24 June 2016
Britain Votes to Leave the European Union, Cameron Resigns as Prime Minister
In a stunning defeat for Britain's political and business establishment, Britons voted yesterday to leave the European Union (EU). With 72% of the electorate casting ballots, 52% of British voters opted to leave the EU while 48% voted to remain. Although British withdrawal from the EU will take several years, the markets reacted quickly to the unexpected decision, with the British pound falling to its lowest level in thirty years and the London Stock Exchange falling by about 5%.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, who had called the referendum in the mistaken belief that British voters would vote in favor of remaining in the EU, and who had campaigned hard in favor of remaining, announced his resignation this morning. He will stay on in a caretaker role for several months, while his Conservative Party selects a new leader. The new Conservative Party leader will then become the new British Prime Minister, as the Conservatives continue to have a large majority in the British House of Commons (the lower and more important of the two house of Parliament). Immediate speculation has focused on Boris Johnson, the former Mayor of London and a Conservative Member of Parliament, becoming Conservative Party leader, Johnson broke with Cameron and became one of the leaders of the "Brexit" campaign.
Although the United Kingdom as a whole voted to leave the EU, voters in Scotland and Northern Ireland voted strongly to stay. (63% of Scots voted to remain in the EU). In the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, in which Scottish voters opted to remain in the United Kingdom, one of the main arguments against independence was the claim that an independent Scotland would be outside the European Union, and that it would have no realistic possibility of membership so long as the rest of the United Kingdom remained in the EU. Now that Scotland will be leaving the EU, against the wishes of Scottish voters and solely because English and Welsh voters have opted to leave the European Union, Scottish nationalists have a strong argument for holding another independence referendum. Most observers expect that Scottish voters would choose independence in a second referendum, and that an independent Scotland would join the European Union.
Northern Ireland, the only part of the UK with a land border with an EU country (the Republic of Ireland) faces an even more complex dilemma. The prospect that people and goods will no longer be able to cross freely between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland once the UK withdraws from the EU strengthens the arguments of Nationalists in Northern Ireland who support leaving the United Kingdom and joining the Irish Republic. The prospect of the establishment of a "real" border between both parts of Ireland could also lead to renewed political violence in Northern Ireland.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, who had called the referendum in the mistaken belief that British voters would vote in favor of remaining in the EU, and who had campaigned hard in favor of remaining, announced his resignation this morning. He will stay on in a caretaker role for several months, while his Conservative Party selects a new leader. The new Conservative Party leader will then become the new British Prime Minister, as the Conservatives continue to have a large majority in the British House of Commons (the lower and more important of the two house of Parliament). Immediate speculation has focused on Boris Johnson, the former Mayor of London and a Conservative Member of Parliament, becoming Conservative Party leader, Johnson broke with Cameron and became one of the leaders of the "Brexit" campaign.
Although the United Kingdom as a whole voted to leave the EU, voters in Scotland and Northern Ireland voted strongly to stay. (63% of Scots voted to remain in the EU). In the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, in which Scottish voters opted to remain in the United Kingdom, one of the main arguments against independence was the claim that an independent Scotland would be outside the European Union, and that it would have no realistic possibility of membership so long as the rest of the United Kingdom remained in the EU. Now that Scotland will be leaving the EU, against the wishes of Scottish voters and solely because English and Welsh voters have opted to leave the European Union, Scottish nationalists have a strong argument for holding another independence referendum. Most observers expect that Scottish voters would choose independence in a second referendum, and that an independent Scotland would join the European Union.
Northern Ireland, the only part of the UK with a land border with an EU country (the Republic of Ireland) faces an even more complex dilemma. The prospect that people and goods will no longer be able to cross freely between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland once the UK withdraws from the EU strengthens the arguments of Nationalists in Northern Ireland who support leaving the United Kingdom and joining the Irish Republic. The prospect of the establishment of a "real" border between both parts of Ireland could also lead to renewed political violence in Northern Ireland.
16 June 2016
Voters to Decide Next Week on Britain's Continued Membership in the European Union
Next Thursday, British voters will decide whether the United Kingdom will remain in the European Union (EU). The latest polls show a slight lead for "Brexit" -- British withdrawal from the EU -- but most analysts think that a vote to remain is still more likely than a vote to leave.
Most Americans following the controversy are baffled by British public support for Brexit. British withdrawal from the EU would likely precipitate an economic downturn in the UK. In addition, Brexit would make Britain less influential internationally, and greatly increase the likelihood that Scotland (and possibly Northern Ireland) will leave the UK.
So what's driving the "leave" campaign? Four things. First, some older Britons may feel nostalgia for an era when Britain was a great power on its own, and not just as part of a bloc that includes such historical rivals as Germany and France.
Second, some Britons resent immigration from other EU countries. Because Britain is a member of the EU, the citizens of other EU countries have the legal right to live and work in Britain. (Britons also have the legal right to live and work in other EU countries). For example, after Poland joined the EU in 2004, more than one million Poles moved to the United Kingdom; today, at least 750,000 Poles live in Britain. While dozens of academic studies have concluded that immigrants from other EU countries take jobs that Britons don't want, and contribute far more to the British government in taxes than the British government spends to provide them (and their families) with social services, people who distrust immigrants don't tend to be impressed by academic studies.
Third, the EU is intended to be a single market in which all businesses in Europe compete on a level playing field; they do so by complying with the same business regulations. In practice, this means that businesses in EU countries must comply with a huge number of regulations (some of them demonstrably silly) made by bureaucrats in Brussels, where the EU is headquartered. These bureaucrats are not elected, nor are they accountable in any real way to European voters or to the elected governments of the countries of Europe. Indeed, the bureaucratic nature of the EU has made it increasingly unpopular not just in Britain but throughout Western Europe.
Finally, many voters in the UK see EU membership as benefiting the well-educated and the well-off, and not ordinary people. While it's true that EU membership has benefited Britain as a whole, it is also probably true that the well-educated and well-off have benefited most from Britain's EU membership: in Britain, as in almost every other major industrialized economy, the benefits of growth over the past 35 years have gone disproportionately to the well-educated and the well-off (with the best-off benefiting the most). Accordingly, there are a lot of Britons who would like to express their frustration with a generation of increasing economic inequality in Britain by taking some form of radical action (even if they are likely to suffer from that action). In the US, right-wing populism takes the form of support for Donald Trump; in Britain, right-wing populism entails support for Nigel Farage and his anti-EU UK Independence Party.
Whatever their motivation, British voters may well vote to leave the European Union. While the results of a vote for Brexit are uncertain, they are likely to be dramatic. An article in this week's Economist looks at the likely short-term economic consequences:
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21700692-aftermath-vote-leave-european-union-will-depend-unpredictable-responses
Most Americans following the controversy are baffled by British public support for Brexit. British withdrawal from the EU would likely precipitate an economic downturn in the UK. In addition, Brexit would make Britain less influential internationally, and greatly increase the likelihood that Scotland (and possibly Northern Ireland) will leave the UK.
So what's driving the "leave" campaign? Four things. First, some older Britons may feel nostalgia for an era when Britain was a great power on its own, and not just as part of a bloc that includes such historical rivals as Germany and France.
Second, some Britons resent immigration from other EU countries. Because Britain is a member of the EU, the citizens of other EU countries have the legal right to live and work in Britain. (Britons also have the legal right to live and work in other EU countries). For example, after Poland joined the EU in 2004, more than one million Poles moved to the United Kingdom; today, at least 750,000 Poles live in Britain. While dozens of academic studies have concluded that immigrants from other EU countries take jobs that Britons don't want, and contribute far more to the British government in taxes than the British government spends to provide them (and their families) with social services, people who distrust immigrants don't tend to be impressed by academic studies.
Third, the EU is intended to be a single market in which all businesses in Europe compete on a level playing field; they do so by complying with the same business regulations. In practice, this means that businesses in EU countries must comply with a huge number of regulations (some of them demonstrably silly) made by bureaucrats in Brussels, where the EU is headquartered. These bureaucrats are not elected, nor are they accountable in any real way to European voters or to the elected governments of the countries of Europe. Indeed, the bureaucratic nature of the EU has made it increasingly unpopular not just in Britain but throughout Western Europe.
Finally, many voters in the UK see EU membership as benefiting the well-educated and the well-off, and not ordinary people. While it's true that EU membership has benefited Britain as a whole, it is also probably true that the well-educated and well-off have benefited most from Britain's EU membership: in Britain, as in almost every other major industrialized economy, the benefits of growth over the past 35 years have gone disproportionately to the well-educated and the well-off (with the best-off benefiting the most). Accordingly, there are a lot of Britons who would like to express their frustration with a generation of increasing economic inequality in Britain by taking some form of radical action (even if they are likely to suffer from that action). In the US, right-wing populism takes the form of support for Donald Trump; in Britain, right-wing populism entails support for Nigel Farage and his anti-EU UK Independence Party.
Whatever their motivation, British voters may well vote to leave the European Union. While the results of a vote for Brexit are uncertain, they are likely to be dramatic. An article in this week's Economist looks at the likely short-term economic consequences:
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21700692-aftermath-vote-leave-european-union-will-depend-unpredictable-responses
Criminal Justice Reform in Mexico
Over the past eight years, Mexico has slowly reformed its criminal justice system. While it may be another decade before the new system operates smoothly, the reforms show some early signs of success:
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21700682-right-reform-has-been-introduced-perfecting-it-could-take-years-trials-and-errors
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21700682-right-reform-has-been-introduced-perfecting-it-could-take-years-trials-and-errors
11 June 2016
Mexico: An Incomplete Democratization
Over the past twenty years, Mexico has developed a more-or-less competitive political system: power alternates among different political parties at the national level and, increasingly, at the state level. But Mexico has not fully adopted the rule of law. Corruption in government is as big a problem today as it was when Mexico was a one-party state. Moreover, organized crime is far more powerful now than it was in the 20th century:
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21700416-intellectuals-find-fundamental-flaws-countrys-democracy-mexican-blues
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21700416-intellectuals-find-fundamental-flaws-countrys-democracy-mexican-blues
Educational Inequality in China
Under China's hukou (household registration) system, Chinese citizens who move from rural villages to large cities remain legal residents of their home villages -- as do their children, no matter where they were born. Undocumented migrants to Chinese cities are ineligible for a host of social services, including low-cost health care and educational services. Moreover, because they lack the legal right to reside and work in the cities where they live, undocumented migrants tend to have the least secure and most poorly paid jobs available in Chinese cities, and to live in the lowest-cost housing available in those cities.
Worse, the Chinese educational system perpetuates, and to some extent exacerbates, the social inequality created by the hukou system. Seventy percent of the teenagers growing up in Chinese cities attend high school; this means that nearly all of the children of middle-class Chinese parents with urban hukou are able to attend high school. Over a third of such students eventually earn university degrees.
Undocumented migrant children growing up in Chinese cities, however, typically cannot afford to attend high school in the cities where they live. In theory, there is some government assistance available to them if they attend high school in their parents' home villages; in reality, fewer than 10% of teenagers in rural China attend high school. Fewer still attend university.
In short, the sons and daughters of prosperous Chinese families with the legal right to live in Chinese cities attend high school; as a general rule, other Chinese teenagers do not:
http://www.economist.com/news/china/21699923-chinas-education-system-deeply-unfair-class-ceiling
Worse, the Chinese educational system perpetuates, and to some extent exacerbates, the social inequality created by the hukou system. Seventy percent of the teenagers growing up in Chinese cities attend high school; this means that nearly all of the children of middle-class Chinese parents with urban hukou are able to attend high school. Over a third of such students eventually earn university degrees.
Undocumented migrant children growing up in Chinese cities, however, typically cannot afford to attend high school in the cities where they live. In theory, there is some government assistance available to them if they attend high school in their parents' home villages; in reality, fewer than 10% of teenagers in rural China attend high school. Fewer still attend university.
In short, the sons and daughters of prosperous Chinese families with the legal right to live in Chinese cities attend high school; as a general rule, other Chinese teenagers do not:
http://www.economist.com/news/china/21699923-chinas-education-system-deeply-unfair-class-ceiling
Russia to Hold State Duma Elections in September
In Russia, the Federal Assembly (the national legislature) has two houses. The upper house, the Federation Council, is chosen by the governors and elected legislatures of Russia's 85 regions. (Russia is a federation of 85 regions). The lower house, the State Duma, is directly elected: all 450 State Duma members are elected every five years.
The next State Duma elections are scheduled for 18 September 2016. Russian President Vladimir Putin remains broadly popular; accordingly, the main pro-Putin party -- United Russia -- is expected to do well. In the 2011 State Duma elections, however, United Russia only won a majority of the seats through fraud. The corruption was so obvious that mass protests ensued in Moscow and St. Petersburg. This time, Putin and his supporters are making more of an effort to make sure the elections appear honest; at the same time, they are making every effort to ensure a United Russia victory:
http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21699944-president-has-crushed-opposition-technocrats-and-security-hawks-are-fighting-his
The next State Duma elections are scheduled for 18 September 2016. Russian President Vladimir Putin remains broadly popular; accordingly, the main pro-Putin party -- United Russia -- is expected to do well. In the 2011 State Duma elections, however, United Russia only won a majority of the seats through fraud. The corruption was so obvious that mass protests ensued in Moscow and St. Petersburg. This time, Putin and his supporters are making more of an effort to make sure the elections appear honest; at the same time, they are making every effort to ensure a United Russia victory:
http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21699944-president-has-crushed-opposition-technocrats-and-security-hawks-are-fighting-his
05 June 2016
New Niger Delta Militant Group Adds to Nigeria's Security Problems
Nigeria has significant security problems. Northeastern Nigeria (and parts of neighboring Niger, Chad and Cameroon) have been torn apart by Boko Haram, now considered the world's deadliest terrorist group. While Boko Haram has lost control of most of the 20,000 square miles of Nigerian territory that it controlled in 2014, it continues to conduct attacks on military personnel and kidnappings of civilians in Africa's Lake Chad region, and to conduct bomb attacks on cities in northern and central Nigeria.
Nigeria also faces a renewed insurgency in the Niger Delta. Following a 2009 amnesty agreement, most of the fighters of the Movement to Emancipate the Niger Delta (MEND) surrendered their weapons to Nigerian authorities, though many of the fighters later joined the criminal gangs that steal crude oil and conduct kidnappings for ransom in the Delta. In the past year, however, a new Delta militant group has surfaced: the Niger Delta Avengers (NDA). NDA has attacked oil and natural gas production facilities throughout the Delta, leading to a deep drop in Nigerian oil production and adding to the problems the country faces in generating electricity:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36414036
Nigeria also faces a renewed insurgency in the Niger Delta. Following a 2009 amnesty agreement, most of the fighters of the Movement to Emancipate the Niger Delta (MEND) surrendered their weapons to Nigerian authorities, though many of the fighters later joined the criminal gangs that steal crude oil and conduct kidnappings for ransom in the Delta. In the past year, however, a new Delta militant group has surfaced: the Niger Delta Avengers (NDA). NDA has attacked oil and natural gas production facilities throughout the Delta, leading to a deep drop in Nigerian oil production and adding to the problems the country faces in generating electricity:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36414036
Iran's Leader Said to Be Peeved with Iran's President
Iran's president, the Hojjat al-Islam Hassan Rouhani, was elected in 2013 on a platform of improved relations with the international community. Rouhani told voters that the only solution to the country's serious economic problems was to persuade other countries (and such intergovernmental organizations as the United Nations and the European Union) to lift the trade sanctions they had imposed on Iran in response to the country's nuclear fuel enrichment program. Last year, Iran reached an agreement with the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. Pursuant to that agreement, Iran has stopped enriching nuclear fuel, turned over its stockpile of enriched nuclear fuel to the International Atomic Energy Agency and allowed IAEA inspectors to inspect its nuclear facilities. In return, most trade sanctions against Iran were lifted in January 2016.
Notwithstanding the lifting of most trade sanctions, Iran's economy remain weak -- a result of the low international price for crude oil and the persistence of some US sanctions against Iran. For now, Rouhani remains broadly popular in Iran. Both pragmatic moderates allied with Rouhani and reformists (those who support significant political change in Iran) made solid gains in elections held this spring for Iran's Majles (parliament). These gains were particularly noteworthy because the country's Guardian Council, made up of hard line supporters of the regime, had disqualified most of the reformist Majles candidates.
Rouhani, however, appears to be increasingly unpopular with Iran's Leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei is the most powerful person in Iran. Among other things, he has the power to dismiss all elected officials, to remove any political candidate from the ballot and to appoint Iran's Chief Judge; he also commands and appoints the officers of the country's armed forces, Revolutionary Guard, police and Basij militia.
Khamenei reluctantly acquiesced in the nuclear agreement negotiated by Rouhani, but made it clear at the time that the agreement would not lead to further improvements in relations between Iran and the West. Khamenei, moreover, is said to be frustrated that the economy has not yet improved as a result of the agreement. Khamenei can make life very difficult for Rouhani: Khamenei and his supporters on the Guardian Council undid most of the reforms enacted during the presidency of Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005), and Khamenei went out of his way to undermine the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005-2013).
Iran is preparing for a presidential election in 2013. At the same time, Khamenei is said to be ill. (Then again, he's been rumored to be dying for at least the past twelve years). Iran's political elite is busy maneuvering in anticipation of the election, and in anticipation of a possible vacancy in the position of Leader:
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21699462-supreme-leader-clipping-wings-reformist-president-whos
Notwithstanding the lifting of most trade sanctions, Iran's economy remain weak -- a result of the low international price for crude oil and the persistence of some US sanctions against Iran. For now, Rouhani remains broadly popular in Iran. Both pragmatic moderates allied with Rouhani and reformists (those who support significant political change in Iran) made solid gains in elections held this spring for Iran's Majles (parliament). These gains were particularly noteworthy because the country's Guardian Council, made up of hard line supporters of the regime, had disqualified most of the reformist Majles candidates.
Rouhani, however, appears to be increasingly unpopular with Iran's Leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei is the most powerful person in Iran. Among other things, he has the power to dismiss all elected officials, to remove any political candidate from the ballot and to appoint Iran's Chief Judge; he also commands and appoints the officers of the country's armed forces, Revolutionary Guard, police and Basij militia.
Khamenei reluctantly acquiesced in the nuclear agreement negotiated by Rouhani, but made it clear at the time that the agreement would not lead to further improvements in relations between Iran and the West. Khamenei, moreover, is said to be frustrated that the economy has not yet improved as a result of the agreement. Khamenei can make life very difficult for Rouhani: Khamenei and his supporters on the Guardian Council undid most of the reforms enacted during the presidency of Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005), and Khamenei went out of his way to undermine the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005-2013).
Iran is preparing for a presidential election in 2013. At the same time, Khamenei is said to be ill. (Then again, he's been rumored to be dying for at least the past twelve years). Iran's political elite is busy maneuvering in anticipation of the election, and in anticipation of a possible vacancy in the position of Leader:
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21699462-supreme-leader-clipping-wings-reformist-president-whos
