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?

WEEK 16: Hostilities Flare Up as Rockets from Gaza Hit Israel

Link to article

Summary:

Nothing is new about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the hatred that both groups have for the other. The nations are constantly fighting, despite attempts from the United Nations and surrounding countries to forage a longer-term ceasefire. Around 250 rockets were recently launched from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip to Israel. In response, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) carried out artillery and air strikes on approximately 120 Hamas-occupied locations. One rocket from the Gaza Strip killed an Israeli man after destroying that man’s house and spraying deadly shrapnel everywhere in a horrid display.

Palestinian Rockets intercepted by Israeli defense systems

Unfortunately, that was not the only injury sustained due to these air strikes. Multiple other civilians on from both nations have died or been severely injured in attacks from both sides. Two Hamas militants were killed by the IDF’s response, and a mother and a baby were killed by a rocket with a questionable origin. The IDF says that this small family was killed by a Palestinian rocket that fell short of its target, while the Palestinian state believes they were killed by an Israeli rocket. This recent attack instigated by Palestinian forces was due to a tight Israeli blockade of the Gaza area that has led to economic hardship in Gaza. Israel says that this blockade is "necessary" in order for weapons to stop reaching the Gaza Strip. A Palestinian militant shot two IDF members near the border, and Israel responded with an air strike. The

An Israeli strike in Gaza

Reaction:

When I scanned online news articles, searching for something to write my blog post, this one certainly did not catch my eye. Sadly, developments in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are not abnormal. However, I thought that this story was more significant than average because of the fact that multiple helpless, innocent civilians were killed by the IDF or Hamas. Also, my hope is that this article serves as a reminder that in the world, there are tons of people living with uncertain futures in war-torn areas. There are the “haves,” the people with food, security, freedom, health, and peace, and there are the “have-nots” that may suffer daily and question where their next meal comes from. We, whether you like it or not, are the “haves” of the world.

Connection:

Quite obviously, this news story connects to our Israeli-Palestinian Conflict unit. As has been stated, this is nothing new, and although the world has made some progress toward peace, there is much work that needs to be done. The two nations are still fighting the war of their ancestors, and show no signs of stopping in the near future. The IDF and Hamas have both reached the point where innocence has been lost. Both are responsible for the tragedies due to the fighting, and blaming the other side for their actions (like this tweet below from  will only escalate the conflict.

Results of an Israeli air strike in Gaza

Questions:

1. At this point in the Israeli Palestinian conflict, is it acceptable to kill civilians? Why or why not?
2. Do you think the two nations will establish some sort of peace in our lifetimes? Why or why not?
3. What should the US do to be a teammate in helping to install peace in the Middle East?

Week 16: Mosques and Shrines Razed in China

Source

     Usually around this time of the year in China, Uighur Muslims would converge on the Imam Asim shrine. People would leave some markers of their prayers at the shrine. It is thought to be as good to visit a sacred shrine at least three times as to complete the hajj, the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. However, no one can visit the sacred shrine anymore as it was torn down and razed. Recently, the Guardian and Bellingcat open-source analyst Nick Waters observed 91 mosques and shrines and it was found that 31 mosques and two major shrines had parts of them destroyed, 15 of those mosques and both shrines were either completely or almost razed.

Imam Asim Shrine

     China has been recently targeting Muslims in the name of "containing religious extremism." China's foreign ministry spokesman has stated, "China practices freedom of religion and firmly opposes and combats religious extremist thought... Religious believers can freely engage in religious activities to the law." However in late March, party secretary Chen Quanguo has said that the government must "improve the conditions of religious places to guide religion and socialism to adapt to each other" by razing Islamic buildings. Despite saying that religious activities are legal, the Chinese government's actions say otherwise as they force Muslims to eat lunch during Ramadan and monitor people to see if they are a Muslim.

Jafari Sadiq Shrine

Reaction: I think that what the Chinese government is doing to the Uighur Muslims is wrong. They have been discriminating against them for many years and have done many acts that have violated their human rights. Although it is morally wrong, it is understandable that the Chinese government wants to solidify their position of power and make it last as long as possible, obtaining it with whatever they deem necessary.

Connection: This connects to world history at is similar to Germany and Jews. Instead of German people discriminating against Jewish people, it is Chinese people discriminating against Muslims. They both use their targets as scapegoats and the movement is driven by the government.

Questions:

1. Why do you think the Chinese government is discriminating against Muslims?

2. What potential consequences do you think could happen if this continues as it has been for the past few years?

3. Why do you think that more countries don't try to step in and stop this?

Week 16: Turkey Demands Another Election for Istanbul

Original Article

Summary: After a decision to rerun just the mayoral vote, Turkey's main opposing party has called to declare last year's national elections and the entire Istanbul city election in March illegitimate.  On Wednesday, the Republican People's Party said that if the mayoral vote is rerun, votes for Istanbul officials and councils should be cancelled after President Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AK) won the majority vote.  Following appeals by the AK Party, citing irregularities in the appointment of polling station officials, the High Election Board on Monday ordered a rerun of the Istanbul mayoral election, which the CHP's Ekrem Imamoglu won by a slight majority.  On March 31st, citizens voted for district administrators, mayors, municipal councils, and local officials.  The board ruled to cancel the one the AK Party lost, the Istanbul mayoral result, arguing that the ruling should apply to all four elections because the votes cast in the same envelopes and counted by the same officials.  CHP Deputy Chairman Muharrem Erkek told reporters, "If you're revoking Ekrem Imamoglu's mandate ... then you must also annul President Erdogan's mandate because the same laws, same regulations, same applications, same polling stations and conditions were present in both elections," and also stated, "Why are you not cancelling the results that came out of the same envelopes,". 

Former Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on Tuesday that the decision to annul the results "caused damage to one of our fundamental values", tweeting "The biggest loss for political movements is not losing elections but the loss of moral superiority and social conscience,".  Two of Erodogan's former party members have also expressed their concerns that rerunning the election will hurt the state's image.  Abdullah Gul, former president and cofounder of the AK Party, compared the decision to a 2007 ruling that prevented him from becoming president without a two-thirds majority in parliament.  

Germany's foreign minister called the decision "incomprehensible", and the European Union wants an explanation.  Istanbul's reelection is scheduled on June 23.  Analyst Ege Seckin told Al Jazeera, "This is something we had not seen in Turkey until now. The decision casts a shadow on the integrity of the ballot box in the country, which was something relatively safe, as some would claim, from the authoritarian tendencies of the government."  

"It is definitely a bad sign for what may come. And it potentially creates a discouragement for the integrity of future elections."

Reaction:

Election integrity is something that is vital to a successful democracy.  Refusing to accept results or trying to manipulate them is definitely a step towards dictatorship.  After pretty much every election, no matter who wins, the losing side often cries "voter fraud" or "foreign interference", which we saw after the 2016 election and still see today.   Turkey's CHP demanding a mayoral election rerun when the opposing party won the first time can be taken as disrespecting their democracy and heading down the slippery slope of  dictatorship.  

Connection: 

Like I mentioned above, voting integrity is a topic often brought up here.   In regards to connecting this to what we have learned in class, this reminds me of  dictatorships and how they came to be.  A sign of a dictator is controlling elections.  When Stalin came into power, he turned the Soviet Union into a one party state.  Often, dictators made sure that they were the only candidate, or took out all of their opponents.  

Questions: 

1. How dangerous is it to democracy to demand election reruns?

2. Should other countries interfere?

WEEK 15: Buenos Aires Almost Fully Shut Down Due to Protests.

Original Article Here

Summary: On September 3, 2019 thousands of citizens in Argentina took to the streets and marched as a part of a two-day nationwide strike. The strike was coordinated by trade unions, social movements and by the general public. They all came together to protest against rising poverty and unemployment rates. Both of which have been caused by the President's fiscal austerity programme. This is disappointing because President Mauricio Macri (Argentina's President) promised during his campaign he would manage to reach “poverty zero”, not only that but he repeatedly said it would be “super easy.” The protest was so powerful that it caused banks and schools to close, and hospitals only attended to emergencies.

The Plaza de Mayo square in Buenos Aires was swarmed full of people who were unhappy and unable to keep up with the costs of living. Since inflation has increased in Argentina people have had to adapt. The large portion of the population that earns around minimum wage has had to make serious changes to their lifestyle. Either they pay for gas other they pay for electricity, because the ridiculously high prices prevent them from having basic human resources. During the protest 27 people were detained according to the Police. However, this didn't stop the people. The protests escalated and the population started to get violent, two buses were lit on fire. Fortunately, there were no reported injuries and those were the only damages major throughout the city that day.

Reaction: I personally think this is a very sad situation for the citizens and businesses in
Argentina. Realistically minimum wage should be set at a high enough earning that the people can buy basic resources. However, since this isn’t the case I predict homelessness rates to rise from the current 25.7% to around 30%, unless Mr. Macri makes serious changes that benefit the population. I think all this is occuring due to corruption and politicians pocketing the money from taxes. Even though Argentina's economy is failing i believe there is still hope as long as Mauricio Macri is not reelected.


Connection: This article connects to both our Russian revolution unit and our South Africa unit. It connects to the Russian revolution because one of the sparks for the revolution was the scarcity of food in Petrograd, and the fact that most Russians had lost faith in the Czarist regime. This also connects to our South Africa unit because much like the Soweto uprising the march took a violent turn and buses were set on fire.


Question:
1) Do you think Argentinas economy will bounce back?
2) Do you think these protests will help make change?

Week 15: Russia news: Is a Beluga whale in Norway seas spying for Putin? Fishermen find harness

Original Article

    Last week a beluga whale with a strange harness came up to a couple of Norwegian fishermen out by Ingoya, an Arctic Island about 250 miles from Murmansk, Russia where their Northern Fleet is based and where a Russian naval base close by. The harness marks that it came from St. Petersburg it also had a GoPro camera holder but no camera. This shocked the fisherman who found out that the whale was actually a Russian spy for Vladimir Putin. This beluga is not the first animal Russia's used to help spy on its enemies in the West. 

Russian reserve colonel Col Viktor Baranets was interviewed soon after news of the whale became global news. He started by assuring Norway was in no harm however he didn't deny that the whale was actually an escapee from the Russian navy. He also revealed in the interview about Russia's public use of combat dolphins for the navy. And since Russia's takeover of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine back in 2014 they've had a fully functional facility to train the dolphins to perform tasks that humans could never do underwater. There training includes "training to solve various tasks, from analyzing the seabed to protecting a stretch of water, killing foreign divers, and attaching mines to the hulls of foreign ships" according to the colonel. 

Reaction: At first glance, I could not believe that Russia was making animals into soldiers for their own use. I found it very eyeopening knowing that there could be more secrets like this to outbest the U.S. It makes me wonder how far have both countries gone to perfecting these animals so they'll follow exact orders at every point. And if they'll be eventually used in global warfare in the future or will they be used secretively as spies. This also makes me wonder how this will affect the Russia-U.S. relationship as other allegations are arising between the two from the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Connection: This connects to our Cold War Unit as both powers raced to beat the other in the arms race and to hold an advantage over the other. During the Cold War Both U.S. and Russian Navy's trained aquatic mammals to enhance their underwater influence and power. The U.S. in specific trained dolphins and sea lions to locate mines and various other objects along the ocean floor.

Question:

1) How do you feel about the training of marine animals for military use? 

2) How do you think the outbreak of this news will affect Russian-U.S. tensions?

3) What steps do you think Russias neighbors and the UN should take after discovering that their operations could expand out into their waters?