The Emmy Award winning show has been running for almost three years and is currently on its third season. While watching the first two seasons always had me anticipating for more, the current season is making me want to turn it off. The excitement that the initial seasons had is sorely lacking. Whether the first seven episodes have been leading up to something big at the end, the intrigue that had captured viewers for the first two years is something that the producers of the show need to go back, explore and reignite into this season. Whether the problem is that there isn't enough of Brody in the show at the moment, the attempted insight into his whereabouts was an epic fail of an episode - boring, disorientated and lack lustre.
Now that the show has been renewed for a fourth season, writers, producers and directors need to seriously think about what made seasons one and two such an immense success and focus on why season three isn't as successful as they'd hoped.
Although episodes six and seven have been heating up indicating potential for the season to improve, the truth is if you can't garner the interest of viewers within the two or three episodes then it is time to face facts that there is some serious work to be done.
Time to go back to the drawing board, producers!
Monday, 11 November 2013
Sunday, 20 October 2013
A Pawn in International Foreign Policy
Before you start reading, I'd just like to point out that I have nothing against the subjects of this blog post. I hope what you read opens up your views to see this case through another perspective.
Malala Yousafzai. The girl shot by the Taliban for fighting for girls' education. No doubt she is one of many courageous young teenagers in the world and I commend her campaign, but surely it is not just me who feels the hype surrounding her is going too far? Sure, all girls deserve an education, and it is a worthy cause she is fighting for, but the extent to which politicians, royals and the like are parading her around the world is unrealistic. In just a few months, if not years' time, she will be another in a long line of other young girls who have fought for similar causes.
The UK have picked her up and put her on a pedestal. She spoke out at a UN headquarters in New York, opened the new Library of Birmingham, received a Pride of Britain award by the one and only David Beckham (despite having lived here for less than one year and is more a Pride of Pakistan), met with President Barack Obama of the United States just last week, awarded the 2013 Sakharov Prize for freedom of thought, nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, met with the Queen yesterday and she has just today received an Honorary Masters' Degree presented by none other than the former Prime Minister of the UK, Gordon Brown, at the University of Edinburgh. And what has she done, or had done to her in fact, for her to receive all this understandable but excessive attention you ask? She has been the subject of an undoubtedly terrible attack by the Taliban. The Taliban - everyone's enemy. This has indirectly been the cause of all the uproar surrounding her. Everyone hates the Taliban and for good reason but putting a young girl up on a pedestal only to bring her down later on just to use her as a pawn in international foreign policy is simply cruel and dismissive of her campaign.
Of course I condemn this action. No one deserves to be the target of such a vengeful crime when they are simply fighting for a rightful cause and I undoubtedly praise her efforts, but the excessive global attention she has received for the past year is simply going too far.
What people don't seem to see behind her courageous fight is that her and her family have received all they could have possibly wanted: from living in a downtrodden village in Pakistan, to living in a well-off area in Birmingham, attending a prestigious Birmingham private school, free NHS medical treatment, and her family given top jobs and access to all the resources even some of us British citizens aren't entitled to. Her and her family are flourishing and are relishing in the attention they have received over the past year.
This publicity and celebrity-status Malala has received is in contrast to that of her in her home town of the Swat District where she is hardly even known to those she has lived around for the past 15 years which further proves my point that global political dignitaries are using her as a pawn in their game of foreign policy.
Behind the scenes it is most probable that some of what she is preaching is being fed to her by other more influential people and she is a puppet on some powerful strings, which, if true, degrades her and her campaign and proves that she is simply being used and abused by higher powers with their own agenda.
I'd like to conclude with the point I have laced throughout this article, that Malala's campaign is a worthy one and her determination to fight for a cause that has already made the subject of an cowardly attack is admirable and highly commendable and therefore I do not wish to degrade her campaign by highlighting these issues but simply wish her well and that I sincerely hope she stays true to her campaign for girls' right to an education.
Malala Yousafzai. The girl shot by the Taliban for fighting for girls' education. No doubt she is one of many courageous young teenagers in the world and I commend her campaign, but surely it is not just me who feels the hype surrounding her is going too far? Sure, all girls deserve an education, and it is a worthy cause she is fighting for, but the extent to which politicians, royals and the like are parading her around the world is unrealistic. In just a few months, if not years' time, she will be another in a long line of other young girls who have fought for similar causes.
Malala speaking at the UN headquarters in New York in July 2013
The UK have picked her up and put her on a pedestal. She spoke out at a UN headquarters in New York, opened the new Library of Birmingham, received a Pride of Britain award by the one and only David Beckham (despite having lived here for less than one year and is more a Pride of Pakistan), met with President Barack Obama of the United States just last week, awarded the 2013 Sakharov Prize for freedom of thought, nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, met with the Queen yesterday and she has just today received an Honorary Masters' Degree presented by none other than the former Prime Minister of the UK, Gordon Brown, at the University of Edinburgh. And what has she done, or had done to her in fact, for her to receive all this understandable but excessive attention you ask? She has been the subject of an undoubtedly terrible attack by the Taliban. The Taliban - everyone's enemy. This has indirectly been the cause of all the uproar surrounding her. Everyone hates the Taliban and for good reason but putting a young girl up on a pedestal only to bring her down later on just to use her as a pawn in international foreign policy is simply cruel and dismissive of her campaign.
Of course I condemn this action. No one deserves to be the target of such a vengeful crime when they are simply fighting for a rightful cause and I undoubtedly praise her efforts, but the excessive global attention she has received for the past year is simply going too far.
What people don't seem to see behind her courageous fight is that her and her family have received all they could have possibly wanted: from living in a downtrodden village in Pakistan, to living in a well-off area in Birmingham, attending a prestigious Birmingham private school, free NHS medical treatment, and her family given top jobs and access to all the resources even some of us British citizens aren't entitled to. Her and her family are flourishing and are relishing in the attention they have received over the past year.
This publicity and celebrity-status Malala has received is in contrast to that of her in her home town of the Swat District where she is hardly even known to those she has lived around for the past 15 years which further proves my point that global political dignitaries are using her as a pawn in their game of foreign policy.
Behind the scenes it is most probable that some of what she is preaching is being fed to her by other more influential people and she is a puppet on some powerful strings, which, if true, degrades her and her campaign and proves that she is simply being used and abused by higher powers with their own agenda.
I'd like to conclude with the point I have laced throughout this article, that Malala's campaign is a worthy one and her determination to fight for a cause that has already made the subject of an cowardly attack is admirable and highly commendable and therefore I do not wish to degrade her campaign by highlighting these issues but simply wish her well and that I sincerely hope she stays true to her campaign for girls' right to an education.
Friday, 6 September 2013
❤
“I don’t want normal, and easy, and simple. I want…I want painful, difficult, devastating, life-changing, extraordinary love. Don’t you want that, too?”
-Olivia Pope, Scandal
Saturday, 5 January 2013
Is America in Decline?
During
the recent Presidential Election, there was one issue on both candidates mind –
a possible American decline but the fact they felt obliged to mentioned but
denied it instantly, suggests that, while they do not want to give other
nations the opportunity to gloat, nor are they sure whether they believe their
claims that America is not in decline . While there are many that argue against
America’s waning power such as Robert Kagan, in recent years and specifically
since 9/11, it is hard to say that America is not declining, in fact “the
United States has been fading as a global power since the 1970s, and the U.S.
response to the terrorist attacks has merely accelerated this decline”
(Wallerstein, 2003, p.13). America’s decline can be argued due to its limits of
hard power and soft power. Joseph Nye coined the term soft power as the ability
to get what you want through attraction rather than through coercion (2004a, p.
x) and while America has many elements of soft power such as its culture
visible through the institution of Hollywood, it also has a large hard power
basis namely its economy and military. In recent years, it has become clear
that these aspects of American hard and soft power are facing decline mostly
due to its foreign policy and the rise in anti-Americanism and terrorism which
have had a significant effect on the decline of different aspects of American
hard and soft power.
N.B. This is a paper I wrote for my class at university. Please do not copy any of this unless you are prepared to source me as the author. © Thank you
Adam
Quinn states in his article “The Art of Declining Politely” that declinists
have been crying ‘wolf’ for a long time, but that wolf did come and it is only
a matter of time till America’s decline becomes too obvious a problem that it
is impossible to deny its occurrence (2011, p. 805).
America’s
‘superpower’ status is defined by its apparent strength in hard power and soft
power but with China a strong competitor in the 21st century, it is difficult to ascertain
whether America will hold this superpower label for much longer, after all,
with a new superpower on the rise, it is inevitable that another nation will
reduce the United States down to the same state as the United Kingdom. Since
the United States’ rise to global hegemony was at the expense of Great Britain
and its receding economy, it is only to be expected that another country will
rise above America to be global superpower. The Pew Research Center’s survey
(2011a) reveals that of 22 nations, 15 feel that China already has or soon will
replace the United States as the world’s primary superpower – a view which is
consistent throughout Western Europe – but “only in Pakistan, Jordan, the
Palestinian territories and Kenya do majorities see an upside to China matching
the U.S. in terms of military power”. This could partly be due to America’s
military power already being in decline.
What has
also affected America’s superpower status in terms of soft power is the United
Kingdom’s rise above America in the country with the best soft power policies.
According to Forbes, “this is the first time the US has been dethroned” with
relation to matters such as “standard of government; diplomatic infrastructure;
cultural output; capacity for education; and appeal to business” (2012).
Although the United States and United Kingdom are close allies, it appears the
British have aspects of soft power which attract other nations more than that
of America. This may have been affected by the UK’s recent two years filled of
festivities such as the Royal Wedding, the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and the
London Olympics but surely these factors are only have a small effect on soft
power ratings in comparison to politics concerning education for example. While
the UK’s hard power status is little to none, it “ranks among the ‘soft power
superpowers’ of the 21st century”,
(YouGov, 2012).
The term
‘hard power’ is using threats via coercion and payments in order to get what
you want. This is usually through the use of the economy and the military. Of
late, both of these factors of American hard power have been under attack by
‘declinists’ who say that American power is in decline. This is mainly due to the
recession and Obama’s rationing of America’s use of power.
Both the
economy and the military are inextricably linked. The economy is undoubtedly
what is seen as the United States most powerful source of hard power especially
because America holds the key to the World Bank but due to the rising debt and
poor fiscal outlook, it appears as though American economic power is decreasing
more rapidly than Americans first thought. Since 9/11, the economy has had its
main focus being on the war against terrorism and although “Osama bin Laden failed in his lifetime to achieve his
goal of ‘bleeding America to bankruptcy’”, America’s economy suffered
massively due to the “avalanche of spending of spending military on military
and counter-terrorism operations [...] estimated at up to $4 trillion in
foreign wars” which have contributed to ‘the deficit crisis’ that has crippled
the country (ABS-CBN, 2011). “Following on from the recession of 2001 to 2003,
the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars started amidst weak economic condition [...]
[causing] the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts [to be] entirely financed by
debt.” Although military expenditure significantly increased, Bush
administration cut taxes which in effect caused income to fall considerably.
“This was the first time in American history that the Government cut taxes as
it went to war”, (Institute for Economics and Peace, 2011, p. 15). As a
consequence United States has now amassed a $16 trillion dollar and counting
and considering this debt is only fractionally due to other governments,
causing experts to emphasise how the “US government spending now depends on
borrowing money from China [...] [therefore] perhaps the moment in
Britain’s decline that American policy makers should be focussing on is [...]
when the US stopped the fighting by threatening to pull the plug on the British
economy” (BBC, 2012) This and the still high unemployment rate have both
contributed to the failing American economy and the problem may lie with Obama (a Democrat) being
President but the Republicans having control over the House of Representatives
and this was proved when first came into office and “offered only the heavy fist of government intervention, rising taxes,
increasing poverty and welfare dependency” (Gardiner, 2012). Because of these
conflicting views between the parties, it is no wonder America’s hard power is in decline
under the democrats and this is only set to continue, especially with Obama
having been re-elected President.
The Iraq
and Afghanistan wars were “dazzling display[s] of America’s hard military power
that removed a dangerous dictator” during Bush’s presidency but since Obama’s
time in office and his slow withdrawal of troops from these countries, the
question is “does withdrawal from Iraw and Afghanistan really mean that
American power is in decline and that of its adversaries on the rise” (Global
Post, 2012)? Since the US military’s failure in Vietnam, the implications have
had a significant effect on its power in modern politics and warfare with
American forces having to surrender their base in Saudi in 2003 due to the
threat of Al-Qaeda while in Afghanistan, the US forces failed in their attempt
to overturn the Taliban rule, resulting in them leaving Afghanistan in the same
in if not worse state than before with it “still run by landlords”. In more
recent years since the Iraq and Afghanistan War, America’s intervention in
Egypt has seen them unable to “secure the pro-revolution tilt that it wanted”
and in Libya, US influence has had no effect on the fighting that still ensues
(Left Futures, 2012). Therefore, it is reasonable to say that with reference to
the past few decades since the Vietnam War, America’s military power has been
significantly declining.
Terrorism
has had a significant effect on American soft power and has led to it almost
disappearing from American foreign policy. Since the 9/11 attacks, terrorism
has emphasised America’s vulnerability which has shown through for the world to
see thus leaving America in a state of paranoia leading them to attack all possible
threats to its superpower status. This is what has led to the rise of
anti-Americanism among many other nations and hence the decline in popularity
of America as a result. This is mainly the result of the war on Iraq which may
have eliminated the rule of Saddam Hussein but it did not solve America’s main
problem – terrorism (Nye, 2004c, p.114). In fact, America’s war on Iraq saw a
rapid decline in its soft power, “in the aftermath of the war, polling by the
Pew Research Center (PRC) showed a dramatic decline in the popularity of the
United States even in countries like Spain and Italy whose governments had
supported the war. And the standing of the US plummeted in Islamic countries
from Morocco through Turkey to Indonesia”, (2004, pp, 114-115). This ever
changing favourability of America has been influenced by the different
Presidents. According to the Pew Research Centre, “under the Bush
Administration, American anti-terrorism efforts expanded [but] many
[people] around the world turned against the U.S. Widespread anti-Americanism
remained a key feature [...] before fading significantly following the election
of Barack Obama” (2011b).
The new
struggle in America is that with Islam and Muslims. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the struggle was with the
integration of African Americans into a society dominated by white Americans
but now, in the 21st century,
a century which has been dominated by and obsessed with the aftermath of the
9/11 attacks, it appears that the hostility towards Muslims has significantly
increased thus causing a rapid decline in American soft power. Since the Bush
Administration, many Americans have stereotyped all Muslims as being
‘terrorists’ as well controversy regarding an American anti-Islam film causing
a less than favourable view of America from Muslim-countries which has caused
many Anti-America protests. This constitutes as ‘Anti-Americanism’ and has
spread all around the world – people’s view of America has declined and this
has more to do with their public diplomacy – hence their soft power – and
although “observers [were] already noting a distinct change in the prominence
and tone of U.S. public diplomacy [...] [and] some [suggested] President Obama
by his very person and style [represented] a game changer for U.S. public diplomacy
in the Islamic world”, (Zaharna, 2009, p. 1), this was only an introductory and
Obama only has partly succeeded in his attempt to improve “America’s dismal
image in the Muslim world”. America’s image in the Muslim world is still rough
especially among Pakistanis and Jordanians where “America’s already poor ratings have declined further since 2008 [when] 19
percent held a positive view of the U.S.
[...] compared with just 12 percent in 2012” (Pew Research Center, 2012]. This view
from Pakistanis has been significantly influenced by the hard power tactics
imposed on their country since Obama’s time in office during which drone
attacks have significantly increased and Therefore American culture no
longer suffices to attract other nations when American hard power actions,
values and institutions override its attraction and with the “world’s Muslim population is expected to increase by
about 35% in the next 20 years” (PRC, 2011c), this is surely not a good
outlook for America’s relations with Muslim countries and is a reminder of
America’s still hostile relations with the Vietnamese following the war on
Vietnam. If America is to keep its superpower status, it needs to limit
its attack on fellow nations and keep its soft power intact because it appears
to be significantly declining.
To
conclude, it can be said that America is in decline and this is mainly due to
9/11. Since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and The Pentagon in
2001, America’s war response to terrorism was imperative on how they were
viewed in the eyes of other nations. Its war on Iraq and Afghanistan along with
its receding economy has caused fellow countries to lose hope and faith in it
as a superpower nation and with its values and policies as well as its poor
public diplomacy with fellow countries being a part of the decisions to declare
war on other nations, have also had a negative effect on its soft power hence
causing an equal decline in both hard and soft power.
Sources
ABS-CBN
News, 2011, Post-9/11, US
economy pays steep price. [online]. Available at: <http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/business/08/17/11/post-911-us-economy-pays-steep-price>
[Accessed 13 December 2012].
BBC
(2012). Is the United States
an empire in decline? [online].
Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19667754>
[Accessed 9 December 2012].
CBS News
(2009). U.S. Terror Strategy:
Hard and Soft Power [online].Available
at: <http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-5221000.html>
[Accessed 10 December 2012].
Ferguson,
T. and Rogers, J. (1986). Right
Turn: The Decline of the Democrats and the Future of American Politics. New
York: Hill and Wang
Forbes
(2012) The Empire Strikes Back: UK beats US in Soft Power Survey [online]
Available at: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/11/18/the-empire-strikes-back-u-k-beats-u-s-in-soft-power-survey-says/>
[Accessed 11 December 2012].
Forbes (2012). World
Economists Confirm America's Decline Under Obama [online]. Available
at: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/09/04/world-economists-confirm-americas-decline-under-obama/> [Accessed 12 December 2012].Gardiner,
Nile. 2012. Under
Barack Obama the US superpower faces four more years of decline. Telegraph.co.uk US Politics blog [blog] 8 November
2012. Available at: <http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100188122/under-barack-obama-the-us-superpower-faces-four-more-years-of-decline/>
[Accessed 12 December 2012].
Global
Post (2012). After Iraq and
Afghanistan: Is US Power in Decline [online].
Available at: <http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/commentary/after-iraq-and-afghanistan-us-power-decline>
[Accessed 12 December 2012].
Judt, T.
and Lacorne, D. (2005). With Us or Against Us: Studies in Global
Anti-Americanism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Left
Futures, 2012, The US: a
declining military and economic power. [online]
Available at: <http://www.leftfutures.org/2012/08/the-us-a-declining-military-and-economic-power/>
[Accessed 11 December 2012].
Magaziner,
I.C. and Reich, R.B. (1982). Minding
America’s business: The decline and rise of the American economy. New York: Vintage Books.
Nau, H.R.
(1992). The Myth of
America’s Decline. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Nye Jr,
J.S. (2004a). Soft Power: The
Means to Success in World Politics. New York: PublicAffairs.
Nye Jr,
J.S. 2004b. Hard Power, Soft Power and “The War on Terrorism”. In: Held, D and
Koenig-Archibugi, M., 2004. American
Power in the 21st Century.
1st ed. Cambridge:
Polity Press. Ch. 4
Nye Jr,
J.S., 2004. The Decline of America’s Soft Power: Why Washington Should Worry. Foreign Affairs [online] 83 (3), Available at:
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/i20033968>
[Accessed 09 December 2012].
Nye Jr,
J.S. 2012. Fear factor – The
illusion of American decline [online] Available at: <http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12396/fear-factor-the-illusion-of-american-decline>
[Accessed 14 December 2012].
Pew
Research Center, 2011a. China seen overtaking US as global superpower. [online]
Available at: <http://www.pewglobal.org/2011/07/13/china-seen-overtaking-us-as-global-superpower/>
[Accessed 10 December 2012].
Pew
Research Center, 2011b. From Hyperpower to Declining Power. [online] Available
at: <http://www.pewglobal.org/2011/09/07/from-hyperpower-to-declining-power/>
[Accessed 10 December 2012].
Quinn, A. (2011) ‘The
Art of Declining Politely: Obama's prudent presidency and the waning of
American power'. International
Affairs [online] 87 (4) Available at: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/20869760> [Accessed 11 December 2012].
The
Institute of Economics and Peace (2011) The Economic Consequences of War on the
US Economy [online]. Available at:
<http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/The-Economic-Consequences-of-War-on-US-Economy.pdf>
[Accessed 11 December 2012].
The Pew
Forum on Religion and Public Life, 2011c. The
Future of the Global Muslim Population. [online] Available at: <http://www.pewforum.org/The-Future-of-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx>
[Accessed 13 December 2012].
Wallerstein,
I. (2003) The Decline of American
Power. New York: The New
Press.
YouGov
(2012) [online] Britain:
a ‘soft power superpower’. Available
at: <http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/10/15/britain-soft-power-superpower/>
[Accessed 12 September 2012].
Zaharna,
R.S. 2009. Obama, U.S. Public
Diplomacy and the Islamic World [online]
World Politics Review. Available at: <http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/3450/obama-u-s-public-diplomacy-and-the-islamic-world>
[Accessed 14 December 2012].
N.B. This is a paper I wrote for my class at university. Please do not copy any of this unless you are prepared to source me as the author. © Thank you
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)