New Thoughts

Class was quite lively and interesting last night. I've found myself siding with the pro-Israeli contingent in the group (which is basically Eurotrash and me and maybe one other guy half the time). It's not that the Palistinians are completely wrong or anything, it's that, as I said last night, I'm a "realpolitik" kind of guy. At many times, the Israeli's have agreed to compromise, but the Palistinian/Arab world has almost never compromised - and certainly never on the two state solution. Allow me to sum up the entire debate (for those of you not as familiar with the conflict).

There are two issues in the Arab-Israeli dispute: the right of Palistinian refugees who fled the country from November 1947 - 14 May 1948 to return (roughly 4 million people now) and the status of Jerusalem. Everything else is (now) negotiable.

Refugees: Israel says no return because the Arab states attacked in 1948 which was the primary cause of refugee flight - it's their problem. Arabs say that the Jews stirred up the refugees and scared them into leaving. Truth is in the middle. I say: It was war - even before the 1948 invasion. It was a civil war, Arabs against Jews. I care not if the Jews ousted the Arabs or not. They were in it for the species. Ongoing civil conflict in the land between Jews and Arabs since the 1930s, 6 million killed in the Holocaust, and now you have 7 Arab states ganging up and attacking at once? Anything short of atrocities is good to go. Cold reality: Israel won't grant the right of return because Palistinians (as they're now called) reproduce faster, there are 4 million refugees and 6 million Jews, do the math.

Jerusalem: It's a holy city for both sides. Israel was willing to cut it in half in 2000, Palistinians said "no", they want it all. I say: Either share it or neither gets it. Cold reality: The end game on this one is likely to leave Jerusalem an "international city" like the Vatican, except under UN control.

Peace Process: That's it. Two issues. There isn't peace right now because Arafat walked away from the table in 2000 and refused to compromise. The Israeli's were willing, the Palistinians were not. (I'm writing a paper about that.) In the end, we'll probably see the same deal on the table in the future. Two states, Jerusalem either shared or international, no refugee return.

Anyway, I had some thoughts last night that continued into the morning that I'll share for consumption and feedback. I'm strongly considering not taking classes in the summer session and pushing back my completion of this program until December 2005. I have two reasons for considering this. First, it extends my stay by two months which I think would be nice; and second, it makes more financial sense. Here's the breakdown:

1. Is it permissible: Yes, getting a visa extension is no problem and I'm not "required" to take summer school.
2. Is it financially feasible: Yes, when school is out of session, I can work up to 40 hours/week meaning that I could earn more than enough to live on and save money. Essentially, I can live on my 20 hours a week salary and pocket the remainder. At the end of the summer, it's feasible that I could have north of £2,000 in the bank. That would be a big help because I would prefer not to work during my last term as I will be focusing on my thesis.
3. Is it academically feasible: I believe so. I need to check with my advisor on this one, but I'm fairly sure that it would work out class-wise. There isn't a lot of flexibility in the courses offered because it's a small program, but I believe that there is enough built in that, combined with my thesis, I wouldn't have to take any independent study classes (which are always offered, but don't look that great on a transcript).

Now, the other part of this is likely to be more upsetting to certain family members located in the mid-Atlantic, but I'm also strongly considering attempting to stay and work for a year after the program. The reason for this is quite simple: money. If I can get a job starting at £35,000/year (which is what the political consulting market begins at over here), then I really couldn't turn it down. That comes to about £3000/month before taxes or about £2000/month net. I can live frugally on about £700/month meaning I could pocket about £1300/month. Over the course of 1 year, that would add up to over £15,000 - i.e. enough to pay off my student loans in one fell swoop. How can I refuse this if I receive an offer?

Of course, this is easier said than done. Getting a 6-month work visa is easy. It's a matter of forms, nothing else. But after that, you have to get sponsored or you have to go home. Firms may not wish to employ me in a limited capacity or give me a work permit. The Prototype has run into this problem. So, alternatively, I could end up making a lot less working on a contract basis. I have yet to make up my mind about this, but I'm leaning toward giving it a go. The fact is though, I don't really have to decide at all for awhile. I do have to decide about the first issue fairly soon, however. So that's what I'll be pondering over the course of the next week.