emory globe
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
2017
masthead CONTACT US emoryglobe@gmail.com emoryglobe.com
EDITORS-IN-CHIEF David Hervey Andrew Teodorescu
PUBLICATION The Emory Globe is a studentrun publication published for and distributed to the Emory community. The statements and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the individual writers and do not necessarily reflect those of the entire staff or those of Emory University, its students, faculty, staff, or administration.
MANAGING EDITOR Namrata Verghese
LETTERS TO THE EDITORS The Emory Globe staff welcomes letters to the editors but reserves the right to edit all submissions for length, grammar, libel, obscenity, and invasion of privacy. ADVERTISING The Emory Globe does not host advertisements in its issues. DESIGN Cover: Andrew Teodorescu
PUBLICATIONS EDITOR Pooja Kanabur ASSOCIATE EDITORS Cameron Hall Zoe Robbin TREASURER Camilo Moraga-Lewy IN THIS ISSUE Mary Bohn Tejas Kashyap Presley West
contents 03 05 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES TEJAS KASHYAP
IRAN & SAUDI ARABIA CAMERON HALL
07
DENMARK PRESLEY WEST
08
FRANCE POOJA KANABUR
09
JAPAN MARY BOHN
11
INDIA NAMRATA VERGHESE
13
UNITED STATES ZOE ROBBIN
15
MEET THE EDITORS
16
AFTERWORD
17
WORKS CITED
THE GLOBE | 2
THE U.A.E.’S PROPOSED ECONOMIC PLOT TO TANK QATAR: HIDDEN MOTIVES TEJAS KASHYAP, Staff Writer
I
n recent leaked documents acquired by the Intercept1 from the UAE Ambassador to the United States, Yousef al-Otaiba, it has become apparent that there was at some point a plan for the United Arab Emirates to wage financial war on Qatar. The UAE’s plan to manipulate Qatari debt capital markets was drawn up by Banque Havilland, a private bank owned by controversial financier, David Rowland, who created a banking empire in taxhavens like Luxembourg and Panama2. To examine the crisis, we must first explore the method of a debt instrument in turbulent markets. In theory, companies and sovereign nations should act completely differently; in practice, the dichotomy blurs. Corporations act to increase profit, whereas countries do not have a profit-comparable item to increase. One could say that nationwide safety, or protection of the right to life and liberty are profit-comparable, but, in theory, this is still something to maintain, rather than a statistic to increase or to decrease on a bottom line. Still, similarities exist between the motives of companies and those of sovereign nations. Companies are beholden to shareholders, who can vote-in board members and vote on wide-scale changes. Democratic countries are beholden to their constituents, who issue a social contract with their nation to release certain rights for national protection. Companies have assets-on-hand; countries have sovereign wealth funds. Companies issue debt instruments, as do countries. Both types of debt instruments are given ratings, as well, to allow an investor to aptly gauge the risk of their investment. When a corporate bond is defaulted upon due to company insolvency or bankruptcy, the results are rather straightforward. A company can declare Chapter 7 or 113 (or occasionally Chapter 12 or 13) bankruptcy, and while both options result in costly legal battles and months of meetings, the creditors still have some guarantee to receive a portion of their assets on which liens are held. The same proceedings do not apply to the bankruptcy of a sovereign nation, especially a volatile one in an emerging market. In traditional capitalism, theoretically, a company can declare Chapter 7 bankruptcy, completely liquidate, and cover first senior, then subordinated, then preferred stockholders, on and on through the list until all funds are divested. However, if a nation declares bankruptcy, there can be no full liquidation because the nation still holds a contractual obligation via the unwritten social contract with its constituents to protect life and liberty (depending, of course, on how autocratic the given country is). The country needs to maintain a semblance of identity to base fiat currency and maintain protective forces at the minimum; therefore, a country cannot completely liquidate. According4 to Matthew Levine of Bloomberg, there are
3
only two options for creditors of debt during the default of a sovereign nation: “(1) Participate in the inevitable negotiations and accept restructured debt—probably with a substantial haircut—in exchange for pre-default claims, or (2) Hold out from the negotiations and engage in years of time- and laborintensive unpleasantness to try to enforce their original predefault claims against the country.” This is simply due to the contractual obligation of the social contract; a country can never default and liquidate completely, otherwise it will cease to exist, which is outlawed by the very laws that instantiate it. Of course, we can have sovereign mergers and acquisitions—we saw this most recently with the Serbia-Montenegro loose merger and the divestiture of South Sudan. Every corporate finance student will learn that bondholder leverage should be higher than stockholder’s, as bondholders have a claim on company assets. However, how can countries truly declare bonds when there is little probability that the bonds will ever be paid on default? In the case of stable governments, like the United States, the risk of default on Treasury Bonds is virtually nonexistent; the government has the authority to raise taxes or simply borrow to pay off obligations. However, in emerging market economies under default, like Venezuela5, how can the loan ever be repaid under pre-default conditions if the government has no authority to raise taxes or borrow in the first place? This ensures that renegotiation, while not the preferred option, is the necessary, as the waiting game expends more resources than it will ever recoup. Qatar has been subject to economic sanctions6 from a coalition of Middle-Eastern countries as a proxy of the longstanding Saudi-Iranian conflict, including three fellow Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. Qatar, occupying a minute peninsula bordering only Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf, is heavily dependent on human capital and banking, with wealth derived from ostentatiously high natural-gas and oil reserves. Already, these sanctions have increased the interbank rates for fund transfer across the Middle East, lowering liquidity. This lowered liquidity has increased bid-ask spreads on government bonds and caused the interbank rate to rise nearly 40 basis points after the embargo. Still, Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund was able to bring $20B back7 into the country to prop up the banking system and allow for liquidity to continue. However, the economic warfare against Qatari bonds continues in this proposed plan. The long and short was that Banque Havilland, under Rowland, would create several offshore shell companies with no ties to the UAE to buy and trade massive volumes of Qatari debt in a "painting the tape"8 manipulation to
create the appearance of high trading volume. Traders outside of the scheme would become skittish at the apparent high selling volume in a politically turbulent Qatar and trade away their bonds, tanking the price on the bond. At the same time, these shell companies would hold credit default swaps (CDS) on the Qatari bond, which would appreciate in value, as they are a sort of insurance against a defaulting bond. Though this economic manipulation, the UAE would be able to tank the Qatari debt market while funneling funds into their own pockets by selling appreciating CDS’s on the debt. This would lead to a flattening of the yield curve, meaning that investors would demand higher yields on short-term Qatari debt instruments, which indicates that a recession is approaching. This plan was seemingly drafted by someone with no economic knowledge – the whole mantra of the plan was to “control the yield curve to decide the future.” Problematically, the yield curve of a sovereign nation is inordinately difficult to manipulate. Additionally, Qatar, unlike Venezuela, can back its debt using reserves. While $20B needed to be recently recalled, Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund contains nearly 15 times that amount, around $335B. The plan would fail—while Qatar would expend resources to maintain the debt, there is no way that the painting tape manipulation would lead to anything longer than a daily drop in bond value, which would change the default risk valuation for Qatar, but only temporarily. Any proper diligence of the trading would reveal the shell companies trading volumes back and forth in a predictable fashion, and the bond would likely appreciate to higher than its initial value. Al-Otaiba has claimed innocence when discussing the hacks, as it reveals shocking information regarding how the UAE influences American politics. One document contains a $250K invoice9 billed from a think tank founded by a Clinton administration alumni concerning a paper on the export of military-grade drones. However, the whole hack is highly
suspicious; the UAE has the second largest10 economy in the GCC, and its relationship with the US is of premier importance11, especially following the collaboration between the US and UAE on the Academi (formerly Blackwater Worldwide) mercenary army. The UAE Ambassador to the US is one of the most important diplomats for the UAE, which makes it seem rather odd that his email would be hacked and dispersed with such apparent ease. The final piece of the puzzle is the relationship between President Trump, who has emboldened Saudi Arabia at the expense of Qatar, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who supported Qatar and faulted12 the blockading countries refusal to change their position on the proxy conflict. This may be due to more personal dealings; President Trump has a golf course in Dubai, but has been rejected twice from investment funding from Qatar. Because this plan reflects so poorly on Saudi Arabia, as well as on David Rowland, is there not a motive for Tillerson or al-Otaiba to release the documents of their own volition, to spite Trump’s negation of their policy? This is not beyond reason. At the time, in Oct., Tillerson was fending off rumors and allegations that he would be losing his job after supposedly calling the President a “moron.”13 Tillerson had been contradicted by the President on the issue of North Korea with the memorable, condescending tweet from Trump: “I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man,” the president wrote14. The President and the Secretary of State seemed to be out of step at every turn, and the derision and divisiveness continued behind closed doors. This conflict on policy in the Saudi-Qatari proxy conflict may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, and Tillerson could easily have used his influence to convince the UAE Ambassador to release these documents on his own to undermine Trump and allow both of their influences to grow.
THE GLOBE | 4
THE MIDDLE EAST'S COLD WAR: HOTTER THAN EVER CAMERON HALL, Associate Editor
I
n recent years, there has been much talk of a “new Cold War” between the United States and either Russia or China. However, the ongoing struggle for influence in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran much more closely resembles the original Cold War, with various proxy conflicts and diplomatic schemes taking place across the region. The two countries support opposite sides in civil wars in both Syria1 and Yemen2. Over the summer, Saudi Arabia suddenly cut ties with Qatar3, creating a diplomatic crisis that pushed the country toward Iran. Most recently, the Prime Minister of Lebanon4 suddenly fled to Saudi Arabia and resigned, claiming that he was in imminent danger from Iran. However, other claims suggested he was being held captive in Saudi Arabia after being perceived as too friendly toward Hezbollah and their supporters in Iran. This list of conflicts and disputes in which Saudi Arabia and Iran are on opposite sides only continues to grow, and steps must be taken by all interested actors to diffuse this tension before it escalates into war. Within Saudi Arabia in particular, several recent developments have contributed to the country’s increased aggressiveness. During his visit to Saudi Arabia earlier in the year, US President Donald Trump essentially gave Saudi Arabia a blank check, which many observers believe5 spurred the Saudis to move against Qatar. Saudi Arabia is also emboldened by new leadership. Recently, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has been consolidating power as he prepares to succeed his father as King. This culminated in a massive corruption purge, which saw many business leaders, government ministers, and even princes detained6. Many have speculated7 that this new leadership prompted the sudden move against Lebanon’s Prime Minister, Saad Hariri. Iran is not blameless, either. Its support2 for the Houthi insurgency in Yemen effectively constitutes aiding in a coup against the legitimate government of President Abdrabbuh
5
Mansur Hadi. Iran also funds Hezbollah, a Lebanese political party with a military arm that has historically contributed to de-stabilization in Lebanon and is considered a terrorist organization by many countries and groups, including the US government. Overall, Iran’s foreign policy has focused on disrupting the largely pro-Saudi status-quo in the Middle East, so it certainly shares blame for the various conflicts and disputes raging in the region. Recent developments are only exacerbating issues with stability and development in the Middle East. Yemen is on the verge of collapse because Iran and Saudi Arabia continue to fund the factions fighting in its civil war, with no end in sight. A rocket fired by Houthi rebels in Yemen even fell7 close to the airport in Saudi Arabia’s capital, Riyadh, recently. Lebanon was on the verge of having its first elections since 2009, but now risks sliding back into chaos. Qatar, a prosperous nation, now faces impediments to growth with its land and sea borders closed by its Saudi neighbor. In addition, these various conflicts only worsen the Sunni-Shia divide in the Middle East, preventing the two sides from learning to live in harmony. Saudi Arabia and Iran are not only wreaking havoc in the short term, they are preventing the Middle East from becoming
more stable and advancing economically and politically. The international community must intervene to stop this dysfunction. However, they have thus far proved unwilling to do so. Both the United States and Israel remain7 fanatically obsessed with a one-sided narrative that places all blame for the mess that exists in the Middle East on Iran. Thus, both are inclined to look the other way when Saudi Arabia intervenes in the affairs of other sovereign states, as they did in Lebanon. On the other end, Russia stands8 as a staunch defender of Iran, as well as of the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, which both Russia and Iran support militarily. Both sides naively claim that one side or the other in this cold war is entirely in the wrong while the other is entirely in the right, ignoring the obvious truth that both are equally at fault. At a certain point, all actors involved will realize that it is no longer profitable to perpetuate a cold war in the Middle East. However, it is important that these actors realize this without the situation devolving into a hot war. A necessary first step is for countries like the US and Russia to recognize that both Iran and Saudi Arabia are actively destabilizing the Middle East. It is in no one’s best interest for the region to collapse into anarchy, as has already happened in Libya, Syria, and
Yemen. Once all such actors have come to this understanding, they can work toward a solution: punish both Saudi Arabia and Iran for interfering in the affairs of other sovereign states. In UNGA Resolution 1514 (XV), the United Nations (UN) affirmed9 that “the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and cooperation.” While this quote comes from a resolution about decolonization, the principles expressed in it still apply. States across the Middle East are being subjugated, dominated, and exploited by Saudi Arabia and Iran to catastrophic effect. The international community, especially Russia and the US, must take the lead in punishing both countries for their meddling. First, they should use diplomatic isolation as a tool to bring Saudi Arabia and Iran to the table. If this doesn’t work, economic sanctions on high-profile figures in the two countries are a viable alternative. Once Iran and Saudi Arabia have been brought to the negotiating table, they must agree to cease their interference in the affairs of states like Lebanon, Qatar, Syria, and Yemen. Only once this happens can the Middle East move toward a stable and harmonious future.
THE GLOBE | 6
A TALE OF TWO DENMARKS: NATIONALISM IN A NORDIC UTOPIA PRESLEY WEST, Staff Writer
F
rom the Brexit1 referendum to the election of Donald Trump2, to the overwhelming victory3 of Austria’s populist, far-right parties in this year’s national election, there has been a steady increase in countries across the globe turning away from globalization in the past few years. Widespread immigration and economic stagnation in Europe and the US has sent voters running to the voting booth in support of candidates who favor more nationalist, country-first policies. Nationalism in and of itself is not inherently dangerous; civic nationalism unites4 people who differ economically, racially, religiously, and regionally with a sense of belonging to a country. However, the nationalism that has risen globally in recent years—partially in response to the influx of immigrant populations in Europe and the US, and thus, a changing demographic—is often xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and antithetical to liberal democracy. A particularly foul brand of such nationalism is gaining traction in Denmark, which has long been hailed as one of the world’s most progressive countries. The Nordic country was found to have the best quality of life of all countries examined in a study by the Social Progress Imperative5, and scored particularly highly in human rights, personal rights, personal safety, shelter and access to communications. However, Denmark fell short in the category of religious tolerance—in part due to widespread anti-Muslim sentiment perpetuated by the Denmark People’s Party that first rose to prominence in the 2015 national election. Formed in 19966, the party is relatively new to the Danish political scape. However, the
7
populist, “Eurosceptic” party has quickly gained support across Denmark—the DPP won 21 percent of the national vote in 20157, nearly doubling its vote share in the previous election cycle. For voters, the appeal of the party is simple— Denmark’s extensive welfare state is buckling under the addition of tens of thousands of immigrants who seek asylum in the country each year. However, the rise of power of the DPP and similar far-right parties have transformed Denmark, which traditionally has welcomed immigrants with open, yet careful, arms, into an increasingly hostile environment for refugees who don’t look, speak, or worship like Danish citizens. The state, which still must meet EU standards for immigration, has yet to enact firm anti-immigration policies, but instead has implemented acts meant to make Denmark unsuitable for refugees—particularly those of the Muslim faith. Social benefits have been all but eliminated for new immigrants. In early 2016, parliament passed a controversial law that allows authorities to confiscate immigrants’ valuables, including cell phones and computers, of up to around $1,453 to help fund the government’s refugee integration and welfare system. The city of Randers has mandated that all municipal centers and public schools carry pork, a forbidden food for practicing Muslims, on their menu in an effort to promote “a central part of Denmark’s food culture.” Denmark’s center left party has even joined in on the nationalist sentiment; the party supported legislature that would ban all prayer rooms in schools in a thinly veiled attack on practicing Muslim’s call to prayer 5 times per day. Earlier this year, the DPP even suggested8 that immigrants should celebrate Christmas and Easter if they wished to be considered Danish, as the DPP touts Christianity as a fundamental part of the Danish identity. Ever since a Danish cartoon of the prophet Mohamed9 sparked protests across the Middle East, the country has struggled to maintain a relationship with the Muslim world and its people. However, the DPP’s rise to prominence has only propelled the country further toward a new normal of anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant policy and public opinion. Civic nationalism can play an important role in uniting citizens of a country together across ethnic, religious, regional, and economic lines. However, the particular brand of nationalism being touted by the Denmark People’s Party, and by countries across the globe, serves only to divide. There is no question that Denmark’s pristine reputation is quickly being tarnished by rising xenophobic sentiments and nationalist, anti-Muslim, and anti-refugee policies.
PROTESTS IN PARIS: HOW THE PEOPLE OF FRANCE ARE LEADING SOCIAL CHANGE POOJA KANABUR, Publications Editor
T
here has been a dramatic rise in the number of protests occurring in France over perceived injustices taking place in the country, specifically in regards to sexual harassment and reformed labor laws. Similar protests are inscribed in France’s history: in 1905, women working in factories went on strike1, not just for their low salaries or poor hours, but because they were falling victim to the factory overseer’s sexual advances. While causes may remain the same, these days such protests are not only taking place in the streets—they are armed with waves of social media outrage1 as well. A new protest against sexual abuse is underway in France in the wake of the accusations of abuse1 involving Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein and the memory of the sexual assault trial2 that hindered the presidential campaign of Dominique StraussKhan, former managing director of the International Monetary Fund. Women have been sharing personal accounts of sexual harassment or abuse on Twitter3 under #BalanceTonPorc, or “Out Your Pig.” Some women in France even started a petition1 addressed to President Emmanuel Macron, urging him to treat sexual harassment as a national emergency. This petition gained over 100,000 signatures1 in the first three days alone. As a result, the sheer number of French women coming forward with details of their unwanted sexual encounters and advocating for a call to action indicates that the private behavior of powerful men has not yet changed. According to Gender Equality Minister Marlene Schiappa4, “[France] is really at a turning point, with the Weinstein affair as a trigger.” In Oct. 2017, Schiappa, inspired by the stories women have been revealing, kicked off nationwide consultations over a law4 that will include steps to fight sexual harassment on the streets and the rape of minors. This law, due to be complete4 in Jan. 2018, would institute a punishment for street harassment and cite a clear age of consent3 for minors. While there certainly are critics of Schiappa’s proposed legislation, the fact that there is a plan in motion to deal with the sexual harassment and nonconsensual sex that has plagued France for centuries reveals the true capacity for social change that the French people hold. Protests have also since been taking place in cities across France in response to President Macron’s reformed labor laws. When Macron came to power in May 2017, he pledged5 to lower the rigidity of French labor laws, to stimulate the economy, and to reduce unemployment from 9.5 percent to 7 percent. In Sept. 2017, Macron formally signed five decrees6 that will cap payouts on unfair dismissals and give companies greater freedom to hire and fire employees and agree on working conditions. As a result, these laws will reduce the possibility of negotiations7 between employers and employees and reduce the power of national collective bargaining7.
Because the decree allows Macron to fast track the new rules7 without the need of parliamentary scrutiny, his critics have attacked his use of executive orders to push though complex economic and legal reforms. Camille Groux, a French citizen, described Macron’s proposals as “extreme,” worried that they would “undermine [French] democracy by giving the power to the heads of companies instead of [to] the people.” Groux even went as far as to declare that these proposals mark the “beginning of an authoritarian power.” Though many believe that the changes may boost France’s competitiveness7 in the global economy, they do not foresee that the changes will succeed in improving working conditions. It is for this reason that protestors have taken to the streets, gathering in the Place de la Bastille8 in Paris on Sept. 12 for the first in a series of marches to oppose Macron’s attempt to liberalize the French labor market. In the French capital, as well as in Marseilles, Lyon, Toulouse, Rennes, and other cities, several hundreds of thousands of people attended the demonstrations8 called by the General Confederation of Labour (CGT), one of the largest French unions. Two more nationwide protests8 also occurred on Sept. 21 and Sept. 23. Macron’s approval ratings have fallen dramatically8 as well, collapsing from 66 percent after his election in May 2017 to a mere 30 percent in early Sept. These two instances of protest have broader implications about the French political system. They reveal that, in France, the power is shifting towards the people. Common citizens are becoming more involved with government occurrences, from demanding social change to reacting to controversial laws. And whether the revolts are taking place on the streets or online, there is no doubt that the people are voicing their opinions and creating an impact on the nation of France, as well as on the rest of the world. Overall, the dissent over a lack of accountability in sexual harassment cases and unfair labor reform laws are more than just individual protests; together, these protests are creating an incredible cultural revolution from which positive change has the potential to bloom.
THE GLOBE | 8
JAPAN'S RE-ELECTION: TIES TO NATIONALISM AND NORTH KOREA MARY BOHN, Staff Writer
O
n Oct. 22, the Japanese Parliamentary snap election1 left the nation in the unremarkable place it was in on Oct. 21: under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s leadership after his overwhelming victory in the election. Abe called for the early election2 in Sept. 2017 while citing pressing issues of national concern such as the threat of North Korea as necessitating the parliamentary election. Notably, Abe’s victory stands in stark juxtaposition to his unusually high disapproval ratings, ranging from 30 percent to 70 percent3 from over the course of 2017. Most recent approval polls show that over 45 percent of the public disapproves3 of his ultra-nationalist ties and leadership. Moreover, Abe has recently been involved in nationalist scandals that range from his connection with a rightwing extremist school group to his visits to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, where Japanese war criminals are venerated. Plagued by such low approval ratings and controversy, Abe’s victory remains bewildering. Ultimately, what implications does the election of this nationalist Prime Minister hold for the future of Japan? Prime Minister Abe’s election is not surprising in light of rising tension in East Asia due to the threat of a North Korean nuclear attack. However, Abe’s ties to extreme nationalism and his extremist scandals contribute to hateful turns in Japan’s
9
tolerance for its minority groups and a potentially devastating loss of historic memory regarding Japan’s violent and imperialist past. Nationalism constitutes Abe’s long-standing goal and forefront political agenda item4, which may contribute, in part, to his appeal. Since his instatement as Prime Minister in 2012, Abe has tirelessly vied for Japan to revisit and revise the nation’s currently pacifist constitution in order to allow Japan a military capable of waging war with other nations. By 2020, Abe seeks to revise article 9 of the constitution, which states that Japan “forever renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation…” and emphatically denounces the use of war, threat of war, and its means to settle international disputes. The article elaborates that, in order to ensure this prohibition, Japan is not permitted to maintain military forces. Though the nation does have forces for self-defense, Japan has stayed true to its pacifist constitution since its inception in 1947. Abe contends that, in light of the growing threat of war with North Korea4, article 9 must be amended to allow Japan to maintain military forces capable of aggressive action. According to Abe, It is only through such a revision that Japan’s self-protection can be ensured. While Abe’s re-election in light of his goal to revise
the constitution could indicate public support of Japan’s militarization, recent opinion polls show results quite to the contrary. Polls conducted from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1 show that over 57 percent of the public, an overwhelming majority, “do not see a need to”5 revise article 9. On the other hand, only 25 percent of respondents wished for revisions. The remaining 18 percent chose not to respond. The sentiments of Japan’s pacifist majority along with Abe’s low approval ratings suggest a different reason for his sound victory in the snap election. Concerns for Japan’s national security may constitute another possible reason for Abe’s victory in this election. East Asia political specialist Daniel Sneider6 described this election as “a ‘Seinfeld election’: much ado about nothing.” Abe’s lack of popularity and the skepticism of the Japanese public towards his problematic ultra-nationalist ties do not help him; however, Sneider contends that the stability he symbolizes is sufficient to ensure he maintains his position. Abe has served as the Prime Minister for over five years, and national security has remained his focus in a time of extreme tension across East Asia. Abe has been sure to capitalize on6 the issue of North Korea’s growing aggression while pushing to revise the constitution and for his re-election. Leading up to the election, Abe emphasized the North Korean threat in the vast majority of his public addresses, and his statement4 immediately following the election reaffirms this priority: “What comes first is the North Korean threat.” Opinion polls show growing public concern5 towards North Korea’s increasingly aggressive actions and provocative missile launches. From Aug. to Sept. 2017, North Korea launched two ballistic missiles across the northern Japanese islands of Hokkaido7. Abe’s approval ratings rose after each demonstration. This suggests the public’s proclivity for the nationalistic ideas of Abe for Japanese self-defense through militarization in the face of rising tension in East Asia. It merits notice that Abe’s victory in the snap election coincides with growing international tensions and concerns for Japanese self-defense. However, Abe’s ties to far-right nationalism remain problematic. Moreover, his primary focus on the North Korean threat has served to exacerbate domestic issues of intolerance towards Korean residence and violent farright political activism. Particularly, two nationalist scandals have proved to both be detrimental to Abe’s popularity and to encourage increased extreme nationalist sentiment in Japan. Abe’s association with a cut-price land deal8 between the finance ministry and nationalist school group Moritomo Gakuen represents the first of his nationalist scandals. The principal of an ultra-nationalistic school group claimed underoath that Abe and his wife Akie Abe sent a private donation to a kindergarten ran by the school, Tsukamoto Kindergarten. While the government denies this claim, many factors point to Abe’s association with the nationalist school group. In Feb. 2017, Abe described9 Yasunori Kagoike, the principal of Tsukamoto Kindergarten, as having “admirable passion for education” and someone “whose ideology is similar to mine.” Furthermore, Akie Abe held the position of honorary principal at the kindergarten. These connections along with Kagoike’s repeated testimony before parliament of Abe’s involvement have strongly indicated the Prime Minister’s connection with a problematic brand of extremism. Abe’s approval ratings dropped to 29.9 percent10 in
July 2017 in the midst of this scandal. The racist rhetoric of the Moritomo Gakuen group leaves Abe’s association extraordinarily troubling. This ultra-nationalist rhetoric is directed towards non-Japanese residence in Japan. One pamphlet that Junko Kagoike, wife of Yasunori Kagoike, distributed11 to the children of Tsukamoto Kindergarten read: “I hate Koreans and the Chinese. They need to assimilate to the Japanese mentality.” A similar pamphlet11 pronounced: “The problem [with Japan] is that people have inherited the spirit of Koreans in our country with the looks of Japanese people.” Furthermore, the group accuses9 Koreans and Chinese of possessing “wicked thoughts.” Especially in light of Japan’s long history of discrimination and resentment towards Korean and Chinese residents, such open displays of bigotry indicate Japan to be far removed from images of the modern, peaceful society the state promotes. The Moritomo Gakuen group is one of many rising far-right groups that vie for more nationalist education, and the racist views expressed by Kagoike echo the rhetoric of right-wing extremist groups in Japan. These groups continue to push for the history of Japan in the 20th century to be taught to youth in a different light than is currently viewed as standard by Japanese and global society alike, aiming to stress the positives of Japanese tradition and history. Such groups view focusing on the atrocities committed by Japan across East Asia—such as the Rape of Nanjing in 1937 and the over four-hundred thousand women forced into sex-slavery for Japanese soldiers during World War II—as “...teaching [that should] lie in history textbooks.”9 Anti-foreign sentiment and growing nativism in extremist groups have begun to incite violently racist language and activism. These groups march through Tokyo with progressive frequency and boldness while spewing anti-Korean, anti-Chinese, and generally anti-non-Japanese hate speech. If Abe’s association with this nationalist extremism were not disturbing enough, he has also raised alarm with his visit to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine12. His visit to the shrine that venerates Japan’s fallen soldiers in Dec. 2013 provoked protests across the nation. At the site, about 1,000 war criminals from World War II are enshrined among another 2.4 million names. With his visit to the shrine, Abe also paid respect to individuals who committed some of the most grievous war crimes in history. Japanese right-wing extremist groups view the Yasukini Shrine as common ground that they frequently visit to pay their respects. These are the very groups that have been perpetuating anti-foreign rhetoric in Japan for years and whose protests and activism only seem to be growing stronger with time. As Abe re-emphasizes his nationalist goals with each rise in tension with North Korea, the hateful activism13 of extremist groups against Japanese Korean-resident communities continues to rise. Abe’s associations with extremist nationalism along with his nationalist approach to the North Korean threat enable such hate and dangerous nationalist delusions in Japan. Abe’s re-election and extreme nationalism may seem logical and even justifiable. However, the ideological movements in Japanese society that coincide with Abe’s problematic nationalist ties could result in a troubling loss of historical memory regarding Japan’s violent past. They could even usher in new forms of violence in Japan of their own.
THE GLOBE | 10
MODI'S IDEOLOGY: A CATALYST FOR RISING RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN INDIA NAMRATA VERGHESE, Managing Editor
W
e, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic…
So begins the preamble to India’s Constitution1, the document that liberated the country from the tyranny of the British Raj and established a fundamentally democratic social order for the newly-minted nation. However, in a shocking Jan. 25 advertisement2 disseminated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration commemorating India’s Republic Day, the preamble is quoted as follows: “We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign, democratic republic…” Notice anything different? The words “secular” and “socialist” were deliberately, even provocatively, removed from the advertisement—an omission emblematic of the Modi administration’s gradual shift3 away from India’s secular origins and towards a right-wing, nationalist platform grounded in the Hindutva ideology. The concept of Hindutva4 can be summed up as an extreme form of Hindu fundamentalism that harkens back to the pre-partition era, when the two-state movement created a religious dichotomy in India—designating Pakistan as a land for Muslims, thus syllogistically implying that India constituted a land for Hindus—that betrayed its secular, pluralist foundation. Coined5 by conservative activist Vinayak Damodar Sarvakar, Hindutva’s three core tenets involve a common “nation, race, and culture” of Hinduism. This religious intolerance, a drastic deviation from India’s basis, has served as political justification for decades of violence, ranging from Hindu nationalist Nathuram Godse’s assassination6 of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948 to Mohammed Akhlaq’s lynching7 in 2015.
11
In a disturbing turn of events, the political party currently in power in India—the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)— adopted8 Hindutva as its official ideology in 1989, along with its inherent intolerance, nationalism, and visceral violence. The effects of this politically-backed fundamentalism can be seen on both micro and macro scales. If we return to the case of Mohammed Akhlaq’s brutal murder in 2015, for example, you may not be surprised to learn that his death kindled a nationwide uproar, instigating protests9 that rippled throughout India. However, what may shock you—and certainly appalled the public—is the government response to the event. One of the accused in Akhlaq’s case, a man named Ravin Sisodia, recently died of natural causes, and the government—rather than condemning him as a murderer—hailed10 him as a martyr for the nation by wrapping his body in the national flag. Not all manifestations of Hindutva’s growing political influence are as blatant as that, however. Consider, once again, the advertisement that conveniently omitted two key words from India’s constitutional preamble. The visuals2 accompanying the concerning text represented Indians from a very limited demographic: Hindus, as evidenced by their attire. Women in traditional dupattas, men adorned with the red tikka of the upper-caste Swaminarayanan Hindu sect. Upon superficial examination, the advertisement seems to reflect the deep-rooted tradition and diversity of India. However, this interpretation does not hold up to scrutiny, as the picture neglects to include even one non-Hindu identifying individual—no Muslims in skull caps, no Sikhs in turbans. This subtle—but indubitably deliberate—erasure of the alternative religious identities that have characterized India for centuries epitomizes the power Hindutva wields in the Indian cultural psyche. To prevent the insidious infiltration of this fundamentalist
ideology into the government, it is imperative that we begin advocating change at the policy level. Notably, in the court of public opinion, the Modi administration has rapidly fallen out of favor. Back in 2014, Modi ran his campaign11 on a mandate of development (not social conservatism), promising “achhe din”—a sentiment that roughly translates to “good days” ahead, and bears eerie parallels to President Donald Trump’s campaign slogan: “Make America Great Again.” However, recent failures have swayed the tide against the once-adored Indian figurehead: his disastrous experiment with demonetization12 (a failed attempt to rid India of “black money”)—in conjunction with accusations of corruption13, conspiracy14, and ties15 to radical anti-Muslim proponents—have urged even the most socially conservative Indians to question whether his continued reign will serve the country well. Modi holds the dubious distinction of social media’s “most-lampooned”16 public figure, thanks to India’s population of a billion and its plethora of tech-savvy meme-creators. Given this recent fall from grace, the upcoming 2019 election cycle presents an unparalleled opportunity for India to denounce nationalism and return to its secular roots. The Indian National Congress Party17 (BJP’s primary opposition) darling, Rahul Gandhi18—a descendent of none other than Mahatma Gandhi himself—is touted as the potential messiah of social liberalism. The Congress Party, which used to easily win a majority of seats in India’s general elections, but was ousted by the BJP in 2014, is based on a platform of tolerance, liberalism, and social progress. Similar to President Trump’s election in the US, BJP’s victory in 2014 was representative of India’s desire to elect a governmental “outsider.” However, given the Modi administration’s laundry list of failures, the public may be ready to return to the stability and secularism offered by
the Congress party in 2019. A wild-card alternative to the BJP and Congress can be found in the Aam Aadmi19 Party. “Aam Aadmi” roughly translates to “common man,” and this encapsulates the spirit of this third-party movement: India’s fastestgrowing source of political power, the Aam Aadmi party champions the common man, promising to hold the government accountable to ordinary people, rather than higher officials. Much like the Green Party in the US, most people did not anticipate that the Aam Aadmi party’s popularity would translate to high voter turnout. However, this proved to be a gross underestimation. The Aam Aadmi party harnessed20 social media, culturallyrelevant messaging, and the need for change to mobilize India’s youth—and their efforts paid off. In the 2015 Delhi elections, Arvind Kejirival21, the face of the Aam Aadmi party, became the 7th Chief Minister of Delhi. He is now poised to run for India’s general election in 2019, and poll data predicts him giving Rahul Gandhi a run for his money. Ultimately, Modi’s time has come to an end. The fundamentalist ideology he espouses has yielded pervasive, far-reaching violence against minorities, and undermines India’s secular principles. When government-sanctioned temples22 are built for Gandhi’s assassin, Godse (to put this in context: imagine a monument erected for John Wilkes Booth in the US), when Rohingya23 refugees are turned away solely based on their religious beliefs, when Akhlaq’s murderers are lauded as national heroes—it is clear that change is long overdue. Hindutva is an ideology that thrives on fear. To combat it, India must be bold in its condemnation of intolerance and fundamentalism. India must cleave to the principles of Gandhi’s liberal vision for the country—or run the risk of devolving into Godse’s extremist nightmare.
THE GLOBE | 12
GLOBAL SOLUTIONS FOR A BROKEN SYSTEM: U.S. HEALTHCARE ZOE ROBBIN, Associate Editor
T
he American healthcare system is one of the largest and most harmful market failures in history. American consumers are faced with staggering prices; each year over 17 percent of the United States’ GDP goes to healthcare1. With a price tag more than double any other country2, Americans expect to receive the best healthcare. However, their big spending does not lead to better health. Life expectancy in America is 79.3 years while in Japan, it is 83.7. The United States has higher infant mortality than any of the other 27 wealthy OECD member nations3, meaning that a baby born in the United States is nearly twice as likely to die during the first year of life as one born in Spain or South Korea. The price of American healthcare does not match the product. Most Americans never look beyond the huge price tag to understand what sustains and incentivizes the systematic profiteering rampant in the healthcare industry. Comparing the United States’ healthcare market to those around the globe, it becomes ever more apparent that Americans have the potential to reform and repair their system using a few key strategies. The first strategy comes into play before a patient enters the hospital. In the United States, most healthcare plans follow a fee-for-service model where doctors and other “healthcare providers are paid for each service performed, like tests and office visits.”4 For example, a patient receiving dialysis may be billed separately for the infusion, use of the facility, a bottle
13
of water, a Tylenol pill, and a consultation with a doctor. This makes doctors and hospitals incentivized to perform more services to rack up charges. In the Netherlands, most health plans bundle payments, meaning the patient pays one flat fee for a blanket procedure5. This incentivizes providers to cut back on unnecessary procedures and services. In addition to promoting frivolous medical procedures, the fee-for-service model also discourages preventative care. For example, if a patient at risk for heart disease comes in for a routine check-up, the doctor will not make much money by calling his or her patients once a week, encouraging them get more exercise and eat better. The doctor will be reimbursed more if he or she runs an imaging test, like an echocardiography, a radiology scan of the heart. Recommendations from the American College of Cardiology and Harvard Medical School, state that people with “stable valve disease, and who have no symptoms, benefit little from routine follow-up with echocardiography”6. However, medical recommendations have little bearing on financial incentives. This might be one reason why Americans receive more diagnostic imaging exams than any other country in the world1. Many European and Asian countries use a healthcare system that incentivizes cheap and safe preventative care. Some German sickness funds reward patients for healthy lifestyle changes and keeping up with preventative care. For example, enrollees are given financial incentives to participate
in tailored prevention and sports programs. Participation in a smoking cessation program can lead to a reduction in copayments5. In another strategy that is widely used among European countries, some medicines, like asthma inhalers and insulin, are completely covered because their use prevents serious and expensive health complications in the future7. Subsidizing a gym membership costs less than a coronary bypass surgery and insulin injections cost less than caring for someone in a diabetic coma, but within the fee-for-service model, doctors are reimbursed more for the most expensive, and often the most invasive, option. The American healthcare system continues to discourage doctors and healthcare providers from pushing safe, effective, and cheap preventative care. It is time for Americans to catch up with other developed nations. The next problem arises with cost-efficacy. From a financial perspective, doctors are incentivized to provide the most expensive procedure, rather than the most effective. Doctors are not reimbursed based on the health outcomes of their patients, although the ACA has taken some small steps to change this8. In the United States, the FDA does not consider cost-effectiveness during approval hearings for new drugs and medical devices. It compares the proposed drug or medical device to a control group using a placebo, or a dummy treatment. The FDA does not compare the new drug’s efficacy to existing treatments already on the market,
nor does it compare the price. In the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assesses the cost-effectiveness of new drugs, treatments, and devices. It uses Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY), a measure which takes into account the duration and quality of life gained as the result of a medical intervention9. It then determines how much one year of perfect quality life would cost, based on the price of the intervention. In the United States, the culture around medicine and healthcare makes it morbid to put a price on one year of life, but in the United Kingdom, it’s £20,000, or $26,3909. Interventions that cost below this threshold are deemed cost effective. NICE then takes this data on cost-efficacy and compares it to existing treatments on the market. The system of cost analysis pushes pharmaceutical companies to rein in prices. For example, Britain pays about 60 percent of the US price for Solvadi, a hepatitis C drug, and a third of the US price for the asthma inhaler, Advair. Similarly, Switzerland and France have national bodies to evaluate cost efficacy of new medical innovations7. By simply including a cost-analysis component to an FDA application process, Americans could force drug companies to consider their drug’s price tag and ensure than it is at least as effective as other existing treatments. The prices of drugs are almost always cheaper abroad than they are domestically, however Americans don’t have much of a choice; the import of drugs is illegal. In the 2008 election, Barak Obama promised to “allow Americans to buy their medicines from other developed countries if the drugs are safe and prices are lower.”10 Such a proposal has had support across the aisle, from members of congress like Edward Kennedy11, John McCain, and Amy Klobuchar12, but millions of dollars in pharmaceutical lobbying have ensured that these ideas have never come to fruition. The United States could impose price controls on drugs, ensuring that American consumers are paying no more than Canadians. However, a more natural and laissez-faire approach would be to allow drug imports that have been approved for sale in France and Japan, among other countries that have a well-vetted body like the FDA. For example, Advair, an Asthma inhaler, is sold for $250 in the United States, but $45 in France7. The price difference could cover the cost of shipping the inhaler back and forth five times. In the European Union, drugs and devices approved in one member nation are sold in the other 2713. This practice encourages competition and prevents market monopolies. In the United States, medical debt is the primary cause of bankruptcy14. Americans must take lessons from other advanced nations around the globe and begin to change this broken healthcare system. While the United States spends the most on healthcare, it is interesting to note that it also spends the least on social spending15, meaning services like public housing, employment programs, and disability benefits. Americans spend 9 percent of GDP on social services, while France and Sweden each spend 21 percent1. In addition to systematic changes to the FDA approval process, billing practices, and drug import regulations, it is time for the United States to fundamentally change healthcare culture to value preventative care and social services.
THE GLOBE | 14
MEET THE EDITORS CAMERON HALL, an Associate Editor for the Globe, is a sophomore from Bexley, OH majoring in International Studies and minoring in Economics. He is particularly interested in separatist movements, press freedom and freedom of speech, and the European Union. DAVID HERVEY, Co-Editor-in-Chief for the Globe, is a senior from San Diego, CA majoring in Political Science and Economics. His research interests are in maritime issues, low-intensity conflict, and Latin American politics. POOJA KANABUR, Publications Editor for the Globe, is a sophomore from Charlotte, NC intending to major in Finance. She is specifically interested in how public policy affects human rights, women's rights, and access to education around the world. ZOE ROBBIN, an Associate Editor for the Globe, is a junior from Fairfield, CT majoring in Quantitative Science and Global Health. She has previously interned in Amman, Jordan with Reclaim Childhood, an organization devoted to young refugees. She hopes to pursue a career in migration policy and global health care. ANDREW TEODORESCU, Co-Editor-in-Chief for the Globe, is a sophomore from Johns Creek, GA majoring in Economics and Mathematics. He is particularly interested in Eastern European politics, international trade, and global education rights. NAMRATA VERGHESE, Managing Editor for the Globe, is a junior majoring in Psychology & Linguistics and English & Creative Writing. Born in India, raised in England, and currently living in the US, her travels have fostered in her a deep-seated passion for international cultures and languages. An aspiring journalist, she combines her love of writing and global perspectives through her position as a Communications Intern at The Carter Center.
15
AFTERWORD Dear Readers, The members of the Globe are excited to present our Winter 2017 print journal. The Globe is Emory University’s premiere undergraduate periodical and journal of international and foreign affairs, featuring a team of staff writers covering topics from all across the world. In addition to producing a monthly collection of research-based articles regarding foreign affairs for publication on our website, the Globe releases a print journal each semester. In years past, articles in this semesterly journal have been selected from the best recent blog posts by staff writers; this semester, we have instead compiled a journal of selected original works from staff writers and editors of the Globe. If you are interested in writing for Globe, or if you would simply like to read our most recent articles, please visit us at our website: emoryglobe.com. We hope that you enjoyed reading our Winter 2017 print journal and will continue to follow our future publications. Thank you for your support. Andrew Teodorescu Co-Editor-in-Chief
THE GLOBE | 16
works THE UAE’S PROPOSED ECONOMIC PLOT TO TANK QATAR: HIDDEN MOTIVES
1 https://theintercept.com/2017/11/09/uae-qatar-oitaba-rowland-banque- havilland-world-cup/ 2 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/aug/20/david-rowland-contro versy-conservatives 3 http://www.miwb.uscourts.gov/content/what-difference-between-chap ters-7-11-12-13 4 https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-11-13/venezue lan-debt-and-bitcoin-claims 5 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/business/venezuela-bond-default. html?smid=tw-dealbook&smtyp=cur&_r=0 6 http://gulfnews.com/business/sectors/banking/qatar-s-financial-sys tem-reels-under-impact-of-economic-sanctions-1.2055295 7 https://www.ft.com/content/47f307a2-b365-11e7-a398-73d59db9e399 8 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/paintingthetape.asp 9 https://theintercept.com/2017/07/30/uae-yousef-otaiba-cnas-american- progress-michele-flournoy-drone/ 10 https://web.archive.org/web/20140104225058/ 11 http://khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=%2Fdata%2Fedi torschoice%2F2013%2FDecember%2Feditorschoice_December12.xml&sec tion=editorschoice 11 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/world/middleeast/15prince.htm l?pagewanted=all&_r=1& 12 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-19/tillerson-faults- saudi-led-bloc-for-failing-to-end-qatar-crisis-j8yqqibp 13 https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/16/rex-tillerson-at-the- breaking-point 14 https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/914497877543735296?lang=en
A TALE OF TWO DENMARKS: NATIONALISM IN A NORDIC UTOPIA
1 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887 2 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-assembly-trump-doctrine-analy sis/trumps-u-n-speech-shows-nationalist-instincts-firmly-intact-idUSKCN 1BV06I 3 http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/16/opinions/austria-nationalism-hock enos-opinion/index.html 4 https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-reifowitz/liberal-national ism-is-no_b_5607207.html 5 http://cphpost.dk/news/denmark-ranked-top-quality-of-life-nation-in- the-world.html 6 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33199488 7 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36130006 8 https://www.thelocal.dk/20170217/immigrants-must-celebrate-christ mas-to-be-danish-dpp 9 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-13038095 PROTESTS IN PARIS: HOW THE PEOPLE OF FRANCE ARE LEADING SOCIAL CHANGE
1 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/world/europe/france-sexual-ha rassment.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fworld 2 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/world/europe/ dsk-acquitted-aggravated-pimping-charges.html?rref=collec THE MIDDLE EAST’S COLD WAR: tion%2Ftimestopic%2FStrauss-Kahn%2C%20Dominique&action=click& HOTTER THAN EVER contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&ver 1 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868 sion=latest&con 2 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29319423 3 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/france-considers- 3 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40173757 tough-new-laws-to-fight-sexual-harassment-and-abuse 4 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/11/08/ 4 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-harassment-minister/ why-lebanons-prime-minister-resigned/?utm_term=.9ee340733193 france-gets-serious-over-sexual-harassment-after-weinstein-scandal-min 5 http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2017/06/ ister-idUSKBN1CP284 how_trump_messed_up_the_qatar_crisis.html 5 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41238162 6 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41874117 6 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-reform-labour/macron-signs- 7 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41893694 french-labor-reform-decrees-idUSKCN1BX1K7 8 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-russia-putin/khamenei-says-iran- 7 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/macron-labour- russia-should-cooperate-to-isolate-u-s-foster-middle-east-stability-idUSKB laws-reforms-new-france-union-protests-a7962141.html N1D14CK 8 https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/observations/2017/09/slack 9 http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/declaration.shtml ers-have-taken-streets-macron-s-labour-reforms-split-france
cited JAPAN'S RE-ELECTION: TIES TO NATIONALISM AND NORTH KOREA
1 http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/22/asia/japan-election-results/index.html 2 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41329669 3 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/23/japan-pm-shinzo-abe-to-remain- unpopular-even-after-parliamentary-election-victory.html 4 http://time.com/4992803/japan-shinzo-abe-win-national-elections/ 5 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-01/abe-sees-momentum-to ward-changing-japan-s-pacifist-constitution 6 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abe-offers-stability-and-in- japan-thats-sufficient/2017/10/18/38d5209e-b373-11e7-9b93-b97043e57a22_ story.html?utm_term=.d19e72b43fa5 7 http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/14/asia/north-korea-missile-launch/index.html 8 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/25/scandals-threaten-japanese- prime-minister-shinzo-abes-grip-on-power 9 https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/02/27/national/politics-diplomacy/ abe-moves-distance-osaka-school-praising-principals-ideology/#.WfoqatOGNsM 10 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/14/as-shinzo-abes-approval-rating-declines-mar kets-could-question-sustainability-of-abenomics-analyst.html 11 https://izanau.com/article/tsukamoto-kindergarten-yochien-racism 12 https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-12-26/why-yasukuni-shrine-so-controversial 13 https://www.vox.com/videos/2017/6/1/15727090/borders-japan-right-wing-na tionalism
MODI'S IDEOLOGY: A CATALYST FOR RISING RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN INDIA
1 http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html 2 http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/republic-day-ad-faux-pas-secu lar-socialist-preamble-of-constitution-narendra-modi-govern ment/1/415614.html 3 http://www.emoryglobe.com/blog/2016/10/16/nationalism-in-con text-hindutva-and-indiasideological-shift-to-the-right 4 https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hindutva 5 https://archive.org/details/hindutva-vinayak-damodar-savarkar-pdf 6 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aparna-pande/secular-india-v-hin du-nat_b_6397778.html 7 http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/Controversial-State ments-by-BJP-Leaders-on-Dadri-Lynching-Incident/2015/10/03/ article3061034.ece GLOBAL SOLUTIONS FOR A BROKEN SYSTEM: 8 https://www.dailyo.in/politics/india-hindu-lynch UNITED STATES HEALTHCARE ings-akhand-bharat-rss-bjp-hindutva-nationalism/story/1/18015.html 1 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?end=2014&start=1995&view 9 http://time.com/4838566/india-beef-lynching-attacks-muslims/ =chart&year_high_desc=false 10 https://thewire.in/71505/draping-nation 2 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with- al-flag-on-body-of-dadri-lynching-accused-by-bisada-village-unconsti other-countries tutional/ 3 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mor 11 https://thewire.in/188094/narendra-modi-bjp-2019-image/ tality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/?utm_term=.fcbb8a7a4da7 12 https://www.dailyo.in/politics/demonetisation-note-ban-naren 4 https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/fee-for-service/ dra-modi-arun-jaitley/story/1/19297.html 5 https://hbr.org/2015/10/how-bundled-health-care-payments-are-working-in-the- 13 https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/modis-double-standards-on-corrup netherlands tion-are-now-clear-1771670 6 https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/high-tech-heart-tests-and-procedu 14 http://www.newsweek.com/india-narendra-modi-elections-conspira res-you-may-not-need-and-why cy-theory-579867 7 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01IOHQ9LO/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encod 15 https://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/20/14982146/modi-india-mus ing=UTF8&btkr=1 lim-yogi-adityanath-incitement 8 https://www.vox.com/cards/how-doctors-are-paid/how-are-us-doctors-paid-to 16 https://thewire.in/188094/narendra-modi-bjp-2019-image/ day 17 https://www.britannica.com/topic/Indian-National-Congress 9 https://www.nice.org.uk/advice/lgb10/chapter/judging-the-cost-effective 18 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahul_Gandhi ness-of-public-health-activities 19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aam_Aadmi_Party 10 http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/71/ 20 http://www.digiwhirl.com/look-aam-aadmi-partys-meteoric-rise-so allow-imported-prescription-drugs/ cial-media/ 11 https://www.law360.com/articles/1336/u-s-senators-unveil-bipartisan-drug-im 21 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvind_Kejriwal port-bill 22 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhopal/hindu-mahasabha- 12 https://www.keionline.org/23248/ builds-godse-temple-congress-cries-sedition/articleshow/61666372. 13 https://ec.europa.eu/health/human-use_en cms? 14 https://www.cnbc.com/id/100840148 23 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmar-rohingya-india/in 15 http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/press-releases/2015/oct/us- dia-calls-rohingya-refugees-threat-to-nation spends-more-on-health-care-than-other-nations al-security-idUSKCN1BP24M
THE GLOBE | 18
emoryglobe.com