Showing posts with label 2014. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2014. Show all posts

Tuesday, 15 April 2014

The Influence of Names: Is Your Name Unintentionally Holding You Back?

Whilst researching for my dissertation I became fixated with youth unemployment, it is a problem that affects my friends and myself. 'What will we do after university?' is a frequent question that often has a resolute, parrot-fashion or panicked response. 

Tangentially I became interested in capitalism as a concept. Why am I jumping through all these hoops of education to gain pieces of paper that resemble lumps of shiny metal that someone in the pre-historic age decided were important (five banks are still calling the shots on this one anyway)? What if the whole world thought leaves were the most valuable good? I would be pretty rich at the moment if they were (obviously it is scarcity that creates value in a capitalist world so this be of little consequence – Brazil would simply become richer still). The debate about capitalism has become more visible in recent years after the catalyst of the boom and Thomas Piketty’s recent publication has caused this debate to resurface again.

This then led me on to the influence that names can have upon our economic performance and this (you can breath a sigh of relief) forms the subject for this article. Does it make a difference? And if so, why? I will cover the other subjects of youth unemployment and capitalism in later articles so watch out for those.

What is striking in the conversation concerning normlative determinism is Ian Salisbury’s reference to research on the coincidence of names in Oxbridge undergraduates, ‘advantageous names’ outnumber ‘made-up names’ by 80-1. So if you are an Elizabeth and applying to Oxbridge your fingers should be crossed with a justifiable hope; but if you are a Shane, Jade or Chelsea then you had better look elsewhere. 

Is this true? Well the research is conclusive and the impact that names have is without doubt; so, you had better choose wisely future parents for your babies' future is partly tied to their name. It could affect schools, jobs, and relationships. Let us look at this in more depth.

What does your name say about you?

Surely it is about the person? The qualities they show? The way they relate? Of course it is but the power a name holds is without question. How many books, religious articles, and scientific publications play with the concept of your name? Knowing your true name, name changing, and the effects that names have are all discussed.

However, is it the name or the fact that classes are likely to choose a certain set of names? It is not often that you find a Percival among the lower classes or a Chardonnay among the upper classes. They are certain social stigmas attached to them which neither class finds tasteful. Therefore it is not the name but the class. 

What would be interesting would be to assess the effect a divergent name has upon different classes. Yet, a human life is not some plaything to be meddled with and if I was the test subject I would find the whole affair rather disturbing. The luck is out on this one.

Or is it? David Figlio does conduct a test that draws out a conclusion on the effect of different names by analysing birth certificates and whether the baby’s mother will be a high school dropout (there is nothing wrong with that but it does have interesting implications). He finds that a name that a teacher perceives to have been given by ‘uneducated parents’ affects how the teacher reacts to the student – as though the parents have consigned the child to a certain fate. Pelham, and Mirenberg and Jones, substantiate these findings and argue that an individuals’ name strongly affects their residential location choices, career choices and spousal selections.

David Key’s comment on the concurrence of ‘a’ on the end of female names and thus her social economic class shows a remarkable similarity. Compare Sophie to Sophia, Susan to Susanna, Helen to Helena, Dianne to Dianna, and Frances to Francesca. The former is often of lower class to the later.

What about the other way around? George Osbourne’s original name was Gideon but he appeared anxious to change it to a more generic name so as to avoid issues at the poll. Clever chap!

Superfans also pose an interesting question. Just because you might have a devotion to a certain team does not mean that your children should be related to them - the consequences are more far-reaching then you can imagine. The story of the Manchester United obsessed mother today compounds this absurdity. What will the cats think?

Though you may deny it our names do have an influence on a lot of worldly factors. Of course there will be anomalies (it could even be you!) but evidently we all have a duty to take care in deciding the names of our offspring. You could contend that if you do not value economic wealth then this argument is rather flawed; your name should represent your group, your class or your heritage. Yet, to talk in terms of class, to participate in the capitalist world (though I appreciate it is rather difficult to do anything else), and to have a job, entails a stake in the significance of names.

I guess in however many years my offspring had better be name appropriately or someone will be redirecting me to this post (it might even be them!).

Thoughts? Has your name held you back? Does this make sense? Do you think this is right? 

Sunday, 30 March 2014

The Last Seminar: Democracy's Fall in Turkey

In reflection, my last seminar was a rather daunting yet enjoyable closure to three years of undergraduate study at the University of Exeter. Indeed it followed a similar pattern to all my contact hours, as very few had read the readings, the presentations seemed to drift over the class, and it ended with a rather broad discussion about democracy. If you do not know the readings just ramble on about current affairs, it works every time.

Equally, when stating my views on democracy promotion in the Middle East I caused a little bit of tension as usual. Brilliant. I enjoy when someone in the class decides to make it their mission to prove that you are wrong, and quite often they do this in a somewhat belligerent manner. However, if I have learnt anything in three years it is that facts can be drawn from many different sources, some truthful and other's simply made up with conviction. If you feel that it is wrong then research it, politics students are adept at making things up.

The question was 'Is it right to pinpoint China as the state to democratise?

Basically, should we be embarking on a global policy or targeting China because we believe that once it falls the rest of the authoritarian world will follow?

There are arguments for both sides -

If we succeed will it be a proper democracy? There is difference between having elections and them being competitive, fair, free, and regular. If we based a democracy on simply elections then Afghanistan, Syria, and North Korea are little fledgling democracies. Only this month Kim-Jong-un won 100% of the votes in his district... he must have a superb campaigns team.

Yet, China supports North Korea economically and under a democracy perhaps it may begin to impose sanctions? This would make the regimes stability very weak and may lead to the end of the current dictatorship. The fall of North Korea would weaken the stability of other regimes as North Korea is seen by the international community as the most repressive state.

And so on....

Could this vital trade recede under a democratised China?

So you are probably wondering what I said to ignite the class in fevered discussion?

Simply, I noticed that democratisation tends to follow where American interests lie. Whether that is in South America, the Middle East, or Central Asia. No one disagreed with that. But, when I added that perhaps democracy does not suit the Middle East due to a different culture I may as well have been in court.

'What do you mean?' they heckled. 'You are simply regressing back to orientalist thought.'

However, yesterday I felt vindicated from this onslaught by the Turkish governments attempt to block twitter and YouTube. The AK party, the Justice and Development Party, was heralded as an example that democracy and Islam could work in the Middle East (or Near East). Yet, after this week many have been left wondering whether this will ever become a reality?

So, do you think democracy can work in the Middle East?

As the war rages in Syria, Egypt is unstable, and the Gulf states maintain their rule with the proceeds from oil, democracy's future has never looked more turbulent.

Monday, 17 March 2014

NATO and Tribal Elements in Afghanistan

For the media to portray Afghanistan in a manner easily understood by a wider audience they must inevitably reduce the complexities of the local and tribal relations to broad locations and groupings. For instance, stating that the Pashtuns largely occupy the south of Afghanistan and the north of Pakistan; whilst the Haraza, Aimak, Uzbek, Tajik, and Uzbek occupy the North. This is overly simplistic as shown by this map:

Note the pockets of Pashtun throughout the North (The light green colour if it is hard to see)

(The Pashtun pockets originate from the rule of Amir Abdur Rahman who uprooted many tribal communities with the goal of strengthening the central government and deliberately weakening the tribal system. He was a Pashtun himself but he resettled various Pashtun tribes and subtribes as punishment for rebellion or to use them as counterweights against hostile non-Pashtun tribes or ethnic groups.)

On the one hand, rather than analysing local tribal factors, it is this broad understanding that NATO and Afghan government forces have based their counter-insurgency policy upon. The work of Robert Gonzalez reiterates this understanding as he contends that a misguided focus on the ‘tribal’ features of Afghanistan is drawn from the ‘desperate political situation’ to identify a source of insurgency that may be rapidly resolved – tribes are ‘imagined’ collections of individuals.

Yet, this argument fails to appreciate the patrilineal segmentary lineage systems that operate in these regions for the ‘social structure of communities is based either on the tribe or the locality’ which unites together if faced by an external threat.

On the other hand, the Taliban use their pre-existing knowledge of tribes, subtribes, and clans to convince the tribes to co-opt and recruit local leaders who can convince their men to fight. The Afghan government has only served to deepen and strengthen this tactic through mismanagement, patronage, and corruption of local strongman not necessarily linked to the quam, a unit of identification and solidarity that could be based on kinship, residence, or occupation.

This is combined with an image of the U.S. and NATO that is at its lowest point since 2001 making the mobilisation of tribes on their side more unlikely.

Ergo, the US and NATO considered the Pashtun as a whole and failed to comprehend the vast web of tribes allowing the Taliban insurgency to rise within the population.

Sunday, 16 March 2014

The International Criminal Court: Time for an Update?

Though debate on the use of capital punishment still simmers among some groups in the UK it was formally abolished in 1965. Further, on 18 December 2008 the United Nations adopted resolution 63/168, which is a reaffirmation of its call for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty (62/149) passed in December the previous year. The resolution calls for states to freeze executions with a view to eventual abolition.

However, where do we send all those notorious international criminals who cause the death, mutilation or disruption of thousands of individuals? 

The International Criminal Court (ICC).

However, few have been vocal in asking whether this institution is entirely practical in its role?

Often public services are measured on the premise of quotas, numbers and other forms of comparative study. Yet, it is reductionist to assess the ICC in this format least because there are insufficient benchmarks to compare the ICC’s work. And even comparisons between its work and the ad-hoc tribunals like the International Criminal Tribunal of Yugoslavia (ICTY) or the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR) is problematic due to their differing structures, features, budgets, and jurisdictions.          

Time for an update?

Inspiration for this article?
I try to begin the day by catching up on the news, first on the BBC, then Reuters, and finally Al Jazeera. I find that comparing different news stations helps to present a more holistic interpretation of the world news. Also, I find the blogs on Al Jazeera offers an in-depth study into a certain niche part of economics, politics or humanitarian issues.

A recent blog on Al Jazeera by Haru Mutasa on whether the trial of Bosco Ntaganda, a warlord from the Democratic Republic of Congo, will make a difference to those terrorised, forms the inspiration for this article.

She questions whether the ICC fulfils its purpose, of discouraging crimes of the gravest manner, as many in the Democratic Republic of Congo realise that ‘the reality is even if he (Bosco Ntaganda) is found guilty and is locked way for the rest of his life, chances are someone will carry on from where he left’

Issues with the ICC

Atrocities are still occurring so it can be infered that the threat of conviction by the ICC does not discourage the leaders of these crimes. This could be because at the time the leader is hopeful that he will prevail and therefore not have to face any charges.

This is combined with the lack of a police force under the ICC’s control making them unable to enforce arrest warrants.  The warrants of arrest for Sudan’s President Al Bashir issued in 2009 and 2010 are unlikely to be enforced by a President against himself.

Formed after the First World War the League of Nations also lacked suitable methods of enforcement.

Hypocrisy?

With Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo the warlords have been implicated by the present presidents but the national armies have escaped investigation. Is it fair that one side escapes punishment even though in both states they committed acts of savagery?

For instance, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda has on various occasions ordered his men to ‘shoot and kill the civilians’.

Focus on Africa

For an International Criminal Court the focus on Africa is hardly 'international'. If you visit the website the top bar is dominated by African states. Other states such as Sri Lanka should be considered further by the ICC.

Africa again? We need a more holistic outlook!
Recommendations

The ICC should:
  • Remain independent
  • Indict all guilty of crimes within a given state
  • Push for major states to ratify the Rome Statute
  • Make all aware that only crimes committed after 2002 can be investigated to limit false expectations from the international community
  • Involve the Security Council to enforce warrants
  • Empower courts in the states to try those of lower note and concentrate on those who conducted the gravest crimes

The ICC is a worthwhile organisation but with these improvements we can hopefully help to reduce some of the most abhorrent crimes. For the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo they need to see changes on the ground, not just a warlord removed and replaced by another.

Friday, 14 March 2014

We Extended Our Hand to Russia, but Instead We Got a Barrel: A For and Against for the Seccession of Crimea

The Crimean referendum on whether to split from the Ukraine and add another little portion of the world to the behemoth that is Russia will to be held this Sunday. Syria has regretfully faded from our thoughts as we seem capable of only focusing on war-torn state at a time (yet, it could be argued that it is Ukraine’s close proximity to our European Union and theoretically our sovereignty that has made this state’s condition such a concern) and the news is dominated by the yellow and blue of a tense Ukrainian situation.

There are a lot of difficulties with this conflict ranging from nuclear weapons, democracy, and revolution. For America and Europe to allow Russia to attack a state protected under their treaties, particularly the 1994 Budapest Memorandum highlighted by Ukrainian PM Yatseniuk, would demonstrate that America does not have the power to stand against Russia and presents an embarrassing conclusion to a difficult period of US foreign policy. To a lesser extent, Europe would be implicated under similar charges.

Furthermore, any sanctions imposed by the two partners are predicted to affect their economies as well. This is would constitute an unpopular move in our present economic situation; an aspect the UK is apparently well aware of when a picture of an important document urging against sanctions was leaked. How likely that this was an ‘accident’ remains to be seen.

Anyway, so instead of condemning the Russians in line with the present media I am going to have a go at justifying the unification of the Crimea into Russia. If I reach some sort of strong conclusion that it should not then maybe we, the West, should take a step back from the current state of affairs. Yet, if I fail then maybe we can conclude that perhaps the Crimea should remain in Ukrainian hands. 

For

A Whim
The Crimea was originally given over on a whim by the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, who was half-Ukrainian in 1954. The break-up of the Soviet Union 44 years later was not envisaged at this time so giving Crimea over to Ukraine was likely to not have been given due thought.

21st February Deal
When the president fled Kiev, the opposition moved in to fill the power vacuum. But earlier that week, in a bid to calm the crisis, both sides had agreed a deal to restore the 2004 constitution and reduce the president's powers. That deal was signed by Mr Yanukovych and opposition leaders as well as by three EU foreign ministers - but fast-moving events soon rendered it out of date. It was not signed by the Russian official present.

Illegal
With all the discussions of illegal activity on the behalf of the Russian forces in the Crimea we should not forget that the Ukrainian Prime Minister was overthrown illegally after having won a democratic election. The cyclical issues related to revolutions repeating themselves due to being justified by previous successful revolutions.

Little left
Putin can claim a victory, but it will be pyrrhic. Moscow will have gained little it did not already hold: access to the Black Sea and military infrastructure in the Crimea. It stands to loose ties with the Ukraine so gaining the Crimea is hardly likely to benefit them.

Democracy
With talks about Scotland and independence we can see a similarity in the Crimea. If a majority of the region desire to join Russia then surely democratically they have the right to split from the Ukraine.


How long can Ukraine hold out in the face of a strong Russian occupation?

Against
UN security council
The UN security council meeting yesterday was typically a showdown between Russia… and every other state. Lithuania’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Raimonda MurmokaitÄ—, summarised the thoughts of the UN clearly,

‘A referendum had never been set up so hurriedly and in such clear violation of Ukraine’s constitution.  The voices of many other ethnic groups in Crimea would not be heard through the referendum because it had only been planned because the Russian Federation was “fast-tracking” the annexation of Crimea.  As a result, one could only imagine the shudders being felt across the region, she said.  The Russian Federation had repeatedly expressed recognition of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity under existing agreements, yet the its actions violated the very foundations of international law, as well as regional and international security.  Nothing that had been said warranted or justified the Russian Federation’s actions, she emphasized, noting that Ukraine had repeatedly invited monitors in and had nothing to hide.  The crisis was deeply troubling because it had a highly explosive human dimension and risked unleashing the “most dangerous demons” of hatred, she warned, calling upon the Russian Federation to stop its “warmongering”.’

Democracy
The media has often cited the majority of Russians in the Crimea as a reason for Russian involvement. In fact, Putin has also argued that sending troops into the Crimea is to protect the Russian people. However, only 58.5% of the Crimea are Russian… so perhaps that majority is not so conclusive.

Economic sanctions
European leaders appear to be calculating that the damage to Russia would be far worse than to Europe. EU-Russian trade makes up 15 percent of Russia's economy and just 1 percent of Europe's. Although EU countries depend on Russian gas imports, storage tanks are full after a mild winter season. We have the time to hold sanctions in place.

Swings and roundabouts really but I would argue that Russia taking the Crimea makes more sense than the issues surrounding the West Bank.

Tuesday, 18 February 2014

Has Iran replaced Saudi Arabia in the Middle East?

America and Iran is meeting today to discuss the latter’s nuclear policy and future relations. This development in the international community is to be honest rather obscure and not a transition many predicted. The main question this article asks is why the pleasantries? What has changed in the region that has made America keen to engage with Iran?

Likely Allies? American and Iranian talks continue.

The Near East/Middle East (yes there is a difference) is evidently a complex web of state relations. A brief overview of the area is practically impossible but I will attempt below to layout the relational history of the states discussed in this article.

America and Israel – Typically strong allies as Israel has been seen as a bloc against the extremism so feared by the Americans. Yet, with the 24th November 2013 Geneva Interim Agreement, which eased economic sanctions on Iran in return for a freeze on its nuclear program, the relations have worsened between America and Israel. With this second round of talks Israel is watching the development with intense focus.

America and Saudi Arabia – A checkered relationship typifies the relational foreign policy of these two states. The first conflict between the two states centred on the creation of Israel and since then it has been dominated by this issue, oil, and counter-terrorism. By partnering with Saudi-Arabia, America has reduced Arab defiance to the Jewish state.

Israel and Iran – In 1947 Iran was among 13 countries that voted against the UN Partition Plan for Palestine. Two years later, Iran also voted against Israel's admission to the United Nations, and showed tacit solidarity with the Arab states during the 1948 Palestine war. After the 1979 Revolution, Iran severed all diplomatic and commercial ties with Israel, and its government does not recognize the legitimacy of Israel as a state.

However, this is a broad overview. In reality the states all help and work against the other states in divergent ways. For instance, only yesterday an article was published on Israel attempting to sell arms to Iran.

Why Iran?
So why is America courting Iran when Saudi Arabia can provide the oil needed to keep its international dominance?

Simply, it does not have enough. The Saudi oil production is beginning to flatline and thus America is looking elsewhere for oil, mainly Iraq and Iran.

Saudi Arabia's Oil dominance is showing signs of waning.

With Iraq’s security issues, Iran is a tempting partner for American oil interests but is displeasing to Israel as demonstrated by this rather untactful article in ‘The Jerusalem Post’.

Though, Ayatollah, the Iranian Supreme :eader, is not optimistic about the talks today we should not read too much into this statement. After years of opposition it would be strange for Iran and America to become strong allies. Approaching the talks with scepticism simply safeguards the Iranian government against its developments and may help to further reduce the sanctions placed on Iran.

Furthermore, this is the not the first time the Americans have worked with the Iranian. During the Bonn Conference concerning the future of Afghanistan the Iranians were vital to securing American intentions (read After the Taliban: Nation Building in Afghanistan by J. F. Dobbins for an in-depth account of this period).

It is an interesting shift in politics in the region and I look forward to the progression in these talks. It may have a knock on effect for the talks on Syria as well.

Friday, 14 February 2014

Flooding: It's Time for an Individual Response

As my car immobiliser suffers from water damage due to Renault’s somewhat lacklustre attempt at engineering I cannot help think of the plight of others within the UK. We are in a severe situation as the Governor of the Bank of England has mentioned that the effects on those flooded will influence the UK’s economic situation. Forgive me for taking on the often quoted Darwinian phrase but is it ‘survival of the fittest’ when we consider flooding?

Flooding has become an issue that this nation continues to suffer from and the future does not appear to be forgiving. As a nation we are over-populated and continuing to place houses on flood plains is common alongside a form of flood defence to alleviate issues. Yet, as humans are we taking a step too far? Can nature truly be restrained?

Simply, yes we are fighting a battle we cannot win. Nature has no master, is relentless, and attempting to build large-scale flood defences has had limit success. The failed flood defences of Ruthin, North Wales in late 2012 offer a typical example of these ineffective solutions.

The UK seems to have limited solutions to this issue as the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) wrote a consultation paper in 2013 to ensure ‘property insurance continues to be widely available and affordable in areas of flood risk in the UK’. This is a resolution rather than prevention to flooding.

Flooding is only going to get worse
From a macro consideration the world is consistently impacting human activity yet other states have learnt to adapt. Japan is afflicted by earthquakes and has adopted measures to reduce the damage it can bring. Surely we should adopt a similar response.

But it is not a national response but an individual response. We need to move on from a reliance on state because in this present economic situation the state can do very little. If you live in a flood-prone area it may be time to adapt. We cannot consistently rely on insurance (though you should check if you can get it!) You must research the area before you move there to prepare yourself for the eventuality.

This is a good video on how a couple in Oxford have adapted


It’s time to leave the government and the economy to deal with the plight of farmers as their entire life is at risk. Damning rivers or stopping floods flooding the flood plains can only logically cause issues. Consider how you can make your homes more resistant and check out the area before you move. It may be ‘picturesque’ now but it will not be when 3ft of water comes smashing through the door. It won’t even knock.

Thursday, 13 February 2014

Karzai Renegades on Allied Support

Two prisons both central to concerns over human rights. One prison released its inmates against American wishes and one prison holds 166 detainees despite being the focus of an executive order.

What is all this about?

In the news today 65 detainees of Bagram prison have been released by the Afghan government. Bagram has often been described as the Guantanamo Bay of Afghanistan and contains the alleged troop commanders, bombers and other notables of the Taliban forces. With the upcoming Afghan elections on the 5th April it is worth considering why Karzai has done this? It has affected the relationship between the American and Afghani government. So was it all worth it?

Discussion over Afghanistan's future centers on whether the Taliban will regain control of the region. Karzai is aware of the threat the Taliban hold and therefore seems to be edging away from the Americans to secure the progression he has made.

A few factors support this:

1. Karzai has backed away from signing the Bi-Lateral Security Agreement in November as he wishes to forestall it till after the next elections. Yet, this contradicts the Loya Jirga, a grand assembly of elders, who approved of the agreement and asked Karzai to sign it as soon as possible. The rational behind his refusal to engage in this agreement is likely linked to the calls by the Pashtun to take a harder stance against the Americans.

2. Aid is another concern. After skimming through the book 'War Front to Store Front' by Paul Brinkley I was surprised to learn that 60% of the GDP of Afghanistan is foreign aid, 30% is from the narcotics trade, and 10% is economic activity. Drawing conclusions from these figures, I consider Karzai to be concerned about is whether the government he leaves behind will function without American backing. If American backing is pulled from Afghanistan and the government is wholly reliant on it then it will collapse. Karzai is attempting to make the government independent from America to encourage other sources of economic support and growth.

Bagram is another disagreement between Karzai and America
What makes this situation challenging for Allied Forces is that they are unable to logistically plan for the future of Afghanistan. Do we continue to fight to secure what we have gained or do we except that we have lost the fight and leave it to the Afghan people to dictate their future? Will Karzai's attempt to distance his government from America help weakening his government and enabling the Taliban to gain further control?

Finally, how can America be so committed to removing Guantanamo Bay but then condemn Karzai's decision to close Bagram? Human rights and the hypocrisy we often breed is concerning.

Monday, 20 January 2014

Peacekeeping in the Central African Republic

The Central African Republic (CAR) has descended into another bout of sectarian violence as Muslim fighters have had their arms seized and the minority comes under attack from the Christian majority.

This region of Africa is often forgotten as Sudan, The Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda dominate the news as violent clashes, war lords and child soldiers plague these states.

France has deployed to its old colony in an attempt to quell the violence and though some have argued that it is another attempt to serve their own interests they have been well received. CAR has 4.6 million people and only 200 police officers, that is 1 policemen to every 23,000 people. No wonder they cannot control the populace.

French troops patrol limited areas of the CAR

Michel Djotodia came to power on the back of a rebellion last year after the Muslim Seleka ousted Francois Bozize on the charge of failing to respect a peace deal agreed in 2007. Yet, the rebels have continued to attack the populace leading to the rise of sectarian violence as Christian ‘anti-balaka’ work to protect themselves. Making matters worse is that the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) is operating in this region. In addition, it is not a good moment to be an elephant as over 90% have been killed for exports of ivory to the developed world in order to finance the conflict.

However, what affect have the French forces had upon the violence in this region? Though widely well received is that because they have supported the majority Christians as suggested by the Muslims?

In the CAR French peacekeepers have, with the permission of the UN, begun to remove weapons from the Muslim fighters but this has allowed militias to launch reprisals. Christians were angry at the government, blaming their economic conditions on its policies but in reality it reflected the current global pattern and the UN’s inability to access the region as it feared armed groups.

Disarming the Muslim groups draws the state into a stalemate and as suggested third party interventions appear to prolong conflict. They place a barrier between the fighters and enable them to build up rhetoric and weapons. If peacekeepers are implemented for a long period which enables the sides to ‘forget’ the atrocities which occurred or economically divert their attention then this may be effective. Yet, with no form of statehood it looks likely to be a costly and protracted peacekeeping mission.


Many desperately flee the conflict via any form of transport.

Nonetheless, the haunting memory of Rwanda keeps Western politicians eager to implement forces to prevent the feared genocide in the CAR. But are they doing enough?

In the Defence Web’s analysis of peacekeeping it notes that Retired Rear Admiral Rolf Hauter argues the mandate for an operation must correspond with the requirement on the ground to have any chance of success, “the forces assigned to the operation must be able and willing to execute the mandate ie adequate numbers, trained and correctly equipped. If not, it will most probably be a waste of time”.

The forces committed to conflict resolution must be significant enough to reach to all corners of the state. Presently, French forces are unable to police the rural areas where the militants have set up new bases and continue the atrocities.

In light of the British Army’s Strategic Narrative published on the 1st October 2013 it is clear that for a military force to achieve successful intervention a division strength of 25,000 troops is necessary. In fact, this is mentioned consistently in the report. Simply, we need to concentrate on several issues at a time and devote considerable resources to conflict resolution, whether economic or militarily. Cutting the Armed forces in the United Kingdom is the appropriate course of action as the United Kingdom is accused by Robert Gates, former US defence secretary, as being unable to fulfil its full partnership alongside the United States.

If we are committed to resolving conflict in the international context we must retain a strong military force which we are prepared to deploy for long periods of time in effective peacekeeping missions. With the Taliban suggesting Afghanistan will be retaken after the troops pull out in 2014 we need to revise our peacekeeping strategy and halt risky and small operations which serve only to reduce conflict in the short-term. Long-term policies may not be popular with the voter but the public must stop and consider the arguments.

Thursday, 9 January 2014

The Plight of the Botswana Bushmen

On Tuesday the BBC released an article on the Bostwana Bushmen. When reading it I could not help but think of the parallels to the Native Americans on reservations in America. Visiting Africa and going on safari is something I have always considered on my list of things to do but how much is our tourism costing people in Africa?

Well at first that was what I considered the issue was, an attempt by the government to expand tourism. However, the Botswana Bushmen's land lies directly on the world's richest diamond field.

These tribesman live on and from the land and therefore they are not costing the world a great deal. Yet, now they have been forced to live a 'modern life'. They have become dependent on the state rather then on their own self sufficiency. When we are considering the implications of the benefit culture in our own country this is worrying (George Osborne wants to cut more money from the welfare state - click here for the full story).

My thoughts are that as a Western world we are concerned with a sustainable world yet our businesses are forcing perhaps the most sustainable tribes to modernise. Our lives are not particular happy, money does not make things better. You just need to read the thoughts of Mark Boyle who lived on no money for an entire year and continues to do so to realise this.

I am encouraged by the words that Mark quotes from Ghandi, 'Be the change you want to see in the world'.

That does not mean we all have to go to limits that Mark has but lets consider our actions so that the West's contradiction becomes a quality of the past not the present. Be the change. Read the BBC article and make your own deductions.

The Tribesman face a difficult transition to an unwanted life.


Tuesday, 7 January 2014

The Democratic Republic of Congo: Fighting in the Katanga Region

We, the West, may like to hide our past and pretend that we have moved on from it all. As though we have matured from a ‘naughty’ stage in our development to reach the heights of human welfare, economic prosperity and become the guardians of global peace. I mean we banned the slave trade, defeated communism and attempt to secure peace at every turn. Yet, though we like to promote this side we often forget that we accelerated the slave trade into a global business, wrecked countless states so its people could not express themselves, and often provide weapons for profit without considering the implications they may have. The repercussions of our abuses during the time of the colonies and the slave trade are still felt across the developing world.

Of course, we should not be too hard on ourselves. The slave trade has been a constant feature throughout the world for countless centuries and the fact that we got powerful… well other empires have existed before us that committed terrible acts of brutality. This is not a justification, rather the necessary context for this discussion.

The issue is that we, at least on the outside, now fight against most of our previous qualities. However, the developing world does not easily forget what we did. The signs of our presence are everywhere from the language they speak, the borders they guard and the political systems they use.

(Side note: There is a good film coming out called '12 Years A Slave', the interview of Chiwetel Ejiofor in the Culture was interesting and he has really taken his role a step further by campaigning strongly for an awareness of the slavery that still occurs to this present day.)


We should not forget the past.


It is not front page news, but the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been having some problems in the eastern and southern part of the state. It is easy to see why.

Throughout the research for my dissertation I have been focusing on the sources of conflict. Of course across the world these sources vary in their prominence but a unifying factor is the economy. Everything appears to be based around it. 

When we look at our own lives it seems obvious. Why do we attend school? To get a job (Yes, I know the government forces us to but they do have a reason). Why do we attend university? To get a better job (hopefully). Most of our lives are revolved around the economy and it consequently has an influence on our lives.

What the people of the developing world want before democracy and any other fancy initiatives is the ability to survive. Thinking about this I am reminded of an article I read about Morocco. It stated that though the people took some interest in politics their main focus was how they were going to feed themselves the next day. They do not care unless they can see the benefits in their everyday life. That is why aid is so focused on building a basis so that people can begin to consider democracy and other projects. Makes sense.

The DRC is a resource rich state, in fact that is an understatement... it is one of the richest in the world. Most of it based in the east and south of its territory (see below). Starting to get where I am going with this one?

The location of resources in the DRC

That is right. For a state repeatedly rated poorly in the UN Human Index this should not be the case. Furthermore, the people of the DRC are not blind to their natural wealth and understand it creates vast amounts of money. They observe truck after truck go by with the resources they have mined to be sold for huge profits which will rarely reach their way back to them. I can understand why they are angry.

Here enters another factor I witness in every conflict - leadership. The people can be angry but often will not do anything about it until a strong leader unites them together, works out a plan and tells them why they are fighting. 

For the one of the richest regions in the DRC, Katanga, it took the leadership of Gedeon Kyungu Mutanga to kickstart another conflict in the region. He was freed in September 2011 after gunmen attacked the prison he was in.

It did not take long for this former militia leader to draw men to his banner with promises of a 'better life'. A man who fled a rebel base told a BBC reporter that:

"Gedeon came to our village in August 2012," he said.

"We did not see him with our eyes; he hid in a hut to talk to us.

He told us that if we joined the Kata Katanga, we would have a better life. He told us that if Katanga became independent, it would put an end to the harassment by the soldiers, and would give us access to the resources that belong to us.

"Katanga is very rich, but we don't benefit at all. He told us that would change."

For men of this region this is an attractive offer as the Congolese law that 40% of the taxes on companies who operate in the area should be spent in this region have never materialized. In the face of regular mistreatment by government forces an armed struggle was inevitable.

Yet, what has limited support for the rebels is the brutish way in which they treat the local people too. The rebels, drawn from communities similar to the ones they are abusing, often rape, pillage and loot villages to support their army and in desperation against the overwhelming government and UN forces.

Indeed, the Congolese Prime Minister Matata Ponyo stated that "For me there is no rebellion".

With an 8-hour battle between rebels and government troops yesterday the President's statement seems unfounded...

It is not more violence that will cure this desperate situation but a united effort by the West to understand the havoc we wrecked here and encourage the government to improve the humanitarian conditions of these resource rich states. They need to have the bread of tomorrow to consider the politics of today.

If you are interested in the Congo, the Dutch settlment and all things historical you should check out "This World: Dan Snow's History of Congo".

For the purposes of keeping this post shorter I have not explored the rebel group, how the borders with other countries helps their struggle and other conflicts in the state so I would simply google Katanga, Gedeon Kyungu Mutanga or the DRC if you want to know more. Further, I may follow up with more articles on this or feel free to post below and I will attempt to answer your questions.




Saturday, 28 December 2013

China Reverses the One-Child Policy: Discussion on the Policy and an Ageing Population.

Yesterday, China officially relaxed its one-child policy introduced in 1979 as its unpopularity, gender imbalance and economic factors start to drastically influence the country. Forced and selective abortions and the complications of an ageing population have angered many. Gender imbalance caused by a preference for male offspring will leave 24 million Chinese men without a wife by the end of the decade. Economically, the labour force in China shrank for the first time last year as employers are forced to increase pay to attract employees. So what has stopping over 200 million births achieved? Will relaxed laws encourage parents to have more children? Should the population be considered in greater depth by politicians and the world as a whole?

Abortions

The violation of women’s rights has been a major issue in China. Parents often medically abort babies if they are girls as the parents prefer male children because of an age-old tradition. Essentially, the Chinese believe, as with Western cultures and the name of the family, that the bloodline descends through the males. Also, males were seen as a form of pension for many.

However, sex-selective abortions are illegal in the country, couples face fines for doing it, but experts fear that by cracking down on these abortions could drive the practice underground. It is a tricky situation for the government to handle.

Likewise, if families are unable to pay the 40,000 yuan fine then the baby must be aborted.

This has led to over 336 million abortions.

This harrowing picture of Feng Jianmei, and her aborted child, enraged Chinese citizens. This is the reality for many who are unable to pay the 40,000 yuan fine for a second child.



Ageing Population

China is poised to become an aged society before it is rich enough to support this ageing population. We see similar issues in the UK with the mistreatment of the elderly consistently in the news. The situation in China has been exacerbated by the one child policy coupled with people living longer who are unable to work.

Right, this is going to sound wrong and some may take offence but please bear with me. I realise I am considering some difficult areas of humanity.

So, here goes.

The increasing technological advances in healthcare have been undoubtedly a progression for humankind. But, with this advance has come the ability to keep our loved ones going for longer. Why should we, when we have the relevant technology, witness our parents, grandparents or greatparents die earlier then they have to? As a human I do not, I love my family.

As an outsider, i.e not a human but some form of metaphorical alien, I would disagree.

From the outside, and this is a viewpoint without emotion or empathy, the planet cannot sustain our population. Evidently, restricting parents to one child comes with complications but it has prevented 336 million people being born. Yet, the way it was achieved was unseemly.

Furthermore, if the elderly are assessed against our capitalist system then they are economically inefficient. I feel wrong to class them as that but an outsider may reach that conclusion. This presents difficulties as defining humankind in these simplistic terms presents a conundrum. What about those who are presently unemployed? Do we stop supporting them because they are economically inefficient at that present time? Thus, we must define humans by something more then their economic output. 

What do we assess? What they have done in their lifetimes? How many wars they have fought? How lazy they have been? Consequently, issues are presented when we do not define people economically. Is there a happy (?) medium? 

Moreover, is it right that we prolong the lives of humans beyond what is natural? Though what does natural mean? And, thus should we change our economic model? It is the state that must support the elderly as the children must work to keep the economy going. Those against state intervention must consider this predicament. 

If we continue to define humans economically, just look at the news and you will find this, then these arguments need answering.

Personally, I have witnessed the decline of my grandmother from sweeping the patios 3 years ago at the age of 94 to an inability to remember or function at the age of 97. She is like this because she refuses to take the medicine that will keep her going and I somewhat admire her for it. She repeatedly states that a good diet, a healthy lifestyle and her stubborn attitude is what kept her going. For the most part she is right.


What does all this mean?
  • I think we should assess whether our population growth is sustainable.
  • Analyse different methods for population control. I do not want to violate free will but merely encourage parents to consider the impacts of population on the world. A child is a gift not a matter of fact and thus the parents should be prepared to support and nurture their children. Of course there are exceptions to this (i.e. rape).
  • Assess the states remit and responsibilities for the care of the elderly.

I want to answer these questions so that we understand our commitments to the elderly, the economic factors and the pressures placed upon the next generation. Avoiding this difficult issue will not help the situation.

This Native American proverb surmerises this well:

"Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children."

Gender Imbalance

By the end of the decade 24 million men in China will be without a wife.

Yet, as China has developed economically the issue of gender in the vibrant coastal regions has largely transformed from birth control to other issues. The number of men without wives looks likely to fall in future years.

Further, the Government is trying to promote women’s rights throughout the country with roadside signs telling villagers that girls can continue the family line; focus-group discussions for mothers-in-law; help packages for women starting businesses and extra encouragement for girls to enter schools. Officials have even tried to promote the idea of men marrying into women's families, rather than vice versa.

Likewise, the idea of sons acting as a form of pension is not entirely accurate. This report typifies this:

“Chen admits that she was initially disappointed when her daughter was born. "Of course, I wanted to have a boy. But after giving birth, I thought: 'I don't care. This is my baby,'" she says.
"I looked around me; one of my neighbours had five sons and one daughter. One day, when he was 60 or 70, he wanted some money from his sons for living costs. He cooked a tableful of dishes and bought wine and invited his sons. But none of them agreed to give the money to him. He was furious and smashed the table with his stick. And I thought: 'Well, sons are useless.'"
Meanwhile, she noticed, daughters were returning to visit their parents, bringing gifts and money. Despite strong pressure from her husband and in-laws, she refused to have another child: Qiaoyue was enough for her.”
In fact, based on a sex ratio estimate in 2008 there were only 1.06 male(s)/female.
These progressions are positive for the rights of women and I look forward to seeing further progression.
For more information on abortions and gender imbalance visit this article entitled ‘China’s great Gender Crisis’

Economics

Economically, it is pertinent to discuss the work of Sir Arthur Lewis who won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for his theories of development and its relation to population. Lewis’ “dual sector model” purports that economies advance without triggering inflation because the expanding industrial sector can scoop up labour from the subsistence primary (agricultural) sector. Thus, an unlimited supply of peasants willing to work in factories for low, but not subsistence, wages allows the industrial sector to power ahead by earning, then reinvesting, excessive profits.
However, there comes a time when the supply of surplus labour peters out and developing countries confront a labour shortage. The point at which an abundance of labour is about to vanish is known as a “Lewis turning point”. Among its symptoms: wage increases outstrip productivity, industrial profits decline, investment drops and inflation becomes a threat.
This is exactly what is occurring in China.
Inflation, increases in wages and a strengthening of the reminbi have pushed up the cost of exports from China.
Government sign in Tangshan Township: "For a prosperous, powerful nation and a happy family, please practice family planning." This sign is perhaps a tad simplistic in its conclusions?

Ergo, China’s reliance on a cheap workforce has been undone by its birth control policies.

Questions answered?

I have certainly updated my knowledge on the one-child policy in China. It is important to note that the policy has only been reformed to allow parents with either parent being an only child to have one more child. This means for this present generation most of the couples can have two children.

Furthermore, within China parents are focused on giving their children the best possible future and therefore one-child families are likely to remain. It is seen as a norm rather then an oddity now.

The government of China has been surprisingly understanding in its treatment of gender in the country by promoting the role of women in society.
Regarding abortion it is a predicament that comes with enforcing the policy. The government has to enforce the policy's subsequent fines and forced abortions for it to work and keeping abortions away from the underground system is a good thing. Clearly, by revoking the policy then the abortions would decrease, which we will hopefully now witness.
An ageing population is a predicament that needs to be discussed in all countries of the world. I really feel this is an issue that needs more attention from the media. Rather then focusing on the plight of the elderly we need to assess why they are in this state? The pension system was an inviting concept that failed to fulfill to its promises due to economic pressure. Are pensions beneficial?
Economically, China will now face the consequences of its policy. However, it is good for the rights of workers, their pay and will perhaps slow down the economy.
I would love to hear your views on the one-child policy, the ageing population and why/if you think population is an issue for this generation?



Friday, 20 December 2013

12 Years On and What Have We Achieved in Afghanistan?

With the departure of troops from Afghanistan intended for 2014 and David Cameron’s recent trip to Camp Bastion to declare, or rather infer, ‘mission accomplished’ it seems Afghanistan is finally over.

Yet, the media was quick to draw parallels between G. W. Bush’s speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln on Iraq in 2003 due to their disbelief that coalition forces have managed to secure any of their objectives. They were not far off the truth.

Soldiers appear bemused?

The objectives were to:

Disable Al Qaeda

Yes, Mr. Cameron you have the right to fist bump the air as Coalition forces did disable Al Qaeda within their area of operations. However, Al Qaeda typifies a new form of actor on the international stage, one that does not have a set piece of land. Therefore, capturing a certain town or a capital will not destroy it as it is the ideology and the people which embody the organisation. To destroy this it will take localised actors, a shift in ideology or a reconciliation process. None seem likely.

Disable the Taliban

Driving the Taliban from Afghanistan is difficult. The Taliban, like Al Qaeda, are now partially removed from a certain spatial space. Yes, you can predominately find them in the south of Afghanistan but that is simply because they are predominately Pashtun and gain support from Pakistan. Moreover, Pakistan presents another issue as the Pashtun constitute the majority within the northern regions. This makes it easier for Taliban fighters to cross the border but coalition troops cannot as it violates the independent statehood of Pakistan. Finally, the villagers are reluctant to inform on the Taliban as they fear reprisals as Coalition forces wind down their processes.The Taliban’s Qatar office which was seen as an embassy for a government in waiting accentuates the point. Likewise, when Coalition forces arm villager defense forces against the Taliban they often end up being shot by the same weapons they gave out the week before.

The belief that the Taliban are slowing their attacks or waiting till Coalition forces pull out is unfounded. We just are not hearing about the attacks because it is the Afghan National Army that are taking the brunt of the fighting.

This article by the BBC talks in-depth about village defense forces and the arguments for and against them.

Ahmadzai tribesmen
Militias have had little success. Credit: BBC

Additionally, more Taliban attacks have started to occur in the Western and Northern areas of Afghanistan which are typically seen as safe areas for the Karzai government. It is likely that the Taliban are trying to suggest that Karzai has a lack of control over the whole state. He personally agrees, stating that:
“The entire NATO exercise was one that caused Afghanistan a lot of suffering, a lot of loss of life, and no gains because the country is not secure.”

There goes the whole ‘mission accomplished’ rhetoric… put your fist down Mr. Cameron.

(Important to note that when I refer to the Pashtun I am not stating they are all Taliban but that the Taliban are mainly of Pashtun or external origin).

Drug Prevention

This seemed to be an objective at the beginning of the campaign however it has declined as this year saw a bumper crop of poppies in Afghanistan. 6000 tons, the biggest since the invasion began, was harvested.

Conversely, Afghanistan’s 2000 drug eradiction program under the Taliban was highly effective with production falling to 185 tons in 2001 compared to 3300 tons in 2000.  It was even acknowledged at the October 2001 session of the UN General Assembly though since the war started the Coalition has been keen to distance itself from this.

Yet, the reduction in opium did have detrimental outcomes for the farmers as they struggled to feed their families. Wheat needs more water and earns no money until it is sold. The opium trade gave the money up front.

See this article for more information.

Create a stable and loyal Afghan National Army (ANA)

Yes, no, maybe?

Well some ethnic and political faction leaders have begun to revive their militia forces should the international drawdown lead to a major Taliban push to retake power. Successful? Erm, no?

This was illustrated in a November 2012 meeting organized by Herat leader Ismail Khan, in which he reportedly began taking steps to reorganize his Soviet and Taliban-era militia. Vice President Muhammad Fahim has also discussed potentially renewing the Northern Alliance force in anticipation of the need to assist Afghan government forces against the Taliban. And Uzbek leader Dostam is also reportedly trying to reorganize his loyalists in northern Afghanistan. These and similar moves could spark ethnic and communal conflict from an all-out struggle for power and a reversion to Afghan rule by faction leaders rather than elected leaders.

US forces training the Afghan National Army.

Do armies even work in a clan based societies?

Armies need to be centred on a shared common identity and a goal. At present the ANA comprises of Afghans from the North with the goal of fighting the Taliban south. The title is misleading as it is not a national force, rather what resembles the Northern Alliance with a few new toys courtesy of the coalition.

For a rather stimulating and patriotic history of the Taliban and what the Americans have done about it read this:
So moving on to 2014 about 8,000 to 12,000 American trainers and Special Forces will remain in Afghanistan alongside with 5,000 coalition forces. Clearly some way to go and that means that not all forces are pulling out. It is one of those "we said we would pull all the troops out but then..."

In the realm of international politics that is sort of understandable.

Provide proficient Aid

This article would not fit in to my blog if I did not discuss aid. But, it is kind of the same story again - I'm really noticing a trend.

The aid is going through the governments of Kabul and thus the people are being told what they need!
Only in 2008 did the UK gov ask the people what they wanted and were truly shocked by the answer that came back.


Basically, as per, see this Ben Anderson documentary on Afghanistan. There is also a more recent one entitled 'This Is What Winning Looks Like'.

And if you prefer to listen to all the arguments surrounding Afghanistan listen to reliable Ben talking to VICE. Good discussion on women rights and the views of a typical Afghan villager.

Thoughts welcome as always.