World Politics News   Articles for World Politics Course

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has issued a scathing report on the treatment of Palestinian children by Israeli authorities.  Israel did not cooperate with the investigations that led to the report, asserting that it believed that the charges against it were politically motivated and not based upon a full understanding of the issues.  The report asserts that Palestinian children are routinely denied birth registrations, and are denied access to health care, education, and clean water.  Moreover, the report asserts that Israeli authorities detain Palestinian children, and that over a ten year period over 7,000 children ages 12-17 were held prisoner.

The protests in Brazil are continuing and are widespread and huge.  The protests were not really affected by the government’s decision to reduce the bus and subway fare hikes, and the clear sentiment of the protesters is that the government does not represent their interests.   In particular, the common theme of all the protests in 60 cities was that there is too much corruption in the Brazilian system, manifested most specifically in the preparations for the World Cup competition in 2014.

Almost as soon as they were announced, the scheduled talks between the US and the Taliban were cancelled.  President Karzai made clear that he was opposed to the talks, and the US decided that it could not embarrass its ally in Afghanistan.  The disarray surrounding these talks suggest that Secretary of State Kerry has yet to achieve the degree of coordination within the State Department necessary for effective diplomacy.  The sequence of events is hardly encouraging.

UMass has announced that it will be offering a new course in the fall.  The description is as follows:

The course is being taught by Mukul Sanwal, who will be here as a Five College visiting scholar. Sanwal’s bio is below, but needless to say that he has a wealth of practical and scholarly expertise, so this course should be terrific for students interested in global politics and/or climate change policy.

The exceptionally strong support from Qatar to the Syrian rebels is an interesting dimension to the Syrian civil war.   Qatar is committed to selling its huge reserves of natural gas to Europe and the most obvious method of transporting that gas is through a pipeline.  There are many pipelines possible, but the most promising route is through Syria and President Assad has blocked that possibility.   A new government in Syria may mean billions in new revenues for Qatar.

Officials in Rio de Janiero and Sao Paulo have rescinded the bus and subway fare increases that sparked nation-wide protests in Brazil.  It seems unlikely that the protests will end since they seemed to draw strength from a broader sense of inequality and corruption in Brazil.  We will have to see how the people respond to this concession, but some analysts suspect that the current government is not at risk just yet.

The number of refugees in the world has reached its highest level since 1994–45.2 million people.  These numbers include internally displaced people–people who have been forced to leave their homes, but who are still living in the same country.  The saddest part of this statistic is that half of the 45 million are children.  And this figure is only for the end of 2012 which means that many Syrian refugees are not included.  The primary cause of being forced to leave one’s home is war.  And few countries are opening their doors to these new refugees.

I was fortunate to have a very good article about the use of chemical weapons in war brought to my attention.  It is by MG Zimeta and it appeared in the New Internationalist entitled “Why are we so afraid of chemical weapons?”  It asks some very important questions about the so-called “red line” that need to be answered before the word decides that a case for intervention has been sealed.

The internationalization of the Syrian civil war has been accompanied by an increased emphasis on the Sunni-Shia divide.  The divide is not religious–it is an extension of power politics.  The Syrian government is supported by Iran, Hezbollah from Lebanon, and Russia.  The rebels are supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and, to a limited degree, the US and some European states.   The lineup of states is only partially religious, and the Muslim supporters of Assad are Shia, and the Muslim supporters of the rebels are Sunni.  But religion is being used as a way to mobilize support for both sides–the cause of the violence is not religious.

The US and the Taliban are finally going to negotiate face to face.  The Taliban have established an office in Qatar and have designated a delegation to conduct talks with the US.  The negotiations are long overdue, and it is not clear what substantive issues can be discussed since the US has signaled its intention to leave Afghanistan at the end of 2014.  But the discussions can minimize the potential misunderstandings associated with the US pullout.  More importantly, the negotiations will begin even thought President Karzai has publicly opposed them in the past.  The distance between the US and Karzai is an important precondition for forward movement in Afghanistan politics.

The protests in Brazil continue, but the reaction to them by President Dilma Rousseff is markedly different from Prime Minister Erdogan to the protests in Turkey. She is quoted as saying:  “Brazil woke up stronger today.  The size of yesterday’s demonstrations shows the energy of our democracy, the strength of the voice of the streets and the civility of our population.”  Whether she can effectively respond to the demands of the protesters remains to be seen, but her acknowledgement of the legitimacy of the act of protesting is encouraging.

There is an incredibly large number of protests going on in the world today.  My own view is that these protests are part of the backlash against globalization, a process which generally rewards capital more than labor.  But all protests are fueled primarily by local concerns.  Thanks to some former students, my attention has been drawn to the protests in Brazil which have occurred in most of the major cities in the country.  Here is a video explaining some of the issues motivating the protesters.

Pay attention to these protests.  Something very important is going on in the world.  It is too easy to dismiss the protests as unconnected or as the actions of a few disgruntled people.  Ask yourself: why are all these protests occurring at the same time with essentially the same issues.

Hassan Rouhani has been declared the victor in the Iranian presidential election.  He won with 50.7% of the vote which means that a run-off election will not be necessary.   Rouhani is regarded as the moderate candidate in the election and he had called for better relations with the West.   Ahmadinejad’s anointed successor, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, and the former nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, were regarded as the hardline conservative candidates and they were soundly defeated.  It is hard to say what kind of changes Rouhani might attempt–I suspect the most the West can expect is a change in the tone of Iranian foreign policy.  Major changes were unlikely given that all candidates had to be pre-approved by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his associates.

Pakistan has been rocked by violence in which the home of the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and a bus filled with female students going to school were bombed.  The Baluchistan Liberation Army claimed responsibility for the blasts, which also included a siege at the hospital where the students were being treated.  The attacks were in retaliation for the killing of rebel associates in the city of Quetta.   The violence is likely to continue and to worsen.

The Whitehouse has published a transcript of an On-the-Record Conference Call by Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes on Syria that was held on 13 June.  The transcript deserves a close read because it suggests that the “change” in Syrian policy occasioned by the assertion that Syrian has used chemical weapons against the rebels (the “red line” drawn by President Obama).   It actually suggests that there has been no major policy change other than to initiate contact with the Syrian Military Council, the military arm of the rebel forces.  President Obama is going to wait until the G8 meeting before he makes any definitive decision–at this point I would suggest that the US is going to remain aloof from the conflict.

The Institute for Economics and Peace publishes an annual report called the Global Peace Index (GPI).  The Institute takes a number of variables it believes are indices of violence or peace, and then ranks countries by how well they score on those attributes.  Sadly, the GPI suggests that the world has become a more violent place over the last five years, something which jibes well with my own sense of world politics.   The Index also measures the cost of containing violence and the Institute found that “…were the world to reduce its expenditure on violence by approximately 50 per cent it could repay the debt of the developing world ($4,076 bn), provide enough money for the European stability mechanism, ($900 bn) and fund the additional amount required to achieve the annual cost of the Millennium Development Goals.”

The failure of the world to intervene in the Syrian civil war has raised all sorts of questions about the “Responsibility to Protect”.  The issue of humanitarian intervention has always been fraught with difficult decisions, most notably the difference between a genuine humanitarian intervention and an intervention for self-interested reasons.  The conflation of these two goals was manifest in the Libyan intervention against Muammar Qaddafi and that experience has made an intervention in Syria more problematic.  The Council on Foreign Relations has a good background essay on the issue of humanitarian intervention.

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has issued a chilling warning to the protesters, stating that “We have not responded to punches with punches. From now on security forces will respond differently.”  It is not clear how the protesters will react to this threat, but Erdogan seems to be unmoved by the international criticism of his handling of the crisis thus far.   In the mean time, Erdogan’s party, the AKP, has announced that it will hold rallies in support of Erdogan this weekend.  Such rallies will likely attract many counter rallies with a subsequent risk of continued violence.

The protests in Turkey continue and the response of the government seems to be one of the iron fist.  The footage on the cable news networks suggests that both the protesters and the police are pretty disorganized.  But I have a colleague in Turkey right now and this is what she reports:

• At the risk of presenting a very incomplete and superficial account, here are a few points to share with you from my own personal experiences:
• An attitude of non-violence reigns among the protesters – they are very proactive in implementing this attitude – we can easily say that the resistance movement, as an entirety (at least in Istanbul, which is the only part I’ve seen) has a very peaceful character..
• Humor and creativity have been huge elements in manifesting demands, dissent, discontent.. I wish I could translate the many creative slogans that I’d seen – you’d die laughing..
• A large proportion of the protesters are very young (75% below the age of 30)
• The last I checked protests had broken out in about 67 cities
• These young people have made a point of building a new life in Gezi Park – they have shown that people can live peacefully side by side without the need for the state/govt and this crowd is truly diverse (in terms of religious beliefs, class, educational level, gender, demands, political views, experiences etc.).  It is complete with tents, neighborhoods, kindergarten, infirmary, market, library, garden etc. and all services/commodities are provided for free.  People take extra care to embody the kind of life/politics they want.  They are careful and responsible.. their reactions are unique and unexpected – one of the first things that people did, for instance, was to clean up Taksim & Gezi Park right after one of the worst clashes with the police where countless numbers of teargas cans covered the streets.
• People have regained their self-confidence in terms of mobilizing and being able to have a say in socio-political affairs.  They seem to have overcome their fears in this respect
• People have become immune to teargas:)
• These young people are insisting on building a movement (which looks more like building a new way of living) that refuses the more conventional tactics, symbols, strategies, language of politics
• It is not a secularist vs. Islamists movement at all.  there are many individuals and groups who first identify themselves as devout muslims (e.g. ‘anti-capitalist muslims’ are an active part of these protests) – respect for each other is a primary concern.  Several Leftist groups, for instance, guarded a group of muslims who were performing their ritual prayers the other night… The emphasis is on living together in harmony and respecting each others’ freedoms and right to be the way everyone wishes to be.
• The reaction of the PM has been one that needs to be put under the microscope, I think – it is quite peculiar.  But now it is time for less analysis and more immersion in this movement that has been unraveling (at least for me)!
• It is, of course, not all rosy and pink and perfect.  Many have been wounded, several people died, police is still intervening in a number of cities (and there’s absolutely no guarantees that they won’t start the teargas/watercannon/arrest practices again in Istanbul and elsewhere). But I’m not sure if it can get any better than this in practice in terms of what these young protesters have been trying to accomplish (which all unraveled spontaneously for the most part)

Her point about it not being a protest of Islamists vs. secularists is very important.  The American media is portraying the schism as religious, but given the young age of the protesters, I find this hard to believe.  We should all be on guard against the way the protests are used by the media–we should dig very deeply with open eyes into the unfolding events.

Iran will be holding its presidential elections next week.  The Council on Foreign Relations has published a very nifty list of issues and media references to the election that should serve as a good guide once we know the election results.  The bottom line is that the West should not expect any major changes no matter who wins.

The Russian Duma has passed a law making it illegal to equate straight and gay relationships as well as to distribute gay rights literature.  The bill passed 436-0.  The bill also contains special fines for foreigners within the country who break the law.

One of the nettling questions concerning the Syrian civil war is the role that Russia is playing.  It is clearly backing President Assad and is not afraid to send some of its most advanced military technology to support him.  That technology, sophisticated anti-aircraft weaponry place it squarely as an obstacle to the West’s (and Israel’s) main military advantage–airpower.   Interpreting Russian objectives is very difficult:  is it just a spoiler (something eminently believable about President Putin) or are there more strategic objectives?  One of the more interesting foreign policy analysts for the Asian Times, Spengler (a pseudonym) gives an insightful analysis of Russian objectives: that it believes that the Iraq War spelled the beginning of the end of American predominance in the Middle East and that Russian influence should replace American power.

The revelation that the US National Security Agency’s spying program (PRISM) has been shocking for many Americans since it seems to violate the American presumption of privacy.  That debate is an important one for the US, but the implications of the program are also quite serious for the rest of the world.  Of particular interest to the NSA are messages sent abroad, which means that the NSA has records on virtually everyone with access to a phone or a computer.  Needless to say, the rest of the world is quite upset, although there are very few options available to them aside from diplomatic protests.

According to the US Energy Information Agency, carbon dioxide emissions globally increased 1.4 in 2012.  The news is grim–it suggests that the world is one step closer to climate changes that may be irreversible.  The US and Europe actually decreased their emissions, but those losses were offset by increases in the emerging markets.

There were dueling protests in Turkey, as supporters of Prime Minister Erdogan held a rally in his support while anti-Erdogan protesters called for his resignation.  The roots of the anti-government protests are somewhat opaque–there is a sense that Erdogan has become increasingly authoritarian, but it is difficult to separate that feeling from a larger fear of the increasingly religiosity of the regime.  I would welcome comments from anyone who has a deeper insight into the causes of the protests since the mainstream media reports that the economic situation in Turkey is generally positive.  Anti-government protests under good economic conditions is somewhat rare politically.

Wealth inequality keeps getting worse over time.  The discrepancies between rich and poor are truly staggering in the world:  “29 million individuals, or 0.6% of those with any actual assets under their name, own $87.4 trillion, or 39.3% of all global assets.”    There have been, however, some changes in the geographic distribution of wealth, with Europe being the biggest loser.  This graph is from Credit Suisse:

Much of the European losses stem from the sovereign debt crisis, but Germany and France’s decline are notable.   The US and China continue to accumulate the largest number of ultra-high income earners.

Now for a little comic relief.  One of the great conspiracy theories of our time involves what is known as the Bilderberg Group.  To many, the Bilderberg Group is a secret shadow government that is, in effect, ruling the world  One of the principal people propounding this theory is a journalist/radio personality by the name of Alex Jones who runs a website called Infowars.com (I recommend the site if one needs a good laugh).  The BBC ran an interview with Jones which is pure gold, as only the BBC can do.  Watch the video and then have a good stiff drink.