6 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(11/13/14 1:14am)
Earlier this week, an ISIS convoy outside of Mosul, Iraq transporting its caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was struck by a U.S. airstrike. Many are celebrating the potential death as a possibility to bring ISIS to its knees quickly and effectively with little expenditures in terms of time, money and men.
(10/30/14 10:00pm)
Great changes are coming to the East. With newly-elected prime minister Narendra Modi set to hold firm control of the Indian government for years to come, the focal point of Asian politics will shift from China to India.During 15 years as governor of Gujarat, Modi managed to sustain 12-14 percent growth per year, an astounding feat. Now, he promises to bring this to all of India. This shift from the long-time socialist-oriented patchwork coalition of governments to a more classically liberal and traditionally Hindu-minded government marks a huge change in the country's mentality.
Modi has mobilized a country which has long had the unfair stereotype of being poor and backwards and is now successfully paving a path toward prosperity. He started his office in a stampeding fashion by planning and implementing new and continued projects at all levels to improve the quality of life and opportunities of Indians. The list is an impressive one.First, his economic policies have promised to revamp the nation with Make In India, a project which will attempt to open up the Indian economy to manufacturing ranging from high-level research and development to low-skilled manufacturing; this measure could employ up to 200 million Indians. He is also planning to simplify a dauntingly burdensome tax code, making it simpler for both Indians and international corporations to do business. Modi is advancing the infrastructure at all levels of Indian society while updating archaic property laws to further development.By opening several hundred new Indian universities — some in conjunction with American universities — he is ensuring India's place as a competitor in the global knowledge-based economy.Additionally, Modi is working to ensure the nation's poor remain fed via subsidies in what is an agriculturally abundant country despite rumblings from the World Trade Organization.He is also being tough on those who pose threats to his nation. Modi is quelling the large-scale black money profits within India by instituting monitoring controls as India's resources begin to shift away from services. With Modi's backing, the Chief Justice of India has been successfully pressuring Swiss banks to release names of corrupt people within the Indian government along with their business cronies to recover what might be more than $1 trillion in stolen and embezzled money.
On top of all of this, Modi has actually helped unify the country's Hindu and Muslim populations despite western media's claims that he is polarizing the country with constant use of buzz phrases such as "Hindu supremacist." A notable example of this occurred during a campaign speech in which terrorist attacks took place, and he stood upon a stage under which a bomb set to kill him malfunctioned. As countless millions watched the speech live on television, Modi calmed the crowd and made a public plea that none act irrationally or violently in response to the terrorist attack. Despite holding a firm position toward Pakistan by clearing out dozens of government-backed terrorist camps and fortifying the border of India's Kashmir with Pakistan, he makes his position clear that Muslim Indians are still Indians.
Whether you make the claim that he is excessively Hindu nationalistic, Modi has helped to paint a future of India so bright that only at blind man could argue.
All these advancements mean that India, due to the large shift in mentality and the firmly mandated government, is on track to overtake China as Asia's powerhouse. China has been built via the aid of international corporations and is thereby dependent upon the international economy to sustain itself, whereas India is working to build a sustainable future, even in the case that international interests shy away.China has been built upon a stack of foreign business cards whereas India is laboring to build itself up brick by brick, fighting to pull people out of poverty rather than keep them there. This positive mentality is shown in the protections it gives for local and small industries by denying access to companies such as Wal-Mart, which if allowed to enter India, would threaten the livelihood of countless domestic companies and vendors.
In terms of hard conflict, India is no longer entirely focused upon Pakistan but instead focused on China. India's military has created 12 new battalions and has begun plans to expand its navy to ensure no Chinese encroachment upon Indian territory is possible. If the Chinese military encroaches by land, the Indian military has a construction crew not far behind to attempt to make claims upon territory. Luckily, despite the reality that India will be looking to make ties with southeast Asia to push back the attempts of Chinese expansion, — particularly into the oil rich South China Sea — Modi has excellent ties with Chinese officials and has been given awards of merit by four Chinese leaders.
Projections show that by 2028, India will have the third largest GDP in the world with China and the U.S. coming in 1st and 2nd. However, the rule of 72 may suggest otherwise; if India as a whole can manage the wonders pushed by Modi within his home province of over 10 percent growth per annum or to keep up the projected 8.5 percent growth, then it would have the potential to be the top GDP consumer by around 2040 to 2060.
The elephant has awoken from slumber, and it has begun a charge which has the potential to change the world as we know it. The seeds have already been sown with the creation of the BRICS bank and even more so with talks of increasing the U.N. permanent security council, of which India would undoubtedly become a part. I predict this coming century is the century of Indian growth and eventual dominance, not only in Asia by overtaking China, but potentially of the world in terms of soft power. This election not only marks the induction of a great leader but also a huge shift in mentality of over a billion people which will assuredly bring amazing things.Reach the columnist abbooth1@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @AndrewBuckBoothEditor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(10/07/14 12:32am)
As we watch the Iraqi state we propped up break down, it begs the question: Can the U.S. successfully keep the Afghan government from collapsing despite the presence of the Taliban, corrupt government officials, and Afghanistan's history as a decentralized country? The obvious answer is no.
(09/23/14 12:14am)
Hillary Clinton has been made out to be another big push for positive change in America, the reason being that she has the potential to be the first female President of the U.S. However, the biggest issue lies in her history of being willing to strip away the rights of Americans and her quick-trigger attitude toward foreign intervention.Clinton's views on foreign policy are rife with inconsistencies. She has longstanding opposition against Iran due to their "sponsorship of terrorism," but at the same time, she supports and accepts over $500,000 in gifts and over 10 million in donations from the Saudi royal family for her family's foundation while she herself has stated that "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide."Even more perplexing is that Saudi Arabia is the home of Wahhabism, the ideology professed by ISIS. What would this mean should Clinton become Commander-in-Chief and the Saudi monarchy becomes too threatened by ISIS? I am incredibly doubtful that the Islamic world would view an American intervention into the country that houses Mecca as a positive thing. This is an important issue, because Clinton's past actions have shown her to have little thought for unintended consequences. This was shown in Libya when she acted as the main orchestrator of the invasion to oust and kill Muammar al-Gaddafi, which has since turned Libya into a place of ruin, roving militias and possibly a long civil war. Of course, increased anti-American sentiments came with that, as was demonstrated in Benghazi.Clinton as president would not only pose issues internationally, but domestically, as she has proven to be quite disquieting when it comes to constitutional and basic human rights. An exchange with Wolf Blitzer at a 2007 Democratic Party debate revealed this:Blitzer asked Clinton, "You say national security is more important than human rights. Senator Clinton, what do you say?", to which Clinton responded, "I agree with that completely. The first obligation of the president of the United States is to protect and defend the United States of America. That doesn't mean that it is to the exclusion of other interests."She had also previously shown this with gusto when she voted for the PATRIOT Act and publicly compared those who support gun rights to terrorists. Her position on accountability and abuses of government power became clear when she decried Edward Snowden for simply having shown the American people what their government is doing. That, in conjunction with the quote from the debate, paints a chilling picture as to how she must view the role of the government in relation to the people it exists to serve.Clinton may be trying to tout herself as a bastion of progressiveness and forward thinking, but her record shows her to be incredibly ruthless internationally and domestically. I agree it would be a great step to elect a woman president, but I want it to be a woman who will fight for the best interest of this great country.Reach the columnist at abbooth1@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @AndrewBuckBoothEditor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(09/01/14 8:33pm)
The U.S. government has a troublesome issue to work out. Does it want to renege on its commitment to combat Bashar al-Assad, the pseudo-dictator of Syria, or does it want to back the Islamic State, the group which has taken over Iraq and beheaded countless individuals? It shouldn’t be too difficult a choice, but because of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy decision to completely oppose Assad and his Syrian government, it could prove problematic.
(08/27/14 12:05am)
In recent months, the U.S. government has been flexing its economic muscle by imposing sanctions upon Russia and attempting to end the civil war in Ukraine by forcing Russia to relinquish claims to Crimea. However, the success record of imposing economic sanctions to achieve bloodless victories has been rather shaky; our actions against countries like Cuba and Iran have had seemingly negligible effects and potentially have done us more harm than it has them. I don’t believe that we still have the stability, prosperity or influence required to collapse economies without a large risk of bringing down ours in the process, especially when attempting to do so with another superpower like Russia.