Are Companies Boycotting Israel?

Boycott in Israel

The article is explaining how the executive of the French company Orange, Stéphane Richard went to Israel to meet with Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu to apologize.  The article covers how there is a “rumor” that companies are boycotting Israel.  The company Orange was said to be pulling out Israel as a part of a growing movement to boycott companies that operate in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.  The Orange Company wanted to make it totally clear that it has never supported any kind of boycott against Israel.  He went on to say, “Isreal is a fantastic place to be in the digital industry, and, of course, our will is to strengthen and to keep on investing here.”

The Prime Minister goes on to say, “We seek a genuine and secure peace with our Palestinian neighbors, but that can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties without preconditions.  It will not be achieved through boycotts and through threats of boycotts.”

This article applies to the road map to peace between Israel and Palestine.  These are benchmarks designed to move Israelis and Palestinians towards the creation of a Palestinian state that exists in peace with Israel.  This was intended to be done in a three-year period.  The two countries are still working towards this; however, it is still a work in progress.

The road map idea has good intentions.  It also calls for progress toward peace agreements between Israel and Lebanon, and Israel and Syria.  The suggested timetable was for peace by the end of 2005.  This means that this plan has obvious hiccups.  It is supposed to be based on performance and would move forward only when they have been met.  

Independence Day: Why Partition was a good thing for India

The article comes out on the 65^th anniversary of the partition.  It is expresses the opinion of Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiya.  It is his opinion that the partition of India and Pakistan was not only necessary but was desired and that if it had not taken place that a bloody more gruesome civil war would have taken place.  He states, “Had the British left undivided India in 1947, the Muslim League would have continued its struggle for separate nationhood. “

The formation of Pakistan created an entirely new nation.  It was created because it consisted mostly Muslims; however, the people that lived in the combining areas are diverse.  Even though it was essentially Muslim, the beginning years were intense with internal conflicts over religion, language, and other regional issues.  The people of the new nation would need to find their way to forming a government, policies, laws, and other necessary socially functioning tools.

Pakistan is a hard place to be a Christian.  Literacy for Christians is less than 10%.  The Universities require Koran memorization for entrance so Christians are unable to hold jobs that require an education.  Young daughters of Christians are the target of violence.  It is estimated that around 3.000 Christian girls between the ages of 10-12 are kidnapped every year.  Young kidnapped girls that refuse to convert and marry are beaten, physically tortured, and either killed or simply raped and left to die naked in the wilderness.  Christians do not have access to the legal system and by law a Christian’s testimony carries only half credibility in court.  Christians are accused of blasphemy, which carries the automatic death sentence.

So the final thought is….  Was it a good thing to partition India for the creation of Pakistan?  Was it a way to avoid a civil war that would have been bloodier than the consequences we are still seeing today?

Rearming Japan - Good or Bad?

Japanese prime minister pushes to end constitutional limits on the military

The article informs people that the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, is pushing for a revision of the country’s post-war constitution.  The United States wrote the 1947 constitution, barring Japan from having its own armed forces, a measure designed to prevent it from ever again invading its neighbors or attacking the United States.  Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Japanese have viewed the post-war constitution as a restraint to pursuing its own imperialist ambitions. 

The question that comes to mind is, is it good or bad for Japan to begin to rearm themselves with nuclear weapons?  There are some Americans that wonder why, 70 years after World War II, the United States is still maintaining 50,000 troops at 84 bases in Japan, at great cost to the United States and with great savings to Japan.  The Obama administration has been encouraging Japan to take a more active stance.  The thought is that this will make China as well as Korea nervous.  On the other hand, the re-emergence of Japanese militarism holds great dangers for the working class in Japan and internationally.  Among an economic crisis and a growing inter-imperialist rivalry, all the major powers are preparing for war.  Let us not forget that the US and Japan fought a bloody war between 1941 and 1945 that cost millions of lives in order to determine which power would dominate China and the Asia Pacific.  While the US and Japan are currently allies, the unresolved questions of the last war continue to fester, threatening new tensions and conflict.

In the bible, there are passages that encourage peace.  “Don’t fight against the one who is working evil against you…You have been taught to love your neighbor and hate your enemy.  But I tell you this: love your enemies.  Pray for those who torment you and persecute you in doing so you become children of your Father (5:39, 43-45).”  “  Blessed are the peacemakers they will be called children of God.”  In the great debate on revising the constitution in Japan shouldn’t the question be, “is there another way?”

UK Better Off in EU

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32957134

The article expresses the Norway Foreign Minister, Borge Brende's opinion regarding the UK being in the European Union.  He feels that they have more influence in the EU than outside of it.  These opinions are expressed due to the fact that the UK plans on holding a vote on EU membership by the end of 2017.  Prime Minister David Cameron of the UK already launched a diplomatic campaign in order to gain support from other EU leaders for his EU reform plans.  

This article is a good example of the issues that are coming about from the unification of Europe in the market.  The UK has already seeing a recovery on its economy.  The trade of goods more freely among the European countries has a positive impact.  Mr. Brende also points out that a free trade deal between the US and EU could pose some difficulties for countries such as Norway that are not a part of the EU.  This article has pointed out that countries that are in the EU do have the ability to get out if they wish (UK will vote on this in 2017).  It also points out that there is a strong point to the trade market with being a part of the EU and for countries that are not part of it it is more difficult.  They even implement EU directives in order to trade in the single market.

The EU is one of the biggest donors of development aid in the world.  They seek to alleviate poverty by providing funding for inexperienced enterprises in the developing world.  They also provide humanitarian aid via certain non-governmental organizations that include those with a Christian affiliation.  The EU has been active over the years in securing the partial fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals.  They focus on the environment and sustainable development as well as include a continued focus on poverty reduction.  These are all good characteristics and goals of the Christian society’s values.