AFGHANISTAN: ‘If Talks With Taliban Bring Peace, I’ll Support It’

November 3, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Monday, November 03, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Analysis by Anand Gopal

KABUL, Nov 3 (IPS) – Western officials are increasingly turning to new strategies in an effort to stabilise Afghanistan and defeat the insurgency here, according to U.S. and Afghan officials. The various initiatives — from negotiating with the Taliban to arming tribal militias — have differing degrees of support from Afghans.

Violence has reached record levels this year and Afghanistan is now considered a deadlier battlefield than Iraq. Insurgents are able to operate openly in areas close to the capital and the central government’s popularity is at the lowest point in its history. The situation is prompting a number of strategy reviews in Washington as the U.S. prepares for possible strategic shifts after the next president takes office.

Some officials are quietly considering a plan to arm tribal groups, in a move reminiscent to the American strategy in Iraq that is credited with decreasing violence there. ”We are seriously looking into using tribes and local communities to provide security,” says an American intelligence officer with the international forces.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Analysis, Asia, Conflict, Peace Efforts

TIBET: ‘STATUS QUO PLUS’ AS AN OPTION?

November 3, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites
Monday, November 03, 2008

Copyright © B. Raman – South Asia Analysis Group
www.southasiaanalysis.org

B.RAMAN

There is a note of increasing dejection in the post-Olympics statements and comments of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and his spokesmen regarding the future of Tibet. His hopes that in the wake of the protest demonstrations in Tibet in March,2008, the international community will step up pressure on Beijing to reach an accommodation with him have been belied. The restrained post-March 2008 reactions of the international community have shown that the economic links of the West with China have become so strong that the West is not prepared to risk this linkage by over-focussing on the Tibet issue to the annoyance of China. Apart from proforma expressions of reverence for His Holiness and of support for the improvement of human rights in Tibet, the West is disinclined to do anything more. It has come to the realisation that it won’t be desirable to exploit Tibet as a card against China.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Featured, Peace Efforts, Politics, Separatism

Q&A: ”We Must Rethink the International Economic System”

October 30, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Thursday, October 30, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Bankole Thompson interviews ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU

DETROIT, Michigan, Oct 30 (IPS) – Archbishop Desmond Tutu is South Africa’s first black Anglican bishop. An elder statesman whose moral voice and advocacy against the racist apartheid regime in South Africa first brought him to the world stage in the 1980s, Tutu received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984.

Today he is an international peace negotiator, a man sought after by world leaders and governments for his counsel, and a teacher of peace, justice and non-violence on the campuses of major colleges and universities around the world.

IPS correspondent Bankole Thompson had a one-on-one interview with the man Nelson Mandela trusted with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to bring racial healing to South Africa. Tutu was in Michigan Thursday to receive the University of Michigan’s Wallenberg Medal in Ann Arbor for his humanitarian work.

Tutu told IPS that the current global financial crisis shows something is wrong with the ”free market” system and called for a review of the fundamentals of capitalism. He said African governments should form cartels to protect their institutions if Western nations are protecting their own financial companies, lamented that Africa’s political and religious leadership failed Zimbabweans, and hailed the prospect of a Barack Obama presidency in the U.S.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Peace Efforts, Politics, Report

LOWS IN INDIA-SRI LANKA RELATIONS – OPPORTUNITY FOR TURN AROUND

October 26, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites
Sunday, October 26, 2008

© Copyright 2008 Malladi Rama Rao. All rights reserved.

By Malladi Rama Rao

Many commentators see in the present lows in the India-Sri Lanka relations a repeat of history – what had happened twenty one year ago, June 1987 to be precise, when President J R Jayewardene was in the midst of ‘Operation Liberation’ for Vadamarachchi. Delhi had airlifted a plane load of journalists to Rameswaram and sent them along with a ‘relief flotilla’ to Jaffna. Some of us, who were engrossed in catching up with the history of Rameswaram, missed the flotilla. The Indian diplomat, who was of the rank of a director in the foreign office, was amongst the ‘left out’. We caught up with the ‘journalists’ ship’ by hopping on to a barge.

Sri Lankan navy stopped the flotilla short of the maritime boundary. The Navy commander was very polite but did not mince words. “You cross the line. We will fire at you”, he told the Indian official, who, we felt, was not willing to take any risk what with so many journalists listening to them on the ‘open radio’. By the time the flotilla returned to the shores, it was past mid-night and we all missed our deadlines. Compensation of sorts came the next day afternoon by way of aerial food drop mission.

This incident comes back to mind because once again ‘humanitarian ‘ issues have become talking point in the India-Sri Lanka relations. And questions are being asked particularly in the Sri Lankan circles whether what had happened at the door step of Vadamarachchi will repeat at the gate way to Kilinochchi. India has not directly or indirectly asked Colombo to stop the Eelam War. Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagman has frankly conceded this point as recently as October 21 on the floor of Sri Lanka Parliament.

Vikitha Herath (JVP) asked him ‘what are the pressures created by India government on the Sri Lankan Government to stop the military operation against terrorism. Foreign Minister replied in the negative. Herath persisted (according to the transcript of the proceedings) by asking ‘What is the action taken by the Sri Lankan Government regarding such pressures’. Replied Bogollagama: “Doesn’t arise’. And categorically emphasized that the Government of Sri Lanka has not faced any kind of external pressure from any quarter regarding the operations by the security forces to defeat terrorism and disarm the LTTE.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa picked up the refrain the same day and it should have been sweet music to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Because the media and political verdict in Colombo is very harsh against him. Interacting with media heads and editors at Temple Trees, Rajapaksa said there was no demand from the Indian government to halt the military campaign when he spoke to Singh on telephone. A statement circulated later by President’s office said: “It is the primary responsibility of his government to look after all the citizens. He carries out this responsibility to the fullest especially with regard to the people who are temporarily displaced in the north, due to the ongoing military operations to defeat terrorism.’ The statement went on to quote President Rajapaksa to say, ‘There is a wrong impression created in Tamil Nadu that this not been done. This is furthest from the correct position. All these are our citizens and we take every measure to look after and provide for them.’

MISPLACED EUPHORIA

As some Colombo dailies noted, the tone was ‘conciliatory’. It was quite a contrast to the report aired on Sri Lankan Broadcasting Corporation’s main news bulletin on Oct 14. It reflected what has come to be identified as Sinhala-Buddhist euphoria and gave currency to the view that whatever be Tamilnadu compulsions and vote politics, Prime Minister Singh is a chicken in an elephant body and hence would like to do a Rajiv Gandhi. The all-party meeting convened by the President sent out the same message and declared its opposition to any Indian intervention.

Interestingly, at no point of the escalating Wanni war, India had called for an end to the military campaign. Its advice: try for a political solution which will be long lasting. And any solution should be within the frame work of unity and integrity of the island nation. This is what the Indian Prime Minister reiterated when Rajapaksa managed to speak to him last week end (after failing to meet him in New York on the sidelines of UNGA session).

External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee elaborated the theme when he made a statement in Indian Parliament on Wednesday Oct 23. So much so, where is the question of India in general and Tamilnadu chief minister in particular orchestrating a campaign to bail out LTTE. In fact, any observer will agree that there is no change in the stand of Delhi and it is not music to Prabhakaran. That is why the high decibel propaganda emanating from Colombo that India is surrendering to the killers of her great son Rajiv is amusing to say the least.

Whatever be one’s political inclinations, it cannot be held against Karunanidhi that he is supporting the LTTE at the present juncture. The humanitarian concerns were first voiced by CPI, which is not known to be Tamil Chauvinist. Others including DMK chief picked up the issue. In all his recent public remarks, Karunanidhi only spoke about Tamils and Tamil race in the context of SL developments. “I am unable to sleep whenever I think of it. Let us avoid the racial genocide in Sri Lanka …”, he wrote in Murasoli, the DMK mouth piece.

One may turn around and ask what about his ‘ultimatum’ to Delhi and threat to withdraw his MPs if Delhi doesn’t act by Oct 28. It should be remembered that Indian Parliament has entered its slog overs with the talk of general election in early February. To that extent, Karunanidhi’s threat doesn’t hurt Manmohan Singh and influence his government’s policies.

Any how, there is continuity in India’s foreign policy whoever is in power in Delhi. It may be recalled Jayalalithaa Jayaram of AIADMK as the TN chief minister led a delegation to then Prime Minister Vajpayee on Sri Lanka issue. And the BJP led government articulated India’s concerns just the way the Congress led government is doing now. In other words, unlike in other democracies, India’s foreign policy is based on national consensus and is not dictated by coalition blues

DELHI-CHENNAI WAVELENGTH

Will Karunanidhi execute his threat spurred by his own local concerns in Tamilnadu? One intelligent guess is that he will not. His close aide T R Baalu, who is also a minister in Manmohan Singh government, has already said that they (DMK) have no intention to bring down the government. “We are not doing anything to help or save the LTTE. We only want to help the orphaned Tamils”, he said in Chennai.

Put differently, there is not much of a difference between Chennai and Delhi on issues related to Sri Lanka. There is a clear distinction between LTTE and ethnic Tamils wherever they may be living in the island nation.

India has umpteen options to make Sri Lanka realise that it is but an island by itself in today’s global village. Yet it chose to be the true friend in need, and not an adversity in distress. It also ignored Colombo’s half baked attempts to bring in other players into the SL theatre. That is not because of any magnanimity but because India knows its backyard and knows, if it comes to crunch, how to protect its interests and influence without much ado.

Obviously, most mainstream politicians and commentators in Sri Lanka have horribly failed to read the TN pulse and the Indian mood. They allowed themselves to be straight jacketed as before and started indulging in cheap talk like why not Colombo also fund fringe terror movements across India. And got carried away by pseudo-nationalism.

Like Sarath Fonseka, for instance. Since he is an army commander, the government, if not the defence minister, should have ‘checked’ his excessive exuberance. That did not happen.

A quiet requiem has been said for APRC and to the much talked about devolution package. There are enough signals that the ruling party will like to ride over the crest of Wanni war euphoria and secure a 2/3 majority in Parliament. Politicians have a tendency not to look beyond the immediate. They also tend to be economical in what they say and do as is the case now when a major humanitarian problem is rocking the north of their own country.

It defies logic why Colombo needed to be reminded of the heavy costs in terms of human suffering in the course of latest military campaign. The 2, 70, 000 Tamils caught in the conflict zone are Sri Lankans first and foremost.

Till Chennai first and then Delhi spoke up for these hapless people, Colombo refused to acknowledge their plight. Otherwise, it would not have ordered the exit of international relief workers (except the Red Cross).

It should have corrected its act when Sri Lanka was voted out of the Human Rights body of the United Nations. And worked to win over the Northern Tamils and removed their mistrust of the government agencies, the armed forces in particular. An element of empathy with them is essential as they are caught between the might of the state and the gun power of a non-state player. Turning ire on NGOs accusing them of indulging in anti-Sinhala propaganda doesn’t help.

TIME TO ACT

The situation in Sri Lanka is the subject of a recent debate in the British Parliament. The Minister for International Development, Michael Foster termed the situation as grave. As the intensity of fighting has risen, the space in which humanitarian agencies could operate has been constricted, he said, virtually echoing the sentiments of Delhi. Both he and members who took part in the debate were concerned over restrictions on the press in Sri Lanka as well as ‘harassment, physical attacks and even assassination’ of innocent persons.

Suffice to say, humanitarian concerns are something no civilised society can afford to ignore. It is not an issue that should be used to score political points either at home or across the Palk Strait in India. Instead of anti- Indian sentiment, what is needed is Colombo, Chennai and Delhi working together to help an estimated 150,000-200,000 people in the uncleared areas. Relief to them should not be tied to end of Wanni war. Firstly because, the LTTE is reportedly preventing them from coming down south. Secondly because, an end to the war is still not in sight (at the time of writing this article).

A senior SL politician (who is still around and active in the power circuit), once told me India is like an old lady whom Colombo should keep telling that she is looking beautiful. We both laughed at the analogy. That was three years back. I don’t know whether the government in Colombo subscribes to this view. What is however essential is that neither India nor Sri Lanka should make an enemy of each other.

About the Author

Malladi Rama Rao is an analyst and writer on the Indian political scene and geo-political and security issues of South Asia. He directs a Weekly Feature Service in English, Syndicate Features, in colloboration with his wife Vaniram. He is also the India Editor of Asian Tribune.

SYNDICATE FEATURES

B-308, Puneet Apts. B-10, Vasundhara Enclave, Delhi; Ph -22617660 E-mail: syndicatefeatures@rediffmail.com

Filed Under: Exclusive, Geopolitics, Peace Efforts, Politics, Tensions

INDIA/PAKISTAN: Picking Up The Peace Threads

October 16, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Thursday, October 16, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Analysis by Praful Bidwai

NEW DELHI, Oct 16 (IPS) – India and Pakistan are trying to revitalise their mutual dialogue and pick up the threads of the peace process they launched in early 2004. This may be the last such effort before the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh demits office by May next, if not sooner.

At least three positive signals have emerged from the recent discussions between and statements of top-level officials of the two countries, which hold out the hope that their mutual dialogue could produce results in the
very near future.

First, the maiden meeting between Pakistan’s newly installed President Asif Ali Zardari and Singh in New York, three weeks ago on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, was remarkably successful in raising the level of mutual confidence.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Geopolitics, Peace Efforts, Report

GEORGIA-RUSSIA: Talks Off to Uneasy Start

October 16, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Thursday, October 16, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Oct 15 (IPS) – Talks to put an end to the conflict in Georgia came up against foreseeable difficulties due to the obstinacy of both sides, although at least the process has gotten off the ground, said a European diplomat who closely followed the opening of negotiations Wednesday.

The envoys to the meeting for the United Nations, the European Union and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) were able to overcome a few procedural difficulties and ensure a new meeting, the source, who asked not to be identified, told IPS.

The delegates from Russia and Georgia, the three brokers of the meeting, and the United States will meet again Nov. 18 at U.N. headquarters in Geneva.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Geopolitics, News, Peace Efforts

Man of Peace Swimming against the Current

September 16, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Analyst Online
Tuesday, September 16, 2008

© Copyright 2008 Nicola Nasser. All rights reserved.

By Nicola Nasser*

For the first time, since the U.S.-hosted Annapolis conference on November 27 last year re-launched the Palestinian – Israeli negotiations, which were interrupted by the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000 after the collapse of the Camp David trilateral summit, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas came out for the first time on record in Cairo on September 6 to “doubt” striking a peace deal with Israel “by the end of the year because very little time is left;” on September 10 he reiterated his skepticism in an interview with the Israeli daily Haaretz.

Accordingly he dispelled U.S. President George W. Bush’s pledge to reach such a deal before his term ends and at the same time practically announced that peace talks have now been frozen for at least a year by the government changes in Washington and Tel Aviv. Abbas was reportedly scheduled to hold his last meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, in Jerusalem on September 16, one day before Kadima, Olmert’s ruling party elects his successor, ahead of his scheduled meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House on September 25. It seems all the partners to the Annapolis process are trying to strike a last minute impossible deal or simply saying good by to each other.

Nonetheless Abbas shows all evidence that he is determined to swim against an overwhelming current to prove that he is the persistent unrelenting Palestinian partner who will never despair in his pursuit of peace, even he would pay the price with his own life, despite all the internal and external odds, nor will he be deterred by the undelivered U.S. promises to loose trust in Washington.

On September 10 he told Haaretz that, “Even today, I’m convinced that I would have signed the Oslo Accords. I risked my life for peace and if I have to pay for it with my life, that’s a negligible price. I don’t regret the Oslo Accords. Twenty years before the agreement I believed in peace with the Israelis, and I still believe in it.”

He is still desperately determined to remain committed to his “strategic option” of a negotiated peace deal with Israel in pursuit of a life-long hope that would make or break his political career as well as a Palestinian leadership team, led by him, that has bet everything on a mirage-like U.S. promises to deliver a Palestinian state on the part of historic Palestine which Israel occupied in 1967, although Bush’s pledges to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on April 14, 2004 have so far proved much more stronger strategic commitments than the U.S. vague promises to Palestinians, and despite the fact that the overall Israeli policy and every single tactic of that policy indicate a strategy that clashes head-to-head with the minimum Palestinian national aspiration for an independent, viable and contiguous state as the basis for a just and lasting peace.

Not deterred by all indications to the contrary, his determination, it seems, would never loose hope to agree with those, like King Abdullah II of Jordan, who believe that the Annapolis opportunity was the last chance for the Palestinian – Israeli peace process to deliver. He is determined too not to be held responsible for any collapse of the peace talks; therefore he ignores Israeli non-commitment and clings to his own commitments to the letter and soul of the Annapolis understandings.

He is similarly determined not to loose his hope that the United States could still deliver on its promises. “We are determined to continue accelerated diplomatic negotiations concurrently with the change of administration in the United States,” Abbas was quoted as saying in Cernobbio, Italy, on Friday. He appealed to the upcoming U.S. administration not to waste “seven more years” to resume its peace efforts. “The new administration should not wait seven years for us to start negotiations. It should begin immediately as soon as a new president is in the White House.” However, with nothing on the record to prove the U.S. would be forthcoming, a Palestinian semi-consensus is ruling out such a possibility as wishful thinking, and Abbas is similarly swimming against this strong internal current, which has all throughout opposed the Annapolis initiative as a non-starter.

Peace-making seems so absurd now as to defy all logic and belief, at least to the majority of the Palestinian people, according to Palestinian polls, the most recent of which was released on September 7 by the Near East Consulting Company to show that 86% of Palestinians are frustrated, 43% believed that the conflict with Israel will continue and a Palestinian state will not be established, 24% of respondents believed that a Palestinian state will be established within 10-20 years, 18% within 5-10 years 16% within a year to five years.

The optimistic fanfare Abbas and his team raised following the Annapolis conference has now boiled down to publicly voiced bitter disappointment and disillusion; his earlier insistence on time tables and deadlines as preconditions have now been forgone for the sake of not dooming the talking process; his threatening repeated warnings that the continued expansion of the illegal Israeli colonial settlements would spell the end of negotiations have been replaced by lenient appeals to the same effect.

Abbas’ preconditioning a deal with the Israelis on reaching an agreement on all and every issue of the final status issues, a precondition which was recently revived with stress, was met by a cold shower with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s proposal for a partial deal agreement that rules out Jerusalem, ostensibly temporarily until a later stage, but detrimentally excluding the issue of refugees for good, a deal not to be implemented but to be presented to Bush then to the United Nations General Assembly in November, which would bestow on the proposal a UN legitimacy that would in turn legitimize Ariel Sharon’s original draft of an interim, transitional and long-term temporary Palestinian state on (42) percent of the West Bank, demarcated by the more than 700km-long wall Israel is building on the occupied Palestinian territory, termed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the Wall of Expansion and Annexation, by Israelis as the “security barrier” and by everyday media as simply the Apartheid Wall, which the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled as “illegal” in July 2004.

Abbas, the PLO and the Palestinian Authority (PA) have officially on record rejected both Israeli proposals of the transitional state and the partial agreement. “Jerusalem and the right of return are inalienable Palestinian rights, too,” he confirmed during his recent visit to Cairo. However this official rejection is defying the Israeli-created facts on the ground of more than 200 Jewish settlements and outposts, home to slightly less than half a million settlers, living among two and a half million Palestinians, but exclusively controlling (37) percent and restricting the free movement of Palestinians on (21) percent of the land, all tied inextricably into Israel proper by a massive network of Israeli-only highways and, ultimately, the “Security Barrier,” which all indicate that the Occupation is no longer “a temporary military situation” as defined by international law. These facts, together with the U.S. collusion with the Israeli determination to annex most of them, especially in Jerusalem, to Israel proper, sweep away whatever credibility is left to whatever remains of the peace process.

Bush’s letter to Sharon was an old proof of the U.S. collusion; the latest proof was revealed on September 7 by Tayseer Khaled, a member of the Executive Committee of the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO), that the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in her last visit to Ramallah, tried to get the PLO’s OK for a statehood with temporary borders and the postponement of negotiating the outstanding final-status issues.

While rejecting out of hand the notion that peace-making would ever have a “last chance,” Abbas however would accept a “last chance” to resolve peacefully the inter-Palestinian conflict with Hamas in the Gaza Strip. If the ongoing Egyptian mediation fails to reconcile the Palestinian rivals, Abbas will “take all steps and measures to restore Gaza before the end of this year,” he said in Egypt. This impatience with Hamas is another manifestation of his determination to use the break in negotiations, brought about by the U.S. and Israeli government changes, to put his Palestinian house in order ahead of any possible resumption of talks thereafter.

Within this context Abbas is battling political foes on two fronts, declaring the Hamas – Gaza front as being his first priority. He is also involved in a power struggle within his own Fatah party on another front. Abbas here is allying himself with a U.S. – backed and Israeli – okayed diverse spectrum of Fatah and non-Fatah politicians who share his strategy and tactics, with the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in the forefront. The battle ground revolves now on the renewal of Abbas’ mandate, which terminates on January 9.

This spectrum is evolving as a “third power” between Fatah and Hamas and is fueling the rivalry between them in the hope of establishing itself as the alternative to both, but has yet to officially take shape as a unified party. Both Abbas and this “third” power are mutually exploiting each other to gain the upper hand both within the ranks of the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, where there is still very strong opposition to the strategy of both. This evolving force is fomenting the power struggle between Abbas and that opposition as much as it is exacerbating his rivalry with Hamas, cornering him in a very sensitive but critical showdown with his own party, Fatah. Abbas’ bitter battle with Hamas is smoke-screening the power struggle within Fatah, which currently evolve around convening both the PLO National Council (parliament-in-exile) and the sixth Congress of Fatah, both overdue.

However Abbas shows all the determination necessary to put his house in order, with his sight unwaveringly focused on his peace prize, an independent, viable and contiguous state, no matter what!

Nicola Nasser is a veteran Arab journalist based in Bir Zeit, West Bank of the Israeli – occupied Palestinian territories.

Filed Under: Featured, Middle East, Peace Efforts, Politics

POLITICS-ZIMBABWE: Power-Sharing Deal Signed

September 12, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Analyst Online – IPS
Friday, September 12, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Stanley Kwenda

HARARE, Sep 12 (IPS) – Zimbabwe’s political leaders signed a long overdue power sharing deal late on Thursday night.

The deal follows four consecutive days of talks between the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) at a Harare hotel.

With economic and social conditions in the country continuing to deteriorate, Zimbabweans welcomed the news.

”This is what we have been praying for in a long time because it’s the only way that our country was to go forward but to be honest this is too good to be true,” said Chenesai Musundure, a Harare primary school teacher.
[Read more...]

Filed Under: Africa, Featured, Peace Efforts, Politics

RIGHTS: Betancourt Wants Political Niche for Guerrillas

September 5, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online – IPS
Friday, September 05, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Sabina Zaccaro

ROME, Sep 5 (IPS) – Resolution of the conflict in Colombia can only come through ”dialogue and openness,” says Ingrid Betancourt, the former presidential candidate held hostage by leftist guerrillas for more than six years before being rescued by the Colombian military in July.

Opening a ”political niche” to guerrillas from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), where they can act ”in a scheme of political legitimacy” could help progress in achieving peace, she says.

Betancourt’s four-day visit to Italy this week was highlighted by a meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, something she had ”been dreaming throughout all the period of captivity.”

She had declared immediately after her release that she wanted to meet the Pope to thank him for his prayers and for his public appeals for her release.

Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi told Vatican Radio that the meeting was ”very emotional.” Her years as a prisoner were ”a time of great spiritual experience, of prayer, and so she really wanted to tell the Holy Father about the importance faith played in sustaining her during that very difficult period,” Father Lombardi said.

Betancourt said she is also thankful to all of Italy for support through the period of captivity.

But she used her visit mainly to reiterate a call for dialogue between government and guerrilla forces, which she said are in a kind of ”autistic attitude, they are only able to listen to themselves.”

Addressing her kidnappers directly, she said: ”After almost seven years, I can say I know you, I know your organisation, your ideas, your objectives.” The world, she said, is inviting them to open their hearts ”to something more than political and military calculations,” and to ”make room for peace in your minds.”

And peace can come only ”through the way of democracy, mutual respect and law,” she said. She asked the Colombian government to recognise the political role of the FARC, ”knowing that we are different, and have different ideas.”

Ingrid Betancourt spoke also about her political and personal plans. ”The truth is that after seven years as a victim of tyranny and war, my life’s perspective has changed,” she told reporters, her eyes lowered most of the time, and in a voice often breaking with emotion.

”Things that used to be important no longer are; at this moment I only feel the need to speak for those who can’t, first of all for those still in the hands of the FARC, people I know very well, and who are suffering.”

She said her priority is to work for the liberation of other hostages in Colombia and around the world. ”I no longer have ambitions for a political career in Colombia. Perhaps in the future I will think about it, but I don’t believe my place is in the political arena at this moment.”

Referring to reports of her joining the Paris-based United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), she said ”it would be a great honour for me to work for UNESCO, but there are people who are more qualified than I am.”

Her priority, she said, is ”to build up a group of people that can help me to achieve my mission: to alleviate the pain of those who are still prisoner, to make people aware.”

Her own story shows, she added, that talking about the victims of terror can save lives. ”During my imprisonment, globalisation to me meant knowing that people in the whole world were asking for my release.”

Nicola Zingaretti, president of the Rome province, said Italy is supporting her candidature for the Nobel Peace Price. ”Because Ingrid has won her battle in the name of democracy and freedom, and gives the world a message of hope,” Zingaretti told IPS. ”With her liberation, the cause of peace and justice has won.”

The municipality of Rome conferred honorary citizenship to Betancourt in 2003. Under former mayor Walter Veltroni, the city led many public initiatives for her release.

A day before Betancourt’s arrival in Italy, the daily La Repubblica reported that a Colombian government dossier would accuse Italy’s Refounded Communist Party (Rifondazione Comunista) of links with the FARC, included fundraising for it.

The revelation allegedly emerged from e-mails on a laptop belonging to FARC commander Raul Reyes, who was killed in March in a Colombian military raid.

Ramon Mantovani, in charge of the party’s foreign affairs section, said the party’s contacts with FARC are well known. ”The position of my party is that Colombia needs peace talks, and all the contacts between us and FARC are addressed to give our contribution to rebuilding a peace process in Colombia,” he told IPS.

Mantovani said his party will keep campaigning for peace in Colombia, and seek the ”politically negotiated resolution of an armed conflict that has been staining Colombia with blood for too many years.”

Filed Under: News, Peace Efforts, Politics

SIERRA LEONE: Building Peace

September 2, 2008 By

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online – IPS
Tuesday, September 02, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Lansana Fofana

FREETOWN, Sep 2 (IPS) – Sierra Leone has been a major recipient of foreign aid since the end of a devastating 11-year civil war in 2002. But government, donors and citizens are all questioning how effectively this aid is being used.

The West African country, battered by years of civil strife and a plummeting economy, relies heavily on bilateral and multilateral aid — according to the ministry of finance, 44 percent of the national budget comes from external assistance.

Allegations of misappropriation of donor funds, both by government actors and NGOs threatens this inflow. One of the government’s principal partners, the British Department for International Development, withheld aid in protest against such anomalies, for most of 2007 and early 2008.

The lack of accountability and coordination is felt by Sierra Leone’s most vulnerable people. The country’s educational and health sectors are in dire straits, despite being priority areas for both government and NGOs.

The government is currently conducting a verification of to weed out so-called ”ghost” teachers and non-existent schools that account of misappropriation of donor as well as state funds.

At the end of the civil war, dozens of NGOs sprang up, many lacking adequate monitoring mechanisms or accountability. The questionable performance of some of these NGOs led the government to review its NGO policy. The Sierra Leone Association of Non-Governmental Organisations also introduced new oversight and monitoring mechanisms.

Fatmata Kamara, 23, is a double amputee who spends her time daily begging on the streets of Freetown, the country’s capital. She lost both her legs in January 1999 when rebels of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) invaded Freetown and committed horrific atrocities against civilians, including mass amputations.

”Before my amputation, I was being trained as a hair-dresser and was hoping that after graduation, I would open a salon of my own and train more youngsters,” Fatmata says.

She has not yet given up that hope. In her small village of Kosso on the outskirts of Freetown, where she resides, Fatmata solicits clients who pay small fees to do their hair, money she uses to supplement income — normally not enough — she accrues from begging.

”This is what I use to take care of myself, two children and the kid who moves me around. It is really difficult and all my hopes that I will be assisted by philanthropists to set up my own business have been dashed.”

Apart from tiny mud houses for a few amputees in Kosso, built by the NGO Norwegian Refugee Council, the bulk of them rely on begging to upkeep their families. It is the case of the amputees, for instance, that the effectiveness of aid is been questioned, even by implementing partners.

John Caulker, the executive director Forum of Conscience, which works to support the rule of law and respect for human rights, told IPS: ”With the lack of proper accountability and monitoring of donor funds, a lot of the NGOs folded up as donors quickly withdrew funding for a good number of these NGOs some of which were described here as ”briefcase NGOs” because they were centred around one individuals or a few with just the motive to make quick cash.”

The Paris Declaration commits governments and donors to meeting certain standards of public financial management, open procurement policies and transparent assessment of the effectiveness of aid.

Sierra Leone’s government has set up a public procurement unit and established regional budget oversight committees to improve aid distribution and effectiveness. The impact of these measures is yet to be fully measured, with a change in government barely a year ago.

However, according to Tennyson Williams, the country director of international anti-poverty group ActionAid, the current aid architecture as a whole needs revamping if it is to have positive impact on the recipient nation.

”The aid packages come along with conditionalities such as ensuring the recipient — government — gets 37 percent for its reserves, another 37 percent to finance its debts and only at liberty to spend just 26 percent of the total package. This does not give the necessary flexibility for the government to spend,” Williams laments. According to him, donors emphasise macro-economic stability at the expense of social stability.

Williams says that with limited spending, the recipient falls short of delivering the targeted services and this, he says, could lead to unrest and social strife. He also questions donors’ insistence on bringing in technical experts for implementation of projects, and asks: ”Has technical assistance done us any good?”

Williams also believes the sizable chunk of funds going to servicing the experts eats into the value of the package itself, sometimes rendering projects a disaster.

The problem here, though, is that the government lacks both the technical teams and the necessary credibility to make aid effective. Corruption in public offices has seen the misappropriation of foreign aid to the extent that donors insist on flying in their own personnel to help with implementation.

Matthiew Dingie, the director of budget at the ministry of finance, acknowledges that resources generated domestically are not enough the run the economy and state machinery. Nonetheless, he blames the conditionalities and benchmarks set by the donors for the ineffectiveness of aid.

”The major problem is the timeliness for disbursement of the aid package. For instance, if money meant for infrastructure such as construction of roads comes in at the rainy season, work won’t go ahead,” he says. This timeliness, he opines, impacts negatively on distribution.

Dingie adds that the aid received as budgetary support is most effective because it comes straight into the government’s coffers and can be spent with flexibility.

”The government will have a free hand to spend it more effectively in areas like health, education and other social services. Where I see the ineffectiveness of aid is the bilateral disbursement. Here, the government does not have control of the recipients who are mostly NGOs and UN agencies, a situation that sometimes leads to duplication in distribution,” Dingie adds.

His argument is that the government may have budgeted for a specific project, something the NGOs may also have received funding for, but they proceed with their work independently of the government.

The government established the Development Assistance Coordination Office in 2004 with the task of tracking development assistance coming into the country from various sources, both bilateral and multilateral as well as through NGOs. But this too has been less than effective because of the lack of transparency, reporting and capacity at both the donor and government level.

The government has also set up district budgetary oversight committees throughout the country with the task of monitoring projects. Dingie says this is working. ”This is the best way of tracking anomalies and ensuring projects are thoroughly implemented.”

However development economist Jacob Saffa says a lot more needs to be done. ”Development assistance has to be well coordinated to ensure equity of distribution among sectors and regions and proper monitoring mechanisms put in place.”

Saffa agrees that ”channeling pledged resources through NGOs and UN agencies without the knowledge of the recipient country is problematic because the bilateral players decide where to spend and on which activity.” Saffa also questions the wisdom behind the ”flying in of experts” which he says is unacceptable and ”must be resisted” by recipient countries.

He also urges that the government must have in offices strong technocrats capable of articulating the views of the government, both at the level of negotiating aid and its implementation, instead of relying exclusively on ”imported experts.”

Saffa concludes by saying that the monitoring of development aid continues to be a major challenge for Sierra Leone and that a thorough framework of monitoring both recurrent and development activities must be put in place. ”Strong institutions for such monitoring must be set up at district and national levels and citizens allowed to report on project effectiveness in their communities.”

The real failures — and some successes — of aid effectiveness are the subject of a major gathering of donors, governments and civil society organisations taking place in Accra, Ghana at the beginning of September.

The High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness aims to bring new voices into a review of how aid is managed, and to sketch out a course for greater transparency, accountability and ultimately impact on the lives of the world’s poor.

Filed Under: Africa, Peace Efforts, Politics, Report
« Older Posts