Determining Borders – Creating Internal Stability

Dear readers – please use this link to the original source of the article

In 2008 there have been numerous disputes, peaceful and not, with regard to borders. In some cases these disputes turned violent. The biggest border conflicts and disputes have resulted in tensions between Israel and Gaza, Russia and Georgia, India and Pakistan, Turkey and Iraq, and Afghanistan and Pakistan. The peaceful border tensions are between the U.S. and Mexico and the ongoing debate about the status of Cyprus. Aside from the geographical border disputes and tensions, the economic crisis has shown the world that economic borders are not that safe as well.

In 2009, many nations that have border disputes will try to settle them. After the fall of the USSR, borders of many countries have destabilised and there are many regions and territories in the world that would like to see independence. After having numerous countries engage in open and political conflicts in 2008 with regard to borders, leaders of some nations look like they have realised that borders need to be set and finalised once and for all, preferably without the use of force.

Geographical

There is an argument that, in order to have a stable regime, whatever it may be, inside a country, that nation needs to have stable borders. Support for this argument is abundant, and there are few that would disagree. However, it seems that only now is this argument really finding its place in the global arena. Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev has assigned an advisory commission to present solutions to Russian border disputes, to map those borders, and to finalise them, so everyone knows where the nation’s borders are drawn.

As Israel has had numerous clashes with its neighbours, it has become evident that it needs to start working towards more stable and accurate borders in order to avoid conflicts such as the one in Gaza. Therefore it could definitely say that a rocket attack, or any attack, over that particular given line will automatically result in an open conflict.

Gaza’s borders are not stable. Israel set up a wall, literally and figuratively that isolates the people inside the Gaza strip. Israel even goes as far as to not allow international aid workers to bring in supplies and medication to Palestinians living in the Gaza strip. During Israel’s short campaign in the Gaza strip, the Israeli Navy went as far as ramming a ship full of humanitarian aid intended for the Palestinian civilians. Israel’s conflicts have been coupled by political instability. Not that the regime has changed or has any intention to do so, it is that the Israeli government has largely been unstable and its leaders and prominent politicians have been at the center of attention for shady activities on numerous occasions.

Another country with unstable borders and even more unstable relations with its neighbours is Pakistan. It has been in the spotlight quite often recently. First of all, its borders with Afghanistan are nearly unguarded, to say the least. Secondly, after the events in Mumbai, Indian-Pakistani borders have become as tense as ever because of India’s accusations that Islamabad had trained and even organised the attack in Mumbai.

Northern Waziristan, according to U.S. sources, is a base of operations for Al-Qaeda. The U.S. military has been launching raids into Pakistan on many occasion, stating the fact that Pakistan’s military has nearly no control over the province and lets insurgents roam freely over the Afghan-Pakistan border.

Evidence of instability in Pakistan is seen through the change of power in August of 2008, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and many other events. All of this can be linked to the fact that the borders of Pakistan are very insecure.

The United States, although most stable out of the above mentioned countries, has their own instability to deal with. The U.S. erected a fence going between Mexico and the U.S. The illegal immigration of Mexicans to their northern neighbour has stirred up a lot of controversy. The fence was erected exactly for the reasons of stabilising the inside of the country, rather than the illegal immigration situation. The Bush administration was already speeding downhill at the time of the decision to erect the fence. Its hope did not do anything to stabilise their situation and slow down their descent in public approval. Nevertheless, it was an attempt at getting the situation under control.

Now, Barack Obama will try and secure the border with means other than physically trying to get in the way of the illegal migrant inflow into the U.S. Whatever the means are, they are aimed primarily at stabilising the order primarily in the Southern and Southwestern United States. Whatever the arguments may be for and against, it is a fact that illegal immigration destabilises the order in places that illegal migrants go to because they are willing to work for below the minimum wage and thus cost jobs that actually create tax revenue. This is the issue with border stabilisation between the U.S. and Mexico.

Cyprus and Turkey have another border issue to deal with on the international arena, primarily due to Turkish aspirations to join the EU. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is only recognised by Turkey, and thus Turkey will need to determine what is more important: a small area that has been disputed since the British colonial rule, or the current issue of joining the EU. It will have to draw its border sooner or later and finalise the issue eventually.

Turkey, although more stable than most other Middle Eastern countries, still has problems developing a more stable democracy, to which they aspire. Its relationship with the Kurds and the Iraqi border is another issue at stake. Until those issues are finalised, it will be hard to focus more on internal issues because they are an immediate security risk.

Geographical borders will need to be covered first in order to stabilise regimes and political situations within many countries. It looks like more and more countries are recognising the correlation between stable borders and stable governments. Nevertheless, the economic expansion of many multinational corporations from all over the world brings instability as well (to be discussed in part 2 later this week).

Conclusion

There are many unresolved border and territorial disputes all over the world. After seeing many conflicts spring up between neighbours in recent years after the fall of the Soviet Union, borders have become key issues in certain regions. In recent years many conflicts and disputes have escalated to new levels primarily because many nations are not willing to look into the issues and would rather just keep at proving that they are right. Although it seems logical, nations need to compromise and resolve these issues because unstable borders nearly always lead to unstable governments and internal politics.

It is a benefit to all to find solutions to these problems in order to bring about more order within a nation. 2009 will be the founding year for nation defining their national borders and securing them in order to bring about order with regard to domestic politics.

Dear readers – please use this link to the original source of the article

Why Europe will not be the next superpower

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Many political analysts and observers have predicted that the EU will rise up to be the next power, stronger and more unified than the United States. Nevertheless, there are many reasons why this may not happen and it is important to note this in order to understand the reasons for Europe lagging behind its scheduled growth and why the EU, with its bigger markets and greater population, has not risen above America yet.

Although today Europe is a multinational union that has integrated …

FULL ARTICLE HERE

…indication enough that Europe is not sovereign enough. Western Europe is fairly independent of the US, considering the fact that they’ve blocked most major US companies from becoming major players in Europe’s economy (GE, Microsoft, Boeing to name a few). Nevertheless, Eastern Europe is not needed for the market share. It is needed for political leverage and for presence close to Russia.

Although the EU knows this, it also knows that getting in the way of US global aspirations will end up hurting them in the end. After all, it was the American Marshall Plan that rebuilt Western Europe after World War Two. It was the Americans that helped Europe keep the “evil” USSR from attacking the weakened Europe throughout the Cold War. Most of all, it was the Americans that helped Europe, including Germany, to get back up after being destroyed by war.

To reiterate – Europe will not be more powerful than the United States. It is closely tied to America economically and by past “favors”. Moreover, the fact that the EU is not socially integrated is still a problem. Eastern and Western Europe are still different and even some Western European nations are still unfriendly towards some of their partners and neighbors. Most of all, the fact that the US has some control over Eastern Europe is an indication that Brussels is still not the one in control over the whole EU. Once someone is in the US’s pocket (IMF, World Bank loans), then it will most likely not get out of it. Eastern Europe is in and thus half of the EU is under American influence. It is essential to understand this to understand relationships within Europe and of Europe to the rest of the world.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Obama’s changes may have to wait

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Barack Obama ran on a platform of change, and it has come swiftly after his inauguration. The U.S. population is so excited about Obama taking office that they are forgetting that he is a politician and that his way to the White House was not all that clean.

He has come from Illinois – the most corrupt state in America. In just four years he has risen to be the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth, a journey that has taken many before him far longer to achieve.

Nevertheless, Obama has been inaugurated to the office of the President of the United States, and now the American nation will look at everything he does, for he has promised a lot. Primarily – change. Most likely the bulk of Obama’s first 100 days will be focused on showing Americans that he is really going to present them with the things he promised. Nevertheless, most of it will probably be all talk, for sudden change is never good and he will create many enemies even among those that have supported him throughout his campaign.

Still bringing up McCain

Obama ran against John McCain. Both men obviously did not like each other. One look at any of the debates between the two and especially McCain’s rallies show that the two were complete opposites. Yet, on the eve of the inauguration Obama and McCain stood together at a dinner promoting bipartisanship. Obama openly praised McCain for his efforts and praised him for being a worthy adversary in the race to the White House.

It is nothing but talk, however. Obama does not need McCain in his political life. The 2008 election has created such a big divide between the McCain and Obama supporters that the new President simply needs to make the Republican Party supporters feel that he is working in their favor as well. By praising McCain’s efforts and by acknowledging that McCain was motivated by “a pure and deeply felt love for his country” he has established himself as a President that will bring about more bipartisanship, or at least attempt to do it. Obama knows that most of the nation is behind him, he simply needs to keep up with his image that he created during his campaign. People expect him to be a leader that does something great, and most people appreciate that he has acknowledged his former opponent. President Obama is simply giving people what they want at the moment, and that is to feel that he represents every single person living in the U.S.

Distancing Himself from Bush

George W. Bush may well be the most disliked President in the history of the United States. War in Iraq and Afghanistan, a huge budget deficit, huge private profits for him and his close friends, and deregulation that ended his presidency with a financial crisis of epic proportions.

Barack Obama spent a lot of time preparing to take office. Some even say that he may have been preparing his inauguration speech and his cabinet way before he actually won the election. Regardless of what may be said or what theories may circulate, the White House web-page was changed a few hours following Obama’s inaugural address to the American people. It takes longer than a few hours to create such a functional and well-designed web-page.

Clearly the website is intended to be a first-hand news agency covering the events and daily operations of the President. Obama’s campaign focused on bringing the simpler…FULL ARTICLE HERE

American Bailouts – Keeping Europeans Away

READ FULL ARTICLE

News about U.S. bailout packages have been on every newsstand and news website in the past months. There is talk constantly of American companies being bailed out and discussions about the topic are abundant. The stir is caused not because America is considered a superpower and not because United States economy is the symbol of economics success that many nations are aspiring for. It makes news because America is becoming less and less American. With the U.S. economy being the weakest that it has been since the Great Depression, many Europeans and Asians are taking advantage of this and buying out American companies and their assets.

The bailout packages that are being considered and hundreds of billions of dollars that have already been committed are aimed at buying up failing U.S. companies for one reason – to keep the U.S. economy dependant on itself and its own workforce rather than European parent companies and…

READ FULL ARTICLE

Gas Tug-o-War

FULL ARTICLE HERE Aside from being an essential element in heating homes during the coldest time of the year, Russian gas is a political tool. It is a tool for the U.S.-sponsored Ukrainian government as well as Moscow. However, what are the goals being pursued? It is not just to show might and power over Europe. That actually would hurt Russia in the long run with no real short term benefits either. The current gas dispute between Moscow and Kiev is actually a continuation and a move forward in trying to discredit each other and win over the majority support of the population.

Just to recap, President Yuschenko and his government tried to discredit the Russian Black Sea Fleet and taint Russia’s reputation in Ukraine during and after the conflict in the Caucasus between Russia and Georgia in August 2008. Yuschenko was not successful in getting the Fleet out of Sevastopol and did not change the population’s outlook on Russia. One thing did become evident – Ukraine is split into East and West, Eastern Ukraine being pro-Russian and Western part being more pro-Western. Also, Yuschenko’s government is not as popular as some, especially in Washington, had hoped for.

Transit of gas is one of the best trumps in Russia’s hands. If the observers that are supposed to monitor the flow of gas through Ukraine find any disruptions that can potentially damage Ukraine’s credibility, Moscow will score a big win in this tug-o-war on many levels. First, the credibility of President Yuschenko’s government will be dealt a big blow. Second, Moscow would score an indirect win against the U.S. in global politics. Lastly, the EU will be more reluctant to consider Ukraine for membership.

If Russia is successful in discrediting Yuschenko’s government, Washington will suffer the biggest loss. Having put a lot of effort into getting the current Ukrainian government in place and putting even more…FULL ARTICLE HERE

Effects of Israel’s Operations in Gaza

READ THE FULL ARTICLE Israel’s military operation in Gaza is in full swing. The current situation in the Gaza strip puts to the test world leaders’ abilities to protect peace and to bring about a resolution before a calamity strikes. Implications of Israel’s military operations are already becoming evident.
Israel Proves a Point

Israel’s operations proved that none of the radical Islamist organizations want to fight an open all-out war with Israel. The eagerness of radical Islamists to wage war on Israel has been more than evident and has grown in recent years. However, when the fight has been brought to them, they are not ready to face an enemy that is as ruthless as them and one that has its forces up to 21st century standards.

Israel has been striking targets with precision, bombing not random buildings, but those that have had top ranking Hamas officials or have been of strategic value to the organization. Israel obviously has prepared well for the operations because they are carrying out precision strikes and their every move looks to be well thought through. Although there are casualties among civilians, it is only because Islamists use civilians as cover. Evidently, Israel has made a choice to engage Hamas where they are. This is a good strategy because this will hopefully make Palestinians reject Hamas and leave them out to dry on their own, without popular support. It will not take long before Hamas’ use of civilians for cover will be condemned by the Palestinians themselves.

Implications

Tel-Aviv’s operation in Gaza could also spell disaster of global proportions. Most likely, Hamas and other radical organizations will spin this situation to their advantage claiming that this is a crusade. Iran’s Ayatollah already stated that anyone that dies in this fight against Israel will become a martyr. Moreover, Israel’s actions could READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Ecuador’s First Steps Towards Economic Independence

FULL ARTICLE HERE “Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said Friday that he will not pay interest on the nation’s foreign debt and that he was prepared to accept any consequence” –CNN. And so it begins. Latin American countries are a cornerstone of the global corporate empire’s hold on developing nations. Although these countries are not truly developing, they are called such due to large U.S. investments and a large corporate presence.

Rafael Correa stated that although around $US 7 billion has been paid towards interest on its outstanding loans, the principal sum remains the same, which is $US 4 billion. The World Bank makes huge profits off of countries like Ecuador. It is an intricate process involving many resources that make such schemes come to light. Although expensive, returns on Western efforts in persuading underdeveloped nations to accept huge loans that they cannot afford are enormous.

U.S. Involvement in Ecuador

The United States has played a huge role in Ecuador since the 1950’s. U.S. consulting companies such as Chas T. Main, Bechtel, Halliburton, and many others have convinced the Ecuadorian government to take out huge loans from the World Bank to finance big projects which were supposed to grow the nation’s economy at rates far exceeding realistic expectations. Using econometrics and other statistical analysis to forecast the growth, consultants inflated their analysis to persuade the government of the Latin American nation to go through with… FULL ARTICLE HERE

Gaza – Disproportional But Inevitable

FULL ARTICLE ON RUSSIATODAY.COM

Israel is bombing Gaza. Israel’s defence minister has stated that the nation is in an all-out war with Hamas. It looks like Israel is taking a step forward in trying to cripple Hamas’ ability to attack them. Although many condemn the actions of Israel, there may be some logic to their actions. They may actually be correct in using this kind of force. Both sides of the current events in the Gaza Strip need to be analyzed in order to understand what these actions by Israel may bring.

Israel vs Hamas

Israel’s military is by far superior to anything that Hamas can put together. Israel’s sudden attacks on the Gaza Strip are exactly unjustified. The current war between Israel and Hamas is actually putting to use all of the political safe guards that both sides have put together.

Hamas is an organization that has utilized terrorist tactics. Considering that there is no way for them to put together a formidable 21st century force, they are turning to guerilla warfare and using “pity tactics” with regard to world politics.

Hamas has endangered the very people it claims to represent. It was only a matter of time before Israel would get fed up with Hamas using civilians as cover, forcing Israel to ditch restraint. As was anticipated, most of the world has condemned Israel’s excessive use of force.

Nevertheless, does it make sense for Israel to use foot soldiers and tanks to roll into Gaza if they can use their air forces instead? Israel’s army is up to 21st century…FULL ARTICLE ON RUSSIATODAY.COM