AHS Comparative Government

The Russian Federal Assembly has approved a bill that will severely limit foreign ownership of Russian media; the bill requires all Russian media outlets (newspapers, magazines, television stations, etc.) to be at least 80% Russian-owned.  The bill, which was supported by President Vladimir Putin's United Russia Party, appears intended to prevent foreign criticism of Russian government leaders and policies from reaching ordinary Russians.  President Putin is expected to sign the bill into law next week:

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/28/352198470/russia-moves-to-protect-its-information-sovereignty

The Chinese Government is building the world's largest water-diversion project, to move water more than 650 miles from the Yangtze basin to chronically water-short northern China.  The Economist argues that the project is unnecessary, wastes both funds and water, and poses environmental and public health risks.  Worse, it won't solve northern China's chronic water shortage.  Indeed, The Economist argues that the project may even exacerbate that shortage, by encouraging development based on artificially inexpensive and unsustainably abundant water:

http://www.economist.com/news/china/21620226-worlds-biggest-water-diversion-project-will-do-little-alleviate-water-scarcity-canal-too

Of course, as Californians, we should readily understand how the construction of expensive water projects, and the sale of water to consumers (including growers) at below market prices, leads to the consumption of water at unsustainable levels and to the depletion of groundwater aquifers.

In order to persuade Scots to vote against independence, the leaders of Britain's three main political parties promised that the British government would devolve more power to the Scottish Parliament.  Prime Minister David Cameron, however, now insists that any further transfer of power to Edinburgh must be accompanied by a solution to the "West Lothian Question" -- the anomaly that, under current British political practice, allows Scottish MPs sitting in the Westminster Parliament to vote on questions that affect England  alone, even though no one in England has any say in matters that affect only Scotland (because such matters are within the purview of the Scottish Parliament, which is elected only by Scots). 

Cameron's Conservative Party would like to see a solution to the West Lothian Question that prevents Scottish MPs in Westminster from voting on matters that affect only England.  This is because a future Labour Government might depend on Scottish (or Scottish and Welsh) MPs for a majority -- and a system that would prevent those MPs from voting on matters affecting England alone would effectively prevent such a Labour Government from enacting any part of its program that affected only England.  The Labour Party, for its part, would like to see the transfer of substantial powers to regional governments in English urban areas -- i.e., local government bodies that would likely be led by Labour politicians:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21620243-scotlands-independence-referendum-has-opened-cracks-united-kingdom-let-england-shake

Chinese President Xi Jinping holds the three most powerful positions in his country.  He is General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  He is Chairman of the Central Military Commission, which makes him commander-in-chief of the Chinese armed forces.  Finally, as President of the People's Republic of China, Xi is head of state.

Holding these three positions simultaneously does not distinguish Xi from his immediate predecessors; both Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin held all three positions in the years they led China.  Hu and Jiang, however, were the leaders of teams of men who ran the country.  Since becoming General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party in 2012, Xi has established himself as the most powerful single person in China since Deng Xiaoping governed the country in the 1980s.

In this week's issue, The Economist examines the ongoing consolidation of Xi's power.  At the moment, Xi is both powerful and popular with the Chinese public; this may make it easier for the CCP to carry out what Xi believes are critical economic and social reforms.  But centralizing power in a single figure is a step backwards for China politically -- not that any senior CCP official supports or even contemplates further political reform:

http://www.economist.com/news/china/21618882-cult-personality-growing-around-chinas-president-what-will-he-do-his-political

Scottish voters have voted against independence from the United Kingdom by a margin of 55% to 45%.  In the closing days of the campaign, the leaders of Britain's three major parties pledged that the British Government would devolve more power to the Scottish Parliament; the details of the further transfer of powers from London to Edinburgh must now be negotiated:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-29270441

The link below will take you to a video of the Prime Minister's Questions of 23 January 2013.  The verbal combat begins at 3:44, when the leader of the Opposition, Ed Miliband, questions the Prime Minister, David Cameron, about his government's European Union (EU) policy.  That morning, the Prime Minister had delivered a speech in which he promised that, if the Conservatives form the next government (i.e., if they win the next general election), they will seek to renegotiate the terms of Britain's membership in the EU.  The Prime Minister further promised that, once those negotiations are concluded, he will put the question of Britain's continued membership in the EU to the country's voters.

As Miliband suggests, the position that Cameron announced in his speech differed substantially from his previous position on Britain's continued membership in the EU, and likely reflects his fear that the Conservatives will lose votes in the next election to the UK Independence Party, a right-wing group that favors leaving the EU.  Cameron's promise to hold an "in or out" referendum on British EU membership (forty years after British voters first opted to join the EU) also holds risks for Britain.  Cameron's speech annoyed most European political leaders (because Cameron essentially threatened that Britain will quit the EU if those leaders don't give him what he wants) and the Obama Administration (which believes that America's "special relationship" with Britain is far more valuable to the US if Britain stays in the EU).  It also caused concern among some British businessmen and bankers (who fear that any doubts about Britain's continued membership in the EU and continued ability to sell its goods in Europe may jeopardize Britain's ability to attract investment from abroad and the status of London as the world's financial capital):

http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2013/january/prime-ministers-questions-23-january-2013/

On Thursday, Scottish voters will decide whether Scotland will remain part of the United Kingdom or become an independent country.  While supporters of continued union were once 20 points ahead of independence supporters, a recent surge of support for Scottish independence has left the election too close to call:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21617063-sundering-united-kingdom-has-come-look-much-more-likely-rise-ayes

In an effort to weaken the independence campaign, Britain's three leading political parties have long promised that the British Parliament in London would devolve further powers to the Scottish government.  A recent proposal by former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a Scot opposed to separation from the United Kingdom, would effectively grant Scotland self rule on all issues other than foreign relations, military matters and monetary policy.  The current leaders of the British Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat Parties have agreed to Brown's proposals in principle.  It remains to be seen whether the proposals will prove sufficient to turn the tide of the election.  But even if Scotland votes "No" to independence it seems clear that, in the future, political power in the United Kingdom will be far more decentralized than in the past:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21617033-even-if-scots-reject-independence-union-will-grow-looser-and-messier-unitedish-kingdom

Nigerian army units fighting Boko Haram, a militant Islamist group, have been plagued by inadequate equipment, unpaid wages, desertions and mutinies.  As a result, Boko Haram now controls a large part of northwest Nigeria's Borno state.  The conflict has led tens of thousands to flee their homes and threatens to engulf the state capital, Maiduguri -- a city of over one million:

http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21615642-boko-haram-now-taking-territory-and-threatens-state-capital-other

Hong Kong was a British colony from the late 19th century to 1997.  In 1984, the British and Chinese governments agreed that Britain would restore Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997.  As part of that agreement, the Chinese government agreed that Hong Kong would be governed separately from the rest of China, and that Hong Kong would enjoy a high level of political autonomy and freedom.

When Hong Kong formally became part of China in 1997, it promised Hong Kong's residents to respect their freedom of speech and the press, and to establish a system by 2017 for electing the city's chief executive by universal suffrage.  Since 1997, Hong Kong has, in fact, enjoyed more political autonomy than any other part of China.  Hong Kong residents enjoy freedom of speech and the press, and have a partially-elected Legislative Council.

The Chinese government recently unveiled its plans for electing Hong Kong's chief executive by universal suffrage, starting in 2017: Hong Kong residents will be able to choose from two or three candidates selected by a pro-Beijing nominating body.  In other words, Hong Kong voters will only be able to elect a leader acceptable to Chinese Communist Party leaders in Beijing.

The Chinese government's proposal has enraged Hong Kong democracy activists and intellectuals, and disappointed many of the city's political moderates.  The activists are planning a mass civil disobedience campaign if the Chinese government does not amend its proposals.  One former Chinese official, however, has warned that "blood will be shed" if democracy activists conduct such a civil disobedience campaign:

http://www.economist.com/news/china/21615636-denied-free-elections-hong-kongs-democrats-plan-reluctantly-protest-political-city