instruction:
Your task is to extract the thesis of an opinionated news article by selecting some of its text segments. The thesis is a summarization of what the author wants to persuade the reader of. Your answer should consist of segments of the given text. Note that you are not allowed to combine different sentences.
question:
If Abbott is serious about tackling terrorism, cutting foreign aid is the worst way to go about it. In conjunction with the joint military action against Islamic State (Isis), Tony Abbott has pledged $5m in humanitarian aid for Iraq on his recent surprise visit to Baghdad . But don't be fooled by the government's apparent show of generosity - Australia isn't giving any more to foreign aid than it was before . In fact ,  it is giving significantly less . It is vitally important that we don't stop talking about recent cuts to foreign aid . The government's mid-year economic and fiscal outlook has reduced the foreign aid budget to the lowest levels in Australian history . Foreign aid spending has been cut by almost $3.7bn over four years . In addition to the $7.6bn already cut in May's federal budget, foreign aid has been cut by one quarter . If the government is serious about tackling terrorist threats and defending "universal values" , cutting off foreign aid to programmes that provide education, reduce poverty and improve gender equality is one of the worst ways to go about it . The Save Australian Aid campaign states that $11bn in foreign aid - the amount cut from the foreign aid budget in the past year - is the equivalent of 2 million children who may not be able to enrol in school, 1.4 million births without a birth attendant, 3.7 million children who may not receive vaccinations, 4.7 million people who will have reduced access to safe water, and almost 22 million people with reduced assistance in emergency situations . These cuts further perpetuate the idea that Australia is not a team player, a notion fuelled by our past behaviour towards our neighbours, and our recent denials of international obligations towards asylum seekers and climate change . In addition to the cuts in the Myefo, Australia backed out of commitments made to tax justice in the recent G20 summit . It is estimated that developing nations lose $160bn per year to corporate tax dodging; an amount that would end world hunger three times over . The G20 commitment, Abbott said, was "about the countries of the world, the people of the world, receiving the tax benefits that are their due and it's needed so that governments can fund the infrastructure and the services that people expect and deserve." As the host of the G20, backing out of this commitment not only damages our international credibility, but also has a huge impact on the developing world . The foreign aid cuts are irresponsible, but not surprising . Cutting the aid budget sends a clear message to our developing neighbours that Australia won't lend a helping hand unless it's in our own best interest . However ,  our politicians seem to forget that there is something in it for us, and not only in Iraq . Aid is much more than a humanitarian gesture ; it's a tool for regional development, trust and cooperation . Foreign aid programmes promote stability through education and equality, in turn reducing conflict . As an added bonus, foreign aid and sustainable development programmes create stronger economies , which in turn create opportunities at home and abroad . Poverty breeds hopelessness and despair , which are both contributing factors to extremist behaviour . Foreign aid is not the only factor in answering this issue , but it's more than a step in the right direction . Higher levels of foreign aid have the potential not to only alleviate extreme poverty in our region, but to raise international opinion of Australia as a fair country . A recent study examining the effects of foreign aid on foreign public opinion found that US aid programmes targeting HIV/Aids have improved perceptions of the US among the public in recipient countries . Australia would reap these benefits as a side effect of foreign aid, saving the millions of dollars set aside to "stop the boats" and wage a "war on terror" . But our government has, predictably, made yet another irresponsible decision with untold repercussions . While two innocent people died in Martin Place on 16 December in what has been labelled an act of terror , a reduction of this size in the foreign aid budget will result in the unnecessary deaths of hundreds across the globe due to reduced access to vital services . The high priority the Abbott government has placed on security doesn't come cheap, with funds for anti-terrorism programmes costing billions of dollars . Wouldn't this money be better spent reducing inequality, poverty, and conflict? Shouldn't we be stopping the problem at the source, not trying to cure the symptoms?
answer:
the government is serious about tackling terrorist threats and defending "universal values" cutting off foreign aid to programmes that provide education, reduce poverty and improve gender equality is one of the worst ways to go about it


question:
Boko Haram's deadly advance must be stopped, but how? Last week's massacre of perhaps 2,000 people in and around the Nigerian town of Baga, and the bombings of markets in the north-east using children perhaps as young as 10, mark not a new tactic for the violent extremist organisation Boko Haram, but an intensification of its existing behaviour . Boko Haram is pushing the boundaries of the extreme and is challenging - and seemingly succeeding - in overstretching Nigeria's 7th Infantry Division, tasked to fight the insurgents in the north-east . In recent months it has made significant territorial gains and is in control of many towns around the Borno state capital, Maiduguri , though this is in a constant state of flux as the military defends state capitals and recaptures lost urban centres . Speculation as to the aims of Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad, the real name of the network of Islamist, cultist and criminal elements that grew from a radical but initially largely non-violent movement, continues . And the logical conclusion is that it is capturing territory to carve out an Islamic caliphate in north-eastern Nigeria . But the group is decimating what is in its path . And it is greedy : the longer Boko Haram goes unimpeded and the more confident it becomes, the more it seems to want . So perhaps what is its endgame is the wrong question . Boko Haram is fighting because it can , because it is a lethal fighting force and has children and conscripts to send into the field as terrified, intoxicated and indoctrinated weapons and shields . The question that needs to be answered is how did this terrorist threat grow to such horrifying proportions, killing thousands and displacing millions- a threat unimaginable in a democratic Nigeria 10 years ago? And what can be done to stop it? Nigeria's military is around 130,000-strong, and has been previously lauded for its peacekeeping successes in civil conflicts in Africa , but now , with a worsening conflict at home, questions are being asked about just how hollowed out such an important institution has become . There are varying reports as to why the 8,500 troops deployed to battle Boko Haram have been unable to halt its advance . Allegations of corruption; misallocated resources; poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly directed troops; fear; low morale; and deficient interagency cooperation all have a basis . While promises have been made to investigate reported abuses by the Nigerian armed forces against civilians, in December 2014 an army court sentenced 54 soldiers to death for mutiny and cowardice - for refusing to fight Boko Haram . In the short term , preventing Boko Haram from expanding further relies on a more effective military response with a much-bolstered force . But this is impossible without essential leadership from the centre, without tough calls and effective management . The international community will come under increasing criticism for not doing enough to stem the tide of Boko Haram's terror . Assistance has been offered by a range of partners including the US, UK, France, Russia and China - some of it has been declined - but it is likely more offers of assistance will come . Nigeria believes its neighbours Chad, Cameroon and Niger could be doing more . But domestic and international confidence in the will or capacity - or both - of Nigeria's federal government to take the decisions to mount an effective response is fast waning in the face of increasing casualties . Nigerians will go to the polls on 14 February to vote for a new president and national assembly . How much this violence, predominantly in three of Nigeria's 36 states, will affect the outcome is unclear because Nigerians face a range of daily challenges . There are concerns, however, that the majority of people in the states at the epicentre of the conflict - thought to be potential opposition supporters- will be disenfranchised, along with over a million internally displaced people . However politicised the crisis may become in the runup to elections, the insurgency will outlast the event .
answer:
Last week's massacre of perhaps 2,000 people in and around the Nigerian town of Baga, and the bombings of markets in the north-east using children perhaps as young as 10, mark not a new tactic for the violent extremist organisation Boko Haram, but an intensification of its existing behaviour


question:
Madonna's cultural appropriation confirms what a cliche she has become. There' s only thing duller than a Twitterstorm , and that's an Instagramstorm . Particularly when said storms feature figures who like to think of themselves as controversial and as deliberately baiting us : Rihanna posing in a clingy burqa at a mosque, Mario Balotelli posting a racist image , and now Madonna doctoring pictures of African and African-American leaders to promote her new album . Really, the only dignified thing to do is to not dignify it with a response, and move on . Who cares if Madonna straps black ropes on the images of dead black rights icons? As Peter Robinson wrote in the Guardian:"It's slightly heartbreaking that Madonna, an artist who made her name through an intuitive grasp of almost every major trend and zeitgeist fluctuation, is so crap at social media." But sometimes a solely jaded response betrays our own complacency, like resigning yourself to the fact that there will always be people who think of racist slurs as banter , or those who think it is just fine to appropriate the symbols of others to give their own tepid existence some edge , or people who still wear bootcut jeans . It's not OK, no matter how persistent and ever- present it is . Even though Madonna has always been controversial , it also seems that as the world around her has got sharper, she has got duller and more derivative . The appropriation that she and others have carried out is nothing new ; we're just noticing it more . That's because those who are piggybacking on others' journeys do not only have more channels to flaunt their cluelessness and sense of entitlement (Iggy Azalea, walk away from Twitter) but they are also being called out on it more . Whether it is usurping religion - crucifixes and nun habits are passe now; it's niqabs on naked bodies  - keep up - homosexuality or now minority rights , Madonna is a manifestation of how privilege feeds off the authenticity of "struggle" . This is a double plundering that leads to further marginalisation : the dominant narrative will oppress you, then co-opt you, and then weave you into your own tiny little section of the tapestry . Some would argue that slavery and segregation ended long ago (well, segregation in the US in the 60s and apartheid in South African in the 90s, so not that long ago) . But that doesn't mean white people can now happily vandalise the cultural and historical totems of a minority's struggle as part of some universal poster for the white western narrative of overcoming and learning from our mistakes . Imagine a pop artist using the recent CIA torture as part of their campaign - perhaps showing dead Arab personalities being waterboarded . No? Too soon? Well , when it comes to certain issues , it will always too soon . Of course ,  the charitable position is that Madonna, or to a different extent, Iggy Azalea, are not doing this with any high degree of self-awareness or design - they might see all contemporary culture as equal-access human heritage that they can dip into and sample as a vehicle for their talent . They would be right to some extent , but the sad fact is that these modern iterations of minority culture that they are sampling all arose from suffering and oppression rather than from a series of tortured geniuses in drawing rooms across Europe . Yes, there are spaces where our common mix of religious, sexual and racial legacies intermingle - gloriously, sometimes . But that is usually an uncurated, spontaneous thing, not a cynical shopping list . To put it simply , edginess comes from just that : being on the edge . Ironically, all Madonna and her ilk's desperate antics to appear so only confirm that they are, in fact, utterly comfortable and mainstream . Cultural appropriation is now the standard default of the unoriginal . It is a common and predictable template , where one becomes a cliche in trying to avoid being a cliche because you have nothing new to offer - something Madonna would surely be mortified by .
answer:

Who cares if Madonna straps black ropes on the images of dead black rights icons?