What the World Holds in 2014 - A Prediction

So that’s my review of 2013 over, obviously there were numerous stories that I missed. The horsemeat scandal that gripped Europe, elections in Japan and Germany, and the birth of Prince George. The biggest news story that I missed was documenting the progress within Iran. I was planning on writing more reviews, but revision for exams has cute into the amount of time I can afford to spend blogging. Perhaps when I finish exams I’ll do a few more reviews of 2013.

The point of this post is to predict what will happen to the world in 2014. The number in red is the amount of predictions I’ve made in the paragraph.

Pro-gay rights athletes will be arrested in Sochi during the Winter Olympics. Of the 100s of athletes attending, it seems unlikely that nobody will protest. Expect tensions to rise between the West and Russia. [1]

The European elections will be a mixed bag as the likes of France jump to the rights whilst Britain and several other countries jump to the left. I predict that Nick Griffin will lose his seat and Labour will have the largest MEP delegation from Britain. In France Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP will have the most MEPs, followed by Marine Le Pen’s National Front. This will leave President François Hollande’s Socialist Party in third place.  [5]

Scotland will vote to remain in the union, although the vote will be closer than most unionists would like [1]

Scotland will also legalise same-sex marriage, as will Luxembourg and the Faroe Islands. Michigan and Virginia, by court ruling, will legalise same-sex marriage through the courts, whilst Ohio and Oregon will legalise it through ballot initiatives. The Supreme Court will reject Utah’s appeal, keeping same-sex marriage legal in that state. [8]

The November elections in the US will be mixed. Republicans will make a net gain in the Senate but will fall short of enough to take control. Little will change in the House of Representatives. Democrats will make a net gain in the governorship. [4] I’ll do a more in depth post about this later this month or in early February.

The bloodshed in Syria will continue, and by the end of 2014 nothing much will have changed unfortunately. There will be no Western military intervention in Syrian affairs. [2]

Obamacare will become more popular as its positive effects are felt. By the end of the year it will have a positive approval rating [1]

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts will continue to gain popularity within the Democratic Party. She will eat away at Hilary Clinton’s lead in 2016 polls. New York City Mayor, Bill deBlasio, will gain national attention, also resulting in him being touted for a 2016 Presidential run. [2]

If I were to guess one person who is likely to die in 2014, I would chose President George H.W. Bush. We already know that he is in poor health and turns 90 this June. People who could also die this year include the Duke of Edinburgh, after all he turns 93 this June and had a number of health scares in 2013. Thailand’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej has had numerous health scares over the past decade and hence is also on the list of likely deaths. He turns 87 in June (I swear I have nothing against people born in June). Aging stars Bruce Forsyth (turns 86 later this month) and Betty White (turns 92 next month) could also die in 2014 without much surprise.

Excluding deaths, I have made a total of 23 predictions for 2014. I guess we will have to wait until 2015 to see how accurate they were!

The Rainbow Wave

It has been an extraordinary year for gay rights, particularly when it comes to gay marriage. Unfortunately there have been set backs, most notably in Russia, which I will come to later. Earlier last year I made a prediction that the total population of countries and jurisdictions that have passed same-sex marriage before 2013 would be less than the population of those who passed it in 2013 and 2014. My prediction was true, just a bit conservative. Before 2013 363,310 people lived in places that had legal same-sex marriage, whereas last year places with an additional 37,806,000 people being added in 2013 alone!

Marriage Rights

The first gay couple to get married in France (Montpellier)
source: standard.co.uk

The expanding of marriage rights took place across four continents and seven different countries. Brazil, France, New Zealand and Uruguay legalised it nationwide, taking the total to 15 countries. The UK government also legalised same-sex marriage but it only applies to England and Wales as both Scotland and Northern Ireland have the power to define marriage devolved to them. Scotland is making good progress when it comes to same-sex marriage, a bill that would legalise it has passed the first reading in the Scottish Parliament and awaits another vote. In Northern Ireland there are no plans to extend marriage rights at the moment.

Same-sex marriage seemed unable to stay out of American news this entire year, every few weeks there was something new to celebrate, or be sad about. In total nine states started to issue same-sex marriage licences. Five legalised it through their legislatures (Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota and Rhode Island) whilst the other four legalised it as a result of court rulings (California, New Jersey, New Mexico and Utah). There are many other court cases pending across the country. In addition, six tribal jurisdictions began allowing same-sex marriage. They were the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Santa Ysabel Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, and the Leek Lake Band of Ojibwe. In 2013 Colorado started offering civil unions to same-sex couples and Oregon began recognising same-sex marriages performed out of state.  

USA Supreme Court Rulings on Same-Sex Marriage

The biggest boost for gay rights campaigners in the US came in June last year when the Supreme Court sided with them in two landmark cases. The court finally put to rest the fight over same-sex marriage in California that has been going on for a decade. Under Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger the Democratic controlled legislature passed same-sex marriage, which he vetoed. A challenge was brought to the constitutionality of California’s same-sex marriage ban which resulted in the Supreme Court of California ruling that the ban was unconstitutional. This was rapidly overturned by Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman and received the backing of 52% of the public vote in the 2008 referendum. A suit was then filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8. Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Proposition 8 did run contrary to the US constitution and hence would have to go. As the state of California refused to defend the law, it was the original organisers of Proposition 8 which then appealed the ruling in court.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to take up an appeal, when the court ruled in February 2012, it ruled in favour of the gay rights side. So the Proposition 8 proponents had no choice but to go to the US Supreme Court or abandon altogether, naturally they appealed.

The ruling later came on the 26^th of June and the results were rather surprising. The court did not rule based on whether or not Proposition 8 was constitutional, but rather whether its opponents had a right to defend it in federal court. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court decided that Proposition 8 opponents were not able to appeal and so the original district court ruling stayed. What is more surprising is how each justice ruled. It is widely recognised that the court is split along political lines. There are four liberal justices; Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Opposing them are conservative justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Finally there is the swing justice who is viewed as a moderate, Anthony Kennedy. You would be forgiven for thinking that it was the four liberal justices plus Kennedy that enabled same-sex marriage to return to California, but you would be wrong. Instead it was Roberts, Ginsburg, Kagan, Breyer and Scalia that ruled against the Proposition 8 proponents. Kennedy, Sotomayor, Alito and Thomas dissented. Scalia is the most shocking vote as not only is he one of the most conservative justices on the court, he is one of the most conservative men in the country.

The other major case heard by the Supreme Court on gay rights in 2013 concerned the federal Defense of Marriage Act (aka DOMA). The Act was passed in 1996 by a strong bipartisan majority and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The law basically barred federal recognition for same-sex couples. Section 3 stated that the federal government could not provide benefits to same-sex couples, even in states that had legal same-sex marriage. In 1996 this was of little consequence as no state allowed same-sex marriage, and it wouldn’t matter for another eight years until Massachusetts became the first US state to legalise same-sex marriage in 2004. In 2010 several plaintiffs filed in New York calling Section 3 unconstitutional. The case was called United States v. Windsor and dealt primarily with the case of Edith Windsor who had been taxed on the inheritance she received from her spouse, Thea Spyer. If the federal government had recognised her marriage then she would have been exempt from the tax. By the time the Supreme Court agreed to take the case, eight other states and DC had already legalised same-sex marriage and several more were planning on legalising it in the coming months. The Supreme Court decided in a 5-4 decision that Section 3 was indeed unconstitutional as it violated states’ rights and individual rights. The way the justices ruled was entirely as expected; the four conservative justices opposed gay rights and the four liberal justices (joined by Kennedy) backed gay rights.

Other positive moves on gay rights

One fundamental part of the family life is children, so naturally being allowed to adopt is important to gay people who want a family. There are two types of adoption here; joint adoption and step-child adoption. Joint adoption is when both partners adopt a child that is not the biological child of either of them. Step-child adoption is when one partner is the biological parent of one and the other partner adopts the child as their own. In 2013 France and New Zealand both began allowing joint adoption as a result of legalising same-sex marriage. In Northern Ireland and Gibraltar courts ruled that their respective jurisdictions had to allow joint adoption. Tasmania also legalised joint adoption. In 2013 step-child adoption was legalised in Austria and Germany.

Despite plenty of good news for gay rights in the West, less good news came from other areas of the world. I will be addressing that in the next post. 

Britain Won't Intervene

Syria has dominated the headlines over the past few days and for good reason. It was announced that the UN inspectors would be finished and out of Syria by Saturday, the BBC revealed a new regime-committed atrocity, and France and America will likely intervene in Syria. But the biggest news came out of the UK.

Last night the House of Commons rejected David Cameron's proposal that we should have some form of limited intervention in Syria. This was despite Cameron conceding that intervention would have to follow the UN inspectors' report, that there would be a second vote in the House of Commons and we should at least try to go through the UN. The pro-intervention side said that we must show Assad that we are serious and that intervention would be perfectly legal from a humanitarian standpoint. Unfortunately Labour won the vote, 285 against intervention, 272 in favour. This means that Britain will not be able to intervene in Syria and it sends the message to Assad that Britain will not act against him if he uses chemical weapons again.

As this vote was taking place last night, the BBC was releasing evidence of a new atrocity in Syria. A Syrian air-force jet dropped, what is believed to be, some form of incendiary bomb on a school playground. The BBC reported that the injuries from nearby victims was consistent with that of napalm. So far, ten have died.

Meanwhile the US has revealed that it is certain that Assad used chemical weapons earlier this month. The report claimed that the US knows exactly when the attack took place and where the chemicals were launched from. The report claims that 1,429 people were killed and 426 were children. So the US and France are intervening, whilst Britain sits on the sidelines and Russia raises tensions by sending a warship to the eastern Mediterranean.

Watch this space folks.

Old World Order - France

Population: 66 million
Area: 641,000 km2
GDP: $2.7 trillion
GDP (per capita): $36,000
United Nations Security Council Veto: Yes

France has been at the centre of European history for over 1100 years. In Europe, the only country that's been in more wars is Austria (although largely powerless now, before the 20th century Austria dominate Central European affairs). France had a huge empire and once nearly conquered all of continental Europe bar a disastrous attempt to invade Russia in the winter. These days France is still pretty powerful, having the 6th largest military expenditure in the world and veto power on the United Nations Security Council. It also has close ties to its European neighbours. France's future, however, is not all that rosy. 

One problem France is going to experience is population growth, or lack thereof. Currently France is the 21st largest country in the world with 65 million people, but by 2050 it is expected to drop to the 25th largest. Although its population will have risen to 69 million, it will have been shrinking since 2040. One way to reverse this would be to increase the amount of immigrants to France, but the French populace doesn't like that idea much. 

Although France's finances are not in the dire state that some of its European neighbours are in, economic prospects are gloomy. Since Hollande took power last year France's economy has barely improved. France is also vulnerable because it is in the Eurozone, which means the PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) countries' troubles are France's troubles. Its banking sector is particularly at risk from a Greek default due to the amount of money French banks have lent in Greece. Another Great Recession could hold France back for too long. 

One option France has is to move to closer ties within Europe. More fiscal policy and banking integration with Euro currency countries. This obviously has massive problems and rather glaring obstacles. To pull closer to political integration requires the other countries to do the same. There is increasing euro-scepticism in many Euro countries, particularly in the Netherlands and Finland. The problem is that fiscal integration can only happen it all countries currently using the euro agree to do this. Hollande must convince the Northern Europeans to stimulate the PIIGS economies, rather than demand austerity which simple makes the situation worse. 

Another issue facing France is the rise of the extreme right epitomised by Marine Le Pen and her party, the National Front. If we ignore the obvious historical similarities between this and the rise of Hitler following the Great Depression in 1929, this is still an issue for France. Le Pen is an isolationist, similar to Nigel Farage in the UK except more extreme, she wants out of the Eurozone, the EU and Schengen Area as well as reducing immigration by over 95%!

So France faxes three main issues; isolationism, population decline and economic turmoil in Europe. Solving the economic trouble will be difficult, but would go a long way to reducing isolationism. The population decline problem can be fixed by immigration policies that the French won't like. 

The Old World Order

It's been a year since I wrote about the rise of developing nations, a "New World Order" of sorts. I looked into five countries, and Africa, and how rapidly they were rising and what challenges they were facing. The countries I reviewed were:

1. China
2. India
3. Brazil
4. Mexico
5. Indonesia

This year I have decided to look into the countries that are currently at the top. The countries that will be faced with a lower influence in the world as other countries overtake them. I looked into how the "Old World Order" might manage its decline, or perhaps reverse it! Over the next few days I will be discussing the following countries as well as Europe:

1. United States of America
2. United Kingdom
3. France
4. Germany
5. Japan
6. Italy
7. Canada

Old World Order countries in red, Europe in green

Gay Marriage Salvaged

Labour has rescued the government's proposal from the Doldrums. The bill has majority in the House of Commons but Tory MP Tim Loughton was determined to go against the will of the majority and added a wrecking amendment. Loughton added a clause which extended civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples. The amendment would cause the bill to be held up for several more years. The amendment was a problem as it had the support of the Labour Party as well as many back-bench Conservatives. Earlier last week the Coalition government issued a warning to Labour, claiming that their support for the amendment could result in the whole bill failing.

With the very real chance that they could cause the bill to fail, Labour has pulled support for the amendment and instead will create its own bill in its place. This has thankfully killed the amendment. This should mean that the UK will have passed same-sex marriage by the end of this parliament. It's about time the UK joined the march for LGBT rights. The mother of parliaments must move forward.

____________________________________

In global news, last week was excellent for gay rights as France and Brazil legalised same-sex marriage nationwide! They join New Zealand as well as Minnesota, Rhode Island and Delaware as jurisdictions that have legalised same-sex marriage just this year!

Review 2012

Well what a year we’ve had! There has been the most expensive Presidential Election of any country ever, Greece has gone from bad to worse, the Arab Spring continues in Syria and here in Britain we entered into a double dip recession. Although I don’t feel that 2012 was the year of change that 2011 was, it will still go down as important in the history books. The shooting of a 15 year old girl by the Pakistani Taliban sparked outrage in the country. The attack could help to stop people joining the terrorist organisation! The Palestinian-Israeli conflict took a turn for the worse after Israel killed one of Hamas’ leaders and Israel was furious when Palestine had its status upgraded in the UN.

The year saw a change of leadership in China and France and Greece choose a new government for its sinking economy. It was confirmed that in 2013 the EU will get a new member, Croatia, whilst the Eurozone crisis continued to rattle on.  

The year ahead of us will be the sixth since the economic crisis began and still there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Predictions are that the Eurozone economy has shrunk by a small amount in the past year, the same is true for Britain. What stopped the crisis that began in 2007 being worse than the 1929 crash was the economies of the developing nations, particularly Brazil, China and India. Unfortunately their economies are beginning to slow down, China has stopped producing double digit growth for the first time in a decade and India and Brazil are below 5%. Although European countries would kill for growth figures like those, the world economy depends on them being very high. The US has just fallen off the fiscal cliff (although a deal should be one the way) and Europe’s economy is expected to shrink again this year, if the developing nations’ economies do start to slow this could have cataclysmic knock on effects.

We are living in a time of change, what happens over the next year could prove very important in the long run.  

French Elections

It was a victory for the left in France this year with Franҫois Hollande winning the presidency and his party, the Socialist Party, did well in parliamentary elections. This left Nicholas Sarkozy to be the first President of France to lose their re-election bid in 30 years. The third candidate to make a big splash during the election was Marine LePen, the candidate for the National Front. The National Front is a far-right party, probably similar to the BNP here in the UK.

The Victorious Franҫois Hollande
Source: telegraph.co.uk

Presidential Election:

First Round:

Hollande (Socialist Party): 28.53%

Sarkozy (Union for a Popular Movement): 27.18%

LePen (National Front) 17.90%
Mélenchon (Left Front) 11.10%

Second Round:

Hollane: 51.64%

Sarkozy: 48.36%

Parliamentary Elections:

Socialist Party: 280 seats and 40.91% of the vote, a net increase of 94 seats

Union for a Popular Movement: 194 seats and 37.95% of the vote, a net decrease of 119 seats

The election came as a relief to many on the left throughout Europe. Many Europeans are fed up with the austerity induced recessions and the economic gloom that began five years ago. The left has largely been out of power throughout Europe since the financial crash.  Many Europeans would point to America which rejected austerity in favour of stimulus and is growing steadily and its economy is above its pre-crisis level. (At the time of writing I do not know if America has gone over the ‘fiscal cliff’). Hollande promised a super tax for the wealthy – 75% on incomes over €1 million – a lowering of the retirement age to 60 and the recreation of 60,000 public education jobs cut under Sarkozy. He also promised to give immigrants the right to vote after five years of legal residence and grant adoption and marriage rights to gay couples. This differed greatly from Sarkozy who outright opposed Hollande’s plans for gays and immigrants. In his first term Sarkozy had reformed universities and the retirement age, he had also significantly cut public sector employment. In a second term he promised to reduce immigration by 50% and threatened to leave the Schengen Area if certain demands were not met.  

One of the most notable figures in the election was the far-right Marine LePen, leader of the National Front. She tried to avoid some of the seriously extreme views her party had previously had by being less visibly xenophobic and anti-semetic. Some people have compared trying to change the BNP to UKIP. Nonetheless her views are still extreme, she believes that French citizens should get preferences jobs and services, in 19^th century protectionism, withdrawing from the Euro and EU as well as reducing legal immigration by 95% and re-instating the death penalty! I’m sad to say that she managed to get almost 18% of the vote in the first round. I believe her rise is mostly because of the economic crisis. As history shows us, in times of economic desperation people lurch to the extremes, just look at Germany circa 1929. 

No Deal on EU Budget!

European leaders failed to reach an agreement on the EU budget as tensions flared over whether to increase or cut the budget. Originally the European Commission wanted an increase in the budget to €1025 billion, David Cameron was less than pleased with this as he wanted a cut to €825 billion. This did not bode well for Cameron who, when it comes to EU proposals, tends to struggle to find allies. Yet on this occasion he may have found some friends, the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland are all firmly on the British side and Germany is sympathetic to the British viewpoint. Incidentally all of them contribute more than they get. Under this pressure, Herman Van Rompuy, the President of the European Council offered a new budget of €973 billion, still above what Cameron had hoped for.

The debate over the EU budget focused on a number of areas, spending on developing poorer areas of the EU seemed to be largely a non-issue and an agreement seemed closer on the issue of the farm subsidies. The lack of progress on cutting EU administration costs angered Cameron the most, although cutting the sky-high pay of some ‘eurocrats’ would make no meaningful dent in the budget, for Cameron it is important symbolism: European taxpayers should not have to suffer austerity at home whilst paying for ridiculously high EU civil servants’ pay. Britain’s rebate was not brought up, which is surprising considering the strong feelings of certain leaders. It could prove to be a flash point in the next round of debates as France’s President, Francois Hollande, is determined to have it reduced whilst David Cameron says that the rebate is non-negotiable.

A deal will be difficult to formulate as a budget needs to be approved by all 27 member states, with the wide range of opinions this will not be easy. David Cameron is under immense pressure back home, with Conservative backbenchers demanding a cut or a rebellion. They could succeed if Labour also opposes the budget proposal, at the moment Labour seems intent on opposing whatever the government suggests.  Yet blocking a budget could produce more problems that it would solve. The nature of EU budgets is that if a budget is not agreed then the old budget would roll on, with added spending. The results would be the budget rising even higher than what the EU Commission asked for in their original proposal. An agreement must be reached or the UK will much more than it wants. 

The New World Order

Between the Age of Discovery in the 15^th century and World War Two, European nations ruled the world, both directly and indirectly. The colonial Empires of Spain and Portugal dominating in the early years of Empire, but they were eventually leapfrogged by the French and British Empires, and to a lesser extent the Dutch Empire. Russia, Germany, Austria and Italy also played an important role, especially in the later years. By the time the 20^th century dawned the world was changing, Japan and the US were emerging powers and Germany was threatening the balance of power within Europe itself. The two World Wars that followed devastated Europe, both economically and politically, immediately after WWII the empires of France and Britain fell apart and the UK handed superpower status to the USSR and USA. Yet Europe was far from unimportant, the USSR was a European country after all, and Germany, France and Britain still commanded significant influence. But with the fall of the USSR in the early 1990s, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful and important nation was not a European one, rather the USA.

So I think I’ve made my point, countries rise and fall and everyone has to adapt to the new world order brought about every century or so. Although Europe is still far from unimportant, of the top 20 economies, nine are European and of the five countries with a veto on the UN Security Council, three are European.

The Question is where is the world heading? Who will be the new countries on the scene, which nations will challenge western power?

The truth is nobody really knows, but there are certainly contenders. Over the next few days I will write about countries I believe could take the mantle of power from the West. The big debate surrounds whether China will eventually best the USA or will another country be the one to overtake America?

The following are the countries I believe have a chance of besting the west:

1.       China – the favourite to become the next superpower

2.       India – A rising nation with a population set to become bigger than China

3.       Brazil – the big boy of the South American economies

4.       Mexico – the rising star that may not be if drug lords have their way

5.       Indonesia – the island nation could be a surprise winner

6.       Africa – as a continent it will not take power any time soon – but its day will surely come 

New World Order Countries in red

G8 Summit Crucial in Greek Crisis

The G8 meet in Camp David, Maryland, United States today. The group represents the eight most powerful industrialised nations; Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and United States as well as a representative from the EU. Also attending some of the G8 meetings are Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa. The main focus of the meeting will be is the world’s 35^th largest economy: Greece. Obama (who is President of the G8 this year) is urging European leaders to come to an agreement to try and sort out Europe’s failing economy. Obama believes that what happens in Europe is extraordinarily important.

The G8 summit is the first meeting between Obama and Hollande, both presidents are advocates of stimulus to try and create jobs and boost economic growth. Obama calls for the focus in Europe to move away from austerity and towards the stimulus, the Eurozone is a huge trading partner for the United States and any serious trouble would throw America’s recovery off course. Obama has called on a stimulus specifically for Greece, but America will not provide a cent of this money; he believes the Germans must pay for this. Hollande and Obama are hoping that they will be able to persuade Merkel and the Germans to re-orientate Europe away from austerity.

Although Greece and the Eurozone’s woes will be the main focus of the meeting also on the table are the likes of Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the possibility of releasing oil reserves to keep the price of petrol down. Despite this there is no doubt that Greece will dominate the talks.

G8 Countries in Dark Green (EU in light green)
courtesy of wikipedia

French and Greek Elections

Elections in Greece and France have rocked Europe today, the markets turned down as the news of a socialist president in France came in. In Greece the majority of people voted for anti-austerity parties, yet the pro-austerity party New Democracy managed to come in first. Although New Democracy came first, they did not win a majority of seats so attempted to form a coalition but was unable to. As a result it is now up to the party that came second, the “Coalition of the left” to try and form a coalition. If no party is able to form a coalition then the Greeks will have to vote again.

The Golden Dawn Logo is
very close to the Swastika

What was more worrying in the Greek elections was the rise of the neo-Nazi party, Golden Dawn which got 7% of the vote. Golden Dawn opposes the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution and supports Hellenism and Greek Orthodoxy. This bizarre party is entirely legitimate and not a comedy party as you might hope. They genuinely oppose science, modern medicine and anything remotely modern, I do believe these people are beyond reasonable discussion and I hope their rise does not go beyond 7%.

Back in France Hollande has promised Europe and alternative to austerity and that there is hope for growth and restoration of Europe’s battered economy. Despite having a radically different viewpoint to Merkel they have both stressed the importance of the Franco-German relationship and that it will always remain amicable.  Most people do believe that even though Hollande and Merkel have difference opinions they will try and work together, after all both people only want to keep the Eurozone strong and continue with the European project… They just have very different views of how to get there.

The new face of France...
and Europe?

A Hollande Europe?

Hollande is likely to become France’s next President after Sunday, but wider implications could a socialists rise to power have on Europe, particularly the Eurozone countries. The Dutch government has already fallen, the Spanish government is experiencing serious protests and Greece is approaching elections.

So what does Hollande have to offer to a Europe still in crisis? Most importantly he offers an alternative to fiscal austerity; he says that he will re-orientate the European economy to growth and jobs (much like what the Labour Party advocates here as well as an Obama-style stimulus) and away from harsh, growth killing budget cuts. Although he disagrees with Merkel and other north-European leaders on the policy of austerity he does believe firmly in fiscal responsibility and the Euro project. The key difference on fiscal responsibility is that Hollande believes that it should come later, that the European economy is already on a path to recovery before the government reigns necessary spending.

The centre-right currently have control over the vast majority of the European Union, they have failed epically to deal with the financial crisis. One important part of Hollande’s vision for Europe is stimulus, which is funded by borrowing. This poses one major problem; the Mediterranean countries cannot borrow at a cheap rate and would be unfeasible for them to do so. On the other hand, north European countries such as Germany and Finland have low interest rates and can borrow cheaply. I find it difficult to imagine the Germans borrowing more money to facilitate a Greek stimulus; it would be political suicide for Merkel. So although the vision of growth would be perfect for northern Europe, it would still leave the question of what to do with the Mediterranean countries and Ireland. Hollande will need to think about this if he is to solve Europe’s difficulties!

Sarkozy Set to Lose

The exit polls from the French Presidential election show Sarkozy losing the first round by one percentage point. Coming out on top is his socialist rival, François Hollande.

François Hollande

For weeks opinion polls had predicted that the first round of voting would be close between Hollande and Sarkozy, with Hollande being just slightly ahead of the incumbent President. Sarkozy's followers believe that, because the men came so close in the first round that Sarkozy could manage to win in two weeks time when the French go to the polls again. But it is also important to note that as well as predicting a tight win for Hollande in the first round, they also predicted Hollande trouncing Sarkozy in the second round of voting.

What is most surprising about the race is the amount of the vote that the far right candidate, Marine Le Pen, attracted. She managed to get almost 20% of the vote (nearly one in five French voters), this progress made by the far-right in France is extremely worrying. So why have the French voted en masse for a far-right candidate? Some of her policies are quite appealing to many French people for one, she has been anti-globalisation, which is also a characteristic claimed by Hollande, she also has managed to tap into the fear that many French people have that French culture and heritage is being eroded by immigration and European integration. France is one of Europe's, and the world's, oldest countries having existed in some form since around the 5th/6th centuries and French people are very proud of their heritage and identity. I really hope that when people voted for Le Pen they forgot that at the heart she is racist. For you cannot be far-right and non-racist, it isn't possible. Since the 2007/8 economic collapse and subsequent recession far-right groups have made significant progress across Europe, in Germany I have written about the rise of the Immortals and other far-right groups. The far-right is also gaining in debt-stricken Greece and the Norway massacres shocking the country to its core. With recovery on the horizon it is possible that the rise of the far-right will be quelled and the fears of a pre-WWII Europe will be gone.

The likely outgoing
Nicolas Sarkozy 

Despite the rise of the far-right, it looks like France will have its first socialist president in 17 years. Electing a socialist president will be a game-changing on the French, European and world stage. Hollande will challenge the cuts that Sarkozy, Merkel and Cameron have been supporting and will probably look towards an Obama stimulus package for growth. If he wins I wish him good luck, I hope he wins as we need some left-wing views on the European stage.

South East France on Terror Alert

Just hours after a horrifying attack at a Jewish school in Toulouse, the whole region has been put on the highest level of terror alert possible. The reason for the high alert level is because the gun used to kill three children and a rabbi was the same gun involved in the murder of three French soldiers in two separate incidents last week. The authorities believe him to be an ex-army officer who was discharged recently due to links with the far right. Authorities believe his next attack may occur on Friday, as each of the attacks occur four days after the previous one, let’s hope it’s just coincidence and he carries out no more shootings.

The attacks come nine months since the terrifying killing of 77 people in Norway by Anders Breivik, the right wing extremist; this displays a worrying trend to me. Europe prides itself in tolerance when compared with other continents, but tolerance is slowly being ebbed away. Over the past decade, there has been an increase in racist talk and even racist laws, the banning of the face veil in France and the ban on building minarets in Switzerland are very dangerous to European culture. Although the vast majority of people who voted for these laws would oppose the ideology of these men, these laws legitimise their attacks in a way. The murderers see a general move in society to be anti-immigrant from this they convince themselves that this means that society would support the ideas and so carry out these attacks. I understand if my argument lacks logic, but that’s the point, find me a right-wing extremist whose logic makes sense and I’ll find you a pig that can fly.

We must tackle racism head on in Europe and not allow racist people dictate policy to the majority of people who are good, decent and tolerant.

Empires Today

In 1997 the British handed Hong Kong back to Chinese, with a population of around 5 million this was the last major colony of any country. But the old colonial empires are not totally gone, their remnants still exist and although they are small, they do have major benefits for the countries that own them. Officially the only countries which still have empires are France and the UK, the USA also has areas similar to an Empire, but is not considered to be so. The UK has territories in the Mediterranean, Caribbean, Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans. These are mostly small islands with relatively small populations; the total population of all 17 is around 510,000 people. The benefit for the UK is not the people, but the location, being scattered across the globe means the UK can place military bases around the world. Akrotiri and Dhekeli and the creatively named British Indian Ocean Territory are mostly military bases. By nature of them being islands they significantly increase the size of the UK’s EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone), this is the area over which a state has special rights on exploration or the use of marine resources and extends up to 200 nautical miles from the coast. The UK has 6.8 million km² of EEZ, mainly thanks to the overseas territories. This means that any oil found in that area would benefit the UK greatly.

France also benefits significantly from the remnants of the era of Empires although the system through which France governs them is more complicated than the UK. Contrary to what most people believe, parts of France are outside of Europe, such as French Guiana in South America. These are actually part of France in the same way that Paris and Marseilles are. France also has territories which are not part of France and she governs them similar to hoe the UK governs her overseas territories. France experiences significant benefits just like the UK from its overseas territories such as the ability to put military bases in any ocean and benefits from a huge EEZ, the second largest in the world!

Other countries have remnants of their colonial empires, parts of the Netherlands are in the Caribbean and Portugal owns a number of Atlantic islands. Norway controls a small island in the south Atlantic called Bouvet Island, Denmark controls Greenland and the Faroe Islands and Spain owns a few Atlantic islands. Even the USA owns a few islands in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean. All these countries benefit significantly from the control of overseas territories. This scattering of islands owned by the west on every continent and in every ocean gives the west an advantage that the east will never be able to get. China and India will only be able to place military bases where they please if they harbour good relations with other countries.

The age of empires is long gone, but the legacy of that era still influences the world today. 

Nuclear Weapons

Since 1945, when America destroyed two Japanese cities, nuclear weapons have been central to negotiations between west and east. When the Cold War ended in the early 1990s, helped by the breakup of the USSR and Warsaw Pact, the amount of nuclear warheads has subsequently decreased significantly. To understand the place of nuclear weapons in the modern world we need to know which countries have nuclear weapons and which countries want them.

The five permanent UN Security Council members have their own weapons which they control independently (China, France, Russia, UK, USA) and are members of the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty). Non-NPT members who have declared that they have weapons are India, Pakistan and North Korea. Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey have a nuclear sharing programme organised through NATO. Israel is known to have nuclear weapons, but refuses to declare this. There is strong evidence that Iran is attempting to get nuclear weapons but she denies this.

There have always been campaigns against nuclear weapons, especially in the west through CND and other anti-Nuclear organisations. The reason why the west has nuclear weapons is as a deterrent against aggressive regimes such as Iran and North Korea. I believe that all the signatories of the NPT and the non-signatories Pakistan and India would not fire weapons at a country, provoked or un-provoked. I cannot say the same for Iran and North Korea, they are rogue nations which appear to want to destroy other countries without thought for the consequences. Iran is particularly dangerous as it has promised that if Iran gets nuclear weapons it will obliterate Israel. Also, due to the religious beliefs of many Iranians, they may not mind if firing nuclear weapons at Israel results in the death of half their population after a retaliatory attack. This is very dangerous for our world and the NWS (Nuclear Weapon States) must keep their weapons as a deterrent against Iran and North Korea. Not only do nuclear weapons dissuade other countries from firing or getting them, it also dissuades them from attacking or invading other countries unprovoked and because of this nuclear warheads can be said to be helping to maintain world peace.

I believe that no nation should have nuclear warheads but in an imperfect world, the west would not be safe without them.

Light blue - NWS & NPT
Dark blue - Nuclear sharing (NATO)
Red - Declared NWS non-NPT
Black - suspected of attempting to get weapons
Yellow - Got weapons but does not declare
Green - ex-nuclear weapon states