Moves (Page 26)

According to Jewish estimates, the amount of help reaching Gaza has fallen to a low in 11 months. And the kidnapping, by an military Arab group, of a fleet of 109 cars on November 16 has exacerbated the situation. Food costs are rising, and it is thought that Hamas soldiers are currently battling Israeli troops in some areas of the area.

Israel’s leadership, led by former US president Joe Biden, has consistently supported Israel in its political and military operations against Hezbollah, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and of course Israel’s hostile attacks against Iran. But all the while Biden has urged restraint.

After the worst murder of Jews since the Holocaust, Israel has the right to support itself, according to Biden, who addressed the G20 this year.

The US’s position on Israel is likely to change, based on the initial consultations made by President-elect Donald Trump to his foreign policy group.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Trump’s choice for Israeli adviser, has long been associated with the Christian christian right, which fervently opposes Israeli control of the West Bank.

Huckabee made his position apparent in a 2017 interview with CNN, saying:” There is no such thing as a West Bank. It’s Judea and Samaria]the republic’s bible name]. There’s no such item as a lawsuit. They’re areas, they’re districts, they’re cities. There’s no such item as an job”.

Democratic senator Marco Rubio, the man who would be the secretary of state, has publicly opposed a peace in Gaza. He just stated to reporters that he wanted Israel to “destroy every aspect of Hamas they could get their hands on.” These individuals committed vile acts.

A month out from the election, on October 5, Biden appeared at a White House press briefing and commented on speculation that Netanyahu’s apparent unwillingness to agree a ceasefire was motivated by US politics:” Whether he’s trying to influence the election, I do n’t know– but I’m not counting on that”, he said, adding that:” No administration has helped Israel more than I have. Nothing, none, none”, he said. ” And I think]Netanyahu] may consider that”.

Netanyahu must accept that the election results and Trump’s choice of steadfast supporters of his government as confirmation of a strategy that, at least today, has Israel in ascendancy. Israel’s unpleasant in northwestern Gaza shows no sign of slowing.

A new motivation for the ongoing defense activity appears to be emerging as more and more people are being forced southward.

Stress from the appropriate

Some political right-wingers, including members of Netanyahu’s administration, are currently calling for Jewish settlers to retake control of the northern Gaza Strip. These colonists see the Gaza Strip evacuation of 2005 as a “hillul hashem,” a blasphemy against God, as opposed to a tactical error.

Many now believe a similar style may be repeated in at least the northern half of the Gaza Strip as its 2 million Arab residents are squeezed even more into a shrinking space, just as IDF outposts in the West Bank have frequently been used as settlement building sites.

For the two most notable Catholic Zionists in Netanyahu’s state, Interior Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, the vote of Trump is the product that will keep on giving. Full conquest of what they refer to as” Judea and Samaria” is still a celebration for them and their power base if the long-awaited prophecy time is to be ushered in and their perception of Zionism realized.

Regardless of the wider repercussions Israel’s state to be both Jewish and democratic, Smotrich and Ben Gvir believe they have the global support to accomplish this.

Full conquest, according to the majority of observers, would effectively declare Israel an apartheid state unless all Palestinians received full citizenship and political rights. This is doubtful.

Netanyahu’s equations

Netanyahu knows this. However, he is no longer so dependent on Smotrich and Ben-Gvir because of the dynamic nature of his local elections. He now has a wider base of support thanks to the addition of a little bloc to his alliance under Gideon Sa’ar.

His approval rating has also increased significantly since Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in response to Hezbollah, according to recent elections. Netanyahu appears to be in an unafraid status despite a new boost in his ballot scores and a divided opposition.

He is also aware that Trump was elected as a transactional leader with a goal of reducing US involvement in international conflicts. Netanyahu is also aware that Trump’s first administration’s efforts to normalize relationships with Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries have been undermined by the Gaza issue, at least for the time being.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has conditioned any measures being taken by the Israeli state and its alliance, the US, toward Israeli sovereignty by calling Israel’s military activities in Gaza a murderous.

Netanyahu may be aware that any change in that direction had fracther his coalition. He will also have a suspicion that Trump did try to use their own political influence to pressure Saudi Arabia and other Gulf kingdoms.

Reading Trump’s purposes is not for the uninitiated. Even so, Netanyahu did believe that the approaching US president will likely grant him political joy to come to an end to his wars. Many, of course, remains questionable. The Palestinians, however, will continue to bear the most of the load.

They can anticipate little assistance from the Arab globe, despite the fact that they lack effective management in Gaza or the West Bank. They now face a victory-seeking Jewish leading and the possibility of a US leader who will help him in every way.

Clive Jones is professor of local stability, Durham University

The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.

Continue Reading

In 2019, Naksungdae scholar and former Seoul National University doctor Rhee Young-hoon published Anti-Japan Tribalism. The book’s argument is that South Korea should examine its colonial past more nuancedly under Chinese rule. Hatred for Japan, Professor Rhee and his co-authors argue, is not a ideal foundation on which to build the modern, democratic state of South Korea.

We regret noting a phenomenon like this in recent studies about the existence of cruel South Koreans. We are uneasy about the accusations made by some North Korean women that South Korea is a “patriarchy,” because they appear to reflect a novel form of politics, which blinds both inside and outside the Korean coast to the difficulty of South Korea.

One of us, Morgan, spent a month in Gyeongsangbuk-do, in southeast South Korea, some twenty years ago. While that, he met some strong, smart, independent people. He had opened discussions with them about their opinions on any number of items, from politics and religion to history, culture, and social problems. He never understood that those people were the subjects of any sexism. To the contrary, many of the people Morgan met in Gyeongsangbuk-do and throughout South Korea were welcoming, helpful, and style. Many of them were interested in serving women’s requirements. Some were a little quiet. No one in his memory has ever had bad opinions of people as individuals. South Korea as a “patriarchy” does not match with any of Morgan’s activities in or with that state.

The other of us, Yoshida, has lived and worked in South Korea for over a century, spending the past four decades as a blogger covering the government’s social relationships, among other subjects. He has firsthand knowledge of the raging gender divide that he witnessed during the Moon Jae-in administration ( 2017-20 ) and how tensions have evolved as a result. Although anti-feminist activities have gained popularity among young Vietnamese men and gender-motivated crimes against women, these styles do not apply to all men. Also, he believes that people with radical ideologies—whether rooted in sexism or misandry—exist within both genders but make up just a small fraction of the entire North Korean people. In summary, neither of us agree with the statements made in aggressive hit articles about South Korea.

The proof given above is subjective, but much more reliable empirical data and much bigger trends verify our knowing. For instance, South Korea has gained notoriety for child bands due to their graceful dance moves and love of makeup and hairstyles, among other things. Additionally, South Korea is currently experiencing a boom in professional sports, or “women’s professional sports.” Moreover, South Korea’s demographics, in certain its low fertility, would seem to indicate that ladies control decisions about friendship with men. The “incel” sensation, although also, however, often associated with South Korean community, also hints clearly at sexual autonomy. The fact that North Korean women appear free to make such decisions does not support South Korea’s existence as a sexism in which people are ruled, even if it is claimed that North Korean women usually find them impractical as intimate partners. If anything, the “pro-natalist” laws which some in South Korea condemn as evidence of sexism are tacit admittance of feminine freedom. ( It is also jarring that those who criticize such policies seem to forget that men also of course fall under such policies ‘ purview, reproductive-biologically speaking. )

There is another, albeit indirect, discussion against the cost of sexism. Specifically, the universal military service condition in South Korea, which, far from being really common, applies only to able-bodied people. An army of mainly young males, mostly from a angry, nuclear-armed state with a propensity for foolish ICBM launches and global terrorism, stands along the border with the accusations of sexism. We make no suggestion at all that women may be forced to join the military alongside people. But in saying this, we do not think that we perpetuate a sexism. In addition, we think that the men who guard the South Korean border actually do their duty because they are n’t trying to subjugate South Korean women. To put it simply, if South Korea is a sexism, one would never know it if the lives of female soldiers and sailors were comparatively unharmed.

South Korea may never have always had the same level of progress as it does now. Before the Republic of Korea was established, the yangban class of aristcratic literati kept other women as virtual sex slaves, including kisaeng ( courtesans akin to Japanese geisha ). American service members were given comfort women by the Korean authorities, which was a state-run trafficking practice during the Korean War, which suffered horribly for the ladies. Even now, some people are still living in the vicinity of British military installations.

However, Park Geun-hye, Park Chung-hee’s daughter, is still the only adult leader in East Asia to have been elected president. It is correct that President Park Geun-hye was removed from office by female lawyers. She was not, however, the first North Korean leader to face legal repression after taking business. In facing a severe post-presidential death, Park joined a portfolio of different fell rulers, all of them males. And the latest president, Yoon Seok-yeol, is beset with difficulties caused by none other than the First Lady, his wife. Apart from the typical cutthroat politics that may befall every would-be ruler, whether male or female, South Korea seems to be filled with optimistic people who face much resistance or discrimination in the exercise of power.

We hope that the portrait of South Korea that the expanding 4B global movement may paint is much more complex in the details provided above. We believe that South Korea, which has worked hard to join the rates of contemporary governments, is disregarded and unfairly treated when compared to this extraordinary and compressing philosophy. We also believe that it violates cultural richness in an excessive way because it will never be true that all X are Y in any society. Human life is noisy, human knowledge is varied, and each individual lives his or her career as an entity, not as a copy in a flock. Instead of indicting whole nations for the actions of a terrible few, we should treat people as like.

Or more than a few. Well, in recent North Korean actions have been outrageously disrespectful to women’s dignity. We aspire that the government may learn who the crimes against women are committed and to put all possible punishment on those who violate the law. We also hope that commentators wo n’t make South Korea’s reputation look bad by insisting that such reprobates represent the entire country. They are n’t. Additionally, all South Asian women are represented by those who accuse all South Korean people of sexism.

North Korean culture is complicated. It and its citizens deserve to be treated with dignity and not to be subjected to widespread condemnation. Politics, whether democratic or sex, does not do justice to a position as rich and vibrant as modern-day South Korea.

Jason Morgan, a researcher and writer based in Chiba, Japan, is co-author of The Comfort Women Hoax: A Fake Memoir, North Korean Scouts, and Strike Teams in the Academic Swamp.

For JAPAN Forward, Kenji Yoshida is an interact journalist in Seoul and a speaker.

Continue Reading

Many people around the world are confused about what Donald Trump might do in his second term and whether some of the threats he made about foreign policy will be realized as a result of his success in the US presidential election.

The president-elect has threatened to make a number of significant policy changes after in office.

One of the most important issues with foreign policy is how the Trump administration may approach ending the conflict in Ukraine, in the opinion of some. Trump claimed that he could halt the conflict in a day. Different nations on Russia’s edges are concerned that any agreement that ends in a victory could lead to ideas for further military brutality, according to Vladimir Putin.

Also, if Trump abandons the US’s traditional support for the self-governing area of Taiwan, it may enable China into an invasion. The island’s status as a separatist state and its inclusion in China are seen by Beijing. But generally, US assistance of Taiwan has been a component in China holding up.

Mao Zedong’s failure after the civil war prevented Xi Jinping from establishing his reputation as the one who brought China together. In recent years, the Chinese leader has increased the pressure on Taiwan, and there are clear indications that he wants to advance.

However, neither Xi nor Putin is ensure that Trump did follow his own advice. How’s why.

A training from match idea, the scientific study of cooperation and competition, may be appropriate here – in particular, the scenario referred to as the” chicken game” or the “hawk-dove” game, which provides a model of conflict between two actors.

Because it follows the same reasoning as 1950s and 1960s contests between American teenagers, it is known as the” chicken activity.” They may drive their vehicles at high speeds, and the first to veer off to avoid a collision that might turn dangerous would be called” meat” and lose the game.

We can use a payoff matrix ( see below ) to explain the logic of this game. The speculative payoffs that could be produced by person A and player B are shown in this table. In each pair of result, person B’s return from their combined behavior is given first, followed by person A’s.

A fall is the worst possible result for both people, so this pays a total of 0 for both. When player B swerves, player A should continue driving, with the payoffs visible in the top-right cell ( 1, 3 ). In the middle left body, player B experiences the same outcome. If both turn, the reward is 2 for each person.

Swerving is preferable to colliding, but the winner is the one who drives right at his or her backwards.

Nuclear punishment can be modelled using the hen game. In this situation, striking the player first before they can drive when they swerve is equivalent to striking them first. Needless to say, when both people launch attacks together, the result is a lot worse than the zero depicted in the structure.

The trick to winning the game is to persuade your rival to keep driving at all costs. For instance, some American teenagers would pretend to throw the steering wheel out of the car to warn their rival that they could not swerve in the middle of the road if they wanted to. This basically means that you must persuade your opponent to take that risk in order to win.

This is similar to what Trump does in some circumstances. He makes significant statements about what he will do, which might include what his rivals will do after they concede defeat.

Trump also has the advantage of unpredictability. The gap between what he says and does is significant, as Michael Wolff, the biographer of his first term in office, has detailed. Wolff said in an interview:” Donald Trump is deeply unpredictable, irrational, at times bordering on incoherent, self-obsessed in a disconcerting way, and displays all those kinds of traits that anyone would reasonably say: ‘ What’s going on here, is something wrong?'”

A couple of examples from Trump’s first term make the point that the president-elect often chooses moves that, historically, other US leaders have ruled out. Sometimes these moves are successful, in other cases, they are n’t.

In 2019, Trump made a historic visit to North Korea, the first US leader to do so. Trump made the suggestion that he was the only one who could bring about a new era of friendship between the countries at this meeting. However, he made a failed attempt to form a deal with North Korea and stop the country’s nuclear program. In this case, Trump’s unpredictability did not work.

However, his unpredictability provided another example of how the US had been longing for a solution. Trump aimed to “insult and alienate US allies” in his first term, attempting to stifle the NATO alliance.

And his threats to reduce US support helped him achieve his goal of persuading NATO member nations to increase their defense spending. He had hoped exactly that.

So, Trump’s unpredictability could be a deterrent to opponents such as Putin and Xi, as they do n’t know how he is likely to react, or when he might take offence. The US president has the potential to take this personally and even have an opinion against Putin if Trump rejects a peace agreement offered by Trump to Ukraine or accepts it after starting the war in his place.

Unpredictability and carelessness can pay off in conflict and negotiation situations, according to game theory. No one is yet to decide what Trump will do next, as a result.

Paul Whiteley is professor, Department of Government, University of Essex

The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading