Belfast Murals

Two months ago (February 27 – March 1), I went on a weekend trip to Belfast organized by my study abroad program. On Sunday, our last day, Bill Rolston offered us a lecture on the political murals that are spread throughout Belfast. Rolston is an expert on the murals and has the largest collection of pictures of murals.

Rolston outlined the political situation, and some of the terms he defined are vital to understanding the political situation in Northern Ireland. As he explained it, Nationalists are those who want Northern Ireland united with the Republic of Ireland; Unionists want Ireland to remain a part of the United Kingdom. Republicans are militant Nationalists; Loyalists are militant Unionists. I had previously dismissed such terms as politically correct euphemisms, just synonyms for Catholics and Protestants. As I learned more about the conflict, however, it became more and more clear to me that the conflict really was not about religion at all, and the terms were much more suitable for defining the conflict than religious labels (although it is true that the overwhelming majority of Nationalists/Republicans are Catholic and Unionists/Loyalists are Protestant).

Most of the murals do not appeal to religion. Both sides demand “freedom”. Unionists appear to have a definition of freedom that necessarily involves being part of the United Kingdom. Republicans have a definition that necessarily involves being part of the Republic of Ireland. I do not know enough about the conflict to say much more about these differences, but this seems to be the root of the conflict. I also can’t say I agree with either of these definitions, but again, I may just not know enough.

The political murals are at the same time frightening and fascinating. They are a stark reminder, among many in Belfast, of the terrible social strife that took place so recently. Images of masked men with assault rifles point to the viewer, seeming to say, “We’ve killed before and will do it again.” Hopefully the violence in March is not an indicator of anything to come, but seeing these murals, one senses how fragile peace can be and particularly leads me to cherish the tranquility at home in the United States.

Republicans relate a history of oppression into a more global philosophical movement. As such, Republican murals now make statements about causes around the world, linking all those they understand to be oppressed together. Thus, murals might bring up the Basque movement, the plight of Palestinians, U.S.-Cuba relations, the Iraq war, and even Frederick Douglass.

Unionist murals appear to make a case for the importance of British identity. They are now much more likely than others to feature guns. Other prominent themes are major British victories in Ireland.

If the peace holds, the lessons will hopefully be able to guide us as we search for an end to conflicts around the world. At the same time, each situation is unique, and we cannot force a template on all problems. While human rights challenges are all different, the human rights we all hold are universal. This is what we must always remember.

All of my pictures of the Belfast murals are available here (N.B. the opinions represented in the pictures do not necessarily reflect my personal opinion nor any endorsement by the center).

Holocaust Remembrance Day at CMC

Yom HaShoah—Holocaust Remembrance Day—was two days ago on Monday the 20^th of April.  It was a day to remember the 6 million Jews that died in the Holocaust and the approximately 5 million others—ethnic poles, homosexuals, gypsies, and the disabled—that also gave their lives in the concentration camps.  To properly observe the holiday, The Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human rights at Claremont Mckenna College brought in one of the foremost scholars of the Holocaust and Genocide, Robert Skloot.  Skloot takes the issues raised by the holocaust and genocide and looks at them through a very unique lens: theatre. 

During his talk at the Athenaeum, he described and presented excerpts from five spectacular plays on the Holocaust, each one offering Holocaust experiences from a very different perspective.  His talk was eloquent and emotional, forcing the audience to be truly engaged in a very difficult subject.  Moreover, his theme was conveyed clearly throughout the night—that art can at times be the most communicative medium through which to grapple with tough issues.  Overall, his talk was the perfect event to remember the lives lost in this horrible genocide, and I am proud to be at a school and involved in a center that encourages students to remember.

The Hope for International Justice

As time passes and the Sudanese president Omar Hassan al-Bashir maintains his security in his home country and among the 22 countries of the Arab League, it has been difficult to have faith in international justice. In fact, I blogged about this very issue in the recent past. But having recently seen the progression of justice that has occurred for the former president of Peru, I am regaining hope.

In September of 2007, Chile’s Supreme Court approved the extradition of Peru’s former president Alberto Fujimori. This was a surprise to the globe considering all of Latin America’s—including Chile’s—history of hesitancy to extradite. Alredo Etcheberry, the Chilean lawyer who represented Peru’s government in this case said that “this is a breaking point in international law.” I hope this is the case.

Furthermore, once returned to Peru, the former president was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison. He is still being tried on additional charges of corruption. Simon Romero of the New York Times related this conviction to its implications on global human rights: “Specialists in international human rights law closely followed the case because of its implications for other former or current heads of state who might face charges of war crimes and other abuses.”

We can understand how this incident truly might have ripple effects regionally, if not globally. An editorialist also at the New York Times mentioned the criticism that the current president, Alan Garcia, is not much better. The columnist astutely responded by highlighting that in the very least, the current president will need to be aware “that Peru’s citizens and its legal system are watching.” This very fear can be extremely powerful and might be the largest incentive to discourage corruption.

Reproductive Rights in the Developing World

In 1968, “the right to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of one’s children and to have the information, education and means to do so” was added as a human right.  Since its adoption, family planning efforts have littered the developing world, attempting to give women the resources to properly control their reproductive health.  These efforts have not had the impact one would have hoped, but progress has been made. 

 

Still today, 200 million women have an unmet need for contraceptives—they want to avoid pregnancy but do not have the ability to do so.  This means that they either do not have the money to afford contraceptives or they are uneducated about them.  An op-ed columnist, Nicholas D. Kristof commented on the results that have been gathered of this problem: “This “unmet need” results in 70 million to 80 million unwanted pregnancies annually, the United Nations says, along with 19 million abortions and 150,000 maternal deaths.”  Moreover, these additional births (which predominately, though not exclusively, occur in the developing world) increase overpopulation, strap limited government resources, and lead to the continuation of poverty. 

 

The money that has been spent on family planning has not in the past been extremely effective because of cultural differences that were strategically difficult and were not preempted.  For instance, most of the developing world has large populations of people living in rural areas.  These people do not have access to hospitals and often get their reproductive health through their local midwives.  As such, women in rural villages have been neglected in the past by family planning programs.  Secondly, programs have often distributed contraceptives without adequate education about the proper use of them or education about the side effects. Because of this, many women stop the contraceptives when complications arise that they did not expect.  Also, they might take it improperly, deduce that it doesn’t work, and never try it, or other methods, again.  Finally, too often family planning programs have had a western agenda.  They have aimed at intimidating women into choosing smaller families instead of educating them about their options and offering them the ability to choose.  As many developing cultures value large families, this can be extremely problematic.  Once women feel that they are misunderstood, they stop trusting the family planning experts and continue with their normal patterns. 

 

This issue is one about which I feel very strongly.  Not only as a woman do I find importance in the attempt to ensuring that woman has control over her own body, but I have additionally spent a great deal of time in the developing world working with women and have been able to see what a large issue this truly is.  Just because family planning has not made the strides it should have in the last 30 years does not mean people should capitulate—these women in the developing world still need help and have not yet received it.  In the end it is about learning from our mistakes and continuing to do our best to help the world in a responsible manner.  Doing this, I am confident, requires a perseverance to important causes like this one. 

 

I really recommend this article for anyone that is curious about what it might be like to live as a woman in the developing world: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/opinion/05kristof.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=pregnant%20again%20and%20poor&st=cse

Flogging in Pakistan

A video of a Pakistani woman being flogged was circulated recently, raising anxiety that the Peace Treaty giving the Taliban control over the Swat area in Pakistan was a mistake. The current story is that she was flogged March 7^th on the charge of consorting with an electrician as an unmarried woman, but the stories have ranged from leaving the house unaccompanied by a male to denying the proposal of a Taliban official.  Regardless of the reason, she was held down in public and whipped 34 times regardless of her screams and pleas.  These acts of brutality against women are egregious.  Furthermore, with the Taliban controlling the area as of February, they are only to get worse.

Mr. Afridi, the Peshawar lawyer, has described the Swat Valley since the treaty in the following way: “The most fundamental rights are violated every second of every day. People are being ejected from their houses, courts are closed, 300 schools have been demolished.  More than 900 police officers had deserted the force of 1,600 in Swat, and now the Taliban were on the verge of taking over the neighboring area of Dir.”

Many people were critical of the Peace Treaty because they feared these exact consequences and suspect that the Taliban will us this to continue to gain power.  The flogging itself was horrible, and further incidents like it will only continue without regaining some control over the area.  The Pakistani government should revisit the decision to make the treaty to see if it was really in the country’s best interest.

Torture in Guantanamo

The torture of war criminals is not only a violation of human rights but also a strict violation of the Geneva Conventions. The Red Cross did an investigation of American “Black Site” prisons in 2006-7, concluding that the US treatment resulted in cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of detainees. The report was shared with the US government but not given to the public due to the humanitarian group's strict policy of neutrality in conflicts. Last week, Mark Danner, a journalism professor, obtained a copy of the report and published extensive experts of it through the New York Review of Books.

The findings in the report are horrendous. The ICRC interviewed many detainees from Guantanamo. They all reported nearly identical treatments though they were questioned separately, adding to the credibility of their reports. Their allegations range from sleep deprivation, intense temperature change, water boarding, and severe beatings. The Washington Post summarized the interrogation reports in this way: “During interrogations, the captives were routinely beaten, doused with cold water and slammed head-first into walls. Between sessions, they were stripped of clothing, bombarded with loud music, exposed to cold temperatures, and deprived of sleep and solid food for days on end. Some detainees described being forced to stand for days, with their arms shackled above them, wearing only diapers.”

These torture techniques clearly had a huge impact on the health of the detainees. In a federal court filing, Abu Zubaida was reported to have had 175 seizures that were directly related to the abuse he suffered. The Washington Post and Danner repeatedly remind audiences that the Red Cross’s use of the term torture has significant weight and should be highly respected. Therefore, their conclusion that the U.S. tortured people in these prisons has huge significance.

People might be tempted to think that we have moved past this issue—that because our new president has outlawed such practices, we no longer need to worry about them or feel culpability as a result of them. Unfortunately, I think this would be a very wrong attitude to hold. Guantanamo has yet to be closed and many other secret prisons have not even been broached to the public. So long as they exist, there is reason to fear that once again the United States could condone acts of torture when circumstances of fear arise.

For more information or to see the report (last one), follow these links: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/15/AR2009031502724_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009031602358
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0316/p99s01-duts.html
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22530

Hope in Haiti

This blog is frequently littered with reports of suffering, continued inaction and overall bad news, but today I am excited to write of a hopeful message for human rights in Haiti. This country now has special meaning to students of the Center for the Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights due to the recent visit of Anne Hastings, the commander of the largest micro finance institution in Haiti. Through her visit, we heard a optimistic message of how non-profits are improving the lives of Haitians. Now, there is reason to dream big for Haiti. After the HOPE II Act passed last year in the House of Representatives, Haiti has begun to show improvements. Furthermore next month, international donors will meet in Washington to talk of increasing aid to Haiti.

As many of you know, Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and has long been suffering from famine, corrupt governments and disease. Last year, America proclaimed their commitment to the country by passing a 9 year act that offers Haiti duty-free, quota-free access to U.S. markets (HOPE II). Though this has had an important effect on Haiti, according to Ban Ki-Moon (the Secretary General of the United Nations) with additional aid at this moment in time, there could be a substantial increase in economic development. I found his argument in the New York Times to be quite persuasive. Here is the heart of it:

“HOPE II, as the act is known, offers Haiti duty-free, quota-free access to U.S. markets for the next nine years. No other nation enjoys a similar advantage. This is a foundation to build on. It is a chance to consolidate the progress Haiti has made in winning a measure of political stability, with the help of the U.N. peacekeeping mission, and move beyond aid to genuine economic development. Given the country’s massive unemployment, particularly among youth, that means one thing above all else: jobs.

My special adviser on Haiti, the Oxford University development economist Paul Collier, has worked with the government to devise a strategy. It identifies specific steps and policies to create those jobs, with particular emphasis on the country’s traditional strengths — the garment industry and agriculture. Among them: enacting new regulations lowering port fees (among the highest in the Caribbean) and creating the sort of industrial “clusters” that have come to dominate global trade.

In practical terms, this means dramatically expanding the country’s export zones, so that a new generation of textile firms can invest and do business in one place. By creating a market sufficiently large to generate economies of scale, they can drive down production costs and, once a certain threshold is crossed, spark potentially explosive growth constrained only by the size of the labor pool.

That may seem ambitious in a country of 9 million people, where 80 percent of the population lives on less than $2 a day and half of the food is imported. Yet we know it can work. We have seen it happen in Bangladesh, which boasts a garment industry supporting 2.5 million jobs. We have seen it happen in Uganda and Rwanda.”

For further reading, following this link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/opinion/31iht-edmoon.html?_r=1&ref=global

I hope that the international donor committee heeds this advice in Washington and capitalizes on this moment to significantly impact the lives of the Haitian people. Haiti has suffered for too long.

Remembering the Rohingyas Refuges

In recent weeks, Hillary Clinton has become increasingly loud and frustrated in her criticism of Myanmar, a Southeast Asian country formally known as Burma. The country, which has been under military rule since 1962, has been heavily reprimanded for their policies that violate numerous human and political rights. One specific area that the country has shown absolutely no attempt to improve is in their treatment of the Rohingyas ethic group—a Muslim group living in the predominately Buddhist country. For nearly five decades this group has faced radical discrimination—they have been stripped of citizenship, forced into labor, pushed into regions as their land was confiscated without explanation, and denied the right to travel or marry.

This destitute group has come back into headlines this year due to their failed attempt to escape to Thailand. According to survivors, thousands of refugees have in the recent past boarded boats to Thailand in attempts to flee persecution. In December, the Thai government decided this was unacceptable. They gathered these refuges, badly beat them, forced them onto a boat without and engine, limited water and food supply and drifted them off to sea. Three boats and over 800 people have been found, while the other boats are still missing. Thailand has long been a country flooded with immigrants escaping problems in varying countries, yet this accusation rightly caused them to put in a very negative international spotlight.

Yet, there has yet to be a clear solution to the problem. The government refuses to falter on their sharp stance toward this group, while neighboring countries—currently dealing with their own problems of food security, poverty and labor—are overwhelmed with the prospect of taking care of more people in desperate need. Luckily, there has been some help from refugee organizations, but the future still seems bleak. One can understand Clinton’s frustration with Myanmar’s lack of response to any international pressure: “Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn’t influenced the Burmese junta,” she said last month. “Reaching out and trying to engage them hasn’t worked either.”

It is important that we continue to remember this group of people—a group that has long been suffering and is frequently forgotten in the news and our memory.

the Difficulties of Implementing Justice Internationally: Thoughts on Sudan

Yesterday, President Bashir of Sudan was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity for playing an “essential role” in the murder, rape, torture, pillage and displacement of large numbers of civilians in Darfur. This appears to be a great move forward for justice on behalf of the victims of Darfur, but unfortunately justice for the victims does not always entail prosperity for them. As soon as the International Criminal Court—which was established in 2002 to convict crimes of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity—made their decision regarding Bashir, nearly all aid organizations operating in Sudan were ordered to shut down and leave.

To give you an idea of what that will do for the people of this region, I will list some important organizations that currently work there and the extent of their aid. To begin, Oxfam was ordered to leave, which might harm the 600,000 people that currently use its services in that region. The Dutch section of MSF was closed, which offers health care to people in South Darfur—the numbers of people that will be affected by their absence is unknown for the moment. The International Rescue Committee, an organization that also provides medical care—was closed, which currently aids 1.75 million people. Also, Mercy Corps will not be allowed to continue their work in the region, and they assist 200,000 people. Other groups that have been expelled include, but are not limited to, the Norwegian Refugee Council, CARE, and Save the Children (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/06/world/africa/06sudan.html?ref=world).

As you can see, the effects of the President’s choice to remove international humanitarian aid will be dramatic. The Sudanese people are dependant on it, and very little will remain after the next few weeks. The Christian Science Monitor and others have been asking the question of whether the courts ruling was actually counter productive. If the point of convicting a felon is to ensure he can’t cause more harm, then as of now, it seems the conviction has done very little. In fact, the president now appears to be less likely to speak of peace negotiations and the people will surely suffer more in future months without the humanitarian aid that he has banished.

But, the hope is that with Bashir convicted, the future for Sudan could be brighter. Furthermore, having strong stance now toward corrupt state leaders could offer incentives for future leaders to not misuse their power. Though this is not a completely parallel example, imagine how people would act in individual societies if there did not exist a justice system that could regulate behavior through bad incentives like prison. If we are to be an international community committed to the laws we create for ourselves—such as human rights, rules of war, and crimes against humanity—then I do think we must stand against perpetrators of those crimes. Though it is terribly horrifying that the charges aimed at helping the Sudanese people might actually harm them, the fact that Bashir is reacting to his charges by pulling aid that his people are dependant upon only further shows that the charges the ICC made were correct. For this reason, despite the consequences, I do support the conclusion of the ICC.

Linked below are articles from the Christian Science Monitor. The discussion is very interesting.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0306/p12s01-wogi.html?page=1
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0305/p99s01-duts.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0305/p01s02-woaf.html

The Increase of Modern Slavery

The United Nations recently released a report on the status of human trafficking in the world. Unfortunately, the results were not promising. Though the number of nations which have agreed to condemn the practices of human trafficking has grown, there is real reason to doubt whether their promises are a real commitment to stop trafficking. 40 % of countries where the problem is known to exist have yet to convict one person of trafficking even though all of them have declared their commitment to the cause. The United Nations claims this is due to a lack the legal instruments or political will in these countries to ensure that perpetrators are punished. In the end, the United Nations fears that the problem is only worsening each year.

This is significant not only due to the severity and brutality of human trafficking for victims, but also due to the sheer numbers of new victims each year. The UN has yet to comment on the number of trafficked individuals each year, but estimates range from 800,000 new victims each year, according to the U.S. State Department, to 2.5 million, according to the International Labor Organization. All we know for sure is the amount of people that are reported, which in 2006 was over 21,400 people.

Human Trafficking is said to be the modern form of slavery—and this description is terrifyingly accurate. 80 % of human trafficking is sexual exploitation, with the remaining 20% being mostly forced labor. Both kinds are horrendous. One article that I have linked below describes the experiences of a former sex slave who was able to escape. She was kidnapped at a young age, and woke up beaten and bloody from a man who had purchased her virginity. From that moment on, she never left the building until her escape. She was beaten until she learned to smile and act flirtatious for customers so that they assumed she was complicit in her situation. When she did not act this way, she was literally tortured in the basement. The torture included beatings, massive electric shocks, and days spent in a coffin with biting ants. Many women died in these torture sessions. Now, as an activist, she works under constant threats. In fact, two of her co-workers have had their daughters kidnapped and subjected to sex slavery.

The problem is widespread and a horribly egregious violation of human rights. Governments can do a great deal to deincentivize people from going into the trafficking business, but another obvious solution to the problem is to stop the demand. I hope that human rights activists continue their work to free young women and children that have been trafficked. Additionally, I hope that they focus some attention on educating people about the tactics used by traffickers to make children and women appear consensual, in hopes that such education will fight the rising demand for trafficking.

Below are two links, one to the report given by the UN and the other to woman’s story of human trafficking:
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-trafficking/global-report-on-trafficking-in-persons.html
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-trafficking/global-report-on-trafficking-in-persons.html

Much Needed Inspiration

As the conflict in Israel/Palestine drags on, optimism is becoming a real commodity. With a right-wing coalition likely to take over in Israel and a Palestinian unity government looking unlikely and problematic, it just does not seem like peace is coming soon. Most likely, we can look forward to more violent conflicts, which will invariably leave many people dead or injured, infrastructure damaged, and hateful ideologies hardened on both sides of the border.

It's hard to stay hopeful in times like this. That's why stories like Elik Elhanan's are so incredibly important to Israelis and Palestinians who want to move forward and live enjoyable lives. This is one of the most inspirational stories that I have seen in a while.

Turning Rage Into Reconciliation In Israel

I was born and raised in Jerusalem. I had a normal, happy childhood. I came from a liberal, left-wing family, which means I knew something of the situation. I was for peace, but I never saw myself as part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. My life and dreams were very far away from all that. The reality of Israeli life helped a lot. Even though I grew up in Jerusalem, the biggest Israeli-Palestinian city, I never met with Palestinians and never talked to them. As far as I was concerned, we lived in different worlds.
When I was 18, I joined the army. It was mandatory, but I went gladly. I believed it was my civic duty. I believed one should contribute oneself to one's community. I believed I was going to protect the borders of my country and defend its citizens. But even there I couldn't see myself as part of it all. Again, my dreams lay very far away, and I knew this soldier thing would end one day. But a piece of reality burst my bubble.
I got the news that there had been a bombing while I was training for something or other far from home. My sister Smadar was missing. I remember the long ride home, hoping for the best. But the second I saw my parents, I knew. They had just come back from the morgue where they'd identified the body of my sister.
Smadar died on September 4, 1997. On that day, two Palestinians blew themselves up in the centre of Jerusalem, killing eight and wounding another 50. Smadar was 14 years old. She had gone downtown with some friends to buy things for school. My sister and her friends had the misfortune of being close to one of the bombers. She died instantly, as did her best friend. The third friend was critically injured.
When we're confronted with such a situation, the first question is, of course, How do I go on? How do I deal with the pain? Society offers several solutions to this problem. One is to be sad. Another is to be angry. I refused to take either path.
Life is too precious to be wasted in sombre reminiscence. I thought my sister, who was full of life and love, deserved better than to be remembered in such a sad fashion. I understood that the first victim of my anger would be me. It's easy to succumb to anger, hate and fear, especially when we're hurt by a faceless menace such as terrorism. You can't hate someone so you hate something--not a Palestinian, but the Palestinians, all of them.
But this prospect of living my life as someone who fears everything and hates everyone was unacceptable. The possibility of revenge didn't give me any peace either. Who would be the object of my revenge? Would it make me feel any better? The man who killed my sister was dead.
What was missing from my life was Smadar, my sister, not honour or satisfaction. It didn't matter how many Palestinians would die; she'd never come back. Because of my pain, should more lives be ruined? I decided I couldn't allow it.
What had happened to me was beyond repair. In trying to "fix" it, I'd only destroy myself. My sister didn't die so Israel would be safe; she didn't die because Arabs are naturally bad or because Islam is an evil religion. She died because of a political situation, man-made and solvable.
The events of our time show us there's no violent solution to violence. If you want people to stop trying to kill you and themselves, give them a reason to live. I became aware of the contaminating nature of violence, of its incapacity to generate anything but more violence.
If we really want to stop the violence, to make sure no more innocent lives are lost, we must struggle for a peace agreement. I work for peace in many ways, but the most significant one in my eyes is through the Israeli-Palestinian Families' Forum, a group of 500 families--250 from Israel and 250 from Palestine--that have lost a family member in this conflict. Through this group that I co-founded I've met Palestinians, real ones, not stereotypes or caricatures, but real people like Ali Abu Awwad, who spent four years in Israeli jails. He was shot by a settler, his brother murdered by a soldier. Nevertheless, Ali still wants peace. There are many others like him.
If I can talk to these people, many of them former members of Palestinian resistance movements like the one that killed my sister, and if they can talk to me after losing their family members, no one has a reason not to communicate.
We want to show people in pain that there's another way to deal with it, through hope rather than hate. In our group, we know peace will only be achieved with dialogue. We know it's imperative that each side knows the story, the suffering and the hopes of the other side. If we can speak to each other, anyone can!
Elik Elhanan is co-founder of the Israeli-Palestinian Families' Forum, known as Bereaved Parents for Peace. This is excerpted from a speech published in Occupation Magazine (kibush.co.il).

The Stace of the U.S. toward China

In recent weeks, I have been watching the oscillation of the United States’ stance toward China. When Clinton first visited the country, she publicly relayed that the United States would place the issue of the economic crises above all others; she spoke of the importance of China and the United States uniting to improve the economic situation. In doing this, she neglected to condemn—or even “slap the wrist” of—China of their numerous human rights violations. Then, shortly after her return, she signed off on the State Department Report that harshly criticized the human rights situation in China:

“The [Chinese] government continued to limit citizens' privacy rights and tightly controlled freedom of speech, the press (including the Internet), assembly, movement, and association. Authorities committed extrajudicial killings and torture, coerced confessions of prisoners, and used forced labor. In addition, the Chinese government increased detention and harassment of dissidents, petitioners, human rights defenders, and defense lawyers. Local and international NGOs continued to face intense scrutiny and restrictions. China's human rights record worsened in some areas, including severe cultural and religious repression of ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region and Tibet."

My concern is that it remains unclear what position this administration plans on taking in respect to human rights. From what we have seen thus far, many things could be concluded. In my opinion, it seems most likely that the stace the United States will take is one that is harsh, condemning human rights violations abroad, only when it is convenient for our own goals. This does not mean that the new administration is making the wrong choice; in fact, upon reflection, I do not know what the right choice should be.

On the one hand, I want the United States to place propagating human rights as a priority that does not come second to economics. I care about the Tibetans and Chinese that are being denied rights while other countries watch and do little to protect them. On the other hand, I know this is naive. I know that we are in the middle of serious times, and everyone’s top priority is moving forward. In times of drowning, values become second to staying above water. And in the end, I don’t know if that is okay or not. The United States would argue that we will only be able to effectively protect human rights when the economy returns to normal, so it is only logical that protecting the economy is our primary concern. Yet, no matter the reasons, it is rational to question if the administration truly understands the importance of human rights if anything is allowed to come before them.

Secondly, I have doubts about the United States playing a moral judge when we are violating many of the rights that we have condemned the Chinese for violating. This was the at the heart of the Chinese's response to our report—don’t criticize us for violating many of the same human rights you are. I have a great deal of sympathy for this reaction. In the end, I think the United States needs to decide how human rights will fit in the agenda during this crisis. Primarily, I hope we take China’s criticism to heart and terminate all of our human rights violations (for instance, closing our secret detention centers that deny people the right of habeas corpus and use torture and coercive techniques to gain information). Secondly, I hope we can find a way to support the termination of human rights violations abroad as we work to improve the economy.

Upcoming Human Rights Events

For Human Rights enthusiasts, here are three events coming up that might interest you:

Tomorrow, Wednesday the 11th of Febuary, Efraim Inbar will be speaking at the Athenaeum. He is the author of five books titled, Outcast Countries in the World Community (1985), War and Peace in Israeli Politics. Labor Party Positions on National Security (1991), Rabin and Israel’s National Security (1999), The Israeli-Turkish Entente (2001), and Israel's National Security: Issues and Challenges since the Yom Kippur War. Currently, he serves on the Academic Committee of the History Department of the IDF and as the President of the Israel Association of International Studies. While at CMC, he will be having two discussions. The first will be at 4:00 Pm in the Freeburg Room and second will be over dinner at 6:00 PM in the Parents Dining Room. Both of his discussions will be oriented around the recent conflict in Gaza, where he will offer students his unique perspective.

Another exciting event will be taking place at Pomona on Tuesday the 17th of February. The event is titled Human Rights in the 21st Century, and it will feature a panel discussion of the genocide and ongoing humanitarian crises in Sudan, Zimbabwe, the Congo, and other nations. Additionally, the panel will discuss the future of human rights in an age characterized by globalization and the rise of China, India, and Russia. The speakers are Mark Hanis, executive director of the Genocide Intervention Network, Jeanette Ndhlovu, South African Consul-General, and Michael J. Bazyler, acclaimed Holocaust and human rights scholar and professor at Chapman University Law School. The event will be at 8 PM in Edmunds Ballroom at Pomona College.

Finally, on Sunday the 22nd of February at The University of Southern California there will be a screening of a recently made documentary called Spell Your Name. The film features testimonies of Ukrainian Holocaust survivors and witnesses from the Shoah Foundation Insititute’s archives. Following the film, their will be a discussion addressing issues of cultural stereotypes and the complexity of the public memorialization of massacres that took place during the Holocaust in Ukraine. The discussion will be moderated by Wolf Gruner, a USC history professor, Sergey Bukovsky, the filmmaker, Crispin Brooks, the USC Shoah Foundation Institute curator, and Michael Renov, a USC cinematic arts professor. This really interesting event will be at the Eileen Norris Cinema Theatre at 4:30 pm. The admission is free and refreshments will be served.

The Hope for Change for Bagram

Article 9: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile

Article 10: Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11 (1): Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.


Guantanamo has long been the basis of debate for human rights activists. Yet recently, there is an air of relief as our new President has proclaimed that within a year, the prison will close. Though I share this relief, I am concerned with the fate of not only Guantanamo, but also the Bagram Prison in Afghanistan. As of now, Obama has yet to say much on his plans for this detention center. In a very limited time, he must decide if he wants to approve of the 60 million dollar prison complex that Bush proposed to replace the current one, and if he will give four prisoners in Bagram the ability to challenge their detention as has been done for prisoners in Guantanamo.

I am very concerned about these decisions. This detention center has been reported to have worse conditions for prisoners than Guantanamo, and as the Bush administration has allowed no reporters or human rights organizations inside, we can only image that to be true. These prisoners are being held without rights or the ability to question their charges for indefinite period of time. On top of this, with as little transparency into the prison as is currently allowed, one need not question deeply to imagine the conditions the guards have created for the prisoners. As we have learned from psychology, even good people are corrupted under unregulated power. All it takes is looking back on the Stanford Prison Experiment to see that it does not take evil people to do evil things. Situations are very powerful determinants of behavior. Yet if we know this, then why do we continue to put any people—regardless of their values—in situations where corruption is a foreseeable event. At Bagram in 2003, two men were “coercively interrogated” to death, and the prison was known for using many interrogation techniques that many consider to be torture on a regular basis. Though it is said that the prison has improved after 2003 due to intense public pressure, we must foresee similar events in the future, and decide that they are unacceptable. In my opinion, the only way to prevent their occurrences is make the prisons more transparent, where workers are held accountable by public censure, and more just, where prisoners are given the human rights that should never be denied to anyone.

We have seen the atrocities that have happened since 2001 in these secret detention camps, and the wise know that these atrocities will only continue without increased transparency. Yet, we have not put the pressure on our new president to ensure that these violations stop. It is not only in Guantanamo that they occur, it is all prisons where suspects are held secretly without habeas corpus, without trial, and with very minimal rights. President Obama has been given until February 20th the make a decision about the four prisoners seeking to question their detention in Bagram. I hope that he decides, as as was done for prisoners in Guantanamo, that the values that our country were built upon are never worth sacrificing.

The Effects of Aid in Zimbabwe

Over a month ago, I wrote on the massive turmoil in Zimbabwe. Yet even now, as we sit on the upward swing of the conflict with dual leadership hopefully on the horizon, I remain angry and broken hearted. Recent articles have been published about the ramifications of Mugabe’s rule. Their topics are extremely broad in scope, covering issues in health care, hunger, political angst and inflation. One that I found extremely egregious relates to the abuse that young women—or maybe I should say girls—are experiencing as they flee to South Africa in attempt to find work and send money home. Countless unreported rapes occur each day during this passage. As most of these women cross the border at night, they frequently stumble upon men that have predicted their arrival. They are robed and abused in exchange for passage. Furthermore, once the women arrive in South Africa, the only work that many are able to find is in prostitution.

I am sure that I am not alone in my vehement anger and sadness about Zimbabwe. I desperately want someone to blame for how out of control this situation has become. Clearly, Mugabe is the ultimate culprit, but what about us? Have we been incompetent in being unable to prevent such suffering? I have written about policies and their effects in previous blogs, and I am now interested in their role in Zimbabwe. Currently, NGOs, state aid and humanitarian organizations are vital to the survival of many Zimbabweans. In December of 2008, the United States and the United Nations were responsible for feeding half of the population of Zimbabwe. My first impression is sincere gratitude that these people are being helped. On the other hand, I wonder if in the attempt to help, people are in fact enabling Mugabe’s brutality to reign. As he can rely on others to feed his people, he feels no political or moral obligation to feed them himself. As his people do not need to fight for their own self-preservation, they are not forcing him out. The New York Times quoted an employee of an aid agency who reiterated this idea: "'You’re acting to save lives, knowing that by doing so you are sustaining this government,' said one aid agency manager, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals. 'And unfortunately, ZANU-PF is good at exploiting this humanitarian imperative.'”

This issue I find to be extremely tough. My gut tells me that it would be incredibly wrong to act as Mugabe’s educators while watching his country implode. On the other hand, my mind tells me that it is potentially our willingness to clean up after him that enabled his power to be sustained for so long. In the end, I would rather be blameworthy for enabling Mugabe in attempt to relieve the suffering of his people than blameless at the expense of human life. Regardless, we will never be able to juxtapose and judge the outcomes of the two scenarios to get a clear response as to which one would have been best. This means that we are left with our imperfect, real-time responses.

For more recent news articles on Zimbabwe...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/22/world/africa/22zimbabwe.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123332129713033159.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/world/africa/31zimbabwe.html?ref=world
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/24/world/africa/24zimbabwe.html

Instabilty in Food: Causes and Concerns

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says the following: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

In my opinion, the prominent challenge that lies before leaders as we move into the future will be ensuring the access to this right in particular. Though people often assume that resources are the only factors needed to safeguard this right—and they truly are the essential component—the policies supported by leaders might also dramatically affect people’s ability to gain this security. If nothing more, the quality of supported policies clearly determine the amount of resources needed to sustain this right.

One aspect of this very broad right is food security. If people are unable to eat, then their “right to a standard of living adequate for health and wellbeing” is impeded upon. Though leaders can clearly not prevent a famine caused by drought, they can assuage the effects of the inevitable. This is of course done through the agricultural policies that leaders support and proselytize to developing world governments (countries where food shortages lead to starvation). Policies are not innocuous creatures, their impact can be so massive in scope that hundreds of thousands of lives can be saved or ruined as a result of them. For instance, the recommended policies for food production have changed dramatically since the 1980’s, when the IDF and the World Bank recommended to the developing world to reduce regulation and allow the market to play a greater role in shaping agricultural policy.

This recommendation led to the governments in the developing world to sell off food reserves and eliminate their investments and subsidies in agriculture. The result has been primarily positive until recently. Agriculture has been more efficient in the last thirty years, but we are finding that this increase in efficiency might be at the great cost of security. With governments no longer subsidizing their own farmers or keeping food reserves, certain regions have taken on the global burden of production for specific products like rice. When global food prices spiked last spring, chaos and suffering resulted in the developing world due to massive shortages of the exports people relied upon so heavily. And now, further instability—this time in the form of the food prices decreasing—has caused additional problems and fears in West Africa.

Of course, the reason for the increased food prices was unforeseeable at the time—the demand for bio-fuels massively increased demand for corn and other staple products—but should the existence of a crisis ever be unforeseeable? Though we will hopefully learn from our past blunders, there will always come to exist a future one. Whether it be man-made or nature made, we will again run into problems with a system so dependent on the good of so few. And when these problems again resurface, we will wonder again if our efficient system was worth the suffering of so many.

For futher readings on this topic in the news, please refer to the following links:
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2008/11/24/081124ta_talk_surowiecki
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/letters/2008/12/22/081222mama_mail1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/world/africa/26senegal.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=west%20africa&st=cse

New Speaker Series: Holocaust, Genocide, and Race Relations in World History

On February, 12th at 4 pm, the University of Southern California will welcome Dirk Moses to speak on the topic of "Rethinking the Relationship between Imperialism and the Holocaust." Since the 1930’s, the relationship between Nazism, the Holocaust and Imperialism has been controversial. His lecture will address the question of whether “genocide studies” and the “new imperial history” offer tools to rethink the relationship between anti-Semitism and the Holocaust.

The talk is sponsored through the Shapell-Guerin Chair in Jewish Studies at the Department of History at USC, and will be located at USC’s main campus in the Intellectual Commons of the Doheny Library. Dirk Moses is an exceptional scholar, and the author of, German Intellectuals and the Nazi Past (Cambridge, 2007). He additionally is the editor of Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation and Subaltern Resistance in World History (Berghahn, 2008), Genocide and Settler Society: Frontier Violence and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History (Berghahn, 2004). Finally, he is the coeditor of Colonialism and Genocide (Routledge, 2007), and The Oxford Handbook on Genocide Studies (forthcoming).

Civilians: the Major Causality of War in Gaza

Conflict in the Middle East appears constant in recent years, but the problems that are currently dissipating have incurred serious causalities.  As most are aware, after the six-month cease-fire between Gaza and Israel ended in December, conflict between the two groups was immediately reignited.  Instigated primarily by the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel, the conflict was intensely escalated by the air and ground campaign issued by Israel in response to Gaza’s aggression on December 27^th. The causalities are extensive, and unfortunately, many civilians were lost in the process of the war.

My aim is not to criticize Israel’s decision to attack Gaza; instead, I am concerned with a conflict that left over 1,300 Palestinians dead in less than a month, of which 600-900 are rumored to be civilians.  Clearly, Israel intended to make an aggressive statement in attempts to protect their people, but were the methods used to accomplish that task justified?  Many human rights organizations think not, and have launched numerous investigations regarding the targets and weapons of attack used by the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).  At the top of the list is Israel’s use of white phosphorous, of which certain uses were banned in the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons in 1980.  Though white phosphorus was clearly used, there remains debate in how frequently it was misused, and investigations are currently being undergone on this topic.  Additional critiques of Israel have been the frequency of which humanitarian aid resources were harmed in the conflict; UN buildings and Red Cross/Crescent supplies were damaged or ruined in the course of the month long discord.   Adnan Abu Hasna, a spokesman for UN Relief and Works Agency said that during the conflict “tens of millions of dollars of aid have been destroyed.”  Finally, one must question the motives of a war that ended with a huge percentage of its causalities being civilians.  It took Israel four days to allow humanitarian organizations access into the area, which in this situation was horribly detrimental.   Not only was the Shifa hospital completely overwhelmed and desperately lacking supplies, but the shortage of power and running water was rampant in Gaza.  Both of these things led to increased death and hardship for Palestinian civilians that could have been alleviated or dissipated with increased humanitarian aid.

I am very empathetic with Israel’s need to establish peace for their people, and I think everyone can understand how such an intense priority can bleed the line of right and wrong, but I fear that their actions in the last month have only escalated tensions and angers on behalf of the Palestinians.  If this is true, then I fear that many civilian lives were unjustifiably lost for a very short time of peace.