Blog 12: States petition to secede from union

Following President Barrack Obama’s re-election, twenty states filed for petitions to secede from the United States. The states sent the petitions in through the White House’s “We the People” website. If a state attains 25,000 signatures in 30 days, the White House will review the petition and issue a response. Texas had the most signatures when it sent in its petition, but it was still 3,000 signatures short of the 25,000 needed. It has until December 9^th, which marks the 30^th day since it was sent in.

                The legality of seceding from the Union has been up for debate ever since America’s founding. Many states (most of which seceded and caused the Civil War) have always wanted to secede for the past two centuries. Most of them are southern states such as Texas and South Carolina. Some are surprising, however, such as New York. Who is to tell them that they can’t become their own country? Texas has provided valid reasons for wanting to secede. They have a flourishing economy and don’t benefit at all from being a part of the United States. They would be better off on their own. What’s keeping them from seceding? It is difficult to pick which side is in the right, because it’s not black and white.  It’s interesting that these states are asking for permission to secede too. The president is very likely to deny their request. The plan doesn’t seem to be irrational and not thought out, which is why it will be interesting to see what happens if their petitions do get 25,000 signatures or more.

"States petition to secede from union"

Blog 11: Bombs in Bahrain's Capital Kill 2 Foreigners

                Two foreign workers were killed during a series of bomb explosions in Bahrain’s capital of Manama on Monday. Officials are claiming that the perpetrators were terrorists, and several suspects have been identified. The bombs resulted from a 21-month-long pro-democracy uprising. Protestors of this uprising are seeking broader political freedom from the Sunni monarchy. They are also seeking an end to the Sunni monarchy’s discrimination against the Shiite majority. A few days before the bombings, the monarchy received international condemnation for banning protests. This past Friday, Bahraini authorities arrested a Bahraini human rights activist whose job was to monitor protests. He was charged with illegal gatherings and unauthorized protests.

                The deaths of foreign workers in Bahrain draw even more unwanted and critical attention to the Sunni monarchy. Its international spotlight may be greatly unwanted by the monarchy, but this new attention may greatly encourage protestors who are advocating for change in the government of their country. Bahraini protestors are advocating for democracy. Since many countries like to freely offer support for democratic uprisings in undemocratic countries, this spotlight may become a great advantage to the pro-democracy activists. Bahrain is one of a number of Middle Eastern countries to ban protests. Many of these bans have led to violence on civilians in the form of terrorist attacks. It is unfortunate that many governments oppress their citizens, because many governments throughout history (and especially recently) have learned that this can speed up and increase violence tremendously. The deaths of these two foreign workers are prime examples of this.

"Bombs in Bahrain's Capital Kill 2 Foreigners"

Blog 10: Tunisia's Challenges

Tunisia has been writing a post-revolutionary Constitution ever since it deposed Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali two years ago. Many people believe that this moderate Islamist-led state could transition into democracy. Recent violent events may make democracy unobtainable, however. These incidents have increased tension between the moderate Islamic government and liberal secularist opposition parties over the country’s role and what to do with extremists. Tunisia’s future is based upon the determination of this tension and the debate of democracy’s co-existence with Islam. Constitutional assembly elections occurred last year in which the moderate Islamist party, Ennahda, won. It has promised to respect liberal democratic values and not to enforce a severe Muslim moral code.

If Ennahda upholds its promise to respect liberal democratic values, then Tunisia will be a prime example of democracy working cooperatively with Islam. This may also help the sentiment toward the wars in the Middle East. While many people may not know why their countries are still fighting in their countries’ respective wars, this may be just what the world needs: hope. Not only does it provide hope, but it provides a feeling of accomplishment for those countries that are trying to establish democracies in the Middle East. Maybe other countries around Tunisia will follow its example and transition to a democratic government along with them. Even if Tunisia is the only country that transitions, it’s a win for democracy everywhere. However, if Ennahda backs out from its promise, it will be a terrible loss for countries that are fighting so hard for democracy.

"Tunisia's Challenges"

Blog 9: Ukraine's Troubling Trends

In its twenty-one years of independence, Ukraine has successfully modernized and reformed itself. Just a few years ago, the citizenry of Ukraine elected a new president, and the election was described as “the country’s freest and fairest national election.” Yet, Ukraine’s upcoming election may not share these same elements of freedom and fairness. With this upcoming election, citizens hold high expectations of the people in power. However, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE) has predicted a less than favorable outcome from recent trends including reports of administrative resources being used to favor ruling party candidates, media complications, a lack of representation for some political parties on district and precinct election commissions, the Central Election Commission’s closed pre-session meetings and the distribution of material or financial benefits to voters. Perhaps most significant is the convictions of opposition leaders in trials under par of international standards. Their convictions prevent them from the elections.

To ensure that the election is free and fair, the United States and the European Union are supporting voters with education, trying to train election officials and protecting both the rights of the candidates and voters. However, it’s not their election; this election belongs to Ukraine. The government’s officials and leaders currently in power will ultimately determine the freedom and fairness of the election. The United States and the European Union can only impose their values of freedom and fairness to a certain extent at which they can’t go beyond. It’s also up to the citizens of Ukraine to join together and demand that the election be fair and free.  

"Ukraine's Troubling Trends"

Blog 8: Libya Singles Out Islamist as a Commander in Consulate Attack, Libyans Say

            Libya recently declared that Islamist Ahmed Abu Khattala commanded the attack in September that killed American ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens. Khattala is a leader of the Benghazi-based Islamist group, Ansar al-Sharia. American Republicans are attempting to connect the attack to Al Qaeda in order to gain political momentum against Obama who claimed Osama bin Laden’s death crippled Al Qaeda.  However, Ansar al-Sharia operate unaffiliated with Al Qaeda and their priority is Libya. Ansar al-Sharia fought Colonel Qaddafi with other Libyan opposition, but unlike the other opposition, Ansar al-Sharia opposes electoral democracy and supports Islamic law.

            Even though Ansar al-Sharia consists of only one hundred to two hundred soldiers, it demands the attention of the whole world as a threat. Democracy in Libya is threatened by the Islamic group. Advocates for democracy within Libya’s borders are threatened as well. Khattala was imprisoned but didn’t have to renounce violence as a means of seeking political change because of a useless bid by the government’s release of prisoners to quiet down the emerging uprising. Politics around the world needs to become more effective and less lenient if the world wants to see less violence in it. Unless policies to reprimand violent prisoners are strict and uncompromising, violence will continue to be a part of the news, affecting every country around the world. Other countries need to take a lesson from Libya’s release of its prisoners as a preventative measure for further uprising. It’s impossible to lessen uprising by releasing commanders of it.

"Libya Singles Out Islamist as a Commander in Consulate Attack, Libyans Say"

Blog 6 (7?): Why Chavez Was Re-elected

                Hugo Chavez was elected president of Venezuela by a significant number of votes, which may not be the best outcome in United States of America’s viewpoint. Chavez is a dictator who often makes allies with America’s enemies. However, Venezuela has succumbed to the situations that many South American countries are in: when their president improves their living standards, they re-elect him. It doesn’t matter that the president has a part in the corruption of his country’s economy or that the president controls his country’s media. Aside from the United States of America’s protests of his election, however, Chavez insures the democracy of Venezuela and the protection of Venezuela from the imperialism of the United States of America. South America created the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, a new hemisphere-wide organization, rather than join the United States-dominated Organization of American States.

                By Chavez being re-elected, the Venezuelan people don’t have to worry about their country falling victim to the imperialism of the United States under the bad judgment of a new, inexperienced president. Chavez had gone through the trials and tribulations it took to stand up against the United States of America. With first-hand experience as president, there are no questions of his leadership in defense of Venezuelan’s democracy. However, in regards to his corruption and dictatorship within his own country, there is concern for the need of democracy in those areas. Yet, with Chavez, the country of Venezuela will be able to deal with their problems within their borders without the worry of having to fend off persecutors from outside.

"Why Chavez Was Re-elected"

Blog 5: Georgian Democracy on the March

                The “Georgian Dream” alliance, led by billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili of the United National Movement, has successfully implemented many “modernizing” policies in the government of Georgia. Yet, there are still many problems to be dealt with including prisoner abuse, control of press, and the fact that Georgia is one of the poorest nations of the world. Ivanishvili started out behind President Eduard Shevardnadze but he is now the opposition of present-day President Mikheil Saakashvili who implemented the successful “modernizing” policies. Whatever the platforms, the two candidates for presidency have reasserted democratic politics in Georgia. The international community will be greatly affected by the outcome of this election such as with the relations of Georgia and Russia on the line, but what it will affect the most are the Georgian people themselves.

             The democracy of the Georgian Presidential election is a great win for worldwide democracy. The competition between the two candidates creates the values of democratic politics. Prior to this coming election, there hasn’t been significant opposition to any incumbent. Some countries are stuck in this same predicament in which a president’s term is coming to an end and nothing looks promising to make any great amount of change. However, this race does promise a significant deal of change should Bidzina Ivanishvili win. It is the privilege of the Georgian people to nominate whomever they think is best for their country. Not too many countries have this privilege, and other countries will be able to learn how to get out of their own stagnant predicament from Georgia’s example. It all began with a democratic movement, and other countries may follow suit and start movements for themselves.  

"Georgian Democracy on the March"

Blog 4: Russia Demands U.S. End Support of Democracy Groups

            The United States of America finances many civil society programs in Russia, including those that are pro-democracy and those that promote public health. For the past twenty years, America has funded these programs for fifty million dollars a year. Russia is putting an end to this, however, in the Kremlin’s efforts to get America out of its affairs. One of the programs that that was funded by America was Golos, Russia’s only independent election monitoring group. They have been successful in outing corruption in elections, but without the funding from America, they may not be as successful in the future. The purpose of the funding was to help the country recover from the Soviet Union collapse by rebuilding the economy and helping health programs. Russia has prospered, however, and is now a world power, so the funding primarily goes to democracy and human rights programs. This transition was not received well by the Russian government, hence the Kremlin’s mission to get rid of the funding. Many citizens of Russia, however, including members of Golos, believe that free elections in Russia are not an American goal, but a Russian goal.

            Russia isn’t the only country that hasn’t gratefully received democracy building efforts by the United States. Other countries that aren’t very receptive include Egypt and Pakistan. Should America continue its ethnocentric efforts in other countries whose governments have antithetical principles and politics? There isn’t a definite answer to this question when there are citizens, such as those whom make up Golos, who disagree with their governments and want change that America’s help offers. It’s a very hot debate that doesn’t look like it will end anytime soon. President Obama has already found a way to fund the same amount of money to its Russian programs by privatizing the financing. America has pushed its democratic values on countries for a very long time now, and it doesn’t look like it will stop without a fight anytime soon.

"Russia Demands U.S. End Support of Democracy Groups"

Blog 3: India's Congress Party Leads in Donations

             The governing party in India, the Congress Party, received twenty billion rupees or $365 million in donations in the past seven years, more than twice the amount donated to the primary opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party. These estimates are the products of the Association for Democratic Reforms who spent fourteen months getting the data from public lawsuits and using India’s Right to Information Act to make parties disclose their figures. Indian law allows political parties to keep their source of donations from being disclosed when the donations are less than twenty thousand rupees. Political financing contributes a great deal to the corruption in India. Reports even show that political parties spend much more than what these figures reveal.

            It’s difficult not to view India’s corruption in political financing by contrasting it with America’s own campaign finance laws. By the demands for a purer form of democracy by citizens in the United States of America, there has been a great deal of improvement in the amount of corruption in politics. If Indian citizens continue to demand that their political parties be held accountable for their actions, then Indian politics might see a dramatic change at some time in their future. If Indian citizens continue to want to strive for a less corrupted form of democracy, then it is possible for change to occur. Citizens give power to their government, not the other way around. When government takes power that isn’t given to them, that is when corruption occurs.  The Indian government needs to recognize this so that India may have a better future with purer democracy.

"India's Congress Party Leads in Donations"

Blog 2: Plan for Change in Schools Stirs Protest in Hong Kong

            Compared to the whole of China, Hong Kong doesn’t look too formidable on a map. Yet, Hong Kong is significantly different from the mainland. Instead of the Chinese Communist Party, Hong Kong practices a multiparty democracy. Not only are its politics strikingly different, but Hong Kong’s main language is Cantonese, which is entirely different from China’s Mandarin. It doesn’t help, either, that public sentiment towards the government in Beijing is at its highest state of dissatisfaction since it was handed back over from Britain to China in 1997.

            Recently, citizens of Hong Kong have protested against contemporary Chinese history classes being taught in their city, which essentially is a creation of a mandatory national education. The classes are discretionarily taught in public schools now, but will be mandatory by 2015.

            Although Hong Kong is very different from the mainland, citizens of Hong Kong are still citizens of China as well. I cannot help but compare the similarities of Hong Kong and China to the United States of America and any one of its very diverse states. Although each state in America has its own accent, culture, history, traditions, and a number of other things, all fifty of them unite together to form the United States. It’s difficult to imagine what it would be like today if the South had been successful in succeeding from the Union, but I can fairly imagine that it would be more like Hong Kong’s situation with China. It may even have been very similar to what it had been like before the Civil War began, with the South’s great opposition and resistance to the Union. It’s very unlikely that Hong Kong would try to seceed from China, because it doesn’t have its own foreign relations or military defense. Yet, it would still be interesting to see what Hong Kong would actually succeed for, because it has many reasons to want to succeed, including freedom.

9/4/12 11:22 PM
"Plan for Change in Schools Stirs Protest in Hong Kong"

Blog 1: Crackdown Toll Seen as Syrians Bury Hundreds

            Every day, citizens in democracies around the world are able to exercise a fundamental right that they may not even think twice about during their daily routine: the right to have their voices heard in their own governments, which allows them to contribute to the decisions that ultimately affect their own lives. It’s not only possible, but even likely, that these same privileged citizens could go days, months and even years without considering their less fortunate neighboring countries that are not offered this same liberty.

Some countries use their own militaries to execute their own citizens rather than give citizens a say in government. Citizens of Daraya, Syria experienced this terrifying reality when their government decided it had had enough of being demanded freedom. The Syrian Army surrounded the town, allowing no one to leave. It even cut its food supply and electricity off. The rumor that rebels had an armory that held missiles inside the city was all that was needed to begin the execution of hundreds of men, women and children.

I cannot fathom the possibility of waking up one morning, surrounded by men who were about to execute me and everyone around me. It’s even more impossible to comprehend the possibility of those very men being members of my own country’s military. I am very privileged to live under the protection and promises guaranteed to me by the American government. Viewing the execution of Daraya, Syria from a macro-perspective, the world cannot let this happen. We cannot defend our inaction by blaming the victim. I cannot see any reason to execute any innocent person, as I believe the children executed in Daraya were. Many of the men and women were possibly innocent as well. No government, democratic or not, should exercise any sort of authority to execute its own innocent citizens. The world has come a long way to not let this happen, and I can't understand why it does.

8/28/12 8:44 PM
"Crackdown Toll Seen as Syrians Bury Hundreds"