Shaking Hands

On January 8, 2011, Somalia took another leap backwards.

In Mogadishu, Somalia's capital, militants associated with Al Qaeda decided to ban unrelated men and women from shaking hands, speaking, or walking together in public. Violators of this newly implemented policy could be imprisoned, whipped, and in some cases, executed. Residents of Mogadishu feel victimized and have discovered a newfound fear of communication in general. One man said, "I've started ignoring the greetings of the women I know to avoid punishment...I feel like I'm under arrest."

However, it's unfortunate, yet true, that this recent law is not nearly as detrimental as many of the others. The insurgents have essentially banned women from working in public, forcing them to either sell goods in the marketplace to make money (which is illegal, and punishable by execution), or to remain at home to watch their children starve. Furthermore, some Al Qaeda-linked gunmen roam the streets and buses, searching solely for improperly dressed women, or women travelling alone, just to find easy targets of violence. The clothing that the Islamists require of the women is not only uncomfortably modest, but expensive as well; many women must stay at home to avoid being seen without the robes.

The Islamists have also banned the cinema, music, and bras because they are “un-Islamic.” They now also insist that men grow their beards, but shave their mustaches. These unnecessary and unethical restrictions on human rights, freedom of speech, and equality are pushing Somalia further towards complete destruction. African Union peacekeepers and the UN must rethink their strategies and act quickly, before Al Shabab and Al Qaeda take over the entire nation.

Mahbubani and Judt

                In the article, “The Case Against the West,” Mahbubani focuses on the decline of the American influence and the rise of the rest of the world. Similarly, Tony Judt in his article, “What Have we Learned, if Anything?” criticizes America’s actions throughout the twentieth century and asserts that the United States must reexamine its past in order to continue its reign as a global power. I tend to agree more with the latter, as Judt’s argument seems much more rational, and much more well-presented than Mahbubani’s article.

                Mahbibani’s article appears to be more of a rant than a thoughtful argument to me. He does provide valid points about the hypocrisy of the United States regarding Iran and North Korea, as well as the United States approach to the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), but his assertion that the west is ignorant of the rise of Asia and unwilling to accept their economic improvement is misleading, if not blatantly false. The United States’ relationship with China is peaceful, more peaceful than it has been in many years, and I don’t see how this is a bad thing. Peace between China and the United States is essential for the development of the rest of the globe. The United States economy depends on the Chinese economy, and the Chinese economy depends on the United States economy. As two dominant global powers, it is necessary that they remain on good terms to preserve (what’s left of) world peace. Mahbubani seems to almost suggest that we should sever our relationship with China and the rest of Asia, and completely remove ourselves from the global scene in general.

                Judt, on the other hand, emphasizes that the United States must turn to the twentieth century for guidance regarding future decisions. This seems to be much more logical. Judt talks about how Americans do not fully comprehend war and how they will willingly go into war as a first choice, rather than a last resort. Though the assertion that Americans do not comprehend war makes perfect sense to me, I do not believe it is necessarily the fault of the United States that they have not experienced a ridiculous number of casualities in the two world wars. However, this argument is still valid and I Do agree that we need to pay more attention to the events of the twentieth century, especially our involvement in Iraq and the Middle East.  

                Overall, I tend to agree more with Judt than Mahbbubani.