Foreign Policy in the Monroe Doctrine

     In the article titled "How to Avoid a Bad Deal with Iran", it discusses how the U.S plans to stop the use of nuclear weapons by Iran by setting up negotiation dates with the leaders in Iran to push them towards getting rid of the dangerous weapons. The people of Iran refuse to agree with the prevention of using the nuclear weapons, so the U.S stated that they would "...rather the administration continue to negotiate than agree to a bad deal." The negotiations have been set to last up to another seven months because the U.S and other world power countries are not backing down and letting Iran use these weapons any longer. The negotiation agreements that the world power countries are making to Iran must follow the four main criteria. First, Washington must drastically reduce the number of centrifuges and also reduce the amount of uranium kept in stockpiles down to less than the minimum amount to construct one singular nuclear bomb. Second, there must be "unprecedented monitoring of all aspects of the Iranian nuclear program." Third, Tehran, an Iranian leader, must agree to all negotiations and all decisions to make sure that they can not use military force in part with them. And Lastly, "the sanction-relief mechanism should be gradual and in accordance with Iranian progress in rolling back the nuclear program." In the article it states that if negotiations do not follow these four main criteria, it then gives Iran and other Middle Eastern countries the right to acquire nuclear weapons. 

     This article on the U.S foreign policy could be used to apply the lasting principles of the Monroe Doctrine. It applies to the principle of separate spheres of influence because the U.S is afraid that Iran is going to use their nuclear weapons in attacking their country. So they think that if they can kindly negotiate the use of the weapons with Iran's leaders, then they wont use the weapons against the U.S in hopes that they can stay out of each others ways. Iran will keep to themselves and the U.S will keep to themselves. The article applies to non-colonization because the U.S is not settling and sitting in on Iran to make them stop the use of the weapons, they are simply negotiating with them to end the use. They are not invading their country. And finally, non-intervention applies to this article because the use of these weapons do not affect the U.S directly, but they want to make sure that it will end and not affect other countries. The Monroe Doctrine applies to the U.S foreign policy today in many ways. It is still active these days because the policies written are true to what the U.S should follow in foreign situations.

     Citation of Article: "How to Avoid a Bad Deal With Iran." Foreign Policy How to Avoid a Bad Deal With Iran Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2014.

Race and National Identity: Is it Becoming Too Serious of a Problem?

     The revolution that I had to study was the Brazil Revolution. The Brazil revolution all started when Napoleon, the new French emperor, and his armies severed the connections between Portugal and Brazil by invading Portugal and Spain in 1807-1808, right after the French Revolution had ended. When Napoleon went into Spain, he imprisoned the Spanish King Ferdinand VII, which left the colonies without royalty, thus starting a series of bloody wars fighting for independence. Later on, in Brazil, French troops invaded and to avoid uprisings like the ones that happened in Spain, the royal families of Brazil and 10,000 Portuguese followers made a journey across the Atlantic and relocated their empire in Rio de Janeiro. When the Portuguese prince, John VI, arrived in Brazil in 1808, he was the ruler for thirteen years of Portugal’s Asian, African, and American colonies in Rio de Janeiro. In 1815, King John VI elevated Brazil to the status of a kingdom, and then shortly after, Napoleon was defeated in Europe, which opened up new opportunities to reinstate the monarchy. However, John VI decided to stay in Brazil, and then in 1820, the Portuguese army led a revolution to bring about a constitutional government.  Then in 1821, John VI gave up his leadership position to his 23 year old son Pedro, and Pedro became prince regent of Brazil. In 1822, Pedro declared Brazils independence, thus Brazil became one of the first Latin American colonies to make a peaceful transition to independence. And after creating a new constitution enacted in 1824, Portugal finally recognized Brazil’s independence in 1825. Then, when Brazil was in a long lasting struggle with Argentina over the Southern border of Brazil, it caused the Cisplatine war that went from 1825-1828. Then when Brazil suffered defeat, many people were unhappy with the way Pedro handled the war, thus Pedro abdicated his Brazilian throne in 1831 and returned to Portugal. As you can see, there were no real outbreaks due to race in the Brazil Revolution. After all, it was the most peaceful transition to an independent colony in the Latin American region. Its major outcomes were the takeover of the Southern border of Brazil by the Argentineans, and the discovery of Rio de Janeiro when the Portuguese fled when French troops invaded.

     These days, race continues to affect national identity and politics because there are many laws written in the U.S that state that you can only do certain things if you are a legal U.S citizen or if you were born in the country, etc. But now, these laws are considered discriminatory because people are taking race very seriously now and believe it is unfair to classify people by their race or background. In the article by the New York Times titled “Reaction to Ferguson Decision Shows Racial Divide Remains Over Views of Justice”, it talks about the white man that shot the black teen and how the police officer who shot him was not being as brutally punished because the kid he shot was black. This article shows how race comes in to play in situations every day, and how people of other races and backgrounds are still not treated as fairly as white people. I think that this situation is horrible and that the police officer should be convicted just the same as if he shot a white person because killing someone, no matter their race, should come with the same consequences. Just been the teen was black does not make it any better to have killed him. I believe that racial division is a serious issue and it needs to be toned down and not taken into account as often as it is.

Citation of article from the New York Times: Wines, Michael. "Reaction to Ferguson Decision Shows Racial Divide Remains Over Views of Justice." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 Nov. 2014. Web. 02 Dec. 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/26/us/after-ferguson-announcement-a-racial-divide-remains-over-views-of-justice.html?_r=0