Educashun

This week, the English Parliament introduced a measure to raise the standard tuition for all English universities from approximately 3,500 pounds to approximately 6,500 or 9,000 pounds, which equates to approximately 9,000 or 14,000 dollars due to recent economic pressures. University students responded by protesting and eventually rioting in the streets of England, breaking windows, being raucous, and basically doing everything that many expect college students to do on Friday nights. First, I think that I should explain England's education system:
1. All schools in England are heavily subsidized, including private universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. This allows for them to keep tuition relatively low in comparison to many universities around the world.
2. The highest tuition any university can charge is about 3500 pounds. Universities in England used to be free until the state began to face financial hardship.
3. The educational system in England's private universities is recognized as one of the most erudite in the world. Those studying law as undergraduates, for example, have the opportunity of achieving fellowships, internships, and jobs at law firms during their undergraduate studies.

Let's compare this to all United States public universities: every year, each state-funded university raises tuition by 10-15%. At my own university, during my freshman year my tuition was approximately 22,000 dollars; now, in my junior year, it is approximately 24,000 dollars. Private universities routinely raise tuition as it pertains to their yearly revenue. Public education has been cut in many states, including my own New Jersey. Do we riot? (The answer: No.)

Across just about every university in the United States, tuition increases yearly. There is hardly an uproar over it since there is no universal funding of education like there is in England. In fact, there is no constitutional guarantee for education at all; that issue is completely left to the state side of federalism. Should there be a constitutional amendment? Probably. Will there ever be? Probably not.

So, what do we do to get better funding for education? Pester your local representatives, congressional representatives, senators, neighbors, family members, professors, Jon Stewart, the Chinese deliveryman, etc. It's the way Democracy works, take advantage of it.

That's all for now,
Das Flüg

Afghan War, Part III: Return of the Jedi

Now that my midterm week is over and I have some time to relax, I thought it prudent to update my blog with the final part of my analysis of the war in Afghanistan. This part will be my opinion of a viable improvement to the current strategy.

The strategy:
2010 is becoming a bloody year for troop deaths in Afghanistan. There have been 74 American deaths (icasualties.org) in the first 3 months of combat which, if figures continue in the current trend, leads to approximately 230 American troops killed in the 2010 year (accounting for 12 months of full combat). The troop surge enacted by the president may kill members of al Qaeda and the Taliban, but it certainly won't end the war.
There are several key components to winning a war against a non-state actor; one of the ingredients is the use of combat troops on the ground, but the largest fight should be for the support of the Afghani people as a whole and the creation of a stable Afghanistan. I'll dole this out in bullet form:

• Reduce the number of troops to below 100,000; for the strategy I will propose, this number is more than sufficient.
• Industrialize the nation- Afghanistan suffers from an inordinately high unemployment rate of 40% (according to CIA World Factbook). That 40% is extremely attractive to al Qaeda and the Taliban, as both can promise that those who fight will be well compensated for their actions and their families will be taken care of. A possible solution to reducing the unemployment rate would be to offer incentives to companies that can build factories and offer other types of low-training jobs in the less affluent regions of Afghanistan. Reducing the number of available soldiers for the insurgent groups is a key component to success. Also, troops should be divided into even contingents to protect the new workforce, as these new industries will be a tempting target.
• Public works- This is both a source of employment and a necessity to Afghanistan. The Taliban left the country in shambles after many years of rule, and many parts of the country lack the simple amenities that most countries in the first world take for granted. The beautification of the country not only improves standard of living, but also improves morale and raises the pride of the average citizen. If, suddenly, a building is attacked by the Taliban which had been built by 50 native Afghanis, then the public would turn against the Taliban overwhelmingly.
• Schools- Schools are of the utmost importance to success in Afghanistan and building them should be one of the top priorities for the US strategy. Building schools and hiring teachers and faculty would not only bolster employment, but would allow for a new generation of Afghanis to spurn the Taliban and al Qaeda. The current literacy rate, as reported by UNICEF, is 28%, which is well below any current standard. Teaching children at least the basics of society, mathematics, and literature would make them more informed and educated. Children are typically targets for indoctrination by militants, and educating them would be the best solution. The issue of books for these schools can be solved simply by having schools in industrialized nations across the world donate their old (but not outdated) textbooks. I know from personal experience that many schools put old textbooks in storage; they might as well be used.
• Hospitals- This might seem obvious, but Afghanistan is in dire need of hospitals and doctors. Doctors in Doctors Without Borders are always willing to insert themselves in dangerous situations and help those in need.
  
• Farms-The opium trade in Afghanistan is ghastly. It is extremely profitable, but it deters from American progress in the country. This is possibly the one of the more haphazard problems, as almost no farmers are willing to give up their opium crop. Somewhat luckily (for farmers, not for those in need), food prices are continually rising, especially in the wakes of the recent earthquakes in Chile, Haiti, Taiwan and Turkey. With some convincing, supplying of resources and lessons in horticulture, farmers in Afghanistan could instead grow food staples. This would also enliven Afghanistan's economy.
• Military action- Continue pushing al Qaeda and the Taliban towards Pakistan, and with increased Pakistani support, military operations would be more effective. The military must also be cognizant of the insurgent groups hiding among villages of civilians, lest they be reckless and culpable for the deaths of non-combatants. The insurgents are the perceived enemy by all, and that perception must stick.
• Tribes- Don't pay them to fight the war. The US might end up funding another al Qaeda by providing weapons to tribes which have no accountability under the Afghan government.
• The Afghan army- Training a new army and police force is tedious but necessary. The recruits need to be educated, or else the army will suffer from a severe case of abandonment.
  

• Pakistan- One of the larger pieces to the puzzle is Pakistan. They have recently arrested Taliban leaders, likely holding them until the United States removes its troops. Pakistan wants to utilize the Taliban, according to numerous reports, as a resource to use against India. This is why the constant influx of funding from the United States into Pakistan should come with a catch: Islamabad will only receive funding if troops are diverted from the Indian border to the Afghan border. This would serve to hopefully ease tensions between India and Pakistan, whose relationship has been less than genial. Doing this would likely convey the message that Pakistan does not plan to attack India in any way; hopefully the Indian government will accept this message and could be a first step towards a more amiable relationship between the two. Either way, both countries have nuclear weapons, so a war is somewhat unlikely (though not impossible). Diverting troops would also make military action against the Taliban and al Qaeda more efficient and effective.

These solutions act to build the country from the ground-up. The country will likely become more efficacious, more unified, and relatively free of a corrupt government. With an educated and overwhelmingly employed populace, the insurgent groups will likely become less able to recruit new soldiers. Over time, the groups will likely evaporate completely. This is a strategy that will unfold over time, since no winning formula can be achieved in the short-term. Let's just hope that someone is listening.

I am willing to hear any comments/questions/criticisms to my opinion. Ask away!

That's all for now,
Das Flüg