The United States and the Soviet Union in the Period 1944- 1950 Essay Example for Free

The United States and the Soviet Union in the Period 1944- 1950 Essay In 1944 the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, were allies in the war against National Socialist Germany and her Fascist Axis allies in Europe; however by 1950 the relationship had disintegrated to such an extent that the two countries had on more than one occasion nearly gone to war with each other. How had this situation arisen, and what were the implications not only for the two protagonists in what became known as the Cold War, but also for the rest of the world in this new Atomic Age. There was no definite date on which the erstwhile allies began to regard each other as potential adversaries and rivals for world influence. Neither, was their one definitive or underlying reason, for the difference of opinion between the erstwhile Second World War Allies. However, in the latter stages of the conflict and the years immediately following it would emerge a pattern of misunderstandings, miscalculations, misjudgements and suspicions which would come to characterise the following fifty years or so, in the relationship between the two countries and their respective allies. In order to assess the political realities of the situation pertaining at the time it is necessary to consider the geopolitical realities which existed, particular within Europe; and in addition to consider the internal political and economic situations in both countries in the time of victory over the Nazis, and the five years following that victory. Not, withstanding that there was also the Empire of Japan to be defeated particularly by Britain and America, although the Soviet Union would also have a part to play in that conflicts denouement. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was born as a result of the 1917 October Revolution, when the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov known as Lenin, Established the worlds first communist state by overthrowing the Provisional Government of Alexander Kerensky. There followed a Russian Civil War from which the Red Army formed by Leon Trotsky was eventually to secure a victory for Lenins Bolsheviks. Prior to this the emerging state faced enemies both internally and external, indeed Britain, France and the US all at one time gave support to the whites the enemies of the communists in the Russian Civil war. In 1923 Lenin died and a power struggle ensued to see who would succeed him. Joseph Jugashvili, better known as Joseph Stalin emerged as General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. He set about mercilessly liquidating all opposition. Including his bitter rival Trotsky (who was murdered in exile in Mexico), his merciless repression reached a peak with show trials and executions of alleged counter revolutionaries. The number of people he was responsible for killing either directly or indirectly by failed economic policies etc. is unknown but must run into several millions. The form of communist state he created is commonly called Stalinist. Historians often point out Stalins purges of military officers as one of the main contributing factor in Hitlers early successes in the Soviet Union. The Nazi onslaught came about despite the Non-Aggression Pact signed between the 2 counties in 1940. Nonetheless, by 1944 Soviet troops were poised to begin the final defeat of the Third Reich, from the east. In 1944 a confident and vigorous United States, led by Franklin D. Roosevelt, was relishing the prospect of the liberation of Europe and also the much longed for defeat of Japan. The war, had by dint of the huge amount of government spending, revitalised the American economy and by the final stages of the war America was indisputably the worlds economic heavyweight. Roosevelt was indeed the only American president in history to be elected to four terms in office. He certainly carried the majority of the population along with him. Although, it must be stated that he also earned the undying enmity, of a large section of the American conservative right, who blamed Roosevelt for introducing socialist policies to America i.e. the policies introduced by the first Roosevelt administration, to institute economic recovery in the midst of the Great Depression (known as the New Deal), possibly one of the worst economic crisis that the capitalist economies had ever faced. In reality, the New Deal owed more to the economic policies of the British economist John Maynard Keynes than to those of Karl Marx. Nonetheless, to a section of American Society who imbibed the notion of classic liberal laissez faire economics with their mothers milk; Roosevelts ideas represented an unwholesome and unwelcome change of priorities, and the bitterness felt would not be easily dissipated. With the Japanese attack on the US fleet at Pearl Harbor on the 7th December 1941, and Hitlers Declaration of war against America, the US the Second World War alongside the UK and the Soviet Union which, as previously stated, Hitlers Germany attacked in the summer of 1941 in Operation Barberossa. So right from the outset the alliance between the Soviet Union and the United States was more a marriage of convenience, than a love match. Historically, this alliance was something of an aberration, as the US did not even recognise the USSR, until 1933. However, it wasnt until victory looked certain, that the parties gave any serious thought to the shape of the post war world. In October 1944 the British Prime Minister held a meeting with Stalin in Moscow during the course of which, the post war shape of the Balkans and the contiguous regions was tacitally agreed; or perhaps, more accurately the areas of these regions where each power would have spheres of influence. This meeting was to prove hugely significant in the years to come: in particular as to the thinking of Joseph Stalin. As the end of National Socialism and Japanese militarism became inevitable during the course of 1944, the war aims of the victors became settled in the minds of the probable victors. It soon became apparent that both the USSR and the USA had different end games in mind, which as the international situation settled down in 1945, soon turned out not only to be different but also to a large extent mutually exclusive. These differences became publicly apparent for the first time during the Yalta Conference, a meeting held in the Crimean resort between the leaders of the Allied powers in February 1945, i.e. Stalin, Roosevelt and Winston S. Churchill, the prime minister of the United Kingdom. Although, it is debateable whether, any great or meaningful blueprints for the future of the post war world were actually arrived at during the course of the Crimean Conference, other than the three leaders formally re-affirming the Dumbarton Oaks agreement setting up of the United Nations. However, there were understandings, firstly that elections would be held in all liberated countries, additionally a rather nebulous declaration of self-determination for the said countries. What was not explicitally stated, but nonetheless implicitly understood by all parties was the notion of legitimate spheres of influence, along the lines agreed in the Churchill- Stalin summit in 1944. Had it not been realised before, Yalta it certainly became known during the conferences that each power in particular the Soviets put different interpretations on the notion of free and fair elections and inter alia democracy. This, notion would be physically shaped by events on the battlefield more than lines on a map drawn by political leaders. At Yalta Roosevelt and Churchill informed Stalin that a second front would definitely be launched against Hitler. In addition Churchill and Roosevelt sought to ensure that the agreements viz. free and fair elections would be applied with regard to Poland as it must be borne in mind that this was Britains original war ain in 1939 when it went to war after Hitler invaded Poland. Churchill in particular was aware of the historical enmity that existed between Poland and Russia: Stalin however assuaged Anglo- American concerns, and assured Britain and the US that the Soviet Union would allow free elections in all European countries liberated by t he Red Army The legacy of Yalta, is still the subject of contentious debate, particularly amongst the conservative section of the American body politic; however as was previously stated in terms of ascribing spheres of influence in reality this conference really only confirmed what was happening on the ground i.e. the Red Army had already liberated much of Eastern Europe and was poised for the invasion of the Third Reich proper in 1944/45. Whilst the Western Allies would soon put into effect Operation Overlord landing on the beaches of Normandy on their march, to destroy the Reich from the west; in addition to the push northwards through the now German occupied Italy, in the face of a tactically dogged and inspired German retreat, organised by Field Marshall Albert Kesselring. Thus, it would be difficult to see, short of immediately going to war with the Soviet Union or perhaps credibly threatening to do so, even if that had been either militarily or politically possible; what in reality the Bri tish or the Americans could have done differently. One interesting footnote to the Yalta Conference is that just two days after its conclusion the RAF and the USAAF, bombed the historic eastern German city of Dresden with horrific civilian casualties (around 25,000, although the precise figure was never known) and dubious strategic importance. By the time of the next Allied conference, held in Potsdam in Western Germany in August 1945, the scene had shifted dramatically. President Roosevelt, who had towered over American foreign and domestic policy had died and been replaced by the Vice- President Harry S. Trumann. Roosevelt had not involved Trumann in the field of foreign affairs quite deliberately. He therefore had to get himself up to speed immediately. Trumann was not as understanding of Soviet foibles as Roosevelt had shown him to be; nonetheless he was not, at this stage, anti Soviet. In the United Kingdom too, there was a change in leadership Clement Atlees Labour Government having won a sensational landslide victory in what was dubbed The Khaki election: replacing the wartime coalition led by Churchill (the actual changeover coming during the conference itself). Both Western leaders were suspicious of Stalins motives regarding his plans for Eastern Europe, in particular his approach to the promises made in Yalta in regard to free elections, where it seemed in both American and British minds, that Stalin just wanted the installation of puppet pro- Soviet regimes. The Soviet leader was perhaps somewhat perplexed at this change of attitude, as Stalin understood that he already had agreement on spheres of influence and he considered it a done deal. One factor, which obviously emboldened Trumann, was the knowledge that the US would drop the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima six days after the end of this conference. The Americans did not officially inform Stalin, but in any event it is likely he was aware of the bomb from his spies (mainly within British Intelligence); nonetheless, it is debatable if Stalin actually understood the awesome power of nuclear weapons at that stage. As the records show Hiroshima was bombed on the 6th August 1945, followed 3 days later by an atomic attack against the Japanese city of Nagasaki. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union declared war on the Japanese on the 8th August 1945. The Japanese in the face of the twin threat from Atomic weapons and the Red Army surrendered on the 15th August. The wartime alliance now began to rapidly unravel as its whole raison detre i.e. the defeat of its wartime adversaries had been accomplished. There were meetings between the parties but little of substance was achieved, and more often than not these meetings would degenerate into accusatorial exchanges. There was no doubt that the power of the bomb was in many ways a show of American strength, to the Soviet Union, one that was noted accordingly. One, agreement of note should be mentioned which would assume great import in the coming years was the Agreement for the Soviets to accept the surrender of Japanese forces above the 38th Parrralel, and the Americans to assume control below this. The area of trade proved another source of disagreement, Roosevelts lend lease scheme that had been of enormous influence throughout the conflict. to all Allied nations, more or less came to an end on the ascension of Truman to the Presidency. In actual fact cargo ships destined for the Soviet Union were called back en- route. To add insult to already injured Soviet feelings was the loss of a Soviet application for US trade credits, somewhere within the Washington bureaucratic machine. The Soviet hunger for tax credits was satiated by the American talk of consultation representation on all matters relating to trade in Eastern Europe. In the same breadth the Americans sought to agree plans for repayment of Soviet lend lease debt. The question of American commercial and cultural hegemony would resonate in Europe in years to come, and not just with the Soviet Union. Perhaps the most important document to come out of this period was the so- called long telegram whose progenitor was George F. Kennan an America specialist on Soviet affairs. Keenans analysis of Soviet policy was widely disseminated within the US State Department and in time would hugely affect the policy of Trumans administration. In this telegram Kennan espouses the view that the Soviet view of the world is essentially akin to that held by the pre revolutionary Russians, dressed up with and made even more lethal by the addition of Marxism. Kennan advised toughness when dealing with the Soviet Union and essentially called for a US policy of containment of Soviet influence, as opposed to the view of Roosevelt, which sought to encourage the Soviet Union into a new liberal democratic order. However, at this stage Truman was not yet ready for a policy of containment, if not idealistic enough to take Roosevelts position he was still hoping for some kind of rapprochement with Stalin. Winston Churchill captured the mood of the times (15th March 1946) from an Anglo/ American perspective at any rate, when in a speech in Fulton, Missouri he declaimed to an audience that included a nodding President Truman that from Szczecin in the North to Trieste on the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended on the continent. Churchill also used this speech to call for an alliance of English speaking nations. Stalin was, not altogether unsurprisingly, alarmed at the thrust of Churchills rhetoric, as in Soviet eyes the target of this proposed alliance could only be the Soviet Union itself: and made his feelings public in an interview given to Pravda on the 13th March 1946. Stalin reiterated Soviet concerns viz. Anglo- American aggressive tendencies and equated the undertones of Churchills speech to the racist ones orated by Adolf Hitler. Stalin also pointed out that the Soviet Union had been invaded via neighbouring countries that were unsympathetic to the Soviet Union. Thus, it did not entail a massive leap in logic to surmise that one of Stalins primary aims was to ensure that all neighbouring states were at the very least pro- Moscow. Perhaps the single largest issue to emerge in the immediate post war years was the status of the defeated Germany. In 1946 Germany was administered by the four victorious allies i.e. the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and France (still, smarting over having been left out of the Great Power conferences). The German capital Berlin was similarly divided into four zones. At the outset neither side had any firm or concrete plans for the future of Germany apart from a desire for some form of reparations by the Soviet Union and on the Anglo/ American side a deep desire to avoid the re- creation of the mistake many believed had been made with The Treaty of Versailles i.e. being too punitive in relation to reparations and development in Germany These views although divergent to some degree, need not have been axiomatically opposed. Indeed, at this stage the idea of a united Germany was one that found favour in London. Moscow and Washington, with Paris being the only one to harbour doubts, mainly for internal political reasons. Truman, however increasingly frustrated at what he saw as Soviet obduracy and deception enunciated his feelings in what came to be known as the Trumann Doctrine in March 1947 before Congress in a debate on allocating funds to Greece and Turkey. Essentially this doctrine divided the world into free and enslaved/ enslaver peoples and committed the US to act in the defence of any so called free people being threatened by armed minorities or outside pressures. Stalin (correctly) saw that Truman meant communist when referring to armed minorities etc. He immediately reasoned the Truman Doctrine as a threat to Soviet interests and the Cold War was now off and running, in earnest. The announcement of the new US policy was actually precipitated by the relative decline of the UK in power and influence, and the ravages of the terrible winter of 1947 in Europe. At the time of Trumans speech the main purpose was to secure funds for the anti communist side in the Greek civil war. The UK had been pushed to the brink by the efforts required to sustain the Second World War; and was virtually bankrupt. Most European countries were in a similar if not worse position, if action was not taken to rectify the financial and economic situation as a matter of extreme urgency, it was soon apparent that Western Europe may not require the massed Red Army tanks in order to sharply turn to the left. The solution proposed by the US was at once remarkable and even viewed through the lens of over fifty years extremely generous, if not carried out for reasons of pure philanthropy. The US Secretary of State George Marshall proposed a plan, which would bear his name. The Marshall Plan was formally unveiled in a speech by Marshall at Harvard University on the 5th June 1947, in which a broad outline of an economic aid plan to Europe was outlined. A meeting was held in Paris to take the idea forward, at this stage the Soviet Union was seriously interested in the Marshall Plan. The thing that stuck in the throat of Stalin and his foreign minister Molotov was the idea of common planning and the notion of the Soviet economy being examined by British and American economists. The Soviet Union declined to take any further part in the Marshall Plan. The boundaries of capitalism and communism were now set and would remain so for the next 50 years. The Soviet rejection of the Marshall Plan could not have come as any shock in the West; indeed it may have been exactly what the Anglo- Americans for one were aiming for all along. Europe was now divided between the recipients of American largesse in the west and those countries by dint of their closeness to the Soviet Union who were unwilling, or perhaps unable to accept such American aid. In order to respond to recent events the Soviet Union convened the Communist Information Bureau, known as Cominform in Szklarska Poreba in Poland, which composed of representatives of the communist parties of the Soviet Union, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, France, Italy, and Yugoslavia.The Cominform launched an ideological attack on the Marshall Plan and the Trumann Doctrine. It however was at pains to point out that despite the ideological differences the Soviet Union was perfectly happy to co- exist with capitalism for an unidentifiably long period; after which orthodox Marxist theory predicted the collapse of capitalism due to one or other of the many in built tensions that existed within that system. The desire for both systems to co-exist did not preclude the enlistment of the French and Italian trades unions in an effort to derail the Marshall Plan. The strikes failed in large measure due to the arrival of American food aid in Western Europe. The US for the fist time began to run covert Central Intelligence Agency covert operations within Italy; in an attempt to ensure that the Italian Communists did not succeed in winning the Italian General election. This was done by a series of direct and indirect public pronouncements on the consequences for American aid in the event of a communist victory, together with what was to become the familiar pattern of CIA covert operations i.e. black propaganda, secret payments to non- communist political parties, and special training and equipment for the armed forces. Stalins reaction was characterised by its lack of insight and success in uniting the anti communist political forces in Western Europe. The failure of communist led strikes in Italy and France. In the increasingly heavy-handed approach to the political situation in Eastern Europe alienated many in the left in Europe. The situation in Czechoslovakia where firstly the Czech Foreign Minister had an unfortunate fall from his Foreign Ministry window: swiftly followed by a communist coup in that country severely undermined Soviet credibility in the minds of the Western public. A further crisis developed within the Cominform itself when Stalin tried to exert pressure on the Yugoslav Communist Party to expel its leader Marshall Tito. Tito however retained the confidence of the Yugoslav Communist Party, and far from being feeling himself by Stalins overtures actually began to negotiate for US aid, an act that resulted in Yugoslavias expulsion from the Cominform in 1948. The internecine squabble between Stalin and Tito, had the effect of reducing even further the goodwill of the public towards the Soviet Union within both the US and Europe. Stalin further raised the tension in Europe by paralysing the Allied Control Commission by withdrawing his representative Marshall Sokolovsky. The three other control powers proceeded to treat each of their occupation zones of Germany and of Berlin itself as effectively one unit. In addition plans had been laid for the introduction of the Deutschmark, which was duly introduced in the British, American and French sectors of Germany as well as in the zones controlled by theses three countries of Berlin on the 23rd June 1948. The Soviet response was to immediately begin a blockade of Berlin. For the first time since the cessation of hostilities their existed the very real fear that war could break out. In order to beat the Soviet blockade the Western Allies decided to mount an airlift in order to supply food and other essentials to West Berlin. The Berlin Airlift lasted for eleven months and managed to supply adequate food and fuel for two million Berliners. Despite some calls for the forcing of a passage into West Berlin by tanks, cooler council prevailed .The Soviet rationale for the blockade was simply to prevent the Western Powers proceeding down the road with their plans for a separate West German state: whatever the Soviet intention it was once again based on misjudgement and a miscalculation, and succeeded only in pushing forward the establishment of a West German state. Realising eventually that the only choices open to him was to relent or face fighting a war against a US led alliance armed with nuclear weapons, Stalin abandoned the Berlin Blockade on the 11th May 1949. The consequence of this crisis was the establishment of the very thing Stalin had started the blockade to prevent i.e. the formation of the Federal Republic of Germany on the 20th of September 1949. Following, the rather predictable tit for tat response that was to become the trademark of the cold war, the creation of the German Democratic Republic was announced to the world on the 7th October 1949. The Berlin Blockade and the splitting of Germany succeeded in raising fears within Western Europe to such an extent that there was intense pressure for a formal alliance, which would tie the US into the defence of Western Europe. As a result the North Atlantic Treaty organisation came into being in 1949. The division of Europe was now formalised, and complete along ideological lines. The focus of attention would now turn east, where Mao Tse Tungs communists were in the process of achieving the final defeat of the nationalist Kuomintang forces under Chiang Kai- shek. Conservative opinion in the United States was outraged at this development; accusing Trumanns administration of selling out American interests in the region and failing to provide adequate support to the Kuomintang forces in the Chinese Civil War. This was to be a running sore in the side of the right in America, who viewed it as the sign of communist aggression worldwide. It would act as the impetus for the McCarthy Period, so called because of the committee called The House Committee on Un- American Activities, which would be headlined by Senator Joseph McCarthys purges on alleged communists. McCarthy aided and abetted by future President Nixon unleashed a series of show trials which uncannily mirrored those of Stalin in the 1930s, albeit with considerably less gruesome results Nonetheless, the hearings of this committee changed the atmosphere in the US to such an extent that political liberals, trades unionists and effectively anyone who dared challenge McCarthys orthodoxy was subject to harassment, intimidation and exclusion from employment. The atmosphere endangered by Nixon and McCarthy would help to polarise opinion in America during the late 1940s and well into the 1950s. Against, this backdrop the forces of North Korea backed by Moscow, albeit with some reluctance crossed the 38th Parallel, to invade the western backed South. The attack was repulsed and the forces under the command of wartime hero Douglas Macarthur, after a series of battles advanced towards the Yalu River and Koreas border with China. Seeing this as a provocation China became involved in the war. This brought the world once more to the brink of nuclear conflict, as Macarthur rather injudiciously ruminated about the possibility of using nuclear weapons against China. Fortunately, Trumann declined; the war eventually ending in stalemate with both sides having to be content with the pre-war boundary of the 38th Parallel. The start of the Korean War signalled the end of the development of the cold war, and ushered in the political conditions that would shape the map of the world for the next fifty years nearly. However was the Cold War the inevitable outcome of the situation that arose at the end of World War Two? What is obvious from studying the records of the period is that neither side considered war inevitable, far less desirable. Instead the emergence of the Cold War owed more to serendipity than careful planning and desire by either side. The Cold War began in Europe, as that was where both sides met each other over the ruins of the Third Reich. The Americans with some initial distaste took up where her enfeebled Western Allies left off in South East Asia and the Pacific. The Soviet Union by dint of its support for Marxist regimes found itself being dragged along on the coattails of Maos revolutionary China. Once underway the cold war developed a momentum of its own and its logic embedded itself in the mindset of policymakers in Washington and Moscow. At every turn either superpower would see the nefarious hand of the other behind every event: more often than not erroneously. It is tempting to imagine what the outcome would have been had President Roosevelt not died in 1945. In order to avoid the Cold War the situation needed thought that was imaginative and could see things in a way that was novel. Unfortunately for the world no one emerged in either side of the Iron Curtain with the necessary breadth of vision. Stalin was undeniably a tyrant, and it would have been unlikely that a Soviet Union led by him would have been able to reach a long-term rapprochement with the West. However, the great mistake made by the West was in assuming that the monolithic state espoused by Stalin was truly representative of the Communist Part of the Soviet Union. Indeed Stalin was unique and by tarring his sucessors with the same brush the West was unable to change its perception when a new and potentially more accomadating power took charge in the Kremlin. The Soviet Union for its part made error of judgement so vast as to be inexcusable. Perhaps the greatest of which was its failure to join the Marshall Plan. That and the desire to supplant any form of independent government in Eater Europe, proved in the long term to harbour the seeds of the systems eventual destruction. If more thoughtful council had prevailed, on both sides then perhaps the next fifty years could have been entirely changed. Instead the only real winners of the cold war were the industrial- military complexes as Eisenhower was to term it on both sides, although in the long term only that of the West proved to have the longevity to be called by some the winner.

Existentialism :: essays research papers

Existentialism is perhaps one of the world’s oldest philosophies. It has been dated back to nineteenth-century Danish and Greek philosophers. It is a simple idea, yet it has so many different ideals within it that it is almost impossible to define. There are many parts that make up one whole, basic idea. The many parts have been defined by famous existentialist artists and writers such as, Nietzsche, Chamfort, Sartre, and Kafka. These works have all proven many points about existentialism; however, even the pros cannot decide on one basic idea. That is why there are so many different interpretations of this famous ideal. If there were a single definition it would have something to do with having your own ideas and being free to choose any path.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If you were a believer in existentialistic ideals chances are you would not participate in society and/or your own life very much. Albert Camus believed that to be a true existentialist you had to remove yourself from society as much as possible since a belief in the foundation of government was to conform. Conforming to society norms is considered bad, it doesn’t allow the individual to progress and reach his own decisions Camus realized, however, that restricting himself from all social conformity was impossible. In his award-winning book, The Stranger, Camus depicts a man with very little emotion. Once in a while he shows a bit of heart, but for the most part, he is gives a robotic appearance. This character is based on existentialistic views, he tries to stay out of society as much as he can. He does the same thing from day to day. The character expresses no feeling about anything except that light is a sign of evil or annoyance, while the dark becomes a place of calm and seriousness. In society, the common idea is that light is good and evil grows in the darkest of places, but in Albert Camus’ novel, evil is good and the light is bad. They’re many other parts of existentialism. Camus influenced many of the writings on this subject although he did not stand unchallenged.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many existentialists believed that man had no reason for life. In other words, there was no God and no reason to live life with rules of any kind because there is nothing in the end anyway. This thought did not gain the existentialist popularity with many religions.

Philippine Gaming Industry

Despite the surge of Pagcor income that has succeeded immensely in supporting the cash-strapped government, several lawmakers, nongovernment organizations and especially the religious sector are still firmly against government engaging in the business of operating casinos. Edward King, spokesman for Pagcor chairman Efraim Genuino, told The Manila Times that first and foremost, one thing that people should remember is that Pagcor is a creation of law. Pagcor, a government-owned and controlled corporation was established to regulate all games of chance in the Philippines. It was born in 1976, created by then-President Marcos to oversee the operation of gaming casinos, to generate funds for the government’s developmental projects and to help curb illegal gambling. An unaudited Pagcor report shows that Pagcor, â€Å"a vital arm of the government in nation building, â€Å" netted P25. 4 billion in income making it one of the biggest earners for 2006. † So is Pagcor a proof that casinos and legalized gaming can be a valuable source of government funding and an effective engine for national development? â€Å"We are created by law, we are just following what the law orders us to do. It is not a question that is up to us to decide. We must obey the law,† King said. Under the law, he explained, Pagcor is required to run casinos. He said that the most important thing about the government running casinos is that all funds that generated from Pagcor goes back to the government â€Å"100 percent. † â€Å"We are operating the casinos but here is where everything lies: 100 percent of the income that we generate goes back to the government,† King said. The state-run gaming firm surpassed its earlier record-breaking P21. 9-billion total annual income in 2004 and breached its target income of P23. 1 billion for 2005. It surpassed the P24. 5 billion target for 2006 as well. Pagcor’s 2005 total income of P23. 4 billion was 6. 8 percent higher than the P21. 9 billion it posted a year before. The issue of privatizing Pagcor is also very controversial, with several lawmakers pushing for it and even more congressmen against it. King said that while the act can be considered purely from the noble and idealistic viewpoint that government should not be in the business of gambling, one has to think from the point of view of generating funds for the government. He said that if the government would privatize Pagcor, then all income goes to the private sector leaving only a small amount in taxes being paid to the government coffers. â€Å"If you give Pagcor to the private, they will just be paying taxes. There is a huge difference between a fraction of income from taxes to 100 percent,† King said. An official from Pagcor who requested anonymity even claimed that perhaps the lawmakers have their own personal agenda. Maybe they want to be the ones who will buy and operate Pagcor, they said. Its simple, privatize Pagcor they get the income, the lawmakers may perhaps be getting their own kickbacks from certain lobby groups who want Pagcor for their personal purpose,† the official said. King merely laughed at the statement of the official adding that he did not want to comment, not wanting to get into trouble with the congressmen. King, however, added that if Pagcor is run privately, all measures such as that of the antimoney launderi ng might be removed and the private personalities owning it may use the gaming for the bad purposes that the antimoney-laundering council wants to prevent. Pagcor is created by law with the purpose of bringing much needed funds to the government. Certainly if you are run privately mahirap bantayan. How can you impose legislation on it which means how can we protect ourselves now from money laundering, how do we prevent this money going out of the country,† he said. â€Å"We are able to ensure that these things do not happen since the protective mechanism are all in place here. ’Yung mga private casinos for instance maaaring lumalabas iyang pera at magamit for money laundering once they are privately owned,† he said. We do what we can,† King said. King also thanked Congress for granting them a fresh 25-year franchise. King explained that government departments are dependent on Pagcor. The Department of Education is seeking more money from us. Even many church organizations get donations from Pagcor despite the opposition to Pagcor of some bishops. Pagcor, in President Arroyo’s own words, is an important part of Philippine nation building. In its endeavor to generate more funds for the governmen t’s pressing concerns, Pagcor has ventured beyond casino management. To meet the challenges of the new millennium, the gaming corporation is constantly looking for ways to improve its gaming products and maximizing the efficiency of its gaming operations. Philippine Gaming Market Sports betting is, to a vast population of Filipinos, a way of life from cockfighting to horseracing and basketball. Betting on number combination games such as lotteries and basketball â€Å"ending† offered by illegal bookies, has become part of millions of Filipinos’ daily routine. The gaming market in the Philippines is estimated to be over P100 billion a year. Illegal gaming accounts for half of the country’s gaming industry revenues. Internet Gaming Market The Internet gaming global market is estimated to be US$10 billion in 2002 and is predicted to reach US$14. 5 billion in year 2006. Internet Sports Betting and Internet Casino dominates most of the revenues. Although US now accounts for half of industry revenues, the gaming market is changing and the biggest area of growth is in places like Europe and Asia. Pagcor aims to go global and is keen on gaining a share of the Internet gaming revenue. Internet gaming will allow Pagcor to reach out to local and foreign gaming enthusiasts with less investment cost. About Philweb Capitalizing on its Internet technology experience, Philweb in early 2003 made a deliberate decision to focus on Internet Gaming. It established partner relationship with leading software providers in addition to establishing its own gaming software capability. On the basis of this expertise, Philweb was successful in concluding a contract with Pagcor, whereby Philweb became Pagcor’s overall service provider for Internet Gaming technology. To date, Philweb has concluded 2 Internet Gaming agreements with Pagcor, as follows: Acknowledging the Filipino’s yearning for sports and gaming as well as the continuing popularity of local sports betting, Pagcor, in partnership with Philweb Corp. , designed and deployed a new and innovative way to utilize Internet technology in fueling the Filipino’s passion for sports—Internet Sports Betting. Pagcor aims to compete head on with illegal bookies and migrate most, if not all, of the illegal gaming revenues into additional source of income for the government. Recognizing Philweb’s extensive knowledge in Internet technology, software development expertise and its nationwide marketing distribution network, Pagcor signed a Memorandum of Agreement with Philweb on November 28, 2002, engaging the latter as its technology service provider and marketing consultant for Internet Sports Betting. Subsequently, Philweb and Pagcor likewise entered into several supplemental agreements to cover the expansion programs of Pagcor on Internet Sports Betting. Philweb is a PLDT subsidiary. Pagcor license for Internet casino Pagcor has decided to offer casino games outside the land-based casinos via Internet Casino Stations. Compared with the land-based counterpart, Internet Casino Stations require less investment because of their low overhead as well as operating and marketing costs. Also, Internet Casino offers gaming enthusiasts the opportunity to play casino games in the privacy and comfort of their homes at any time of the day and at their own pace. As an additional feature, a prepaid card system will be incorporated in Pagcor’s Internet Casino betting platform to avoid credit card fraud and fast-track its nationwide distribution. Philweb is partnering once more with Pagcor to accelerate the market entry of the latter’s Internet Casino products in the Philippines. With a management team rich with Internet Casino business expertise, Philweb expects to realize with Pagcor the revenue potential of Internet Casino. Currently, Pagcor and Philweb are pursuing for the expansion of their Internet Gaming relationship to now include Internet Casino. Philweb will provide its technology and marketing services to Pagcor. These services shall include the following: Recently, Philweb, the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) affiliate that oversees the operation of an Internet casino business on behalf of the government, expects to report a full-year profit for 2006, the first since it was set up in 2000. Philweb reported net profit of P42 million ($861,848) in the first nine months of 2006. The company, which oversees 45 Internet casino stations, most of them in Manila, said gross betting volume in online casinos had surged from P562 million in 2004 to P10. 8 billion in 2005. It is likely to rise by another 30 percent in 2006, according to Dennis Valdes, the company’s president. That forecast looked optimistic on a recent Saturday night in Manila on the basis of competition between a bookmaker’s office, crowded with laborers betting on horses, and an Internet casino station a few feet away where no-one was queuing to play. But the relative quiet outside the online casino belies the vast and rapid flow of money into the newest game of chance to hit Manila. On entry into what looks like an Internet cafe, where about 25 desktop computers are linked to a powerful server running gambling software, customers are asked to buy at least P500 worth of credits, and it is not uncommon for players to spend P1,000 in just 15 minutes. â€Å"We started out as an ISP [Internet service provider] and it was only recently that the company refocused on Internet gambling,† said Valdes. In November 2002, Philweb won a contract to provide consultancy services to the state gambling monopoly, which is trying to curb an illegal market that it estimates to be worth about P50 billion a year. Stock market investors are making a big bet on Philweb, whose share price more than doubled in 2006 and has risen by about a 10th so far this year. Its market capitalization of P3. 9 billion is now almost a quarter more than the combined market value of the two bigger and older companies that run horse races.

The Islamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham - 1550 Words

In his autobiography ‘Radical’, Maajid Nawaz, a former member of the radical Islamist organization, Hizb al-Tahrir (HT), outlines the differences between Islam, Islamism, and Jihadism, three different concepts that are key in understanding radical groups within the Muslim world. Firstly, Nawaz defines Islam quite simply; it is a religion, defined similarly to all other faiths. Islamism, on the other hand, is defined as â€Å"the desire to impose Islam over society as law†. It is an ideological thought that seeks to develop a coherent political system that can house all schisms within Islam. Finally, jihadism is a militant strand of Islamism that is â€Å"the merger of literalist religion with Islamist politics† (Nawaz, 13). One can make the argument that Islamism and jihadism, while obviously they do not promote the views of the overwhelming majority of Muslims, come from the same source; religion. The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is a radical, literalist Muslim group that promotes an ideology that follows a distinctive form of Islam, with a heavy focus on the end of the world and the time leading up to this point (Wood, 14). In general, the Western world has little knowledge of ISIS, and many concepts within the organization still remain mysterious to most people not within its walls. There are many opinions and arguments, especially in the Western world, about whether ISIS can or should be defined as an Islamic movement, or rather a political organization that should notShow MoreRelatedThe Islamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham1620 Words   |  7 Pages know how dangerous these people are becoming. The Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham also known as ISIS, an Al Qaeda affiliation is not only alive but spreading and spreading fast. The group started out in Iraq as the world known Al Qaeda before rebranding themselves. Though both jihadi groups strived to establish an i ndependent Islamic state in the region of Iraq , ISIS believes in a much more brutal regimine. Threating to take over both Iraq and Syria, killing and beheading both their own andRead MoreIslamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham943 Words   |  4 Pages The Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham is a terrorist organization that began as Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Since Al-Sham can mean Syria or the Levant, media and governments usually refer to them as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL); some use the derogatory name Daesh in order to avoid recognizing the group’s claims. The Islamic State declared themselves a caliphate with Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi becoming Caliph Ibrahim. He claims authority over allRead MoreThe Islamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham1461 Words   |  6 PagesThe Islamic State, otherwise called the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), takes after an unmistakable assortment of Islam whose convictions about the way to the Day of Judgment matter to its system, and can help the West know its adversary and foresee its conduct. Its ascent to power is less like the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a gathering whose pioneers the Islamic State considers faithless people) than like the acknowledgment of a tragic substitute reality. The White HouseRead MoreThe Islamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham1471 Words   |  6 PagesJoshua Bacon Ed Rowe American Security Overview 26 January 2016 The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), follows a distinct variety of Islam whose beliefs about the path to the Day of Judgment define its strategy, and can help the West know its enemy and predict its behavior. Its rise to power is less like the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a group whose leaders the Islamic State considers apostates) than like the realization of a dystopian alternateRead MoreIslamic State Of Iraq And Al Sham ( Isis )838 Words   |  4 PagesWhat Are ISIS Intentions? This assignment is a qualitative study about Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS). What it ISIS? Where does it come from? What are its intentions? These questions seem to be simple but can be misrepresenting. According to Schmitt, Major General Nagata, the Special Operations commander for the U.S. in the Middle East, admitted that that he had barely begun figuring out the Islamic State?s appeal. ?We have not defeated the idea,? he said. ?We do not even understandRead MoreThe Islamic State During Iraq And Al Sham ( Isis )1703 Words   |  7 Pagesindividual or society responds well to the hardships and suffering it encounters, that individual or society will continue to improve and evolve. Today, the media reports that the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is struggling to gain power for their people through the reacquisition of land and reunification of Islamic people. ISIS has threatened attacks on the western world, should they attempt to intervene in this struggle (Ivison, 2014). The western world views this as a threat to its powerRead MoreThe Fall Of The Taliban Group809 Words   |  4 Pageswar on Afghanistan, forced Zarqawi to escape to Iraq. There his existence went widely unnoticed till the Bush administration used it as evidence that al-Qaeda was in relation with Saddam Hussein and they would get assistance through his regime. In fact, though, Zarqawi was a free agent, searching to create his own terror group organization. Briefly after the US-led Occupation of Iraq in 2003, he set up the forerunner to today’s Islamic State: Jama’at al-Tawhid w’al-Jihad (the Party of Monotheism andRead MoreWhat Is The Potential Of The Islamic State Attacks?767 Words   |  4 PagesWith the increase of Islamic State-affiliated attacks by radicalized â€Å"Lone Wolf† actors and dedicated Islamic State fighters, it is necessary to consider the potential for similar attacks in the United States. The November 2015, coordinated attack in Paris, France, and the January 2015, shooting in the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris, demonstrated the Islamic States ability to coordinate complex attacks in physical locations however, the true measure of the Islamic States potential lies in its abilityRead MoreSyria During The Middle East1666 Words   |  7 Pagescontinuously inhabited cities in the world (CIA Fact Book). Once a part of the Ottoman Empire, Syria was controlled by France following World War I until it gained its independence in 1946. Following independence, Syria has been in a rather consistent state of turmoil and government coups leading to instability in not only the country but also the region as a whole. Current Events Syria has been in a Civil War officially since July 2012 when the Red Cross declared it so that Geneva Conventions couldRead MoreThe Islamic State : An Accident Of History1579 Words   |  7 PagesIntroduction: The Islamic State is an accident of history, emerging from multiple political, economic, and social tensions in the Middle East. It has challenged the territorial divisions forced in the region following the fall of the Ottoman Empire by shaping out for itself a large area of territory. But ultimately, its consequence will flow as much from its challenge to settled concepts of government, national sovereignty, and national identity. The Islamic State is most well-known for the violence