Reflection Week 7- Hooligans Threaten Serbia EU Membership

In Serbia today thousands of “hooligans”, as described by the BBC, violently tried to disrupt a gay pride march in downtown Belgrade. According to the report more than 140 people were hurt and 200 were arrested. Since our reading of How Soccer Explains the World, I have noticed a significant difference in the cultural reactions and violent riots of Europe. Soccer was merely the underlining “punching bag” of anger for the Europeans to take out any violence or aggression they had on a different country. However, this type of violence as shown in Serbia is morally wrong and dangerous no matter what viewpoint an individual holds.

Sunday's gay pride march was viewed as a major test for Serbia's government, which has pledged to protect human rights as it seeks European Union membership. After our class visit to the European Union just a few weeks ago we were able to touch on some of the debates and conflicts that coincide with membership. Serbia's pro-European government still faces strong opposition from the conservative and nationalist forces opposed to the modernization and reform of the country. The opposition by the conservative group to reform the country could be damaging for the entire scope of the economic stability of Serbia if not addressed promptly. The parade was the first of its kind in Belgrade and was seen as a test of Serbia's readiness to become a more modern, open society after years of war in the 1990s caused by ethnic hatred.

These right wing extremist groups are devastating not only to the people within the country, but are a stumbling block for the opportunity for Serbia to join the EU. These extremists group argue that march is contrary to the values of predominantly conservative Serbia. Even though last year the Serbian parliament passed a bill banning discrimination against homosexuals, anti-gay sentiment still runs deep in the country.

Similar to the hooligan rights illustrated in How Soccer Explains the World, the country of Serbia needs to establish increased protection and security when they are informed that a parade is going to occur. My only hope is that because of these riots Serbia chances to be accepted in the European Union will not be drastically impacted.

Sources

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11507253

Reflection-Week #7

It was nice to have last week of from class and a structured blog post. While I enjoy our class and our discussions very much (believe me, they make my day most days) it was nice to have a change of pace. This semester, apart from WP, has become monotonous quite quickly.

Considering our “free time” this week, we really used every minute of the time preparing for our project. The simulation was a lot of fun in my eyes. I don’t know about my colleagues, but I really do learn better when we apply the concrete theories into a simulated experience. As much as I want to say that I was able to retain a good bit of the information that we discussed on Thursday, I can’t remember most of what happened. I do remember one question of mine that remained unanswered. During Ford’s fantastic presentation, they mentioned a new effort by Ford to use more recyclable materials in the production of their cars. These recyclable materials include soy-based foam for seats. My question is this: What happens to the growing number of the population of people who want to reduce their impact and purchase a Ford with these new materials but are allergic to soy? I applaud Ford’s (the company, not the representation of them in the simulation) desire to be more environmentally friendly, but I think that allergies must be taken into consideration when new products using natural substances are employed.

I’m looking forward to getting our first analytical essay out of the way. But that’s more something to speak on next week. Hooray for Fall Break. It’s going to be a much needed vacation.

Reflection week 7

This week, I went to hear a panel on the genocide in Sudan. Two men who escaped from Sudan and have been living in America since have organized a freedom walk, starting in New York, and ending at the capitol. I was planning to attend the walk and following rally, but had classes. The men who came and talked at the panel were very moving, and talked about the conflict and awful things occurring today in Sudan, and their reasons for walking.

I had written an informative speech on the topic of the “lost boys” from Darfur 3 years ago, but the issue has morphed into something slightly different since that time. When I first became aware of Sudan’s bloody conflict, I was 14, and had gone to see the documentary God Grew Tired of Us, regarding the situation of the lost boys in Sudan at the time (http://www.godgrewtiredofus.com). I was struck by the plight of these young boys, forced to walk over 1,000 miles for sometimes more than 5 years in order to escape the bloody civil war in their own country. They survived bombings, hyenas, starvation, dehydration, and had to deal with the abandonment of their families and the deaths of family members and friends. In the end, some of the lost boys made it out of the refugee camps to the United States, and a safer life, still sending money home from their new jobs to oppressed family members back in Africa. Although the situation of the “lost boys” has not changed much in previous years, the bigger issue today in Sudan is the overall genocide and war crimes being committed by the Janjaweed, which represents both the government and the Arab tribes. African farmers and other innocents in Darfur have been systematically being wiped out by these ruthless forces, all in the name of “ethnic cleansing”. This fighting has claimed 400,000 lives and displaced over 2,500,000 people, and over one 100 people continue to die each day; five thousand every month.

Perhaps the most upsetting component of the entire conflict is the lack of awareness in the world. Even though these atrocities have been ongoing since 2003, the international community remains ignorant and inactive. There are children being snatched from their villages, desensitized, and forced to commit violent acts against their own people, killing, raping and pillaging all before they hit puberty. And no one seems to care. In our news, we see headlines about facebook, celebrities, and the newest technology before we come across anything to do with Sudan. And what can we do? The thing is, Looking at this crisis from a realist perspective, you can’t really blame countries that don’t intervene. What do they have to gain? In most cases, nothing. If the US were to send troops into Darfur to attempt an aid mission, it may worsen the situation, and would be a waste of our troops and money. We wouldn’t gain any dominance by showing we are a compassionate nation, as Darfurians do not determine our standing on the world stage. Also, if we send our armies to help one country, we will be left less protected then before.

Reflection Week 6

Recently, with the number of quality and informative speakers our UC has been hearing from the State Department I have become interested in the way they interact with the American people on an everyday basis. When I read news articles now I think of the State Department as having a greater role and also keep in mind the Schools of thought of realism, constructivism, and liberalism impact society.

Just this afternoon the State Department released a statement that cautioned American travelers of potential dangers in Europe after what U.S. officials said was an assessment of information that al-Qaeda appeared to be plotting attacks on cities there. European authorities fell in line with the United States in urging increased caution. The United Kingdom raised its threat level for Germany and France to "high." The threat level for England had been raised earlier to "severe." Authorities in Europe have been warning travelers for the past three weeks that the danger of a terrorist attack in Europe has been higher than usual, but they issued no specific information on what new intelligence has been received to lead them to ratchet up the alert level.

The communication with different European countries and other global powers of the world has created cooperation and communication on the national level. According to liberalism international relation theory, liberals have argued that the chief goal of foreign policy should be to promote peace. However, when the countries in Europe have been reported to be under strict surveillance and terrorist threats, a liberalism IR theorist would turn to organizations to reflect the balance of power and protection of one another if additional threats should occur. While this view may not be the most efficient method, theorist under this school of thought would urge communication as an outlet to achieve security.

Just on Tuesday night the Eiffel Tower in Paris was evacuated following a bomb threat called in from a telephone booth. It was the second such alert at the tower in two weeks. A search by bomb experts found nothing unusual, and it was reopened within hours. On Friday, Sweden announced it has raised its threat alert to the highest level ever because of an increased threat of terror attacks. The threats in Europe are very concerning today. It reminds not just Americans, but the entire world that al-Qaeda is still very prevalent and a serious threat to society. It is therefore important for the United States and other global powers to remain in close watch of one another and to be ready to react if such a threat were to occur.

Sources

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11460335

Reflection-Week #6

I really enjoyed the discussion on Thursday. It’s nice to be moving out of the technicalities of learning about IR theory and actually applying it. Enloe’s article seemed to be the perfect way to begin looking deeper in to the field of world politics. For me, her focus on the marginalized was a deeper look into the problems of Latin America.

One thing that was mentioned in our discussion that I found interesting was the mentioning of Mexicans being the most marginalized people in the world. At the time it just didn’t sound right and I must disagree. While I do agree that the culture of Mexico continues to endure a strict hierarchy, which prevents the rise of the poor to the top of the wealth distribution period, many other countries around the world (including many Latin American countries) are significantly more marginalized than Mexico. Looking at marginalization strictly from an economic standpoint 90% of Latin American countries are below Mexico in a GDP per capita rating by the IMF. The only country that stands above Mexico is Argentina. The country that rounds out the list as the poorest in Latin America is Nicaragua. Currently, Mexico’s GDP per capita stands at $13,628. This is well above the world average of $10,355. Nicaragua’s GDP per capita in 2009 was $2,627. Now, there are no official statistics on the marginalization of a people, however, one of the most significant factors in the quality of life can be measured in the GDP. If Mexico has one of the largest GDP’s in Latin America, how can one claim for its people to be the most marginalized. Yes, I do agree that the plight of the Mexican people is significant. In addition to an economic standpoint, the cultural separation must be acknowledged. Since the time of the conquistadors a strict caste system has existed in Latin America. Those white Spaniards who immigrated to Central and South America became the top of the pyramid while the darker natives became the bottom. The mulattos filled out the very small middle class. Granted, the strict nature of this system has become more relaxed in many countries, the historical impact still divides the way Latin America operates. Therefore, I feel that it is a bit centric on an American point of view to consider our closest neighbors to be the only sufferers of marginalization.

Reflection Week 6

Enloe's article was interesting to read and discuss about, because what she was advocating was basically fundamentally modifying the international relations as we know it. The study, as we take it currently, can be summarized as the relationship between nation states and how, why, and what affects these relationships. The central aspect in trying to answer these questions is who holds the power and how it is used, and this is exactly what Enloe is arguing against; she advocates studying the fundamentals of these power; the people and what they do to flip the unequal power distribution.

One fact that I wanted to make clear was the statement I made during the class on Thursday when I tried to bring in economics because I feel like I just stumbled through and nobody understood it. What I meant to say was this: in economics, there is traditional and behavioral economics, where traditional one focuses on the big picture and tries to provide generalizations, while behavioral economics study the behavior of individuals and thus focuses on the more specific small pictures that make up the big picture. Same applies to the issue at hand here; traditional international studies is like traditional economics; it focuses on the general, big picture, and it inevitably bears the cost of not analyzing the small pictures that shifts around. Enloe's argument is more like behavioral economics in that it delves into domestic arena and how it affects the power at the top and how this affects the global arena.

One interesting thing that was brought up during the discussion was the question, isn't horizontal spread of power possible? In other words, is there a need to be the "powerful" and "marginalized"? To this question, I would say yes, unless you envision a perfect, ideal communism. Don't take me wrong here. I am not saying communism as we saw in history was good, but the ideals behind it, is basically horizontal spread of power. What I am saying is that if there is someone or some institution with power, then that power must come at a cost of someone else's capacity to wield that power. This ultimately means that if there is a powerful, then there is a corresponding powerless; if there is a strong, then there is a weak. Thus, unless we can achieve the idealistic communism with a snap of our fingers, then there will be a power struggle and there will always be the marginalized.

Reflection week 6

In class this Thursday, our discussion based off of Enloe’s article was really interesting to me. The tie-in with empowering the silent, by giving myself and Julie light sabers and the authority associated with them led me to think about Enloe’s argument from a new perspective. Although it is not my personal belief, I was struck by an idea in opposition to Enloe. What if, instead of advocating for the power of the marginalized, we instead focus on why the marginalized actually need to stay on the outside? The point can be made that, in order for society to remain stable and functioning, the disenfranchised people should remain on the fringes of society.

If you think about recent arguments being made by pro-immigration camps, they make points in refutation to those that believe immigrants steal jobs away from deserving and eager Americans. To counteract this, immigrants only take the low-paying jobs that are not in fact being filled by Americans. Many Americans do not want to take these jobs, and if immigrants and those willing to work for less did not occupy the positions, the jobs would not get done at all. This relates directly to marginalized people. Perhaps it is necessary to have inequality in society to ensure that a country’s infrastructure continues to function smoothly. As callous as this stance may sound, it makes sense.

In class Thursday, someone made the point that no matter how empowered the disenfranchised become, a new “lower class” will always take their place. For example, if the current group of marginalized people rise up and take power, whomever was overthrown will become the new marginalized group. In essence, looking at a the world from a realist standpoint, all that matters is how powerful an individual company is, how they treats their populace is in effect irrelevant to how they survive in the global world. Without this distinction in society, we have communism, and no matter how equal the population of a communist country may profess to be, communism is not a sufficient solution.