Congress, as seen in the 26 states who sued Obama for this executive order. However, others believe that his actions were constitutional and were necessary for change. They also believe that the immigration reform would benefit the economy, as indicated by a study by the White House that estimated an increased gross domestic product (GDP) from 0.4 to 0.9 percent. 26 states filed a lawsuit against Obama’s immigration plan. As a result, U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Texas put the plan on hold by a pre-

liminary injunction. Fourteen states, including California, requested the lifting of the court freeze of Obama’s immigration plan. The issue will be brought to a court hearing on April 17, where Obama’s immigration executive action will be considered again. Although the Obama administration hopes to implement the immigration plan before he leaves office, illegal immigration will surely be a focus in the 2016 presidential campaign.

APRIL 2015

Creative Commons License

CONCERNS

Hillary Clinton’s email scandal Ellaine Chou Contributing Writer

n March 3rd, The New York Times reported that potential 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had exclusively used a private email account for her government business during her tenure as Secretary of State, rather than a government one. Later on March 5th, Associated Press reported that Clinton used her own email servers, rather than a thirdparty server like Gmail or Hotmail. In fact, one of her private email addresses was hrd22@clintonemail.com. The reason using her personal email is such a huge issue is that given her failure

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

email account “must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.” However, during Clinton’s tenure, it was never explicitly required that top-level officials like Clinton use government-issued accounts. Though a Creative Commons License string of emails to adhere to government proceedings, regarding the Clinton has compromised her transpar- Benghazi attack back in 2012 seems to ency. Clinton’s campaign has said she compromise Clinton’s confident appearfollowed both “letter and spirit of the ance, this scandal will fade away in time rules,” but the Republicans criticize her and will most likely not affect her presias being secretive and politically calcu- dential campaign significantly. Most lating. Clinton apelections for the White pears to be supHouse revolve around When Clinton became Secportive of the macro-issues such as the retary of State in 2009, fedemail leak, tweeteconomy and war, and eral rules required governing that she wants voters instinctively realment employees to ensure the “public to see ize that personal pecall records be kept, but did [her] email” and cadilloes fade in impornot require officials to use had asked the State tance. In addition, voters government accounts. to release them. have already formed fixed Though Clinton views of Clinton. Lastly, technically did not it is still early in the elecbreak the law by using her own email, tion cycle; most candidates have yet to there is a grey legal area in terms of her declare. If Clinton becomes her party’s actions. When Clinton took office in nominee, the email scandal will be a dis2009, federal rules required that govern- tant memory by the time voters start foment employees using a non-government cusing on the general election. APRIL 2015

THE CHARIOT

DEBATE: BUSINESS HAS THE PRO

Dhruv Rajan Contributing Writer

ecently, Indiana legislators signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which attempts to grant businesses the right to exercise their religious freedom. This means that businesses are allowed to alter their employment or service offerings to their customers as they choose. Specifically, the bill stipulates that: “A governmental entity may not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion … [unless it] (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” This verbiage does not in any way legalize tactical discrimination of groups, based on sexual orientation or otherwise. Rather, it defends religious liberties in the abstract sense, ensuring that government entities may not place burdens on lawabiding citizens who wish to express their religious freedom in choosing how to run their private businesses. All businesses remain obliged to respect the law (tax laws, minimum wage laws, etc.), and to not infringe upon citizens’ civil liberties. The proposition has been blasted by the leftist media and by politicians, who were very quick to label this bill an anti-gay scheme. So much so, that Indiana’s Governor, Mike Pence (who was initially in favor of the bill) was forced to approve “fixes” calling out sexual preference as a speciallyprotected class, thereby undermining the original bill’s protections for liberty. It is no small feat to have overturned the legislation. The RFRA initially passed the Indiana senate with an overwhelming

majority (40-10). However, out-of-state influINDIANA RFRA QUICK FACTS ences actively opposed the legislation with such vigor, that the strong vote was reversed, and Exempts religious objectors from certain federal law the ostensible “fixes” requirements including service to all customers inserted. Especially with such an immense majority, as per the Constitution, the state’s While the 1993 federal RFRA only allows individudecision ought to have als to enjoy religious exemptions, the Indiana RFRA been final. The magniextends that privilege to businesses as well tude of the force which combated the legislation is staggering. Soon after the bill The Indiana RFRA does not explicitly authorize was signed, an Indidiscrimination but rather lifts the legal obligation of impartiality for objectors ana pizza restaurant became famous for a SOURCE: Washington Post policy it created. The owners stated that the There is widespread agreement that restaurant would not cater to homosexual systematic discrimination against a group weddings. This should be within the juris- of people is a social evil. It is reasonable diction of the owners; to decide at which that people leverage powerful entities such events they are willing to offer their own as the government in the cause of eradirestaurant’s service. And, as Christians, cating such evil. Unfortunately, governwhy should they be forced to offer ser- ment is all too often a crude tool, and the vice at events which they do not support? use of the government comes with signifiThe restaurant faced severe and physically cant costs. In this case, the cost is that deviolent opposition for its policy, and was vout Christians are forced to compromise forced to close for days. their religion’s basic tenets and principles What we have witnessed is a monu- merely in the living of their private lives mental force pushing and the conductagainst Christian reliing of their prigious freedoms: those vate businesses. “In the face of such force, expressly granted in At the moment, what is to become of our the first amendment the Christian individual liberties?” to the Bill of Rights. religion has few Out of state forces defenders in the have seized the power media, and thus, to dictate state legislature decisions, and this immense loss is not being highlighted the power to abridge the freedoms of pri- sufficiently. I wonder how American socivate businesses to operate freely. This is ety will be changed, in the long-run, by the the very tyranny that our founding fathers reflexive abandonment of the very first sought to abolish in drafting the Constitu- freedom in the Bill of Rights. Isn’t the estion. In the face of such a force, what is to tablishment of religious liberty at the very become of our individual liberties? center of America’s founding? APRIL 2015

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

E RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE CON

Alex Dersh Contributing Writer

n 1964, the white owner of a BBQ joint in the South denied service to an African-American woman. The owner used his right to freedom of religion as justification, saying his “religious beliefs compel him” to deny blacks services. In 2015, a Christian conservative lobbyist who stood behind Indiana governor Mike Pence as he signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) on March 28th called the act necessary to protect “Christian businesses and individuals” who want to refuse service to gay and lesbian couples. The similarity between past and present attempts to justify injustice with “religious freedom” is no accident. Religion is still being used today by social conservatives across the country to validate discrimination against LGBT people and other minorities, just as it once was to jus-

tify discrimination against African-Americans. All too often, socially conservative Christian business owners have tried to deny service to LGBT couples, and most of the time LGBT couples win lawsuits alleging such discrimination. Paired with the almost weekly strike-downs of samesex marriage bans, Christian conservatives feel that their faith is no less under attack by activist liberal judges. Despite this fear, religious exercise is not truly threatened. Combining the first amendment with the passage of religious freedoms laws at the state and federal levels, the right to exercise one’s religion has arguably never been stronger. The real reason laws like the RFRA are being proposed is that current religious freedom laws have failed to successfully defend discriminatory businesses. In 2013 the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled against a photography company that refused to photograph a samesex couples’ wedding because the owner claimed it violated their religious beliefs. The owner’s defense failed because first, New Mexico has legal protections for

Creative Commons License APRIL 2015

LGBT people, meaning any religious freedom law there must be interpreted in accordance with anti-discrimination law. Second, it failed because New Mexico’s religious freedom law only covers situations in which the government has burdened the exercise of religion. Third, it failed because New Mexico’s law does not define a business as a person, rather it only defines individuals and non-profit organizations (like churches) as people. The Indiana RFRA, on the other hand, includes new wording that explicitly includes for-profit businesses in the definition of “persons,” meaning it would apply to religiously-held corporations. It also explicitly says that the government does not have to be a party in the lawsuit for the religious freedom defense to be invoked, meaning the business can claim that serving gay couples “burdened” its exercise of religion. Finally Indiana does not have anti-discrimination protections for LGBT people, meaning Indiana’s law would not be interpreted to protect gays and lesbians. Comparing the New Mexico law with the Indiana one with the knowledge that New Mexico’s is almost identical to religious freedom acts at the state and federal levels puts into context the battle raging in the state capitol. This religious freedom law is not designed to protect religious liberty in the same way other laws have done so. If it were, Indiana lawmakers would not have passed up the chance to add anti-discrimination language into the bill, and the law would not have received strong backing from organizations that vocally oppose gay rights. Instead, this law is designed to allow people to use religious liberty as a legal defense for discrimination against lesbian and gay Americans. Because of this, Indiana is heading down the wrong path in civil rights and liberties. Instead of finding a balance between the interests of religious and civil rights groups, lawmakers have drafted a law that threatens to make what was a thing of the past, discrimination, now a thing of today.

THE CHARIOT

ISLAMIC TERRORISTS ISIS

Katie Russell Contributing Writer

he Islamic State, or IS, sprang onto the world stage in June 2014, when it proclaimed its establishment of a caliphate in Iraq. Since then, the terrorist organization has gained territory in seven countries in the Middle East and North Africa and has become known for its human rights abuses including beheadings and mass executions. The spread of IS appears to have dissipated; ten months after its first appearance as an international threat, its activities are no longer reported daily in major news outlets. However, although IS is no longer mentioned as frequently in media, it is still very much active. Since the beginning of the year, IS has killed at least twenty-four hostages, and continues to fight to gain control over increased territory. Following IS’ proclamation of victory in Iraq in June 2014, it seized the city of Mosul. Since Mosul’s fall, American and Iraqi forces have been planning its lib-

Boko Haram Alex Dersh Contributing Writer

he kidnapping of over 200 schoolgirls in April 2014 shocked the world. Unfortunately this was not the first time that the group known as Boko Haram, which roughly translates to “Western education is forbidden,” has kidnapped women and children to be used as sex slaves and servants. Nor is it the first time that they’ve used brutality to strike fear into the people of northern Nigeria. Boko Haram is a militant Islamic terrorist group based in parts of northern Nigeria. It was founded in 2002 by a Muslim sect leader who attracted poor and discontent Muslims from around the region to study at his schools,

eration, expected to take place in April. The Peshmerga (Kurdish armed forces) began preparations to free Mosul beginning in January, and the US has increased airstrikes in the area. On March 11, IS threatened to behead any civilian attempting to leave Mosul, continuing its reign of terror in the area. Like Mosul, the city of Tikrit had been controlled by IS since June 2014, until the Iraqi government with a US-led coalition began a massive military operation to retake the city beginning in March, cutting off IS’ line of communication. Tikrit was liberated by Iraqi troops on April 1. Kobane, a Syrian city under Kurdish control, has long been a target of IS. The ter-

rorist group began to siege the city in September 2014, initiating a five-month long battle. The pushback from Kurds would see the Peshmerga work alongside the Free Syrian Army with assistance from the United States. On January 30, 2015 IS conceded its loss of Kobane, a major turning point in the saga of the Islamic State.

where people were enlisted as jihadists. The group then began its campaign of terror, launching their first major assault in 2009 with attacks on government and civilian targets. The following years saw monthly bombings and shootings against Christians and Muslims, civilians and soldiers, the children and the innocent. Like the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which is at war with an American-led coalition in Iraq and Syria, Boko Haram vows to establish an “Islamic state” based off their extremist interpretations of Islam. Western education and culture of any kind is punished by death and non-Muslims are either converted or killed. Opposition to western-style education is widespread in northern Nigeria, where resentment by the ruling elite of decades of British rule reflects itself into anti-western and anti-secular sentiment. Frequent disruptions to Nigeria’s fragile democracy occur at each election, as evidenced by the attacks after President

Goodluck Jonathan was elected in 2011. Nigeria’s March 2015 election also had to be extended due to threats by Boko Haram over the safety of voters in the country. Boko Haram earns near universal condemnation from the international community, especially after pledging allegiance to the equally violent Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. The Nigerian government, the ones responsible for subduing the threat posed by these terrorists, have been locked in a drawn-out conflict with no end in sight. The Nigerian military is under-equipped, unprepared, disorganized, and ineffective in fighting the insurgency. The US and her allies have pledged support to Nigeria in terms of material support and specialists, but the fight against a better motivated and wellarmed militant group is by all accounts an uphill to climb. It remains to be seen whether, at the end of the day, terror or peace will prevail in Nigeria.

APRIL 2015

Creative Commons License

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

IS ISLAMOPHOBIA JUSTIFIED? OP-ED: Islamophobia is causing unjust persecution of Muslims Eric Wang Contributing Writer

n the face of global terrorism, fear has revealed the true identities of many, creating products like Islamophobia—a hatred of those who practice Islam. In all nations there is a fear and hatred of Muslims. In the bitter distrust that has emerged since the many attacks on Western soil from 9/11 to Charlie Hebdo, many have come to

distrust Islam. Around the globe there have emerged many strong examples that demonstrate that Islamophobia is alive, well and stronger than ever. Regardless of certain individuals’ actions, it is not right for us to harbor a feeling of Islamophobia as this estranges a large group of people who are innocent of a crime only few have committed. In China, there have been crackdowns on the Uighur people of the autonomous zone of Xinjiang. As an ethnic minority that primarily practices Islam, the Chinese governments, in an attempt to dilute the longstanding culture and identity of the Uighur people, has done everything from banning the wearing of headscarves to preventing Muslim officials from observing fasts during the month of Ramadan. The reason for these policies is to suppress the calls for separation from China by many in Xinjiang. In their struggle for complete autonomy, a few have turned to acts of violence, including the knife attacks that left 29 dead at a railway sta-

Creative Commons License APRIL 2015

tion in Kunming last year. To combat this the Chinese government has branded the Uighurs as terrorists linked to Al Qaeda, justifying the repression of their right to worship freely. To the south of China, the Myanmar government and “Buddhist Bin Laden” monk Ashin Wirathu lead attacks on a religion and its peaceful practitioners, preaching a message of hatred against Muslims. Wirathu’s sermons have culminated in a campaign of brutal violence against the Rohingya Muslim minority. Many have been murdered in mob violence. The Myanmar government, meanwhile, continues to deny the citizenship of over one million Rohingyas. Anti-immigrant backlash has grown in the Western countries. From Greece’s Golden Dawn party, a neo-Nazi group known for its anti-immigrant and strong anti-Muslim ideals to attacks on mosques immediately following the Charlie Hebdo attacks; discrimination, both in its more undetectable or most evident forms exists. Earlier this year Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal touted the idea of “no-go zones”—areas throughout Europe and the US where sharia law is imposed where non-Muslims are not allowed, and federal and state laws are not applicable. However, many oppose this idea. In the long run, misconceptions, prejudices and even outright lies will only serve to increase strife and put innocent, peaceful human beings at risk. Ultimately, when a group is singled out because of religion, it is our duty as Americans and global citizens to stay informed, because all too often, their pleas are ignored.

MIDDLE EAST THE CHARIOT

US-Iran nuclear framework Nicholas Chung Contributing Writer

fter a marathon stretch of late night negotiations, the United States and Iran have both agreed to a rough outline of a landmark nuclear deal. The deal, however, still faces significant opposition both abroad and at home and has yet to be finalized, with a final deadline of June 30. Both the US and Iran have made key concessions. At the beginning of negotiations, the US had demanded that Iran’s nuclear program be dismantled entirely, a stipulation Iran has flatly rejected. Now, the US and five other major world powers—France, Russia, China, UK and Germany—have settled for restricting Iran’s nuclear program to peaceful purposes. Iran, for its part, has agreed to significantly reduce the program’s capabilities and to place limits on production, ensuring that if Iran broke any restrictions and tried to build a nuclear bomb the process would take at least a year. If a nuclear deal is reached, this could have far-ranging effects on the global economy. The oil industry, already suffering from an oversupply of oil, could be flooded with 7 to 35 million more barrels of oil if Iran is allowed to export oil. The Iranian stockpiles could be sold over a three-month period, swelling the current global market surplus by 30 percent. Iran’s total output could increase by 2.5 million barrels per day within three months to reach full capacity. Oil prices have fallen by more than 48 percent in the past six months as supply has outpaced demand, with millions of extra barrels of oil being produced daily. By increasing the supply glut, oil prices risk dropping further. While this will negatively affect the oil industry

and the fracking industry as well as oil exporters such as Russia and OPEC, this will be a net benefit to the US economy as it is a net importer of oil. By importing oil at lower prices, the US saves money, boosting the economy. The Iranian talks have not proceeded without con-

sanctions laws off the books. Some conservatives, including some newspapers that had endorsed the senators’ election campaigns, joined liberals in calling the letter ill-advised. Reactions to the framework have varied. While Democratic leaders such as Nevada senator Harry Reid have expressed “cautious optimism,” other representatives and senators such as Arkansas senator Tom Cotton have denounced the deal as a series of “dangerous concessions.” On April 14 lawCr eat makers voted on ive Co a bill that passed mm with bipartisan supon sL port that would allow ice the Senate to vote on ns e t r o v e r s y. any agreement with Iran. Congress has In addition, if an agreement harshly criticized is not reached by June 30, ConObama over the medigress is ready to push through a ations. Prior to the March bill that would increase sanctions on Iran. 31 deadline, 47 Republican senators sent THE FRAMEWORK a controversial letter to Iran’s Iran’s number of installed centrifuges leader AyatolMost US sanctions will start to be lifted will reduce from 19,000 to 6,104. Only within 4-12 months of an agreement. lah Khamenei 5,060 can be used for the next 10 years. warning that Iran will not enrich uranium past 3.67% any negotiated The European Union will suspend ecopurity (a level acceptable for power usnomic, energy and banking sanctions. agreement on age but not weapons usage) for 15 years. Iran’s nuclear The United States will roll back sancprogram could Iran will reduce its uranium stockpile tions that punish companies that invest expire upon from 10,000 kg. to 300 kg. in Iran. Obama’s departure from Iran will limit enrichment to the Natanz UN Security Council sanctions will be facility. Another, Fordow, will be consuspended after Iran implements the the presidency. verted to a research center. deal. This is a real threat to neRebuild Arak, a heavy water reactor, to Six UN resolutions against Iran’s nuclear gotiations benot produce weapons-grade plutonium. program will be eliminated. cause although Obama can Allow international inspectors regular —Compiled by Nicholas Chung access to all nuclear facilities and supply choose not to chains. SOURCE: Wall Street Journal enforce sanctions, future SOME DETAILS NOT INCLUDED presidents can choose to reimpose them • When key sanctions would be suspended at will if Congress does not • The extent of Iran’s nuclear activity after one decade vote to take the APRIL 2015

MIDDLE EAST WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

OP-ED: ObamaNetanyahu tensions do not reflect US-Israel relations Karunya Sethuraman Contributing Writer

olitics is partisan, but every time we hear that there is a huge political power play going on, we need

Israel elections Isha Gupta Copy Editor

srael’s 2015 elections ended on March 17 with the center-right party Likud surprisingly winning the largest number of seats in the Israeli legislature (known as the Knesset). With Likud’s victory, incumbent Benjamin Netanyahu became Prime Minister and rallied his conservative base with familiar rhetoric blasting the Iranian nuclear program and the rise of radical Islam in the Middle East. Before the results were announced, Likud was trailing the leftist Zionist Union in opinion polls during the past weeks leading up to the elections. A sudden boost of support is credited to a surge in far right-wing support when he closed the potential of a Palestinian state. However there are a myriad issues that will shape Netanyahu’s fourth term, ranging in scale from global to domestic. COALITION CONUNDRUM One of Netanyahu’s immediate tasks is to assemble a majority coalition in the Knesset, which is tasked with finding allies in other parties with similar interests to form a bloc that will form and vote on bills and populate the various executive ministries of the government. Previously Likud formed a coalition with right-wing and orthodox parties and tackled a more conservative agenda. With Netanyahu becoming Prime Minister again, Likud seems likely to join forces with the same parties to secure a coalition in the Knesset. Even while campaigning,

to remember that individual tensions do not signify general divides. President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu have been testing each other’s limits. Op-eds are being written furiously, with critics of President Obama and his Democratic allies acting like Obama is trying to start a world war, or not giving Israel the support that it deserves as one of our oldest allies in the region. On the other hand, some are calling attention to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s inflammatory, divisive, possibly desperate comments, in which he said that Arab voters were “heading to the polls in droves.” This attempt to stir up the right-wing base and imply that if people did not vote they would be letting the Arabs take over was strongly criticized

Netanyahu engaged talks with leaders of conservative parties in order to guarantee the Knesset and promised a coalition within two to three weeks of assuming office. Given his previous experience, Netanyahu will have little trouble in assembling a new coalition for his new term in office. ADVERSARIAL ALLIES Israel’s biggest international partner is the US. However, Netanyahu’s previous hardliner policies have irked the White House, including several initiatives to build new settlements in contentious territory. Additionally Netanyahu vowed on the campaign trail that he would not allow the Palestinians to have their own state. The promise of a two-state solution has been a cornerstone in US-Israeli relations, with the consensus that a two-state solution would be a middle ground between the differing proposed sentiments of the Israelis and Palestinians. Also the tense personal relationship between Netanyahu and President Obama hit a recent low when Netanyahu’s speech to Congress criticized the Obama administration’s policy of engaging with Iran. Though the US and Israel have been tight-knit partners in the past, the future may be different if Netanyahu continues his rightist trajectory in Israel. NUCLEAR NUISANCES In the midst of global nuclear negotiations with Iran, Netanyahu and other right-wing leaders in Israel have been adamant against the West accepting any deal with Iran and instead supporting a suspension of Iran’s nuclear program altogether. Historically Iran has blasted anti-Israel sentiments on a whim and has threatened to use its nuclear capabilities on Israel and APRIL 2015

by many, perhaps leading to Netanyahu’s victory. Of course, within days of winning the election, he reversed his position, trying to clarify his statement. By then, the White House had already come out decrying his statements. And so the conflict and media frenzy began. However, the furor should not be taken seriously. A recent Gallup poll shows that, unsurprisingly, the majority of America still stands with Israel, and most Israelis are pro-American. 70 percent of Americans see the Jewish state favorably, and 62 percent—an all time high—choose Israel if asked to choose sides in the regional conflict. Though politicians are being political, it is doubtful that any of this has monumentally affected US-Israel relations.

other associated nations. Recently reports have surfaced of Israel spying on the Iranian nuclear negotiations and feeding the gained intelligence to Republicans in the US Congress, causing an international breach of trust. Given that this was under Benjamin Netanyahu’s previous administration, the elections have only further encouraged Israel to undermine the negotiations. Netanyahu’s conservative stance and his respective political party will only intensify in response to the ongoing nuclear talks with Iran and the West. THE PALESTINIAN POLITICAL PICKLE The question of Palestine has plagued the nation of Israel ever since its formation in 1948. With the collapse of US-led peace talks in April 2014 and the escalation of violence in Gaza in the subsequent months, anti-Palestinian rhetoric by Netanyahu’s administration has only increased. Though Netanyahu declared that he would reject a Palestinian state on the campaign trail, he backtracked after the elections, stating, “I don’t want a one-state solution, I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that circumstances have to change.” If Netanyahu manages to assemble a conservative-based coalition, Israel may continue to not engage with the Palestinian National Authority on a diplomatic level, much less forge a solution. As mentioned previously, Netanyahu promised new settlements in the West Bank during the weeks leading up to the elections, which has only deteriorated relations further between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Palestinian relations with Israel will continue to test Netanyahu’s leadership and diplomacy.

THE CHARIOT

RUSSIA

Oil price drop effect on Russia’s economy Gabriel Alon Contributing Writer

n early 2014 Russia president Vladimir Putin began sending in troops and weapons into Ukraine. While Putin was aware that his actions might harm Russia’s economy because of economic sanctions, he did not anticipate that by year’s end the price of oil would be half of what it was when he sent out his military orders. In tandem with economic sanctions, oil prices have taken a

tremendous toll on Russia’s economy. Yet despite these economic pressures, Vladimir Putin’s political support within his own country remains high because of nationalism. An increase in supply from shale oil drilling in the United States has driven the drop in global oil prices. Crude has fallen from a high of over $100 a barrel in early 2014 to almost $55 a barrel in recent weeks. This has dramatically impacted Russia because it derives half of its tax revenue from its oil and gas sector. In addition, Bloomberg News reported, “Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov predicted that if a barrel of oil was worth $60, the Russian economy could contract by 4 percent in 2015. ” Despite these budget shortfalls, and the threat of continued sanctions—Russia has announced that it APRIL 2015

Creative Commons License

will increase its military spending by 30 percent in 2015. Earlier this year Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine came together and endorsed a long-term agreement calling for a ceasefire in Ukraine and more political autonomy for rebel-held areas. Meanwhile in its headquarters in Vienna OPEC has voted to maintain its production level of crude oil and not leverage its monopoly power to bring up oil prices, because this would reduce its market share if expensive shale oil drilling is allowed to thrive. The decisions of OPEC are out of Russia’s control, but Russia could save its economy from sanctions by reigning in its military. Russia has a strategic choice between diplomacy and a more stable economy, or nationalism and minor land gains in Eastern Europe.

RUSSIA

New Russian documentary reveals details on Crimean annexation Katie Russell Contributing Writer

n March 18, 2014 Russia annexed the contested Crimean peninsula under orders from Pres-

ident Vladimir Putin. At the time of annexation last year, Putin stated that he had ordered his government to begin working on “returning” Crimea on March 16, the day that Ukraine president Viktor Yanukovych was ousted. However, according to new information released, Putin revealed that he had actually been planning the seizure of Crimea since February and admitted that he had in fact deployed Russian troops to “protect” Crimea, a rumor which he had adamantly denied many times in the past. These new revelations are recorded in a documentary called “Crimea: The Way Back Home” which commemorates the one-year anniversary of the Crimean annexation. This documentary was produced by Russia-1, a state-owned television channel which has over 120 million daily viewers. Due to its close ties

Russian opposition leader’s death raises questions Ellaine Chou Contributing Writer

n February 28 Boris Nemtsov, a charismatic Russian opposition leader and sharp critic of President Vladimir Putin, was gunned down near the Kremlin, just a day before a planned protest against the government. Nemtsov’s death ignited a fury among opposition figures who assailed the Kremlin for creating an atmosphere of intolerance of any dissent and called the killing an assassination. Putin quickly offered his condolences and called the murder a provocation. He also vowed to do everything possible to bring to justice those responsible for the vile murder of Nemtsov. Putin provided reassurance to Nemtsov’s mother in a telegram published on the Kremlin’s website: “Everything will be done so that the organisers and perpetrators of a vile and cynical murder get the punishment they

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

to the government, Russia-1 has often been accused of distributing pro-Russian propaganda. The documentary includes interviews with Putin in which he describes the Ukrainian revolution as a coup masterminded by the United States, and declares that Russia had prepared to use nuclear weapons in the Crimean crisis. The documentary contradicts many of Putin’s statements made over the past year, revealing that he had a much larger role in the annexation of Crimea than he had previously let on. He continuously referred to Crimea as historic Russian territory, and insisted that its annexation to Russia was not forced but rather a “welcome return home”. This use of the word “home” is no coincidence; Russia views Crimea as a historic and integral region of Russia.

deserve.” Putin also told Nemtsov’s 86-year-old mother Dina Eidman that his death was an irreparable loss and that he had “left a trace in Russia’s history, in politics and public life.” Although it seems obvious to the outside world that Putin is somehow related to Nemtsov’s death and perhaps even initiated it, there is rudimentary evidence—if not, a lack thereof. The place where Nemtsov was killed was conveniently covered by a slow-moving snow plow so that none of the security cameras could capture the identity of the assassinator. Moreover, the scene was immediately cleaned after Nemtsov’s death, allowing for no crime investigation to occur. Prior to his death Putin categorized Nemtsov as part of the “fifth column,” a term Putin devised for “various types of national traitors” who hope to “worsen [Russia’s] socio-economic situation” and are used as “a tool for achieving foreign political goals.” Indeed Nemtsov, when many approved the annexation of Crimea by Russia, said if he were the president of Russia, Crimea would have remained Ukrainian. In an offending remark Nemtsov denounced Putin: “You think [Putin] is concerned with the fate of Russians in Donetsk? He could[n’t] care less!” Thus, while no evidence connects Putin with Nemtsov’s death, the only well-founded conclusion to be made is that extreme nationalists influenced by Putin’s parochial view of “national traitors” assassinated Nemtsov. Creative Commons License APRIL 2015

THE CHARIOT

SCIENCE AN

Genetically engineered... humans? Andrew Huang Social Media Director

hen we fail a test, lose a race, or get rejected by a loved one, we tend to blame our biology. We wish we were smarter, faster, or more attractive. But ultimately we move on, for we realize it is pointless to lament qualities we cannot change. Certain traits are ingrained in our genes, and we must live with them—until now. In a recent Science article titled “A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification,” Nobel Laureate David Baltimore and coauthors announce that humane gene editing is fast-approaching. Precise gene-editing tools such as CRISPR, molecular word processor, make it trivial to modify the genes of human cells in a petri dish. This technology seems benign when applied to skin cells, but when applied to fertilized human eggs—also known as germline cells—it becomes possible to genetically engineer people. And the possibility is not far off, for last year scientists at Nanjing University generated several genetically-modified cynomolgus monkeys.

To address the impending ethical dilemma, Baltimore and his colleagues recommend the scientific community to “strongly discourage clinical application of this technology at this time,” open “forums for education and discussion,” and hold an “international meeting” on human gene editing. Other groups of scientists, such as the International Society of Stem Cell Research, recommend stronger measures, calling for a moratorium on human germline genome editing. But such warnings may not stop the momentum of the movement to genetically engineer humans. Biotechnology companies such as OvaScience and Intrexon and researchers at Harvard and Northeastern have already started modifying human egg cells to correct diseasecausing mutations. Once such groups have perfected their methods for erasing genetic disorders, they could then use their techniques to add genetic strengths, conferring certain humans with resistance to Alzheimer’s, immunity to heart attacks, and perhaps increased intelligence. It will be difficult to resist these tempting modifications, for at the core of human nature lies a desire to control our circumstances, a desire which has been ingrained within us over two hundred thousand years of evolution. Thus it will be interesting to see what happens when we take evolution into our own hands.

APRIL 2015

Creative Commons License

ND HEALTH

Betel nut: the unknown carcinogen Katina Yong Fundraising Director

ittle stalls selling controversial betel nuts can be found across Asia. Betel nuts contain areca nuts, which are the seeds of the areca palm. After harvesting, a few slices of areca nut are wrapped in a betel leaf with slaked lime and other flavorings such as clove. Chewing the betel nut induces a rush of energy from the chemical compounds within. As such, it is the stimulant of choice for many fishermen and truck drivers who have red tinted teeth and lips as a result. However, its seemingly harmless purpose is belied by its status as a carcinogen, typically causing oral cancer within twenty years. While there have been active campaigns to reduce tobacco usage, the fight against

betel nut usage is moving along at a significantly slower pace. Betel nut’s status as a known carcinogen necessitates the urgency for stricter regulation. Part of the issue stems from its use in traditional medicines and religious and cultural rituals, making it exceedingly hard to regulate due to its cultural importance. For example, betel nut is commonly placed in offerings to ancestors in Vietnam and its use dates back to the Bronze Age. Any efforts at greater government regulation as in the case of tobacco would lead to public outcry. In addition, there is little education on the risks betel nuts pose, leading people to use betel nut as a “safer” alternative to tobacco. Even with awareness, people continue to chew as the long-term effects take years to develop. In addition, betel nut is readily available for users in convenient packaging at a low price making the habit an easy one to maintain. Even in places such as the UK, betel leaf is easily obtained in supermarkets such as Tesco’s. The regulation of betel nut would be a difficult undertaking and one that local governments would be poorly APRIL 2015

WWW.GUNNCHARIOT.COM

Creative Commons License

equipped to enact. Instead of government regulation, governments should rely on public education especially in schools to combat the usage of betel nut. Such education should focus on the cosmetic and social ramifications of chewing while also emphasizing the risk of cancer. Previous campaigns to promote sunscreen usage have found that showing youth pictures of the sun’s effect on skin are more effective that explaining the cancer risks. In addition, to education, campaigns against the use of betel nut should focus on city cleanliness as betel nut users cause damage to buildings in the form of red spittle. Betel nut’s hold on cultural and religious affairs could be addressed by recruiting priests and other religious leaders to reduce the use of betel nut in religious worship helping sever ties to cultural significance. Betel nut is an urgent health issue that is not pursued as aggressively in Asia as it should be despite its status as a carcinogen. Asia should act rapidly to combat the use of betel nut through public education campaigns.

2016 ELECTIONS

THE CHARIOT

Current presidential candidates* Kathleen Xue Editor-in-Chief

hough it is still a year from the presidential elections, politicians from both parties have already started announcing their intent on becoming their respective parties’ candidates. Not all candidates have publicly come out yet, but below are descriptions of the current candidates and their likely campaign platforms. DEMOCRAT: HILLARY CLINTON Announcing her presidential pursuit on Sunday April 12, Hillary Clinton will run on a platform trying to compromise the Democratic party’s more liberal values with her comparatively centrist goals. She will most likely emphasize her campaign on levelling the wage gap to raise the median income; bolstering the job-training program; making college more affordable; investing in infrastructure improvement; and enforcing a stricter tax policy. REPUBLICAN: TED CRUZ Texas senator Ted Cruz officially became a candidate on March 23, becoming the first official Republican candidate. He introduced

Creative Commons License

his presidential inter2016 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE est with a video statPREDICTIONS (AS OF APR 18, 2015) ing that “It’s going to SOURCE: New York Times take a new generation of courageous conserDEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN vatives to help make America great again,” RUNNING: RUNNING: and made the announcement at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia (which is known to have a large number of conservaTed Cruz, Rand Paul, tive Christian students) Hillary Clinton during its student conLIKELY: vocation. Cruz has already appealed to the Hispanic demographic in one of his campaign Marco Rubio videos spoken entirely Martin O’Malley, Jim Webb LIKELY: in Spanish, and will UNLIKELY: most likely continue that trend by focusing on attracting minorities. Jeb Bush, Scott Walker REPUBLICAN: Joe Biden RAND PAUL NOT RUNNING: NOT RUNNING: The second senator to officially announce his candidacy, Rand Paul (Kentucky), who is known for his Mitt Romney Elizabeth Warren extreme right-wing Creative Commons License libertarian ideals reflecting those of his younger generation with fresh ideas on colfather Ron Paul, kicked lege tuition and job opportunity growth. off his campaign with REPUBLICAN: MARCO RUBIO the slogan “Defeat the Florida Senator Marco Rubio announced Washington Machine.” his bid on April 13. Given his campaign sloPaul will likely be push- gan is “A New American Century”, Rubio ing for his libertarian will be centering his focus around millennials ideas of a strictly lim- and gaining the votes of the youth. Accordited government and ing to ABC News, Rubio has also formed an the protection of in- alliance with Jeb Bush and is currently leading dividual sovereignty to in the primaries. Though he trails in populardistinguish him from ity behind Bush, his union with Bush gives Cruz. Moreover, Paul him boost in the GOP pool. Rubio will be is also likely to take a focusing on the issues of Cuba, healthcare, softer stance on climate Israel, Iran and abortion. change skepticism than Cruz, focusing more Check back at http://www.gunnchariot. on appealing to the com for election updates.

*As of April 18, 2015

APRIL 2015