The UKBA and LMU

This Wednesday at 20:00, the UK Border Agency (UKBA) announced its decision to revoke the Highly Trusted Status (HTS) of London Metropolitan University, thus removing the right for the University to grant approval for student visas, and causing all current student visas approved by the University to be invalidated.

The UKBA’s horrific decision has far-reaching and outstanding effects, far more than one could possibly first imagine; the displacement of current students, the delay to prospective students, the loss of money to the University and the Higher Education sphere as a whole, the loss of tenants, the damaging impact to the reputation of the United Kingdom, overstaffing at the University, confusion for students… the list goes on.

However, of course, the most important is the damaging effect that students have faced. The most shocking part is that even those who are currently studying at the University, of whom most, if not all, will be legitimate hard-working students, are now no longer able to complete their course – some may have less than three months left of their course, and paid out thousands in order to study at this University, yet are now being told their course is no longer an option. They must find a new course by 1 December or return to their home country – a very unfair, and economically harming danger. 

Furthermore, there are the students who have applied for the University, been warranted Visas, perhaps bought their travel tickets, and have planned to travel to the University next month, some within the timeframe of 2 weeks. These students are now being told they must also reapply elsewhere.

The worst? It would be fairly simple if they had more time; the fact is, UCAS applications have been completed, clearing spaces have been open, filled and closed. There are no longer any spaces left for students, and even if there were, it would be very unlikely that it was a course that the students had originally studied or intended to study. What use is that?

This decision is not a simple one, but the Government and the UKBA thoroughly knew the impact of it, and the unwelcome reception it would have. It is also not a decision that will be taken lightly. The National Union of Students (NUS), Unison and the University and College Union (UCU) have all condemned the action, planning a day of protest to show their support and solidarity for the displaced students and I am certain that hundreds, if not thousands, will turn out; perhaps I will be one of them.

What's next for Syria?

The Syrian crisis continues to worsen and any improvement to the situation seems an all too distant possibility. The announcement of the UN's special envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan's resignation from the role highlights the difficulty of the task; and aside from that, revelations from Obama's administration and talks between Russia's Putin and David Cameron  clearly demonstrate the absolute lack of international unity.

But what is the real heart of the problem? Is it a lack of unity between all members of the United Nations, with China and Russia vetoing any proposed action on Assad's regime, or is it the fact that neither the regime or the 'rebels' are adhering to the six-point plan that Annan attempted to implement? Every side blames the other, so no clarity is apparent. Regardless, the crisis is infuriating, and despite it's similarities to the Libyan uprising last year, it is also very different. Cynics might say it's to do with oil, others to say with key alliances; either way, there are civilians being killed left, right and centre here, and it's not something that should occur no matter the situation.

The situation is vastly different to Libya for a number of reasons; essentially, the sides of the oppositions and the length of time this conflict has spanned define the sensitivity of the situation. Comparatively, Libya appeared to have an almost everyone-against-Gaddafi situation, where the majority of citizens were in favour of his deposition, whereas within Syria, there is an obvious divide of opinion, and to favour one side over another would be to ignore the rights and opinions of a large sector of society, regardless of what the rest of the country and, indeed, the world thinks. Secondly, the conflict in Libya lasted only a couple of months before there was international intervention, whereas this conflict has lasted over a year now. The common opinion now is that Syria is militarised; citizens are used to conflict and there is danger for any person within the country. To arm the citizens would not simply result in the overthrow of the Government, but rather in the massacre of a vast number of citizens who disagree with the most armed side. These two points put us in a very difficult situation.

What's the correct way forward? I'm no expert on international relations, and I would hate to advocate war in any form, but it's obvious that some kind of action needs to be taken to depose Assad, or the country needs to be sorted and split, like with Sudan. But first, diplomacy needs to ensure that there is peaceful transition and implementation of whatever strategy is agreed upon. Unfortunately, diplomacy appears to be the first hurdle that cannot be overcome, forcing Annan's resignation today. And Obama appears to have decided that also, signing the document for approval in helping the rebels a few months ago, in a covert operation, just falling short of agreeing to arm them. We are yet to see the backlash on this, and a resolution that China and Russia agree appears too distant.

The strangest part of the situation; Syria have still been able to enter a team into the London 2012 Olympics, and they are competing alongside international athletes peacefully. How can a country that is killing its own citizens be able to peacefully enter an international sports competition is beyond me, but apparently it's possible.

Reflecting on a reflection of the British.

Honestly, I can say that the Olympic Ceremony was no less than impressive and inspiring; a fantastic recollection of the lows and the highs of British history. Yes, a few things were missed here and there, but the British culture in all its vastness was most definitely celebrated; from music, to literature, to the National Health Service, Danny Boyle made sure that something from every aspect of our fantastic nation made it into his memorable masterpiece. It certainly was a spectacle.

Regardless of my mild cynicism and cautious take on the Olympics I spoke of yesterday, the Olympics have already surprised me. A fantastic piece of art itself, the Opening Ceremony simply shone a light on how important art is to culture, at a time when access to it is being cut. The 7500 volunteers who took part are what make this most fantastic - putting so much effort into one performance (so it might be the performance of your life) and coming out on top of the world, and not being paid a penny for it - that's a feat, that's inspiring, that's admirable. In fact, it was Paul McCartney that ruined it for the show - right at the end, messing up his lyrics. Oh well, that bit's not Danny Boyle's fault and "Macca" hasn't got a career left in him to ruin.

Particularly amusing for me though, was the inclusion of some world famous literary characters, and some well-loved comedians: of course, I'm talking about J.K. Rowling's giant Lord Voldemort scared off by a million Mary Poppinses/Poppi(?), before Mr. Bean made his way into the Chariots of Fire video whilst retaining enough stamina to simultaneously press the same piano key over and over. You don't need to be British to have been in awe with all of that in front of your eyes. I just feel sorry for the Americans who were not able to watch it live, and had their recorded version interrupted by commercials; surely that removes the magic of the show, but NBC are to blame.

Politically, a few things stood out to me last night, even though they were not intentional. Firstly, the Bedknobs and Broomsticks-esque sketch of the NHS, celebrating put unique welfare system. Not meant as a sentimental gesture to the Tory-led coalition, it certainly reminded us of what we do love about our country, and Twitter (at least) erupted in support of the system, rebuffing those proposed Government plans. Great Ormond Street Hospital holds particular significance to me, and I felt shivers down my spine as their excellence was demonstrated in the perfomance.

Secondly, the comments of the Tory MP for Cannock Chase, Staffordshire, Aidan Burley, were both shocking and appalling - attacking Danny Boyle's masterpiece as "leftie multicultural" rubbish. It was a celebration of British culture and history, not an idealist piece of propaganda, or the manifesto of the Labour Party. Besides, Danny Boyle is a Conservative himself. Of course, Burley has rebuked his Tweets as misinterpreted, but that's just PR for you.

And thirdly, I wonder how Mitt Romney is feeling about his comments on our preparation following that. Yes, I had some sympathy for his view yesterday, but retrospectively my written views make me nauxious, and I hope he is in a similar state of mind.

However, one point still stands; I'm still not a massive sports fan. That patriotism has become a little stronger, and I will share the joy with our nation when we collect numerous medals - I just won't watch us win them. It's still just about another sporting fixture to me - just preceded by one of the most excellent pieces of art I have ever admired. I will most certainly be remembering that, and I'm sure the other 26.9 million Britons alone will with me.