Week 17: A Woman's Right: Anti-Abortion Law Passed in Alabama

CNN Article

Summary

On Wednesday, May 15th, 2019, the Alabama State senate passed anti-abortion into law. The law effectively banns abortion, by making it a felony to follow through with the procedure. Further punishing those who participate in the act up to life in prison. However, the law only provides certain exceptions to the few dealing with health risks. With additional Democratic attempts to add an amendment to exempt victims of rape and incest, several have failed in the process.

Alabama's Governor Kay Ivey, claims that her actions contributed to a greater cause, as "this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians' deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God." Yet Ivey also mentions that the new law has potential to be unenforced, due to specific legalized decisions during 1973. Overall, the bill has most certainly sparked continuous controversy between the woman of our society.

Reaction

After first receiving the news about this idea, I was really at a point of disbelief. Because I feel that this bill is addressing more than the aspect of pro-life, that it more-so affects quite the opposite in fact. For instance if a women living in unhealthy conditions were to undergo a nine month pregnancy, she is then left with two choices to make after giving birth. To either place her child under foster care, which is horrible for the child's sake, or provide for her child with the needs of government assistance, forcing legislatures to complain about government assisted programs not having the opportunity to contribute to other liabilities with financial support.



Connection

This correlates to our South Africa Unit in how certain laws affected the personal decisions and life choices of its society. During the late 1940's, a specific set of restrictions were enforced that would limit the possibility of equal well-being for all. Consequently enough, this would only resolve to future dispute and controversy over apartheid laws and procedures.



Questions

1) Should abortion be a woman's choice?

2) What is your input on the restrictive laws potentially being up to life in prison and the death penalty?

Week 17: Iran puts right foot out of nuclear agreement

CNN Article

Summary: Iran has decided to lessen their commitment to the nuclear deal that they signed back in 2015. The original deal made restrictions on Iran's nuclear development as well as the amount of nuclear material they were allowed to have at any point in time. In exchange for these limitations, other nations lifted their sanctions in certain areas to help Iran's economy. Iran's president Hassan Rouhani says that he is partially leaving the agreement due to some tension between the Iranians and the US over sanctions and the export of nuclear materials from Iran. The US had left the deal about a year before Iran did and had put sanctions back onto sectors that were previously unsanctioned as a part of the nuclear agreement. This caused Iran to have difficulty getting rid of the excess nuclear material that they needed to dispose of. Some of the tensions caused by this sudden instability have been blamed on the Trump Administration by European countries. Russia also believes that the US is responsible for Iran leaving the agreement due to it's return to sanctions.




Tensions between the international community and Iran only escalate as the US debates transporting more military support and defenses to the area in response to Iran's apparent military movements. Iranian ships carrying various types of ballistic missiles were discovered near the Strait of Hormuz and in the area of the Persian Gulf. The US continues to place sanctions on Iran and has restricted their oil profits. The US plans on maintaining pressure on Iran and labelled Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization.

Reaction: I was pretty surprised to find out that the US has backed out of the nuclear agreement because of how big of a deal it was to build that in the first place. I think that the tension could get worse if things between the countries don't get sorted out but I doubt that things will get too far. Due to international intervention in Iran in the past, I believe that everybody would work to avoid another conflict. When I saw that there was already talk of military action, even just military placement, I was shocked because with this the situation could escalate faster if something were to happen.

Connection: This relates to our World War 1 unit because it involves larger governments such as the US and European nations placing restrictions on other government's military capacity. In this case, the restriction is the limiting of nuclear development in return for lifted sanctions. After World War 1, Germany was given military limitations as well in exchange for monetary support in order for it to rebuild it'd economy. In both cases, they have economic difficulties and receive help in exchange for other limitations.

Questions:
1 How far do you think this situation could potentially get, and do you think that a worst case scenario is likely?

2 Do you agree with the US applying pressure on Iran for mobilizing missiles after they partially left the nuclear agreement?

3 Do you think that smaller countries such as Iran should be allowed to freely research potentially destructive sciences such as nuclear development?

Week 17: South Africa election: Ramaphosa holds power as memory of Mandela fades

Link to Article

Summary: After these recent 2019 elections in South Africa, the ANC has won the national election under the leadership of President Cyril Ramaphosa. Despite receiving 57.7% of the votes, this is the lowest amount of support for the ANC since they were first elected in 1994. This is partially due to the state of the country. South Africa is currently suffering, with inequality still quite a huge problem. The country is also having economic problems. According to the World Bank, "South Africa's richest households are almost 10 times wealthier than poor households. And the overall poverty levels still follow racial lines." Voters in South Africa started looking into more radical solutions to achieve change in South Africa, with smaller groups such as the far left EFF (Economic Freedom Front) having gotten more than 10% more of the votes in the election. The ANC also has had internal problems within the party, with the previous leader, Jacob Zuma having resigned from president due to corruption charges in 2018, and Ramaphosa taking over. This has caused the focus from solving many of the problems they face as a country to have been shifted to the corruption case instead.

Younger voters in South Africa, called "born frees" who were born after the end of apartheid, have also lost faith in the ANC and the democracy in South Africa due to how many of their problems have not been solved. Many of them chose not to vote in these elections. So far, the leaders of South Africa have not been able to bring about the amount of change the people wish for in the country, and do not have the mass amount of support from the people Mandela was able to get.

Reaction: I believe that the South African government still has a lot of work for them before South Africa becomes a mostly equal place for everyone. Although democracy and the end of apartheid made many lives better, they have many more obstacles and lots more work to help fully help South Africa fix their problems. Since 1994, I believe their transition to democracy has been quite successful, and the ANC has done a lot of good in making the country a much better place to live for everyone. With more time, I believe that the government can make South Africa much more equal and restore the people's faith in democracy.

Connection: This connects to our studies of South Africa and their experience with apartheid. We studied the election of 1994 in South Africa, and how it was the end of apartheid, and this is what has happened to South Africa since. During the 1994 election, people lined up very early in long lines to have the chance to vote. In this 2019 election however, many people have chosen to not even register to vote, illustrating how the end of apartheid and switch to democracy did make lives better in South Africa, but did not solve everything. Despite the hope from the 1994 election, everything has not been completely fixed in South Africa, mostly due to the short amount of time.

Questions:

1. Do you think the ANC will be able to remain in power in the future? Should they stay in power?
2. Will South Africa be able to become what the people wished for before the election of 1994?
3. Will more people in South Africa lose faith in the government and not vote?

Week 16: Taliban Attacks U.S. Aid Group in Kabul, Afghanistan

Original Article Here

Summary

On Wednesday, May 8, 2019, Taliban militants attacked the U.S. Aid Group Office in Kabul, Afghanistan. Right before noon, there was a car bomb that let off in front of the building, this allowed four gunmen to invade the Aid Office and kill many employees. There were 5 recorded deaths, all being American, 24 wounded, and other employees in the building who were working for the Humanitarian Non-profit Care Organization that were killed as well. Many believe that this was a direct response to the U.S. peace talks with Afghanistan.

Atiqullah Amarkhel, a retired Afghanistan general, believes that the Taliban did this to establish that, "they are the leader of the peace talks and the Americans should listen to them and accept their demands." The Taliban has made it very clear that they if the U.S. doesn't wish anymore conflict or bloodshed then there needs to be a complete withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. The Taliban declared on many occasions that they will not proceed any peace talks unless the U.S. decides to  comply with their demands. 

Reaction

My initial response was so that I was very upset which is where I remain to stand at this moment. There is absolutely no justification to this tragedy. This is especially such an extreme response to the peace talks. I understand both sides of this situation however, this violence should've never been seen as some sort of solution to the U.S. leaving Afghanistan alone. If anything, this only proves to the U.S. that Afghanistan continues to endanger their civilians and should be offered aid from the U.S. Also, seeing that they're ran by the Taliban, with a very violent reputation, this prompts the U.S. to involve themselves rather than be a bystander knowing that Afghanistan's citizens are in a complete danger zone without any help that would be provided. Although, I do feel that there should be some sort of support system for these citizens, I can also see how the Taliban and the Afghanistan Government feel dominated over in the peace talks. The U.S. hasn't even reduced the number of troops in Afghanistan which seems obviously very threatening to the Afghanistan Government as well as the Taliban. I, again, feel that they should've communicated this non-violently such as a conference of course as opposed to killing innocent people.

Connection

This connects to the Israel- Palestinian Conflict Unit. Israelis and Palestinians lived through the peace process that's been going on for almost 50 years and still haven't resolved many conflicts or achieved any peace. This relates to this event because the attack was in direct relation to the peace talks that have taken place with U.S. and Afghanistan since 2001 to establish a middle ground agreement and eventually peace. In both of these conflicts. one country wants something to receive something in return. Afghanistan wants the withdrawl or reduction of U.S. troops and in return, there'll be peace, and in the Israeli- Palestinian Conflict, the people of Palestine and Israel want to own the settlements and land in return for peace. Until someone gives up something in both of these situations, there will not be peace.

Questions

1) Do you think there will ever be any peace amongst Afghanistan and The U.S. as long as there is American Troops stationed in Afghanistan?

2) What can be an alternative solution to avoid any more violence?

3) Do you think that the situation will eventually escalate if the American Troops remain in Afghanistan, and to what extent?