How will other nations treat the Middle East now? Afghanistan and Pakistan seem to value terrorism over peace with other nations.
It's interesting because there are actual buses that promotes Dokdo island as Korea's land. It is clearly evident that Koreans have strong faith about keeping their land away from Japanese who tries to take away the territory. Koreans are promoting in the US which makes us wonder if normal US citizens even know this fact.http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/09/113_51325.html
One thing that is almost certain is that the neighboring Arabic nations will not take much of a different stance than that of which it had over the past few decades. The US and other European nations however might change their opinion to a more radical stance.
Israel and Palestine tried to solve the dispute over Jerusalem by making it an international city but Arab League strongly opposed it because it wanted Palestine to take over the entire city
The questions always exists: Why does the US support Israel? The hatred towards America grows as the US pulls out of Palestine and they continue to support Israel. Plus, the Middle East and the US' growing tensions after 9/11 add to the battle against terrorism., US started to support Israel around 1950s when the Cold War tension heightened in Middle East. Because Russia started to take control of Afghanistan, US felt threatened and exercised its power over Palestine territories that were supposedly given to Palestinians after British Mandate of Palestine. US started to realize the land's strategic benefits to influence Middle East and it still continues to support Israel for that reason
Fatah lost the election because not only the party was corrupted but also the Palestinians started to believe diplomacy would not solve the issue, Internal conflict still exists within Palestine because Fatah party does not recognize Hamas party as the actual government. Such schism between two parties discourages people from uniting. For example, old security forces from Fatah party and new security forces from Hamas party are still in conflict., Oslo Accord has been proposed by Saudi Arabia in 2000. Fatah and Hamas were close in making an united government but they failed to reach a consensus in foreign policies. The accord itself gave more advantage to Hamas party as it had more time to make proposals. Fatah, on the other hand, mostly accepted the suggestions that Hamas suggested as Fatah was given less time during the negotiation.
Within Gaza Strip, 70% of the population are Palestinians and out of that 70%, 97% of the Palestinians are relying on rainfalls for water supplies., To get sufficient water supplies, Palestinians' method is to adopt desalinization system near Gaza Strip or build water-pipes through West Bank. However, the former is hindered because the Israelis are living near water and built road blockcades/checkpoints. And the latter is, as it's been mentioned previously, prevented because Israeli forces destroy them.
This lack of water that the Israelis are causing is creating more terrorist actions to take place since the people are desperate of water. We have to also remember that water is limited in the Middle East in general, therefore Israel as well as other Arabic nations are unwilling to yield much water to the Palestinians.
Recently, Hamas was willing to be in PLO which shows that the party is considering to use peaceful diplomatic strategies as well
To get any sort of talk and negotiation going, it is also important to make sure the US is either neutral, or a bit more tolerant about Palestinian requests.
Many Americans are beginning to doubt the necessity of such extensive aid. Especially with the downfall of America's economy, people are focusing more on domestic issues. They question whether the U.S. has the time and money to consider foreign nations when so many Americans are suffering jobless., Especially with a 60 trillion dollar debt, which is becoming more and more aware by the Americans.
Many corporations find this as an opportunity to make lots of money since investing in a reconstructing economy, both foreign and domestic, can be very profitable. The US government is now stuck trying to find a meeting point between the two opinions (the one above).
How does the reputation of America outweigh domestic struggles/problems? What interest do these acts fulfill?
It funds international environmental programs which, among many other things protect tropical forests, endangered species, and the ozone layer.
It contains billions of dollars for disaster and famine relief, aid for refugees, and other humanitarian programs. It funds activities to protect human rights, support war crimes tribunals, and train judges and lawyers in countries with no tradition of the rule of law.
It funds reconstruction programs in Afghanistan, as well as our contributions to the African peacekeeping force in Darfur, Sudan, and our programs to combat organized crime, drug trafficking, and the trafficking of women and children.
US's efforts to assist Colombia and the Phillipenes
It provides hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians, and aid to more than 100 other countries. It supports contributions to UN peacekeeping, the World Bank, and educational and cultural exchange programs.
This will force more nation states to follow the guide of Kim, Jung Il's policies
Although the US does indeed help fund many developing nations, some nations find this very displeasing in the fact that the US cannot stop messing around with other people's business. This is mainly because the US does not usually take into consideration of the many factors that made the situation become what it is (for example, Iraq)
"Oil wealth used to hurt only those who had it. Now, it’s hurting everyone."
Saudi Arabia gets blamed all the time for high gasoline prices. Saudi Arabia: holds about 25 percent of the world's proven oil reserves, is by far the largest exporter of oil, and maintains the largest spare production capacity in the world.
Four oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and etc. failed to live up to production expectations when the demand for oil is increasing.
America: -wants to stay energy independent (very unrealistic). -world's largest oil consumer, Barack Obama declared that "America's dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that our nation has faced." He said that it "bankrolls dictators, pays for nuclear proliferation, and funds both sides of our struggle against terrorism," and announced what he called "the first steps on our journey toward energy independence."
This leads to nations joining together to research while some, such as the US and many Asian/Pacific nations, are researching independently.
Currently, the most sufficient energy source, other than petroleum, is nuclear energy. This is classified as extremely risky due to the many cases of leaks as well as the lack of information on how to solve the issue of disposing the used uranium., South Korea is one of the supporters of Nuclear energy, but due to the high chances of accidents occurring, it is still in debate whether to import this technology from Europe/US.
As of now, it seems like the US is trying to change the structure of the six party talks.http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2910127
This is a blog that discusses U.S. relations with Afghanistan in regards to its drug corruption: http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/blog/6391
"A supporting goal is to reduce the amount of illicit drugs cultivated, processed, and consumed worldwide" www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RL33582.pdf
Here's a quote I found extremely interesting in this article. Andres Rozental essentially says that the "attacking the supply-side of the western hemisphere's drug war – will remain an unwinnable war so long as its northern neighbor fails to attack the demand side: Americans' insatiable appetite for illicit drugs." (Rozental).
More rational to discriminate against more harmful drugs such as heroin.
"At great cost, in blood and treasure, Mexico is fulfilling its responsibility with a war on supply. It's time the U.S. fulfills its responsibility with a real war on demand." (Rozental).
First of all, it involves the interaction between countries, especially the United States, Colombia, Afghanistan, and bordering state of Mexico.
This is involved on the military level in that U.S. is working on improving their maritime and land border patrol.
Foreign view towards the US and its power has grown, and the fact that the US is "responsible" for such a catastrophic crisis shows the need to blame power in foreign places.
(UNAIDS) estimates the total HIV population of North Africa, the Middle East, and predominantly Muslim Asia at nearly 1 million people today. 2003, UNAIDS estimated that up to 420,000 people in Mali, 180,000 in Indonesia, 150,000 in Pakistan, and 61,000 in Iran had HIV/AIDS. understated. number of people living with HIV/AIDS are completely missing for Afghanistan, Turkey, and Somalia, all countries with large at–risk populations. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/users/login.php?story_id=3081&URL=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3081
spending is 15 times what it was in 1996, but it is insufficient to turn the course of AIDS today. (UNAIDS) estimates that the developing world needs $12 billion in 2005 alone, which doesn’t even include the billions required to build working. International crisis: wealthy survive
Foreign policy blog: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/users/login.php?story_id=2844&URL=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2844
"It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are... different and distinct social orders. It is a dream that Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality.... The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, and literature. They neither intermarry, nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.... Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, their heroes are different, and they have different episodes. —Mohammed Ali Jinnah (Quoted in Pirzada, 1970:337-338)