Failure to Acknowledge the Inevitable
It's a sorry state of affairs when Dick Cheney has usurped Barack Obama's position as a steward of progress. But that's exactly what has happened, with Cheney declaring his acceptance of gay marriage as Obama desperately attempts to avoid confronting the issue. Cheney's action is neither brave nor commendable. As the country's #2, he had 8 years where he could've made a positive difference. His recent support for gay marriage is a product of personal circumstances, and a daughter whom he hopes to protect from the discrimination that the LGBT community currently subjected to. Once again, nothing wrong with this motive, but his minimal gesture should be put into context.
Obama's moment has come, and so far he has completely flip-flopped on the issues of gay marriage and "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT). Perhaps the writing was on the wall when Rick Warren was hand-picked to give the invocation at Obama's inauguration in January. Warren, the California pastor who lobbied voraciously for Prop. 8, seemed an unlikely candidate for the coronation of someone who received extensive support from the gay community during his campaign.
Since assuming office Obama has dodged the issue of gay marriage, and has upheld DADT under the premise of "legitimate interest in military discipline". One such case was Dan Choi, an Army National Guard Lieutenant who is faced with discharge from the military after coming out. His position as an Arab linguist affords him tremendous importance in America's overseas campaigns, an importance that is apparently rendered trivial by concerns of sexual persuasion.
Just how widespread are these concerns though?
The senselessness of the military kicking out a soldier whose much-needed skills are in short supply has not escaped the American public. A recent Gallup poll found that almost 70 percent of Americans are in favor of military service by openly gay men and lesbians, and even a majority of conservatives -- 58 percent -- do not oppose openly homosexual soldiers serving in the military.
Obama may be biding his time before taking on a lightning rod issue such as this, hoping to shore up support and political capital before the confrontation. But as with all civil rights issues, you can never give the powers that be the benefit of the doubt. If past lessons teach us anything, it's constant grassroots pressure that ultimately leads to the deluge.
Read Der Spiegel's report, American Gays and Lesbians Feel Betrayed by Obama.
The inspiring Lt. Dan Choi:
This video is also quite telling, and quite humorous. I think it speaks for itself:
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Monday, June 1, 2009
Men Benefit When Women Run the Show
Men in a Matriarchal Society
We've all imagined what life would be like in an alternate universe before. But once a while we're actually given a glimpse. That's what this interview in Der Spiegel did for me. Though I'm aware we live in a patriarchal society, the term has never really had any meaning for me. If you can't fathom an alternative, you take the assigned term for granted. But what would life be like in a matriarchal society, where the hierarchy of gender relations is reversed.
According to Richard Coler, it isn't like that at all. The Argentinian writer shared his experiences from a recent stay with the Mosuo people of China, who live in a matriarchal society. What is it like when women run the show?
Women have a different way of dominating. When women rule, it's part of their work. They like it when everything functions and the family is doing well. Amassing wealth or earning lots of money doesn't cross their minds. Capital accumulation seems to be a male thing. It's not for nothing that popular wisdom says that the difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys.
How do men fare in a society where they are put in a subordinate position?
Men live better where women are in charge: you are responsible for almost nothing, you work much less and you spend the whole day with your friends. You're with a different woman every night. And on top of that, you can always live at your mother's house...Where a woman's dominant position is secure, those kinds of archaic gender roles don't have any meaning.
On what stood out most to him, Coler said:
...there is no violence in a matriarchal society. I know that quickly slips into idealization -- every human society has its problems. But it simply doesn't make sense to the Mosuo women to solve conflicts with violence. Because they are in charge, nobody fights. They don't know feelings of guilt or vengeance -- it is simply shameful to fight. They are ashamed if they do and it even can threaten their social standing.
Sounds like a utopia for both men and women...
Also, I suggest checking out this superb piece from Journeyman Pictures on Mosuo society, the only one of its kind in the world.
Beware Climate Karma
Climate Change's Frightening Toll
Approximately 315,000 people a year are being killed by climate change, according to the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum. The statistics of the report are attributable to hunger, sickness, and weather disasters. I can only imagine the what the toll would stand at if armed conflicts over dwindling resources were included in the tally, for example the violence in Darfur.
The report also reveals one of the more problematic dimensions of the climate change issue: the nations most responsible for carbon emissions (U.S., Canada, China, Russia, Western Europe) are going to be least affected in the short-term, while 15 of the 20 nations most vulnerable to climate change reside in Africa. A problem of this magnitude is incredibly difficult to solve when there is no immediate incentive to grapple with it. "The first hit and worst affected are the world's poorest groups, and yet they have done least to cause the problem," said Kofi Annan.
But if we think this is a cushion for affluent nations to fall back on, think again. The west is in for some serious karmic blowback if steps are not taken to mitigate the causes of climate change. It is estimated that 325 million people are currently affected by climate change, and that might double within 20 years to 10% of the world's population. Think of the refugee crisis that's going to cause, and whose borders the refugees will head towards. Think of the instability this will create in the developing world, the failed states, the breeding grounds for terrorism.
Watch this to see how climate change tangibly affects African families:
Approximately 315,000 people a year are being killed by climate change, according to the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum. The statistics of the report are attributable to hunger, sickness, and weather disasters. I can only imagine the what the toll would stand at if armed conflicts over dwindling resources were included in the tally, for example the violence in Darfur.
The report also reveals one of the more problematic dimensions of the climate change issue: the nations most responsible for carbon emissions (U.S., Canada, China, Russia, Western Europe) are going to be least affected in the short-term, while 15 of the 20 nations most vulnerable to climate change reside in Africa. A problem of this magnitude is incredibly difficult to solve when there is no immediate incentive to grapple with it. "The first hit and worst affected are the world's poorest groups, and yet they have done least to cause the problem," said Kofi Annan.
But if we think this is a cushion for affluent nations to fall back on, think again. The west is in for some serious karmic blowback if steps are not taken to mitigate the causes of climate change. It is estimated that 325 million people are currently affected by climate change, and that might double within 20 years to 10% of the world's population. Think of the refugee crisis that's going to cause, and whose borders the refugees will head towards. Think of the instability this will create in the developing world, the failed states, the breeding grounds for terrorism.
Watch this to see how climate change tangibly affects African families:
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Debating the New Media
The Future of Journalism
Earlier this week, Senator Kerry presided over a Congressional hearing on the state of the media. With the newspapers laying off entire swathes of reporters, shutting down bureaus, and revealing major losses in their books, blame has primarily fallen on the “new media.” This term refers to the 21st century nexus of YouTube, Twitter, the blogosphere, and news aggregators that have placed a hitherto unattainable volume of information at our disposal, displacing newspapers from their niche.
Testifying at the hearing was David Simon, a former journalist from the Baltimore Sun and creator of the all-time best television show (not hyperbole), The Wire. For five seasons, Simon’s brainchild was unprecedented in its dedication to expose an America that had been forgotten by most mainstream media outlets: the drug-infested high rises, the decrepit education systems, the corrupt political institutions, and the withered labor unions. In The Wire’s final season, Simon directed his rage at the decline of quality journalism and the fall of the American newspaper.
Here is Simon’s testimony to Congress last week:
These are some valuable excerpts:
From those speaking on behalf of new media, weblogs and that which goes “twitter,” you will be treated to assurances that American journalism has a perfectly fine future online and that a great democratization is taking place. Well, a plague on both their houses.
High-end journalism is dying in America. And unless a new economic model is achieved, it will not be reborn on the web or anywhere else. The internet is a marvelous tool, and clearly it is the information delivery system of our future. But thus far, it does not deliver much first-generation reporting. Instead, it leeches that reporting from mainstream news publications, whereupon aggregating websites and bloggers contribute little more than repetition, commentary and froth. Meanwhile, readers acquire news from aggregators and abandon its point of origin, namely the newspapers themselves. In short, the parasite is slowly killing the host…
Indeed, the very phrase “citizen journalist” strikes my ear as Orwellian. A neighbor who is a good listener and cares about people is a good neighbor; he is not in any sense a citizen social worker, just as a neighbor with a garden hose and good intentions is not a citizen firefighter. To say so is a heedless insult to trained social workers and firefighters.
Simon has a good point here. Society seems to have taken journalists for granted as people who merely observe, question, and write. This suffices as a quick job description, but there is a lot of craft that goes into it. You have to really know the institutions you cover, the various interests at stake, who has an incentive to tell you the truth and who does not. You have to sniff out the whistleblowers, those bureaucratic officials who have observed wrongdoing and are willing to expose it. This requires dedication and persistence, “a daily full-time commitment” as Simon says.
But while this approach has been jettisoned by many bloggers, Simon understates the plethora of go-it-alone independent reporters who do journalism well through the medium of blogs. As a matter of fact, the finest journalist I know at the UN is a blogger who doggedly pursues every contradiction of UN policy and conduct, confronting and challenging officials to the point of annoyance. In other words, quality journalism.
Ryan Tate of Gawker takes objection to Simon’s dismissal of the ‘new media’:
I found this argument odd, because as a newspaper reporter who spent a few years covering a town much like Baltimore — Oakland, California — I often found that bloggers were the only other writers in the room at certain city council committee meetings and at certain community events. They tended to be the sort of persistently-involved residents newspapermen often refer to as "gadflies" — deeply, obsessively concerned about issues large and infinitesimal in the communities where they lived…
Collectively, these bloggers are doing just what Simon suggests: attending meetings, developing sources and holding government accountable every day…
And the best of the crop are doing so individually, on their own and, somehow, basically for free. Simon should spend as much time as he can on A Better Oakland… a thoroughly reported blog on the nitty-gritty of Oakland politics, complete with key video moments from government meetings, illuminating crime analysis, skillful fact-checking of political puffery, transit coverage, development coverage, thorough meeting recaps, spicy guest posts, and, yes, the occasional media criticism…
This is an important debate that we need to have. While mainstream American newspapers may fall by the wayside, the need to hold our leaders accountable will not. Will bloggers be up to the challenge?
Bill Moyers recently interviewed Simon, an intriguing individual with significant insight on the problems facing urban America. Check out the videos and transcript here.
I'd kill myself if I didn't use this as an opportunity to plug my favorite show of all time. Enjoy these legendary scenes:
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Answering Captain Phillips
Piracy is a Response to Maritime Rape
Testifying before the Senate Commerce subcommittee yesterday, Captain Richard Phillips urged America’s leaders to find the root causes behind the piracy in Somali waters that led to his five-day ordeal last month. If the esteemed Senators don’t’ already know the answers, and are actually interested in finding out (both of which I highly doubt), then they’d be wise to forego the mainstream media as their source of information. The majority of Western media outlets of course, opted to focus on proper military solutions and Phillips’ heroism, more so than a genuine effort to understand what had led to piracy.
Phillips is going to be sincerely disappointed if he wants real answers to his inquiry, because it would require a modicum of sincerity and introspection from the political establishment, traits most certainly lacking. Here is the answer you’ve asked for Mr. Phillips: the Somali piracy that has been wreaking havoc on the high seas and was responsible for your capture, is itself a response to piracy…ours!
For years Western governments and corporations have taken advantage of the absence of a Somali government by ravaging the coastlines of fishing resources and dumping harmful toxic waste. Since this coastline belongs to the people of Somalia according to international law, this theft and plundering is by definition piracy. The fact that Somalia has no coast guard or navy to defend its rights does not make this practice legitimate, lest we forego the rule of law and accept rule of the gun.
Few media outlets have cared to bring this issue to light, the notable exceptions being Democracy Now!, The Huffington Post, and Al-Jazeera. African newspapers have done better to service to the issue by acknowledging “the other piracy.” In this article from The New Vision, a Ugandan publication, the author intimates with Somali locals on the matter to get their perspective:
However, fresh information that is increasingly becoming available is that since Siad Barre was overthrown from power and lawlessness settled in, big fishing companies from Japan, China and Western Europe made the Gulf of Aden their playground.
They came with huge trawlers, dug deep and took as much of the livelihood of these poor Somali fishermen and destroyed what they couldn't take with them. And because there was no government in power with a national coast guard, the situation went on for more than a decade when fishermen decided to take the law into their own hands…
Ordinary Somalis do not share the government view that these young men in their 20s are common criminals.
The article poses a sensible question that is nevertheless startlingly naïve:
Isn't it worth investigating by the international community, the MI5, the FBI and other international crime agencies to find the root cause of this menace that has made travel rather unsafe on Africa's East Coast?
No, it isn’t worth it if the answers are going to suggest that Western society’s limitless demand for seafood and need to dump its toxic filth in unprotected waters are indeed Somali piracy’s root causes. It isn’t worth it if an investigation will diminish the capacity to scapegoat a Somali teenager for the scourge of piracy.
In examining ‘The Flipside of the Hijack Coin’, Nigeria’s Daily Trust sees the issue through a more cynical lens. To sum it up:
The collapse of the Somali state since the fall of the Siad Barre regime in 1991, has led to the massive illegal foreign fishing regime of poaching and destruction of Somali marine resources which has not been part of the international concern in the same why that the menace of piracy has been highlighted. Illegal, Unreported Unregulated (IUU) fishing fleets from Europe, Arabia and the Far East, have been active in Somalia waters over the past 18 years damaging economic and environmental life of the Somali people.
Major kudos to the author, Is'haq Modibbo Kawu, for so eloquently describing the phenomenon at work as the world “deals” with piracy:
The situation today is that a combination of biased UN resolutions, big power orders and tendentious news reporting by the major international news outlets have raised the stakes internationally about Somali piracy, but they have failed to mention the need to project Somali mineral resources from IUU violation in the same waters. It is in fact appearing as if the anti-piracy campaigns have as object the effort to cover up and protect illegal fishing activities in Somali waters.
What’s worse, even those fisherman merely trying to obstruct IUU’s, risk being destroyed by navies under the pretense of anti-piracy operations. To his credit, Kawu doesn’t equivocate in assessing this dire situation:
Somalia has therefore become a helpless victim of this massive international process of maritime rape!
That would be an honest answer for Mr. Phillips.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Sex Changes Things: Kenya's Sex Strike
Kenya's Women Declare 'Enough is Enough'
As if to take a page from the ancient Greek comedy Lysistrata, the women of Kenya have decided to use the gifts God gave them to force political change. In a fascinating exhibition of activism, thousands of Kenyan women are protesting their government’s ongoing instability by denying their men that most coveted of treasures: their bodies. Yes, you read that accurately. Male Kenyans have been forced to go without sex for a week, their women outraged by an electoral crisis that has been going on since last year.
To be sure, this episode has its comic elements:
“This will accomplish nothing other than embarrass us," said Martin Kamau, a resident of Nakuru, a major city northwest of the capital. "We are being punished, and yet we are not the ones causing the problems."
Kamau plans to plead his case with his wife. "Seven days is just too much," he said.
Others were not so worried. "Seven days is nothing," one man (said). "I can wait a year."
More than comedy however, the sex-strike is a courageous and admirable step. Kenya’s women have taken destiny into their own hands, defying the status quo of a deeply conservative society that frowns upon sexually suggestive content:
“We cannot allow our leaders to argue over non-issues while relegating the issues that affect this country to the back burner. When this happens, women suffer the most… "
In addition to targeting politicians, activists say the campaign aims to draw spouses into the conversation and nudge them into demanding change.
Kenyan women must be receiving a healthy dose of Greek literature, reminiscent as this is of Aristophanes’ classic comedy mentioned above, Lysistrata. To summarize, the play features a group of women from rivals Sparta and Athens, conspiring to deny their men sex in an effort to draw The Peloponnesian War to an end. In doing so, they disregard their prior allegiances and defy a male-dominated society. The parallels to the Kenyan movement are fascinating.
Leaving no stone unturned, the leading activists have even offered to conscript prostitutes, offering to pay them for lost earnings. The wives of national leaders have also been asked to join the fight and abstain in the bedroom. Unfortunately, I think we can also expect there to be a rise in domestic violence throughout the strike, as it’s certain to exacerbate tensions for men who have also had to deal with the political strife. These women should be applauded however. They have declared they are fed up with the Kibaki/Odinga government and are willing to brave the social establishment’s wrath to change their lot.
The Economist recently ran an article on Kenya’s political situation, a very helpful guide for understanding the anger that has fomented among its people. Here are a few excerpts:
Among the foreign diplomats looking on, optimists refer to the squabbling coalition as an “unconsummated marriage”. The less charitable say Kenya does not have a functioning executive at all, just an unholy alliance of fierce rivals. A schedule of constitutional, electoral, judicial, security, land and economic reforms was laid out in the original agreement between the two parties. A domestic tribunal to judge those responsible for the post-election mayhem was supposed to be set up and a truth commission established. Yet more than a year later the ODM and PNU have failed to agree on any of these issues.
New corruption scandals, confined to no party, are regularly revealed by Kenya’s papers. With so many senior figures from the main parties co-opted into the government—which has 94 ministers and deputies, each earning over $15,000 a month—Kenya has become almost a one-party state. Ministers constantly squabble over pay, protocol, seniority and even who gets the best rooms at government get-togethers. The churches, NGOs and foreign diplomats are left to play the role of opposition, cajoling and threatening from the sidelines.
Apparently, this is not the first such sex-strike in Africa aimed at curbing a national tragedy. The 2008 documentary Pray the Devil Back to Hell features the courageous efforts of Liberian women to put an end to that country’s bloody civil war, employing sexual abstinence as their weapon. Check out the trailer below:
The Young Turks also covered the Kenyan sex-strike recently:
As if to take a page from the ancient Greek comedy Lysistrata, the women of Kenya have decided to use the gifts God gave them to force political change. In a fascinating exhibition of activism, thousands of Kenyan women are protesting their government’s ongoing instability by denying their men that most coveted of treasures: their bodies. Yes, you read that accurately. Male Kenyans have been forced to go without sex for a week, their women outraged by an electoral crisis that has been going on since last year.
To be sure, this episode has its comic elements:
“This will accomplish nothing other than embarrass us," said Martin Kamau, a resident of Nakuru, a major city northwest of the capital. "We are being punished, and yet we are not the ones causing the problems."
Kamau plans to plead his case with his wife. "Seven days is just too much," he said.
Others were not so worried. "Seven days is nothing," one man (said). "I can wait a year."
More than comedy however, the sex-strike is a courageous and admirable step. Kenya’s women have taken destiny into their own hands, defying the status quo of a deeply conservative society that frowns upon sexually suggestive content:
“We cannot allow our leaders to argue over non-issues while relegating the issues that affect this country to the back burner. When this happens, women suffer the most… "
In addition to targeting politicians, activists say the campaign aims to draw spouses into the conversation and nudge them into demanding change.
Kenyan women must be receiving a healthy dose of Greek literature, reminiscent as this is of Aristophanes’ classic comedy mentioned above, Lysistrata. To summarize, the play features a group of women from rivals Sparta and Athens, conspiring to deny their men sex in an effort to draw The Peloponnesian War to an end. In doing so, they disregard their prior allegiances and defy a male-dominated society. The parallels to the Kenyan movement are fascinating.
Leaving no stone unturned, the leading activists have even offered to conscript prostitutes, offering to pay them for lost earnings. The wives of national leaders have also been asked to join the fight and abstain in the bedroom. Unfortunately, I think we can also expect there to be a rise in domestic violence throughout the strike, as it’s certain to exacerbate tensions for men who have also had to deal with the political strife. These women should be applauded however. They have declared they are fed up with the Kibaki/Odinga government and are willing to brave the social establishment’s wrath to change their lot.
The Economist recently ran an article on Kenya’s political situation, a very helpful guide for understanding the anger that has fomented among its people. Here are a few excerpts:
Among the foreign diplomats looking on, optimists refer to the squabbling coalition as an “unconsummated marriage”. The less charitable say Kenya does not have a functioning executive at all, just an unholy alliance of fierce rivals. A schedule of constitutional, electoral, judicial, security, land and economic reforms was laid out in the original agreement between the two parties. A domestic tribunal to judge those responsible for the post-election mayhem was supposed to be set up and a truth commission established. Yet more than a year later the ODM and PNU have failed to agree on any of these issues.
New corruption scandals, confined to no party, are regularly revealed by Kenya’s papers. With so many senior figures from the main parties co-opted into the government—which has 94 ministers and deputies, each earning over $15,000 a month—Kenya has become almost a one-party state. Ministers constantly squabble over pay, protocol, seniority and even who gets the best rooms at government get-togethers. The churches, NGOs and foreign diplomats are left to play the role of opposition, cajoling and threatening from the sidelines.
Apparently, this is not the first such sex-strike in Africa aimed at curbing a national tragedy. The 2008 documentary Pray the Devil Back to Hell features the courageous efforts of Liberian women to put an end to that country’s bloody civil war, employing sexual abstinence as their weapon. Check out the trailer below:
The Young Turks also covered the Kenyan sex-strike recently:
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Rape of Madagascar
How a Coup Has Forsaken Natural Beauty
Last month, a 34-year-old former deejay made international headlines by seizing the presidency of Madagascar in a swift coup. Despite an illegal transfer of power in which the military overthrew a democratically elected government, the image of baby-faced Andry Rajoelina disarmed many would-be critics. His unlikely story, from doing the Antananarivo nightlife circuit to starting his own radio enterprise, using his entrepreneurial skills as a launch pad for winning a mayoral race, and then finally, toppling the Malagasy government, endeared the charismatic upstart to the world community.
To most, familiarity with Madagascar is limited to the 2005 animated film about a zebra and a lion. Unbeknownst to many is that Madagascar is home to one of the world’s richest biological havens, lush with innumerable plant and animal species non-existent beyond the island. The balance that preserves this precious dynamic is extremely sensitive and has long required government protection from raiders looking to exploit the forest’s resources.
Madagascar’s political upheaval has severely disrupted this fragile dynamic. In the aftermath of the coup, the security sector has been paralyzed by urban chaos and street protests. With manpower needed in the capital to protect Rajoelina’s regime, the parks and forests have been abandoned. Capitalizing on the central government’s vulnerability, criminal gangs have poured in to the Malagasy rainforests seeking plunder:
“Organized by foreign businessmen, hundreds of illegal loggers and animal traders have overwhelmed the weak (defenses) of the country's national parks, stripping the forests of precious rosewood and ebony, smuggling out rare animals and destroying the habitat of endangered wildlife.”
With no one to stop it, exploitation has developed into a well-oiled machine, with an apparatus of coercion and bribery:
“The looters are so well organized that they built a road six kilometres into one of the most remote parks in the north, sent a flotilla of ships to smuggle out the logs and recruited workers with radio commercials, environmentalists say.”
Those park rangers who dare to confront the menace are often chased away by the armed militias that accompany looters. But of course, fathoming confrontation is rare in the first place:
“The gangs have paid customs officers to turn a blind eye to the large-scale export of illegally cut wood. And they have sent a fleet of small boats to land on the wild coastline, bypassing the ports.”
The illegal exploitation of Madagascar’s resources is being fueled by a massive demand, particularly in China, for rosewood and ebony, both valued highly on the world market. Exactly who is behind the looting cannot be determined. One local speculates it has been “organized by Chinese businessmen,… although he was uncertain whether they are from China or are ethnic Chinese from a country such as Malaysia or Singapore.”
In a country where most earn less than $1 a day, the Malagasy people are no stranger to hardship. Since gaining independence from France in 1960, coups and military dictatorships have been the norm for the world’s fourth largest island. The latest conflict however has delivered the Malagasy people a terrible blow. Industries from tourism to dairy have been crippled, and squalor has been exacerbated by “strikes, wage shortages and a cutoff in aid supplies from many foreign donors.”
The impending environmental and humanitarian tragedy can only be avoided by genuine efforts from the international community, an altogether unlikely prospect.
Read the original report by Globe and Mail here.
I'd also recommend checking out an African perspective on the political developments in Madagascar.
A traveler to Madagascar shares his dismay.
Watch the video below to get a sense of the enigmatic Rajoelina's personality and the turbulence in Madagascar:
And finally, experience the beauty that is perishing before our very eyes in this video.
Last month, a 34-year-old former deejay made international headlines by seizing the presidency of Madagascar in a swift coup. Despite an illegal transfer of power in which the military overthrew a democratically elected government, the image of baby-faced Andry Rajoelina disarmed many would-be critics. His unlikely story, from doing the Antananarivo nightlife circuit to starting his own radio enterprise, using his entrepreneurial skills as a launch pad for winning a mayoral race, and then finally, toppling the Malagasy government, endeared the charismatic upstart to the world community.
To most, familiarity with Madagascar is limited to the 2005 animated film about a zebra and a lion. Unbeknownst to many is that Madagascar is home to one of the world’s richest biological havens, lush with innumerable plant and animal species non-existent beyond the island. The balance that preserves this precious dynamic is extremely sensitive and has long required government protection from raiders looking to exploit the forest’s resources.
Madagascar’s political upheaval has severely disrupted this fragile dynamic. In the aftermath of the coup, the security sector has been paralyzed by urban chaos and street protests. With manpower needed in the capital to protect Rajoelina’s regime, the parks and forests have been abandoned. Capitalizing on the central government’s vulnerability, criminal gangs have poured in to the Malagasy rainforests seeking plunder:
“Organized by foreign businessmen, hundreds of illegal loggers and animal traders have overwhelmed the weak (defenses) of the country's national parks, stripping the forests of precious rosewood and ebony, smuggling out rare animals and destroying the habitat of endangered wildlife.”
With no one to stop it, exploitation has developed into a well-oiled machine, with an apparatus of coercion and bribery:
“The looters are so well organized that they built a road six kilometres into one of the most remote parks in the north, sent a flotilla of ships to smuggle out the logs and recruited workers with radio commercials, environmentalists say.”
Those park rangers who dare to confront the menace are often chased away by the armed militias that accompany looters. But of course, fathoming confrontation is rare in the first place:
“The gangs have paid customs officers to turn a blind eye to the large-scale export of illegally cut wood. And they have sent a fleet of small boats to land on the wild coastline, bypassing the ports.”
The illegal exploitation of Madagascar’s resources is being fueled by a massive demand, particularly in China, for rosewood and ebony, both valued highly on the world market. Exactly who is behind the looting cannot be determined. One local speculates it has been “organized by Chinese businessmen,… although he was uncertain whether they are from China or are ethnic Chinese from a country such as Malaysia or Singapore.”
In a country where most earn less than $1 a day, the Malagasy people are no stranger to hardship. Since gaining independence from France in 1960, coups and military dictatorships have been the norm for the world’s fourth largest island. The latest conflict however has delivered the Malagasy people a terrible blow. Industries from tourism to dairy have been crippled, and squalor has been exacerbated by “strikes, wage shortages and a cutoff in aid supplies from many foreign donors.”
The impending environmental and humanitarian tragedy can only be avoided by genuine efforts from the international community, an altogether unlikely prospect.
Read the original report by Globe and Mail here.
I'd also recommend checking out an African perspective on the political developments in Madagascar.
A traveler to Madagascar shares his dismay.
Watch the video below to get a sense of the enigmatic Rajoelina's personality and the turbulence in Madagascar:
And finally, experience the beauty that is perishing before our very eyes in this video.
Friday, April 17, 2009
As If We Didn't Hate Spam Enough
Internet Spam Linked to Pollution
More than a nuisance, spam is an environmental hazard. So much so that filtering e-junk would be the equivalent of “taking 2.2 million cars off the road”! Confused? The distribution of spam produces enough electric energy to power 2.4 million homes a year. Every time electricity is used to send this spam out, a small amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted. Multiplied on a global scale however, the result is 17 million tons of greenhouse CO2 a year.
"Although the respite was only temporary, McAfee said the 'day without spam amounted to talking 2.2 million cars off the road' and that tackling spam should be part of the campaign to reduce carbon emissions."
More than a nuisance, spam is an environmental hazard. So much so that filtering e-junk would be the equivalent of “taking 2.2 million cars off the road”! Confused? The distribution of spam produces enough electric energy to power 2.4 million homes a year. Every time electricity is used to send this spam out, a small amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted. Multiplied on a global scale however, the result is 17 million tons of greenhouse CO2 a year.
"Although the respite was only temporary, McAfee said the 'day without spam amounted to talking 2.2 million cars off the road' and that tackling spam should be part of the campaign to reduce carbon emissions."
Tourism Taboos
Five Worst Traveller Types
In March 2008, some friends and I decided to spend our spring break aboard Norwegian Cruise Lines' new flagship, the Gem. It was an all-around solid time, and if not for the absurd false advertising that proclaimed how "all-inclusive" the accommodations and perks would be, I would even say it was a great time. Ultimately though, my lasting impression of the cruise was one of un-tethered gluttony and excess.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with a little self-indulgence. That's what a vacation's for. A necessary intermission to the long, drawn-out play that life can sometimes be. But this was something different. It was as if all the worst stereotypes of Americans were on display. The sight of massive herds stampeding towards the buffet room as if compelled by narcotics, pushing and shoving their way to food that was in plentiful supply, holding plates stacked a mile high, left me feeling dirty. When ten days had passed, and the ship was ashore at last, the first breath of New York City I took in may have been the sweetest air I ever inhaled.
What prompted this recollection was an article in Frommer’s called ‘Our Own Worst Enemy: 5 Types of Travelers That Are Killing Tourism’. It's a sobering indictment of the kind of passengers I had encountered on my cruise, and the behavior we all engage in, myself included, on our trips abroad:
"It's not just that the passengers had as many shots at the buffet line as they wanted. It's that the morsels going overboard collectively represented a titanic waste of resources, which must have been more than a little embarrassing for a cruise line (Celebrity) that prides itself on its environmental record. Not only did these passengers leave their manners and common sense on shore; they were also selfish gluttons."
To summarize, five types of travellers that are ruining things for everyone:
1. The Stupid Tourist
"...you won't find a more impressive collection of brain donors than on a cruise... Once these passengers set sail, they belly up to the bar, get blitzed, and act like ... well, drunken sailors. Some of them jump overboard, too... Since 1995, there have been more than 100 documented cases. How many of them involved passengers having one drink too many and then doing their best Kate Winslet impersonation?"
2. The Rude Visitor
"These vacationers cut in line, drive like teenagers and the words 'please' and 'thank you' aren't in their vocabulary... But one city has figured out a better way of punishing the unmannered masses. Bars and restaurants in Venice have three price lists: one for locals, the other for visitors, and a third for rude tourists. So if you're Italian, a croissant and a cappuccino might cost €3.50, but if you order in English, and are impolite, you have to pay seven.
3. The Obnoxious American
"...I love my country. My countrymen? Not necessarily. I've spent nearly half my life overseas, and I've seen some of my fellow citizens behaving so boorishly that I cringed when someone asked where I was from. Obnoxious Americans are loud, demanding, arrogant and insensitive to local culture. I was relieved to learn we aren't the worst. A recent survey found that the French, Indian, and Chinese tourists ranked even more obnoxious than us..."
4. The Absent-Minded Vacationer
"These are the ones who get left behind at the gate because they didn't know they needed a passport for an international trip. They don't call to confirm their flight and miss it because it was rescheduled. They don't pay attention to where they parked their car at Disney World and then wander around the property after dark, hoping to stumble upon their rental... The problem is when you try to blame everyone but yourself. I've seen tourists accuse their travel agents or cruise line of ruining their vacation because they weren't told about a visa requirement. But securing the proper paperwork is solely your responsibility."
5. The Time Traveller
"They call flight attendants 'stewardesses' and ask what's on the in-flight menu. The answer, unless they're sitting in first class, is a glare -- and peanuts. Time travelers are either unaware that the airline industry was carelessly deregulated in 1978, or they're in denial. These passengers don't make themselves look bad as much as they point out how far we've fallen since then. Only the most rabid airline apologist would argue that flying is a better experience today than it was three decades ago. Time travelers are a constant reminder of the sad decline of America's airlines."
In summation, these 5 types of tourist are hurting travel that while difficult to measure, is surely leaving an negative imprint:
"...when that passenger goes ashore in a foreign port and makes all Americans look like xenophobic elitists, it costs us in ways that are difficult to quantify, but no less real. People who make unreasonable demands on the system raise the cost of travel for everyone, because we'll be paying for the army of lawyers the travel company must hire to defend itself from frivolous claims."
In March 2008, some friends and I decided to spend our spring break aboard Norwegian Cruise Lines' new flagship, the Gem. It was an all-around solid time, and if not for the absurd false advertising that proclaimed how "all-inclusive" the accommodations and perks would be, I would even say it was a great time. Ultimately though, my lasting impression of the cruise was one of un-tethered gluttony and excess.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with a little self-indulgence. That's what a vacation's for. A necessary intermission to the long, drawn-out play that life can sometimes be. But this was something different. It was as if all the worst stereotypes of Americans were on display. The sight of massive herds stampeding towards the buffet room as if compelled by narcotics, pushing and shoving their way to food that was in plentiful supply, holding plates stacked a mile high, left me feeling dirty. When ten days had passed, and the ship was ashore at last, the first breath of New York City I took in may have been the sweetest air I ever inhaled.
What prompted this recollection was an article in Frommer’s called ‘Our Own Worst Enemy: 5 Types of Travelers That Are Killing Tourism’. It's a sobering indictment of the kind of passengers I had encountered on my cruise, and the behavior we all engage in, myself included, on our trips abroad:
"It's not just that the passengers had as many shots at the buffet line as they wanted. It's that the morsels going overboard collectively represented a titanic waste of resources, which must have been more than a little embarrassing for a cruise line (Celebrity) that prides itself on its environmental record. Not only did these passengers leave their manners and common sense on shore; they were also selfish gluttons."
To summarize, five types of travellers that are ruining things for everyone:
1. The Stupid Tourist
"...you won't find a more impressive collection of brain donors than on a cruise... Once these passengers set sail, they belly up to the bar, get blitzed, and act like ... well, drunken sailors. Some of them jump overboard, too... Since 1995, there have been more than 100 documented cases. How many of them involved passengers having one drink too many and then doing their best Kate Winslet impersonation?"
2. The Rude Visitor
"These vacationers cut in line, drive like teenagers and the words 'please' and 'thank you' aren't in their vocabulary... But one city has figured out a better way of punishing the unmannered masses. Bars and restaurants in Venice have three price lists: one for locals, the other for visitors, and a third for rude tourists. So if you're Italian, a croissant and a cappuccino might cost €3.50, but if you order in English, and are impolite, you have to pay seven.
3. The Obnoxious American
"...I love my country. My countrymen? Not necessarily. I've spent nearly half my life overseas, and I've seen some of my fellow citizens behaving so boorishly that I cringed when someone asked where I was from. Obnoxious Americans are loud, demanding, arrogant and insensitive to local culture. I was relieved to learn we aren't the worst. A recent survey found that the French, Indian, and Chinese tourists ranked even more obnoxious than us..."
4. The Absent-Minded Vacationer
"These are the ones who get left behind at the gate because they didn't know they needed a passport for an international trip. They don't call to confirm their flight and miss it because it was rescheduled. They don't pay attention to where they parked their car at Disney World and then wander around the property after dark, hoping to stumble upon their rental... The problem is when you try to blame everyone but yourself. I've seen tourists accuse their travel agents or cruise line of ruining their vacation because they weren't told about a visa requirement. But securing the proper paperwork is solely your responsibility."
5. The Time Traveller
"They call flight attendants 'stewardesses' and ask what's on the in-flight menu. The answer, unless they're sitting in first class, is a glare -- and peanuts. Time travelers are either unaware that the airline industry was carelessly deregulated in 1978, or they're in denial. These passengers don't make themselves look bad as much as they point out how far we've fallen since then. Only the most rabid airline apologist would argue that flying is a better experience today than it was three decades ago. Time travelers are a constant reminder of the sad decline of America's airlines."
In summation, these 5 types of tourist are hurting travel that while difficult to measure, is surely leaving an negative imprint:
"...when that passenger goes ashore in a foreign port and makes all Americans look like xenophobic elitists, it costs us in ways that are difficult to quantify, but no less real. People who make unreasonable demands on the system raise the cost of travel for everyone, because we'll be paying for the army of lawyers the travel company must hire to defend itself from frivolous claims."
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Piracy Coverage Still Lacking
Root Causes Still Missing
The comedy continues in the coverage of piracy, perpetuating the dearth of perspective that has been emblematic of the media’s performance thus far. It seems most commentaries have focused on the correct military response, maybe hoping the Pentagon will come across their shoddy work and take their suggestions to heart. Well, probably not. But that’s certainly the sense one gets (or maybe it’s just me). Take this piece from the Wall Street Journal for example:
“Pirates, like the Nazi submarines of World War II, do not hunt for their targets; they lie across the sea lanes where ships are likely to travel and simply wait for a victim to come over the horizon. And the same tactic which defeated the U-boats can put an end to the majority of pirate attacks. Merchant ships can be ordered to form convoys for their own protection.”
Great. Tell the Secretary of the Navy. Or do you expect us to start writing our Congressman, begging them to adopt you innovative tactics – that is, if you call a 60 year-old game plan innovative. How about giving this rather complicated issue some much-needed context instead of scoring cheap points with readers by regaling us with drivel.
This LA Times op-ed sits on the fence, urging reconsideration of an aggressive American response, but clearly too timid to bring light to the other injustice off the Horn of Africa, illegal fishing and waste dumping by affluent nations:
“U.S. officials hope that the tough stance and successful rescue will discourage pirates from attacking American ships. Maybe, but it's more likely that it will just spur the pirates to bring more crewmen and bigger guns the next time around, and to be more inclined to use them. The threat of death isn't much of a deterrent to hopeless young Somali men who face a choice between potentially making millions on the high seas or starving on shore.”
Of course, there have been occasional gems. At first, the post on the Compass called 'Adding Context to Piracy Debate' seemed to offer hope. Though offering an interesting take, it was off target:
“Despite the mythologizing of the U.S. response to Barbary piracy, the U.S. paid off the Barbary Coast pirates under two U.S. administrations until the cost/benefit analysis finally tipped in favor of attacking them… Unlike jihadists, who can't be deterred, military action might raise the costs enough to make pirates think twice. But let's at least have a full accounting of the costs and benefits before the shelling begins.”
Appreciating the author’s historical analogy, his argument nonetheless has a fatal shortcoming. First, the pirates won’t be deterred as easily as he suggests because they are absolutely desperate and two, the causes of that desperation will not be undone by the doling out of booty. So long as the developed world continues its selective enforcement of international law, vehemently condemning Somali piracy while ignoring its own, there will be no peace on the seas.
This article in The Guardian, while guilty of neglecting piracy's origin, does deserves credit as an all-around quality piece that puts the notion of an aggressive response in historical perspective, rather than acting as a cheerleader for military reprisals:
“What we have recently seen far more often is what a New York Times headline on the piracy story said last Thursday: 'US power has limit'. We're dealing, that's to say, with one of the most important discoveries of our time: the impotence of great might.”
Those searching for a refreshing antidote to the typical take on piracy would do well to consult alternative media resources. Rebecca Macaux and Philip Primeau did some outstanding work on Tuesday for Counterpunch. Warning: This analysis is certain to sting a bit, especially for those skeptical of the view that American foreign policy has played a major role in fomenting some of world’s worst crises. Here is an excerpt:
“With the explosion of Somali piracy, America is reaping what it has sown. In many ways, we have nobody to blame but ourselves for the emergence of high-seas crime threatening to disrupt important lanes of trade.
America’s support for a violent strongman during Somalia’s formative post-colonial years hindered the development of stable political institutions and severely complicated its capacity for effective self-rule and sustainable growth.”
The main flaw in the thesis (or implication) that America is solely to blame for piracy is that it disregards how the criminal activities of others nations (including practically all of southern Europe, France, Spain, Greece, the UK, Norway, Russia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Korea, China… you get the idea), has provided the immediate impetus for the scourge we see today.
In any case, the article is an outstanding piece, casting a lens of introspection at Americans who feel they are simply the latest victims of a dastardly phenomenon sweeping the Gulf of Aden.
The video below offers a firsthand account from someone of Somali origin, a perspective that has yet to be incorporated by a mainstream media outlet. I would urge watching the interview below (start at 13:22) to get a good idea of what’s going on in the waters off the Somali coast. If you don’t have the time, you can check out the transcript right here. This is one part that caught my eye:
“…It reminded me of a controversial memo that was leaked from the World Bank—this was when Lawrence Summers, now the chief economic adviser, was the chief economist at the World Bank—in which it said, ‘I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest-wage country is impeccable, and we should face up to that. I’ve always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly under-polluted.’ He said he was being sarcastic.”
I sure hope so.
The comedy continues in the coverage of piracy, perpetuating the dearth of perspective that has been emblematic of the media’s performance thus far. It seems most commentaries have focused on the correct military response, maybe hoping the Pentagon will come across their shoddy work and take their suggestions to heart. Well, probably not. But that’s certainly the sense one gets (or maybe it’s just me). Take this piece from the Wall Street Journal for example:
“Pirates, like the Nazi submarines of World War II, do not hunt for their targets; they lie across the sea lanes where ships are likely to travel and simply wait for a victim to come over the horizon. And the same tactic which defeated the U-boats can put an end to the majority of pirate attacks. Merchant ships can be ordered to form convoys for their own protection.”
Great. Tell the Secretary of the Navy. Or do you expect us to start writing our Congressman, begging them to adopt you innovative tactics – that is, if you call a 60 year-old game plan innovative. How about giving this rather complicated issue some much-needed context instead of scoring cheap points with readers by regaling us with drivel.
This LA Times op-ed sits on the fence, urging reconsideration of an aggressive American response, but clearly too timid to bring light to the other injustice off the Horn of Africa, illegal fishing and waste dumping by affluent nations:
“U.S. officials hope that the tough stance and successful rescue will discourage pirates from attacking American ships. Maybe, but it's more likely that it will just spur the pirates to bring more crewmen and bigger guns the next time around, and to be more inclined to use them. The threat of death isn't much of a deterrent to hopeless young Somali men who face a choice between potentially making millions on the high seas or starving on shore.”
Of course, there have been occasional gems. At first, the post on the Compass called 'Adding Context to Piracy Debate' seemed to offer hope. Though offering an interesting take, it was off target:
“Despite the mythologizing of the U.S. response to Barbary piracy, the U.S. paid off the Barbary Coast pirates under two U.S. administrations until the cost/benefit analysis finally tipped in favor of attacking them… Unlike jihadists, who can't be deterred, military action might raise the costs enough to make pirates think twice. But let's at least have a full accounting of the costs and benefits before the shelling begins.”
Appreciating the author’s historical analogy, his argument nonetheless has a fatal shortcoming. First, the pirates won’t be deterred as easily as he suggests because they are absolutely desperate and two, the causes of that desperation will not be undone by the doling out of booty. So long as the developed world continues its selective enforcement of international law, vehemently condemning Somali piracy while ignoring its own, there will be no peace on the seas.
This article in The Guardian, while guilty of neglecting piracy's origin, does deserves credit as an all-around quality piece that puts the notion of an aggressive response in historical perspective, rather than acting as a cheerleader for military reprisals:
“What we have recently seen far more often is what a New York Times headline on the piracy story said last Thursday: 'US power has limit'. We're dealing, that's to say, with one of the most important discoveries of our time: the impotence of great might.”
Those searching for a refreshing antidote to the typical take on piracy would do well to consult alternative media resources. Rebecca Macaux and Philip Primeau did some outstanding work on Tuesday for Counterpunch. Warning: This analysis is certain to sting a bit, especially for those skeptical of the view that American foreign policy has played a major role in fomenting some of world’s worst crises. Here is an excerpt:
“With the explosion of Somali piracy, America is reaping what it has sown. In many ways, we have nobody to blame but ourselves for the emergence of high-seas crime threatening to disrupt important lanes of trade.
America’s support for a violent strongman during Somalia’s formative post-colonial years hindered the development of stable political institutions and severely complicated its capacity for effective self-rule and sustainable growth.”
The main flaw in the thesis (or implication) that America is solely to blame for piracy is that it disregards how the criminal activities of others nations (including practically all of southern Europe, France, Spain, Greece, the UK, Norway, Russia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Korea, China… you get the idea), has provided the immediate impetus for the scourge we see today.
In any case, the article is an outstanding piece, casting a lens of introspection at Americans who feel they are simply the latest victims of a dastardly phenomenon sweeping the Gulf of Aden.
The video below offers a firsthand account from someone of Somali origin, a perspective that has yet to be incorporated by a mainstream media outlet. I would urge watching the interview below (start at 13:22) to get a good idea of what’s going on in the waters off the Somali coast. If you don’t have the time, you can check out the transcript right here. This is one part that caught my eye:
“…It reminded me of a controversial memo that was leaked from the World Bank—this was when Lawrence Summers, now the chief economic adviser, was the chief economist at the World Bank—in which it said, ‘I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest-wage country is impeccable, and we should face up to that. I’ve always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly under-polluted.’ He said he was being sarcastic.”
I sure hope so.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Piracy Coverage Missing the Point
Looking for the "Why?" in the Equation
The coverage of Somali piracy took a turn from deficient to laughable this morning, gracing us with headlines like Kill the Pirates (Washington Post), Real Men Invade Somalia, and Saving Captain Phillips (WSJ). I can just see it now: Saving Captain Phillips, coming to a theater near you!
None of these articles, or the ones preceding them, have cared to examine the root causes of this bane to international maritime security. Some might say that’s because it simply isn’t pertinent, but I’d argue it’s because it isn’t convenient. I would also argue it’s more important as a long-term approach to examine piracy’s root causes rather than how to deal with it in a military capacity. Cut off a hydra’s tentacles and they’ll grow back. Striking at the body is the only way to eliminate it.
Watching Meet the Press on Sunday morning, I was perturbed by the paucity of insight during a discussion on the topic. It wasn't a misunderstanding of root causes so much as a complete indifference to them.
What about the damage done to the Somali fisherman, whose entire livelihood has been, eradicated by fishing trawlers that recklessly destabilize and loot their seas? The pirates would argue they are merely protecting their shores from the poaching of international fishing fleets. Who then are the real pirates? This Chicago Tribune article from 2008 offered a uniquely fresh perspective:
“Somalia's lawless coastline has been ravaged by unscrupulous outsiders with impunity since the Somali government collapsed in 1991…
Somalia, like all maritime countries, has legal rights over an exclusive economic zone that extends 200 nautical miles to sea. And though it has no navy to enforce its control, it theoretically owns the fish and minerals in that area…
Many of Somalia's angry fishermen have picked up rifles and joined the pirate mafias that have seized more than two dozen vessels off the Somali coast so far this year (Oct. 2008) …”
And let’s not forget about the vast amounts of toxic waste, some of it nuclear, dumped off the Somali coast by Western corporations. Apparently, this is being done without the authority of the West's governments. This still beckons the question: where are the calls for stringent enforcement of maritime law then?
A UN Environmental Program official explained to Al-Jazeera back in 2008:
"Somalia has been used as a dumping ground for hazardous waste starting in the early 1990s, and continuing through the civil war there.”
"European companies found it to be very cheap to get rid of the waste, costing as little as $2.50 a ton, where waste disposal costs in Europe are something like $1000 a ton.”
"And the waste is many different kinds. There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes – you name it."
Johann Hari of the Huffington Post lucidly delves into the mindset of the typical Somali, 70% of whom support the pirates, something most media outlets haven’t bothered to understand:
“Did we expect starving (Somalis) to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn’t act on those crimes - but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, we begin to shriek about “evil.” If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause - our crimes - before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia’s criminals.”
Nonetheless, we must avoid romanticizing the pirates as modern-day Robin Hoods. Their crimes have been heinous, especially the hijacking of World Food Program (WFP) vessels on which most Somalis depend for food. Indeed, there is a contingent that has been left no alternative for feeding their families. Many pirates however, are seeking ransoms to finance the warlords and militias ashore, which operate with impunity in a land of anarchy.
Sunday morning I read an op-ed in the Times, the title of which was Anarchy on Land Means Piracy at Sea. I liked where the article was going at first, but it ultimately teetered off into the typical concerns-about-terrorism diatribe that has been the predominant thesis of piracy coverage. It's disappointing that the Times elected to ignore America’s role in perpetuating the anarchy.
In 2006, the United States supported an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, undermining the Islamic Court Union (ICU). The ICU, an Islamist force that had restored a semblance of order to a nation utterly deprived of it since 1991, had been construed as a jihadist enterprise by the Bush Administration, making their fall predetermined.
With the ICU now severely weakened, the new ruling power in Somalia (on paper at least) is holding on for dear life as it contends with Al-Shabaab, an Islamist organization far more militant than the ICU, who considers Osama bin Laden to be their spiritual father. It is this group, among others, that the West fears is benefitting from piracy.
Check out this fascinating video below about the unresolved murder of Italian journalists attempting to disclose arms smuggling and toxic waste dumping by an Italian corporation in Somalia:
How the depletion of fish stocks has contributed to piracy:
Also, a tremendous piece of investigative reporting on the US-backed Ethiopian war with Somalia:
The coverage of Somali piracy took a turn from deficient to laughable this morning, gracing us with headlines like Kill the Pirates (Washington Post), Real Men Invade Somalia, and Saving Captain Phillips (WSJ). I can just see it now: Saving Captain Phillips, coming to a theater near you!
None of these articles, or the ones preceding them, have cared to examine the root causes of this bane to international maritime security. Some might say that’s because it simply isn’t pertinent, but I’d argue it’s because it isn’t convenient. I would also argue it’s more important as a long-term approach to examine piracy’s root causes rather than how to deal with it in a military capacity. Cut off a hydra’s tentacles and they’ll grow back. Striking at the body is the only way to eliminate it.
Watching Meet the Press on Sunday morning, I was perturbed by the paucity of insight during a discussion on the topic. It wasn't a misunderstanding of root causes so much as a complete indifference to them.
What about the damage done to the Somali fisherman, whose entire livelihood has been, eradicated by fishing trawlers that recklessly destabilize and loot their seas? The pirates would argue they are merely protecting their shores from the poaching of international fishing fleets. Who then are the real pirates? This Chicago Tribune article from 2008 offered a uniquely fresh perspective:
“Somalia's lawless coastline has been ravaged by unscrupulous outsiders with impunity since the Somali government collapsed in 1991…
Somalia, like all maritime countries, has legal rights over an exclusive economic zone that extends 200 nautical miles to sea. And though it has no navy to enforce its control, it theoretically owns the fish and minerals in that area…
Many of Somalia's angry fishermen have picked up rifles and joined the pirate mafias that have seized more than two dozen vessels off the Somali coast so far this year (Oct. 2008) …”
And let’s not forget about the vast amounts of toxic waste, some of it nuclear, dumped off the Somali coast by Western corporations. Apparently, this is being done without the authority of the West's governments. This still beckons the question: where are the calls for stringent enforcement of maritime law then?
A UN Environmental Program official explained to Al-Jazeera back in 2008:
"Somalia has been used as a dumping ground for hazardous waste starting in the early 1990s, and continuing through the civil war there.”
"European companies found it to be very cheap to get rid of the waste, costing as little as $2.50 a ton, where waste disposal costs in Europe are something like $1000 a ton.”
"And the waste is many different kinds. There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes – you name it."
Johann Hari of the Huffington Post lucidly delves into the mindset of the typical Somali, 70% of whom support the pirates, something most media outlets haven’t bothered to understand:
“Did we expect starving (Somalis) to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn’t act on those crimes - but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, we begin to shriek about “evil.” If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause - our crimes - before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia’s criminals.”
Nonetheless, we must avoid romanticizing the pirates as modern-day Robin Hoods. Their crimes have been heinous, especially the hijacking of World Food Program (WFP) vessels on which most Somalis depend for food. Indeed, there is a contingent that has been left no alternative for feeding their families. Many pirates however, are seeking ransoms to finance the warlords and militias ashore, which operate with impunity in a land of anarchy.
Sunday morning I read an op-ed in the Times, the title of which was Anarchy on Land Means Piracy at Sea. I liked where the article was going at first, but it ultimately teetered off into the typical concerns-about-terrorism diatribe that has been the predominant thesis of piracy coverage. It's disappointing that the Times elected to ignore America’s role in perpetuating the anarchy.
In 2006, the United States supported an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, undermining the Islamic Court Union (ICU). The ICU, an Islamist force that had restored a semblance of order to a nation utterly deprived of it since 1991, had been construed as a jihadist enterprise by the Bush Administration, making their fall predetermined.
With the ICU now severely weakened, the new ruling power in Somalia (on paper at least) is holding on for dear life as it contends with Al-Shabaab, an Islamist organization far more militant than the ICU, who considers Osama bin Laden to be their spiritual father. It is this group, among others, that the West fears is benefitting from piracy.
Check out this fascinating video below about the unresolved murder of Italian journalists attempting to disclose arms smuggling and toxic waste dumping by an Italian corporation in Somalia:
How the depletion of fish stocks has contributed to piracy:
Also, a tremendous piece of investigative reporting on the US-backed Ethiopian war with Somalia:
Friday, April 10, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Article 85
Council Omits Sri Lanka Again
Michael Brasky
UN Correspondent
UNITED NATIONS – The Security Council revealed its program of work for the month of April on Thursday, a calendar displaying the issues on the agenda. Once again, the agenda lacked any mention, even a footnote, of the situation in Sri Lanka. As a result, barring an unlikely rescheduling, the Council is precluded from addressing a humanitarian catastrophe in northern Sri Lanka in which almost 200,000 civilians are trapped.
The agenda is presented by the holder of the Council Presidency, a seat that rotates among the 15 members on a monthly basis. Mexican Ambassador Claude Heller assumes the Presidency for April, taking over for Libya, which held the seat for March.
The Council has resisted dealing with Sri Lanka since the conflict’s recent incarnation erupted in January. Successive Council agendas have omitted the issue, only to claim they are hamstrung by the agenda when pressed to deal with the humanitarian fallout. When there is sufficient political will, the Council has the ability to raise issues in its chambers that are not on the schedule, as was the case with Gaza in December. So far however, Sri Lanka does not seem to be such a case.
While expressing deep concern, the United States and the United Kingdom have taken little substantial action on the matter. China and Russia have stood in the way of efforts to deal with the issue as well, many speculate because of arms deals the two nations have with Sri Lanka.
Asked about the omission of Sri Lanka, Heller replied that while each state has different criteria for the agenda, “some states have a very clear position that Sri Lanka is not part of the agenda of the Security Council.”
Attempting to ameliorate this harsh reality, he added, “other countries have maintained that even if it’s not on the agenda, its important to bring to attention.”
Heller commended the Secretary-General for taking the initiative to talk with the President of Sri Lanka, and assured that “the Council had been concerned about the Sri Lanka from a humanitarian perspective.”
Heller was asked to clarify on what grounds his colleagues had stricken Sri Lanka from the agenda, a striking omission considering the humanitarian dimensions of the conflict. He responded, “From what I understand, some members considered that it’s not in the agenda of the Security Council, and even if there is a humanitarian aspect it should be dealt in other places the UN system.”
He continued, “We have in a sense overcome the perspectives that it’s in the agenda or not in the agenda, but we have a found a way to treat, to be informed, to get briefed on this situation in Sri Lanka.” He concluded that the main objection of some members was that they “have not accepted that Sri Lanka is on the agenda of the Security Council.”
Heller has been among those who have advocated a Council hearing on Sri Lanka. While a meeting was held last week in the UN basement, they were closed off to the press. UN Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes even joked to the press of its secretive nature. Nothing substantial came out of the deliberations.
The Sri Lankan government remains intent on crushing the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Pushed to the brink of annihilation, the Tigers withdrew to their last base in the northeastern part of the island in January.
Civilians in the area have been trapped between a government bombardment, and a Tigers force that is using the civilians for protection. It is uncertain as to how many have perished in the conflict, but estimates believe it is well over 2,000 people. Despite calls for a ceasefire, among them the Secretary-General’s, the Sri Lankan government has declared it will continue its campaign.
Watch as I ask the Mexican Ambassador to explain the omission of Sri Lanka here.
Michael Brasky
UN Correspondent
UNITED NATIONS – The Security Council revealed its program of work for the month of April on Thursday, a calendar displaying the issues on the agenda. Once again, the agenda lacked any mention, even a footnote, of the situation in Sri Lanka. As a result, barring an unlikely rescheduling, the Council is precluded from addressing a humanitarian catastrophe in northern Sri Lanka in which almost 200,000 civilians are trapped.
The agenda is presented by the holder of the Council Presidency, a seat that rotates among the 15 members on a monthly basis. Mexican Ambassador Claude Heller assumes the Presidency for April, taking over for Libya, which held the seat for March.
The Council has resisted dealing with Sri Lanka since the conflict’s recent incarnation erupted in January. Successive Council agendas have omitted the issue, only to claim they are hamstrung by the agenda when pressed to deal with the humanitarian fallout. When there is sufficient political will, the Council has the ability to raise issues in its chambers that are not on the schedule, as was the case with Gaza in December. So far however, Sri Lanka does not seem to be such a case.
While expressing deep concern, the United States and the United Kingdom have taken little substantial action on the matter. China and Russia have stood in the way of efforts to deal with the issue as well, many speculate because of arms deals the two nations have with Sri Lanka.
Asked about the omission of Sri Lanka, Heller replied that while each state has different criteria for the agenda, “some states have a very clear position that Sri Lanka is not part of the agenda of the Security Council.”
Attempting to ameliorate this harsh reality, he added, “other countries have maintained that even if it’s not on the agenda, its important to bring to attention.”
Heller commended the Secretary-General for taking the initiative to talk with the President of Sri Lanka, and assured that “the Council had been concerned about the Sri Lanka from a humanitarian perspective.”
Heller was asked to clarify on what grounds his colleagues had stricken Sri Lanka from the agenda, a striking omission considering the humanitarian dimensions of the conflict. He responded, “From what I understand, some members considered that it’s not in the agenda of the Security Council, and even if there is a humanitarian aspect it should be dealt in other places the UN system.”
He continued, “We have in a sense overcome the perspectives that it’s in the agenda or not in the agenda, but we have a found a way to treat, to be informed, to get briefed on this situation in Sri Lanka.” He concluded that the main objection of some members was that they “have not accepted that Sri Lanka is on the agenda of the Security Council.”
Heller has been among those who have advocated a Council hearing on Sri Lanka. While a meeting was held last week in the UN basement, they were closed off to the press. UN Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes even joked to the press of its secretive nature. Nothing substantial came out of the deliberations.
The Sri Lankan government remains intent on crushing the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Pushed to the brink of annihilation, the Tigers withdrew to their last base in the northeastern part of the island in January.
Civilians in the area have been trapped between a government bombardment, and a Tigers force that is using the civilians for protection. It is uncertain as to how many have perished in the conflict, but estimates believe it is well over 2,000 people. Despite calls for a ceasefire, among them the Secretary-General’s, the Sri Lankan government has declared it will continue its campaign.
Watch as I ask the Mexican Ambassador to explain the omission of Sri Lanka here.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Movie I'm Pumped For
SIN NOMBRE
I just read the following synopsis and I think this film is going to be an intriguing, political conscious examination of the immigration issue.
Sin Nombre, world-premiering at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival, is an epic dramatic thriller written and directed by Student Academy Award winner Cary Joji Fukunaga in his feature debut. The filmmaker’s firsthand experiences with Central American immigrants seeking the promise of the U.S. form the basis of the Spanish-language movie.
Sin Nombre tells the story of Sayra (Paulina Gaitan), a teenager living in Honduras, and hungering for a brighter future. A reunion with her long-estranged father gives Sayra her only real option – emigrating with her father and her uncle into Mexico and then the United States, where her father now has a new family.
Meanwhile, Casper, a.k.a. Willy (Edgar Flores), is a teenager living in Tapachula, Mexico, and facing an uncertain future. A member of the Mara Salvatrucha gang brotherhood, he has just brought to the Mara a new recruit, 12-year-old Smiley (Kristyan Ferrer), who undergoes a rough initiation.
While Smiley quickly takes to gang life, Casper tries to protect his relationship with girlfriend Martha Marlene (Diana García), keeping their love a secret from the Mara. But when Martha encounters Tapachula’s Mara leader Lil’ Mago (Tenoch Huerta Mejía), she is brutally taken from Casper forever.
Sayra and her relatives manage to cross over into Mexico. There, they join other immigrants waiting at the Tapachula train yards. When a States-bound freight train arrives one night, they successfully rush to board – riding atop it, rather than in the cars – as does Lil’ Mago, who has commandeered Casper and Smiley along to rob immigrants.
When day breaks, Lil’ Mago makes his move and Casper in turn makes a fateful decision. Casper must now navigate the psychological gauntlet of his violent existence and the physical one of the unforgiving Mara, but Sayra bravely allies herself with him as the train journeys through the Mexican countryside towards the hope of new lives.
I just read the following synopsis and I think this film is going to be an intriguing, political conscious examination of the immigration issue.
Sin Nombre, world-premiering at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival, is an epic dramatic thriller written and directed by Student Academy Award winner Cary Joji Fukunaga in his feature debut. The filmmaker’s firsthand experiences with Central American immigrants seeking the promise of the U.S. form the basis of the Spanish-language movie.
Sin Nombre tells the story of Sayra (Paulina Gaitan), a teenager living in Honduras, and hungering for a brighter future. A reunion with her long-estranged father gives Sayra her only real option – emigrating with her father and her uncle into Mexico and then the United States, where her father now has a new family.
Meanwhile, Casper, a.k.a. Willy (Edgar Flores), is a teenager living in Tapachula, Mexico, and facing an uncertain future. A member of the Mara Salvatrucha gang brotherhood, he has just brought to the Mara a new recruit, 12-year-old Smiley (Kristyan Ferrer), who undergoes a rough initiation.
While Smiley quickly takes to gang life, Casper tries to protect his relationship with girlfriend Martha Marlene (Diana García), keeping their love a secret from the Mara. But when Martha encounters Tapachula’s Mara leader Lil’ Mago (Tenoch Huerta Mejía), she is brutally taken from Casper forever.
Sayra and her relatives manage to cross over into Mexico. There, they join other immigrants waiting at the Tapachula train yards. When a States-bound freight train arrives one night, they successfully rush to board – riding atop it, rather than in the cars – as does Lil’ Mago, who has commandeered Casper and Smiley along to rob immigrants.
When day breaks, Lil’ Mago makes his move and Casper in turn makes a fateful decision. Casper must now navigate the psychological gauntlet of his violent existence and the physical one of the unforgiving Mara, but Sayra bravely allies herself with him as the train journeys through the Mexican countryside towards the hope of new lives.
Editorial VII
The Death of Organic
Well, it was fun while it lasted. How wonderful it was to think that the influx of organic, all-natural, eco-friendly foodstuffs in our supermarkets came from independent farmers. That at least there was a gastronomic refuge from manufactured food, contaminated with God-knows-what.
But then…along came this totally depressing article, debunking the fairytale that organic food still has the integrity its name suggests.
Don’t take this as some sort of socialist rant, but the last thing I want corporate culture having their hands in is my food. I get it, mass manufacture drives down prices, enabling us to provide food to a gargantuan population with limited means. But affordability has a price. That fee comes in the form an array of additives, preservatives, dyes, poisons, and inedible chemicals, i.e. crap.
As it is however, consumers of all-natural and organic products are fools. Most of the "reliable" organic brands we hold dear have succumbed to the corporate leviathan that is now going to employ its vast marketing apparatus to cash in on the trendiness of the organic movement. Here is shortlist of sanctified products that are have been engulfed, and the amoeba that did it: Burt's Bees (Clorox), Ben and Jerry's (Unilever), Tom's of Maine (Colgate-Palmolive), Stonyfield (Danone, French conglomerate that had to recall yogurt for unsafe dioxin content), Odwallia (Coca-Cola), Naked (Pepsi Cola), R.W. Knudsen and Santa Cruz Organic (Smuckers), and the list goes on.
Read the article above and get the full picture. Then, check out these videos below to learn more about discerning the food you eat.
Well, it was fun while it lasted. How wonderful it was to think that the influx of organic, all-natural, eco-friendly foodstuffs in our supermarkets came from independent farmers. That at least there was a gastronomic refuge from manufactured food, contaminated with God-knows-what.
But then…along came this totally depressing article, debunking the fairytale that organic food still has the integrity its name suggests.
Don’t take this as some sort of socialist rant, but the last thing I want corporate culture having their hands in is my food. I get it, mass manufacture drives down prices, enabling us to provide food to a gargantuan population with limited means. But affordability has a price. That fee comes in the form an array of additives, preservatives, dyes, poisons, and inedible chemicals, i.e. crap.
As it is however, consumers of all-natural and organic products are fools. Most of the "reliable" organic brands we hold dear have succumbed to the corporate leviathan that is now going to employ its vast marketing apparatus to cash in on the trendiness of the organic movement. Here is shortlist of sanctified products that are have been engulfed, and the amoeba that did it: Burt's Bees (Clorox), Ben and Jerry's (Unilever), Tom's of Maine (Colgate-Palmolive), Stonyfield (Danone, French conglomerate that had to recall yogurt for unsafe dioxin content), Odwallia (Coca-Cola), Naked (Pepsi Cola), R.W. Knudsen and Santa Cruz Organic (Smuckers), and the list goes on.
Read the article above and get the full picture. Then, check out these videos below to learn more about discerning the food you eat.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Editorial VI
The Price of Justice
The ICC issued its much anticipated arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir last Wednesday, charging him with war crimes and crimes against humanity in the death of 300,000 civilians in Darfur. The Sudanese government’s response was predictable: casting blame on the Western establishment for trying to destabilize Sudan.
The International Criminal Court, according to Sudan’s UN Ambassador, was merely a stooge for the neo-imperialist troika of America, Britain, and France. The familiar echoes of US hegemonic domination, British nostalgia for empire, and French desires for the influence of yore, did little to disguise the fact that the warrant was entirely just. The evidence accrued by the Court’s Chief Prosecutor clearly demonstrates that Bashir recruited Janjaweed militias to terrorize and pillage the Darfuri population.
Unfortunately, the price of justice as it turns out is high indeed. The subsequent expulsion of 13 NGO’s from Darfur in retaliation for the ruling, has gutted the main providers of aid and assistance to Darfur. UN Ambassador Susan Rice has referred to this as “genocide by other means.”
An excerpt from Nicholas Kristof’s excellent piece on Sunday summed it up well:
More than one million people depend directly on the expelled aid groups for health care, food and water. I’ve been in these camps, so let me offer an educated guess about what will unfold if this expulsion stands.
The biggest immediate threat isn’t starvation, because that takes time. Rather, the first crises will be disease and water shortages, particularly in West Darfur.
The camps will quickly run out of clean water, because generator-operated pumps bring the water to the surface from wells and boreholes. Fuel supplies to operate the pumps may last a couple of weeks, and then the water disappears.
Health clinics have already closed, and diarrhea is spreading in Zam Zam camp and meningitis in Kalma camp. These are huge camps — Kalma has perhaps 90,000 people — and diseases can spread rapidly. Children will be the first to die.
It is important to note that the people of Darfur support the ICC, according to Kristof at least. I wonder however, just how long their support will last if the situation grows as dire as his article suggests.
Sadly, this won’t be the first time helpless people suffer for the cause of international justice. I refer to the misery incurred by the people of Iraq for over a decade while the world exacted legal retribution on Saddam Hussein.
Following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the international community was determined to punish Saddam Hussein’s regime by forcing withdrawal, payment of reparations, and disclosing/destroying weapons of mass destruction. The UN Security Council authorized a wide-ranging and near total sanctions regime to this effect.
Considered the most comprehensive sanctions in human history, the embargo on Iraq had disastrous humanitarian consequences. Conservative estimates placed the death toll at 170,000, with higher estimates tending towards 1.7 million. Madeleine Albright’s infamous interview on 60 Minutes when she declared, “we think the price was worth it,” epitomized the callous disregard for human suffering due to sanctions. We must consider if the price will be worth it this time, should Sudan bring further suffering on Darfur as a result of this ruling.
The comparison between Iraqi sanctions and the ICC ruling confronts a moral quandary inherent in the pursuit of justice, as we understand it. In both cases, sound moral arguments could be made (less so in the former) for the international community’s policy towards homicidal regimes. But it must be asked, are we committing incidental manslaughter in the process?
The ICC issued its much anticipated arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir last Wednesday, charging him with war crimes and crimes against humanity in the death of 300,000 civilians in Darfur. The Sudanese government’s response was predictable: casting blame on the Western establishment for trying to destabilize Sudan.
The International Criminal Court, according to Sudan’s UN Ambassador, was merely a stooge for the neo-imperialist troika of America, Britain, and France. The familiar echoes of US hegemonic domination, British nostalgia for empire, and French desires for the influence of yore, did little to disguise the fact that the warrant was entirely just. The evidence accrued by the Court’s Chief Prosecutor clearly demonstrates that Bashir recruited Janjaweed militias to terrorize and pillage the Darfuri population.
Unfortunately, the price of justice as it turns out is high indeed. The subsequent expulsion of 13 NGO’s from Darfur in retaliation for the ruling, has gutted the main providers of aid and assistance to Darfur. UN Ambassador Susan Rice has referred to this as “genocide by other means.”
An excerpt from Nicholas Kristof’s excellent piece on Sunday summed it up well:
More than one million people depend directly on the expelled aid groups for health care, food and water. I’ve been in these camps, so let me offer an educated guess about what will unfold if this expulsion stands.
The biggest immediate threat isn’t starvation, because that takes time. Rather, the first crises will be disease and water shortages, particularly in West Darfur.
The camps will quickly run out of clean water, because generator-operated pumps bring the water to the surface from wells and boreholes. Fuel supplies to operate the pumps may last a couple of weeks, and then the water disappears.
Health clinics have already closed, and diarrhea is spreading in Zam Zam camp and meningitis in Kalma camp. These are huge camps — Kalma has perhaps 90,000 people — and diseases can spread rapidly. Children will be the first to die.
It is important to note that the people of Darfur support the ICC, according to Kristof at least. I wonder however, just how long their support will last if the situation grows as dire as his article suggests.
Sadly, this won’t be the first time helpless people suffer for the cause of international justice. I refer to the misery incurred by the people of Iraq for over a decade while the world exacted legal retribution on Saddam Hussein.
Following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the international community was determined to punish Saddam Hussein’s regime by forcing withdrawal, payment of reparations, and disclosing/destroying weapons of mass destruction. The UN Security Council authorized a wide-ranging and near total sanctions regime to this effect.
Considered the most comprehensive sanctions in human history, the embargo on Iraq had disastrous humanitarian consequences. Conservative estimates placed the death toll at 170,000, with higher estimates tending towards 1.7 million. Madeleine Albright’s infamous interview on 60 Minutes when she declared, “we think the price was worth it,” epitomized the callous disregard for human suffering due to sanctions. We must consider if the price will be worth it this time, should Sudan bring further suffering on Darfur as a result of this ruling.
The comparison between Iraqi sanctions and the ICC ruling confronts a moral quandary inherent in the pursuit of justice, as we understand it. In both cases, sound moral arguments could be made (less so in the former) for the international community’s policy towards homicidal regimes. But it must be asked, are we committing incidental manslaughter in the process?
Editorial V
Virological Time Bomb
Nations typically deal with the African AIDS epidemic like such: throw money at it, get some good publicity for your dedicated philanthropy, and ignore the fundamental causes. While foreign aid may not be solving the problem, surely it helps. Doesn’t it?
It seems the unmonitored and irresponsible application of antiretroviral treatments is creating new drug-resistant strains of HIV (Financial Times). This development is especially alarming at a time when the economic crisis will surely curtail the development of new treatments to combat HIV, particularly new strains.
At the risk of being an alarmist, understand that this is more than just a humanitarian concern. Should this negligence continue, there exists the realistic possibility of a resistant strain making its way over here. We already learned with the SARS outbreak of 2002-2003, when the disease spread to 37 countries from Guangdong province in China, just how easily viruses could travel in globalized world.
Whether or not this problem will be addressed in a significant way remains to be seen. Countries doling out aid do not want to hear that their efforts are counter-productive. Just to reiterate, no one advocates cutting aid off. After all, “it's better to be alive with drug-resistant virus than dead with drug-sensitive virus.” As one doctor counters however, “resistance is an entirely predictable end-point. If it starts to spin out of control, it's going to be difficult to get a handle on."
This is a problem of state-capacity. Effective monitoring is a laborious undertaking, certainly more arduous than the unregulated allotment of treatment, some of it in bastardized forms. Recommended solutions for this growing problem include:
a) “tougher international scrutiny of plants that produce HIV medicines and an assurance for countries buying them that quality is consistent.”
b) “innovative medical (programs) to boost drug adherence in poor countries.”
c) “a shift in the treatments used…a switch directly to make current second-line therapies into the first-line option.”
One other point, about a separate matter: In Veracruz, Mexico, where HIV/AIDS mortality rates are the highest of anywhere in the country, sex education is advocated as a combative tool by many of the local outreach programs. Unfortunately, ideological opponents of sex-ed have made sure this weapon against AIDS remains shelved in the arsenal. If ever there was a time to be practical about these matters, it is now.
Below is a fascinating presentation on the formation of resistant HIV strains.
Nations typically deal with the African AIDS epidemic like such: throw money at it, get some good publicity for your dedicated philanthropy, and ignore the fundamental causes. While foreign aid may not be solving the problem, surely it helps. Doesn’t it?
It seems the unmonitored and irresponsible application of antiretroviral treatments is creating new drug-resistant strains of HIV (Financial Times). This development is especially alarming at a time when the economic crisis will surely curtail the development of new treatments to combat HIV, particularly new strains.
At the risk of being an alarmist, understand that this is more than just a humanitarian concern. Should this negligence continue, there exists the realistic possibility of a resistant strain making its way over here. We already learned with the SARS outbreak of 2002-2003, when the disease spread to 37 countries from Guangdong province in China, just how easily viruses could travel in globalized world.
Whether or not this problem will be addressed in a significant way remains to be seen. Countries doling out aid do not want to hear that their efforts are counter-productive. Just to reiterate, no one advocates cutting aid off. After all, “it's better to be alive with drug-resistant virus than dead with drug-sensitive virus.” As one doctor counters however, “resistance is an entirely predictable end-point. If it starts to spin out of control, it's going to be difficult to get a handle on."
This is a problem of state-capacity. Effective monitoring is a laborious undertaking, certainly more arduous than the unregulated allotment of treatment, some of it in bastardized forms. Recommended solutions for this growing problem include:
a) “tougher international scrutiny of plants that produce HIV medicines and an assurance for countries buying them that quality is consistent.”
b) “innovative medical (programs) to boost drug adherence in poor countries.”
c) “a shift in the treatments used…a switch directly to make current second-line therapies into the first-line option.”
One other point, about a separate matter: In Veracruz, Mexico, where HIV/AIDS mortality rates are the highest of anywhere in the country, sex education is advocated as a combative tool by many of the local outreach programs. Unfortunately, ideological opponents of sex-ed have made sure this weapon against AIDS remains shelved in the arsenal. If ever there was a time to be practical about these matters, it is now.
Below is a fascinating presentation on the formation of resistant HIV strains.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Editorial IV
CLIMATIC ARMAGEDDON
For most of us, concerns over global warming are of a distant, somewhat abstract variety. Perhaps you’re considering a hybrid car for your next auto purchase or you’ve attempted to reduce the frequency with which you let your engine stay idle. Beyond this however, you’re life has not been measurably altered or significantly impacted by what skeptics refer to as an unproven theory.
To those who have doubts, I urge to you to request proof from the people of Bangladesh.
Last year, Fakhruddin Ahmed, chief adviser of the interim government of Bangladesh, appealed to the United Nations on behalf of those who have been done asunder by global warming.
"This year we in Bangladesh have witnessed one of the worst floods in recent times . . . there is little we can do to prevent significant damage . . . a one-metre sea level rise will submerge about one-third of Bangladesh, uprooting 25 million to 30 million people. I speak for Bangladesh and many other countries on the threshold of a climatic Armageddon," he said.
Don't fool yourself, this is an existential threat, despite the fact that it's usually marketed as a hip trend. Where are 25 to 30 million people going to go? With Bangladeshi cities being pushed beyond capacity as it is, displaced people will surely be heading to India, where they have already adopted a defensive posture by sealing their borders. A conflict is imminent, if not inevitable.
As for those sticking it out, the rise in water levels and salinity, has made life nearly unlivable. South Asia’s Venice, this is not. More like a nightmarish Atlantis. A portent of our future? Quite possibly.
For more on the drowning of Bangladesh, check this out:
For most of us, concerns over global warming are of a distant, somewhat abstract variety. Perhaps you’re considering a hybrid car for your next auto purchase or you’ve attempted to reduce the frequency with which you let your engine stay idle. Beyond this however, you’re life has not been measurably altered or significantly impacted by what skeptics refer to as an unproven theory.
To those who have doubts, I urge to you to request proof from the people of Bangladesh.
Last year, Fakhruddin Ahmed, chief adviser of the interim government of Bangladesh, appealed to the United Nations on behalf of those who have been done asunder by global warming.
"This year we in Bangladesh have witnessed one of the worst floods in recent times . . . there is little we can do to prevent significant damage . . . a one-metre sea level rise will submerge about one-third of Bangladesh, uprooting 25 million to 30 million people. I speak for Bangladesh and many other countries on the threshold of a climatic Armageddon," he said.
Don't fool yourself, this is an existential threat, despite the fact that it's usually marketed as a hip trend. Where are 25 to 30 million people going to go? With Bangladeshi cities being pushed beyond capacity as it is, displaced people will surely be heading to India, where they have already adopted a defensive posture by sealing their borders. A conflict is imminent, if not inevitable.
As for those sticking it out, the rise in water levels and salinity, has made life nearly unlivable. South Asia’s Venice, this is not. More like a nightmarish Atlantis. A portent of our future? Quite possibly.
For more on the drowning of Bangladesh, check this out:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
