The Iraq Crisis and Western Involvement

The current crisis in Iraq is being deemed by most as a result of the failures of western influence. The Sunni extremist group ISIS has pushed itself into Iraq from Syria. The sectarian group aims to topple the current Shia government and take over as the main regime in Iraq. Once ISIS began freeing people from prison, it allowed the group to maintain support by reuniting the prisoners with their families, portraying them as a movement that aims to aid the people of Iraq. Although by prolonging the conflict between the militant Sunni’s and the Iraqi Shia’s, the only result will be a civil war. At this point in time, the idea of a unified Iraq seems impossible; the country seems most likely to split up into separate states. Not only does ISIS pose a threat to Iraq, but it is also a major setback to western governments, as it produced a re-thinking of how to approach a group that is anti-western in a country that was not so long ago occupied by American troops.

Foreign involvement in the crisis has come through two main countries: Iran and America. As 90% of Iranians are Shia, stopping the sectarian group will help keep their own people safe. Although this comes alongside the history of discontent between both Iraq and Iran; it poses the fear of further Iranian involvement and the status of Iranian troops in Iraq once ISIS is subdued and no longer creates a threat to Iraq. This is also the case through American involvement. The last time America took an interest in Iraq, it left a wide platform for extremist groups to take responsibility in governing the war-torn country; American troops also remained in Iraq for 9 years after their initial invasion.

On the 19^th June 2014, Obama stated that US forces “will not be returning to combat in Iraq”, but 300 officials will be sent to Iraq to guard the embassy and gather more information on the extremist group. President Obama’s statement can be perceived as both a positive and a negative. As the adamant position that Obama has taken into not placing US troops lessens conflict between ISIS and the west, it also presents the assumption that the US have gained an understanding of the repercussions that rapid involvement creates. On the other hand, sending 300 military officials furthers the gap between the Middle East and America. As the use military officials reinforce the image of a selfish and self-serving America, an America only cares about its embassy and not the people that fear for their lives. 



Edna Mohamed

The Emergence of Far-Right parties in European Politics

The recent European elections presented the increase in far-right parties. The most significant being the triumph of the Front National party in France. Le Pen described the votes as a ‘France for the French’, calling on Hollande to dissolve the French government. The win shocked many students in France and led to an all out protest denouncing Le Pen and her party. Many slogans held the sign: Dear Europe, we are sorry. This was coupled with UKIP coming out as the winning party for England. The key issues that both parties seemed to echo was anti-immigration; which is ironic as both are former colonising countries, which aimed to have the largest number of allies, so rather than allowing the countries that fought alongside them sovereignty, they are being forced out.

The gradual dissatisfaction with the EU is problematic. As European countries that claim multiculturalism are voting for far-right parties that not only discriminate but also refuse to vote.  With voter apathy being at an all time high it’s no wonder that these parties were voted in. In conjunction with this, times of hardship present extremism, explicitly displayed in Greece.  The EU is presented as being the driving factor for the rise of extremism, issuing a cry for change either in home countries or the make –up of the European Parliament.

E