MNC’s Who Call America’s Legal Protections Their Own, Though These Same MNC’s Often Lobby For Anti-tax Policies, a Decision That Cannot Self-perpetuate Prosperity or Freedom, as Domestic Policy Pressures Foreign Policy, as Democracy Must Have Internal Revenue to Transfer Power Peacefully

Article Analysis Assignment

First, read a news story from the newspaper or the Internet.  Answer the following questions regarding your news story: 1) What is the main issue, who are the main actors being discussed;  Then, choose one of the assigned articles you read for this week.  Answer the following questions regarding the assigned article: 1) What are the basics of this article (who, what, when, how, why, etc.);  2) What is the overall main point the author is trying to convince you of?  3) Do you agree with the author’s argument?  Why?  Why not?   Finally, tie together your news story with what you learned from the assigned article, textbook readings, podcasts, videos, etc. for this week.  Type your answers in the box below using your own words, no outline or bullets, complete sentences and paragraphs, single-spaced, full-page. 

Things change so fast, I went through three articles before settling on “US Calls Countries…” because of the summation it gives re: the previous events. Here goes: The main issue is the degradation of civil society in Syria, as well as the impact this development has on the region and the international community. President Bashar al-Assad, a President’s son with ties (through Hezbollah, I believe) to the Iranian regime, is cracking down violently on pro-democratic reform protests that have been in the streets there for a year or more. The Arab League recently withdrew amid escalating bloodshed as the Syrian army retook many of the Damascus suburbs held by “militant” protestors. Assad is Russia’s closest Mideast ally; this explains Russia’s vehement opposition to an Arab League-drafted text of a UN resolution calling for Assad to hand “things” over to a general. This may have enough votes to pass—but Russia holds veto power. With the Strait of Hormuz a crucial oil gateway for the world economy (assuming you believe one exists), and the Levant a piece of the world I am becoming quickly familiar with—what will the Obama doctrine be? When White House Spokesman Jay Carney says “Assad will go” this means he will likely die soon; if Assad doesn’t accede and adhere to internationally recognized “good law”—the sovereignty of Syria under current leadership will be seen as fraudulent by the world community. America, being a hegemony in the balance of power (perhaps because of the overwhelming number of MNC’s who call America’s legal protections their own, though these same MNC’s often lobby for anti-tax policies, a decision that cannot self-perpetuate prosperity or freedom, as domestic policy pressures foreign policy, as democracy must have internal revenue to transfer power peacefully) will probably drone him.

            Now to the 14 points, and there are so many parallels: the utopian Wilsonian philosophy, a Liberalism that the UN and to a lesser extent perhaps NATO represent in action—speaks immediately to the “rights” which were violated—so severe, these violations, that the concept of sovereignty, to survive, must incur this damage; to protect that which all men believe is worth protecting will mean sacrifice of the same, if “essential rectifications” are to take place. There are mentions of “open access to the sea” (the Levant is fronted by Lebanon and Israel as well), the need for “open covenants of peace” (Iran and Syria and their various “harbored” sub-state and individual actors are not an example of being very open, though Iranian scientists do keep dying, to be fair), and various disarmament/economic/democratic reforms that ought to be finished so all may enjoy sovereignty’s security. Russia, should they veto the UN measure, will only destabilize themselves when we react by droning Assad, thus proving their inability to, with their power through non-military means, achieve their purpose. Legitimacy remains the point here: We (America) are still legitimate, both as INTL state actor and enforcer as hegemony through INTL law—will Syria and Iran and Russia and who knows who else decide they have more to gain by challenging what some say is a declining America? I wouldn’t.

 

Source citation: “Syria's Assad will go, says US, as UN vote nears” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16796616

Wilson, Woodrow. “President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points.”