Evaluating Terrorism

Since our topic for the semester was to compare and contrast terrorism in the Middle East with terrorism in a different region in the world, I feel it only justified that it be given a wrap-up as well. Through investigating terrorist activity in Turkey and Sri Lanka, focusing mainly on the PKK and Tamil Tiger organizations, I have concluded that terrorism is rooted in the same values across the world.

            Despite what some may think, cultures do not bred terrorism. Terrorism is a reaction to an imposition, generally an infringement on one’s culture. In the case of Sri Lanka the Tamil Tigers want all ethnicities to be eliminated due to their impurities and contamination of the Tamil community. They want what they the territory which they believe to be theirs, returned to them.

            The latter part of the Tiger’s view is one that is shared by the PKK as well—they want their homeland. The PKK wants to be separated from the ethnicities and cultural groups which do not share their values. They want a political entity to call their own.

            Though the means of terror may be different in these two that is due to their traditions and economic means, not due to choice. They do not choose their terror options by preference, but rather through utilizing the supplies they have.

            Terrorism is not an inherent quality of any type of political system, values, or beliefs. Terrorism has become a universal entity due to globalization challenging cultures, and cultures attempting to strengthen themselves by attempting to become pure units—whether it is pure ethnically, religiously, or through which ever means the community seeks.

comparative politics

This topic was hard to understand what comparative politics really is. According to the definition we learned the first week, we are comparing politics of other countries on their government structure and others. It is really hard for me because I have no clue on politics whatsoever. So what is comparative politics means for me. For me it is the way to compare and give critics to readers about what they are thinking about certain countries policy and their structures. There are many differnt types of governments and systems.

We comparied many different countries political structures and what their values and believs are. Some arguements that politicians made seemed interesting or very new but wondering why they are making these comments but definitly able to see what they would think about certain countries policies and others.

Some of them we were able to made judgement by statistics and their cultural structures.  We were able to compare countries with these statistics and think about why they are more focusing on these issues more than others and why these statistic reveals with these results.

With all these databases and learn about each countries culture and the structure, I was able to understand little bit how we are trying to help each other to improve better countries by comparing and give criticisms to others.

Defining It All.

Comparative politics transcends merely evaluating governing bodies. It provides various manners and methods in which cultures, civilizations and countries can be compared and contrasted. It is fundamentally based on asking questions, creating hypothesizes, to understand the effectiveness of institutions, ideologies and policies.

Ideally it creates a focus in which individuals become politically interested in. Why are crime rates lower in some countries than in others? How essential is removing religion from government? The most convincing aspect of comparative politics is that there is never one answer. It can be evaluated from countless angles, providing innumerable solutions.

Comparative politics connects economies to religion, and race to exports. It makes connections that many would not see at first glance. The chances of the findings being provocative are generally high, which is good. It either convinces an audience of the answer, or inspires them to do their own research. Comparative politics calls for engagement, interaction, investigate. Essentially it creates an awareness.

It does not provide a right and wrong approach, so long as theories are supported with evidence. It is based on judgments, and backed with proof. It applies to the local, regional, and global communities.  It relies on surveys and statistics. It can incorporate the interests of the investigator so long as they are appropriately applied.

All in all comparative politics is a tool and a resource to further awareness and knowledge about the global community. It is a vehicle for conversation and communication. A method of global application.

German Politics

The mock version of German politics was very interesting to me. The most memorable or the most interesteing fact was that even if there are not many members elected in division, the party can control the power and get many seats(FDP). We had to go through many differnt steps to elect people and elect parties to represent the certain division of the country, which was the same as other countries.

But after they were elected, just certain party was focused on certain party of the issue instead of whole congress decide on everything together as votes, which means German political system might be very inefficient because there might be a huge disagreement on certain decision that one party makes decision.

Also like a mock trial version, it can have a huge controversal or can be easily corrupted by group of political parties join together to demolish the other political group, which means even if FDP won the majority of seat, they could become the one that could be useless in German politics.

According to Dr. Dasovic, this decision can take upto 2 months, which means by the time politicians were elected, it would take two months to make them settle and move forward and make decisions instead of jump in and make differnces right away.

I think there will be corruptions in German politics easily and can be very difficult to maintain.

 

Beggars Can’t Be Choosey?

The German political election process was a concept that I did not quite understand until we simulated it. After 2 full class periods of speeches, debates, and deliberations the idea became much more concrete–take a stance but be flexible. The Green Party became the deciding factor in the coalition, not because it had a large representation, but because it did not. Let me explain. No one wanted to share power with the largest party in fear of being monopolized–the proposition of “We have chancellorship, you take all the cabinet position” sounds quite preposterous.

Power in a coalition must be shared, thus greed does not play in well. Giving up cabinet positions is not as difficult as one might assume, for if your party has a similar view of the same position, let’s take education for example, then that position allocation is not as pertinent for your group to have than one where you may differ on ideas. It is better to have one cabinet position on a topic that you don’t agree on, than 2 positions where you share similar interests. It is for this reason that the Green party was able to obtain 2 seats in the cabinet—they ensured their coalition partners that they has similar views on education—and essentially it was assumed that they would receive he environmental position if they were to have any at all.

The point is, once elected, your role is not to only provide for those that voted you in, but to manage to cooperate with those who will win you the next election—the others vying for the same positions. If you agree to represent them as well, your chances of being elected into a higher position are far greater. Sadly for the FDP, they had to learn their lessons the hard way.

 

 

Speaking Out. Sound Off.

One civil liberty that many Western democracies find inherent is the freedom of speech. Turkey is yet again making Western moves. This time they are being more open to freedom of speech. This not only allows for speech, but freedom of protest. Allowing its citizens to be heard opens communication lines. Often times this does include talking with terrorists—not necessarily negotiating with them, but communicating with them. If terrorist groups are silenced, the motives for their actions with remain unknown, thus it is important for all groups to benefit from the freedom of speech. Though the attached article does not describe the positive effects on eliminating terrorism, it does address the universal benefits that can be applied to group groups. If voices are heard, action is not always necessary.

Hunting Party

The target is not a fowl, rather it is a Political Party in Turkey. Turkey, a well-established democracy, is currently investigating eliminating yet another political party from participating in their multi-party elections. The party under investigation is for incorporating, and potentially enabling Islamist activities.

One of the major reasons why the elimination is occurring is because Turkey is a secular country, with an incredibly strict anti-religious involvement in government. Thus it is the “duty” of the country to ban political parties that would attempt to instate religious activities or affiliations into the government.

 Yet, is this democratically just? To eliminate a party due to an affiliation? The argument against it would be that if the people want a religious affiliation, they would vote for it. There would be no need to ban the party, if the government was not worried that people would vote for it. But people are voting for it. There are some Turkish citizens that want the presence of Islam to exist in the government, so why should their beliefs be silenced?

 The banning of political parties is not new. Western countries have this same practice. Germany for example, has banned a political party from ever running: the Nazi party. This is for both fear and respect that this party has been banned. What are the reasons for the Turkish party being banned? Essentially, the constitution.

STOP THE TERRORISM!!!

Sri Lanka is still going through the crisis in their country. Instead trying to find the solution, the government is doing what they shouldn’t do. Killing people. Since I was looking more Sri Lanka news, always there are news about the government military forces killing people and feel like more people are dying in Sri Lanka than Iraq.

Democratic country Sri Lanka is more like communist country. Sri Lanka citizens have only one choice, the government way. They do not have any voice over anything against the government. They either follow the message or get killed, like how terrorists handel situation with hostages.

 This needs to stop asap for better life in Sri Lanka and found the true democratic country value, but this also bring the issue if Bush is clearing Terrorists or creating new terrorist(the United States)

Trading for more than goods–trading for entrance

Turkey has been vying for entrance into the EU, and will remain doing so until they meet the standards that the multinational organization has put forth. Creating a strong democracy is one of the most weighing elements regarding acceptance. Though democracy can be applied in many different manners, the EU is looking for a Western democracy, which is generally associated with a strong economy and free trade.

 Turkey is stepping up to the plate and is considering signing a Free Trade Agreement with India. This would expand their trading power from their current 2.7 billion (US) dollar allowance to 10 billion. Since India has a growing economy as well, selecting it as a partner could only help. Right?

 That depends on how the EU views India as a trading partner. One of the motivating factors for India participating in this potential agreement is to gain access with more of  the nations within the EU. It is irrefutable that India’s economy is growing, however, is it growing in the Western manner that the EU is looking for in a trade partner?

Sri Lanka has something to be thankful for.

Luckily for Sri Lanka, its economy is much more stable than that of Zimbabwe. Though the inflation rate is rising in Sri Lanka, and reached 12.10% in 2006, the number is minuscule compared to Zimbabwe’s 100,000%.  Sri Lanka just recently began printing new money, as did Zimbabwe; however, Zimbabwe’s money is virtually worthless. Their newest bill is the 10,000,000 which can buy you approximately two rolls of toilet paper. You could be a billionaire and barely afford a jacket.