Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta U.S.A.. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta U.S.A.. Mostrar todas las entradas

viernes, 27 de junio de 2014

The Spotlight Is Back On The Atlantic


Since 2009, when president Barack Obama came into power, a “pivotation” regarding the U.S. foreign policy has taken place. The idea of the Obama administration’s strategic “pivot” from the Middle East to East Asia seems to be challenged with the negotiations of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Photograph retrieved form: <http://www.baquia.com/tecnologia-y-negocios/entry/emprendedores/2013-05-28-startups-europeas-como-conseguir-inversores-de-los-eeuu>.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, is a proposed free trade agreement that would link the world's two largest economies: the United States and Europe. If successfully negotiated, the TTIP would replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as the world’s largest free trade area, with a combined GDP of $31.06 trillion.

On the one hand, the TTIP implies advantages such as a greater economical growth, which would create more jobs and prosperity for two giant engines of the world's economy; reduce high unemployment levels left over from the 2008 financial crisis; improvement of the political bilateral relations between the U.S. and the European Union; and boost the economy by reducing costs (for example the removal of double-taxations).

On the other hand, TTIP could also involve some negative aspects such as the disappearance of small business due to the increased competition and the possible monopoles that big enterprises may build. The U.S.A. and specially, the E.U. would have to give up protectionist measures in industries such as agriculture, energy.. For example, European agribusiness would suffer from cheaper American-made food imports. In addition, the E.U. bans all genetically-modified crops and meat from animals treated with growth hormones. It also refuses poultry that's been washed with chlorine. These are all practices common with U.S. food. European consumers would complain loudly if these bans were lifted. They feel the ban protects them from tainted or lower quality food and public criticism may arise with the implementation of the TTIP.

It is estimated that until late 2015 or early fall 2015, technical negotiations would not conclude. Then the agreement will be submitted to the US Congress and the European Parliament for their consideration and hopefully their approval in the months of January-April 2016. If it goes as planned, the agreement will be approved by late spring of 2016 and on January 1st 2017 the TTIP will be implemented.

Since Colonial times, the Atlantic has been of key importance regarding trade, alliances and economic relationships. We can say that the last time we could see the Atlantic as the major ocean from a geopolitical point of view was during the Cold War. This agreement will relocate the focus of Americans towards their historical allies responding to those who argue that the U.S. was more interested in the Pacific (eg. The Trans-Pacific Partnership: U.S. Trade agreement with Pacific countries such as Japan, Philippines…).

An agreement would strengthen the geo-political standing of the Trans-Atlantic bloc against the rising economic power of China, India and other Pacific nations, as well as the growing success of Latin America. If the U.S. and E.U. could iron out their differences, they could stand as a united front against market threats from the rest of the world.

Paula Padrino

viernes, 6 de junio de 2014

Taliban release last U.S. military prisoner of war


Last Saturday 31st of May, the Haqqani group (Islamist insurgent group) liberated the last American prisoner of both Iraq and Afghanistan war. Bowe Bergdah, an American soldier who was held hostage since the 30th of June 2009, was released in exchange of five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay prison.

Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl was delivered to the U.S. Special Forces in the east of Afghanistan, near the border with Pakistan. Authorities declared that during the exchange there was no violence and that Bergdahl was in good condition and able to walk. However he was taken to an American military hospital in Germany after receiving medical care at Bagram Air Base, the main US base in Afghanistan. Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steve Warren said that Bergdahl is showing improvement during his treatment after nearly five years in captivity and that there’s no “set timeline” to move him into an American hospital to continue his medical treatment.
The five Taliban involved in the swap were high-ranking members of the Taliban government (Fazl, Mullah Norullah Noori, Mohammed Nabi, Khairullah Khairkhwa and Abdul Haq Wasiq) who were arrested by the U.S. in 2001. All of them fled together to Qatar in order to culminate the exchange.

This operation was the result of indirect negotiations between the United States and Taliban with the intermediation of the government of Qatar. Qatar agreed to take the Taliban detainees and said it would allow the United States to track the five men in the Gulf emirate. Under that arrangement, the United States installed extensive surveillance equipment to monitor their movements and communications.
In his early twenties, Bowe Bergdahl enlisted in 2008 without telling his parents. He was drawn by recruiters’ promises that he would be able to go overseas to help people. Once deployed to Afghanistan, he was disillusioned with the US military mission. In his final email to his parents before his capture, he wrote: “I am ashamed to even be an American”.
After telling his comrades he was disillusioned, Bergdahl disappeared off his base in Afghanistan and was captured by Taliban fighters. After being captured, some fellow soldiers believed he willingly walked away from his post and called him a traitor. That morning Bergdahl’s unit started searching for him, as he didn’t show up for roll call. Members of his army blame him for the deaths of other soldiers sent out to rescue him.
The price paid for the release of the Sergeant (the liberation of five former Taliban leaders from Guantanamo to Qatar) is a very controversial issue. Although some Republican members of the U.S. Congress have said the prisoner swap was a dangerous precedent, Obama stands by his decision and said on the G7 Summit in Belgium: “I make no apologies for making sure we get a young man back to his parents”. Furthermore, Mr Hagel, US Secretary of Defense, said that “This was the right decision for the right reasons”, “We don’t leave our people behind”.
Finally last Saturday Bowe’s parents appeared with President Obama at the White House to announce their son’s release. Obama argued that the U.S.A. never leaves the men and women in uniform behind. He thanked the government and Emir of Qatar for their help and their assurance to put measures to protect American national security. Due to the allegations of dissertation the American Army is going to review the circumstances surrounding Bergdahl’s capture and authorities say they will not ignore any misconduct by the released detainee. However, John McHugh, the secretary of the US army, said on Tuesday that officials would interview Bergdahl about the circumstances of his disappearance in Afghanistan once completes a rehabilitation programme in Germany. In addition, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff has stated the former detainee should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

martes, 3 de junio de 2014

Obama announces future foreign policy at West Point


On May 28th, President Barack Obama spoke at the United States Military Academy at West Point to define America’s doctrine on foreign policy.

Obama started his intervention by congratulating the newest officers in the United States Army. He pointed out that this year’s graduates are the first class who may not be sent into combat in Iraq or Afghanistan since 9/11. Things have changed since he first spoke at West Point in 2009. At that time, more than 100,000 troops were deployed in Iraq, they were preparing an invasion to Afghanistan, they were trying to fight terrorism and America was just starting to enter one of its biggest economic crises.
Furthermore, this speech is the closest Obama has been to defining his foreign policy doctrine. Obama mentions how the world is changing rapidly, how Americans must adapt to the new situations and shift from military-interventionism to collective action and diplomacy. “U.S. military action cannot be the only – or even primary – component of our leadership in every instance. Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail” He also explained that the U.S. and it’s important role in the international system is not in decline, on the contrary, he describes America as “the one indispensable nation” which the world looks to for help.
Regarding the use of military force, U.S. president insisted that America should never ask for permission to protect its citizens or its homeland. The U.S.A. will use military force if it’s in the interest of the country, Americans are threatened or its allies are in danger. He added that in the rest of the cases, U.S.A. will always look for other ways to solve issues such as international law, diplomacy or sanctions and isolation, for instance, the U.S. response to Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Moreover, he defended his decision not to intervene in Syria and he offered support toSyria’s neighbours who are the hosts of thousands of refugees.
Unlike other speeches, this one was characterized by its foreign policy announcements. For instance, he is going to ask the Congress to support a new $5 billion Counterterrorism Partnership Fund that will be used to help and assist partner countries (such as Yemen or Mali) on the front lines. In addition, Obama announced that American presence in Afghanistan will be reduced by the end of 2016.
Obama also highlighted some aspects of the environment and climate change.He thinks that climate change is a national security threat, so it must be combated as such. U.S.A. plans to develop a treaty during the negotiations of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate. “That spirit of cooperation must energize the global effort to combat climate change – a creeping national security crisis that will help shape your time in uniform, as we’re called on to respond to refugee flows, natural disasters, and conflicts over water and food,” Obama said. He emphasized the threat posed by the development of technology and globalization, saying that they have “put power once reserved for states in the hands of the individual, raising the capacity of terrorists to do harm.”
U.S. is nowadays a reference and the entity to which any state or any region goes to ask for help or advice. Military forces are and will be very important for the president and the citizens of the U.S  in order to maintain the peace and the stability of the country.

Paula Padrino Vilela

sábado, 24 de mayo de 2014

U.S. response to the abduction of the Nigerian girls


The abduction of more than 200 young Nigerian girls, most of them Christian, from the Government Secondary boarding school in Chibok by the terrorist group Boko Haram on the 14th of April this year, has led to an increase insocial media activism. On May 9th, due to the strong social pressure, the U.S.A. sent a group of 16 military personnel from U.S Africa Command to join an interdisciplinary team working from the U.S. embassy in Abuja to try and help the Nigerian government forces to free the schoolgirls.
Abubakar Shekau, the leader of the terrorist group, claimed that he will sell the girls as God had instructed him. Moreover, he considers that the girls shouldn’t have been in school in the first place, but rather should get married. Those girls were considered to receive a western education, this, in addition to their religious beliefs led to their abduction by this terrorist group whose name can be translated as “non-Islamic education is a sin”.
The role of the U.S.A. is of key importance in the international arena. On May 9th, the U.S. decided to send help to the Nigerian government in order to free the innocent girls. “The main role of this interdisciplinary group is to assess the situation, advise and assist the Nigerian government in their efforts to respond to the crisis situation and find the young women kidnapped by Boko Haram”- Army Colonel Steve Warren explained. According to the Pentagon, the members of the team sent to Nigeria are specialized in communications, logistics, civil affairs, operations and intelligence.

American citizens have asked the U.S. army to step into the problem using several campaigns in the social media. World-known personalities such as The First Lady of the U.S.A., Michele Obama, Amy Phoeler, Angelina Jolie, Malala Yousafzai or Hilary Clinton have raised their awareness and joined the social media campaign “Bring Back Our Girls” that urges for a military intervention in order to rescue the schoolgirls in the African country. According toTopsy, a site that offers Twitter analytics, thousands of tweets using (hash)BringBackOurGirls are being posted everyday. This shows the level of concern of the whole international community, not just Americans. Furthermore, on the 10th of May (Mother’s Day) Michelle Obama gave a speech to campaign for the girl’s release. It is very unusual for a First Lady to address national policy issues on her own. She said she and his husband Barack Obama were heartbroken over the kidnapping of the Nigerian girls.
Apart from the U.S. intervention, other countries have offered their help to the Nigerian government. The United Kingdom, France, China, Canada, Spain, Cameroon and Chad, among some others, have compromised to share valuable information and send skilled teams to the field. At the international level, the members of the U.N. Security Council expressed outrage over the abductions stating that appropriate measures against Boko Haram will be taken.
All in all, the public opinion is shocked by these terrorist acts and the U.S.A. seems to be trying to help liberate the girls from their abductors. As Obama said: “We’re going to do everything we can to provide assistance to them. In the short term our goal is obviously is to help the international community, and the Nigerian government, as a team to do everything we can to recover these young ladies”.

Paula Padrino Vilela

U.S.A. accuses China of cyber-espionage against American enterprises.


On May 19, five Chinese military officers were accused by a grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania (WDPA) for spying six American nuclear power, metals and solar products companies in order to steal trade secrets. China, on the contrary, denies these accusations and warns that bilateral relations between the two countries are going to be damaged.
A few days after the announcement of the American accusation, China signed a 30 year-gas-supply agreement with Russia, American’s rival counterpart due to the friction in Ukraine.
The defendants Gu Chunhui, Wang Dong, Sun Kailiang, Wen Xinyu and Huang Zhenyu were officers in Unit 61398 of the Third Department of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The indictment alleges that the defendants hacked or intended to hack into the following American entities: Westinghouse Electric Co., U.S. subsidiaries of SolarWorld AG (SolarWorld); United States Steel Corp; Allegheny Technologies Inc; the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; and Alcoa Inc.Mandiant, an American Cyber security firm, identified Unit 61398 as the source of a large Lumber of espionage operations. Unit 61398 is said not to be one of the most sophisticated bodies in China but it has hundreds of active spies.
It is the first time that the U.S.A. has filed charges against specific foreign officials for criminal hacking. However, it’s not the first time that the U.S. has taken measures to try and stop cyber espionage. For instance, on the 6th of September 2013 president Obama met the Chinese President Xi Jinping during the G20 summit in the city of St. Petersburg to talk about cyber espionage among many other issues.
China has denied the implication of its citizens regarding these criminal acts. Geng Yansheng, a spokesman for the Ministry of National Defense, met with the U.S. Ambassador in Beijin, Max Baucus shortly after the U.S. charged the five Chinese officials and stated, “The Chinese government and military and its associated personnel have never conducted or participated in the theft of trade secrets over the Internet”.
China warns that the indictment is likely to damage the relationship between both countries. During the last decade, the accusations coming from both countries regarding cyber espionage are becoming more frequent. The two biggest economic forces have entered in a spiral of accusations and complaints dealing with the steal of national security information.
China denies the existence of this serious problem. What the U.S. expects from China is the elimination of the Sino-US Cyber Working Group’s interactions. Moreover, this indictment is merely an accusation, a defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law. The U.S. is going to go forward with the charges, probably in order to prove its commitment to the protection of American businesses and for the absence of a better idea. However, sceptics said that U.S. authorities would not be able to arrest the Chinese officials because Beijing would not hand them over. Still, they won’t be able to travel to the United States or other countries that have an extradition agreement with the United States.
Paula Padrino Vilela