UNESCO admits Palestine as a Member

In a 107-14 vote with 52 abstentions, Palestine became the 174^th member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The most surprising ‘yes’ vote was France, while some of the ‘no’ votes included the United States, Israel, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany. 81 votes were needed to admit Palestine to UNESCO. Full UN membership is not required for membership to every UN agency.

The supporters of this outcome are mostly overjoyed and proud of their accomplishment. Many states are still apprehensive, not wanting to step on toes too heavily or to further jeopardize UNESCO’s funding. Others, such as U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who called the outcome “reckless” and “anti-Israel and anti-peace,” are not enthusiastic about the vote.

UNESCO will lose 22% of its funding, because of a United States’s law that bars the funding of any organization that admits Palestine as a member prior to an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal is achieved. The effect of this law will be felt immediately, according to the United State’s State Department.

This vote is primarily "a grand symbolic victory for the Palestinians, but it alone won't make Palestine into a state.” The UN Security Council will vote on Palestinian statehood.

So what is all the fuss about? UNESCO is concerned with science, culture and education. Could UNESCO offer anything to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process? Why are some countries not willing to try a new approach or at least wait and see what might happen as a result of this membership?

For the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/31/us-unesco-funding_n_1067628.html.

For more information about UNESCo: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/.

Uruguay overturns war crime amnesty law

Early this morning, Uruguay's parliament overturned a amnesty law that had protected those who had committed human rights violations during Urugay's 1973-1985 dictatorship. This would allow the government "full punitive powers" to prosecute state terrorists who had abducted and executed citizens during the military rule.

What kind of repercussions can we see from this law being overturned? Can peace be enhanced by punishing crimes that occurred over 25 years ago? Does prosecution lead to better results than the truth and reconciliation commissions of countries like Argentina and South Africa?

http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2011/10/27/uruguay-overturns-war-crime-amnesty-law

Human rights in a dire climate

On the immensely varying global scale of gay rights, this is an interesting juxtaposition for us to consider, the policies of the US and those of a third-world country. In a conservatively-led country where homosexuality and prostitution are equally criminalized, the advocacy for safe sex practices and disease prevention seems to be bound by sociological restrictions. This article forces the question of what new ways can Botswana reconcile its narrow and strict policies on human rights and its ever-pressing health concerns.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15368752

Witness the Birth of Constitutions

A person who witnesses a birth may describe it in two ways: A violent bloody struggle for liberty, or a glorious and magical process by which a mother gives of herself to bring life into the world. The Arab Spring could be described both ways. Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have all overthrown their old trappings and now face the tremendous responsibility of birthing a new order for their countries. These countries have some things in common. For one, every one of them have similar Islamist, centrist and liberal forces competing for their own interests in the new constitutions. Second, many middle eastern countries had their borders drawn for them. This leaves many competing ethnic groups vying for their say. Can the revolutionaries overcome their differences to create workable documents that will successfully guide them into the future?

In the United States, we view our constitution with near religious deference. It is a linchpin of American nationalism. We are justifiably proud of the work of our founding fathers, who get their own fair share of American reverence. Our reverence for our own constitution should underscore the importance of the birth of a constitution abroad. A constitution is not only a document of governance, but also a symbol of the culture and pride of a nation. What symbol will these new nations choose for themselves?

Western nations will be tempted to inject their own sensibilities into this process; this temptation must be resisted. We must provide advice only when we are asked. Already, there is a growing concern regarding a conservative backlash in some of these countries. In Libya, Gadhafi had instituted several progressive reforms that could suffer in a new state if it is controlled by conservative Islamists, including broad protections for women. Any uninvited intervention or aide from the west could fuel this conservative backlash. Instead, we should take the role of honored observers. We should remain in the waiting room prepared to celebrate when the Arab Spring has finished birthing her new constitutions.

For more on this subject:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/22/world/africa/libya-main/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/21/world/gadhafi-arab-spring/index.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/201182812377546414.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/10/20111020184739761495.html

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/21/new_tunisia_islamist_elections?page=0,0

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/21/an_islamist_a_liberal_and_a_former_regime_loyalist_walk_into_a_cafe?page=0,0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/22/tunisia-elections-2011_n_1026311.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-r-barber/sic-semper-tyrannis-but-n_b_1024477.html

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-30/world/egypt.constitution_1_new-constitution-emergency-laws-egypt?_s=PM:WORLD

US-China Tensions

The United States (U.S.) and China have a relationship that I would describe as a sibling rivalry. The two economies are interdependent upon each other in many aspects; China relies on exporting to the U.S., which in turn makes China the foremost holder of U.S. bonds(debt). However while this economic interdependency binds the two countries together, they are constantly at odds over policy and legal issues. Similarly to siblings, no matter how much they quarrel they are still related.

The U.S. is constantly criticizing China over their human rights issues, fair trade violations, and currency policies. Next week when House of Representatives convene the concern with China and the issues previously stated are top is on the top of their topics. The article posted below discusses the topics that will be covered in greater detail.

China is often quick to respond to these harsh criticisms by liquidating the United States bonds and canceling orders from U.S. Corporations (i.e. Possible cancellation of Boeing 747s from one of China's largest airlines, posted below the first link).

Both countries have a duty to serve the interests of their private citizens, as well as, the interests of the country itself. To focus the issue at hand we will concentrate on the instance of intellectual property. On one hand the U.S. has major corporations that need to prevent piracy as to maintain the value of their company and the products that are produced (i.e. Apple). On the other hand, China is a different country with a different set of laws that do not parallel the U.S. government's patent or trademark laws.

This all appears to come down to a balancing act. In the NASDAQ article it addresses the issues that lawmakers have with the relations to China. To what extent is the United States allowed to exert its power and influence over China, especially in terms of all the Fortune 500 companies in the U.S. that are multinational corporations? How should policymakers proceed in its decisions and what interests are foremost?


http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201110181710dowjonesdjonline000429&title=us-lawmakers-to-continue-scrutiny-of-china-at-house-hearing

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-18/china-southern-may-scrap-787-orders-as-delivery-delayed.html

Wrong Again!

When Emrah Emre took his human rights claim to Strasbourg, he faced an uphill battle against the ever-neutral Swiss.

After a range of convictions including assault and robbery, Emre, a Turkish national living in Switzerland, was indefinitely banned from re-entry into Switzerland - a harsh sentence for seemingly minor offenses. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) agreed with Emre.

In 2008, the ECHR passed down a judgment stating that the Swiss punishment did not "[strike] a fair balance." In response, the Swiss courts lessened Emre's sentence to a 10-year ban. Emre said that was not enough. Again, the ECHR agrees. The ECHR passed down a second judment stating that "the Swiss domestic court (le tribunal fédéral) had substituted the court's balancing of interests by its own. Even if one would suppose...that such a thing would be admissible, such renewed balancing should be complete and convincing in dealing with all the relevant factors the court had identified."

The real question here is not whether or not a Turkish national was robbed of human rights by Swiss law. The underlying debate about the role of international courts in domestic issues is the real question here. Although it has long been policy for a state to have liberty in applying judgments passed down from the Hague, this decision is a grave derivation from precedent. Is there a new question of sovereignty in this case? And looking at the bigger picture: Is this just another step toward a more unified European Union?

Read the full court opinion here (French):

http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=893340&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649

The English opinion and article can be found here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/oct/18/esme-switzerland-european-court-human-rights

How does a death impact international policy?

Humberto Leal was executed in Texas this Thursday for the rape and murder of 16-year-old Adria Sauceda. While the death penalty is not uncommon in Texas, the context of this case was far from run of the mill. Humberto Leal was a Mexican citizen who had lived in the US since he was a small child. Leal's case is one of many in Texas where foreign nationals are charged without receiving consular aide.

What effects will Leal's execution have on American foreign policy? On the safety of Americans who are traveling abroad?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/humberto-leal-execution-texas-supreme-court_n_892008.html

US-African troop movements: A final push to end long-standng East African conflicts?

Since the infamous attack on US Black Hawk helicopters in Somalia in 1993, the US has been weary of entering sub-Sahara militarily. The recent addition of 100 US troops to an east/central African force to track down the Lord's Resistance Army in central Africa marks a turning point in US-Africa military relations. At the same time as the LRA is being hunted down with a multinational force, it is also interesting to note that Kenyan troops and African Union Ugandan troops have entered Somalia to fight Al-Shabab. The Islamic fundamentalist army presents an equally destabilizing element for the region and a much more globally destabilizing force than the LRA. What effect will the continued presence of Ugandan troops and the new Kenyan troops have on the official Somali government's effort to talk with Al-Shabab? Would the US be willing to enter Somalia as well?

Can all these recent concerted efforts in central and east Africa be a sign that the world/US is starting to see the economic and global security importance of these regions?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/10/20111016115410991692.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/10/2011101591032110944.html

What is the International Community doing about the Crisis in Syria?

UN officials are warning that the 6 month long revolt in Syria is threatening to turn into a civil war. The wave of revolutions that have swept across the Middle East and North Africa have been met with varying degrees of support and intervention from the international community. Weighing into the international community’s calculations are concerns over respect for sovereign borders, establishing international norms that are contrary to domestic policy, traditional and potential spheres of influence, and how actions by the international community must be balanced with larger concerns over regional peace and international security.

China and Russia vetoed a bid in the UN security council that would have been a step towards putting more strict sanctions on Syria. This veto has been widely criticized by the US and the UK. Not long after the veto, Russia and China publically became more critical of the Syrian government. So what is motivating this seemingly contradictory behavior? Are these moves strategic geo-political power assertions? Do these moves simply demonstrate different emphasis on different international norms? It is speculated that China is merely looking to shore up its influence in the Middle East, and Russia’s strategic partnership with Syria, dating back to the Cold War, is playing a role in its actions.

With the international community unable to act meaningfully with respect to the Syrian uprisings, what can the Syrian protestors continue to do? How does the uprising in Syria vary from in Libya? And, why did one warrant military intervention, while the other has not? Does this demonstrate the inefficiency or efficiency of international institutions?

For more information:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/11/china-urges-syria-regime-reforms and http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/14/syria-protesters-defections-security-forces .

Be Careful What You Blog

The UAE has arrested 5 pro-reform bloggers. This arrest comes despite recent moves by the UAE to liberalize the political process. Already the largely closed proceedings have been riddled with controversy, from allegations of mistreatment to accusations by the defense attorneys of improper proceedings.

Read more at Al Jazeera:

http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/uae-bloggers-trial-speaking-out-online

Mladic Challenges the Jurisdiction of the ICTY

Ratko Mladic, former Bosnian-Serb military leader, who is accused of “monstrous” war crimes, claims that he does not recognize the authority of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslovia (ICTY) to assert jurisdiction over him. This is not altogether shocking: Mladic is a nationalist, not an internationalist.

It is alleged that Serbian officials aided in keeping Mladic hidden for so long. How then do the international criminal courts gain jurisdiction over alleged international war crimes criminals that may not be viewed as such in their home country?

Mladic shares characteristics with many of history’s most notorious historical figures: charisma, military backing, and ideological foundations. Many of these historical figures have contributed to the legitimacy and necessity of international criminal tribunals. But, what is the difference between one country’s hero, and another country’s war criminal?

The following article provides insight into Mladic’s background: the historical underpinnings of his nationalist sentiment, his military training, and experience growing up in an ethnically cleansed area of Serbia. This insight is useful when attempting to answer the above questions.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,784851-2,00.html

Is there an end in sight?

Following the recent assassination of the leader of Afghanistan's High Peace Council, Burhanuddin Rabbani, the tension of the ongoing war in Afghanistan only continues. This week marked year 10 of the U.S. led war and the outlook is still bleak. While the government struggles with the deficit and the like at home, its counterparts at NATO are at a loss in Afghanistan. This opinion piece focuses on the negative effects of earnest peace building attempts, and points to several more simple approaches.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-schirch/nato-afghanistan_b_1000027.html

International Law and Birthday Parties

How controversial can a birthday party invitation really be? Pretty controversial if the birthday is for Desmond Tutu and the invitation went to his friend, the Dalai Lama. This week, the South African government denied the Dalai Lama a visa to visit South Africa for the second year in a row. The Dalai Lama believes the Chinese government's growing influence in Africa is to blame for his second visa denial.

Is this a sign of even greater Chinese influence on Africa? What does it mean for Mandela's "Rainbow Nation" when entrance visas are denied for political reasons?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20111008/af-south-africa-dalai-lama/

The Plot Thickens... Palestine and UNESCO

Palestine has now approached UNESCO for membership. While UNESCO considers the proposal, the U.S. threatens both Palestine and UNESCO with deep funding cuts. U.S. law currently prohibits the funding of any UN organization that gives Palestine the same standing as member states. The saga continues:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/palestine-statehood-bid-us-unesco_n_998128.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/10/201110523540744569.html