The United Arab Emirates

 

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is one of the most important nations in the Arab world. It is a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and exercises a considerable amount of influence not only on the Arabian Peninsula, but also in the Middle East as a whole. Its influential role, despite its relatively small size, is one of the most unique aspects of this country because it enjoys the confidence of other GCC member states as well as numerous others in the region. Its influence comes second only to that of Saudi Arabia, its biggest partner in the region, and this has ensured that it plays an important role.

One of the most significant strategic issues that affect the UAE in the region involves the growing influence that Iran has in the Middle East. Iran is a Shia Muslim state, and this is in contrast to the GCC countries which are essentially majority Sunni Muslim states. The contentious relationship between these two sects of Islam have been ongoing for centuries, but have ended up becoming more magnified in recent years. This is especially considering that a majority of Sunni nations consider Iranian influence to be a serious security threat to their own survival (Guzansky, 2015, p112). Iranian influence has also come close to home in Yemen, which is the southernmost country in the Arabian Peninsula. Another strategic issue for the UAE is that involving the growing influence of democratic as well as Islamic forces such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which tend to be anti-monarchist and seek to ensure the establishment of Islamic states following the abolition of monarchies in the region (Hedges and Cafiero, 2017, p.129). The third issue is that brought about by a situation where the UAE is faced with the need to stabilize the region through retaining the status quo rather than allowing unpredictable revolutions to take place.

When handling the issue of Iranian influence, the UAE, along with some of its allies in the GCC has taken military actions against the rebel groups in Yemen supported by Iran. The military capabilities of the UAE are among the best in the region and these have been utilized effectively to stifle Iranian, and by extension, Shia influence on the Arabian Peninsula. In addition, being one of the most powerful economies in the region because of its oil wealth has enabled the UAE to ensure that it is able to make use of its financial clout to influence some strategic events in the Middle East. Among these is that it is among the foremost backers of the counterrevolutionary forces in such countries as Egypt and Libya. In the latter, the UAE has been active participant in the funding and arming of General Khalifa Haftar to become the most powerful person in the country (Dorsey, 2017).

Finally, the need to stabilize the Middle East has led to a situation where the UAE is increasingly using its influence to prevent the exacerbation of the effects of the Arab Spring. This is especially in countries such as Egypt, as well as its actions in imposing sanctions on Qatar for sponsoring groups that it considers destabilizing, such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Pull-Push Migration Theory

 

Migration is the relocation of individuals from one place to another and it involves a situation where there is the spread of ideas, innovations, and behaviors. The reasons why individuals migrate are based on the push and pull factors, which essentially oblige individuals to move from their current place of residence to others. This is especially considering that these factors involve political, economic, environmental, or cultural ones, which inspire individuals to seek out better opportunities elsewhere. Push factors are situations that are essentially related to instances where individuals are forced to leave their homes, and these are often in relation to the countries from which these individuals migrate. Pull factors, on the other hand, involve the direct opposite of push factors because they are the conditions that attract individuals to certain locations. This paper will be making an analysis how the push-pull migration theory explains the movement from Europe to America in the 1600s.

Political

One of the most significant factors that involved the migration of Europeans to America in the 17^th century was political. This is important because it shows that some of these individuals were forced to migrate because of some push factors that made their lives in Europe unbearable. Among the most important of these was that those who migrated did so in order to avoid the religious persecution that they faced in their home countries. They sought to ensure that they lived in a manner that they believed was right for them rather than being forced to conform to the rules or religion that were imposed on them at home. In addition, migrants sought to make sure that they escaped the increasingly autocratic or absolutist forms of monarchies that had emerged in Europe following the Middle Ages. These had denied people a considerable number of their rights and had ended up making some of them to essentially become a people without basic rights and freedoms in their own lands (Campbell, 2015). Therefore, the move to America was a pull factor because it provided these individuals with an opportunity to start over in an environment that was far from the political and religious persecutions that they had encountered in their home countries. In this situation, the push and pull factors of migration worked hand in hand to mitigate increasingly unbearable political and religious situation in the migrants’ home countries which made their lives difficult. They instead provided these individuals with an opportunity to restart their lives away from their fears.

Economic

Changes that were occurring in the economy of Europe at the time also inspired some individuals to choose to migrate to America. The European economy was in transition from a feudal one to one that was based on capitalism, and these changes had led to a situation where a considerable number of people ended up not having employment opportunities. Despite many of them leaving the rural areas to cities in order to find jobs, their lives did not get any better and in fact, many of them experienced a considerable reduction in their quality of life. The bad life conditions ended up becoming the push factors that made them want to migrate to America, because this was considered a new and untamed land that could provide them with the opportunities that they missed in Europe. America functioned as a pull factor because the land itself was rich in natural resources, and it also inspired some individuals to believe that it was a place that had a lot of gold and other valuable metals that could make one instantly rich. Such dreams of swift wealth inspired individuals to want to leave Europe and this ensured that a lot of Europeans went to America in order to attain their ambitions (Kulikoff, 2014, p.9). The desire to have the same quality of life as the members of the nobility in Europe inspired a considerable number of individuals to migrate to America where they believed they would be able to make their dreams come true.

Environmental

Environmental factors also contributed to the migration of people from Europe to America in the 17^th century. During this period, most of the natural environment on the continent had essentially been destroyed because of the considerable population pressure. The remaining parts of the natural environment, especially forests and wildlife had been put into the private hands of the nobility and this was to such an extent that if anyone outside of this class was caught hunting in these private preserves, they would be severely punished. The severe depletion of natural resources because of the massive population that had developed, as well as the numerous conflicts that took place on the continent ensured that individuals had a push factor to migrate. The push factor, on the other hand, was the vast and untouched forests and wildlife that could be found in America. These were able to attract individuals because in the colonies that had been established in the Americas, they were free to make sure that they hunted as much as they wanted while at the same time having access to such resources as timber that they could make use of without having to obtain the permission of the local lord (McCusker & Menard, 2014, p.314). American promised to have a capacity to support those individuals who were willing to migrate from Europe; meaning that they were inspired to move away from their home nations because the desire to take advantage of the massive space promised by America.

Conclusion

The push-pull migration theory is extremely pertinent in explaining the reasons behind why individuals sought to migrate from Europe to America in the 1600s. This theory is important because it shows the various factors, including environmental, cultural, political, and economic factors that influenced these individuals to want to move from their homelands to a new place that was completely unknown. Therefore, the diversity of factors that are involved in the push-pull migration theory have shown the manner through which Europeans ended up seeking to enhance the quality of their lives through moving to America; a place that had attributes that they could no longer find in Europe.

Economic Policies and How they Work

 

In most developing countries, there are three main models of economic growth that have been implemented in varying levels. Among these are import-substitution industrialization (ISI), structural adjustment programs (SAPs), and the developmental state. These economic policies differ in a diverse number of ways, and this is especially in the manner through which they are implemented. ISI involves countries seeking to ensure that there is the imposition of import restrictions in order to bring about the promotion and protection of domestic industries. This economic policy aims at making sure that there is the establishment of measures aimed at advancing domestic consumption of locally made goods and services. SAPs, on the other hand, essentially promote a liberal economic policy in which governments are not directly involved in any economic activities and the economy is left in the hands of the free market (Orvis and Drogus 532). The free market ensures that only the strongest and most viable industries are able to survive while the weaker ones, because of the competition from international businesses, are forced towards improving their performance to ensure their survival. The developmental state is a situation where the government makes a direct intervention in those industries that it considers critical to the economy. It ensures that these industries are protected to further their growth, but take the necessary steps to remove the protective measures as soon as possible.

The developmental state has been the most successful economic model because it involves government support for industries until such a time that they are ready to stand on their own feet. This model is fundamentally important because it ensures that the economy has the necessary freedoms it needs to compete with others while at the same time allowing individuals to undertake their business activities without government interference. The implementation of this policy has especially been successful in Japan and South Korea, both of which rose from the economic devastation of the Second World War to become among the greatest success stories of the twentieth century. Both of these countries, especially the latter adopted export oriented policies, which sought to encourage the growth of local industries that were able to produce high demand goods that could be exported to other countries. A consequence is that the countries that have adopted the developmental state model have been successful in the achievement of rapid economic growth to such an extent that it has become possible for them to achieve the status of developed states. Thus, while South Korea and Ghana were essentially at the same economic level in the 1960s, the former has been able to achieve a per capita gross domestic income of $22,670 in comparison to the latter’s $1550 today (Orvis and Drogus 536). This achievement by South Korea shows the considerable success that can be brought about by the developmental state model as well as the need to balance between government intervention and the free market. Without the interventions undertaken in the developmental state model, the system becomes highly unstable to such an extent that critical sectors become subservient to international competition.

In most cases, regime type often has a lot to do with economic outcomes. This is especially the case when it comes to the manner through which the regime makes decisions concerning how the economy should be managed. In stable democracies, for example, there are often greater economic freedoms to such an extent that they end up in a situation where markets are freer and different sectors are forced to improve themselves in order to remain competitive. Authoritarian regimes, on the other hand, tend to have a tighter grip on the economy to such an extent that it is the state, rather than private businesses, that are major players in the economy (Orvis and Drogus 432). This situation can be considered to be the reason behind such a country as North Korea is having considerable economic problems that are essentially unsustainable. The communist regime within this country, because of lack of competition for the domestic industry, has essentially made its economy quite weak because there are hardly ever any improvements in the locally produced products.

In conclusion, the North Korean economic situation can be contrasted with that of Japan, which has achieved considerable growth over the years because it has adopted a developmental state model where the government only intervenes when the sector involved is critical to the economy and lets it go as soon as it achieves a level of stability. Japan is a democratic state with all the freedoms that come with it; ensuring that its people in the private sector, rather than the government, are the main drivers of the economy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work Cited

Orvis, Stephen, and Carol Ann Drogus. Introducing Comparative Politics: Concepts and Cases in Context. CQ Press, 2013. Print.