A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism †the case for a more neutral role Essay Example Essay Example

A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Example Paper A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Introduction Academics within the Social Sciences and Humanities departments have put forward a broad range of views on the Twenty First century affliction that is global terrorism. While the United States has taken upon itself the prime responsibility of waging â€Å"war on terror†, the rest of the world is not so sure about its intentions. There are exceptions, of course, and there is no surprise in the fact that Britain and Australia have continued their long standing position as junior partners to American initiatives – diplomatic or military. This is a tradition that has its origins in the common Anglo-Saxon roots of the respective nations’ elite. While joining the American led ‘Coalition of the Willing’ might help boost the Australian economy, there is more to the issue than just prosperity. In the course of the essay I will be arguing that the status quo lacks prudence and how a neutral stand on the war on terrorism will augur well for Australia’s l ong term future (Lee, 2007, p.601). The foremost argument against Australian participation in the war on terror is a simple one – that terror breeds more terror. The two nations targeted for terrorists or their perceived threats are Afghanistan and Iraq. Both the nations are now in dismal social and economic condition. Its civilians are drenched in conditions of poverty and a state of misery and despair. For people surviving in refugee camps the idea of being agents of terrorism is very appealing. It is understandable: rather than dying of starvation after being humiliated and dispossessed, it is far nobler to give up one’s life voluntarily (Bendle, 2004, p.115). There is pride in martyrdom for the surviving Afghans and Iraqis (although there is no evidence of Iraqi hand in any of the terrorist acts of the last few years). So, the Australian mission of curbing terrorism by bombing innocent civilians will only lead to escalating terrorist acts. This self-defeating logic employed by the Australian government is bound to back-fire sooner than later. Rather, the Australian policy makers will be better advised to wage wars on poverty eradication, for environmental protection, etc, which are more pressing necessities that the one in discussion (De Castro, 2004, p.193). A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Body Paragraphs Moreover, the benign facade of the â€Å"free market† has been exposed in case after case. The Australian foreign policy of trying to spread â€Å"democracy† and â€Å"free market capitalism† to the third world does not hold much merit, in that, what is good for trans-national corporations like Halliburton and Chevron is not necessarily good for a majority of people. To the contrary, â€Å"free markets†, as defined by the WTO, have only increased economic disparities across the world. In the context of the impoverished people of Afghanistan and Iraq, they would choose the religious solace provided by â€Å"jehadist† martyrdom than wait for â€Å"extravagant promises of earthly riches† that free-market capitalism proposes to offer but seldom delivers on the promise (Pilger, 2003, p.19). The Australian government should also keep in mind that the electorate is increasingly gaining a broader awareness of geo-political situations. It can no longe r hope that conventional policy frameworks (that were essentially based on imperialist lines) will get electoral approval. A good example of discerning electorate can be found in Spain. In spite of the Aznar government’s official propaganda, its citizens threw Aznar and his cohorts out of power, in light of the Madrid bombings. This suggests that the Spanish populace is aware of the connection between Spain’s involvement in the war on terror and the Madrid bombings; they also knew if they had distanced themselves from the masters in Washington they could have avoided this tragedy. I personally feel that the Australian government should learn from the Spanish example. This sentiment is also expressed by John Lee, a respected political commentator, thus: â€Å"The idea that geopolitical strategies should be polluted by a crude popular fear of attack, and that gangs of outlaws should influence democracies, may be abhorrent. But the grisly truth is that poor people in Ira q and Afghanistan have achieved a kind of equality with rich westerners. Both now know fear. Our lives may soon prove as cheap as theirs. That is the progress made so far in the war on terror.† (Lee, 2007, p.602) The policy makers in Canberra should also remind themselves of the Bali bombings and its causes. The Establishment press, most of it owned or controlled by Rupert Murdoch and keen on promoting its own interests had presented a blanket view in its Bali reports. For example, the Australian mainstream media wants its citizens to believe that the terror attack in the Indonesian island was a sequel to the campaign of hatred against western way of life that was kick-started with September 11 attacks. But this view-point is not accurate. If only the Australian press will see the attacks as an act of retaliation against Australia for its alliance with the United States, its citizens can have more peaceful holidays (Razack, 2006, p.12). There is widespread perception in the th ird world that â€Å"the Australian military is an extension of the Pentagon†. In support of this, we see how the Australian and American navies exchange know-how and technology; they were also involved in joint operations in the Gulf in order to implement sanctions against Iraq. In this context one can understand the grievances of the Islamic terrorists when more than half a million innocent Iraqi children died as a result of this international embargo, in which Australia played an important role. Hence, I would argue, that a position of neutrality in the war on terror and adopting a foreign policy framework that is independent of the United States is the right course in the future (Pilger, 2002, p.8). The other glaring flaw in Australian diplomacy is its double standards, especially in its relations with its neighbouring countries. For nearly forty years since 1965, the Australian government supported the atrocities carried out by General Suharto in neighbouring Indonesia. John Pilger, an internationally respected journalist draws out this case of hypocrisy in an emphatic style thus, â€Å"During the long years of Suharto’s dictatorship, which was shored up by western capital, governments and the World Bank, state terrorism on a breathtaking scale was ignored. Australian prime ministers were far too busy lauding the â€Å"investment partnership† in resource-rich Indonesia. Suharto’s annexation of East Timor, which cost the lives of a third of the population, was described by the foreign minister Gareth Evans as â€Å"irreversible†. As Evans succinctly put it, there were â€Å"zillions† of dollars to be made from the oil and gas reserves in the Timor Sea†. (Pilger, 2002, p.7) The other criticism of Australian foreign policy is relating to its illegal immigrant controls. The rationale given for long detainments of illegal immigrants in inhospitable conditions is very flimsy. The four thousand odd poor migrants, who land on the shores of the Australian continent hoping for better economic opportunities, will not destabilize the economic system. Yet, most of these desperate people (who are mostly Asian Muslims) are locked up in detainment centres with no opportunities for a reprieve. The officials claim that this is not based on racial lines and that such measures are imperative in the post 911 world. But this argument does not hold much weight, for the international community perceives this as a continuation of the notorious â€Å"White Australia† policy of the decades gone by, which flaunted white supremacist tendencies. The only reasonable way in which Australia can reclaim the trust of its Asian neighbours is by adopting a more welcoming stance with regard to destitute migrants, which will act as a symbolic severance from its blatantly racist â€Å"White Australia† past. It will also mean that the consequences of America’s war on terror will be mitigated in Australia n soil (Shuja, 2006, p.445). The mainstream media in Australia, which is a near monopoly, can present only one sided views to the general public – a view that is in favour of vested interests. So it is difficult to gauge the direction and effectiveness of Australian foreign policy from the accounts of this source of information (misinformation?). Hence, heeding to the opinions of intellectuals from elsewhere in the world, where there is greater freedom of press and a thriving culture of dissent, is essential. For this reason, I had perused the research conducted by Edward Herman and Gerry O’Sullivan in support of my thesis. The authors infer that the killing of a few thousand people by organizations such as Al-Qaeda is blown out of proportion while state-sponsored terrorist acts during the â€Å"South African apartheid regime, the Suharto regime in Indonesia, the â€Å"Contras† in Nicaragua, etc†, where Australia had been involved (militarily or diplomati cally), account for more than 2.5 million deaths (Snyder, 2006, p.336). Surely, when compared to this huge figure, the victims of terrorist acts by non-state entities seem miniscule. Hence, it is high-time that Australia abandons its â€Å"follow America† approach to foreign policy and adopts a more pragmatic policy framework that would help it regain lost goodwill within the international community. I personally believe that a closer association with rising Asian powers such as China, India and Indonesia to go with severance of military ties with the United States will comprise this new direction (Shuja, 2006, p.447). We will write a custom essay sample on A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Example specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Example specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on A critical evaluation of Australia’s role in the campaign against global terrorism – the case for a more neutral role Essay Example specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer

Importance of an EU Regional Policy

Importance of an EU Regional Policy Introduction The European Union was created with the aim of contributing economic growth and development of European countries through establishing a common currency and a single market. According to economics, breaking down existing barriers will cause the escalation of positive economic effects through efficiency and redirection of resources to cost-effective investments.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Importance of an EU Regional Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More However, equal distribution of profits among the members in freely competing markets is not possible. Newly entering member states having different conditions received different end results from the integration. This uneven distribution within the integration may be hindered by cohesion thus a need for regional policy. The European Union regional policy covers all European regions and consists of three objectives: employment and regional competitiv eness, convergence as well as territorial cooperation (Cini, 2003). The regional policy environment has however become very complex and regional policy makers at the national and EU levels are facing the key challenge of globalization. The increasing internalization of economy, the removal of trade barriers within the EU, technological change and the shift towards knowledge-based economy has been actively restructuring the competitive advantage of regions and countries (Boldrin Canova, 2001). Arguments for EU regional Policy The main argument for the EU regional policy is the presence of large income disparities within the EU. In the Treaty of Rome signed in 1957, the goal of the EU regional policy was aimed at strengthening the economic units of the community as well as ensuring their harmonic development according to Steinen (1991). In any economic unit, there will always be stronger and weaker territorial units in terms of dynamism and economic performance. It has been seen that regions in relative ascendancy and decline can be found in all member states. These disparities are not temporary aberrations but have persisted over long periods. National policies have been under heavy pressure from the effects of globalizations and have mainly focused on increasing competitiveness in areas where different countries can afford and handle.Advertising Looking for essay on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In the EU, uneven economic performance can be limited through a top-down approach in which the EU policy takes responsibility (Krugman Venables, 1999). Justification of a common EU policy has been provided on the grounds of solidarity. EU regional policy seeks to find spatial balance in economic development so as to ensure that all economies achieve their full potential. The EU regional policy also presses for cohesion within the member states and in the community as a whole. Ci ties such as London and Paris can be able to deal with any problems of deprivation in their worst affected territories while others such as Portugal and Greece have for a long time been unable to deal with regional disparities. Argument for a common EU policy can thus be made on an institutional capacity as well as in a political capacity. Some member states have been unable to institute internal cohesion policy or to develop proper priorities for such a policy. The EU on the other hand has developed a cohesion policy that relies on two basic measures: unemployment rates which is social cohesion and GDP per head that is economic cohesion (Midelfart-Knarvik Overman, 2002). Policy development and spending in the EU is based on a well researched model that seeks to improve weak areas so as they conform to the whole EU requirements. Regional policy at the national level has also been unable to adapt sufficiently to the ever changing economic environment. International competitive press ures have been slowly increasing with some countries unable to keep up. In many EU member states, the past few years have been described by rising numbers of unemployment, public expenditure constraints, structural change and productivity as well as concerns on international competitiveness (Wallace Wallace, 2000). Antagonism towards movement intervention has supported a market-led approach to economic development. Internalization of the economic environment has resulted in countries being unable to make sustainable long term planning and has rendered more regions susceptible to the rapid changes resulting from global market shifts. The EU structural funds have mainly concentrated on solving most of these issues according to Ehlermann (1995). Traditional policy instruments have been overhauled and a new direction has been developed. The focus on large-scale business aid and infrastructural aid has been abandoned in favor of softer policy measures. Financial aid has however proven t o be a more durable policy instrument capable of bringing policy makers and developing industries together in a positive policy environment.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Importance of an EU Regional Policy specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Another main problem is that spatial problems have become more complex and localized. Regions of urban decline described by social exclusion dominate parts of many cities in the member states. Focus on interpersonal and interregional disparities in prosperity is not always straight forward. At a spatial level, national policies have proven ineffective and EU regional policy instruments have proven to be better equipped in dealing with this issue (Cini, 2003). Regional policy objectives were created in terms of minimizing spatial disparities in economic growth, infrastructural provision and employment issues. Over the past 20 years, regional policy goals have been increasingly di rected towards optimizing the contribution of regional resources to the establishment of economic growth through promoting entrepreneurship and competitiveness. Spatial problems have been seen to be best solved through education, welfare and social measures. The EU policy focus is on wealth creation at the local level through Small Market Enterprises (SME) formation, skills formation, employment and innovation (Wilson, 2002). National regional problems have always been an obstacle to the cohesion of the community. There are wide disparities between the individual members of the community each having its own set of policies. In order to enable cohesion and reduce disparities, the Structural Funds were put in place and designed in a manner that those different classes of regions and member states were treated appropriately. Most of the money in the fund is targeted at low GDP regions matching the convergence objective. Fewer fiscal resources are available domestically for the low GDP countries in the region (Cini, 2003). These regions also have lesser institutional capacity and while it can be assumed that low GDP member states can profit from rapid growth while they strive to catch-up with the other richer states, this process has resulted in regional inequalities in GDP per head. Although the cohesion policy was created to ensure that economic development is balanced within the member states, there is a need for an EU regional policy that curbs the widening disparities (Ehlermann, 1995). The total Hungarian or Polish growth that attains the optimum catch-up path may be best supported by concentration of activity in the more developed parts of those countries with trickle down being expected to influence the other parts of the country. Such an approach however, may result in an enduring special imbalance that is evident in Italy (Wilson, 2000).Advertising Looking for essay on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The growing interest in decentralization of government is changing attitudes to regional disparities and problems. National policies have been unable to keep up with the pressures of devolution and deconcentration in many member countries. These pressures resulted from a mix of social political, economic and cultural factors, and from reshaping the structure of governance (Cini, 2003). Due to the EU, there has been a significant shift of powers to lower government levels. However, this shift often takes place without the corresponding allocation of additional resources and devolution of revenue-raising powers. Intervention was required in economic development both in respect to the instruments required to address regional problems as well as the broader issues related to fiscal transfer systems. The EU policy debates have been dominated by changes in modes of governance (Boldrin Canova, 2001). The EU policy has been able to foster balance and ensure equity in economic development. In the UK, Italy and France, recent decisions reveal a more decentralized approach to regional policy making. A more coordinated approach to the EU policy both within the regions and centrally can be witnessed. The growing concern with political and economic consequences of regional inequality is also an issue that necessitates an EU regional policy. Due to the community, some countries feel that national political stability is under threat. In the 1990s, most countries sidelined questions about regional development (Krugman Venables, 1999). The relationship between sectoral and regional issues has not been fully established resulting in several problems. Member countries face pressures from major problems, such as dynamics of growth, external economic relations, macro-economic stability, and balance of payment. In most member states, concerns of regional differences and the marginalization of certain territories are still considered minor problems. The EU competition policy has ho wever introduced a new powerful shift between EU regional policies and national policies. The original treaty documents developed provisions for control of the state aid policies of member countries under the competition policies. The EU began to have an impact on the use of state aids as instruments of the regional policy in the early 60s, as soon as the treaty was developed (Steinen, 1991). Many scholars have argued that an effective cohesion policy can only result from a strict control of state aid. The EU competition policy has thus not only created a means to prevent the growth of regional inequality but has helped in shaping the coverage of other policies especially those under the realm of the structural funds. The EU community has been plagued by political squabbles and bureaucracy problems (Cini, 2003). A driver for change from reliance of national policies to EU regional policy has been the bureaucracy associated with Structural Fund implementation. It has been generally a ccepted that the implementation of funds carries with it a heavy administrative burden and substantial investment in institutional capacities at different levels. The negotiation of the Structural Funds regulation has made it clear the power of precedent in the European Community regional policymaking. According to different objectives, the EU regional policy has been able to quell differences in Structural Funds allocation and cut down on the bureaucracy involved in the process (Midelfart-Knarvik Overman, 2002). The EU policy has also influenced the allocation of EU funding within the national policy delivery system in most member countries. Some countries such as Spain, Germany and Austria have effectively included EU structural funding within their own national funding mechanisms while others such as UK and Sweden have set up different delivery systems for administering the funds and delivering programmes. Despite the mode of delivery, considerable policy transfers from the EU t o the national regional policies can be seen. Conclusion The EU is an integration initiative that has proven to be very effective and structured. There are however many different national policies that can affect the overall effectiveness of the EU cohesion objectives. It can be seen that national territorial policies can hinder the effectiveness of the EU regional policy. The thrust to achieve cohesion can lead to internal disparities as countries neglect some areas in order to succeed in others. The EU regional policy is concerned with overall development, reduction of poverty and increase in the GDP of member countries. Some urban policies in member states can steer resources to favored regions neglecting other areas. Another problem is the employment measures taken by member states that fail to contribute to the regional convergence of the community. The EU strives for the promotion of entrepreneurship and creation of SME’s within the member states in order to improve int ernational competitiveness and economic stability. Apart from this, national policies have been unable to deal with the decentralization of power required for the EU to prosper and the promotion of convergence. National policies have been unable to meet the main objectives set out during the formation of the EU. The main problem however has been that national policies hinder cohesion within the EU. There is a greater need for a comprehensive policy that understands and conforms to the needs of the EU and fosters convergences of the member states without fostering regional disparities. References Boldrin, M. Canova, F. 2001. Inequality and convergence in Europe’s regions: Reconsidering European regional policies. Economic Policy, 32, 207-245. Cini, M. 2003. European Union Politics. London: Oxford University Press. Ehlermann, C. 1995. State Aid Control in the European Union: Success or Failure?  Fordham International Law Journal 184, 1212-1229. Krugman, P.R., Venables, A. 1 999. The Spatial Economy: Cities. Regions and  International Trade. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Midelfart-Knarvik, K. Overman, H. G. 2002. Delocation and European Integration: is Structural Spending Justified? Economic Policy, 35(10):323-359. Steinen, M. 1991. State Aid, Regional Policy and Locational Competition in the European Union. European Urban and Regional Studies, 41(1):19-31. Wallace, H. Wallace, W. 2000. Policy Making in the European Union. London: Oxford University Press. Wilson, T. 2000. Obstacles to European Union regional policy in the Northern Ireland borderlands. Human Organization, 122, 33-38.