new world wall

Unit 4 political geography 

This article explains how the world is filled with division and segregation. Some of the most notable are the walls are the wall in berlin, the wall/border/river/fence between the u.s. and mexico and the border between north and south Korea is the most notable walls.

This article relates to unit 4 because it shows how people, through borders, have divided them through history creating new politics, culture and borders themselves. The political processes involved can change the policies and shapes of nations in the world.

This map shows that hi-tech political surveillance of borders is highly correlated with the core areas of the global economy and some of the most attractive immigrant destinations.  

Questions to Ponder: What else do you see in this map?  What does this say about the world order?  Are there patterns that this map reveals/conceals?   

We looked at this map in class its really interesting nd weird to see all the dividing walls in the world and to discover ones youve never seen before.

The video attached to this article reminded me made me think "racism". It is not Americas first time targeting one cultural group and antagonizing them. We did it to the Indians, Jews, at one time we denied Chinese immigrants the right to enter the country or become a citizen. The projection of walls in my opinion only creates more room for crime. I would love to research what benefits its had. I think the world is lacking the understand that people are people .period. This segregation and division is so unnecessary and creates wars, tension, hostility, and divide.

the social impact is we do not get to mingle with people of different culture, religion, ethnicity. Economically businesses do not grow at least on the small business side. There is no chance of growth. what about population once again if you stay with in a section divided by walls then the population stays within. a society would have to stay above the 2.06 fertility rate to keep their population stable.

The key of this article is that there has been an initial treaty signed. This agreement overturns a colonial era treaty which stated any countries upstream (south of Egypt) essentially had no right to touch the Nile in any way that would effect Egypt. They had veto power over everything. 

The reason behind this is that Ethiopia had overthrown there colonial power-Italy, in the 1890's-and was henceforth its own country. Another attempt to seize Ethiopia took place in the 1930's under Benito Mussolini's rule. Him being a fascist and wanting to be like Hitler and take everything certainly contributed to Mussolini wanting to take Ethiopia. Another contributing factor is the fact that Italy tried and failed in claiming/colonizing Ethiopia. They had lost in the battle field. Mussolini wanted to improve and prove Eastern Italian Africa's dominance. Ethiopia would be freed of Italy's rule during WWII and become its own country once again. In any case the article states the treaty designed by the British was set forth in 1929. Ethiopia was not part of British Africa, or a protectorate (in regards to what Egypt would become in relation to the UK), so Britain would not care about the Nile in Ethiopia, rather the Nile in Sudan and especially in Egypt. Any country upstream is to not obstruct or deter the natural flow of the Nile-a pivotal source for Egyptian civilization. 90 percent of Egyptians live within 20km of the Nile while a little over 50 percent live within 1km. It is clear Egypt needs the Nile in order to function.

Ethiopia is able to create jobs through the building of the dam and will also be able to employ people through dam maintenance, inspections, etc... for years to come (if the dam is built). The dam will also provide an immense amount of power/energy, truly benefiting the country. The article states Ethiopia just wants to take a more fair share of the Nile. Everybody feels entitled to the Nile. This concept I understand. With that being said I also understand the concept of Egypt being concerned. There country functions though the Nile and its existing. 

I would like to see more of Ethiopia's plans and the statistics they've gathered throughout the duration of this project. I'm sure they have comprised some projected statistics, not just focusing on the positive aspects (for them) but also the negative aspects for Sudan and Egypt. The article states Sudan is on board but Egypt-although taking part in the new agreement thus putting aside the colonial era treaty- is very hesitant when discussing the existence of the dam. Obviously there are fair reasons for the concern...but then again exactly what are the reasons? How would the Nile be affected by the dam and also how would countries downstream (Egypt, Sudan) be affected? 

Its a concern amongst African countries but is it also a concern amongst the world? Will professionals from other countries "put their two cents in?" 

With all this being said, I suppose it does not matter...to Ethiopia. They have already begun the process of building and are about 30% completed. As stated in this bbc article: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26679225 Another interesting factor is how other sub Saharan countries are in favor of the dam. Why? Being in favor means they probably benefit from the dam as well, however this is something that may come to my light at the dam progresses. Until the dams construction is arrested, the dam is certainly being built. Ethiopia is making ground, excuse me energy, to better its country as a whole.  

This article discusses the dispute between Egypt and Ethiopia over the construction of a dam that would provide Ethiopia with a larger share of the Nile's water. Egypt is wholly opposed to this dam because it would mean less water for the country, which so desperately needs it. With 95% of the population of Egypt living within 20km of the Nile River, a reduction in the amount of water supplied to these tens of millions could potentially spell slow disaster. At the same time, however, Ethiopia desperately needs water from the Nile in order to provide sustainable energy for its citizens. 

The Nile has been a source of life and energy for thousands of years in an oppressively hot, dry place. The ancient Egyptians counted on the Nile to flood every year so that they would have arable land and used the large river to irrigate their farmland. It is almost ironic, therefore, that Egyptians are once again counting on the water of the Nile to help them survive in such a harsh climate. It seems that the Nile is one of those natural geographic features that is pivotal to political, economic, and social wellbeing. It represents the nexus between natural landforms and the political and economic goals of human beings and nations. Dispute over use of the Nile as a natural and life-giving resource is not the first instance of human debate over possession or use of natural geography and it likely won't be the last. 

How can political stability and security be measured? The Fragile States Index is a statistical ranking designed to measure the effective political institutions across the globe.

APHG-Unit 4