AlandMizell.com

Islam is going to be the last giant to face Christians. In the few days since Donald Trump took office, he has signed quite a number of executive orders, some of which have caused heated debates. The current media and left wing buzz about President Trump’s executive order that he signed enacting a temporarily ban on entry into the USA of nationals from seven Muslims countries is normal. I don’t understand what all the buzz is about; he is just doing what he told his supporters he would do if he was elected President. There is no doubt that President Trump has declared war on Radical Islam, thereby demonstrating that his administration will shift America’s approach to terrorism. People should understand that President Trump’s order did not come from nowhere. President Obama ‘s approach to terrorism produced the ISIS and caused Americans to vote for Donald Trump out of disenchantment and frustration, and Muslims in the West have produced Donald Trump’s policies toward them.For years President Obama refused to properly address the threat of radical ideology by fighting against it. So the American people decided they wanted to have a tough leader who would call something by its name without being constrained by political correctness. Denying the problem will not solve the problem itself; the only way to solve the problem is to address it correctly. It is true that Islamic values and Western values clash with one another. This is not about hate toward Muslims nor producing hate or fear. We need to accept our differences before we agree on our commonalities; that is the problem. Donald Trump is not just temporarily restricting immigration from seven Muslims countries to the United States, but also he tells the public that Islam hates the West.  We are living in a world war against an ideological movement with many of its members committed to kill those who do not believe or share an ideology with them. Continue reading →

The past centuries of the Middle East domination of the Arabs, Persians, and Turks have been a major historical aberration. All aberrations end eventually. The Kurds have returned to center stage again. However, many Kurdish leaders do not understand this, or they do understand but because of their egos, selfishness, and mental maps, they have been trapped by their narrow-minded thinking and self-interests. Leaders as well as friends of the Kurds should realize that we are entering a completely different historical era. It is going to be an era where the Kurds will have their own state.The Kurds are always making some serious strategic mistakes in their dealing with each other. They have sometimes sacrificed long-term interests in favor of short-term objectives and their global interests in favor of self-concerns. And in the process, they have undermined a critical catalyst to their independence. The United States, Russia, China, or the EU will not create a new Kurdish state. To do so might be seen as making up for their imposing borders nearly a century ago, but the Kurds have to make their own decisions. Kurdistan’s peaceful emergence as it fights against ISIS, as the number one power is a modern geopolitical miracle. Great power transitions are accompanied by competition and conflict. The KRG has managed to establish workable state institutions, including an electoral system, institutions of local government, and an effective military in the Peshmerga. It is true those institutions are not perfect in terms of checks and balances, but which country is free from corruption? That is not to say that corruption should be allowed, absolutely not. It is to say that Kurdistan is ready. Continue reading →

There is no doubt this century will be different from the previous ones. If China plays its card correctly, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will be a critical catalyst for China’s future as well as the U.S.’s presence in the Pacific. It is true that China has a territorial dispute with almost all its Asian neighbors, and China’s growth is a big concern for these neighbors. If China does not make some strategic mistake in its dealings with the ASEAN, if is does not sacrifice its long-term interests in favor of short –term objectives and its global interest in favor of regional concerns, then China will gain the trust of its neighbors, and it will help China to rise peacefully in its global economic status. Otherwise, some of its neighbors will continue to doubt China’s intent and will seek security from other countries. There is no doubt that the peaceful rise of China as a world power after the United States is a great achievement.According to some of the studies, in 1980 its share of the global GDP in terms of purchasing power parity was 2 percent –-far less than the 22 percent the United States accounted for. China is now the world ‘s number one trading power and the world biggest exporter of manufactured goods. As such, China’s share has surpassed the United States’ position. However, a great power transition normally causes conflict and competition, like the example of the Middle East. Yet, so far China has emerged peacefully with no major wars breaking out to date. Continue reading →

According to a recent article in The Economist, foreign affairs are often “a zero-sum game in which global interests compete with national ones.” Our world, however, is not the world of a decade ago. We live in an unstable world, so matters are not so black and white. Different nationalities no longer sing together as in the Coca Cola ad, “I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.” The song of globalization has become muted. Our world is going through a new transformation and is striving to have a new world order and system. Every nation is competing for power, including the Philippines. President Dutterte understands the rise of world politics with discordant identity-based attitudes and with new ethnic nationalisms.With the rise of nationalism and racism, political leaders are now becoming the representatives of these attitudes. Defining President Duterte’s political vision, one widely acclaimed in the Philippines, is a civic nationalism and a corruption free campaign. This civic nationalism signals an energy that takes a more conciliatory position in calling for common ground and for structural changes in society and politics. Given the complex defeat of the war on drugs in the Philippines and now the broad political engagement, we see not an “exclusionary nationalism” that the article in The Economist speaks of, but rather an “encompassing discourse of nation.” Continue reading →

Americans chose their new President on Tuesday. When this article went to print, the voting process was not yet over. Regardless of whether Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hillary Clinton has been elected, the American leadership is in crisis and has been for a long time and especially in a very crucial time when our world faces so many challenges from terrorism, violence, poverty, injustice, wars in the Middle East, a resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the rise of China and Russia. Neither Presidential candidate is very different from each other in terms of qualification to take the leadership. Most Americans are averse both to Hillary Clinton and to Donald Trump as candidates to lead America. This is why the U.S. witnessed one of the most toxic campaigns in its history, unfortunately during this crucial time.The outcome of this election will have the most significant consequences of any election cycle in recent American history. With 70 percent of the American electorate disenchanted with the direction the country is moving, Americans are frustrated by their economic marginalization, by liberal trade deals and economic polices, by traditional political elites, by the role of American leadership around the world, and by liberal politics. For the American voters fear of immigration, terrorism, Obama‘s failed foreign policy, especially with the rise of Russian and Iranian influence in the Middle East, China’s growing power in Southeast Asia, economic disempowerment, and political disentrancement—all have accelerated under President Obama. Continue reading →

The Middle East is strategically important for the Western powers. The issue there was, and still it is, all about oil and the strategic influence to find new markets. Western powers continue to clash over who will obtain the oil and the accompanying strategic position and interest. The current wars in Syria and Iraq are undergird by a historical struggle over access to oil and gas, not in entirety about liberating people from authoritarian leaders such as Assad or about bringing democracy to the region.The history of the modern Middle East begins with the discovery of oil, and now the same Allied powers are trying to draw a new map of the region. After World War I and the ensuing fall of the Ottoman Empire, many Middle Eastern states were Western made: Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Prior to the Ottoman collapse these regions were divided into vilayets and had a fair amount of autonomy. It is difficult for Westerners, whose main exposure to information about the Middle East is through their own media, to have a clear understanding of what is transpiring in that region. Continue reading →