Turkey Launches an Air and Ground Offensive on Afrin

Article Link

         Turkish military and Syrian rebels launch an air and ground offensive on Afrin. Their primary goal was to drive out the members of the Kurdish People's Protection Units, which was thought to be an extension of a Kurdish rebel group. Turkey's government makes claims that they have only targeted terrorists and not civilians, however, their bombardment has left dozens dead, hundreds injured, and many civilians are forced to flee from their homes. Many refugees from Arab towns who were controlled by Turkey and ISIS had come to Afrin thinking that it was a safe place for them to stay; however, they were wrong. Now they have to run away again.

         Kurdish leaders have appealed to other powers to protect their residents, however, the US, who relied on an alliance led by the YPG, has only urged its Nato ally Turkey to "de-escalate, limit its military actions, and avoid civilians casualties." Syria's ally, Russia, withdrew its military observers from Afrin before the Turkish offensive and is allowing Turkish warplanes to use Syrian airspace to bomb the Kurdish territory.


Discussion Questions:

1. What do you think the real reason is, if any, for Turkey to attack Afrin?
2. Why are the Kurds seen as a big threat to Turkey?
3. Do you think US's response to Afrin's appeal is justified?
       

Increasing oppression of press freedom in Sudan

Journalists protest against the increasing oppression of press freedom in Sudan.

The press freedom laws in Sudan have changed a lot in the past years, but not for the better. Osman Mirghani the editor in chief of a local newspaper in Sudan says: “When we started working in the 90’s the [press] freedom was much more than it is now. There are a lot of regulations the government uses such as confiscating newspapers.”

Several newspapers have been getting confiscated before hitting the streets of Sudan. Editors say that national security agents and printing press houses confiscate papers containing news critical to the government and their actions.

Eight journalists were arrested by government officials after covering violent protests against a new government measures that increases the price of bread and other products. These journalists were recently detained and the people are fed up of the government who are directly imprisoning journalists without a proper court trial.

Najeeb Adam a press freedom activist says: “The right way to regulate the press is through the courts since there are laws… confiscating papers and things like that is not a good idea and journalists who are detained should be presented to court and if they have any fault they should bear responsibility but they shouldn't be put in jail without a clear charge.”  

In addition to that the government is trying to deliberately pass a bill which would allow national security agents to shutdown newspaper, radios and TV station for 15 days without giving a reason. If this bill were to become a law Sudan’s press council could ban any journalist who expresses opinions against the government.

Journalists are concerned not because they're being charged for what they’re reporting on but being restricted from reporting in the first place. And the shutting down

Reporters without borders, an international organization ranked Sudan 174 out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom and it could only get worse if nothing is done to control this situation.

Historical connections: Before the 1989 coup led by military officers under Col. Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Sudan had a lively press, with most political parties publishing a variety of periodicals. But after that censorship became common and regulation on news became tighter.

Discussion questions:

1. Should other nation or the UN get involved into the situation of the Sudan government officials unjustly detaining journalists without a fair trial?
2. How could this law negatively affect the government, including their economy and etc?
3. If the bill was to pass how could residents of Sudan get raw, uncensored news to know the truth about what’s happening?

Reference articles:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/01/sudans-press-freedom-concern-confiscations-180122111644005.html

 https://citizen.co.za/news/news-africa/1791098/sudan-media-demonstration-release/

Government Shutdown

Article Link
The Senate adjourned for the night at 1:30AM Eastern Time on Sunday, January 19, 2018 after a spending measure that would have kept the government operating temporarily was blocked by Senate Democrats. Early the next morning, much of the government shut down.



Moments before the official cease of operations, the Donald Trump's press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted an official statement that blamed the shutdown on the Democrats and more specifically on Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, claiming that Schumer and the Democrats had "put politics above our national security, military families, vulnerable children, and our country's ability to serve all Americans." New York Democrat Nita Lowey countered by claiming that it was "outrageous that... the Majority [Republicans] could not chart a course toward keeping the government open..." her point being that the Republicans, holding a majority in both the House and the Senate were responsible for the mismanagement of the government that led to the shutdown.



Construction cones along the sidewalk of the US Capitol Building, January 19, 2018
Photo by Susan Walsh

Schumer was singled out because he was behind the filibuster that kept the proposal from being called to vote. The unwillingness to pass the spending proposal was fueled in part by unwillingness on both sides to compromise on the DACA immigration policy, and about whether funds should be allocated for building the Mexico-US border wall that Trump has been promising since the beginning of his campaign.

Schumer claims that a resolution was almost reached on the Friday before the Senate filibuster over a lunch between Donald Trump and himself, but that impending agreement was dissolved when Trump and his chief of staff John Kelly demanded further immigration concessions on the Democratic side.

The shutdown ultimately came to a conclusion when Democrats agreed to end the filibuster in exchange for the promise that the Republicans would reopen debate on the DREAM immigration act which Congress failed to pass in 2012.

Discussion Questions:

1. Was it unjustified for Democrats to block the proposal for political reasons at the cost of the nearly 800,000 government employees furloughed? Why or why not?

2. Should Donald Trump be held responsible for his unwillingness to compromise with Schumer? Did his late demand for further concessions ultimately cause the shutdown?

3. Were the Democrats too hasty to withdraw from the position of power, given that they didn't have any real assurance that the Republicans would indeed reopen debate on the DREAM act?



Uganda's Museveni: Trump "talks to Africans frankly"

Following a comment made by US president Donald Trump describing African nations as "sh@#hole countries" which had drawn significant criticism from various African countries. including the African Union and Ghana, a US ally who has denounced Trumps statement. Bringing some unrest into even countries which largely support US Policy. Despite this, Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni has come up in support for his comments.
          "Donald Trump speaks to Africans frankly. Africans need to solve their problems. You can't survive if you are weak. It is the Africans' fault that they are weak. We are 12 times the size of India, but why are we not strong?" Museveni said in a tweet on January 23rd. 

Donald Trump and Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni.

               Within his comments, Museveni seems to neglect the fact that throughout the 19th and early 20th century. Africa has been seen as a large battleground for resources exploited by western countries. Which exported Africa's mineral wealth and other natural resources to the Western world at the cost of the people living there. Many of whom were enslaved or worked for very little pay. However, many issues in Africa had also been the result of corruption and poor leadership from the people themselves. With Zimbabwe's "Gucci Grace" spending millions of taxpayer dollars on luxury goods for herself being a clear example of this trend. Fighting between many factions in African nations has also contributed to this instability.
      Overall, Donald Trump's comment had been a reminder of the brutal history of African nations and imperialism. Which has now often been overlooked and neglected. However, the result of these actions still is seen in Africa today. With a comment from an oppressive dictator being a sad symbol of the many Africans living in a poverty-stricken world that has barely changed.

"Ugandan Knuckles" internet phenomenon, Which has been a seeming mockery of African culture and its poor infrastructure. Representing a stereotype of African nations that has been upheld by many american citizens, who often ignore the issues and problems occurring in other parts of the world, similar to Museveni's comment on Africa.

How does Donald Trump's perspective of Africa build upon a stereotype of poverty and instability in Africa?

How do you think western nations should respond to this comment about Africa?

Do you think that the instability of Africa is due to the people themselves, or the history of imperialism in Africa?

Museveni provides a view from the top of society in Uganda, what do you think a person at the bottom of society in Uganda might think about Trump's comment?

Source;
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/24/africa/uganda-museveni-comments-trump-trnd/index.html

When Will Congo Draw the Line Between Democracy and Autocracy?

Article Link

Protests have erupted in the Democratic of Congo due to the citizens’ frustration with their current government. Congo’s president, Joseph Kabila, was constitutionally mandated to step down from his position after completing his second term at the end of 2016, however, he has refused to do so. The Congolese people are demanding free elections and for President Kabila to follow his legal agreement to step down. Security forces have turned to violent means in order to stop these protests including shootings and tear gas. This has increased the UN’s concern with the issue as they are worried about the safety of other protestors. These protests have been increasing in frequency for the past few months, all of them followed by violent outbursts of security forces. In effort to end the anti-government ideals once and for all, Congolese authorities have been detaining opposition political leaders, critics, and members of civil society organizations. It has gone as far as the government suspending access to the internet and social media sites throughout the country.

Discussion Questions:

1. Should the UN get involved in these matters considering their concern for the matter?
2. Would the government in the Democratic Republic of Congo be considered a dictatorship, considering the extreme measures taken by the public and the authorities?
3. Do the authorities have good intentions by trying to stop the protests, such as hopes of a society living in harmony? Or are their motives more driven by obeying the leader?

Turkey Increases Attacks Against Kurdish Regions along border with Syria

Article Link

As Kurdish forces have gained control of more land in northeastern Syria, the Turkish government has become increasingly alarmed. Turkey has been targeting Kurdish YPG fighters, which they consider to be a terrorist group. Meanwhile Russia is a key ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who has warned Turkey against any attacks in Syria. Turkish President Erdogan is concerned about increasing Kurdish control on the Syria side of the border with Turkey. The Kurds are a major ethnic group spread across Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran with 30-45 million people and aspirations for forming a sovereign state in the Middle East.

1. Should Turkey seek international assistance in confronting the Syrian Kurds given the ongoing civil war between government and rebel forces in Southern Syria?

2. Would it help if Middle Eastern nations could agree to grant Kurdistan sovereignty to limit violence in the region?

3. What role should Russia, the U.S., and the U.N. play in the Syrian Civil War and conflict between Turkey and Syrian Kurds?

US Israel Embassy Plans Moving Out to Jerusalem

Article link

1/18/17: The Trump administration plans to relocate its current Embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel (middle) to a new building in Jerusalem, Israel (bottom) which currently serves as the US Consulate. The new Embassy will be located just inside West Jerusalem, on the disputed border between Israel and Palestine/West Bank (top).

President Trump and his administration have allegedly announced plans to move the US's Israeli embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This process is forecasted to be completed by 2019, but the administration states that it may take longer. A law previously put out in 1995 had prevented the US from opening an operational embassy in Jerusalem beforehand. As a result, the Trump administration has rather prioritized the US's security, which is greatly contingent on peaceful relations between Israel and Palestine. Tension has been going on in the area since 1948. Following this declaration, the UN abruptly reacted to the decision, accusing it to be staunching efforts to create peace between the two countries. And consequently, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has already agreed not to participate in any peace negotiations with the US.

Discussion Questions:
1. Ambassador David M. Friedman of the US suggests relocating him and his embassy to Jerusalem in roughly three years. Do you believe the US should relocate its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? Why or why not?
2. The border between Israel and Palestine/West Bank is currently disputed. How do you believe this relocation would affect the relationship between the Israelis and the Palestinians? Israelis and Palestinians individually?
3. Building an embassy out of scratch in an entirely new area could cost anywhere from $600 million to $1 billion. Should the US invest that much money into a new embassy in a different city, or should it stay in one of the two locations presented above? If so, which location do you think would be most beneficial for the US Israeli embassy? In addition, do you believe the decision to relocate the embassy into West Jerusalem rather than East Jerusalem is rational? Why or why not?

Could this Spell the Death of Free Speech in Myanmar?

Article Link

Yangon, Myanmar - 12/27/2017
Reporters Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo en route to their trial for
allegedly illegally obtaining secret government documents

For a long time, Myanmar has been under strict military rule. The current democratic government, which only arose after a long fight, has only been in place for 6 years. Hope was initially high that Myanmar could become a true democracy, but that all changed with the Rohingya Crisis, which started in 2016. This crisis has been perpetrated by the Army of Myanmar, which has committed countless atrocities on Rohingya Muslims such as random killings, arson and gang rape under the pretense of eradicating Rohingya insurgents, prompting many Rohingya to flee into neighboring Bangladesh. The most recent event in this crisis has been the arrest of two Reuters journalists Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, who were in Myanmar to write about the discovery of a mass grave where 10 Rohingyas were found dead. The journalists are currently being charged with 14-year sentences for being in possession of "government documents" regarding the mass grave which seems to have been a police bait and trap to censor the media and cover up human rights violations. People around the world are concerned that the situation in Myanmar could escalate into genocide and press suppression if left unchecked.

Discussion Questions:
1. Should the Myanmar government be sanctioned or in some other way held responsible for the actions of the Army? Could sanctions lead to a Rohingya genocide by the Army in retaliation? Explain your answer.
2. Myanmar and Bangladesh recently approved a plan to send 150 Rohingya refugees (out of 600,000+) back to Myanmar every day, a plan that will take over 10 years to complete. Although they claim that moving back is voluntary, it may very well turn out not to be if the crisis worsens. What do you think is the best way to resolve the refugee crisis?
3. Myanmar's current State Counsellor (a title equivalent to Prime Minister) is Aung San Suu Kyi, a descendant of founding father Aung San, who is immensely popular in Myanmar. Aung San Suu Kyi won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for her non-violent protests helping to put Myanmar on the path of transition from military control to democracy. In light of her support for the recent events in Myanmar, should her Nobel Prize be revoked? Why or why not?

The US only gives HALF of expected funds to Palestine

Article Link

Thousands of Palestine refugees remain trapped in the Yarmouk neighbourhood of Damascus 

    President Donald Trump follows up on earlier claims saying that the US would cut aid if Palestinians rejected peace efforts with Israel. The State Department stated that the decision to withhold $65m from the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) was because the department is making reforms and that other nations should step in to help the cause. Previously the US has funded almost 30% of UN's work, and last year gave a total of $370m to UNRWA. This is significantly less compared to the $3b that is given to Israel per year. This decision to suspend funds with greatly affect Palestinians refugees that are currently scattered throughout the Middle East. Palestinians are upset with the White House because of Trumps earlier decoration of Jerusalem as Israel's capital. This claim has since been declared "null and void" by the UN, and the territory dispute between Israel and Palestine continues.


Discussion Questions:
1. Is the US responsible for refugees affected by the suspended funds?
2. Should the US be funding this cause in the first place? And with this much money?
3. How much, if at all, should other countries be contributing?

Temporary Protected Status to end for more than 200,000 Salvadorans

Article link

Approximately 200,000 Salvadorans who have been living on Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in the U.S. since two earthquakes damaged the Central American nation in 2001 will have to return to El Salvador by September 2019. The Trump administration is also forcing 45,000 Haitians who lost their homes in the 2010 earthquake off of TPS and back to Haiti. Along with the 800,000 undocumented children who lost their DACA protection in 2017, the total is more than 1 million people that the Trump administration is forcing back to the country of their ancestry. That will leave fewer than 100,000 people protected by TPS, which is a program President Bush created in 1990.

Discussion Questions
1. Should all people in America protected by TPS be sent back home? If so, after how much time under protection? If not, why not?
2. What should happen to children who have U.S. citizenship if their parents are sent back to their nation of birth?
3. When refugees are taken in to escape natural disaster or war, should there be a standard for how long they can stay? Should exceptions be made depending on family circumstances?

Trump team working on peace plans behind the scene

Article link

Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, along with Jason Greenblatt, special representative for international negotiations continue working on an Arab-Israeli peace plan that they began a year ago. Despite Trump's declaration last month that Jerusalem will become Israel's capital and the President's later threat to cut aid that the U.S. gives to Palestinians, Kushner and Greenblatt remain confident that their plan will appeal to both sides. These two men report to the President, so Trump's actions speak louder than theirs and it may be difficult to sell a peace plan that contradicts the President's approach. Given the difficulties in creating a peace over the past 70 years, it seems certain that no peace between Israel and Palestine will come easily.

Discussion Questions
1. Do Trump's declarations and threats in December and January undermine peace proposals that members of his administration are still working on?
2. Will Great Britain and France withholding judgement until the full peace plan is on the table set an example that Palestinian leaders will follow?
3. Ultimately will the Trump administration be able to create a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine in the Middle East? Would it be in the form of a one state or two state solution?

Arab League Calls for a Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its Capital

Article link

In a response to President Trump's call to make Jerusalem the capital city of Israel, the Arab League of nations in the Middle East announced their support for the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as the capital city. Officials from Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Palestine joined with the Jordanian foreign minister in making this announcement that the Palestinian state should be based on 1967 borders. The UN General Assembly met last month and denounced President Trump's declaration on Israel 128-9 with 35 abstentions. Jerusalem is a city to all three religions in the region (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and it has been under international control in recent decades.

Discussion Questions
1. Should Jerusalem become the capital city of Israel, Palestine, or should it remain under international control?
2. Who should have a voice in this decision? Israel? Palestine? the UN? Regional Arab nations? the U.S?
3. Are declarations such as Trump's last month or the Arab League's this month likely to lead to war or might they help solve the Arab-Israeli conflict?

One State Solution Gaining Support but Much Work Remains

article link

With President Trump's declaration last month that Israel should make Jerusalem into Israel's capital city, the solution with Israel and Palestine forming two separate states becomes more difficult. More Jews and Arabs are now discussing the one state solution, but whether it can be done with Palestinians gaining citizenship and equal rights still remains doubtful. the conflict between Jews and Palestinians dates back to the formation of Israel as a state in 1948, which Palestinian leaders have never recognized. A variety of conflicts between the two sides took place in the second half of the 20th century and they still have not reached a peace agreement.

Discussion Questions:
1. If the two sides agree to a one state solution, what should be the terms of the agreement?
2. Should Jerusalem in fact be Israel's capital city or should it be kept under international governance?
3. Do you support the one state solution (where Jews and Palestinians live side by side) or the two state solution with a separate Israel and Palestine? Why?