Some of my kinks during the writing process

Currently some of the issues I'm currently facing with my paper is meshing institutional approach with particularly more recent issues that have occurred in Haiti (such as the 2010 earthquake and government aid from the US). After finally posing a question that I aim to answer within my paper I have found a lot more arguments to make. However, at the same time I've also realized that focusing to heavily on the historical context of Haiti and DR may not be in my best interest if I don't remain focused on my institutional argument. Due to this I have contemplated either focusing on only more recent issues between DR and Haiti. Or even going as far to only focus on Haiti alone. Which brings another issue I have been facing. A lot of the sources I have been researching for this project have been noticeably biased. Either one side being partisan to Haiti or DR. There are a few ways around this but again it has been tough trying to mesh it all together while staying on the topic of strictly black identity.

Chicago Style Citation Troubles

I was recently reminded by a classmate that we have to cite the paper in Chicago Style. This has become a slight problem for me, as I am currently going back in my paper and reformatting. That is not a huge issue, the real problem is that this is my first time citing in this fashion. I am in the process of issuing footnotes for all of my quotes and cited sources, but am being sucked into the Purdue OWL site because I have no experience with this. I actually just stopped into the Writing Center for help with it, as I was not sure footnotes should be listed chronologically or if the multiple citations from the same source should be listed in the same clump (i.e. 1,2 not 1____3). My advice to those who have this same issue, stop into the Writing Center. I was in and out within a minute because of the helpful receptionist type workers.

Syrian Partition

This is a crude map I made that represents what a partitioned Syria might look like. 

Rabab Mushtaq

                                                Book Review

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an intergovernmental economic organization with 35 member countries, aiming to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well being of people around the world. OECD has a series called Recruiting Immigrant Workers, which focuses on countries labor migration policies. With an institutional and economical approach, each volume analyzes whether a country is effectively using migration policies to help meet its labor needs in response to their institutional forces, as well as limiting any unfavorable effects on their national economic growth.

As Germany is one of the member countries of OECD, in 2013 the organization published Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany, which argued that Germany is dealing with a detrimental shrink in their working age population. Germany being one of the fastest aging countries in the OECD, it is destructive, economically, if the working age-population starts to decline sharply. As a result, the nation is in dire need to recruit workers, however, the demand cannot be met at a domestic level because of the nation’s demographics. Labor shortages in Germany are noticeable with the rising numbers of vacancies, which OECD discusses. Shortages according to OECD, are expected in all levels of skilled workers from high to low and are expected to increase with time. With employment levels in Germany being generally high in comparison to other countries, the labor market is promising for vast peoples such as women, refugees, and older workers.

Although the book heavily focuses on Germany’s labor migration policy, such as working permits and student visas, there is immense amount of information in regards Germany’s labor needs. I chose OECD’s Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany as a means to find adequate information on how refugees will become a catalyst to improve the shortage in Germany’s labor force and stabilize their economy. “According to the United Nations population projections, there will be about 60% more people leaving the working age population in Germany than entering it in 2020. Part of this decline is due to much lower levels of immigration in Germany” (OECD, 35). This information strengthens my research by affirming that Germany will reap economical benefits from opening their doors for refugees. However, being written in 2013, there is no explicit discussion of the refugees in regards to Germany’s recent open door policy. Furthermore, Germany being a member of the OECD organization can raise concerns upon the organization ability to publish an unbiased critical analysis of Germany. However, this book is informative due to the enormous amount of tables and figures displaying trends that correlate to the content within the text. Additionally, the detailed reference has become essential in obtaining work correlated to my research.               

The book is separated into five chapters, addressing key areas such as, demographics (discussing the declining working age population), Germany’s labor force (vacant occupations), German employer demands (highly skilled to low skilled workers), Germany’s labor migration policy in response to the labor shortage, and more. Throughout the book, the contributors show a detailed declination of the labor force in various fields with the support from the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Federal Employment Agency, and the Central Foreigners Registry Division of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees. One example is the following, “the German Federal Employment Agency forecasts-in the absence of change—a skilled—labor shortage of about 5.4 million by 2025” (OECD, 45). Another example was an analysis done by the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, which concluded that labor shortages in specific occupations occur not only in highly qualified occupations, but also in a number of apprenticeship-level occupations. “The largest number of shortages for apprenticeships was in service occupations, such as merchants, sales personnel, cooks, waiters, hotel clerks, and hairdressers” (OECD, 36).

 Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany contains extensive statistical data. It can be argued that refugees entering Germany have an opportunity to obtain an occupation, which can benefit economical stability in regards to labor shortage. With the support of the institutions mentioned earlier, such as the Federal Employment Agency and the Central Foreigners Registry Division of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, the book contains valuable data that supports OECD’s argument on Germany facing a labor crisis and their need of migrants to stabilize their economy.

Bibliography

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013.

-->

  

My Paper Abstract

Since I haven't posted it on this blog yet, I thought I'd provide a summary of my research project:

Working from a neorealist perspective, I offer an interpretation of the Syrian Civil War in terms of ethnic partition theory. However, in order to reasonably interpret the Syrian situation through the lens of ethnic partition theory, the theory’s central conceptual model of the proliferation of sectarian violence—the ethnic security dilemma—must be revised. I propose a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma referred to as the heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis. I submit that this modified account of the ethnic security dilemma will supply the theoretical equipment necessary to defend an ethnic partition theory-based interpretation of the Syrian Civil War from the critics of such an interpretation, in particular, Erin K. Jenne.

There are at least three problems with applying ethnic partition theory to the case of Syria. More generally, these three problems prevent the application of ethnic partition theory, and consequently, its policy implications of population transfer and new borders, to more than a small handful of particular cases. I refer to these problems as the problem of elites, the problem of the threshold, and the problem of other causes. These three problems facing ethnic partition theory can be summarized by three questions, respectively. (1) What if it is the case that ethnic cleansing and sectarian violence are carried out by malevolent offensively-oriented opportunists rather than rational defensively-oriented security-seekers? (2) How can we know the point at which an ethnic security dilemma is occurring, and if we can, at what point does it warrant partition? (3) If it is the case that sectarian violence is caused by a source other than interethnic animosities, what good will new borders and population transfer do?

          The heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis, I believe, provides a defense to ethnic partition theory in light of these problems. The hypothesis may be stated thus: given x level of ethnic heterogeneity within a state, any civil conflict necessarily approaches the ethnic security dilemma. The subtlety of this hypothesis stresses the temporal dimension of the security dilemma phenomenon as well as the requirement for sufficient ethnic heterogeneity. So long as a violent civil conflict is ongoing, a state will invariably approach conditions of anarchy, and consequently, the security dilemma.  The hypothetical syllogism implied by the heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis can be stated thus: If a civil conflict emerges, then a state of x ethnic heterogeneity will approach anarchy. If a state of x ethnic heterogeneity approaches anarchy, then it approaches the ethnic security dilemma. Therefore, if a civil conflict emerges, then a state of x ethnic heterogeneity will approach the ethnic security dilemma.

            Thus, the project endeavors to complete four goals: (a) provide an overview of ethnic partition theory as articulated most prominently by Chaim Kaufmann as well as common objections to it, (b) identify the current weaknesses of ethnic partition theory that preclude its reasonable application to cases more generally, (c) propose and articulate a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma that can address the weaknesses faced by ethnic partition theory and better defend it from its critics, and (d) offer an interpretation of the Syrian Civil War in terms of such a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma.

This is a very helpful PDF map for understanding the present territorial distribution on the ground in Syria. It is very relevant to many of our projects, including mine, which deals with the prospects for a partitioned Syria.

http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Regime%20-%20Iranian%20Posture%20MAR%202017_2.pdf

Refugees and rivals: The international dynamics of refugee flows analysis

Often, individuals think about refugees and the struggles that is faced from day to day. As a result, when critiquing host nations on willingness to accept refuges, relationships between refugee and host is largely ignored. This article sought to discover why some nations accept some refugees over others. While many nations are empathetic toward refugees and their plights, analyzing how a host nation can benefit from a group of individuals can not be ignored. Nations too, often operate as businesses in a sense where there needs to be a value added to the nation when an action occurs. The articles argues that refugees are another proxy mechanism by which rival states may seek to undermine one another. If this notion is applied to the current crisis in Syria, there is no clear cut nation or group of people that would benefit from taking in Syrian Refugees economically or geo politically. Since Assad's ruling class is the minority in the nation, neighboring sunni nations may perceive the plight of other Sunnis in Syria as helping Assad instead of trying to get rid of him. Similarly in the west, many nations have economic and cultural fears of taking in refugees.

The Uncertain Role of the EU Countries in the Syrian Refugee Crisis analysis

This article is a great article because it illuminates the competing issues within the EU construct that aid in the dysfunction of the current Syrian Refugee crisis. When distributing refugees within the EU, having a policy that hurts boarder nations was perhaps the biggest mistake for several reasons. First, the southern boarder nations of Greece, Italy, Hungary and Bulgaria, are not the economic powerhouses of the EU. Thus, housing and finding room to find work for Syrian refugees is problematic. Moreover, they are not the largest nations by population within the EU. Furthermore, the bordering nations are more susceptible to problematic refugees than inner EU nations because the inability to vet thoroughly. Inner nations possessing the power to send unwarranted refugees back to "first arrival"EU nations (border nations) help to stoke resentment, islamaphobia, and general anti immigrant sentiments throughout EU nations that have limited resources, smaller populations, and geographically on the border. Arguably, refugees independent of belief or cultural practices, were already diagnosed as scapegoats in some EU nations because of the failed policy structure to handle the Syrian refugee crises within the EU.

Cyrpus Conflict

I posted this as a small background tool for everyone to get an idea about my paper topic, which is the Cyprus Conflict. At the bottom you'll find the bibliography.

As the Triple Entente declared war on the Ottoman Empire in 1914, the country of Cyprus was annexed by Britain. By 1955, Greek Cypriots began guerrilla war against British rule, which resulted in Cyprus gaining its independence after Greek and Turkish communities agreement on the Treaty of Guarantee in 1960. This treaty grants Cyprus its independence meanwhile giving Great Britain, Greece, and Turkey the right to intervene if Cyprus does undertake its role not to participate in any political or economic union with any state. Archbishop Makarios of Cyprus was alleged to have raised fears in the Turkish community by proposing constitutional changes to the treaty. Backed by military junta in Greece, a coup against Makarios was successful (1974). Days after the successful coup, Turkey asserted Article IV of the Treaty of Guarantee to invade the island of Cyprus. Turkish forces continue to occupy a third of the island, enforcing a split between the north and south along the “Green Line”. Talks have since then been continued to reconcile both sides.

            The Cypriot people have since been furious with the outcome of the Treaty of Guarantee from its failed implementation in 1960; the emotions continue to run high from the 2004 referendum election within the United Nations and in a recent talk taken place in Davos, Switzerland, on January 21, 2016, in Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s first joint meeting with the Cypriot president Nicos Anastasiades and leader of the Turkish Cypriot Community, Mustafa Akinci.

            The Cypriot people display resemblance of topics written by Bernard Mayer. In The Dynamics of Conflict, Mayer portrays a map in guidance of the conflict process known as the Wheel of Conflict. Within the wheel of conflict, he examines five factors, which three are relevant to this case: Emotions, History, and Communication. Dealing with the intense emotions often associated with conflict usually requires finding some opportunity to express and release emotions and to experience someone else’s understanding and empathy (Mayer, 2012, 13). The emotions of the Cypriot people that want others to understand include the feelings of betrayal, and anger and frustration.

            Turkey brought about the feelings of anger and frustration from the feeling of betrayal the Cypriot people possess. Turkey invaded Cyprus under the fear of supposed concern that Archbishop Makarios was proposing constitutional changes to the treaty. Acting in direct accord of fear to illegally invade Cyprus would be in contrast to Mayer’s thinking. A direct display of feelings can escalate a conflict (Mayer, 2012, 13). Article IV of the Treaty of Guarantee states, “In the event of a breach of the provisions of the present Treaty, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom undertake to consult together with respect to the representations or measures necessary to ensure observance of those provisions.” Turkey did not abide by the article when it solely invaded Cyprus in 1974 dividing the country. This act frustrated the Cypriot people whose response was, “Although Article Four of the Treaty of Guarantee refers to the right of intervention, it does not refer to military intervention for the simple reason that, according to the United Nations Charter, no state has the right to intervene militarily in another state without the consent of the UN Security Council.” The Cypriot people believe their rights under the treaty have been violated. Some anger is also placed towards Great Britain and Greece who did not intervene in stopping Turkey during the invasion. The Cypriot people believe the key to successful negotiations between Cyprus and Turkey remain with idea that Cyprus shall be returned its land to the country. Turkey does not believe this should be done. This yearning for the return of land is a sense of pride, which makes it tougher for interveners to negotiate successfully. A challenge for interveners in many conflicts is finding an adequate way to deal with the feelings of all participants so that these are neither ignored nor allowed to escalate out of control (Mayer, 2012, 14). This challenge of understanding the feeling of the Cypriot people is a most difficult in the sense that they believe land was stolen from them.

            Conflict cannot be understood independent of its historical context (Mayer, 2012, 14). The conflict and emotions the Cypriot people face in the wake of the Turkish invasion are explained by the country’s history. The island of Cyprus, for centuries, has been under foreign rule. Receiving independence was the major contribution to the country’s nationalism. Striping away this sense of nationalism has caused the Cypriot people to become frustrated and betrayed by the acts taken of the countries within the Treaty of Guarantee. When we try to understand a conflict in isolation from its historical roots, we are sometimes baffled by the stubbornness of the players or intractability of the issues (Mayer, 2012, 17).  Understanding Cyprus’ history from being subordinate to independent is immense understanding the emotions and context behind the conflict.

Mayer states that we are, “very imperfect communicators.” This imperfection has the ability to generate conflict or exasperate it. Communication has played a role with this treaty and conflict of Cyprus. The communication between the Cypriot government and Turkey was a factor to the invasion of 1975. Turkey and Cyprus did not communicate about the Archbishop’s proposed changes to the constitution, and out of fear, Turkey’s action was to invade Cyprus and violate Article IV of the treaty. Communication between Cyprus and the United Nations on resolving this issue continued to the referendum vote of 2004 through the present. Many factors contribute to communication problems (Mayer, 2012, 12). He uses examples of culture, environment, and age amongst others. These three examples are relevant in the Cyprus case. Since the Turkish invasion, Cyprus’ culture has changed due to the geographic shift in social and political terms. Smaller cities became more populated allowing for the integration of the people. Politics have also been affected as now many political campaigns target newer issues that have been presented with the geographical shift of the country. This integration of social and political culture has consequently changed the environments of most of the country. Age has been a determining factor as it was seen in the referendum vote of 2004 within the United Nations. The majority of the people, who were older, influenced the younger age groups (who were allowed to vote) in objecting the United Nation’s referendum vote allowing for the emotional conflict between Cyprus and Turkey to stay relevant in present and future negotiation talks.

            Since the signing of the treaty and the Turkish invasion, Cyprus has exhibited a variety of factors that are present in Mayer’s guide to engagement and intervention. This conflict between Cyprus and Turkey is ongoing, and talks between the Cypriot president and the president of the Turkish-Cypriot community are in progress.

Bibliography

Treaty of Guarantee:

http://www.mfa.gr/images/docs/kypriako/treaty_of_guarantee.pdf

“Cyprus Profile – Timeline- BBC News.” BBC News.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-eruope-17219505(February 22, 2016).

“Turkey Did Not Have a Right of Intervention in Cyprus.” Cyprus Federation of America. http://www.cyprusfederation.org/?p=379 (February 22, 2016).

Mayer, Bernard S. 2012. The Dynamics of Conflict: a Guide to Engagement and Intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Initial Research Post

I am doing my research on Iranians and Cuban immigrating to the United States. One of my most helpful articles thus far has been “U.S. Foreign Policy, 1959-80: Impact on Refugee Flow from Cuba,” by John Scanlon and Gilburt Loescher. It has been extremely helpful in my understanding of immigration flows to the United States. It mainly talks about the internal pushes from the country. My group project has supplemented my own research quite well. In particular, for anyone considering pushes and pulls for immigration, I would recommend using our group’s article “Refugees and Rivals: The International Dynamics of Refugees Flows,” by Shweat Moorthy and Robert Brathwaite.