ThePoliticalReview

Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his Conservative challenger David Cameron each made their case Friday for a coalition with the party that finished third in Britain's elections, hoping to secure the balance of power following an inconclusive vote.
The Conservatives, who won the largest number of seats in Thursday's contest, suggested that lawmakers from the third-place Liberal Democrats could serve as ministers in a future Tory government. But they held back from promising the far-reaching electoral reform the Liberal Democrats have demanded. Brown, whose left-leaning Labour Party lost more than 90 seats is fighting to cling to power, promising to back the Liberal Democrats on reform and opening negotiations with Britain's smaller, Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties,

Labour came second in Thursday's vote, which for the first time since the 1970s produced no outright winner. The Conservatives gained the largest number of seats but fell short of the parliamentary majority needed to govern alone.

With the results of all the country's contests declared, Conservatives earned 306 seats, Labour held 258 and the Liberal Democrats had 57. Other parties, such as the Scottish National Party and Welsh nationalists Plaid Cymru, held 28 seats.
As sitting prime minister, Brown would traditionally be given the first chance to put together a government. His left-of-center Labour Party is seen as a more natural coalition fit with the Liberal Democrats.

Many of the Conservative party's old guard distrust the Liberal Democrats' pro-European leanings and fiercely oppose its call for proportional representation, which would make it hard for any single party to hold power alone — effectively shutting out the Conservatives indefinitely. Talks were expected to begin between political players Friday, aided by civil service guidelines detailing how the process should unfold.

Although Britain has no written constitution, senior civil servants have been preparing furiously to lay out the rules and avoid market-rattling uncertainty in the event of a so-called hung parliament, a result in which no party secures a majority. The last time a British election produced such a result was in 1974.

A period of political wrangling and confusion in one of the world's largest economies could unsettle global markets already reeling from the Greek debt crisis and fears of wider debt contagion in Europe. Britain's budget deficit is set to eclipse even that of Greece next year, and whoever winds up in power faces the daunting challenge of introducing big government spending cuts to slash the country's huge deficit.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu

On Tuesday, Thai anti-government protesters stated that they welcomed a proposal from the Thai prime minister to end the violent political crisis that has paralyzed central Bangkok for nearly two months, but asked for more details on the plan before wrapping up their demonstrations. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva proposed elections for November 14 in order to appease the Red Shirt protesters and encourage them to stop riots across the nation, which have killed 27 people and injured thousands more. Protest leaders unanimously agreed to talks with the prime minister, but said they wanted more details on the prime minister’s plans.

The protesters, who believe that Abhisit came to power illegally in 2006, said they wanted Abhisit to commit to a date for dissolving Parliament ahead of the election. That date could help determine the future balance of power in the country because the dominant party stands to influence the reshuffle of top military posts that will take place in September. The plan, which Abhisit said took into account the main grievances of the protesters, was his first real effort to reach out to his opponents after several weeks of treating their demonstrations as mainly a security problem and accusing "terrorists" in their ranks of being responsible for the deadly violence.

Abhisit has said he would proceed with the reconciliation plan even if the protesters reject it, but in that case he could not set a date for the elections. The five-point plan announced Monday calls for respect for the monarchy, reforms to solve economic injustices, free but responsible media to be overseen by an independent watchdog agency, independent investigations into violence connected with the protests, and constitutional amendments intended to level the playing field for all political parties.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu

In a nearly unanimous decision, the lower house of the Belgian parliament passed a measure banning the burqa in all public areas, following similar actions taken in France, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The law's author, Daniel Bacquelaine, a Liberal, said a burqa is incompatible with basic security as everyone in public must be recognizable and clashes with the principles of an emancipated society that respects the rights of all.

The law states that no one may appear in public "with the face fully or partly covered so as to render them no longer recognizable." Although Belgian authorities have fined women in the past for wearing burqas in public, the new law will have effects in the entire nation and make currently spotty regulation of burqas much more strict. However, the law needs approval from both houses of parliament and the law may not take effect for at least several more months, since the Belgian government led by Prime Minister Yves Leterme resigned on April 22 after it was unable to reach a stable compromise over the use of Dutch and French in different parts of Belgium.

3% of the population of Belgium is Muslim, making Belgium one of the top five European nations with the highest percentage of Muslims in its population. Laws similar to Belgium’s new measure include a 2004 French law that banned wearing of the Jewish yarmulke, the Christian Cross, and Muslim Niqab in its schools, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy has criticized the burqa and called for a national ban on the garment. Denmark earlier this year called the burqa contradictory to Danish values but has not implemented a total burqa ban.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu

The Mexican government warned its citizens Tuesday to use extreme caution if visiting Arizona because of a tough new law that requires all immigrants and visitors to carry U.S.-issued documents or risk arrest. The controversial new law signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has faced stiff opposition from many groups and individuals, including various Hispanic American rights groups, the NAACP, and even President Barack Obama. Arizona's law — slated to take effect in late July or early August — makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally and allows police to question anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. Lawmakers said the legislation, which has sparked huge protests and litigation, was needed because the Obama administration is failing to enforce existing federal laws.

Mexico's Foreign Ministry issued a travel alert for Arizona after the law was signed, warning that its passage shows "an adverse political atmosphere for migrant communities and for all Mexican visitors."The alert said that once the law takes effect, foreigners can be questioned at any moment and detained if they fail to carry immigration documents. And it warns that the law will also make it illegal to hire or be hired from a vehicle stopped on the street. People from both parties, including Republicans like Tom Tancredo, a vocal opponent of illegal immigration and Florida senatorial candidate Mario Rubio have criticized the law for containing elements of a police state and encouraging racial profiling. There are signs that the law will face conflicts with federal officials, since some opponents of the law are citing federal regulations as contrary to states’ abilities to regulate immigration.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu

The quiet extradition of Manuel Noriega, former de facto ruler of Panama, to France, where he will be prosecuted for money laundering, brings to mind a time when U.S. foreign policy in the Americas involved questionable alliances, the consequences of which have reflected embarrassingly on the CIA and the U.S. government for years.

Noriega ruled Panama from 1983 to 1989, after the abrupt airplane death of general Torrijos, the man who oversaw the nationalization of the Panama Canal. Noriega was considered, initially, a top ally of the United States in South America, and an active supporter of CIA operations, on its payroll since the 1960s.

His dictatorship, nevertheless, strengthened ties with Colombian drug trafficking groups, coincided with an economic and political crisis in Panama and was known for its elimination of dissidents. Unable to account for its ally’s actions, the United States launched its invasion of Panama in 1989, dubbed Operation “Just Cause,” which overthrew Noriega’s government but left between 3,000 and 5,000 dead in the country.

Until extradited, Noriega man had been serving a 30-year sentence for money laundering and drug trafficking in Florida. France, requesting extradition in 2008, had tried the former dictator in absentia in 1999 and found him guilty of laundering 3 million dollars in 1988 from international banks into French accounts. Panama has also been asking for his extradition, charging him with political murder and corruption.

While not as discussed as its current policies in the Middle East, alleged U.S. influence upon state rule in Latin America during the 1970s and 80s has a controversial span and rather unpleasant implications, connecting the late Cold War administrations to the turbulent histories of dictatorships in the Dominican Republic, Chile, and Argentina.

Agnes Trenche can be contacted at atrenche [at] gmail.com

As Democrats in Congress look to capitalize on high support for stricter financial regulation, many Republicans are now trying to slow debate on several other key issues, including climate and immigration legislation.

While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has put in motion plans to begin financial reform formal debate in the Senate later this afternoon, several senior members of the GOP predict that such a debate will not come to pass quite yet, especially because it appears that a bipartisan compromise plan may be forthcoming in the very near future. As such, it is likely that even the most partisan Democrats may be willing to hold out for a few more days and drum up more support.

On the other hand, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham brought climate legislation negotiation to a near halt when he walked away from talks aimed at creating a bipartisan compromise, similar to those which are currently proceeding for financial reform. Graham, like several of his supporters within the legislature, believes that the simoltaneous push for financial, immigration, and climate reform is simply too much too quickly for the Senate to handle this year and risks undermining the legislative process.

The Obama administration is currently working to restart talks on climate legislation, and immigration reform remains a contentious issue in the wake of Arizona's recent controversial bill.

Bryan Baird can be contacted at bryanbaird [at] wustl.edu

Hundreds of Arizonans massed outside the state’s capitol building to protest the recently passed, controversial bill enforcing strict measures to prevent illegal immigration. Approved by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer on Friday, the legislation requires immigrants to carry immigration documents at all times and requires police to stop and question people if there is reason to suspect that they are illegal immigrants. Officials say that the bill is meant to crack down on the noted illegal immigration problem in Arizona.

Already, many protestors have called the new law unconstitutional and immoral. Many national organizations, especially Latino and Hispanic groups, have publicly expressed their outrage. Some claim that the “reasonable suspicion” clause amounts to legalizing racial profiling by police.

Notable figures such as the Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon and Reverend Al Sharpton have joined in criticizing the bill, with the former promising and the latter demanding that legal action be taken against the state of Arizona.

Experts have predicted far reaching consequences for the bill, including an outflow of both legal and illegal immigrants from Arizona and the possibility of other similarly-affected states on the border with Mexico enacting similar legislature.

Taka Yamaguchi can be contacted at tyama2891 [at] gmail.com

Yesterday the Revolutionary Guard, the elite sector of the Iranian military, held war games in the Hormuz Strait, a strategic part of the Persian Gulf oil route, in a move clearly designed to provoke the United States and demonstrate Iran’s fighting capabilities. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei accused the Obama administration of attempting to annihilate Iran with “implicit atomic threats”, revisions of its nuclear policy in the past couple of weeks, and American efforts to push for stronger UN sanctions against Iran to persuade Iran to end its nuclear program. Iran is looking for ways to weaken the US’s new nuclear policy by sending Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchechr Mottaki to Austria in the next few days to negotiate with the UN Security Council about the possibility of reaching a compromise on nuclear fuel that could allow Iran to continue nuclear research for the sole purpose of energy sources.

Since 2006, Iran has been holding military maneuvers, dubbed The Great Prophet, in the Persian Gulf, and Iranian TV news reports depicted Iranian air, naval and ground units in action recently at the war exercises. Iran's leaders have said in the past that if attacked, the country would respond by shutting off the Strait of Hormuz, the mouth of the Gulf through which around 40 percent of the world's oil and gas supplies pass, as well as by attacking American bases in the Gulf. Iranian military officials also announced new developments in their technology, but US authorities have responded with statements saying that the current war games “don’t seem out of the ordinary” and that Iran’s military capacities are being exaggerated by its leaders. The US Navy announced that there will be “no significant impacts” on the American fleets near the Persian Gulf.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu

Mexico’s northeastern region has seen a persistence of the violence spike that began earlier this year, evidenced in the hotel abduction of at least 6 people in one of the region’s premier business cities, Monterrey, a feat that occurred this Wednesday.

At 3 a.m., attackers entered the hotel with a hostage and began looking through rooms, abducting individuals and in some cases laptops. In the regions surrounding the U.S.-Mexico border, Mexican authorities and cartel attackers engage in elaborate skirmishes which alter the Mexican population into a state of anxiety and leave the drug related death toll at 3,000 less than halfway through the year.

Mexican authorities have advised American citizens not to use highways that connect the U.S. to places like Monterrey, where American economic interests are lodged.

Directing trucks to block traffic, where stalled cars are sometimes vandalized, abducting businessmen and women from hotels, as well as attacking local journalists and beheading policemen – all are measures that have been taken up by the drug cartels, retaliating each other and against the crackdown the government initiated in 2006.

Monterrey in particular was once considered a hub for blooming investment and entrepeneurship, a status the city is at threat of losing because of the recent violence and corruption.

In addition to the raid on two hotels, two students were killed last week in the city when a shootout between cartels broke out in front of a private university.

With basic institutions such as transport, lodging and education threatened, Mexico seems far from improvement.

Agnes Trenche can be contacted at atrenche [at] gmail.com

On Tuesday, the Brazilian government announced that a union of nine Brazilian corporations has won the bid to build a hydroelectric dam in the Amazon rainforest of Brazil. The coalition, led by Companhia Hidro Eletrica do Sao Francisco, a state-controlled company, plans to construct a government-supported dam over the next years that will satisfy much of Brazil’s growing energy needs. The project will cost $11 billion and, when completed, will be the world’s third largest dam, behind China's Three Gorges dam and the Itaipu dam that straddles the border of Brazil and Paraguay.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva strongly supports and spearheads the dam, saying it is a necessary development that will provide clean and renewable energy to Brazil and will genearte a net positive effect. However, many environmentalists, indigenous Brazilians, and activists claim that the dam will do irreparable harm to the natural environment of the Amazon, in addition to displacing large numbers of civilians, and killing off many forms of life.

The opponents of the dam recently have received the endorsement of director James Cameron, who visited Brazil last week to join the protest. Cameron claims that the controversy over the dam is a real life example of the themes of his recent film “Avatar”, which depicts native aliens fighting against extraction of its resources by humans. Cameron praised the protesters, who have been active in a number of cities across Brazil and who plan to physically block dam construction by building a village in front of the construction site.

Derek Sun can be contacted at dsun [at] artsci.wustl.edu