Khaled Azizi

2010-05-12T23:25:00.000-07:00

A Letter by executed teacher Farzad Kamangar:
“YOU ARE FORBIDDEN TO WRITE!”

I still remember when they first separated us from each other during our childhood when we played, only because you were a girl. You left the game with teary eyes and I still crave to sit and watch you as we play student and teacher.

My Dearest, this inattentive student in your classroom, in the midst of the tumultuous nationwide security scheme, is still craving to hold your hands in public while mumbling forbidden words of love and flashing many smiles, much like our childhood days. It is as if your childhood playmate does not feel the passing of years. It is as if they have not carried out all these projects to separate men from women.

Your childhood playmate is craving for equality in the decades of much oral and written warnings, handcuffs, courtrooms, and black veils. It is as if he doesn’t know that in a century where people of your gender are traversing space and are hugging the stars, we have [religious] men who wear green and dictate the type of shoes you must wear and measure the tightness of your pants to ensure the security of your land!

Your calm childhood playmate never grew up. Here, from behind the prison walls, he is craving the narrow alleys of the warm and quiet summers of our town, while the residents were all asleep. He is waiting for another opportunity to come to you as a guest where you will share your plate of watermelons with him.

My dearest, these days, your playmate is terribly wanting to get away- as if he still doesn’t know that you have reached the age when you can receive inheritance! As if he doesn’t want to believe that some women are awaiting their stoning sentences. He doesn’t want to believe that in a world where thoughts, rights, freedom, dignity, humanity, and the motherland are on sale, a woman still does not own her own body.

By the way, how did all this inequality and separation begin?

Did it begin when Eve’s “ferocious craving” led her to ignore God’s orders and chose Earth as a place of her suffering? Or was it when for the first time a little girl let her hair loose in the wind? The wind ran through her hair and took with it the secrets of her loose hair from town to town and whispered them in the ears of the mountains and the trees. Did this “great travesty” cause the wrath of the tribe? Maybe not! When the spring water saw the reflections of a beautiful little girl in itself and fell in love with her and whispered about her beauty in her ears? And the river, mesmerized, told of this love story to the seas. Maybe all these stolen glances did not go down well with the “men of honour” who grounded the little girl in her home.

Or was it that when we shook hands with nine year old angels, the foundation of our beliefs were destroyed? And the traditions were used as a justification to make you a second class citizen.
Or no, maybe when your beautiful smell took me, your playmate, to the back alleys of my memories and chased my childhood friend Sara in order to find traces of love in the first glances and the last tears. Clashing with the unwritten “laws of nature”, we became [religious] strangers to each other.

I don’t know. I don’t know where it all started. But in my dreams, I whisper a thousand times the unfinished sentence that I was supposed to recite to you at our first dawn together- at a time when you were going to stare into my eyes with your ever innocent look and I would be mesmerized and tell you, “Congratulations on becoming a woman.”

They didn’t let us see each other even one last time. Now, from behind prison bars, I am not able to see the grandeur of the love of life in your eyes. While under their heavy and watchful eyes, you are still squeezing your little doll as a sign of your love and faithfulness to your childhood playmate, and you are not denying your love.

But now, as a sign of gratitude for the thousands of years of being a woman and as a sign of gratitude to thousands of memories and unfulfilled dreams, I join the “Campaign for Equality for Women” with a single signature: one signature to honor your womanhood and being a women.

Sara’s childhood playmate,

Farzad Kamangar

2010-05-12T23:19:00.000-07:00

For those who represent a nation- For Farzad, Ali & Farhad

By MAJID TAVAKOLI

They announced that Ali was being sent to ward 209. The phones in the halls were disconnected. I tried to call from the phone in my hall, but that too was disconnected.

When we went upstairs, Farzad said that they had announced that he too will be moved to ward 209, but it turned out to be a lie, as they ended up moving him to ward 240.

The announcement on Saturday afternoon had worried all of us. They usually announce the executions for political prisoners on Saturdays. An intense sadness took over my body, but Farzad kept saying that nothing was going to happen. He said they were only going to ask him a few questions. He knew what was awaiting him, but as always, he had a positive attitude and tried to make the best of the situation.

It was hard to believe. Until moments before, we were in the library together. Ali had stopped playing volleyball. He had washed his face and was getting ready. It was very difficult and painful. It was around this time every day, after Ali had worked out, that he would come over so we could study physics together. He intended to take the last two exams left so he could receive his diploma in June.

He had such high spirits that no one could ever believe that he was on death row. If you had a hard time believing Ali’s predicament, then it was impossible to fathom Farzad’s. He too was preparing for the university exams. The story of his engagement and wedding were also so heartfelt. It broke my heart when I thought about the courage of the young girl who was so taken by Farzad’s attitude and spirit that she married a person on death row.

It wasn’t the first time that I was witnessing my friends in this state. It was the summer of 2008 and I had met with friends in Evin prison’s ward 209. The first person I saw after my days in solitary confinement was Farhad. He was sharing the drawings of his young child. His incredible determination was a great inspiration to all of us. After a while, I also met Ali and Farzad. Ali always exuded calmness and Farzad was a solid pillar amongst us. He represented an entire nation alone and he stood proud and tall. He was always happy. he laughed and was hopeful, despite the hardships, the humiliation, the physically-grueling interrogations, and the unjust sentences by the Revolutionary Court. I was once again witnessing him in that similar predicament.

It was during the Sanandaj arrests that Farzad was transferred to Evin prison for the second time. He was wearing a neck brace, his shoulder was dislocated, and his teeth were broken, but his determination was stronger than ever.

When they transferred Ali and Farzad from Rajai Shahr prison to Evin’s ward 240 for execution, their presence in section 7 was excuse enough for those of us who were in section 8 to try and visit them regularly.

As they sat in solitary confinement waiting for the arrival of 4:00am, I was weak and on hunger strike. I was fully aware of why they had been transferred and I was unable to do a thing. Farzad kept encouraging me. He would say that everything is going to be okay and Ali continued to be calm, despite all the hardships.

During all the days when I was free, the uplifting meetings with Farzad and listening to his warm voice were a source of strength for my mother. It made me realize that a human being can achieve anything, even in the worst circumstances. But they killed my older brother, a Kurdish brother whom I loved with all my heart. He was my brother and my teacher- a teacher who represented resistance. He was someone who represented all of Iran’s children. I learned from him the ABC’s of resistance against the worst form of torture, deceit, and false accusations against people. I learned the role that faith plays in a person’s life when they face such hardships. I came to the realization that continuous visits to interrogation rooms and the narrow halls of solitary confinement may defeat your body, but they will never make you surrender or take away your soul, your thoughts, and your opinions. He was my teacher. He was a teacher who taught me to always smile and said that regardless of our differences, we can treat everyone humanely with the respect they deserve.

Now he is gone. He was unwilling to say goodbye and kept repeating, “I will see you tomorrow.” He didn’t let me embrace him and kept repeating, “I will see you tomorrow.” I know that he took those courageous steps together with his friends as he approached his final destination. He promised repeatedly to never allow the hatred of tyranny to break his spirits and remove the stool from underneath his feet. He promised to remove the stool from underneath his feet by himself. He never allowed the long reaching arms of tyranny to take his life. I am certain that he kept his promise. I am certain that he also smiled in the face of death – a heroic smile that has left us, but will remain eternal.

He and his innocent friends are gone, but their memories will live on forever. He left knowing that he was a good person and became an eternal teacher- a teacher who now represents resistance in the history books. He is a pillar of hope. He is an ever-lasting encouragement and beacon of light for all those who seek freedom. He is no longer with us, but we can still remember his memory. We will remember the time when the Ministry of Information was forced to kneel in front of the spirit of an entire generation; a Ministry of Information that will finally be forced to confess to its crimes so that when there are arrests after Farzad’s, the summer of 2008 is never repeated in Evin’s ward 209.

They had removed the airway passages and taken away our mail box. They believed that they could silence our spirits, but Farzad kept smiling in protest, demonstrating that we will stand strong and tall forever.

They took the hostages in order to demonstrate that they are tired of our resolve. But our friends showed that the power of tyranny is nothing in comparison to the strength and resolve of the brave children of Kurdistan. Farzad always stated that his interrogator said, “You are laughing in our faces when you continue to study and plan to marry.”

Farzad, Ali, and Farhad’s fighting spirit was incredible. I sit today in the memory of a few friends who were more than just a few. Farzad was a nation to himself, Ali was a great friend to all, and Farhad was a mountain of strength. Farzad was such an inspiration that when we were feeling depressed and down, even though he was ordered to stay away from other political prisoners, knowing that he was present brought hope to all those in section 7. I would use any excuse to go to the library, even for a few hours, just to be next to Farzad.

Even though Farzad left us hopeful for the future, he was nevertheless disappointed about a few things. He regretted the fact that a group of people want to confiscate everything and arrest everyone. He was writing a letter entitled, “I am an Iranian. I am an Iranian from Kurdistan.” His goal was to express the fact that even though being a Kurd meant being subjected to oppression and deprivation, the plight of the Kurdish people with regards to their ethnicity was an important one. He tried very hard to bring attention to the challenges in Kurdistan and the issues associated with ethnicity and minority rights. He was worried and sad until the last moments, that because of differences in opinion, attention would not be paid to the ethnic and human rights of the Kurdish people.

He was an offspring of the people of Kurdistan and worried about their fate. When he left us, he would have wanted someone to assure him that his ideals and lessons will bear fruit one day. He wanted everyone to know that if the violence, deprivation, and oppression in Kurdistan does not end, many more innocent people will become hostages and be arrested under false accusations, just like he was.

Oh, how evil is tyranny when it is fearful that it will no longer be able to commit crimes- The crimes that lead Farzad to teach us to resist? They feared his smile and perseverance and that is why they disconnected the phones.

It was this fear that led them to cancel any gatherings and distribute sweets and dates. It was this fear that led them to insist that we not talk of him, even though nothing they said stopped us from keeping his memory alive and strong. It was this fear that led them to resort to martial law. It was this fear that led them to shout that they had executed terrorists, when everyone was fully aware that those executed were not terrorists. They are fully aware that there were no bombs involved. They know how they lied to incriminate Farzad. They also know why they sentenced him. Even though they killed him, they were unable to destroy his spirit. Because his death allowed us to realize that tyranny can never take away the children of our nation without paying a price.

Today I went to the library once again. Farzad and Ali were not there. Farzad was not there to tell me about past memories and our friends. He was not there to bring back hope, to sit with me and discuss ways to end this suffering and tyranny. He was no longer there so we could talk about the possibility of a bright future and sing a song of freedom.

Ali was not there to bring calm and serenity to the library as we sat leafing through the books. Even though they were not there, the memories of Farzad, Ali, and Farhad remained strong. I promised Farzad I would not cry as it would only glorify oppression and tyranny. But I want my brother Farzad to know, that like all the other children of this nation, I have made a vow to never forget him and continue his cause for freedom.

Majid Tavakoli

Evin PrisonMay 11, 2010
Translation: Negar Irani Persian2English.com

2009-05-20T06:52:00.000-07:00

Have “Southern Strategy” and “values” wedge politics underpinned US Republican federal electoral successes? How and Why?

By: Suheyla M Ahmed

28 April 2008

The aim of this essay is to demonstrate the outcomes of Southern strategy and values for the US Republican Party resulting in the Republican federal electoral success. It will be argued that the Southern Strategy and Values wedge politics have underpinned the successes of the Republican in the election during many elections. The main focus will be on the 2000 election where Georg W Bush unexpectedly won the election and defeated Albert Gore the Democrat’s candidate. In order to understand how the southern strategy underpinned the republican federal electoral success it is necessary to go back to the history when Richard Nixon used this strategy to insure votes for republicans in the Southern States. The Southern strategy was a tactic which the Republican president Richard Nixon employed successfully to win over the Democrat candidate. Value is an issue which is influencing Americans political behavior is culture and value to an extent where it is argued that Americans politics is becoming more value-based. Gender, race and religion play important role in Americans political life, particularly during national elections.

Different sources have set different times for the first appearance of the Southern Strategy, for instance Chapin (2001), believes that the phrase Southern strategy was first introduced by political analyst Kevin Phillips more than three decades ago, accurately described the political situation of those years. Between 1948 and 1964 the South which once was a supporter of the Democratic Party was “up for grabs” (Chapin 2001).

For the Republican party, the aim of the southern strategy was to win the white working voters in the south through peeling away white voters in the heavily Democratic South (Benedetto 2005). It began in the mid-1960s, when Republicans blamed pro-civil rights Democrats for racial conflict and other racial problems and used this to encourage isolated white voters in the Southern states to vote for Republican (Benedetto 2005). To be more precise the Republican Party took advantage from racial polarization to gain more votes (Benedetto 2005).

The aim of developing the Southern strategy was to take advantage of the upheaval in the Southern Structure and its major goal was to transform the Republicans’ reputation as the party of Licoln, Yankees and carpetbaggers into the part that protects the white interests (Aistrup 1996, p.8). Assessing the Southern strategy it is agreed that it has been successful as presidents (Aistrup 1996, p.6)

As Democrats’ main focus was on Blacks’ issues, the Republicans used the opportunity to appeal to the angry White working men class; this resulted in driving a wedge between the less wealthy whites and minorities and shattered any possibilities for class politics (Stonecash 2000, p.732).

The South has been the battleground for the Republicans and Democrats. From 1880 to 1944, the 11 Confederate states only twice did not vote as a block for the Democratic Party (Chapin 2001). Thereafter a solid South has only appeared for four times, all for the Republican candidates which were Nixon as well as Reagan in their 49-state landslides, for Bush in 2000 and his father in 1988 (Chapin 2001). The 11 Southern states have not often been required to provide the electoral margin for presidential candidates (Chapin 2001). Precisely during the entire post-Civil War period, only four candidates had required Southern electoral votes to prevail over a loss and these candidates were Grover Cleveland , Woodrow Wilson , Jimmy Carter in 1976 and George W. Bush in 2000 (Chapin 2001).

Reconstruction was the first Southern strategy of the Republican Party (Chapin 2001). In this process blacks were combined with traditional poor whites in order to create a competitive political system (Chapin 2001). It resulted in successful election for President Ulysses Grant in 1872, the first election in which all the so called disloyal states voted again, and Rutherford Hayes in 1876 (Chapin 2001). After a compromise in 1877 which in it, it was agreed to withdraw Northern troops from the South “this strategy sputtered to a halt” (Chapin 2001).

There have been times where the candidates have had no need to employ Southern strategy, for instance in 1896 the Republicans won elections without having the votes from the South (Jim Chapin 2001). From 1872 to 1896 there was a slow decline in the Southern share of the national vote (Chapin 2001). William McKinley's great victory is seen to be a new era in which the Republican majority in the North was so great in number that there was no need for the Southern blacks (Chapin 2001). The South disenfranchised its blacks and many poor whites quickly (Chapin 2001).

In 1964, the Republicans changed their Southern strategy to a new model which was providing direct support for their Southern opposition to desegregation (Chapin 2001). This strategy cost them the outer South, but it gained them the Deep South. In addition, it detached the party from blacks, and that is proved to be permanent (Chapin 2001).

African Americans have long voted for Democrats, therefore “Republicans have been working aggressively to build the party's support among African-Americans”. Despite Republicans’ effort, during the 2000 election, President Bush only received 9% of the black vote (Benedetto 2005). According to Chapin (2001) there is no need for the Republicans to employ the Southern strategy, because their strategy has worked and now the Southern States have become the base of the Republican Party.

In the 2000 election, Bush was sure of Southern support, therefore his campaign concentration was on winning the North (Chapin 2001). In the election, Republicans’ Southern strategy in Florida was to reject as many votes from minorities and Black people as they can through different methods, such as using “outdated machines, improper counts and tabulations, inadequate access to individuals with disabilities and lack of translators for immigrants” (Hines 2002, p.72). Due to the fact that the governor of Florida was Jeb Bush who had taken many conservative actions against the Blacks, the plan was successful and Georg Bush won the election (Hines 2002, p.72). Studies show that there are evidence which suggest that there were a relationship between race and rejected votes in the 2000 presidency election. It is argued that compared to affluent counties with large white population, counties with large minority groups had a much higher rate of ballot rejection (Hines 2002, p.72).

According to Allen (2005) in 2005 the Republican National Committee chairman stated that Republican’s Southern strategy which was to exploit racial conflict for votes was wrong and referred to the two parties’ racial polarization as ‘not healthy for the country’ (Allen 2005).

It is argued that in recent years the American politics have become more value-based (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.751). Election studies from 1980 to 1992 show that cultural orientations have significant influence on American’s political behaviour, particularly when these cultural orientations are defined by religious traditionalism rather than material-postmaterial value priorities (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.751). Religion and religious-based cultural differences play a powerful role in contemporary American politics (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). Unlike many other democratic industrial societies, religion still plays an important role in the US and the country continues to be very religious (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). In its policies Democratic Party is increasingly associated with cultural liberalism while Republican Party is becoming more culturally conservative (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.752).

Surprisingly, in America politics cultural issues such as abortion, women’s rights, prayer in public schools, and homosexual rights are in the forefront (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.752). To set an example, Bush’s popularity was declining until before the 2004 election, when the issue of gay marriage came out in a perfect time for Georg Bush’s re-election as “it enabled the Republicans to obtain the necessary signatures to place anti-gay marriage referenda on the ballot in eleven states including the greatest prize of all Ohio” (Landy 2005, p.100). The referenda were passed in all the eleven states and this clarified that the majority of the Americans disregard of colour and race were against gay-marriage (Landy 2005, p.100). Bush’s position was clear as he was against gay- marriage therefore the voters’ decision to vote for Bush was guaranteed (Landy 2005, p.100).

It is argued that “the Republican Party is becoming the political home of religious traditionalists while the Democratic Party is becoming increasingly attractive to religious liberals and secularists” (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). Campbell (2006, p.104) stresses the role of religion and culture in Americans political life stating that American politics is further divided along religious or cultural lines. Kemmelmeier (2004, p.218) states that most candidates from Democratic Party are more liberal while candidates from Republican Party are more conservatism. Some studies show that compared to Democrat candidate supporters, Republican candidates supporters are higher in Authoritarianism (Kemmelmeier 2004, pp.218-219). In times of election, the evangelicals vote for racially conservative candidates rather than liberal candidates as they believe that seculars undermine their values therefore the white voters feel threatened by the existence of Africa Americans in their community (Campbell 2006, p.104).

The concern of Christian religious conservatives is not with the focus of new elites on nonmaterial concerns, but rather with their systematic secularism which refers to their “rejection of traditional religiosity and its associated cultural norms and the public and private policies” (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). This secularism had some consequences such as “the Supreme Court decisions to remove prayer from the public schools, banning state restrictions on abortion rights and the threatening of traditional sex roles and sexual morality by the motion picture industry” (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). These policies and their threat to traditional religious and moral values have resulted in political mobilization of conservative evangelical and fundamentalist Christians into American politics (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.753). It is argued that religiosity and value priorities are almost independent of each other (Layman and Carmines 1997, p.754).

It is stated that Republican identification is more associated traditional religiosity, while Democrats identification is more associated with Post-materialism. However, except the year 1984, religious traditionalism has had stronger effect than value priorities in American politics (Layman 1997, p.759). From 1980 to 1992 Party identification has been the most reliable predictor of the presidential vote, which has had the largest impact on the probability of voting Republican in each year. Except for 1984 election, race has been the only one of the noncukural variables to have a significant impact on the vote. It is now more obvious that cultural orientations have impact on American political behavior, but this is argued to be true only if these cultural orientations are defined by religiosity and not by Material—Postmaterial value priorities. In 1984, 1988, and 1992 elections religious traditionalists were more likely to vote for Republican presidential nominees, while value priorities did not have any impact on vote choice in any of these years (Layman and Carmines 1997, pp.762-764).

According to Layman and Carmines (1997, p.767) “when citizens are concerned about cultural matters, it is their religious orientation and not their level of Post-materialism that plays a principal role in shaping their political behavior”. Immediately, after the 2004 election commentators explained that Bush’s victory was due to the Republicans’ emphasis upon moral traditionalism and their debt to the religious rights (Ashbee 2005, p.210). One source has stated that ‘for Bush mandate, look no further than abortion and gay-marriage’, this shows the importance place of moral values amongst the American voters (Ashbee 2005, p.210). It is stated that Bush’s election campaign was based on morals values and in particular on national discussion over abortion rights and gay-marriage (Ashbee 2005, p.212). However other sources suggest that Bush’s victory is not due to Republicans’ emphasize on values but there are other reasons such as having a stronger national security (Ashbee 2005, p.215). Fear of another terrorist attack might have been a reason for mothers to vote for Bush in order to assure the safety of their children (Ashbee 2005, p.215).

Republican Party is not popular among women, therefore in America’s politics women are more attracted to democrats rather than Republicans and this has created a gender gap because men are more and more attracted to Republicans while women have stayed with the Democrats (Norrander 1999, p.566). This is true in both the North and the South as white men have left the Democratic Party to join the Republican more than women (Norrander 1999, p.574). The only difference between the North and the South is that both men and women have become more republicans and less Democratic (Norrander 1999, p.575). Additionally, the gender gap in the South mainly began when men dramatically moved away from the Democratic Party into the Republican Party (Norrander 1999, p.575).

In conclusion, in a number of elections the Southern strategy has underpinned the Republicans’ federal electoral success. The Republican Party has employed different Southern Strategy in different times all aiming at creating race conflict in order to win the poor white working men’s vote. The Republicans’ first Southern strategy was reconstruction. In regards to value as an element which is believed to be influential on elections, it is argued that American politics is becoming more value based. In addition, religion plays a great role in Americans political life to an extent where it affects their voting preferences as well. White evangelicals believe that seculars -the Democrats -are a threat to them therefore they rather vote for the Republicans. The Republican Party is said to be conservative while the Democratic Party is more Liberal. Evidence show that women tend to support Democrats while men support Republicans and it is the case in both the South and the North. The reason is because the Democratic Party shows a secular position on cultural values as well as economic and political issues.

References:

Aistrup, J.A 1996, The Southern strategy Revisited: Republican Top-down Advancement in the South, University Press of Kentucky, USA.

Allen, M 2005, RNC Chief to Say It Was “Wrong to Exploit Racial Conflict for Votes, viewed 10 April 2008,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html.

Ashbee, E 2005, The 2004 Presidential election, ‘Moral values’, and the Democrats’ Dilemma, Political Quarterly Publishing Co. Ltd, 76(2), UK.

Benedetto, R 2005, GOP: 'We were wrong' to play racial politics, USA TODAY, viewed 15 April 2008,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-14-GOP-racial-politics_x.htm.

Campbell, D.E 2006, Religious “ Threat” in Contemporary Presidential Elections, The Journal of politics, vol 68, No. 1.

Chapin, J 200, Why the GOP's Southern Strategy Ended, Part I, NewsMax.com Wires, viewed 10 April 2008,
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/23/172905.shtml.

Hines, R.I 2002, The silent voices: 2000 Presidential election and the Minority Votes in Florida, Western Journal of Black Studies, vol 26, No.2, USA.

Kemmelmeier, M 2004, Authoritarianism and Candidate Support in the U.S. Presidential Elections of 1996 and 2000, The Journal of Social Psychology, 144(2).

Landy, M 2005, Election in wartime: the president under siege, Prospective on Political Science, vol 34, No.2, USA.

Layman, G.C & Carmines, E.G 1997, Cultural conflicts in American politics: Religious Ttraditionalism, Postmaterialism, and U.S. Political Behavior, The Journal of politics, 59 (3), USPIR Reader, the University of South Australia, Adelaide.

Norrander, B 1999, The valuation of gender Gap, Public Opinion Quaterly, 63(4), USA.

Stonecash, J.M, Brewer, M.D, Peterson, R.E, Mcguire, M.P & Way, L.B 2000, Class and Party: Secular Realignment and the Survival of Democrats outside the South, Political Research Quarterly, 53(4), USA

Australian federalism needs major reforms to be effective in the 21st century: Options for reform

2009-05-04T20:20:00.001-07:00

This statement comes from the fact that as time has passed by the world has changed and for the Australian federal government in order to be effective it needs to make major reforms and changes. Arguably this statement is shaped by some facts such as globalization and regionalism as well as other major changes and developments nationally and internationally. As political systems face challenges such as policy challenges politicians think of change and reform as a way of tackling these new challenges. Australian federalism has come across some important policy challenges such as water policy, tax policy and other constitutional issues. In this paper it will be argued that federalism needs to go under some major reforms in order to be effective in the ever changing political and economic and social system of the world, particularly at a time where the old system of federalism does not serve the citizens well. It will also be argued that federalism can still be an effective way of governing Australia as federalism has been successful so far, but there are some challenges and problems which need to be addressed. At the end of the paper some recommended options for reform will be discussed and highlighted.

In order to discuss federalism and reforms in Australian federalism first the term federalism needs to be defined. Federalism is a form of government system which is used in some important countries such as the United States, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Russian Federations (Lovell et al 1998, p.61). In a federal system, power is divided over existing territories and at least two levels of governments govern the country (Lovell et al 1998, p.61). One is central and the other one is based on state (Lovell et al 1998, p.61). This definition is a general definition, but all federal systems have their own distinctive character. In this case Australian federalism is distinctive from other forms of federalism around the world, although it has borrowed the idea of creating a federal system from other federal countries, particularly USA.

Generally federalism is viewed as one of the most effective governmental systems in dealing with "the twin pressures produced by globalisation – the upward pressure to deal with some matters at the supra-national level and the downwards pressure to bring government closer to the people" (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.4).

Federalism was first chosen for Australia in 1901 as a way of governing a number of states under one national government. According to Singleton et al (2006, p.77), one major reason for choosing a federal system of government for Australia is "the desire for a political arrangement of convenience, where existing interests and tensions make power sharing imperative if the various groups involved are to come together at all". Historically, the founding fathers chose federalism for Australia to protect the distinct responsibilities which were previously held by the colonies of that time (Singleton et al 2006, p.77). Also they wanted to create a national government in order to take care of issues such as foreign affairs and defence (Singleton et al 2006, p.77). Additionally, at that time federalism was the best option for Australia as arguing on other options was very difficult (Singleton et al 2006, p.77). Federalism has been beneficial to Australia in many ways. Some of the benefits of federalism for Australia are "protection for the individual by checking the concentration of power", "choice and diversity" and many other benefits (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.8).

For many years, federalism in Australia has been criticised (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.4). Over time the Commonwealth has used its financial powers as well as increased legislative power to intervene in states and their responsibilities (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.4). Such action by the Commonwealth undercuts the benefits of federalism for Australia and also worsens problems such as duplication and excessive administrative burdens (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.5). While in Australia centralism seems to be the order of the day, in the rest of the world, all steps are taken towards decentralisation and federalism (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.4).

Despite many advantages for Australia, federalism has been criticized in terms of "overlap and duplication", "vertical fiscal imbalance", "insufficiencies when individual states have different rules" and "too many tiers of government" (Singleton et al 2006, p.100). It is argued that federalism in this country has not served its citizens well (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.30). There are some internal and external factors which undermine federalism in Australia and pose the question of whether federalism is the best system to govern Australia. External factors are regionalism, a more mobile workforce, privatization of public sector, globalization, internationalization, the republican issue and the difficulty and slow process of making states to implement policies Policy challenges as internal and globalization and regionalism as external factors (Singleton et al 2006, pp.118-119).

The following quote by Tony Abbott is a starting point to argue for reforms in Australian federalism. Abbott (2008, p.1) states:

Federalism means that bribing the states is the only way to improve water management in the Murray-Darling basin, to achieve academically-rigorous, national standards in schools or to reform public hospitals. In important respects, the federation is broken and does need to be fixed.

The above quote reaffirms the main statement of the paper which states that Australian federalism needs to go under major reforms. According to Williams, each year the federal structure costs Australia around $9 billion in wasted taxes. The inadequacies and bottlenecks of this structure are a barrier to the future prosperity of Australia (Williams 2008, p.1). The result of a federal system where Commonwealth has control over most of the money and States are in charge of expensive and growing areas such as education and health has usually been "a chronic underfunding of essential public services, along with an unfortunate misdirection of some of those funds, and excessive administrative duplication and red tape" (Williams 2008, p.2). These issues and many more have raised voices to bring about reform.

In late 1989, two areas which were "fiscal and constitutional federalism" were proposed to be reformed (Galligan and Walsh 1991, p.4). According to Galligan and Walsh (1991, p.4), these areas needed reform in order for the Australian federalism to continue its vitality in the economic and political environment of the twentieth century. Additionally, Galligan and Walsh (1991, p.15) stress the need for "a fundamental rethink" in Australian federal fiscal arrangements.

There are several other recommendations for reform in Australian federalism. For instance Twomey (2008, p.2) recommends focusing on three matters. The first one is "the relocation of powers and responsibilities between the levels of government (Twomey 2008, p.2). Second is the improvement of mechanisms for intergovernmental co-operation and third is the reform of financial relations between Commonwealth and State (Twomey 2008, p.2). In explaining the first area of focus to reform, Twomey (2008, p.3) suggests that matters such as housing, police and education should be under the control of states' governments while national government should deal with matters such as defence, foreign affairs and social security which equally affects all Australians. Twomey (2008, p.5) introduces the third area of focus as the most important and necessary area to reform in Australian federalism. According to Twomey (2008, p.5) two problems exist in that area. The first one is that the Commonwealth collects more than eighty percent of all taxes in Australia, while states' governments are responsible for services such as hospitals, schools, police as well public transport. Therefore, in performing their constitutional functions states remain dependent on Commonwealth grants (Twomey 2008, p.5).

The areas for reform in Australian federalism could be summed up as six reform ideas (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.30). First, the roles and responsibilities of states and commonwealth need to be defined. Second, Commonwealth and states must collaborate in national economic reform. Third, the ways in which GST revenue across the states is allocated need to be changed. Fourth, vertical fiscal imbalance needs to be addressed. Fifth, "specific purpose payments (SPPs)" which is given to states from the Commonwealth needs to be reformed. Sixth, state taxation needs to be reformed (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.30). It is stated that the current government is only interested in two of the above ideas to reform which are reform of SPPs and State-Commonwealth collaboration in national economic reform (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.30).

Many of the suggested reforms could be achieved through co-operation and the transfer of power in areas necessary (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.5). Withers and Twomey (2007, p.5) also suggest that a constitutional convention could be a useful way to reach consensus on these reforms and to propose any constitutional amendments which could improves and develops the operation of the Australian federation in future (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.5). Singleton et al (2006, p.101) points out that the national and states' governments cooperate in many ways in order to form and implement policies for joint interest, however Abbott (2008, p.1) argues that further and better cooperation is demanded and needed for Australian federalism to perform better.

Although Australian federalism needs major reforms, making changes in the constitution is difficult as it has been written in a form which does not allow changes and reforms easily (Jaensch 1994, p.296). Similarly Mathews (1975, p.9) describes the Australian constitution as "inflexible" and points out that the only way to amend it is through referendum. However, Twomey (2008, p.7) suggests that Australia needs to take necessary steps towards reform in its federalism in order to position the country for the future. The current government may take steps towards a cooperative federalism but it is argued that this could be one step further towards centralization with "smiles and handshakes" followed by more Commonwealth intervention in states' policies (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.37).

The twenty first century is described as the century for federalism nationally and internationally (Galligan and Walsh 1991, p.4). Internationally, the popularity of federalism is increasing because federal systems cultivate unity through accommodating diversity, and bringing governments closer to their citizens (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.6). It is suggested that federalism strengthens the democratic process through "increasing access to and participation in the political system, and checks the potential abuse of power" (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.6). Globalisation is an external force which influences the ways in which governments around the world function. As Withers and Twomey (2007, p.6) point out that in order to obtain the economic advantages of globalisation the respond of governments around the world to the pressures of globalisation have been joining supra-national bodies as well as decentralising power and granting greater functions and responsibilities on sub-national states and states (Withers and Twomey 2007, p.6).

When Kevin Rudd was elected as the Prime Minister of Australia in 2007, he proposed reform in the Australian federalism, however it is still not clear what the Rudd government means by reform as reforming federalism has different meanings for different people (Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, p.30).

In conclusion, this paper discussed federalism in Australia and options for reform. It highlighted some of the important areas to reform suggested by many people specialized in the area. It also pinpointed the benefits of federalism for Australia and the reasons for choosing federalism for Australia by the founding fathers. While highlighting the criticisms of federalism the paper argued that federalism is still an effective system of government for Australia as it is made up of smaller states and each state has the capability of governing the citizens while working in cooperation with the national government. In the paper it is argued that federalism is now preferred as the best system of government around the world.

References:

Abbott, T 2008, AUSTRALIAN FEDERALISM: RESCUE & REFORM CONFERENCE, viewed 25 December 2008, <http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/Pages/Article.aspx?ID=3672>.

Fixing Australian Federalism 2008, Vol. 24 No. 1, Autumn 2008, POLICY, viewed 30 December 2008,

<http://www.psmprogram.sa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/carling-2008-fixing-australian-federalism.pdf>.

Galligan, B & Walsh, C 1991, Australian Federalism: Yes or No, Federalism Research Centre, Discussion Papers, No.9, December 1991, Canberra.

Jaensch, D 1994, Federalsim Australian Style, in Parliament, parties and people, 2^nd ed, Longman Cheshire, Melbourne.

Lovell, D. W, McAllister, I, Maley, W & Kukathas, C 1998, The Australia Political System, 2^nd ed, Longman, Melbourne.

Mathews, R 1975, Innovations and Developments in Australian Federalism, in Federalism in Australia: Current Trends, Publius, The journal of Federalism, Summer 1977, vol 7, No.3.

Singleton, G, Aitkin, D, Jinks, B &Warhurst, J 2006, Australian Political Institutions, 8^th edition, Pearson Education Australia, NSW.

Twomey, A 2008, Australian Federalism: Options for Reform, viewed 1 February 2009, <http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/pdf/ir/conference/aust-federalism-options-reform-twomey.pdf>.

Williams,
G 2008, Now for the hard bit, Australian Policy Online, <http://www.apo.org.au/webboard/comment_results.chtml?filename_num=248188>.

Withers, G & Twomey, A 2007, FEDE RALIST PAPE R 1: AUST RALI A'S Federal Future, A REPORT FOR THE COUNCIL FOR THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION, viewed 3 February 2009, <
http://caf.gov.au/Documents/AustraliasFederalFuture.pdf >.

2009-03-19T03:52:00.000-07:00

Arsonist menacing Golden Grove

MICHAEL MILNES, POLICE REPORTER

March 19, 2009 01:45pm

AFTER nine brush fence fires around Golden Grove in just two weeks, arsonists have been put on notice they face a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Nine fence fires in the past two weeks has residents of an area of Golden Grove living in fear.
Mother of two Suheyla Ahmed has told how she was scared for her children's lives when a brush fence adjoining their house on Bennett Court was set on fire about 10pm Wednesday night.
Mrs Ahmed said she saw their fence - and a neighbour's fence across the laneway - on fire when she was some closing blinds for the night.

"I screamed 'oh my God there is fire', rang 000 and got my children out of the house," Mrs Ahmed said today.

Her husband Khaled screamed for help and then grabbed a garden hose. Along with neighbours, he tried to put out the fire.

The fence fire spread to a garden shed attached to their carport.
"If the fire had taken hold on the front of the house we could not get out because we do not have a side gate," Mrs Ahmed said.

"I was just so scared for my children. It is just so stupid."
The MFS put out two more brush fence fires that were lit in the laneway, which runs behind houses in the area.

The people responsible for setting these brush fences on fire are on notice from police that they face life imprisonment for their dangerous and irresponsible actions.
Detective Chief Inspector John McCafferey said "the maximum penalty for arson is life imprisonment".

"In a very short space of time we have had nine fires in that area and each one of those fires has had the potential to become life-threatening," he said.

"We have already mounted an operation in that area and have interviewed a number of people in relation to the fires."

Source: Adelaide Now

2009-02-18T18:59:00.000-08:00

Is there a connection between globalisation, economic rationalism and neo-liberalism?
Defend your answer with examples

In this paper it will be argued that there is a connection between globalisation, economic rationalism and neo-liberalism and this relationship is based on the common aims and ideas of the three terms. To begin with all three terms will be defined, and then it will be argued that the aim of globalisation, economic rationalism and neo-liberalism is to create a free market where governments do not intervene and all barriers from governments are removed. Proponents of all three terms believe that there is no other way of adjusting and directing the economy of the world other than applying these rules and theories to markets. Countries such as America, Australia and Canada are some of those countries which their economic system works according to the ideas of globalisation and Australia is the country of economic rationalism.

Globalisation
Bell (1997) states that globalisation is defined “in terms of the increasingly worldwide spread of capitalist economic relations and in terms of the increasing international interdependence of the world economic system” (Bell 1997). It is argued that as a result of globalisation states lose their sovereignty and the autonomy weakens under the pressures from the global market (Bell 1997). Consequently policy makers’ power on decision making decreases by global governance arrangements (Bell 1997). According to the principles of globalisation, the market needs to be deregulated and globalised (IMF Strategies for an Alternative Globalisation n.d). Also the capital flow should be allowed to move and extent freely and much as possible in order to gain the intended benefits (IMF Strategies for an Alternative Globalisation n.d). The policies of globalisation are simply the policies of neo-liberalism which are continuously implemented by IMF, and the World Bank and these policies have not been successful in achieving their goals which is bringing about a better economy for the world (IMF Strategies for an Alternative Globalisation n.d). It is indicated that globalisation heavily relies upon the free market, privatisation, deregulation, and lessening the role of the governments (Global Policy Forum 1998).

The relationship between globalisation and Neo-liberalism

Globalisation means the spread of free-market capitalism to virtually every country in the world’ (Steger 2005, p.17). Nowadays markets are the driving force and free market capitalism is the driving idea behind globalisation (Steger 2005, p.17). Arguably these free markets are affecting the role of government (Steger 2005, p.17). The ideological sources of Globalisation are mainly two ideologies of neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism, however it is cannot be limited to either of them (Steger 2005, p.16). Historically, Neo-liberalism first came into economic politics in1973 in Chile (Werlhof 2008). The aim of launching this ideology was to make the neoliberal model of the Chicago Boys a reality (Werlhof 2008). Followed by that, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher introduced neo-liberalism in Anglo-America in the 1980s (Werlhof 2008). Then in 1989, the Washington Consensus was created which claiming that it would “lead to global freedom, prosperity and economic growth through ‘deregulation, liberalization and privatization’” (Werlhof 2008).

Arguably, neo-liberalism results in pushing out the Small, medium, even some bigger enterprises out of the market, then eliminated or mixed with international corporations (Werlhof 2008). However neo-liberalisation of markets which is the aim of neo-liberalism serves globalisation through providing a policy environment combined with the technological environment (You and Lee 1999, p.2). While Neo-liberal policies are promoting market forces and commercial activity they are opposing the role of the state as well as discouraging any government intervention into economic, financial and even social affairs (Makwana 2007). This ideology is driving the economic process of globalization, aiming at eliminating borders and barriers between states and thus enabling the market forces to drive the global economy (Makwana 2007). The primary demand of neo-liberal globalisation is free trade as it is believed to be a better and greater access to the emerging markets for businesses (Makwana 2007). These demands are opposing the original statements of free trade because the wealthy countries are still maintaining protectionist measures (Makwana 2007).

Globalisation from neoliberals view
Neoliberals view globalisation as a process which is driven by economic and should aim at protecting private ownership, promoting free trade and lessening political interference (Scholte 2005, p.1). Additionally, policymakers refer to globalisation as a process of creating a global liberalised market (Scholte 2005, p.1). It is strongly stated that Neo-liberal policies are generating enormous wealth for some people and living many in deep poverty (Makwana 2007) and this shows more similarity between globalisation and neo-liberalism as the same argument is stated in regards to the implications of globalisation on rich and poor. Statistics show that between 1980 and 2000 annual economic growth in developing countries from 3.2 percent dropped to 0.7 percent (Makwana 2007). During this period neo-liberalism was a prevalent ideology in global economic policy (Makwana 2007).

Economic Rationalism
Similar to neo-liberalism the doctrine of economic rationalism states that ‘economies, markets, and money can always, at least in principle, deliver better outcomes than states, bureaucracies, and the law’ (O'Hara 2001, p.249). In agreement, it is stated that economic rationalism is a doctrine which says that markets and money are the only reliable factors which can do everything much better than governments (Whitwell, n.d). “Economic rationalism is based on the classical liberal ideal of the super-ordinate value of an individual's liberty against the coercive powers of the state, and an individual's freedom to make private rational choices” (Murray, 1996).

The relationship between globalisation and economic rationalism

In order to pinpoint the relationship between globalisation and economic rationalism some sources have linked the beginning of globalization to the end of the cold war and the demonizing of communism by the leaders of the so-called free world, when there was a global struggle to define an alternative ideology or philosophy to economic rationalism (Gamage 2007). The alternative came out to be globalization and in that process many countries including developing ones started to open up their markets to the outside market and started creating free markets (Gamage 2007).

Conclusion

From the above arguments this could be concluded that all three terms globalisation, neo-liberalism and economic rationalism have common ideas and the core ideas are promoting free market or the so called free trade and decreasing the role of the governments. Supporters of neo-liberalism, globalisation and economic rationalism believe that their ideas are the only way to strengthen the economy and therefore reducing poverty. It is also believed that globalisation is another term for economic rationalism. The main similar point among all three concepts is the liberation of economy and all three claim that the idea of a free and deregulated market serves the economy of any individual country. America, Australia, and Canada are just some examples in which their economic system is based on privatisation and deregulation and promote free trade. They basically, enforce the core ideas of globalisation, economic rationalism and neo-liberalism.

References:

Bell, S 1997, Globalisation, neoliberalism and the transformation of the Australian state, Australian Journal of Political Science; Nov97, Vol. 32 Issue 3.

Gamage, S 2007, Globalisation, Economic Rationalism and Civil Society: What are the Negative Consequences?, viewed 2 may 2008,
.
Global Policy Forum, Statement on Globalization: UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights 1998, viewed 3 May 2008, <>.

IMF Strategies for an Alternative Globalisation n.d, viewed 3 May 2008, .

Makwana, R 2007, Neo-liberalism and Economic Globalization: An Introduction, viewed 1 May 2008, <>.

Murray G, 1996, Global 'Who-can-l-Kill-Today?' Capitalism: Top Business in the 90s, Social Alternatives, Vol 15, No.1.

O’Hara, P.A 2001, Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Routledge, London and New York.

Scholte J. A 2005, The Sources of Neoliberal Globalization, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, program paper No.8, viewed 30 April 2008, .

STEGER, M.B 2005, Ideologies of globalization, Journal of Political Ideologies, Vol 10, NO.1.

You, J.I & Lee, J.H 1999, Economic and Social Consequences of Globalization:
The Case of South Korea, CEPA Working Paper Series I, Working Paper No.17.

Whitwell, G n.d, What is economic rationalism?, viewed 3 May 2008, .

Werlhof, C.V 2008, The Consequences of Globalization and Neoliberal Policies. What are the Alternatives?, viewed 30 April 2008, .

2009-02-18T18:57:00.000-08:00

Analysing and evaluating Climate change policy in Australia: The strengths and weaknesses

The aim of this essay is to analyse and evaluate climate change policy in Australia. The essay argues that Australia’s climate change policy mainly considers the interests of businesses, therefore it holds back significant steps towards reducing gas emission. 2007 election was a starting point to bring some differences into the policy, for instance the new government signed the Kyoto Protocol. Compared to other policies, Climate Change policy is new and in its early years and it will take many more years to improve and enforce the policy. This essay would mainly analyse the former government’s climate change policy. The argument starts with defining the concept of policy.

What is policy?

According to Fopp (2008, p.6) a policy is a document which is “a response to a community or social need or problem”. In this case climate change policy is a response to a problem which is a big threat to Australian land, economy and community.

Australia has its own climate change policy. In Australia, the debate on climate change began in the late 1980’s “as a response to rising global awareness of the issue” (Howe 2007, p.1). From the start there were differences and disagreements between what is right for the environment and what is right for the economy and these disagreements ultimately dictated government policy directions (Howe 2007, p.1). Arguably, all governments, communities and industries are facing a complex policy challenge (Minchin 2001). Climate change is a global issue that has created significant uncertainties for decision-makers, “in terms of the timing and scale of the possible impacts of climate change and in the challenge of developing an effective policy response” (Minchin 2001).

Australia as a highly vulnerable country

Amongst all developed countries Australia is the most vulnerable country (Pittock 2005, p.256). Several factors increase severity of exposure to climate change such as vulnerability to warming, already stressed water resources and regional reductions in rainfall (Pittock 2005, pp.256-257). Australia’s geographical situation and land has made this continent more vulnerable to climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Among all continents Australia is the driest inhabited continent which has a highly variable climate (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Australia’s vulnerability to drought and its natural resources such as the Great Barrier Reef and the proximity of its urban settlements to coastal regions means that the impacts are quite significant for this continent (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1).

International and Australian government responses

Internationally one of the most recognized treaty towards solving the issue of climate change is the Kyoto Protocol which is “an international treaty designed to limit global greenhouse gas emissions by assigning individual emissions targets to developed countries” (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3). In 2007 Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the instrument of ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3)

In Australia, in early 1990, the federal government clearly stated that “the government will not proceed with measures which have net adverse economic impacts nationally or on Australia’s trade competitiveness in the absence of similar action by major greenhouse gas producing countries” (Howe 2007, p.2). In Australia during the 1990’s Government policy were removing as many restrictions on business as possible (Howe 2007, p.3). The majority of large companies and industry associations in Australia were opposing any government plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions which could damage their business activities (Howe 2007, p.3). To be more precise the government policy was mainly based on “‘no regrets’ measures or measures that were in the commercial interests of polluters” (Howe 2007, p.3).

In 1980 the Australian Business Roundtable was established (Howe 2007, p.4). It was formed of CEOs from 20 of Australia’s largest companies (Howe 2007, p.4). The aim of Australian Business Roundtable was ‘to influence decision makers and shape public policy to ensure the best possible environment for business to succeed’ (Howe 2007, p.4).

Aims and objectives of the policy
The objectives of Australia’s climate change policy are firstly to achieve global reductions in emissions that will avoid dangerous climate change; and secondly to maintain the strength of Australia’s economy (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). Achieving the second objective would be through “providing competitive, clean, low emission and affordable energy to Australian households and businesses; remaining a major supplier of energy and resources to international markets; and preparing for the impacts of unavoidable climate change” (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). The aim of Australia’s climate change policy framework is to reduce domestic emissions at least economic cost, to develop key low emissions technologies, to improve energy efficiency and supporting households and communities, to reduce emissions, to support world class climate science and adapting to the impacts of unavoidable climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, pp.4-5); and to pursue effective international responses to climate change that involve all major emitters, and that reflect our domestic policies (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.5).

Australia’s climate change policy is built on three pillars (Wong 2008, p.1). The first one is reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, the second one is adapting to climate change that could not be avoided and the third one is helping to shape a global solution (Wong 2008, p.1). All these needs huge amount of money and resources. The funding for the policy mainly comes from the Australian government (Howe 2007, p.12). Australia’s climate change policy is working towards achieving the target of approximately 108 per cent of 1990 level of emissions over the period 2008-12 (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.6).

Excluded factors
It is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is not gender literate (Salleh 2008, p.1). When governments and think tanks deliberate on strategies for combating climate change, they will very likely avoid one highly significant variable. This variable is that global warming's causes, effects, and solutions, are gendered. Those who frame Australia's climate change policy have not taken into account that “women's ecological footprint is negligible in comparison with men's or those women and children will be the main victims of global warming”. It is not known whether Australian climate change policy will rectify women's under-representation at every level of climate change negotiations or not. In times of climate change dialogue sociological factors are often not considered, although the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change does have potential in this respect (Salleh 2008, p.1). According to Salleh (2008, p.4) “global warming causes, effects, and solutions are gendered, and therefore, gender justice is a prerequisite of sound environmental governance”.

Dealing with climate change
In regards to that status of the issue of climate change Roze (2008) states that “climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue”. In dealing with climate change Wong (2008, p.1) argues that using market-based mechanisms is the best way to drive as emission reductions. Wong (2008, p.1) also suggests that setting targets to reduce emissions and imposing action on those industries and companies that are carbon intensive are not enough actions. It is also argued that “an integrated solution to climate change will require governmental and business investment additional to least-cost options and regulation to drive the deep emission cuts that are required to transition away from a carbon-based economy” (Roze 2008).

Critics of Australia’s climate change policy
Howe (2007, p.16) criticizes the Australian government’s climate change policies and states that they really are “business development plans” (Howe 2007, p.16). Further critics come from Hamilton (2001, p.73) where he points out that under John Howard’s government the industry and energy departments was dominating the formulation of climate change policy (Hamilton 2001, p.73). As Hamilton (2001, p.73) points out “the environmental dependent had been progressively co-opted by an industry viewpoint” (Hamilton 2001, p.73).

The effectiveness of Australia’s climate change policy
Mercer (2007) points out that a new report by Australia's Climate Institute shows that Australia’s climate change policy is failing as the level of gas emission has been more than what the governments had predicted. It is also argued that Australia will exceed the Kyoto Protocol’s level of gas emission (Mercer 2007). In contrast, it is claimed that Australia is on track to meet Kyoto target (Hammer 2008). However Australia’s climate institute does not praise this improvement and states that “even if we are on track to meet Kyoto, we shouldn't be congratulating ourselves for increasing emissions. We need to reduce emissions. We should be aiming for a 20% reduction in emissions by 2020, not a 20% increase” (Hammer 2008).

In conclusion, it is pointed out that Australia is more vulnerable to climate change compared to other developed countries. Also it is pointed out that climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue and needs further cooperation among government and businesses to enforce and develop the policy. The aim and objectives of the policy is also highlighted. It is also pointed out that the government is confident in its efforts to achieve Kyoto target by 2012. In the essay it is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is mainly in the interest of businesses.

References:

Australia’s Climate Change Policy 2007, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, viewed 2 July 2008, .

Department of Climate Change 2008, Tracking to the Kyoto target: Australia’s Greenhouse Emissions Trends1990 to 2008–2012 and 2020 , viewed 1 July 2008, .

Fopp, R 2008, What is policy?, course contents: Week 2, Policy and Globalisation, University of South Australia, Adelaide.

Hamiltion, C 2001, Running from the Storm: The development of climate change, UNSW Press, Australia.

Hammer, C 2008, Australia on track to meet Kyoto target, The Age, viewed 2 July 2008, .

Howe, W.A 2007, An Assessment of Australia's Climate Change Policies, Australian Law Postgraduate Network Paper Series, Macquarie University, viewed 29 June 2008, .

Mercer, P 2007, Study Shows Australia's Climate Change Policy is Failing, viewed 30 June 2008, .

Minchin, N 2001, Responding to Climate Change: Providing A Policy Framework For a Competitive Australia, University of NSW, Law Journal, viewed 1 July 2007, <>.

Pittock, A.B 2005, Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat, CSIRO Publishing, Australia.

Roze, S 2008, Vested interests shaping government policy, viewed 30 June 2008, < article="7271">.

Salleh, A 2008, Is Australia's Climate Policy Gender Literate?, viewed 27 June 2008, .

Wong, P 2008, Climate change an opportunity for innovation and growth, viewed 1 July 2008, .

2009-02-18T18:55:00.000-08:00

A Review

The aim of this paper is to present a review on chapters one and two of The Politics of Fear written by Peter Gale in 2005. The author focuses on the role of the Media in presenting the issue of nationalism and its connection with racism in Australia and ultimately its affects on the politics and the public of Australia. In the first chapter some events such as the issue of Woomera detention centre and the arrival of new asylum seekers which were represented by the media as threats to Australia have been highlighted. The author puts Pauline Hanson’s political activities under light and explains her role and influence on the Australian public. The author also underpins the 2001 election campaigns where the major focus was on the issue of “boarder protection” as the result of changes in public opinion. The main argument of the author is build around the creation and employment of the politics of fear by Pauline Hanson which changed the face of Australian politics and public, also divided the nation of Australia over issues of race. The author highlights the significant influence of Hanson’s political party over the policies of the two major political parties in Australia.

Later in chapter two the author introduces the concept of “new racism” and the way racism is expressed in another way described as racism through cultural superiority. In continue the Author brings in the issue of racism and nationalism into the argument and examines the links and connection between the two terms. In addition the author introduces the history of discourse on race and explains the gradual development of the term racism and its different types. The issue of “the racialisation of gender and sexuality” (p.12) in Australia in regards to indigenous women and Muslim women is also examined and called as “historically specific” (p.12). Another important issue which has been focused on is the relationship between racism, state, power and technology. Moreover the way in which these factors interact with one another is examined. Overall the aim of the author is to examine the influence of different media in regards to the development of different type of racism and the way in which the presentations of the media contributes to racism in Australia and Britain.

According to Gale (2005, p.10) the history of the notion of race can be traced back to the end of the seventeenth century. Racism is defined as “a racial hierarchy, with a discourse in which one’s own group or culture (or country) is believed to be superior to others” (Gale 2005, p.8). However Gale (2005, p.8) argues that this has changed now and racism no longer applies to colour but culture.

Reference:

Gale, P 2005, The Politics of Fear: Lighting the Wik, Pearson Longman, NSW, pp.1-23.

2009-02-18T18:53:00.000-08:00

Discuss the relationship between Nationalism and Racism

The aim of this essay is to discuss the relationship between nationalism and racism. In order to present a stronger argument this paper will include colonialism as another term which has close relationship with nationalism and racism. Arguably without referring to colonialism this discussion will not be complete. This paper would argue that there is a complex relationship between colonialism, nationalism and racism. Examples in proving the argument are from three countries of Britain, Australia and Turkey. It will be discussed that in all three countries nationalist movements and nationalism in general has led to racism and discrimination of different groups and minorities. The essay will start with defining nationalism, colonialism, racism and assimilation.

Nationalism is described as an ideology that was created after the French Revolution (Cashmore 1994, p.224). Nationalism is also defined as a reaction against globalization and a product of globalization (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.523). Some factors which oppose nationalism are migration, economic integration, employment abroad and shared prosperity (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.523). Some factors which promote nationalism are hostility to immigration, fears of unemployment and dislike of alien cultures (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.523). From these points it could be concluded that Australian nationalism is partly the result of fear of immigrants and new cultures as well as other factors in regards to the rights of indigenous Australians. Although nationalism has positive sides such as providing a sense of belonging, it has negative side such as causing conflicts which in many cases has resulted in genocide and ethnic massacres (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.532). It can also take some forms of political thinking such as xenophobia and chauvinism (Baylis and Smith 2001, pp.532-533). Sometimes it is used by a majority group to expel, oppress, and exterminate those who are considered as outsiders and not belonging to the majority group (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.533). Nationalism is criticized for being used as a tool of domination within societies (Baylis and Smith 2001, p.532).

Additionally, nationalism is a collective form of racial expression (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Nationalism is also described as an extension of racism (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). On the individual level racism emphasizes and justifies a superiority which is played out at the national level, through the notions of class. Ii is affirmed that ‘class formation was shaped by racialization’ (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Nationalism as a racism also expresses itself when the character of the other have a negative assessment (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Thus,” a nationalized institutionalism of racism” acts as a defender and supporter of ‘us’ against ‘them’ (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Arguably there are two types of nationalism, and in order to distinguish them they will be called “good” and “bad” (Edgar and Sedgwick 1999, p.256). “Good” nationalism is also called patriotism and “bad” nationalism is called Chauvinism.

Australian nationalism emerged at a time where the European dominance was strong and almost complete, when British authority was at its highest point, “when Social Darwinism was the most powerful current of intellectual life”, and when ‘race’ dominated the way people were thinking about all aspects of society (Gray and Winter 1997, p.35). Therefore, Australian nationalism was deeply associated with white Australia (Gray and Winter 1997, p.35). The national social development of Australia has been under the direct impact of White Australia Policy (Dunn 2004, p.6). In this process a populist national identity which excluded and marginalized particular groups, was constructed (Dunn 2004, p.6). During the first few decades of the twentieth century Australia was in the process of nation-building and aboriginal people were excluded as it was expected that they will disappear and die out under strict control until the completion of the process (Hollinsworth 2006, p.105).

Colonialism refers to the domination of a powerful group on another group with lesser power (Cashmore 1994, p.64). Colonial powers took control of the political, social and economic life of the colonized countries (Cashmore 1994, p.65). They treated the people of their colonies as slaves and viewed their physical appearance and culture as nothing and inferior compared to their physical appearance and culture (Cashmore 1994, p.65). Racist beliefs were used to justify their ways in which they treated the colonized people as “subhuman species” (Cashmore 1994, p.65). Although there have been instances of racism where racism has existed independently from colonialism “racism was highly complementary to colonialism” (Cashmore 1994, p.65). Some of the countries which have colonized other countries are Britain, France, Spain and Portugal (Cashmore 1994, p.65).

Defining racism is difficult as it is an “emotive” word (Pettman 1986, p.3). The meaning of racism changes according to time and place and nowadays in Australia it can be seen in different forms (Pettman 1986, p.3). In order to understand racism clearly Pettman (1986, p.3) uses four dimensional approaches to the term which are racial prejudice, racial discrimination, racist ideology and institutional racism. Pettman (1986, p.3) states that all these dimensions have complex relation with each other. In Australia, people of Middle Eastern appearance, Indigenous people, as well as people from Africa are the victims of all four dimensional approaches (Pettman 1986, p.6). During the nineteenth century strong xenophobic nationalist movements declared that “Australia is for the white man” and by white they meant Western European people preferably British people (Pettman 1986, p.6). In another definition racism is described as “the valuation of differences, real or imaginary” (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001).

Racism is expressed in different ways. Some years ago racism was a belief that a group of people with certain character are superior or inferior (Tucker 1987, p.16). This old racism arose in the age of European expansion and with discovering new people on other continents scientific techniques were employed to distinct and characterize them according to the shape of their skull, hair pile, skin colour and other physical appearances (Tucker 1987, p.16). From then on Europeans were seen as superior (Tucker 1987, p.16). However nowadays racism has a new form which is described as more “polite” compared to old racism (Tucker 1987, p.16). The old racism still exists but it is not acceptable any longer in politics (Tucker 1987, p.17).

It is difficult to separate the close relationship between racism, nationalism and colonialism as it is not clear where and when one starts and the other one ends (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Racism shares kinship with ideologies of nationalism and colonialism (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). Additionally, racism is described as a force which motivates both nationalism and colonialism, and allows the processes of colonialism and nationalism to take place (Fritsch and Phillipose 2001). According to Fritsch and Phillipose (2001) “this pervasive utility of racism as an ideology that facilitates nationalism and colonialism is the reason that it can act within colonies to produce racists, and can make the colonized internalize their inequity”. Although nationalism and racism have some significant differences, in common the two terms have a hostile attitude towards others (Todorov 1993, p.248).

An example to examine the relationship between racism and “bad” nationalism is the way in which Kurds in a part of Kurdistan under the Turkish occupation are treated under the Turkish government. In that region there is no unified administration identity (Schaefar 2008, p.818). Even using the term Kurdistan to describe the region is rejected by the Turkish state (Schaefar 2008, p.818). The history of Kurds is full of struggle, destruction, and displacement and in that history war and persecution has fuelled constant movement and migration of these people (Schaefar 2008, p.818).

Britain is another example in discussing and examining the relationship between “bad” nationalism and racism. It is pointed out that racial symbols have been used in the construction of national identity in contemporary Britain (Solomos 1989, p.122). Further it is argued that through complex ways notions of race and national identity have been articulated to support political movements and pressure groups (Solomos 1989, p.123).

In Britain, black citizens are viewed as enemies within that pose a threat to the British society and the cultural and political values of the nation because they want to keep their differences (Solomos 1989, p.135). Some people have argued that opposition to the settlement of Black migrants in Britain does not mean that White British are racist (Solomos 1989, p.129). In Britain racism is naturalized (Solomos 1989, p.135). For instance hostilities towards black communities is regarded as “a natural response to the presence of people of a different cultural and racial background” (Solomos 1989, p.135). Also among the British society it is believed that for people it is natural to prefer their own kind over people of other groups and to reject the creation of a “multi-racial” society (Solomos 1989, p.135).

Fear of immigration in Britain was expressed by Margaret Thatcher when she stated that the country might be swamped by people coming from different cultures (Solomos 1989, p.129). The relationship between nationalism and racism could be highlighted in Thatcher’s swamping statement in 1978 when she expressed her fears of the impacts of immigration and “race” on Britain’s localities, schools and heritage (Solomos 1989, p.139). As a step towards keeping their ‘nationality’ ‘purely white’ and protect their nation and nationality from the presence of other people from different background a country such as Britain has forbidden marriage between Britons and non-Aryans (Tucker 1987, p.17).

Australia is third example. There are a number of ways and examples to examine the relationship between “bad” nationalism and racism in Australia particularly in regards to the treatment of Aboriginal people. An example would be the different methods which were used to eliminate Aboriginal people in the 18th and 19th century such as removing Aboriginal children from their families, controlling Aboriginal women’s sexuality and more (Hollinsworth 2006, p.106). Another important example is the way in which Aboriginal land rights were regarded as a threat to the white Australian community and an unfair decision for the farmers and mining companies (Gale 2005, p.39). Some described it as a threat which would divide the nation and therefore Australia would never be able to address external threats (Gale 2005, p.39). After the Mabo High Court decision, Haugh Morgan who then as the head of the Western Mining Corporation argued that Indigenous Australian were the weaker race with a weak culture (Gale 2005, p.39). In 1996 Pauline Hanson also opposed this decision and the Australian media arranged many opportunities for her to express her fears of government’s decisions in regard to land rights (Gale 2005, pp.40-41). Both Hanson and the media shared a sense of nationalism where white was regarded as mainstream, ordinary and employed and black was regarded as other through representation of race (Gale 2005, p.41).

In order to understand the relationship between “bad” nationalism and racism it is interesting to look at the ways in which Australian narratives is told. From those narratives which are told it could be pointed out that whiteness is the symbol of being Australian and Indigenous people are excluded from narratives as they are not regarded as Australian but a problem (Elder 2007, p.11). That means skin colour is the main measurement which categorizes one as Australian or non-Australian in Australian narratives (Elder 2007, pp.11, 12). Another example in regards to attempts to tell Australian narratives and the way in which nationalism and racism could be highlighted along each other is objections of critics after the opening of national museum in Canberra (Hollinsworth 2006, p.245). The museum and its employees where criticized for what critics described as legitimizing false narratives of Australian history (Hollinsworth 2006, p.245). The museum is being criticized for ignoring the achievements of ‘dead white males’, including an exhibit which tells about quarantine of immigrants when once in Australia others were kept out of the country through making laws and erecting barriers (Hollinsworth 2006, p.245). These critics want to keep these stories and the victims silence and disregard many people who struggled in the way of making Australia “a more socially just and culturally inclusive society” (Hollinsworth 2006, p.246).

Additionally, it is important to pay attention to the concept of ‘blood’ as “ideas of race and stock, of blood and breed were fundamental to social and political ideologies of nationalism, imperialism and progress” (Hollinsworth 2006, pp.105-106). Because of the lack of scientific knowledge it was believed that the personality, character, morality and worth of Individuals were seen as mainly determined by their blood (Hollinsworth 2006, p.106). In Australia children of ‘mixed-race’ were only accepted in the white settlers’ community if their behavior was similar to the European side, otherwise they were regarded as having the indigenous ‘blood’ and were not accepted (Hollinsworth 2006, p.106).

Further on the relationship between racism and “bad” nationalism it is pointed out that the Australian government planned to mix Aboriginal people with the rest of Australia particularly the white people through a process called Assimilation. Assimilation is defined as the process of becoming united or becoming similar (Cashmore 1994, p.37). Arguably, assimilation is a racist ideology and policy which believes in the superiority of Anglo-Australian ways and asserts that others should adapt these ways (McConnochie, Hollinsworth and Pettman 1988, p.182). Assimilation is not only used in Australia but in many other countries such as Turkey. In Turkey the process of assimilation under the Kemalist policy of Atta Turk threatened the very existence of Kurds as a different nation from Turks (Van Horne 1997, p.213). The aim of the assimilation was to ultimately deny a separated identity called Kurds (Van Horne 1997, p.213). The process included intermarriage between Kurds and Turks in order to absorb Kurds in the Turkish society (Van Horne 1997, p.213).

An event which fuelled the flames of debates on racism and nationalism was the formation of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party. The party was formed to oppose government’s assistance to Aborigines, migrants and multiculturalism (Hollinsworth 2006, p.230). In her speech in the parliament Hanson stated “to survive in peace and harmony, united and strong, we must have one people, one nation, one flag” (Australian News Commentary 1996). Later she claimed that she fights for the rights of the white community, Italians, Greeks and other communities apart from Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (Hollinsworth 2006, p.230). She also regarded Asians as different as they have different religion and culture from ghettos and cannot integrate into the Australian community (Hollinsworth 2006, p.230). Although Pauline Hanson rejects any claims that she is racist, her statements and views are a new form of racism where people’s identity and worth are not measured according to their physical appearance (Hollinsworth 2006, pp.230-233). In this new form of racism the scales for measurement are culture and religion. In Australia there are two types of racism which are called symbolic racism and blatant racism (Hollinsworth 2006, p.233). Symbolic racism is related to national identity as an Australian (Hollinswrth 2006, p.233). Supporters’ decision to vote for Hanson’s Party and support her was strongly interrelated with symbolic racism and moderately with blatant racism (Hollinsworth 2006, p.233). In the view of the supporters of One Nation Party Australian identity was seen as exclusively ‘white’ and Anglo and the existence of Asians and Aborigines was a challenge to their power and supremacy (Hollinsworth 2006, p.233).

Similar to One Nation Party in Australia and Pauline Hanson’s statement about one people, one nation, one flag, Erdoğan the prime minister of Turkey recently said "What have we said? We have said, one nation, one flag, one motherland and one state” (ALTINTAŞ 2008). This statement affirms that the Turkish government is ignoring the rights of Kurds who by all means are a different nation on their own land now occupied by Turkey.

Overall this paper discussed the relationship between racism and nationalism and also included colonialism as a critical term in examining this relationship. In the paper nationalism is defined in different ways and it is divided into two different types which are “bad” nationalism and “good” nationalism. Also colonialism and racism have been defined. It is argued that there is a complex relationship between the three terms. Three countries of Britain, Turkey and Australia have been examined in discussing the relationship between racism and nationalism. In the paper different ways of using nationalism to oppress and discriminate minorities are discussed. From the argument it could be concluded that “bad” nationalism, colonialism and racism are all interrelated.

References:

ALTINTAŞ, E.B 2008, Is the AK Party turning its back on its Kurdish supporters?, Today’s Zaman, viewed 3 November 2008,
.

Australian News Commentary 1996, Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in federal parliament, viewed 1 November 2008, <>.

Baylis, J & Smith, S 2001, The Globalization of World Politics: An introduction to international relations, 3rd ed, Oxford University Press, New York.
Cashmore, E 1994, Dictionary of Race and Ethnic Relations, 3rd ed, Routledge, London and New York.

Dunn, K.M 2004, Constructing racism in Australia, Australian Journal of Social Issues, November 2004, viewed 30 October 2008, .

Edgar, A & Sedgwick, P 1999, Cultural Theory: The key concepts, Routledge, London and New York.

Elder, C 2007, Being Australian: Narratives of National Identity, Allen &Unwin, NSW.

Fritsch, R and Phillipose, L 2001, RACISM, NATIONALISM, COLONIALISM: A READING OF LOOMBA AND MEMMI, viewed 2 November 2008, .

Gale, P 2005, The Politics of Fear: Lighting the Wik, Pearson Longman, NSW.

Gray, G & Winter, C 1997, The Resurgence of Racism: Howard, Hanson and the Race Debate, Monash Publication in History, Victoria.

Hollinsworth, D 2006, Race and Racism in Australia, 3rd ed, Thomson, Social Science Press, Melbourne.

McConnochie, K, Hollinsworth, D & Pettman, J 1988, Race and Racism in Australia, Social Science Press, Australia.

Pettman, J 1986, What is racism?, in Anti-racism: a handbook for adult educators, Chamber, B and Pettman, J 1986, AGPS, Canberra.

Schaefer R.T 2008, Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Society, SAGE publication, DePaul University, vol 2.

Solomos, J 1989, Racism, nationalism and ideology, in Race and racism in contemporary Britain, John Solomos 1989, Macmillan, London.

Todorov, T 1993, On Human Diversity: Nationalism, Racism, and Exoticism in French Though, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Tucker, E 1987, ‘Old Racism’, ‘New Racism’: The development of racist ideology, in Prejudice and the public arena: racism, Markus, A. and Rasmussen, R. 1987, Monash University, Melbourne.

Van Horne, W.A 1997, Global Convulsions: Race, Ethnicity, and Nationalism at the End of the Twentieth Century, State University of New York Press, New York.

2009-02-18T18:52:00.000-08:00

Is social inequality between the super rich and the rest of the US increasing? Why?

The aim of this essay is to argue that social inequality between the super rich and the rest of the United States is increasing. Nowadays more Americans particularly African Americans live in poverty and do not enjoy the benefits of technology and wealth in a country which is in the forefront of globalization. Also from political perspective the voices of the poor especially African Americans are not heard or they do not have the opportunity to participate in the political process. In terms of politics and economic, social inequality refers to a situation where different groups in the society do not have the same opportunity and wealth for reasons such as race, gender, class and ethnicity. Two essential factors which cause social inequality in the world including the US are unjust politics and economy. Unequal share of wealth, income inequality has created classes in the US society and it will be argued that the upper class has managed to retain most of the wealth at the expense of the middle and the lower class.

Two essential factors which cause and deepen social inequality in the world including the United States are the unjust government’s economic policy and individuals fault as in the US the current government’s tax cut is in favor of the upper income earners more than the middle and the lower income groups (Caputo 2005, p.5). Also Caputo (2005, p.6) adds that the US’s federal taxation policy is in favor of high income earners and the low income earners pay the price. Findings suggest that in regards to the net effect of the Federal tax burden from1980s to 1990s the poor people as well as the middle income households were better off than under the current administration (Caputo 2005, p.16). Caputo (2005, p.7) argues that unlike the upper income earners, the middle income households experience decrease in their shares of income and this could threaten democracy in the US.
Signs of social inequality are in the ways of which people of a society live very differently from each other according to their gender, race, class and ethnicity in terms of having access to education, health care system, political participation and more (New Dimensions of Social Inequality, n.d). Using this definition this could be proved that social inequality is increasing between the super rich and the rest of the US as poor people are getting poorer and the number of homeless and hungry people is increasing (Watson 2007).

In a comparison between the former governments of Clinton, Reagan and G.H. Bush in regards to tax rates, the total effective tax rates among the highest quintile and top one percent during the Clinton’s administration was higher than Reagan and G.H. Bush’s administrations (Caputo 2005, p.8). However, the total effective tax among the middle and the lower income households with or with out children during Clinton’s administration was much lower than Reagan or G.H. Bush administrations (Caputo 2005, p.8). Evidence suggests that the Clinton’s government continued to benefit the lower and middle income families with children through a tax system which first started under G.H. Bush administration through providing them a greater share of after-tax income (Caputo 2005, p.14).

Wealth inequality started to rise sharply from 1975 and now compared to mid 1970s the level of wealth inequality has almost doubled (Wolff 2003, p.3). If dividing income earners, more than half of the wealth in the US is owned by the top five percent and the top twenty percent owns more than eighty percent of the total wealth (Wolff 2003, p.3). However the bottom twenty percent owns no wealth which means precisely they own no assets (Wolff 2003, p.3). Evidence shows that wealth inequality in the US is 0.82 which is close to the maximum level of inequality (Wolff 2003, p.2). It is suggested that the number of people in deep poverty is increasing in the US, while few others are getting richer (Parenti 2002, p.2). This ends up in more social inequality which affects poor people’s access to health and education as it is stated that rich people have better access to higher education and ultimately taking higher paying positions (Parenti 2002, p.1).

Along wealth inequality, there has bee a rise in income inequality as well; however the level of this increase is not as high as the level of wealth inequality (Wolff 2003, p.3). A comparison between the US, the Great Britain and Sweden shows that up to 1970s the level of wealth inequality was much lower in the US than Great Britain and Sweden. In contrast now as the level wealth inequality in many countries is decreasing, in the US this level is sharply increasing (Wolff 2003, p.5). Wolff (2003, p.5) believes that there are two factors behind the rise of wealth inequality which are increase in income inequality and the ratio between stock prices and housing prices. According to Wolff (2003, p.5) if stock prices goes up quicker than housing prices then the share of richest households wealth increases as the rich’s major assets is stock and small businesses while the middle class’s major assets is their home (Wolff 2003, p.5).

Inequality is proved to be a huge issue as it is harms the well being of societies (Wolff 2003, p.6). Compared to more equal societies, economic growth in unequal societies has a lower rate (Wolff 2003, p.6). In agreement, some researchers argue that those societies which tolerate inequality experience a very low economic growth than equal societies (Pizzigati 2005, p.40). Also in equal societies citizens benefit almost equally from education resources (Wolff 2003, p.6). This is not applied to the US as in the country there still is a huge difference in the total resources which go towards education. Consequently, the quality of schools and the level of performance at schools are unequal (Wolff 2003, p.6). This ultimately results in having less educated people in the work force compared to European countries such as Germany and Netherlands which affects the economic growth of the country (Wolff 2003, p.6).

African American families earn much less than the white families and it is estimated that African Americans has earn 60 percent of the average income of white families (Wolff 2003, p.4). In regards to wealth it is found that an average African American family has only 18 percent of the wealth of an average white family and this shows how people are treated according to their race in the US (Wolff 2003, p.4).

Wolff (2003, p.7) refers to tax and social expenditure system as the reasons of the high level of inequality in the US compared to other industrial countries. Compared to most of the Western European countries the US has a much lower taxes and a less progressive tax system. Consequently unlike the rich in Western European countries the rich in the US retain a higher share of their income, enabling them to accumulate a greater share of wealth (Wolff 2003, p.7). Compared to other advanced industrialized countries such as Canada and Japan, the US has a higher rate of poverty and the level of income support for poor families is much lower than these countries (Wolff 2003, p.7).

Evidence suggests that there is a link between fathers and sons class identity (Bjorklund and Jantti 1997, p.1009). A research study between fathers and sons from different background shows that sons of rich fathers turn out to be rich and sons of poor fathers turn out to be poor (Bjorklund and Jantti 1997, p.1016). It is called intergenerational mobility which is believed to be high in the US as findings suggest that forty percent of sons with poor fathers are also poor and forty percent of sons with rich fathers are rich as well (Bjorklund and Jantti 1997, p.1016).

Living expenses in the US has drastically increased to an extent where those poor people who have very limited budget to spend on food rather buy food which is cheaper and has higher calorie as they can not afford to buy healthy food. This results in more obesity (Spencer 2007). Krugman (2007) believes that the US has gone back to the levels of inequality which existed before 1920s. In regards to health inequality Krugman (2007) states that the US government spends huge amount of money on health care, but people are still uncovered and the reason is that “the system is wildly inefficient”. Pizzigati (2005, p.40) indicates that studies by Epidemiologists -Scientists show that the more unequal society the more unhealthy is the people of that society (Pizzagati 2005, p.40). In unequal society in Brazil, wealthy people spend millions of dollars on private security as they fear of being kidnapped in return for money (Pizzigati 2005, p.42).

Although the US’s economic achievement is high, the country has more poverty and lower life expectancy because income is heavily concentrated at the top (Krugman 2002). Evidence suggests that in the past thirty years there has been an unequal rise in the rich and the workers income (Krugman 2002). For instance from 1970 to 1999 average annual salary in America rose from $32,522 to $35.864 which is 10 percent increase in 29 years (Krugman 2002). However at the same time average real annual compensation of the top 100 C.E.O.’s increased from $1.3 million to $37.5 million which is estimated to be more than 1000 times the pay of normal workers (Krugman 2002).

Additionally, exploitation is a process where one class gets “an economic advantage at the expense of another class” (Sorensen 2000, p.1528). It is argued that exploitation in capitalism is out of sight because most likely workers agree to work in return for a wage but this wage is not the value of the workers’ product (Sorensen 2000, p.1528). In addition Sorensen (2000, p.1529) states that the wage which the workers receive is equal to the exchange value. There is a difference between wage and value produced and this difference is “the source of the capitalist’s surplus that generates profits, the end-all of all capitalist activity” (Sorensen 2000, p.1529). In this process the surplus is for the workers and at the expense of workers the capitalist becomes rich (Sorensen 2000, p.1529). Arguably, although capitalism brings about productivity, it promotes huge inequalities in the style and condition of life and this inequality decreases the possibility of fair equality of opportunity (Rubenstein 1993, p.187). Precisely unequal opportunities increase inequality in societies (Rubenstein 1993, pp.194-195). It is suggested that the US has a capitalist society and according to egalitarians a capitalist society is not able to provide and maintain equal opportunities, however this view has been rejected by some researchers (Rubenstein 1993, p.186). Also it is argued that “great inequalities of wealth undermine the equality of rights and political power” (Rubenstein 1993, p.198).

According Sorensen (2000, p.1524) exploitation refers to “a casual connection between the advantage and disadvantage of two classes”. Sorensen (2000, p.1524) further argues that this connection forms “latent antagonistic interests that when acted upon as a result of the development of class consciousness create class conflict”. Sorensen (2000, p.1524) defines the theory of inequality according to the theory of exploitation and states that “the theory of exploitation is the cause of advantages and disadvantages among classes”. Sorensen (2000, p.1524) further states that the theory of exploitation is “a Structural theory of inequality because the source of inequality resides in the relation between classes and not in the efforts and skills of the incumbents of these classes”.

Sorensen (2000, p.1553) strongly argues that nothing can guarantee that efficient labor market develop and maintain good lives. Therefore poor people need to be supported through governments in forms of income support in order to provide them with decent standards of living (Sorensen 2000, p.1553). Berinsky (2002, p.279) indicates that “social welfare programs in the United States is thin and ephemeral”. Additionally, Berinsky (2002, p.279) argues that the responsible factor in disadvantaging social welfare policy supporters is not only the larger political culture.

Finally, evidence suggests that social inequality between the super rich and the rest in the US is increasing. Unequal opportunity plays a big role in creating and increasing of inequality. Researchers claim that from 1970s up to now wealth inequality and income inequality has been increasing sharply and this has resulted in deepening the gap between the super rich and the rest of the US. Additionally, it is argued that poor people have less opportunity in the professional work force system as they have less access to education. Different factors are believed to be responsible in the rise of social inequality in the US; however all the factors can be gathered under two main headings of US politics and economy. Politics in the US praise capitalism which in this system the rich get richer at the expense of the poor and the poor gets poorer. The economic system of the US has helped the upper class to earn much more in less time. It is feared that increase in social inequality could threaten democracy in the US.

References

Berinsky, A. J 2002, Silent Voices: Social Welfare Policy Opinions and Political Equality in America, American Journal of Political Science, Vol 46, No.2.

Bjorklund, A & Jantti, M 1997, ntergenerational Income Mobility in Sweden Compared to the United States, American Economic Review, Vol 87, No.5.

Caputo, R.K 2005, “Distribution of the federal tax burden, share of after-tax income, and after-tax income by Presidential administration and household type, 1981-2000, Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, Vol 32, No.2.

Krugman, P 2002, For Richer, The New York Times, viewed 25 April 2008, .

Krugman, P 2007-08, Where is the middle class?, ABC Radio National - Background Briefing, Australian Broadcasting Commission, Producer: Kirsten Garrett (Broadcast on 25 November 2007; rebroadcast February 2008.)

New Dimensions of Social Inequality, n.d, viewed 20 April 2008, .

Parenti, M 2002, The super rich are out of sight, Commondreams.org News Centre.

Pizzigati, S 2005, The rich and the rest, Futurist, 39 (4).

Rubenstein, D 1993, Capitalism, social mobility and disributive justice, Social theory and Practice, Vol 19, No.2.

Sorensen, A.B 2000, Toward a Sounder Basis for Class Analysis, American Journal of Sociology, Vol 105, No.6 .
Spencer, N 2007, Food prices rise, living standards fall for US families, viewed 20 April 2008, .

Watson, D 2007, US mayors’ report: Hunger and homelessness intensify in US cities, viewed 22 April 2008,
.

Wolff, E 2003, The wealth divide: the growing gap in the United States between the rich and the rest, Multinational Monitor, Vol 24, No.5.

2009-02-18T18:51:00.000-08:00

Critical response

The aim of this paper is to critically response and review an article called “A women studies war: stranger in a man’s world” written by Edna Lomsky-Feder in 1996.

The article is written from the perspective of the author which is a female as an interviewer who is researching and interviewing Israeli soldiers to gather information about their experience during a war. The author is the editor, producer and presenter. The aim of the author is to use her personal experience to create a link between language and identity. She builds her argument on an experience which has ultimately made her wonder about her self-identity and to find out about an identity inside her which she has not been able to see it before.

The author describes herself in a situation where the response from the soldiers has resulted in thinking about her identity twice and consequently her identity changes from an Israeli woman interviewing soldiers from her own country to a total stranger who is unfamiliar to the topic of war and the interviewees. There is a particular relationship between language and identity as in this case another factor plays an important role and that factor is gender. When the soldiers remind the interviewer that she cannot understand the experience and the situations which they have been through and how strange she is to their world, her identity changes and therefore the language of the interview also changes. Interestingly enough the interviewer is no longer just an interviewer but a woman who has no idea about a war which has happened in her own country and is strange to that world. It makes sense as taking up a role as an interviewer requires wide information and familiarity with the language of the interviewee is essential to understand their identity and their language of expression.

The author reveals that she has been unfamiliar with the language of the soldiers and they way they have described their situations and feelings; therefore she has tried to change her interview in three different stages. Each stage she takes on a different identity in order to get closer to the identity and the experience of the interviewees. The author shows that language and identity are strongly interacting. It also shows that language represents identity as in this case the language of the soldiers represents their identity which is unfamiliar to the author and has influenced her identity. The author states that she has finally accepted that she can use her identity as a stranger as a tool to expand and develop the interviews and that she has finally realized that she is unfamiliar with the world of the soldiers but it does not mean she cannot get close to them and to understand them.

The paper is successful in explaining the difficulties which a female in this case could come across in understanding an issue in a society which belongs to her but still unfamiliar with some part of it. It shows how an important group of people in a country identified as women are kept apart from men’s world to an extent where they are as much strangers as some foreigners are. It is also successfully concluded that being familiar to the language of expression is crucial in understanding the identity of a person or group of people even if they are all speak the same language.

Reference:

Lomsky-Feder, E 1996, A Woman studies war: stranger in a man’s world, Ethics and process in the narrative study of lives, Sage, London.

2009-02-18T18:48:00.000-08:00

Has Bush administration improved Homeland security since 9/11? Why? Why not?

This essay would argue that the Bush administration has not improved homeland security since the September 11 terrorist attack. It will also be argued that the US is now more vulnerable to terrorist attack. The argument will be presented in four sections. The first section will briefly look at the September 11 attack and Bush’s response. The second section will introduce the threat of suicide attacks, a tactic used in September 11 attacks to carry out the maximum damage. The third section will look at the US’ capability to deal with catastrophic terrorism which is now a new threat to the US’ homeland security. The final section will discuss Bush’s homeland security plans and its outcomes. It will be argued that the Bush administration has not been able to improve homeland security because its responses and policies have been wrong from the start. Essentially the essay will focus on the current threat from Al-Qaeda to America’s homeland security.

The September 11 Attack and Bush’s response
The September 11 attack is known to be the biggest attack on the US homeland which shocked the nation and left them in fear and uncertainty about the future and their government (Mahan and Griset 2008, p.xiv). It is believed that the US still faces the threat of another attack most possibly by Al-Qaeda. Arguably the biggest threat to the US homeland security is terrorism and currently Al-Qaeda organization has created a fearful situation for the US in the Middle East and in the US itself. Bin Laden the leader of Al-Qaeda believes that the US wants to keep Muslims in poverty while imposing a Western culture which is deeply offensive to traditional Islam (Posen 2001, p.39). It is highly unlikely that Al-Qaeda would stop killing and opposing Americans and its allies because as Posen (2001, p.40) indicates Bin Laden views Israel as a foreign element in the Middle East which should be destroyed, also American military presence in Saudi Arabia must end. Arguably neither Israel will be destroyed nor will the US military withdraw from Saudi Arabia and this means the US faces an enemy which demands impossible things. They will kill the Americans for as long as the US does not give in to their demands (Posen 2001, p.42).

Some of the Bush’s responses to the September 11 attack were centralizing power and establishing a Homeland Security office to oversee continental defence against terrorism (La Feber 2000, p.14). In addition a new office was set up by the White House and the State Department in order to get its controlled message overseas, particularly to Islamic audiences influenced by Osama Bin Laden’s observations (La Feber 2000, p.15).

The threat of suicide terrorism to America’s homeland
Terrorists practise many types of terroristic attacks such as suicide attacks and bomb attacks, all aiming at achieving their goals, and that is forcing America and its allies out of the so called holy lands of Islam and Muslims. Suicide terrorism poses is a big threat to the US homeland security, therefore it needs more attention because it is easy to carry out and kills the maximum. Pape (2003, p.343) points out that nowadays terrorist organizations heavily rely on suicide attack in order to achieve their major political objectives. Some groups and organizations that have used this type of attack are Palestinian groups to force Israel out and Al-Qaeda to force the US to withdraw from the Saudi Arabian Peninsula (Pape 2003, p.343). Among the terrorist organizations the use of suicide attacks to achieve their goals has been increasing (Pape 2003, p.344). Pape (2003, p.344) argues that the reason is because “terrorists have learned that it pays” (Pape 2003, p.344).

The US does not face terrorism in only one place but in many places and this is another threat which the US homeland security faces. According to Pape (2003, p.346) it is because of the Bin Laden’s fatwa which calls on all Muslim anywhere in the World to kill Americans and their allies, civilians or military as according to him it is a duty for every Muslim to liberate Al-Aqsa Mosque and to force their enemies out of all the lands of Islam. The reasons for the current suicide attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan can be well explained by pointing out Pape’s argument (2003, p.344) which states that suicide terrorists attack those who are in their view occupier of a territory or have military force bases in that territory as the presence of America in Afghanistan and Iraq anger the terrorists organizations as they believe these countries belong to Muslims and America has no right to stay there.

Pape (2003, p.344) suggests that suicide terrorism could be controlled through an effective and promising way and that is to “reduce terrorist’ confidence in their ability to carry out such attacks on the target society”. Bush’s military response to suicide terrorism was not effective because according to Pape (2003, p.344) “states that face persistent suicide terrorism should recognize that neither offensive military action nor concessions alone are likely to do much good and should invest significant resources in border defenses and other means of homeland security”.

In regards to preventing suicide attacks Pape (2003, p.357) suggests that if Al-Qaeda continues suicide attacks against American homeland then the US needs to improve its domestic security. Pape (2003, p.357) points out that in the short term the US need to employ stronger security measures to control the borders in order to make it difficult for suicide terrorists to enter America. Also in the long term the US needs to reduce its dependency on Persian Gulf’s energy resources so the military could be withdrawn from the region and protect Americans from suicide attacks (Pape 2003, p.357).

America’s capability to deal with the threat of catastrophic terrorism and catastrophic events

Nowadays, catastrophic terrorism is a huge threat to the US, although it has not happened yet. Carter (2001, p.6) points out that before George Bush took office, he and his administration claimed that they would formulate their strategy around two issues which were the collapse of Moscow’s power and the growth of Beijing’s military and economic might “in a self-proclaimed return to big power realism” (Carter 2001, p.6). However after the September 11 attack catastrophic terrorism has dominated the Bush administration’s agenda (Carter 2001, p.6).

In regards to the ability of Americans to deal with catastrophic terrorism Carter (2001, p.18) believe that the American society for some reasons such as is being large and open, having complex and interconnected infrastructure, valuing free movement, free speech and privacy, is very weak in the battle against catastrophic terrorism. Posen (2001, p.41) confirms the US vulnerability to terrorism by pointing out that the US has not successfully policed its borders and transferring drugs, illegal immigrants, cash, guns and stolen cars is easy and anyone with money and patience can obtain explosives and other dangerous materials in the US. Carter (2001, p.18) suggests that the US should set up programs to strengthen its homeland security through employing technology not inside government, but in universities and private companies.

The 2005 Hurricane Katrina proved that the US is not yet prepared to deal with catastrophic events, including terrorist attacks as there were evidence of poor implementation of emergency plans, poor communication, and poor decision processes (Waugh 2008, p.11). All these contribute to the fact that Bush has not been able to improve Homeland Security after the September 11 attack.

Bush’s Administration and the US’ Homeland Security
In America so far four approaches have been recommended to manage the mission of homeland security and they are “the command and control approach of the Clinton administration, the lead agency approach, the establishment of Department of Homeland Security, and the appointment of a White House coordinator or ‘czar’” (Carter 2001, p.10). The Bush administration has focused on the last approach only, however like other three approaches it not sufficient on its own (Carter 2001, p.10).

The homeland security under the Bush’s administration has not been improved because as Carter (2001, p.22) points out America’s current capabilities to respond to catastrophic terrorism is not sufficient to protect Americans or the international order from many major new challenges. In agreement Noam Chomsky, a writer and critic of America’s policies in an interview with Schivone (2008, p.16), asserted that the US is very vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Chomsky criticizes Bush for not being able to improve security and failing to act according to the recommendations forwarded by the government commission after September 11 which suggested that the US-Canada borders need to be controlled (Schivone 2008, p.16). According to Chomsky, the Bush administration instead fortified the Mexican border which was not a serious source of possible terrorism (Schivone 2008, p.16). Chomsky argues that the Bush administration programs have not been designed to reduce terror but to increase terror as the Iraq invasion increased terror about seven fold (Schivone 2008, p.17). Iran’s nuclear program can be best explained by the motion that the US invasion of Iraq sent an indirect message to other countries. The message according to Chomsky was that ‘if you don’t obey what the US demands, they can invade you, so you better develop a deterrent’ (Schivone 2008, p.17).

In regards to the Bush’s ability to defeat terrorism and protect the US homeland security Abdel Bari Atwan who is the author and editor of the London-based Arabic daily newspaper Al-Quds Al Arabia states that “president Bush is not ending terrorism nor is he weakening it”, “rather Al-Qaeda now has powerfully developed into more of an ideology than an organization” (Schivone 2008, p.16). According to the 2007 National Strategy for Homeland Security (White House 2007, p.3), the event of Hurricane Katrina and its massive destruction and suffering reminded the Americans that terrorism is not the only big and fearful threat which they face, but nature can also be a huge threat to America’s homeland security. Such event and its consequences makes the US more vulnerable to attack as it is stated in the White House national strategy for homeland security (2007, p.3).

In the National Strategy for Homeland Security (White House 2007, p.9) it is pointed out that America “faces complex and dynamic threats from terrorism” as well as other threats such as natural disasters, accidents, and other hazards. It also stresses Al-Qaeda’s current ability to strike the homeland despite being disrupted and constrained after the September 11 attack and points out that “the United States faces a persistent and evolving terrorist threat” (White House 2007, p.9). Al-Qaeda is now in Pakistan and it has maintained and protected its leadership, therefore the possibility of another attack on America is still strong as they are regenerating in Pakistan’s Tribal areas (White House 2007, p.9). The US does not only face Al-Qaeda but other terrorist groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and they might consider attacking America’s homeland if they see the US a direct threat on them or their principle sponsor Iran (White House 2007, p.9).

The vulnerability of the US to another attack from Al-Qaeda organization has also been stressed by the National Intelligence Council as it points out that the US homeland face “a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years” and the main threat comes from Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups (Martin 2008, p.290). The US is also vulnerable to the emergence of homegrown terrorists within its borders and arresting a small number of violent Islamic extremists indicates that there is the possibility that “others in the Homeland may become sufficiently radicalized to view the use of violence within the United States” (White House 2007, p.9).

Al-Qaeda still has the three capabilities which were critical to the success of September 11 attack and these are “the ability to identify a key vulnerability or gap in the defenses of its principle enemy…, the effective use of deception on board the four hijacked aircraft where the passengers and crew were deliberately lulled into believing that if they behaved and cooperated as they were told … they would not be harmed” and in the attack “suicide attack was employed to ensure the attack’s success” (Hoffman 2003, p.12). The biggest danger which the US faces comes from its support for Israel (Mearsheimer and Walt 2006, p.3). The US support for Israel has “inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized US security” (Mearsheimer and Walt 2006, p.1). US support for Israel is one of the sources of the rise of Anti-Americanism. According to Nye (2004) in recent years Anti-Americanism has increased and as a result the United States’ soft power has declined. In agreement Lundberg (2008, p.8) points out that instead of strengthening the US soft power, the Bush 43 administrations have weakened the US soft power “through a freeloader climate change posture, inconsistent nuclear non-proliferation policies, the occupation of Iraq …” (Lundberg, 2008, p.8).

Overall the Bush administration has not been able to improve homeland security due to its inappropriate policies and responses to the September 11 attack and the Hurricane Katrina. The war on Iraq and Afghanistan increased terrorism and as a result the US is now more vulnerable to terrorist threat than before. The threat from Al-Qaeda is now more serious as the organization is not in Pakistan and it tries to regenerate to launch more attacks on America and its Allies. Under the Bush administration America’s soft power has weakened and Anti-Americanism has increased. There still are huge issues in America which have not been controlled such as border security which is used to transfer drugs, explosive materials, illegal immigrants and more.

Reference:

Carter, A.B 2001, “The Architecture of Government in the Face of Terrorism.” International Security, 26 (3) Winter 2001-2002, viewed 8 June 2008,
.

Hoffman, B 2003, Al Qaeda, trends in terrorism, and future potentialities: An assessment”, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Vol 26, No.6, November 2003, viewed 8 June 2008, .

La Feber, W 2000, The Post September 11 Debate Over Empire, Globalisation, and Fragmentation”, Political Science Quarterly, Vol 117, No.1, Spring 2002.

Lundberg, D 2008, Bush Administration Reaganism and US primacy, University of South Australia, Adelaide.

Mahan, S & Grist, P 2008, Terrorism in Perspective, 2nd edition, Sage Publications, Los Angles.

Martin, G 2008, Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and Controversies, Sage Publications, Lose Angles.

Mearsheimer, J.J & Walt, S.M 2006, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Working Paper, Harvard University and University of Chicago.

Nye, J.S 2004, The Decline of America’s Soft Power: Why Washington Should Worry, foreign Affairs. Vol 83, No.3, May/June 2004.

Pape, R.A 2003, The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism, American Political Science Review, 97 (3) (Aug., 2003), viewed 5 June 2008,
.

Posen, B.R 2001, The Struggle against Terrorism: Grand Strategy, Strategy, and Tactics, International Security, Vol 26, No.3, Winter 2001-2002, viewed 8 June 2008,
.

Schivone, G.M 2008, United Sates of Insecurity, Monthly Review, Vol 60, No.1, May 2008.

Waugh, W 2008, The Political Costs of Failure in the Katrina and Rita Disasters, The ANNALS of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol 604, March 2008.

White House, National Strategy for Homeland Security, White House, Washington, DC, October 2007, viewed 10 June 2008,
.

2009-02-18T18:46:00.000-08:00

My identity

The purpose of this paper is to present my identity in twenty four hours while interacting with different people at different places and find out how other perceived my identity. It is a difficult task because normally people act and react as it happens without thinking about it before hand. But now I specifically need to write about my interactions and people’s reactions and I can already feel that I am acting and communicating differently and observe other people’s reaction closely and immediately.
My Identity! Who am I?

I would write about my identity as a taxi driver who is always seen as a foreigner and different. My findings might not be one hundred percent accurate as I keep records of things that happen and things which I do and say.

Some people in the taxi talk to me in a language that I do not like but I have no control over that as they are free to choose words and ask questions in certain ways. As Shohamy (2006, p.5) points out people are free to select and choose words, intonation and ways of expression. But one thing which those people often do not consider is how this type of communication is viewed by others and how it affects them. For instance asking questions such as “Where are you from?” always hurt my feelings. It is not the question itself but the things which it remind me of. The answer to that question for everyone is normal, basic and simple, but for me it is hard and hurtful as my country is not independent and I do not know how to explain it to them. There were also other questions. The way in which I answer the questions is always different and it is always based on my feelings on one hand and on the other hand it is based on how I identify the questioner.

From the faces of the one after one passenger I could tell that they all considered me a stranger, someone who does not belong to their group. I put on a smile to show the friendly side of my identity; however this was not always welcomed by passengers. During the whole time I was considered as an outsider of their group (Australians). I was identified as different and therefore kept away from their “ingroup” (Benwell 20056, p.25). There were three people in the car. They saw a young person with black skin. They immediately said “we cannot even see her face” meanings that she is very black. Then one of them said “shhhh”. They identified me as other and different because of the colour of my skin and my hair.

As a taxi driver I need to act friendly and be tolerant even if I am in my worst mood of the day. That means I am not always the real me but someone whose conditions of work forces him to act opposite to his deep down feelings. As I drive through the night I had a mask on face showing a happy, hard working man who has enough patience to take in all kinds of communication and behaviour with a big heart.

I picked up two young people. Conversation started and somehow I talked about my life and my study as an Australian citizen and the ways in which I try to balance them, and then I hear one of them at the back of the car saying “do you like it in hear?”, “Will you go back to your country?”, “Why did you come to Australia anyway?”. All these questions suddenly disappointed me and made me ask myself who am I if I am not an Australian. My identity is denied back in the country that I have come from. I came here hoping that I will be identified as someone. I have always heard these questions and comments but they have never hurt me as much as they do now. Often passengers identify me with Middle Eastern people regardless of who I am and whether I want to be identified as a member of that group. As Blommaert (2005, p.205) points out people are often grouped by others even if they do not want to belong to that certain group.

It did not take long when another passenger came in and without having any previous conversation he asked “are you Greek?” That means he already had shaped an identity of me in his mind. This situation is best described by Blommaert (2005, p.206) stating that “identities can be there long before the interaction starts and thus condition what can happen in such interaction”.

I now see the important role of language in very simple and basic daily conversations. Language is not just a means of communication but a machine for thinking and feeling (Wierzbicka 2006, p.299). Through the language which I and the passengers used, forms of communications were created and every time these communications moved and affected my feeling and thought. Every single person created a topic and an issue for me to think about only through the language of expression which they used. If they had interacted with me through a different language of expression, my thoughts and feelings would have been different.

Reference:

Benwell, B. & Stokoe, E. (2006). Theorising discourse and identity. In Benwell, B. & Stokoe, E. Discourse and identity. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press. (pp.17-47).

Blommaert, J 2005, Identity, In Blommaert, J. Discourse. A critical introduction, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Shohamy, E 2006, Expanding Language, In Shohamy, E, Language policy. Hidden agendas and new approaches, London, Routledge.

Wierzbicka, A 2006, English: Meaning and culture, Oxford University Press, USA.

2009-01-18T06:46:00.000-08:00

For Kurdish Girls, a Painful Ancient Ritual

The Widespread Practice of Female Circumcision in Iraq's North Highlights The Plight of Women in a Region Often Seen as More Socially Progressive

By Amit R. Paley

Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, December 29, 2008; A09

TUZ KHURMATU, Iraq

Sheelan Anwar Omer, a shy 7-year-old Kurdish girl, bounded into her neighbor's house with an ear-to-ear smile, looking for the party her mother had promised.

There was no celebration. Instead, a local woman quickly locked a rusty red door behind Sheelan, who looked bewildered when her mother ordered the girl to remove her underpants. Sheelan began to whimper, then tremble, while the women pushed apart her legs and a midwife raised a stainless-steel razor blade in the air. "I do this in the name of Allah!" she intoned.
As the midwife sliced off part of Sheelan's genitals, the girl let out a high-pitched wail heard throughout the neighborhood. As she carried the sobbing child back home, Sheelan's mother smiled with pride.

"This is the practice of the Kurdish people for as long as anyone can remember," said the mother, Aisha Hameed, 30, a housewife in this ethnically mixed town about 100 miles north of Baghdad. "We don't know why we do it, but we will never stop because Islam and our elders require it."

Kurdistan is the only known part of Iraq --and one of the few places in the world--where female circumcision is widespread. More than 60 percent of women in Kurdish areas of northern Iraq have been circumcised, according to a study conducted this year. In at least one Kurdish territory, 95 percent of women have undergone the practice, which human rights groups call female genital mutilation.

The practice, and the Kurdish parliament's refusal to outlaw it, highlight the plight of women in a region with a reputation for having a more progressive society than the rest of Iraq. Advocates for women point to the increasing frequency of honor killings against women and female self-immolations in Kurdistan this year as further evidence that women in the area still face significant obstacles, despite efforts to raise public awareness of circumcision and violence against women.

"When the Kurdish people were fighting for our independence, women participated as full members in the underground resistance," said Pakshan Zangana, who heads the women's committee in the Kurdish parliament. "But now that we have won our freedom, the position of women has been pushed backwards and crimes against us are minimized."

Zangana has been lobbying for a law in Kurdistan, a semiautonomous region with its own government, that would impose jail terms of up to 10 years on those who carry out or facilitate female circumcision. But the legislation has been stalled in parliament for nearly a year, because of what women's advocates believe is reluctance by senior Kurdish leaders to draw international public attention to the little-noticed tradition.

The Kurdish region's minister of human rights, Yousif Mohammad Aziz, said he didn't think the issue required action by parliament. "Not every small problem in the community has to have a law dealing with it," he said.

The practice of female circumcision is extremely rare in the Arab parts of Iraq, according to women's groups. They say it is not clear why the practice -- common in some parts of Africa and the Middle East -- became popular with Iraqi Kurds but not Iraqi Arabs.

Supporters of female circumcision said the practice, which has been a ritual in their culture for countless generations, is rooted in sayings they attribute to the prophet Muhammad, though the accuracy of those sayings is disputed by other Muslim scholars. The circumcision is performed by women on women, and men are usually not involved in the procedure. In the case of Sheelan, her mother informed her father that she was going to have the circumcision performed, but otherwise, he played no role.

Kurds who support circumcising girls say the practice has two goals: It controls a woman's sexual desires, and it makes her spiritually clean so that others can eat the meals she prepares.
"I would not eat food from the hands of someone who did not have the procedure," said Hurmet Kitab, a housewife who said she was 91 years old.

Kitab, who lives in the village of Kalar in Kurdistan's eastern Germian area, where female circumcision is prevalent, has had the procedure done on herself and all her daughters. When asked if she would have her 10-month-old granddaughter Saya circumcised, Kitab said "Of course" and explained that the procedure is painless.

"They just cut off a little bit," she said, flicking her finger at the top part of a key, which she then dropped on the floor.

Women's rights groups in Kurdistan are working eagerly to change the perception that the procedure is harmless and that it is required under Islam. They go to villages in rural areas where the practice is most ingrained and tell women and religious leaders of the physical and psychological damage the circumcision can cause. Health experts say the procedure can result in adverse medical consequences for women, including infections, chronic pain and increased risks during childbirth.

Ghamjeen Shaker, a 13-year-old from the Kurdish capital of Irbil, said she is still traumatized from the day she was circumcised. She sits with her legs clenched together and her hands clasped tightly on her lap, as if protecting herself from another operation. Indeed, Shaker says she sometimes dreams that the midwife who circumcised her is coming back to perform the procedure again.

She was 5 when her mother sent her out to buy parsley and then locked her in the front yard of their home with six other girls. "I knew something bad was going to happen, but I didn't know exactly where they were going to cut," she recalled. "My family just kept saying, don't worry, this is a social custom we have been doing forever."

"They pinned me to the ground, and I just cried and cried," said Shaker, who spoke barely above a whisper. "I was just so astonished. But now I realize that they want to prevent women from living their lives normally."

Her mother, Shukria Ismaeel Jarjees, a 38-year-old housewife, said she was forced by her relatives and elderly women in the community to have her daughter circumcised. "I made a huge mistake, and now my daughter is always complaining of pain in her pelvis," Jarjees said. Her eyes began to fill with tears. "I now advise my daughters to never circumcise their children."

Shaker hopes to become a social worker focusing on women's issues, in particular other girls traumatized by female circumcision.

"I want to make sure the world understands they cannot silence girls like this," she said.
Susan Faqi Rasheed, president of the Irbil branch of the Kurdistan Women's Union, said that even in the cosmopolitan capital, as many as a third of young girls are circumcised. "When the Kurds hold on to something, they hold on to it strongly," she said. "So now they hold to Islam more than the Arabs."

One of the religious leaders who have been less vocal in demanding female circumcisions is Hama Ameen Abdul Kader Hussein, preacher at the Grand Mosque of Kalar and head of the clergymen's union in Germian. Previously, he preached that female circumcision was required. Now he says it is optional, which Hussein believes has caused the area's rate of female circumcision to drop from 100 percent to about 50 percent.

"If there is any harm in this exercise," he said, "we should not do it."

Despite the outreach efforts, a study of women in more than 300 Kurdish villages by WADI, a German nongovernmental group that advocates against female circumcision, found that 62 percent underwent the procedure.

In Tuz Khurmatu, the most famous practitioner of female circumcision is Maharoub Juwad Nawchas, a 40-year-old midwife with traditional Kurdish tattoos covering her chin. She learned from her mother, who used to perform the procedure for free, though Nawchas now charges 4,000 Iraqi dinars, or just under $3.50, because her husband is disabled and can't work. She has circumcised about 30 girls a year for the past two decades.

On the day she circumcised Sheelan, the midwife began the ritual by laying down an empty white potato sack to serve as her working area. AK-47 assault rifles hung from the wall of the dingy concrete house, and watermelons rested below.

When Sheelan entered the room, her mother, Nawchas and a local woman placed the girl on a tiny wooden stool the size of a brick. The midwife applied yellow antiseptic to her pelvic area and injected her with lignocaine, an anesthetic. Little children peeked through the window to see what the noise was about.

"It's all right, it's all right," Sheelan's mother whispered, as the girl screamed so loudly her face turned red. She tried to bunch up her skirt over her pelvis and shield the area with her hand, but the women jerked her arms back.

Then Nawchas uttered the prayer, made a swift cut, and immediately moved the girl over a pile of ashes to control the bleeding.

The entire ritual took less then 10 minutes.

Back home, Sheelan lay on the floor, unable to move or talk much. She clutched a bag filled with orange soda and candy and barely said anything except that she was in pain.

But she became more animated when asked whether it was worth it to have the operation so her friends and neighbors would be comfortable eating food she prepared. "I would do anything not to have this pain, even if meant they would not eat from my hands," she rasped slowly.

"I just wish that I could be the way I was before the procedure," she said.

Staff photographer Andrea Bruce and special correspondents Nian Ahmed and Dlovan Brwari contributed to this report.

Comments

Photos

The Washington Post

2008-12-11T18:05:00.000-08:00

A democracy I would rather not have

By Dr Hussein Tahiri

10/12/2008 00:00:00

Turkey is often hailed by many countries, especially in the West, as a great democracy and a country that has implemented democratic principles. It is often labeled as the only Islamic country with democratic values.

We continually hear from American and European leaders praising Turkey’s democracy. On 29 June 2004, in a speech in Istanbul President George W. Bush said, ‘Turkey is a strong, secular democracy, a majority Muslim society, and a close ally of free nations. Your country [Turkey], with 150 years of democratic and social reform, stands as a model to others, and as Europe’s’ bridge to the wider world.’[1] Even U.S. President-elect Obama and his team as recently as October 2008, described Turkey as an advanced democracy. Barack Obama and his vice presidential candidate Senator Joe Biden in their paper on major foreign, economic and domestic policies seeking a rapprochement with Turkey stated, ‘The result is that this strategically important NATO ally [Turkey], the most advanced democracy in the Muslim world, is turning against the West’.[2] Many European leaders have also echoed similar views.

History of democracy goes back to 508 BC when Cleisthenes of Athens in a radical change reordered the constitution to ‘take the people into partnership’.[3] However, the West, particular Western Europe and the United States of America have come to be known as the ‘cradle of democracy’, particularly the modern forms of democracy. One might think that they perhaps would understand better than anyone else which system is democratic and which is not. Certainly, they have created a perception among many people in the world that they have such an understanding. Therefore, if they call Turkey a ‘great’ or ‘advanced’ democracy they must be right. Who are we to question the forefathers of democracy?

Unfortunately democracy is often misunderstood and misused. The West uses it to appease non-democratic countries to get their support and advance their national interests. Dictators use it to appease their own people, undo their opponents and gain support of the West to gain legitimacy.
Democracy has many forms and can be used in different contexts but its meaning is never so broad and ambiguous that allows dictators and non-democratic elements to abuse it. Broadly speaking democracy is a political organisation that accords power to the people and allows ordinary citizens to influence public decisions.[4] The US Department of State’s Website states, ‘In the dictionary definition, democracy “is government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.”’[5] It further elaborates, ‘In the phrase of Abraham Lincoln, democracy is a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”’ Therefore, democracy stems from people’s free will and the measure for a democratic system should be based on this free will. Free will and democracy are intertwined. Democracy sets up a framework and a set of principles for freedom. As the U.S. State Department has rightly put it, ‘democracy is the institutionalization of freedom.’[6]

Democracy is the rule of majority but it in no way oppresses the minority. The fundamental elements of all modern democracies are majority rule with appropriate safeguards for individual and minority rights. Again as the U.S. State Department put it, ‘The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens.’[7]

If we apply this test to Turkey (and we must do as it claims to be a democratic country) it will certainly fail the test of a democratic system. Which democracy bans the existence and identity of its about 20 million citizens? Which democracy deprives about 20 millions of its citizens from the basic human rights, the right to speak their mother tongue - which is considered a very basic human rights? Which democracy is adamant that legitimate demands of a significant numbers of its citizens can only be resolved through force and by using military means? Turkey does.

Turkey uses an argument that all citizens are equal before the law and therefore it is against ethnic – specific policies. On 25 October 2008, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaking at the congress of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in eastern province of Dersim (Tunceli) said that his party is against ethnic, regional and religious nationalism. He continued ‘Everyone is free in their beliefs. We are at equal distance to all belief groups as a democratic, secular and social state of law. No one can divert us from such an understanding’.[8] If this is the case, why then is Turkey based on Turkish ethnicity? Why is Turkish nationalism nurtured and promoted by the Turkish state? Why is Turkish the only language allowed to flourish and every other language is banned in education? Why on every Kurdish mountain in Turkey it is written ‘what an honour to be a Turk’? If this is not ethnic nationalism then what is it?

It seems that Erdogan wants to prove the democratic credential of Turkey by proposing an ‘innovative’ idea. In his visit to the province of Hakkari on 02 November 2008, he said, “What have we said? We have said, ‘One nation, one flag, one motherland and one state. They [those who advocate Kurdish rights] are opposed to this. Those who oppose this should leave [Turkey]”.[9] This is a new democratic solution Turkey proposes to resolve the Kurdish problem, get rid of them all.

It is interesting to note that Erdogan is asking the Kurds who have lived in Kurdistan for over 4,000 years to leave their homeland. He ignores the fact that Kurdistan has been occupied by Turkey and the Kurds have never been asked if they want to be a part of Turkey.

To further test Turkish democracy it would suffice to look at the European Union Accession report titled, ‘Turkey 2008 Progress Report’ published on 05 November 2008. The report is an indictment of Turkish democracy. It states, ‘The armed forces have continued to exercise significant political influence via formal and informal mechanisms.’[10] It is for long believed that Turkey has been effectively run by the military and the elected government has been powerless when it has gone against the wishes of the military. This report is the confirmation of this long held view.

Impartiality of the judicial system is a criterion of any democratic system. The report expresses concerns about ‘the independence and impartiality of the judiciary’.[11] It further reveals human rights violations by the Turkish state. The report outlines, ‘During the report period, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered a total of 266 judgments that Turkey had violated the ECHR.’[12]

Looking at the above evidence it would be very difficult for anyone to argue that Turkey is a democratic country, lets alone a ‘great’ or ‘advanced’ democracy. It is time to be honest with ourselves, stop hypocrisy and demand reforms that would make Turkey a truly democratic country; a country that would be at peace with itself and respect the rights of all its citizens.
Dr. Hussein Tahiri is the author of "The Structure of Kurdish Society and the Struggle for a Kurdish State". He is a commentator on Middle Eastern affairs. He is currently an Honourary Research Associate with the School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University, Australia.

Endnotes

1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040629-4.html, accessed on 08 November 2008.
2. Turkish Daily News, http://arama.hurriyet.com.tr/arsivnews.aspx?id=-639375, 24 October 2008, accessed on 08 November 2008.
3. Graham Maxxox, Australian Democracy in theory and Practice, Sydney, Longman, 2000, page. 76.
4. Ibid.
5. http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem/whatdm2.htm, accessed 11 November 2008.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Source: Yeni Safak (Turkey), October 29, 2008.
9. AYSE KARABAT DIYARBAKIR, 04 November 2008, Tuesday, http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=157780, accessed on 08 November 2008.
10. The European Union Accession report titled, ‘Turkey 2008 Progress Report’ published on 05 November 2008, p. 9.
11. Ibid, p.10.
12. Ibid, p.11.

Reference: Kurdish Media

2008-09-16T17:24:00.000-07:00

UK: Lorin Sulaiman,

'My classmates came to the rescue when I was threatened with deportation'

Children can be cruel, but when the Government tried to deport Lorin Sulaiman to the land that killed her father, she saw her classmates in a very different light...September 14, 2008UK, — Lorin Sulaiman clasps the prosp-ectus for her university course excitedly. The pretty, dark-haired 18-year-old is as thrilled as any other British teenager about to embark on their degree course. "This is a dream come true," she says. "I can't believe I'm actually about to go to university to study the subject I've set my heart on."But while Sulaiman has the same sense of anticipation as any other student, her route to university could not be more different. Just four years ago, she could barely speak English. As a 13-year-old Kurdish girl, she had always longed to go to school.

People power: a school campaign helped to save Sulaiman from a 'removal centre'
She and her family fled persecution in Syria and claimed asylum in the UK in November 2002. They were given emergency accommodation in Birmingham but Sulaiman was told she could not attend school there as the relevant Home Office paperwork had not been processed.As a Kurd she hadn't been allowed to go to school in Syria like her Arab neighbours' children. She had envied their right to education and was frustrated to find that, on arrival in the UK, she was still denied a school place. Lorin, her parents and her six elder brothers and sisters, had experienced severe discrimination back home. Her parents were human-rights activists for the political party Yeketi, which campaigns for Kurdish human rights and full citizenship in Syria. As a result of these activities her father was jailed when she was four years old and is believed to have been murdered in prison. Her mother was jailed for five years and tortured. She was released only after extensive bribes were paid to government officials. She had been forced to sign documents giving the government permission to arrest any member of the family involved in human-rights activities on behalf of Kurds,www.ekurd.net so following her release the family paid an agent to smuggle them out of Syria to a safe country.The family endured a long and perilous overland journey through Europe, hiding out in safe houses for months at a time. They became separated from one of Lorin's brothers in Istanbul when Turkish police arrived just as they were climbing into a lorry. He didn't have time to jump into the vehicle before it slammed its doors and drove away. "We just have to hope that the police didn't catch him and that he's made a life for himself in Turkey," says Sulaiman sadly.In the UK, there was a television in the flat the family was given, but the only programme that made any sense to Sulaiman was Teletubbies, because it used such simple language. By watching the programme religiously, Sulaiman taught herself basic English. In July 2003 the family were moved to Portsmouth and to Sulaiman's delight a school place finally became available, starting that September. Her English improved in leaps and bounds and, although she was almost 14 when she went to school for the first time, she very quickly became a top student – and was even placed on the gifted and talented register for her language skills and chosen to represent her year on the school council. "I was so eager to learn now that I at last had an opportunity to go to school and I wanted to work as hard as I could to make my English perfect. Teletubbies helped me to communicate with other pupils," she says.She was the only asylum seeker at the mainly white school and some of the other pupils there came from families sympathetic to the BNP – whose anti-asylum movement was then, according to the headmaster, particularly active in the area. "Some of them wouldn't talk to me," says Sulaiman. They just walked past me and gave me dirty looks. I didn't tell people I was an asylum seeker because I wanted to fit in and be normal." But one day some of the girls with BNP sympathies started to criticise Sulaiman and a white South African girl at the school. The South African girl had just returned from hospital where her arm had been bandaged after an accident. "Why have you come here to take our money and use our hospitals," said one of the girls. "She was addressing her remarks to both of us. I got very angry and said to her,www.ekurd.net 'What are you on about? We haven't come here to take your money. I came here because my life was in danger.'"In November 2004, disaster struck. The Sulaiman family were arrested in a dawn raid and taken to Tinsley House, an "immigration removal centre" near Gatwick Airport.

Sulaiman got in touch with her friends and teachers and begged them to do something to get the removal halted.The school responded swiftly by mounting a huge campaign. In art lessons, they made "Free Lorin" posters and received local media coverage. To her joy, Sulaiman and her family were released from detention a week later. When she returned excitedly to school, a lot had changed. "Some of the BNP kids who'd ignored me and given me dirty looks were coming up to me and saying, 'We'll keep you here, we'll make sure you're not sent back. Don't worry. We had no idea that asylum seekers could go through the kind of things you've been through.' I became friendly with a lot more of the kids after my release."The teachers had begun raising awareness in lessons. "Some of the pupils were shocked that asylum seekers could be innocent people," says Sulaiman. "Even though some were sympathetic to the BNP, they just wanted to help me. One girl said she'd even go to the prime minister to make sure I wasn't deported. That really touched me.""While we were in detention we were treated badly but had no power to do anything about it. I know that in this country, unlike in Syria, there are laws to protect people and I decided there that if I could become a human-rights lawyer I could make a difference. It felt like an impossible dream, though. I was a 14-year-old girl who was about to be forced on to a plane back to Syria."Sulaiman's threatened removal stirred up a great deal of emotion among the students – but the repercussions are perhaps surprising. Derek Trimmer, Sulaiman's head teacher,www.ekurd.net said that he'd had to arrange counselling for the children with BNP sympathies who'd campaigned on behalf of Sulaiman. "Some of our older students whose views on race were a bit hostile needed counselling because they had very strong feelings about what was happening to Lorin and had difficulty bringing their two views together," he said.Following their spell in detention, the Sulaimans were given temporary permission to stay in the UK and Sulaiman continued to study, gaining eight GCSEs. In August, she passed her A levels with flying colours and later this month will be taking up a place at university to study law and human rights."In Syria, as Kurds, we were considered lower than other people but there should be no difference between a Kurd, an Arab or an English person. Freedom should be a right for all. If my dad, who campaigned so hard for human rights, could see me now, I hope he'd be proud. I want to carry on the work he wasn't able to complete."

independent co.uk

2007-07-02T04:52:00.000-07:00

University of South Australia

University paper(Undergraduate)

By: Khaled Azizi
10 June 2007
Grade: D(82%)

Does regional integration contribute or is it inconsistent with globalisation:The case of the European Integration

It is argued that regionalism and therefore regional integration is shaped as a safeguard against globalisation. However it is also argued that regional integration contributes to globalisation and accelerates the process of globalisation. Both globalisation and regional integration have positive and negative effects, but when combined together the results would be different, depending on how they are accepted among different states. There are differences between these terms which might be a source of inconsistency. One example of regional integration is European integration which has been effective and successful in many areas of politics, economic and social and it has been able to shape many institutions which govern the region with regard to sovereignty and national identity of the member states. On the other hand globalisation is a process which arguably threatens the national identity, sovereignty and the economic statues of the states despite its effective role in some bringing the world communities closer than ever through powerful information technology. There is a dual nature relationship between these two terms and the aim of this essay is to discuss this relationship specifically in Europe.

In the beginning of the essay the concepts ‘regional integration’, ‘regionalism’ and ‘globalisation’ will be defined, then a background of the creation of the European Union which resulted in the European integration, as well as its effectiveness will be discussed. The essay will focus on the interaction between globalisation and regional integration, in order to find out whether globalisation is contributing to regional integration or if it is inconsistent with it. Some scholars argue that regional integration is a way of confronting the process of globalisation and others believe that regional integration accelerates the process of globalisation therefore it is contributing to it. The aim of the essay is to state that both points are valid however regional integration might be more inconsistence rather than contributing

Griffiths and O’Callaghan (2002, p.156) state that regional integration is “where a number of states within close proximity to one another join together to form a federal political and economic union” and an obvious example of regional integration is the European Union. According to Molchanov (2005, p.431) “no discussion of globalisation would be complete without an assessment of the European Union”. The European Union (EU) is the outcome of sixty years of integration which began from the end of World War II and “it has been a forerunner in manifesting several important tendencies that are now regarded as key features of globalisation” (Molchanov 2005, p.431). It is necessary to know how the EU formed because in itself the EU is a form of globalisation which works in different ways and for different purposes. Before the creation of the European Union, in 1951 the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was established by political leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, it was a practical step toward regional economic and political integration (Hancock 1993, p.462). According to Hancock (1993, p.462) the aim of the ECSC was to “eliminate customs duties on iron, coal, and steel products among the six member countries…”. The power to run the works was divided between a council of ministers which was represented by the six members. Also a European Court of Justice was created in order to “adjudicate disputes over the interpretation and implementation of the ECSC treaty” (Hancock 1993, p.462).

Consequently, the success of ECSC encouraged the members to create a European Economic Community in 1957 which got them closer to each other. The tremendous achievements attracted the attention of other European states such as the United Kingdom to join the EEC and therefore as the number of the members increased, broader policies were made until it led to the creation of the European Union (Hancock 1993, p.462-463). Additionally, the EU was created through intergovernmental treaties between the Member States. These intergovernmental treaties brought up a number of institutions, and defined their capability (What is the EU? n.d). The EU is regarded as a unique institution because it is a free trade area in which most of the product-related regulation is coordinated. Also it is a free movement area of labour and the region which shares many common environmental standards and many common social standards and consequently, it attempts to develop a unified foreign policy (What is the EU? n.d).

The European integration has been successful in many areas. One positive example of its positive impacts can be pinpointed in the area of higher education where both teaching and research have received a European dimension; this has been done through successful student exchange programs and large scales of funding (Baylis & Smith 2001, p.587).

According to Griffiths and O’Callaghan (2002, p. 273) the term regionalism “refers to intensifying political and/or economic process of cooperation among states and other actors in particular geographic regions…”. Regionalism is the result of “the increasing flow of goods, people, and ideas within a spatial entity which thus becomes more integrated and cohesive” (Griffiths & O’Callaghan 2002, p.274) and it is developing strongly all around the world. There have been many attempts towards regionalism but not all of them have been successful. The only one which has achieved success to some extent is the EU (Karns & Mingst 2004, p.147). Political and economical factors drive regionalism; some of these factors are identity, domestic politics, internal and external threats (Karns & Mingst 2004, pp.148-150).

Regionalism and regional integrations are based on regional cooperation. Additionally, regional cooperation may also be used as a support to balance the uneven globalisation of the world economy (Griffiths & O’Callaghan 2002, p.274). Molchanov (2005, p.431) affirms that regional integration among states is often regarded as the proper response to the economic and cultural strains which are generated by the globalisation of market forces and he also agrees that Europe acts as a safeguard against globalisation in order to protect Europe’s cultural identity, however it can also be seen as a vanguard of globalisation which eliminates traditional barriers.

Soltes (n.d, p.54) believes that globalisation is the outcome of the collapse of socialism and the end of the bipolar world and it has negative and positive aspects. Globalisation has many different definitions. According to Kegley and Wittkopf (2006, p.262) “globalisation is a shorthand for a cluster of interconnected phenomena that together are transforming world politics”. In addition, Worthington (2001) defines globalisation as the spread of communication, commercial, and transportation networks across the world and the increasing rapidity which they can move people, capital and produce. For instance from an economical perspective, globalisation is seen as a race between national governments as they attempt to attract more investment through undercutting competition by offering states low taxation and labour conditions. Socially, rapidity of communication and increased population movement is believed to be the reason behind the erosion of established national identities. Also those who are disadvantaged may feel isolated from their traditional communities (Worthington 2001).

It is now agreed that regional integration and globalisation have a complicated relationship. This is true in the case of the linkage between globalisation and European integration which is described as a complex relationship and is continuously changing (Molchanov 2005, p.435). In the case of the EU, the relationship between EU integration and globalisation has a dual nature. On one hand the integration acts as a shelter from global process and on the other hand it acts as an accelerator of the global process (Baylis &Smith 2001, p.587). Consequently, in the political debates there are two different interpretations on the relationship between European integration as a successful example of regional integration and globalisation. Based on the assessment of the integration process, some observers regard the European integration as “an expression of turbo-charged globalisation” and others regard it as “a protective shield against the negative fall-out from globalisation” (Baylis & Smith 2001, p.587). Those who regard it as an expression of turbo-charged globalisation believe that the EU integration is accelerating the process of globalisation through the policies of the European Union, for instance multinational corporations get benefits from the improved access to the market (Baylis & Smith 2001, p.587). Molchanov (2005, p.435) supports this view stating that European integration has contributed to the spread and intensification of globalisation on a great scale through revolutionising the development of supernational institutions with few analogues in the world. However, in the view of the advocates of the single currency, integration provides nation-states and electorates in Europe with a mechanism to confront the challenge of globalisation (Baylis & Smith 2001, p.587).

Arguably one reason behind the inconsistency of regional integration in regard to globalisation is the differences which they have. According to Beckfield (2006, p.7) there are three key differences between regional integration and globalisation. The first one is that regional integration is geographically bound while globalization is defined as the increase of cross-border flows, and the crossed borders can be any national borders. For instance the trade between the USA and Germany is as much globalisation as the trade between France and Germany, but the difference is that “regional integration involves the intensification of international interaction within bounded regions” (Beckfield 2006, p.7). The second difference between regional integration and globalisation is political; the way which the regional polities are institutionalised is stronger than the world polity. In addition, the European Union has the power to compel compliance with their directives. For instance, the EU requires its members to meet budgetary and other requirements before they could join the currency union (pp.7-8). However, “only a few global organisations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), have such coercive power and its power is not nearly as far-reaching across policy domains as the EU’s” (Beckfield 2006, p.8). Finally, the progress of regional integration is far ahead of globalization; in fact, most of what is called globalisation may be regarded as regionalisation (Beckfield 2006, p.8).

Arguably, regional integration is more inconsistent rather than contributing because the aim of regional integration is to provide opportunity for all individuals within the member states and improve their economy while respecting their national identity and sovereignty; nonetheless it is argued that globalisation has resulted in widening the gap between people’s income in rich countries and poor countries and the rate of unemployment is higher than ever before (Kegley & Wittkopf 2006, p.289). Additionally, regional integration encourages and supports the process of development of all aspects (social, political and economical) among the member nations, while for instance “globalisation has interrupted several aspects of social structure that have in the past encouraged the development of the nations” (Scholte 2000, 162). To be more precise “globalisation has shifted the balance of accumulation to include commodities that are much less tied to territorial geography” (Scholte 2000, p.162).

Regional integration is a process where a number of states join together and form a political and economical federation. One obvious example is the European integration. The idea of Regional integration is now more popular than ever before. One successful example is the European integration which has resulted in establishing many effective political, economical and social institutions such as the European Court of Justice. It is believed that regional integration is a type of globalisation but on a smaller scale and with some differences. For instance European integration respects and protects the sovereignty of the states and the national identities within the Union and it is referred to as a contradictory process rather than a developed state of affairs. Similarly globalisation is a process which spreads information technology and the markets all around the globe and aims to bring the world closer together. However it has negative effects, for instance, it might destroy national identities and cultural values; also it might leave poor people poor and ensures that rich people get the most benefits out of it. Regional integration and globalisation have a dual nature relationship together. Some scholars argue that regional integration contributes to globalisation and others believe it is inconsistent with it. Both points are valid, however, evidence shows that it is more inconsistent and this might be because of some major differences between them, such as the high level of the EU compared to globalisation, as well regional integration is far ahead from globalisation.

References

Baylis. J & Smith. S 2001, The globalisation of world politics: an introduction to international relations, Third Edition, Oxford, New York.

Beckfield, J 2006, Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper Series, viewed 11 May 2007,
.

Griffiths, M & O’Callaghan, T 2002, International Relations: The key concepts, Routledge, London & New York.

Hancock, M.D 1993, Politics in Western Europe, Catham House Pub, United States of America.

Karns, P.M & Mingst, K.A 2004, International Organisations: The politics and processes of global governance, Lynne Rienner, London.

Kegley, C.W & Wittkopf, E.R 2006, World politics: Trends and transformation, Tenth Edition, Clark Baxter, The United States of America.
http://www.lisproject.org/publications/LISwps/447.pdf

Molchanov, M.A 2005, Regionalism and Globalisation: The case of the European Union, Perspectives on Global Development & Technology, Vol. 4 Issue ¾.

Soltes, D n.d, Globalization, Regional Economic Integration and New Challenges for the United
Nations and its Specialized Agencies, Comenius University,
.

What is the EU, n.d, viewed 20 of May 2007,
.

Worthington, G 2001, Globalisation: Perceptions and threats to national government in Australia, viewed 5 June 2007,
.

2007-03-25T20:46:00.000-07:00

Kurds and Turks, Palestinians and Israelis

A long conflict

“In 1997, the Clinton administration granted Boeing and Bell market licenses to build the attack helicopters, brushing aside human rights objections from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch about Turkey's abuse of its ethnic population”.

McKiernan, 2001

Student of International Studies
The university of South Australia
By: Suheyla M Ahmed
Grade achieved: Distinction
2006

The division of Kurdistan

The starting point of the conflict between Kurds and the Turkish Government

The reasons of the conflict

Turkish Government’s policy against Kurds

The solution of the problem

The division of Palestine

The starting point of the conflict

The reasons of the conflict

The solution of the problem

***

There are many minority groups all over the world who suffer from being abused, ignored and destroyed under the governance of aggressive governments but their voice is not heard. One of those minorities is Kurds who in reality should not be called a minority because of their enormous population. Kurds have been living in Kurdistan for more than four thousand years. They have a long history of fighting for freedom but other governments such as Iran, Turkey and Iraq as well as Syria still rule them. Another group of people who have been killed and abused simply because they are asking for an occupied part of their land to be returned is Palestinians. An area of Palestinians land has been occupied by Israelis and the reason of the occupation is that Israel claims that that area belongs to them.

The main purpose of this essay is to underpin some of the issues of Kurds in Turkey and discuss the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. The paper will provide a history of a long conflict between Kurds and Turks who are two different ethnic groups living under a Turkish government. Also it provides a brief history on the conflict between Palestine and Israel. Mainly, the essay points out some of the reasons of the conflict between these two different ethnic groups such as economical, political and cultural issues. In continue the essay introduces evidences and examples of Turkish government’s plans in order to destroy Kurds and their identity in the past and present such as destroying villages and prohibiting Kurdish people from speaking their own language even at home. At the end both conflicts will be compared in order to highlight the similarities and differences.

Geographically Kurdistan is an area, which is located in the Middle East where the states of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria converge and the majority of its population are ethnic Kurds. Historically before World War I, Kurdistan was divided between the Ottoman Empire and the Persian Empire. After WWI it was divided among five different states which the larges portion of this land is under the occupation of Turkey and the rest is under the occupation of Iran, Iraq, Syria and former Soviet Union (Gunter 2004, p.xxvi).

Kurds are known as a nation without a state. A nation that has its own history and during their long existence they have struggled to achieve self-rule and cultural autonomy and since the break up of the Soviet Union this nation has become the largest ethnic group in the world with a large geographic land and that has no independent state of their own(Ciment 1996, p.1). Kurds are also know as mountain people and according to Ciment (1996, p.1) “the mountains are where the ancient Kurds fled Babylonian hegemony and where the guerrillas of the Kurdish Worker’s Party (PKK) fight the current Turkish regime in Ankara”. On the other hand the mountains have been a great enemy of Kurds because they have isolated this people from outside world and as a result they have been ignored as a nation (Ciment 1996, p.1). According to Barkey and Fuller (1998) the Kurdish issue is the most painful problem for Turkey and it has been with Turkey since the beginning of the republic in1923. Barkey and Fuller 1998 also state that Kurdish right have been denied and abused by Turkey and this denial and abusiveness is regarded as violating human rights therefore it irritates the relation between Turkey and EU.

In addition three aggressive countries of Iran, Iraq and Turkey rule Kurds. Also a considerable amount of Kurds are also ruled by Syria and until now they have not had a right to hold the citizenship of that country as Kurds and the Syrian government do not accept them as who they are and even as Arabs, in fact the government says that Kurds do not belong to that land (Ciment 1996). Nevertheless, Kurdish nation have many enemies and their land has been targeted by big powers and imperials for strategic purposes and to gain access to its natural resources and economic resources (Ciment 1996, p.1).

Turkish governments one after another have denied Kurds as a different nation to Turks and they have tried to destroy Kurdish people’s identity, culture and language in many evil ways but they have not succeeded. The conflict between Kurds and Turks started when Ataturk stated that Turkey is for Turks and there are no such people as Kurds and there are many reasons behind it. The most serious issues are Cultural, economical and political issues that Kurds have no right in participating in them or even practicing them in Turkey (Ciment 1996). To be more precise until 1991 Kurds in Turkey had no right to speak their own language in public places nor at home because the dominant language is Turkish language and Turks believe that Kurds do not have an independent language and culture. Turks refer to Kurds as Mountain Turks who have forgotten their language and as a consequence of such views the conflict between Turks and Kurds is more likely to be a cultural war.

From the political point of view Kurds have not been able to participate in running the government in Turkey. Kurdish political activists have formed political parties over years but each of them have been declined and rejected by the Turkish government after a short period of time of activity for reasons such as ‘putting the Turkish nationalism in danger’ and many other reasons which have not yet been known (Ciment 1996). The most aggressive thing that Turkey did was banding Kurds from Speaking and writing their own language. In 1923 the treaty of Lausanne maintained the stability of a Turkish state and a year after speaking or publishing in Kurdish were banned and the constitution stated that “Turkey is strictly Turkish” (Chaliand 1994, p.30). Turkey’s aim is to destroy Kurds and to achieve this aim the Turkish government has practiced Genocide in 1979 on Alewi Kurds, destroyed villages and even changed the name of many Kurdish villages to Turkish (Fatah 2006, McKiernan 2006, p.93). In 1937, an uprising of Kurds was crushed by using poison gas, heavy artillery and help of war plans (McKiernan 2006, p.94). During that time “thousands of Kurdish homes were burned, villages permanently depopulated, and civilians massacred. Hundreds of Kurds who were hiding in caves or barns were burned to death by the army (McKiernan 2006, p.94).

In addition, in 1999 the estimate number of Kurds killed by Turkish army increased to over 40,000. “According to the figures published by Turkey’s own Parliament, 6,000 Kurdish villages were systematically evacuated of all inhabitants and 3,000,000 Kurds have been displaced” (Fatah, 2006). If it is not an elimination of a people, a culture and a homeland, then what is it? According to Fatah (2006) Professor Noam Chomsky called the Turkish response to Kurds an “ethnic cleansing”, resulting in the death of thousands, the emigration of over two million people and the destruction of approximately 6000 villages. The Turkish army does not turn back on any one who is suspected of being Kurdish activists. They destroy anything that belongs to Kurds and their identity in order to destroy their history and their real identity.

According to the 1924 constitution, the term citizenship and citizen is associated with Turkishness. In addition the document states that “one had to be a Turk to become a member of parliament and the like”. In this case “Kurds could qualify as Turks, but only at the expense of denying their own ethnic identity”. As a result the seeds for ultimate Kurdish dissatisfaction were planted (Barkey & Fuller1998, p.10).

The key to success is not in the mountains of Kurdistan or the occupying countries such as Turkey, Iran and Iraq but it is in the hands of the superpowers that are afraid of loosing their interests if Kurds become independent (Ciment 1996, p.3). Turkey cannot take its hand off Kurdistan because Kurdistan is highly rich in natural resources; for instance the part of Kurdistan which is under the rule of Turkish government contains large deposits of coal as well as headwaters of Trigis and some other important river systems (Ciment 1996, p.76). On the other hand Kurdistan is an important strategic area for Super powers such as America to have control over the Middle East and to maintain its benefits in Ankara too. Barkey and Fuller (1998, p.97) suggest “one of the major grounds for hope for a peaceful solution to Turkey’s Kurdish problem is its relatively advanced stage of political development.” But arguably it seems impossible to see political development in a country which considers itself a superior and democratic country.

In 1996, in relation to Turkey’s atrocities Lord Avebury who is the head of the British Parliamentary Human Rights Commission, said that, “’just as many people in western Europe turned a blind eye to Hitler's preparations for the Holocaust in the thirties, the democratic world ignores the evidence of incipient genocide against the Kurds in Turkey today’” (Fatah 2006).
In compare to the conflict between Kurds and Turks the conflict between Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews is a modern phenomenon, which began in the 20th century. These two groups have different religions and different beliefs (Palestinians include Muslims, Christians and Druze) but religious differences are not the cause of the conflict but it is the struggle over land. Until 1948, the area which both Palestinian and Israelis claim its ownership was known as Palestine. But as a consequence of the war of 1948-49, the land was divided into three parts which were Israel, West Bank and the Gaza Strip (Beinin & Hajjar 2000, p.1).

According to Beinin and Hajjar (2000) “Jewish claims to this land are based on the biblical promise to Abraham and his descendants, on the fact that this was the historical site of the Jewish kingdom of Israel (which was destroyed by the Roman Empire), and on Jews' need for a haven from European anti-Semitism”. On the other hand “Palestinian Arabs' claims to the land are based on continuous residence in the country for hundreds of years and the fact that they represented the demographic majority”. The Palestinians strongly reject the idea and if the Arabs of Palestine engage the biblical argument at all, they have every right to claim the land because Abraham's son Ishmael is the forefather of the Arabs; therefore God's promise of the land to the children of Abraham certainly includes Arabs as well. They believe that they should not sacrifice their land in order to compensate Jews for Europe's crimes against them (Beinin and Hajjar 2000, p.1).

Until now the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis has not ended and everyday citizens of both sides are killed or injured in clashes between the Palestinian fighters and Israeli army. A large number of Palestinians have immigrated to safer countries such as Jordan and many places have been destroyed during the conflict. Although the united nation and some other countries have tried to settle down the problems and put an end to the conflict and violence but until now there has been no success. According to the US department of state a peaceful solution to the conflict is to stop violence and terrorism. The US department also believes that the Palestinians need a strong leadership to fight terrorism, practice democracy based on tolerance and liberty in the region with the help from Israel. Also both groups need to accept each others independent states and certainly Arab states must cut off public and private funding and all other forms of support for groups who are supporting and engaging in violence and terror (U.S. Department of State 2003).

Now the differences between the two diccussed conflicts can be pointed out. For instance, Kurds in Turkey fight for their divided land, but the major reasons of their anger which has resulted in violence and conflict is the fear of being destroyed ethnically by Turks. Kurds are asking for freedom of speech, and keeping their identity, culture and language. In fact, today Kurds are facing a big problem which is the disappearance of their culture, identity and language under the government of nationalist Turks while the Palestinians do not face those problems. In fact Palestinians fight Israel to take back a part of their land that has been separated and occupied by Israeli government while living in other part of their land and under the rule of their own government.

To conclude the roots of the conflict between Kurds and Turks are in their long history. Kurds have suffered under the Turkish government simply because they are asking to keep their own identity and culture. They have been killed, humiliated and removed from their own homeland by the Turkish army and nothing has been done to stop the Turkish government form being so aggressive with Kurds by United Nation and other super powers. People in Palestine ask Israel to leave their belonging land, in return Israel kill them and destroy their homes and cities. Both conflicts are over political, economical and cultural benefit and the victims are Kurds and Palestinians who seems to have no choice but to fight until a peaceful solution puts an end to these entire two huge problems in the Middle East.

Reference:

Barkey, H J & Fuller, G E 1998, Turkey’s Kurdish question, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC, New York.

Beinin, J & Hajjar L 2000, Palestine, Israel and the Arab-Israeli ConflictA Primer, Middle East Report, viewed 10th November 2006

http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intro-pal-isr-primer.html.

Chaliand, G 1994, The Kurdish Tragedy, Zed Books LTD, London & New Jersey.

Ciment, J 1996, The Kurds: State and Minority in Turkey, Iraq and Iran, Facts on File, Inc. New York.

Fatah, R 2006, The accepted genocide of Kurds in Turkey, Kurdish Media, viewed on 5th November 2006

http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=13491.

Gunter, M.M 2004, Historical Dictionary of the Kurds, The Scarecrow Press, Inc, Lanham, Maryland, and Oxford.

McKiernan, K 2001, Human Rights vs US Arms Sales To Turkey, Common Dream News Centre, Viewed 14th November 2006,

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0113-02.htm.

McKiernan, K 2006, The Kurds: A People in Search of Their Homeland, St. Martin’s Press, New York

U.S Department of State 2003, Roadmap to Solution of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, USINFO, Viewed on 8th November 2006,
http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2004/Feb/04-725518.html.

2007-02-19T23:34:00.000-08:00

The Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran: Which one?

Sunday, February 18, 2007

KurdishMedia.com - By Dr Hussein Tahiri

The news of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran’s (KDPI) split on the 6th of December 2006 has unfortunately passed, at least within international circles, to a great extent unnoticed. Is it because such a party is not relevant to the political reality of Kurdistan, or has the event been overshadowed by international and regional political developments? It could be either scenario; in fact, it is very likely to be both.

When the news of the KDPI’s split was announced it was greeted with sadness by the Kurds and their allies. A sense of betrayal was felt by the families of peshmargas who sacrificed their life for the Kurdish cause, and a sense of jubilation by Kurdish enemies.

The KDPI has been handicapped by internal rivalries for the past several years. As a result, its political activities were lessened dramatically; to the extent that the Party’s very viability was placed under question mark. A party which had been known for its democratic principles eventually become intolerant towards it’s own membership, to the point that division within the ranks eventually led to a split.

Why did the KDPI’s leaders have so many differences that such a split became inevitable? It does not seem that there are any ideological differences between the two new resulting parties. Both groups now call themselves the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran, both claim to follow the path of Qazi Muhammad, Qasimlu, and Sharafkandi. Both seem to want federalism; both believe that the Islamic Republic of Iran should be overthrown. So far, neither side of the new political conflict has given any ideological or methodological reasons for their split from a central party identity.

Nevertheless, a lot of blame shifting and accusations are taking place. One side blames the other for behaving like dictators within the political machine. Another has accused the other for not abiding by democratic principles. Both counterparts claim to be democratic, flexible, having the interests of the Kurdish people as their priorities and being ready to compromise. However in practical terms, they do not follow-up their claims with any evidence of the above.

Both sides insist that two thirds of the party ranks have joined them. At the same time, they are not ready to wait for another year to exercise their “democratic” muscles, and prove without a doubt that their stance is correct. Given that there seem to be no ideological differences, is it so hard to wait for a year to demonstrate unequivocally their claims that they represent two third of the party and gain the control of the KDPI?

The reality is that laying blame and accusations do not resolve this sensitive and politically incorrect split; such actions will only exacerbate the problem. In a way, this split may end the stagnation the KDPI has been facing, but if it is not contained it could lead to a much worse and undesirable situation. It could lead to armed clashes between resulting factions, as has happened over previous splits. It could result in a situation where one side makes an alliance with the PUK and the other with the KDP, a situation that existed during the late 1960s and early 1970s [1]. Either of these situations could destroy any hard-wrought spirit of cooperation and further dishearten the Kurdish struggle in Iran.

In this sensitive time the Kurds of Iran expect their leaders to be sensible, generous and humble. They expect their leaders to put aside personal difference and antagonism in order to advance the greater Kurdish cause.

International and regional political developments have created a great opportunity for the Kurds. The Islamic Republic of Iran is facing international condemnation for its nuclear program and its human rights abuses. The KDPI leadership could have utilized this opportunity to advance sympathy for the Kurdish cause in Iran. However, instead, the leadership have put their personal interests above Kurdish interests. If such a great opportunity, created by international and regional developments, is not utilized by their own political party, the Kurds will not forgive the KDPI leadership, and nor should they.

If antagonism within the KDPI means stagnation, intolerance and ignoring democratic principles, then the KDPI would be better off split. Yet if there is even a vague hope that the KDPI leadership is willing to put aside personal interests in favor of national interests it would be better off having one united KDPI. The least the Kurds expect is that any resulting political parties emerging from the split groups will cooperate with each other to advance the Kurdish cause. This requires concessions from both sides and a greater devotion to the Kurdish cause. And, it will mean putting an end to the current atmosphere of blaming, bitterness and accusations.

The KDPI cannot function and continue with two KDPIs which are to all intents and purposes, identical, yet separate. Finding a peaceful solution to this internal conflict will demonstrate the maturity of the KDPI leadership and it will be the first test for future cooperation between these two factions. History is a lesson for both the present time and the future yet to come. Divisions in the past have never resulted in any positive outcomes for the Kurds. If the wood of the mighty tree is shaved off into splinter groups, how will a strong and flourishing Kurdistan evolve and grow?

There is still an opportunity for the KDPI to unite. If there are problems they need to be referred to the party rank and file; they should be the one who determine who leads the KDPI. Whoever gains a majority of the votes should lead; this is democracy, if, indeed, the KDPI leadership, members and cadres believe in democracy. If any are not happy with the result, hard work and the gaining of trust and confidence of party members and cadres for the next election through vision and policies is the sensible route. If issues are dealt with in this manner the KDPI will advance into an efficient and successful political party. Otherwise, another ten years will be gone before the KDPI leadership realises what has been lost. Such a loss of confidence would result in a complete lack of credibility for the party, a situation which would be impossible to reverse.

If the leadership of both factions cannot reconcile their differences, I would encourage the KDPIs leadership to challenge each other in a TV debate on Tishk or another Kurdish satellite TV to enable the Kurds to make an informed decision who to support. An informed populace, after all, is one of the hallmarks of democracy, which both factions claim to support. So, let us hear your conversation.

Endnotes

[1] In the 1960s, the KDPI members who had fled to Iraqi Kurdistan were divided into two factions. The conservative and more traditional nationalist faction was led by the KDPI leader, Ahmad Tawfiq (Abdullah Ishaghi), who aliened himself with Mulla Mustafa Barzani. The leftist faction comprised of young KDPI members (later on to be led by Abdurahman Qasimlou) who had tendencies towards socialism aliened themselves with the members of the KDP politburo, led by Ibrahim Ahmad, who opposed Mulla Mustafa.

Dr. Hussein Tahiri, a regular KurdishMedia.com contributor, is a Middle East commentator and an Honorary Research Associate with the School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University