Week 13: Greece's Economic Crisis Still Hurts

Greece’s Bailout Is Ending. The Pain Is Far From Over.

Article Link Here

Summary: Greece has been in an economic crisis over the past decade, and it is finally over. During the crisis, a third of the population was in poverty, and the rest experienced pay-cuts. Most Greeks cannot even afford to pay for their rent or their electrical bills. On top of that, Greece relied on about $360 billion on bailouts to help them escape the crisis. Even though unemployment in Greece has decreased since the end of the crisis, it is still the highest in the eurozone.

This shows a day center in Athens. Day centers serve as places for homeless people, refugees, and troubled Greek families to do their laundry, shower, and seek medical aid. 

Luckily, due to Greece’s variety of tourist destinations, such as islands and historical landmarks (like the acropolis), small businesses are beginning to thrive, and larger ones to rebound. There are also social aspects of the crisis that still linger after its end. For example, many people are left depressed, and suicide rates over the crisis had steeply risen. Although those rates have diminished, they are still much higher than what they used to be before the crisis. Debts caused by the crisis also led to many divorces and breaks in familial ties. At the moment, the crisis still prevents Greeks from much if any more than the bare minimum they need to survive.

The Parthenon (which is part of the acropolis in Athens) serves as one of the many tourist destinations in Greece that has provided economic support to the country, and has helped Greece to become more like how it was before the economic crisis.

Reaction: I feel bad for the people in Greece who are taking a heavy toll due to the debt crisis. It’s saddening to see so many people below the poverty line, and to imagine what life must be like over there. However, I am hopeful for the country as business begins to rise. The bailouts and aid from other countries helped the Greeks get back to a more normal state of life. The world should take this as an example of what human kindness is and to apply it to other impoverished countries.

Connection: This relates to the Weimar Republic that formed after World War I in Germany. They experienced an economic crisis after needing to pay off their war debts. Although the two crisis of each country arose from different issues, they both led to similar results. In both cases, many people fell below the poverty line, and in both cases, the issues continued after the crisis. Unsettlement and unhappiness due to low quality of life was experienced after both situations (and still is being experienced in Greece). For example, in the Weimar Republic, people burned their money due to inflation to get warmth. In the same sense, Greeks under the poverty line can not afford to pay their electrical bills, and thus live without electricity (and in the cold).

Questions to consider:

1) Do you think it is safe to say that Greece's economic crisis is over, considering the fact so many people are still barely able to live?

2) For any country in an economic crisis, when is increasing taxes too much, or when is it time to seek international economic support, such as Greece did with bailouts?

3) What are some methods Greece could use to gain income and restore a good quality of life?

WEEK 13: North Korea announces firing of tactical guided weapon

original article

other article

Summary: North Korea just announced that it had test-fired a new weapon. This was its first missile test since the "breakdown of a summit" between President Trump and Kim Jong Un in February. They came up with the potential deal to end North Korea's nuclear program, in return for some modest economic sanctions relief from the US. Although meetings like this could immensely improve relations between the two countries, many experts were not optimistic.

The weapon tested was not entirely clear, but by description, experts seemed to rule out a ballistic missile-- meaning this act would not violate their self-inflicted temporary halt on testing. However, this still seemed to be a demonstration from Kim Jong un that his country is continuing to develop its weapons program. The state-run Korean Central News Agency explained that the weapon was fired at different targets, "could carry a 'powerful warhead' and increased the 'combat power' of the country's military," and the tests were overseen by Kim Jong Un.

(Kim Jong Un at a military airfield recently) 

Although it is not a ballistic missile, Victor Cha (a North Korean expert at Georgetown University) claims that "'They are giving the US till the end of this year to make a deal, but in the meantime, they will bolster their capabilities, untethered from any agreement.'" It is true that North Korea agreed to stop testing nuclear weapons in 2017, but that did not include an agreement to halt the testing of weapons all together. 

(Intercontinental ballistic missiles at a military parade in 2017)

Many experts see this as the way North Korea is showing its growing military potential, as well as their discontent with the lack of flexibility coming from the US. Kim Jong Un said he would be prepared to meet with Trump for a third summit only if the US altered its approach. He also made clear that he won't be patient forever, and gave the US until the end of this year to make a "bold decision."

Reaction: Obviously, North Korea is not known for its stability, both in their government as well as their reactions with the US. North Korea's potential possessions of nuclear weapons has brought attention to the world many times before. The fact that they are testing weapons could cause fear among many countries who could be their next target. As for the US, they gave to make a smart decision, without getting on North Korea's bad side, but I don't think they should completely give in either as that would grant too much power to North Korea. 

Connection: Nuclear weapons was also a huge deal concerning the USSR and the US during the Cold War. Immense fear was brought to the US because of communism and the potential effects of the USSR's nuclear weapons, especially after the weapons were place in communist Cuba-- only around 100 miles from the tip of the US. Luckily, no physical damage was done, but the fear did not simply go away. Similarly, now a nation that has demonstrated authoritarian and communist actions, has possession of potentially dangerous weapons. The US is yet again stuck in a difficult position between relations with a country, who has the capability to be harmful, and the motive of fear that is presented with the force they could use. 

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think the US Govt. as well as US citizens should be fearful of North Korea and their possession of weapons?

2. How should the US respond? Should they really make a "bold decision"?

3. Should people be more concerned with the weapons, or the message they are trying to send? 

photo
photo

Week 13:Egypt Change in Constitution Could Mean Sisi Rule Till 2030

Original Story

Summary:

President Abdul Fattah Sisi came into power in 2014 and was supposed to step down in 2022 at the end of his second four year term. However, President Sisi may see power till 2030 which is 8 years past the original date of his office. He is able to do this because of a change in the amendment which would turn his term right now to 6 years and let him run again. Sisi who had originally overthrown the last leader Morsi, who was known for his mistreating of citizens, ended up putting thousands in detention. Sisi himself hasn't faced a true competitor for his spot, for the last election he had won 97% of the vote. His competitors either dropped out or they were arrested. The Egyptian parliament is filled with supporters of Sisi. If this goes through then Sisi would also get more power in the judiciary and the military.

Reaction:

President Sisi is a very dangerous leader toward his citizens. For example, once he had an Egyptian economist murdered because he challenged Sisi on the topic of why Egypt is poor (Full story). If a leader who is not willing to let his or her citizens come out to make changes when their country is not doing well is able to more than double his term for his place in office I as a citizen would be worried for my family and the well being of my country. Egypt doesn't have a strong chance of getting a good leader to run against Sisi due to these "drop outs" and "arrestings". Plus, with a good amount of parliament on his side he can do what he wants for a long time.

Connection:

This connects to the Rise of the Dictators unit where corrupt people in power used their power in order to lead countries and exploit there people. In this case it would be just the start but if this keeps continuing where he can elongate his time in power Egypt could very well be in the process of turning into a dictatorship.

Questions to Consider:

1. What are some ways the people could fight back and stop this from happening?

2. Do you think that the government even though on Sisi's side would fight for the people's rights?

Week 12: LGBT Communities under heavy scrutiny in Brunei by the government

 New Harsh Laws against LGBT Communities

Original Article

Summary:

The kingdom of Brunei is located in Southeast Asia and is the first country to enforce punishment for crimes such as LGBT sex, or adultery. The punishment in Brunei for these so-called "unnatural acts" includes caning, fines, and even death by stoning. Neighboring countries like Malaysia and Indonesia have also been experimenting with these strict Islamic laws similar to Brunei's. Numerous conservative politicians from Malaysia and Indonesia have voiced their support for these new laws. This news is very concerning for the LGBT communities living in Indonesia and Malaysia. It's said that Brunei's laws are becoming more harsh and strict which also is bad news for LGBT people living in neighboring countries. Brunei is considered the leading example of imposing these laws, so if other countries agree with Brunei they'll most likely be just as strict. People are saying that this is a major human rights issue and if no immediate action is taken then "anything is possible".

Observers gather to witness the caning of two women convicted of having sex in Terengganu, Malaysia

Reaction:

In my opinion, the conflict going on in Brunei made me feel terrible for what some people have to go through for just being themselves. I think that it's terrible that the government of Brunei is imposing these laws and enforcing horrific punishment to these poor people. I feel blessed to live in a country that basically gives you the right to be who you want to become. I'm glad the in my country I feel safe and am never in any real danger and that everyone is treated equally under the constitution.

Hassanal Bolkiah: Prime Minister and Sultan of Brunei

Connection:

I feel that this conflict in Brunei relates to the World War 2 unit. In the World War 2 unit, we learned a great deal about the Holocaust and its tragedies. We learned Hitler's main goal was to massacre Jews but he also targeted homosexuals. We also saw the people of Germany at the time turn very anti-semitic and very hostile towards Jews. This is very similar to what is happening in Brunei. The new laws are similar to the Nuremberg laws which targeted a specific group. 

An Example of a man being punished by caning in Brunei

Questions:

1.  Do you think that this is a big enough human rights issue that other more powerful countries should intervene to create safety for the LGBT community and prevent the cruel punishments?

2.  What do you think are the necessary steps to de-escalate the tension in and around Brunei?

3. What do you think the actual outcome of this conflict will be?

Week 12: EU Delays Brexit Until Halloween

Original Article

Summary:

Theresa May’s Brexit deal for Britain to withdraw from the European Union has been
rejected by the UK Parliament for the third time on March 29, a last minute extension for
Brexit’s exit deadline has been announced at an emergency summit on April 10, with less
than 48 hours for Britain’s scheduled departure whether or not there was not a formal deal
made with the UK Parliament.

Pro Brexit demonstrators gathering for a speech by Nigel

Farage, a member of the European Parliament, in central London

on March 29

This new extension has set the deadline for Brexit to be on October 31, rejecting Prime
Minister Theresa May’s initial proposal to the EU for a shorter extension until June 30. The
prime minister proposed this in hopes of not only having a formal Brexit deal pass through
the UK Parliament by then, but to avoid the UK to participate in the European Parliamentary
elections. The “no deal Brexit” that would’ve been passed in less than 48 hours otherwise
would’ve caused serious economic damage to Britain along with a health crisis and border
chaos.

British Prime Minister Theresa May making a statement on

Brexit to the UK House of Commons in London on March 29

The EU concluded this agreeing that such a short a short deadline was unrealistic for Brexit
and that it was not enough time for Theresa May to persuade the UK Parliament to finally
pass through the Brexit deal and that they wanted to avoid more emergency summits. Not
only this, but the EU has more important topics to focus on in the future (such as the
nomination of a new European Commission president and a election of the new European
Council president) and they do not wish to spend all their time invested in one topic: Brexit.
"I think the extension should be as short as possible. But it should be long enough to create
calm, so we don't have to meet every two weeks to talk about the same subject,"German
Chancellor Angela Merkel told the German parliament as one of the many members of the
EU tired of directing all their attention into Brexit.

Donald Tusk, President of the European Council and the

President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker

"Please do not waste this time," European Council President Donald Tusk said after the
emerging from the negotiations on Thursday, telling British lawmakers to conclude on the
details on the UK’s planned departure from the EU. However, many of Theresa May’s
conservative party members still wish to negotiate the Brexit deal. As progress has been
slow and not much compromise has been made, May’s conservative supporters are holding
talks with her opposition Labour Party to settle on a agreement that can be passed through
the UK Parliament. Meanwhile, there have been some conservative party members that
have been asking for Theresa May to step down from the role of Prime Minister. She
previously promised to relinquish her leadership once the Brexit deal was passed through,
but did not seta date for it. “I know there is a desire for a new approach — and new
leadership — in the second phase of the Brexit negotiations — and I won’t stand in the
way of that," she told the members of the UK Parliament.

An Anti-Brexit Protester outside the UK Parliament in London

As for the United States, President Donald Trump supported Britain the night before the EU
negotiations of Brexit in Brussels, posting on Twitter: "Too bad that the European Union is
being so tough on the United Kingdom and Brexit. The E.U. is likewise a brutal trading
partner with the United States, which will change. Sometimes in life you have to let people
breathe before it all comes back to bite you!"

Reactions:

As of right now, it seems unclear whether or not Theresa May will be able to pass through
the UK Parliament a Brexit deal. However, I feel like regardless of whether she succeeds
or not for a Brexit deal by the extended deadline of Halloween, Theresa May would rather
take a no-deal Brexit for the UK rather than no Brexit at all, but with the consequences of a
no-deal Brexit to UK economically, socially, and internationally being severe, I believe that
Theresa May will only go through a no-deal Brexit if she has no other option—which is if
she fails to get yet another extension for Brexit (which I believe is highly unlikely) and if she
fails to pass through a Brexit deal through the UK Parliament over the course of about 6
months from now. Personally, I would like the UK to go through with Brexit even though I’m
not directly affected by it just to be able to see how the UK and EU would handle the
situation once it’s over.

Connections:

This reminds me of the fall of the Soviet Union—it almost in a metaphorical way seems like
the UK declaring independence from the EU just like many different territories of the once
powerful Soviet Union declaring independence to govern themselves as a country. Like the
UK if they leave Brexit, these countries will have their own self sustaining economy and
currency, and their economy won’t be as volatile and/or unstable if the decisions of another
country or person affects it. Additionally, for the Soviet Union, it was not one but multiple
countries that it split off into, considering that this reflects onto the European Union as well,
this may as well foreshadow more and more countries leaving the EU in the future, seeking
a more stable economy, instead of having to go through the financial crash in 2008 which
was caused by the unwise decisions made by other countries in the union, not by themselves.

Questions:

1. How likely do you think Theresa May will be able to pass through a Brexit deal through the
UK Parliament before the deadline of Halloween?

2. Assuming that the UK goes through a no-deal Brexit, how severely do you think they’ll be
affected, and will they be able to recover?

3. Why do you think Theresa May is so persistent with trying to go forward with Brexit?

Additional Sources:

BBC News

Wall Street Journal

The New York Times

WEEK 12: Israel election: Netanyahu set for record fifth term

Link to Original Article Here

Summary:
This past Tuesday, April 9th, Israelis headed to the polls to vote for their next prime minister. Though the results aren't officially out yet, Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Israeli Prime Minister of the right-wing Likud Party, will likely remain in office. This makes Netanyahu the longest serving prime minister of Israel, with a record of five terms, leading the country for a decade.

Netanyahu's main rival is Benny Gantz, an Israeli army officer and politician who served as Chief of Staff of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). Gantz is the leader of the newly formed Blue and White Party (hence the flag of Israel), an overall centrist political alliance.

The two candidates personally attacked one another with Netanyahu branding Gantz as mentally unstable and therefore unfit for office. Gantz has also talked badly about Netanyahu, bringing up his roles in bribes and on his "Mr.Security" image, which Netanyahu relies on for his right-winged votes.

In a series of final interviews before the election, Netanyahu announced that if re-elected, he would push for the annexation of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, which is still considered illegal by international law. If this happens, however, it could mean an end to the two-state solution and also more unrest in the middle of the conflict. The representation of Israelis in government of the Labour Party, the party that originally made a deal with the Palestinians in the 1990s, also had a record low number of seats in the parliament.

In response to the results of the Israeli election, the secretary general of PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) expressed his disappointment in the representation of efforts for peace attempts in the ongoing conflict between the two states:

Recently, Netanyahu was indicted for charges of corruption. While Netanyahu claims that he is a victim of a political 'witch-hunt', he still faces these allegations, specifically one case of bribery and three for breach of trust. From here, it is officially the Israeli president (Reuven Rivlin)'s choice to choose a candidate best fit and backed by the majority of the parliament. This will be determined in a couple of weeks.

Reaction:
I think that Netanyahu winning this election will make disagreements between Israel and Palestine even deeper and possibly even a final agreement a void destination. Though Gantz didn't explicitly offer Palestine an independent state, he, unlike Netanyahu, has called for moving towards peace with Palestinians, while still maintaining Israel's security. At this point, a strong, mostly right-winged will likely be against compromise.

Connection:
This topic relates to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we studied in class a few weeks ago. As Netanyahu's beliefs are very right-winged, it will be increasingly harder for Palestine to reach their own statehood if Netanyahu stays as Prime Minister. Though security and stability will remain well in Israel, the relationships with its neighboring people will falter. Steps that were taken before, such as the Camp David Accords or the Oslo Accords, will be harder to emulate again.

Questions:
What do you think will happen to the relations between Israel and Palestine if Netanyahu continues to be prime minister? Is there still hope for peace?

Why do you think that some of the Israelis voted for security rather than peace?

Will there ever be a prime minister that is either left-winged or centrist in Israel?

Additional Resources:
CNN

Week 12: Kazakhs React To Their Capital City's Name Change

Link to article

(https://indy-guide.com/en/articles/walking-tour-of-astana)

Summary:
The police have arrested 20 people for protesting Kazakhstan's capital name change from Astana to Nursultan at the mayor's office. For some background, Nursultan Nazarbaev resigned after being president for almost 30 years. Tokayev steps up to the task for the remaining of the term, until elections in April 2020.

(https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/kazakhstan-nazarbayev-transition-plan-190331061032825.html)

At a meeting with Parliament, Tokayev proposes the change in the name of the capital to name it after Nazarbaev. Parliament agrees. Following this, an online petition has been made against this. Nearly 40,000 people have signed it because this city has changed its name 3 times already. The Kazakhs are adamant about not changing the capital a 4th time in less than 60 years. The city of Astana was known as Akmolinsk followed by Tselinograd. After the break of the Soviet Union and Kazakhstan became independent, Tselinograd became known as Aqmola, which means White Grave in Kazakh. This city wasn't the capital until it moved from Almaty. Finally, it became Astana, meaning Capital in Kazakh. Not only does Tokaev want to rename the capital but also some of the major streets after Nazarbaev.

Reaction: 
I think that it is unfair to the Kazakhs that their capital city is being renamed without asking them first. Parliament and Tokaev created this new name for the city so fast that the people barely had time to react. I think Tokaev is also jumping the gun a little bit. He shouldn't make major changes until the elections next year. I also think that it's terrible for a city to be renamed so often in such a short time, especially one that is the capital. Most countries are very proud of their capital, and I think that the renaming is changing its identity in a way. Changing the name loses the value and a sense of magnificence of the capital in my opinion.

Connection: 
This connects to the Cold War because the Soviet Union disbanded after the Cold War. A few parts broke off to create new countries. Kazakhstan is one of these new countries. This article shows a bit of the youth of this country as it is off to a rocky start and their fluctuating decisions about the capital.

Questions: 
1) What do you think about the actions of Tokaev and Parliament?
2) What do you think of the response of the Kazakhs, their petition and protest?
3) How would you feel/react if your capital's name was renamed 4 times in your lifetime?