The upcoming election does not just have the national economy and welfare at stake, but also America's standing abroad.

This was an article in the economists. It presents a very interesting argument regarding the role of foreign investments in the United States and why at times the United States feels threatened by these investments, which are growing very fast. The interesting thing is to note the paradox of the United States, the epitome of free-market capitalism. Protectionist policies do not lead to anywhere and as a free-market capitalist myself, in the  Milton Friedman tradition, i find the United States sporadic championing of  capitalism uncourageous!!!

Foreign investment

Though I had planned to continue my discussion of sex trafficking in San Francisco, a conversation I had earlier today with a friend inclined me to address a different topic. I expressed my confusion and frustration at the criticism Obama has been receiving with regards to his willingness to talk with our "enemies", specifically, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. It wasn't so much the attacks on Obama that offended me; rather, the seemingly closed-mindedness of thinking we're "punishing the enemy" by cutting off communication lines. Moreover, as history shows, former U.S. presidents, including Truman, Nixon, and Reagan, have engaged in dialogue with the enemy-- how is this time any different?

As I sat at the conference table waiting for the theorists to arrive, I tried to understand the causes for the Rwandan intervention into the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 1998. After some time passed I realized that no theorist was coming to confer their knowledge upon me, so I decided to seek them out myself. But before analyzing theories and dissecting Rwanda's intervention in the DRC in 1998 (Second Congolese War), one must note that there were preceding events during the 1996 intervention that triggered the second intervention. Rwanda intervened in the DRC in 1996 because it's newly empowered Tutsi regime realized that the DRC's leader, Mobutu Sese Seko, was in support of the Hutu refugees and ex-FAR/Interhamwe, groups who had perpetrated the 1994 genocide of Rwandan Tutsis (Curtis 3). With Mobutu's support and the foreign aid flowing into the Hutu refugee camps (from aid agencies and bureaucracies) located in the DRC the ex-FAR/ Interhamwe was regaining strength and re-organizing. The ex-FAR/ Interhamwe, with the encouragement of Mobutu and the Hutu government began a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Congolese Tutsi. The Rwandan forces then intervened in 1996 in support of the rebel Congolese Tutsi units. The Rwandan forces had many victories and eventually the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo/DRC (ADFL) was formed with the Rwandan forces, Congolese Tutsis, and anti-Mobutu groups in the DRC.  

The reluctance to question our support for Israel today is attributable to the features of "ethnic group capture," a phenomenon in foreign policy which peaks my own research interests. I have no personal stake in the Middle East conflict -- I am myself Jewish by birth, but I have no visceral connection to anyof the parties in question. My interests are not in who is "right" and who is "wrong" in the conflict, but why certain positions become policy. Below is an excerpt from a term paper I wrote on the topic: