Strombidae Protected Fisheries

Strombidae Protected Fisheries

International Migration

Around 70 million people migrate between countries each year. This type of migration is less common than internal migration such as rural to urban migration. There are two reasons why international migration is less common. Firstly the longer distance involved and political controls make it difficult for migrants to move freely between countries. The border between the USA and Mexico is more than an international frontier. It is a boundary where the rich are divided from the poor, Because of the economic contrast that exists on the other side of the border people are constantly attracted to the bright lights and big money that the USA holds. At least 1 million Mexicans try to cross the border every year most of them illegally although the USA has an elaborate security controls along the border, it is impossible to stop everyone. Those illegal immigrants who are caught are deported back to Mexico. Increasingly Mexican immigrants are unwelcome in the USA as they are seen to drain the nations social security and welfare system. In some places the scale of emigration is so high that population levels have fallen steeply. Santa Ines in NorthWest Mexico has lost two thirds of its population. But people leaving the village were not exactly poor. They left the country not out desperation but mainly to improve their quality of life. At one time only the men migrated and when they made enough money they would return home and share the wealth with their family. It is mainly young adults who migrate and so they leave ageing communities behind. With few children left, these communities will gradually die. Immigrants have a deep impact on America. There is an ideal of America as a destination of hope and opportunity where the poor and the oppressed can make a new life but they bring with them a trail of tension between natives and newcomers, hostility expressed in job discrimination and riots, and laws designed to keep immigrants out rather than welcome them in. These newcomers were the people who built America. They dug canals, cut the timber and laid down the foundations for the megacity. The greatest flow of immigrants took place between 1820-1920 when more than 30 million people poured into the USA. Around 8 million come from Mexico which created a mass overload on the country. One impact of the great diversity of people who have immigrated to the United States is frequent racial and cultural tensions. Clashes have forced America to confront the difficulties of accommodating such differences while remaining a democracy.

International law Essay

International law can be divided into two main branches; public international law and private international law. According to Corel University Law School, Legal Information Institute; public international law, oversees matters of rights between nations and citizens or subjects of other nations whereas, the latter deals with conflicts between private individuals arising out of circumstances of key importance to more than one nation. Over time the line between private and public international laws has been growing thinner with issues of private international law now linking with those of public international law. This is because the international community finds many matters of private international law of significance to them. In a nutshell, international law governs human actions and interactions at the global heights. For a long time since its inception in the 16th Century, international law consisted of policies and regulations governing interactions between nations until recently when the law was redefined to incorporate relations between states and individuals as well as relation between international institutions. International law has received its share of criticism with the emergence of a school of thought holding that it was mechanism designed by developed countries purposefully for colonization in the modern world. In his book; Imperialism, Sovereignty and the making of International Law Anghie argues that â€Å"the colonial confrontation was central to the formation of international law and, in particular, it’s founding concept, sovereignty. He goes ahead to argue that international law is a modern way of governing non-European people, that economic exploitations and cultural erosion that resulted from the same were strategically important for the discipline. Contrary to Anghie’s thinking, international law would otherwise be a benevolent undertaking had it not been demonized by powerful states to achieve 21st century colonialism. The concept of international law obviously conflicts with the fundamentals of sovereignty which also means independence. This is to say that a sovereign state should be free to run its domestic affairs free from hindrances by outside authority. The proponents of international law may have worked on the assumptions that the sovereignty of a state is not only founded on the self-governing will of its sovereign, but also on its position in relationship to several other states. This implies that if a certain country comes up with policies which are likely to affect its neighbors or other countries then its sovereignty can be subject to violation when international law intervenes. Nonetheless, the general belief is that a state should be able to do whatever it pleases within its territories. It is important to mention that sovereignty of a state means it is free to use its resources for its own prosperity without interference from outside powers. However, developed states have in many occasions meddled in the economic affairs of third world states. It is by right that a third world states control all that is within their territories without interference from developed countries. International law, through international business law paves way for exploitation of third world countries by their developed counterparts. Interdependence is a word strategically coined by developed states to cover up for their deeply buried conspiracy aimed at reaping resources from developed countries under the cover of globalisation. Hopefully, out of their own efforts, third world states may eventually grow to the level of being powerful. In the contrary, world super powers are not stupid to let third world countries grow to be as powerful as them. Because of this insecurity, they invent laws and lie to third world states that it is for the good of the world when the underpinning motive is to increase dependence by developing countries on the world powers. Even if these countries develop, they will be under control of developed states. A good example is the claim by developed countries in favor of their investors on foreign territories. The claim by capital-exporting countries is intended to limit a country’s sovereignty to impose limitations on foreign investors (Sornarajah 136). This may sound as a generous thought to open up equal playing grounds for signatories of international law. However, consider the fact that capital-exporting countries are the world superpowers hosting numerous billionaire investors just looking for places to multiply their billions. Some of these multibillion businesses are state owned corporations. With this kind of law, the world powers will establish multibillion corporations in third world territories in the pretext of privately owned investments. They will offer employment opportunities, good health facilities, education, housing, infrastructure to millions of natives of third world states. Because most third world governments are unable to offer basic needs for their populace, these international corporations will win the hearts of many in third world states. Although political rule will be retained by the hosting governments, such multibillion corporations will have unprecedented control not only over citizens whom they will have won their trust, but also over government policy decisions. By that time, third world states will be literally foreign territories of developed states. Of course a few rich individuals from developing countries will have benefited from this law and established businesses in developed countries. However, because their native governments will be lacking both economic and political powers, their activities will be highly controlled by the host governments keeping them from making any breakthroughs. This treaty might also limit a state’s ability to use domestic legal facilities on foreign investors who break the law since they will be under protection of international law. This is based on the belief that any grievance against an investor operating under international law is an injury to his native country. International law therefore was only formed with the excuse of interdependence between signatory states with the hidden purpose to reintroduce a modern style of Colonialism being witnessed today. In the modern world, economic sovereignty is paramount to any form of sovereignty. Political sovereignty in the 21st century is worthless without economic independence. It is because of this that developed countries continue to come up with selfish policies with the excuse of interdependence. For this reason most third world countries brag of political independence but when they cannot provide for their citizens, they seek shelter from the economic giants who do not offer anything without conditions. Developed countries will always do this through economic sanctions such as freezing donor aid which when implemented cripples the operations of third world states. Nye states that although the potential for benefits in interdependence exist, the potential for tragedy exists as well (179). Nye goes to the extreme to refer to the negative results of interdependence not merely as losses, which would be the opposite of benefits, but tragedy. Tragedy can also be a disaster, catastrophe or misfortune. The after effects of a disaster are usually devastating and repairing the mess requires extraordinary measures usually taking a longer period of time. The shocking thing is that whereas developing countries are obeying international law, developed countries can violate it and get away with it. Israel has been in the headlines for many years over Gaza strip conflict with Palestine’s. The attacks have led to serious violation of human rights and international law. Atrocities committed along Gaza Strip are worrying and one would wonder why Israel is being excused from war crimes trials. Up to date, the international judges still seem to be wondering if Israel has committed enough crimes to be subjected to trials. On the other hand, the United States of America reciprocated against Afghanistan after the September 11th attacks on America’s soil and many innocent lives were lost. Most worrying is human rights violations by US soldiers against war prisoners and terrorist suspects at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. In 2001, hundreds of Taliban prisoners of war were suffocated to death after they were imprisoned inside metal containers by US military in the Afghan town of Kunduz. Instead of being charged with human rights violations, the world superpower arrested Saddam Hussein and had him hanged to death for war crime charges during his regime. Meanwhile the international law is in full force in developing countries. International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued a warrant of arrest against Sudan’s re-elected leader Omar alBshir over war crime related charges. Currently, the ICC is also investigating human rights violations during the 2007 post election chaos in Kenya and is expected to take in suspects by September 2010. Efforts by the ICC to arrest perpetrators of violence are all in good faith, but how about the rich countries which commit the same crimes? Whereas it will be extremely difficult for a country which has cut off itself from the rest of the world, international law deprives nations from exercising their sovereignty within their territories with respect to the locally prevailing circumstances. The international law in large part works in favor of the developed countries and does not result in the desired interdependence which will empower weak nations. Nations should be empowered to be able to independently and decisively handle their economic, political and legal activities without interference from outside forces which may not understand the prevailing circumstances. It is only when they are empowered that they will be able to have the bargaining power which is critical for interdependence at the international level.

Kennedy Doctrine - 3116 Words

The Kennedy Doctrine refers to foreign policy initiatives of the 35th President of the United States, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, towards Latin America during his term in office between 1961 and 1963. Kennedy voiced support for the containment of Communism and the reversal of Communist progress in the Western Hemisphere. The Kennedy Doctrine was essentially an expansion of the foreign policy prerogatives of the previous administrations of Dwight D. Eisenhower and Harry S. Truman. The foreign policies of these presidents all revolved around the threat of communism and the means by which the United States would attempt to contain the spread of it. The Truman Doctrine focused on the containment of communism by providing assistance to countries†¦show more content†¦Although the chief military forces never engaged in a major battle with each other, they expressed the conflict through military coalitions, strategic conventional force deployments, rivalry at sports events, and technological competitions such as the Space Race. After the success of their temporary wartime alliance against Nazi Germany, the USSR and the US saw each other as profound enemies of their basic ways of life. The Soviet Union created the Eastern Bloc with the eastern European countries it occupied, annexing some and maintaining others as satellite states, some of which were later consolidated as the Warsaw Pact (1955–1991). The US financed the recovery of Western Europe and forged NATO, a military alliance using containment of communism as a main strategy (Truman Doctrine). The US funded the Marshall Plan to effectuate a more rapid post-War recovery of Europe, while the Soviet Union would not let most Eastern Bloc members participate. Elsewhere, in Latin America and Southeast Asia, the USSR assisted and helped foster communist revolutions, opposed by several Western countries and their regional allies; some they attempted to roll back, with mixed results. Among the countries that the USSR supported in pro-communist revolt was Cuba, led by Fidel Castro. The proximity of communist Cuba to the United States proved to be a center point of the Cold War; the USSR placed multiple nuclear missiles in Cuba, sparking heated tensionShow MoreRelatedKennedy Doctrine1168 Words   |  5 PagesMark A. Stallo, Ph.D. During John F. Kennedy’s presidency the United States was seriously concerned with stopping the spread of communism throughout the world and there where hot spots that sparked the Kennedy administrations attention. Containment was the United States foreign policy doctrine that proclaimed that the Soviet Union needed to be contained to prevent the spread of communism throughout the world. This containment policy meant that the United States needed to fight communism abroadRead MoreLyndon B Johnson and the Kennedy Doctrine1029 Words   |  4 Pagesvice-president was taking over for President Kennedy, who had recently been assassinated. Kennedys foreign policy largely revolved around the Kennedy Doctrine, which was a continuation of the doctrine of preceding presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Harry Truman, both of who were committed to the containment of communism while propagating the capitalist economic system that the U.S. was known for. The Kennedy Doctrine, however, was cons idered slightly distinct from the doctrines of the other two presidents becauseRead MoreEssay about Foreign Policy - Roosevelt Corollary1109 Words   |  5 PagesThe Roosevelt Corollary greatly affected American foreign policy. It was in sharp contrast to the Monroe Doctrine, put in place to stop foreign intervention with the American continents. In 1823 President Monroe implemented US policy that stated European powers were not allowed to colonize or interfere with the newly budding United States or the Americas. In 1904 President Roosevelt expanded upon this policy in response to European intervention with Latin America. This policy became known asRead MoreIn the 1969 case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the fairness900 Words   |  4 PagesIn the 1969 case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the fairness doctrine that the Federal Communication Commission imposed on them in relation to a specific broadca st. Red Lion Broadcasting Co. aired that program on November 27, 1964, which included a personal attack on one author Fred J. Cook. Red Lion Broadcasting Co. refused to give Fred J. Cook his requested free time on air for rebuttal. As a result, the FCC supported Cook and ordered the radio station toRead MoreAnalysis of Naomi Klein’s book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism1683 Words   |  7 PagesThe term the Shock Doctrine was created by journalist Naomi Klein in her book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism which refers to the idea that economic liberalists formed an entire industry take advantage of disasters such as natural disasters or military coups and privatize everything they can get their hands on. The name of this industry is the Disaster Capitalism Complex and it is comprised of the corporations and organizations that see recently shocked areas as ripe for the emplacementRead MoreMonroe Doctrine Essay1777 Words   |  8 Pageswou ld be handle from this point forward. It addressed European nations in particular and stated that â€Å"the United States would not tolerate further colonization or puppet nations† The Monroe Doctrine was initially designed to protect the Latin colonies but later President Theodore Roosevelt extended the Doctrine to include the United States would be the policing powers of the Western Hemisphere, this became known as the Roosevelt Corollary. Roosevelt stated that the United States had a â€Å"morale mandate†Read MoreEvolution of the Monroe Doctrine Essay2572 Words   |  11 Pagespower in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.† The Monroe Doctrine The foreign policy objectives of the United States have changed drastically throughout the nation’s history. Old ideologies and policies have been abandoned and forgotten as America’s role in the global arena has developed. However, the Monroe Doctrine is an example of American foreign policy that has remained influential since its initiation shortly after America’s conceptionRead MoreThe Presidential Election For The Presidency Of The United States1425 Words   |  6 Pages(CITE). After winning his second term as president, Ronald Reagan established what is now known as â€Å"The Reagan Doctrine,† which provided support, both financially and militarily, for anti-communist fighters throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America (CITE).   The policy’s goal was to eliminate tyrannical governments and promote individual liberties, freedom, and democracy. The Reagan doctrine became the centerpiece of the Reagan administration by successfully stopping the Soviet Union from spreadingRead MorePresidential Doctrines Essay1051 Words   |  5 PagesRunning head: PRESIDENTIAL DOCTRINES Presidential Doctrines: President Kennedy and the Communist Expansion Abstract The Kennedy Doctrine was essentially an expansion of the foreign policy of the previous administrations of Dwight D. Eisenhower and Harry S. Truman, The Eisenhower doctrine focused providing both military and economic assistance to nations resisting communism and increasing trade from the U.S. to Latin America and the Truman doctrine focused on containment of communism by providingRead MoreThe War Of The Civil Rights Movement1476 Words   |  6 Pageshe ended the Korean War, CIA-sponsored coups in Iran and Guatemala, and Eisenhower Doctrine in the Middle East. He ended the Korean War by telling the South Korean government if they do not accept the armistice, he would withdraw all American forces from the peninsula. In Iran and Guatemala the coups were sent there for the purpose to install pro-American governments. On January 4, 1957 the Eisenhower Doctrine was proposed for a middle eastern country can request american aid from U.S. military