In today’s political climate, terrorism is a buzzword that elicits a number of different emotions, reactions and perceptions depending on who you are. Thus, it is hard for people to approach such a topic objectively and impartially. This makes the topic of terrorism vulnerable to manipulation of facts and can be used to provoke sentiment of an emotional nature leading people to be irrational in supporting policies or in cultivating opinion on the matter. This year saw the emergence of the Al-Qaeda splinter group ISIS who have taken over parts of Afghanistan and Syria in a quest to establish an Islamic caliphate based on a highly traditional form of Islam. In an effort to combat groups such as this in a time where the War on Terror has been an ever pervasive issue, the US has used tactics to maintain security through such as the use of intelligence agencies such as the NSA and drone warfare to target militants hostile to the US. These are undoubtedly controversial means, which are influenced in one way or another through the highly emotionally charged topic of terrorism.

Emotion is a powerful tool that people on either side of this conflict are susceptible to. ISIS emerging as the principal antagonist in the US’s War Against Terror has come against a backdrop of violence in their newly established Islamic States. Videos emerging of heads impaled on spikes, and the beheadings of American and British journalists/care workers such as James Foley and Steven Sotloff has led to a public outcry in many countries, as well as promises from the respective leaders to see that these men responsible will be put to justice. However there remains the concern of the usage of intelligence agencies such as the NSA as well as drone warfare to maintain security. Drone warfare in particular has been singled out as particularly controversial due to the amount of civilian casualties it incurs. Articles such as this[1] have a headline stating only 4% of drone victims are members of al Qaeda, which at first glance seems unnecessarily brutal for sure a low output. However only 704 of the 2,379 dead have been identified, and 295 of these were reported to be members of some kind of armed group, which improves the numbers slightly. This is an example of how an agenda can be presented in the form of suggestive headlines and framing statistics. Given the fractional nature of US politics and the media circus that surrounds it, it is important to take things objectively and in context. While one might tend towards support for US military action in the Middle East after seeing videos like this, we should not let emotions dictate policy and let reason prevail. The US entering the Middle East again in such a short time and engaging in ground war with ISIS will boost terrorist recruitment from around the world, even if ISIS loses initial military battles.[2] US interference in the region is an example of imperialism used by the Islamic State to fuel radical sentiment. For Muslims, who see their lands occupied by Israel, bombed by the United States, and ruled by corrupt dictators propped up by the West, it is both powerful and seductive. This shows that emotion is powerful tool also used on the other side of this debate.

[1] http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/10/16/only-4-of-drone-victims-in-pakistan-identified-as-al-qaeda-members/

[2] http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/08/how-isis-seduces-new-recruits.html

The Occupy Central movement, which has been happening in Hong Kong, came about through the escalation of student demonstrations in protest of democratic practices that allow the central Chinese government to vet Hong Kong’s top leader in the 2017 poll, contrary to the provisions specified in the Basic Law. This Basic Law serves as the de facto constitution of the autonomous region that has enjoyed civil liberties not often seen on the mainland. However instead of moving towards universal suffrage in 2017, the powers of the central government have increased with the National People’s Congress requiring a nomination committee to pre-approve up to three electoral candidates before proceeding to a vote involving the general population where the winner would then still need to be formally approved by the central government. [1] The movement has since expanded to include a wide range of people who have aimed to spread their cause on a worldwide stage during the National Day of the People’s Republic of China.

One of the defining aspects of the Occupy Central movement is the non-violent way they carry out their protests, choosing instead a campaign of civil disobedience. Unlike other countries like the Ukraine where popular protests against oppressive regimes has led to scenes of violent confrontation, the local Hong Kongers are picking up their litter, passing out food and sorting recyclable goods. [2] Despite this, the police have responded violently with the usage of pepper spray and tear gas to “control” the crowds. While it is unclear what Beijing’s next move will be, it seems that for now the central government is waiting the protestors out. It is clear that Beijing is threatened, as Instagram and Weibo (Chinese social media) have been heavily censored and/or outright banned.

It is feared that the Chinese might escalate and crack down on the protestors similar to Tiananmen. However it should be considered that it is easier to maintain control over communications and protests in isolated parts of the country like Tibet. Hong Kong, with the One China Two Systems, is an international hub with wide exposure coupled with the peaceful nature of the protests, which means that any potential reaction by the central government would be closely scrutinized. Given that China in this day and age is looking to emerge as a superpower on the world stage, it has a number of key international economic and trade deals that could be compromised as Hong Kong is a major source of these deals being a significant financial power in the region.

It is fitting that the movement had its start in time of the National Day of the People’s Republic on the 1st of October. China as a country was established in its present form through revolution against the corrupt KMT, prior to that the Chinese fought off the foreign invaders of Japan in WWII and even before that, China abolished the monarchy in the series of events following the Boxer Rebellion. China has not been wholly unflexible in the past, in fact it was when it changed its socialist ideals into a market economy when it really began to flourish. Change is a constant in Chinese history, it remains to see how it will unfold.

[1] https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.568285576633425.1073741830.565462753582374&type=1

[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-demonstrators-clean-up-and-recycle-after-night-of-clashes-with-police-9761598.html

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/10/occupy_central_s_polite_protesters_the_hong_kong_demonstrators_are_disciplined.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top