U.N. Accused of Opaque Selection Process for Top Officials

March 28, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

ban640-629x419

Ban Ki-moon’s UNCTAD pick will be routinely endorsed by the 193-member General Assembly, which has never rejected a nomination from a secretary-general. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten

Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Mar 28 (IPS) – - The Geneva-based U.N. Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), described as a key forum for developing nations on issues relating to trade, investment and development, will have a new secretary-general come September.As befits a longstanding tradition of geographical rotation, the next head should come from Africa.

At least four Africans, including a former trade minister from Zambia, are feverishly lobbying for the prestigious job.

But Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who is vested with the power to nominate the new UNCTAD chief, heads an opaque selection process where he refuses to even name a short-list of candidates, as with all other senior appointments in the world body.

Ban’s pick will be routinely endorsed by the 193-member General Assembly, which has never rejected a nomination from a secretary-general.

Sir Richard Jolly, a former deputy executive director of the U.N. children’s agency UNICEF, told IPS, "There is a need for some process of open hearing and interview of the best qualified potential candidates, prior to and as a step towards the decision by the secretary-general."

He said possible ways this could be done were set out in a 1996 Dag Hammarskjold publication by two senior U.N. officials, Brian Urquhart and Erskine Childers, titled " A World in Need of Leadership: Tomorrow’s United Nations- a Fresh Appraisal".

"I would add that given the importance of choosing someone with the professional range and awareness of how asymmetries of political and economic power operate in trade and development, the interviewing group should include some distinguished economists with knowledge, experience and reputation in this area," he added.

He singled out Joseph Stiglitz, professor at Columbia University and the 2001 Nobel Prize winner for Economics, and Jose Antonio Ocampo, former finance minister of Colombia and ex-U.N. under-secretary-general for economic and social affairs, as good examples of potential members of an interview panel.

As Urquhart and Childers explained, such a process of open hearings and interview, need not pre-empt the final decision by the secretary-general but it would help narrow the field to a small number of suitable and outstanding candidates and add transparency and objectivity to the whole process, said Sir Richard, currently honorary professor and research associate at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex in the UK.

Jan Pronk, a former three-term Dutch minister of development cooperation and a former UNCTAD assistant secretary-general, told IPS, "In my view, (and under) the present phase of globalisation and (economic) crisis, the new secretary-general of UNCTAD should be a person who will carry weight in discussions with leaders of other international organisations, which – contrary to the UNCTAD secretary-general – have decision-making powers.

"He/she should in particular be able to voice the concerns of weaker developing countries, rather than emerging economies," said Pronk, currently professor of theory and practice of international development at the International Institute of Social Studies in The Hague, Netherlands.

The latter, much more than one or two decades ago, have already gained influence both in the Bretton Woods institutions – namely, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund – and in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), he said.

Asked for his comments, U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq, told IPS, "We don’t comment on appointment processes, so I won’t do that this time, either.

"I haven’t heard about any change in this process from our normal one," he added.

Both Sir Richard and Pronk are part of a group of nearly 150 academics, former senior U.N. officials, ranking diplomats and political decision-makers who are calling for "an intellectually outstanding personality as the new leader of UNCTAD" when the current head, Supachai Panitchpakdi of Thailand, completes his term of office in August.

In an open letter to Ban, the group says the selection is crucial, especially at this time of global economic uncertainty.

"We very strongly urge that the next Secretary-General of UNCTAD, in addition to all the necessary experience, knowledge and management abilities, should have in particular the capacity and courage for independent thought," the letter says.

"It is this characteristic that has been the distinguishing factor among the eminent persons who have held the post over nearly 50 years of UNCTAD’s existence.

"We have an interest in the outcome of this matter," the letter further states, "but no interest in a particular candidate."

"We all fervently believe in the value to the international community, particularly developing countries, of ensuring a strong and credible UNCTAD that serves to focus inter-governmental debates on how the workings of the global economy affect developing countries."

Yilmaz Akyuz, chief economist at the Geneva-based South Centre and former Director and Chief Economist at UNCTAD, regretted there is no transparency in U.N. appointments compared with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) or the WTO, where candidates are known publicly, interviewed and shortlisted.

He said no secretary-general has taken an UNCTAD candidate to the General Assembly without securing the support of 132-member Group of 77 developing countries (G77).

"And never more than one candidate. It is all agreed before it is taken to the General Assembly," he told IPS.

"And if he cannot get agreement, the process is delayed. We were without a secretary-general in UNCTAD for more than a year after Ken Dadzie left in 1994," he added.

A G77 source told IPS that Ban has so far not consulted the Group about a candidate or candidates for the UNCTAD job.

John Burley, a former UNCTAD director and coordinator of the open letter, told IPS there has been no official response to the collective letter.

"The letter has been posted on a number of websites and the reaction is positive," he added.

He found it "incongruous" that the declared candidates for the post of WTO director general are invited to make presentations to an informal meeting of the WTO General Council, and thereafter hold a WTO-sponsored press conference, "whereas the U.N. hides the process."

The last seven UNCTAD heads include: Raul Prebisch (Argentina), Manuel Perez-Guerrero (Venezuela), Gamani Corea (Sri Lanka), Alistair McIntyre (Grenada), Ken Dadzie (Ghana), Carlos Fortin (Chile) and Rubens Ricupero (Brazil).

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Diplomacy, Report Tagged With:

BRICS Vow To Move Ahead on Crucial Issues

March 27, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IDN

[BRICS heads of state at previous summit | Credit: www.brics5.co.za]

By Raghu Nathan | IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis

brics_summiteers_smallDURBAN (IDN) – As South Africa inched towards hosting the fifth BRICS Summit from March 26 to 27 in the historic city of Durban, the German Bertelsmann Foundation threw a spanner in the works by declaring that South Africa is "not a model for sustainable development on the African continent".

The think-tank explained: "The country, in contrast to Brazil for example, has not made convincing social progress in important areas, such as education, health, social inclusion and unemployment, whereas other African countries are catching up and becoming more attractive to the BRICS countries."

BRICS is an acronym for the powerful grouping of the world’s leading emerging economies, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The first BRIC Summit took place in Yekateringburg, Russia, where the elected leaders of the four countries formally declared the membership of the BRIC economic bloc. South Africa joined the bloc in 2010, resulting in BRICS.

These summits are convened to seek common ground on areas of importance for these major economies. Talks represent spheres of political and entrepreneurial coordination, in which member countries have identified several business opportunities, economic complementarities and areas of cooperation.

The BRICS mechanism aims to achieve peace, security, development and cooperation. It also seeks to contribute significantly to the development of humanity and establish a more equitable and fair world.

Bertelsmann Foundation report admits that South Africa has been able to re-establish economic stability and generate notable economic growth after the end of the apartheid regime in 1990. However, the growth of recent years has not been able to effectively eliminate social imbalances in society, it says.

According to the study’s authors, the main reason for the extreme level of social inequality and structural unemployment, especially among young people, is a socially selective and qualitatively inadequate education system. Even though education spending, at 20 percent, accounts for the greatest share of the South African budget, the country has not yet been able to close the gap to other BRICS countries.

With 3 percent economic growth estimated for 2013, economic growth is approaching the level before the crisis. However, this is still based on non-labour-intensive sectors, such as the financial sector, and does not open up sufficient opportunities for the majority of the population. Over 50 percent of South Africans aged 15 to 24 were unemployed in 2010. Country experts attribute the poorest performance in the employment market and education policy to South Africa compared to Brazil, Russia, India and China.

The study makes particular reference to the low average life expectancy in South Africa as an especially striking indicator. In contrast to other BRICS countries and many other African countries, life expectancy fell in recent years and there has only been a slight improvement recently. At 53.4, it still remains behind the average for Sub-Saharan Africa.

The experts state that one of the serious development problems is the political system’s major inability to implement policies effectively. The greatest weaknesses are in the co-ordination between the ministries and state authorities at various administrative levels. Financial resources have not been used effectively enough at a sub-national level.

Meanwhile, the economies of other African countries, for example Botswana, Namibia and Nigeria, are catching up. China and India are not the only countries to have long-standing bilateral links to most African countries; Brazil is also becoming increasingly interested in Portuguese-speaking Angola as a gateway to Africa.

Durban upbeat

South Africa appeared to be upbeat in run-up to the summit. The New Age newspaper reported that the country’s "comparative advantage within BRICS emanates from the country’s considerable mineral wealth".

In a recent report commissioned by the US-based Citigroup bank, the newspaper reported, South Africa was ranked the world’s richest country in terms of its mineral reserves, worth an estimated $2.5-trillion (R22-trillion).

South Africa is the world’s largest producer of platinum, chrome, vanadium and manganese, is the third-largest gold miner and offers highly sophisticated mining-related professional services, contributing significantly to the BRICS resource pool, the news report said.

The country is also seen as the gateway to the rest of Africa and it has sophisticated financial and banking sectors, it added.

What lends an added significance to the forthcoming BRICS meeting is that it promises to bring about ground-breaking initiatives, such as the establishment of a development bank of developing countries that will trim their reliance on the World Bank and IMF.

Experts from the BRICS group of countries have in fact given their backing to the creation of a BRICS development bank, as well as an alternative to Western rating agencies for educational institutions, says the executive director of Russia’s National Committee for BRICS studies, Georgy Toloraya.

According to Summit sources, officials from the five countries met in Durban over a weekend earlier in March for a workshop aimed at mapping out a long-term strategy for a mooted consortium of BRICS think tanks. The experts held three days of sessions in the run-up to the summit, where they agreed to establish a council of think tanks and to “support the idea of a BRICS bank”, Toloraya said.

Toloraya said in the first phase such a financial institution would serve as a centre of analysis.

“We use World Bank and International Monetary Fund statistics and analytical reports all the time, as we have no such instruments of our own. A future BRICS Investment Bank is seen as a mechanism that would help realize where money should go, agree development strategies and coordinate investment,” Toloraya said.

The experts also indicated that the BRICS countries might conclude preferential trade agreements. “It will not be a free trade zone yet, but a first step towards it. Settlements in national currencies are not ruled out,” Toloraya said

The recommendation to create a BRICS rating agency for educational establishments has similar reasons behind it. “None of our universities is high on the Western rating lists. In the meantime, the Silicon Valley in the United States is crowded with Russians,” Toloraya said, adding that Western university ratings relied on publications in Western magazines and on Western awards.

“Such an agency would be rather easy to set up. When we know how we rate ourselves, possibly students will decide to go to study in Russia or elsewhere, and not in the United States,” he said.

Toloraya sees the BRICS grouping as an “intellectual project for formulating new rules of global co-existence”.

An association of countries located on four continents was “an alliance of civilizations which will never develop into a military bloc,” he said. “BRICS is an elite project, an attempt by rising powers to safeguard their interests together. BRICS is a civilized attempt at coming to terms as to what a future world order should be. It is not accidental that the group’s participants are advocates of non-interference in internal affairs and of the rule of international law.” [IDN-InDepthNews – March 19, 2013]

Picture: BRICS heads of state at previous summit | Credit: www.brics5.co.za

2013 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

This article should not be republished or redistributed without the permission of the original author or copyright holder.


Filed Under: Development, Diplomacy, Economy, Report Tagged With:

Crisis Group Urges Comprehensive Talks to End Sudan Conflicts

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

kutum_IDPs_640-629x419

Residents of the Kassab Camp for Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) in North Darfur wait to be examined by doctors. Credit: UN Photo/Albert González Farran

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Feb 15 (IPS) – Amidst ongoing violence and continuing humanitarian emergencies in Darfur, South Kordofan and Blue Nile states, the International Crisis Group (ICG) called Thursday for a comprehensive solution to Sudan’s many regional conflicts.In the first of a series of reports on the subject, the Brussels-based think tank urged the long-ruling National Congress Party (NCP) to sit down with both its armed and unarmed opposition, as well as civil society groups, to forge a transition to a new governance system designed to resolve conflicts between the central government in Khartoum and its restive regions.

It also urged the international community, including the U.N. Security Council, the African Union, and the Arab League, to join the demand for a single, comprehensive solution to Sudan’s multiple conflicts lest the country fragment further 18 months after South Sudan gained its independence.[pullquote]3[/pullquote]

“Unless the government and the international community engage with both the armed and unarmed opposition and achieve a comprehensive solution to Sudan’s chronic problems, the conflicts will continue and multiply, threatening the stability of the entire country,” according to E.J. Hogendoorn, the ICG’s deputy Africa programme director.

The new 55-page report, which focuses primarily on the war between the government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North in South Kordofan, comes as aid groups are reporting growing humanitarian crises in North Darfur, as well as states bordering South Sudan.

Oxfam warned Thursday that tens of thousands of already-displaced people have fled inter-tribal fighting in several areas of a gold-producing region in North Darfur and now lack access to clean water and adequate shelter and sanitation.

It said at least 90,000 people had been displaced in the Jebel Amir area over the past month – more than the number who were displaced in Darfur during all of 2012. The group called on the government to open a key road into the area and permit relief organisations full access.

“This conflict in Darfur is now 10 years old, and we need to see a renewed effort to bring about stability and peace in this devastated area,” said El Fateh Osman, Oxfam’s Sudan country director. “We are struggling to meet already existing needs even as more are pushed into crisis.”

Oxfam’s statement followed an appeal last Friday by the U.S. State Department for the Sudanese government of President Omar Al-Bashir to halt aerial bombings in the region and to “urgently disarm militias” there.

Some of the Arab tribal militias taking part in the current fighting there were allied with the government 10 years ago as part of a scorched-earth counter-insurgency campaign that resulted in the deaths of at 300,000 people, most of them from black African farm communities.

But the ongoing economic crisis faced by the government resulting from the loss of oil revenue that followed South Sudan’s independence has weakened Khartoum’s influence over the militias, some of which have since turned on their former ally and patron not only in Darfur, but also in other regions, including South Kordofan and Blue Nile states where the Bashir government has used tribal militias to fight rebel movements.

Over the 18 months, more than 200,000 people have fled to South Sudan or Ethiopia from those two states, while another half million or more have been displaced internally in areas controlled either by the government or by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), a rebel group with close ties to South Sudan’s government.

In its latest report, ICG said the conflict in South Kordofan, in particular, has reached the state of “strategic stalemate", exacting a “horrendous toll” on the civilian population.

The SPLM-N, according to the report, has as many as 30,000 soldiers and a large stockpile of weapons, compared to between 40,000 and 70,000 government troops. While the rebels are deeply entrenched in the Nuba mountains, the government controls much of the lowlands where most of the region’s food is grown.

“Government forces have fallen back on their familiar pattern of striking at communities suspected of supporting the rebels, so as to prevent the SPLM-N from living off the surrounding civilian population. Unable to farm, and with the government preventing humanitarian access to insurgency-controlled areas, many civilians have been forced to flee,” the report noted.

Adding to the SPLM-N’s strength, however, is its alliance with the Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF), a coalition of rebel groups from around the country, and its increasing coordination with the official opposition parties

In its on-again off-again negotiations with the government, according to the report, the SPLM-N has increasingly pressed a national agenda, reflecting the concerns of its SRF partners, while the government has preferred to confine discussions to local issues.

In a major development last month, the SRF signed a “New Dawn Charter” with the National Consensus Forces (NCF), a coalition of all of Sudan’s opposition parties and some civil society groups. The result is a growing national coalition, including both armed and unarmed groups, in favour of a major reform in the way the country is governed.

The international community, according to the report, should engage with the SRF in order both to encourage its evolution “from a purely military alliance to a more representative and articulate political movement” and to facilitate negotiations with Khartoum for a comprehensive solution to Sudan’s regional conflicts.

“Piecemeal power-sharing arrangements, negotiated at different times with divided rebel factions, often encourage further rebellion with the sole aim of obtaining more advantageous concessions from Khartoum,” the report noted.

“If negotiations only partially address the political marginalisation of peripheries, calls for self-determination, still limited in Darfur and Blue Nile but vocal in South Kordofan, will increase.”

*Jim Lobe’s blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.lobelog.com.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Africa, Conflict, Diplomacy, Featured, Peace Tagged With: , ,

Aiming at Global Disarmament by 2030

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IDN

By Ramesh Jaura | IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis

2013-peace-proposal_small

[SGI President drafting 2013 Peace Proposal | Credit: SGI]

BERLIN (IDN) – An eminent Buddhist leader Daisaku Ikeda is calling for an “expanded nuclear summit” in 2015 to solidify momentum toward a world free from nuclear weapons and become the launching point for a larger effort for global disarmament aiming toward the year 2030.

With this in view, he hopes that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and forward-looking governments will establish an action group to initiate before year’s end the process of drafting a Nuclear Weapons Convention (NWC) outlawing nuclear weapons, which are not only inhumane but also swallow some $105 billion year after year.

“A key factor . . . will be the stance taken by those countries which have relied on the extended deterrence of nuclear-weapon states, the so-called nuclear umbrella,” writes Ikeda, who heads Soka Gakkai International (SGI), a Tokyo-based lay Buddhist organization spanning the globe.

SGI President Ikeda notes with great satisfaction that signatories to the statements so far, urging putting a halt to proliferation and calling for abolition of atomic weapons of mass destruction, “include not only countries belonging to Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones (NWFZs) and neutral countries, but also Norway and Denmark, which are members of NATO and thus come under that organization’s nuclear umbrella. And yet these two countries have not only signed these statements but have played a key role in their drafting.”

On the other hand, Japan, which also relies on the U.S. nuclear umbrella, has refrained from signing some of the important statements, he adds and implores Tokyo to “join with other countries seeking the prohibition of nuclear weapons as inhumane and work for the earliest realization of a world free from the threat of these weapons”.

In his 2013 Peace Proposal ‘Compassion, Wisdom and Courage: Building a Global Society of Peace and Creative,’ Ikeda explores “the prospects for constructing a global society of peace and creative coexistence looking toward the year 2030″.

Originally inspired by second Soka Gakkai President Josei Toda’s 1957 anti-nuclear weapons declaration, Ikeda publishes a peace proposal every year which casts a close look at the interrelation between core Buddhist concepts and the diverse challenges global society faces in the effort to realize peace and human security. He has also made proposals touching on issues such as education reform, the environment, the United Nations and nuclear abolition.

The 2013 Peace Proposal comes in run-up to two significant events this year: The Conference on the Humanitarian Consequences of Nuclear Weapons organized by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry on March4-5 in Oslo – to be preceded by a civil society forum for a global ban on nukes, and a high level meeting in September of the UN General Assembly on nuclear disarmament.

Ikeda’s 2013 Peace Proposal states that the huge annual aggregate expenditure on nuclear weapons globally underlines “the enormity of the burden placed on societies simply by the continued possession of these weapons”. It adds: “If these financial resources were redirected domestically to health, social welfare and education programs or to development aid for other countries, the positive impact on people’s lives and dignity would be incalculable.”

Backdrop

The backdrop to the latest peace proposal is that since the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), there has been a growing, if still nascent, movement to outlaw nuclear weapons based on the premise that they are inhumane.

The Final Document of the Review Conference notes a “deep concern at the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons” and reaffirms “the need for all States at all times to comply with applicable international law, including international humanitarian law.”

This ground breaking statement was followed by a resolution by the Council of Delegates of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in November 2011, strongly appealing to all states “to pursue in good faith and conclude with urgency and determination negotiations to prohibit the use of and completely eliminate nuclear weapons through a legally binding international agreement.”

Subsequently, at the first session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2015 NPT Review Conference held in May 2012, sixteen countries led by Norway and Switzerland issued a joint statement on the humanitarian dimension of nuclear disarmament, stating that “it is of great concern that, even after the end of the Cold War, the threat of nuclear annihilation remains part of the 21st century international security environment.”

They stressed: “it is of utmost importance that these weapons never be used again, under any circumstances. . . . All States must intensify their efforts to outlaw nuclear weapons and achieve a world free of nuclear weapons.” In October 2012, this statement, with minor revisions, was presented to the First Committee of the UN General Assembly by thirty-five member and observer states.

Ikeda refers to important new research on the effects of nuclear war on the environment announced in April2012 in the report ‘Nuclear Famine’. Issued by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), the study predicts that even a relatively small-scale nuclear exchange could cause major climate change and that the impact on countries far-distant from the combatant nations would result in famine affecting more than a billion people.

According to Ikeda, the SGI’s efforts to grapple with the nuclear weapons issue are based on the recognition that the very existence of these weapons represents the ultimate negation of the dignity of life.

“It is necessary to challenge the underlying inhumanity of the idea that the needs of states can justify the sacrifice of untold numbers of human lives and disruption of the global ecology. At the same time, we feel that nuclear weapons serve as a prism through which to bring into sharper focus ecological integrity, economic development and human rights – issues that our contemporary world cannot afford to ignore. This in turn helps us identify the elements that will shape the contours of a new, sustainable society, one in which all people can live in dignity.”

Three proposals

With this in view, the SGI President has tabled three concrete proposals:

First, to make disarmament a key theme of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Specifically, he proposes that halving world military expenditures relative to 2010 levels and abolishing nuclear weapons and all other weapons judged inhumane under international law be included as targets for achievement by the year 2030. In the proposal I issued on the occasion of the Rio+20 Conference in June 2012, Ikeda urged that targets related to the green economy, renewable energy and disaster prevention and mitigation be included in the SDGs, and I believe that disarmament targets should also be taken into consideration.

The International Peace Bureau (IPB), the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and other civil society organizations are currently advocating the global reduction of military spending, and the SGI supports this out of the awareness that disarmament is humanitarian action.

Second, to initiate the negotiation process for a Nuclear Weapons Convention, with the goal of agreement on an initial draft by 2015: “To this end, we must engage in active and multifaceted debate – cantered on the inhumane nature of nuclear weapons – to broadly shape international public opinion,” says Ikeda.

Third, to hold an expanded summit for a nuclear-weapon-free world: The G8 Summit in 2015, the seventieth anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would be an appropriate opportunity for such a summit, which should include the additional participation of representatives of the United Nations and non-G8 states in possession of nuclear weapons, as well as members of the five existing NWFZs – Antarctic Treaty, Latin American NWFZ (Tlatelolco Treaty), South Pacific NWFZ (Rarotonga Treaty), Southeast Asia NWFZ (Bangkok treaty), and African NWFZ (Pelindaba Treaty) – and those states which have taken a lead in calling for nuclear abolition, explains the SGI President.

“If possible, Germany and Japan, which are the scheduled G8 host countries for 2015 and 2016 respectively, should agree to reverse that order, enabling the convening of this meeting in Hiroshima or Nagasaki,” adds Ikeda.

In past peace proposals, he urged that the 2015 NPT Review Conference be held in Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a vehicle for realizing a nuclear abolition summit. He still hopes that such a meeting can be held.

“Nevertheless, the logistical issues involved in bringing together the representatives of almost 190 countries may dictate that the meeting be held at the UN Headquarters in New York as is customary. In that event, the G8 Summit scheduled to be held several months after the NPT Review Conference would provide an excellent opportunity for an expanded group of world leaders to grapple with this critical issue.” argues Ikeda.

In this regard, he feels encouraged by President Barack Obama’s speech at Hankuk University in Seoul on March 26, 2012: “My administration’s nuclear posture recognizes that the massive nuclear arsenal we inherited from the Cold War is poorly suited to today’s threats, including nuclear terrorism. . . .But I believe the United States has a unique responsibility to act– indeed, we have a moral obligation. I say this as President of the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons.”

This, of course, restates the conviction he first expressed in his April 2009 Prague speech. President Obama then went on to say: “Most of all, I say it as a father, who wants my two young daughters to grow up in a world where everything they know and love can’t be instantly wiped out.”

Ikeda says: “These words express a yearning for the world as it should be, a yearning that cannot be subsumed even after all political elements and security requirements have been taken fully into consideration. It is the statement of a single human being rising above the differences of national interest or ideological stance. Such a way of thinking can help us ‘untie’ the Gordian Knot that has too long bound together the ideas of national security and nuclear weapons possession.”

He adds: “There is no place more conducive to considering the full significance of life in the nuclear age than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This was seen when the G8 Summit of Lower House Speakers was convened in Hiroshima in 2008. The kind of expanded summit I am calling for would inherit that spirit and solidify momentum toward a world free from nuclear weapons. It would become the launching point for a larger effort for global disarmament aiming toward the year 2030.” [IDN-InDepthNews – February 12, 2013]

2013 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

This article should not be republished or redistributed without the permission of the original author or copyright holder.


Filed Under: Analysis, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons Tagged With:

Few Hopes for Iran Breakthrough

February 11, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Feb 08 (IPS) – Despite an agreement between Iran and the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany (P5+1) to resume long-delayed talks about Tehran’s nuclear programme in Kazakhstan at the end of this month, few observers here believe that any breakthrough is in the offing.That belief was reinforced Thursday when Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appeared to reject a U.S. proposal, most recently put forward by Vice President Joseph Biden at a major security conference in Munich last week, to hold direct bilateral talks.

While Iran’s foreign minister, Ali Akhbar Salehi, initially welcomed the offer, provided Washington desisted from its “threatening rhetoric that (all options are) on the table,” Khamenei said in a speech to air force officers Thursday that such talks “would solve nothing".

“You are pointing a gun at Iran saying you want to talk,” he said. “The Iranian nation will not be frightened by the threats.”

His rebuff confirmed to some observers here that serious negotiations – whether between Iran and the P5 (the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, and China) plus German or in bilateral talks between Tehran and Washington – are unlikely to take place before Iran’s presidential election in June.

“(I)t simply doesn’t lie in (Khamenei’s) nature to agree to talks from a position of weakness – and certainly not without the protection of having the talks be conducted by an Iranian President who he can …blame for any potential failure in the talks,” wrote Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), on the ‘Daily Beast’ website Thursday.

“Khamenei would rather wait till after the Iranian elections, it seems, in order to both find ways to shift the momentum back to Iran’s side and to hide behind Iran’s new President in the talks,” according to Parsi, author of two award-winning books on U.S.-Iranian relations.

He was referring to the widespread notion here that the cumulative impact of U.S.-led international economic sanctions against Iran, as well as the raging civil war in Syria, Iran’s closest regional ally, has seriously weakened Tehran and “forced” it back to the table, if not quite yet to make the concessions long demanded by the administration of President Barack Obama and its allies.

Those include ending Tehran’s enrichment of uranium to 20 percent; shipping its existing 20-percent enriched stockpile out of the country; closure of its underground Fordow enrichment facility; acceptance of a highly intrusive inspections regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); and the clearing up of all outstanding IAEA questions related to possible past military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear programme.

In exchange for those steps, according to U.S. officials, Washington – and presumably the other P5+1 members — would be prepared to forgo further UN. sanctions against Iran; assure the supply of nuclear fuel for Tehran’s Research Reactor (TRR), which produces medical isotopes; facilitate services to Iran’s aging civilian aircraft fleet; and provide other “targeted sanctions relief” that, however, would not include oil- and banking-related sanctions that have been particularly damaging to Iran’s economy over the past two years.

Gradual relief from those more-important sanctions would follow only after full and verifiable implementation of Iran’s side of the bargain.

Until such a deal is struck, however, Washington is committed to increasing the pressure, according to U.S. officials who say the administration remains committed to a strategy of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon by military means, if necessary.

Indeed, in what one official described as “a significant turning of the screw”, the administration announced Wednesday that it had begun implementing new Congressionally mandated sanctions that would effectively force Iran’s foreign oil purchasers into barter arrangements. To avoid sanctions, buyers would have to pay into local accounts from which Iran could then buy locally made goods.

It’s generally accepted that such so-called “crippling sanctions” are responsible, at least in substantial part, for the 50-percent decline in the value of the riyal, galloping inflation, and a major increase in unemployment in recent months.

At the same time, however, there is growing doubt here that the sanctions are achieving their purpose – forcing Iran to accept the stringent curbs on its nuclear programme demanded by the U.S. – or that they are likely to achieve that purpose within the next 18-24 months.

That is the time frame in which most experts believe Tehran could achieve “breakout capacity” – the ability to be able to build a nuclear bomb very quickly – if it decided to do so.

Indeed, in recent weeks, Iran began installing advanced centrifuges at the Natanz nuclear facility that, if fully activated, could significantly accelerate the rate of enrichment. The move was seen as an effort by Tehran to strengthen its position before the P5+1 meeting in Almaty Feb. 26.

Moreover, the assumption that the economic woes imposed by the sanctions would drive such a deep wedge between Tehran’s leadership and the population that the regime risked collapse is also increasingly in question.

While a majority (56 percent) of respondents said in December that sanctions have hurt Iranians’ livelihoods “a great deal", according to a poll of Iranian opinion released by the Gallup organisation here Thursday, 63 percent said they believed Iran should continue developing its nuclear programme. Only 17 percent disagreed.

When asked who should be blamed for the sanctions, only 10 percent of respondents cited Iran itself; 70 percent named either the U.S. (47 percent), Israel (nine percent); Western European countries (seven percent); or the U.N. (seven percent).

“This may indicate that sanctions alone are not having the intended effect of persuading Iranian residents and country leaders to change their stance on the level of international oversight of their nuclear program,” noted a Gallup analysis of the results.

Its credibility, however, was questioned by some Iran experts who noted that increased security measures taken by the regime may affect the willingness of respondents to speak frankly to pollsters.

In light of the most recent developments, including Khamenei’s rejection of Biden’s offer and the installation of the new centrifuges at Natanz, Iran hawks here are urging yet tougher sanctions and moves to make the eventual use of force more credible – appeals that are certain to be greatly amplified next month when the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) holds its annual convention here

At the same time, however, there appears to be a growing conviction within the foreign-policy elite that ever-increasing sanctions and threatening military action are unlikely to work, and that Washington should offer be more forthcoming about sanctions relief to get a deal.

Indeed, the administration’s commitment to resorting to military action, if necessary, to prevent Iran from obtaining a weapon is also increasingly being questioned, as a growing number of foreign-policy “greybeards” are calling for a strategy of “deterrence” if and when Iran reaches breakout capacity.

“In the end, war is too costly, unpredictable and dangerous to be a practical option,” noted Bruce Riedel, a former top CIA Middle East and South Asia analyst who was in charge of preparing Afghanistan policy on Obama’s transition team in 2009 and remains close to the White House from his perch at the Brookings Institution.

The “stark choice” between a diplomatic solution and war that Obama’s commitment to prevention has created, he wrote to the “Iran Primer” this week, “is a mistake".

“But there is a good chance that (Secretary of State John) Kerry and Obama will bail themselves out of this trap by re-opening the door to containment, although they would probably call it something else.”

*Jim Lobe’s blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.lobelog.com.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Diplomacy, Featured, Middle East, Nuclear Weapons, Politics Tagged With: ,

Q&A: FGM Is About Culture, Not Religion

February 7, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

babatunde_pink_tie_640-629x419

Babatunde Osotimehin, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Credit: UN Photo/Paulo Filgueiras

Kitty Stapp

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 07 (IPS) – The fight against female genital mutilation and cutting (FGM/C) continues to gain traction around the world.On Wednesday, the United Nations observed the annual Day of Zero Tolerance for FGM/C, an act that is shocking and inhumane to much of the world but remains a tradition among a significant minority.

This year’s observance is particularly momentous after the General Assembly’s December 2012 unanimous adoption of the resolution on "Intensifying Global Efforts for the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilations", which U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) Executive Director Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin says "speaks volumes to the world’s commitment" and is "the greatest testimony to the work we do".

An estimated 140 million women and girls in the world – 120 million concentrated in 29 African and Middle Eastern countries – are living with FGM/C, which, in addition to being excruciatingly painful, can result in infection, cysts, infertility, childbirth complications, and the need for corrective surgery.

IPS correspondent Marzieh Goudarzi spoke with Dr. Osotimehin on UNFPA’s role in the global fight against FMG/C. Excerpts follow.

Q: According to data from the World Health Organisation, FGM/C-affected communities exist in northern, northeastern, and western Africa and in some Middle Eastern and Asian countries. FGM/C is also practiced in immigrant communities from these countries living in other parts of the world. Are there common elements among these communities that allow FGM/C to continue?

A: It is difficult to find a common thread, but I would like to suggest that it is more cultural than anything else. I do not think it is religion. What UNFPA has done with our partner, UNICEF, is to engage communities across those regions that you mentioned and persuade them that FGM/C has no medical benefits at all and that, for a fact, it causes damage to women and girls physically, psychologically, and emotionally.

Q: Can you discuss some specific mechanisms employed by UNFPA and UNICEF to bring about change?

A: On the ground, community dialogue, making sure we connect directly to the community, and making sure we educate them about the harmful effects of FGM/C, are all crucial. We do this with community leaders, religious leaders, and the women, especially the elderly women, as well as the practitioners themselves, who are engaged in this practice. For some, it has been like this for generations so you have to try and shift them away from that sort of harmful tradition.

We are also encouraging them to abandon FGM/C and we see great success in that area. In fact, a total of 1,775 communities across Africa publicly declared their commitment to end female genital mutilation and cutting. That was very gratifying. We have also worked in countries to put in place a legal system and laws to penalise the practice. Thirty-four African countries that have done this.

Q: To what extent does the UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme for the Acceleration of the Abandonment of FGM/C work directly with local implementers on the ground in FGM/C-affected countries? Who are the key local implementers?

A: The truth of the matter is that we at UNFPA and UNICEF work in countries to provide assistance, support, and advocacy to governments and to civil society. So we see that "tripartite" as an essential to what we do. We don’t do it all by ourselves because of sustainability issues.

You have to build a whole army of stakeholders on the ground, particularly when you do community work, which will consist of local leaders and civil society, to be able to sustain the advocacy and to ensure that communities go forth from where they are now and are able to maintain that pattern.

Q: What is UNFPA/UNICEF’s strategy in approaching a sensitive issue like FGM/C, which communities see as rooted in cultural or religious tradition, and how do you engage communities and community leaders who hold these beliefs while actively working to abolish the practice of FGM/C?

A: We go into communities, first of all, to understand communities. UNFPA initiates community dialogue with interlocutors that have integrity within the community, with mutual respect from both sides, to understand why they do the things they do. We then explain to them that these are things we believe we have to let go because of their consequences, and demonstrate quite clearly to them why that is so.

It takes some time for them to change what has been a part of their culture for years and years. However, this can be done with persistent and continuous engagement, honesty of purpose, and the ability to generate "champions" on the ground who will impact their communities. This is the basis of our success on the ground.

Q: Recent data shows that since the establishment of the UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme in 2008, nearly 10,000 communities in 15 countries, representing about eight million people, have renounced FGM/C. UNICEF data from 2012 shows that younger women and girls have lower rates of FGM/C than their older counterparts. Looking ahead, what has worked for the countries that are making progress and how will UNFPA and UNICEF continue their work on this issue?

A: Going forth, we want to continue to ensure that we build capacity on the ground, and also ensure that we identify real "champions" who will work on the ground. Sustainability of (the programme) is in community ownership… and in making sure we have data which is reliable, that enables us to track the progress we make and give us a better on handle on what we see.

We have trained about 88,000 health providers and established 15 medical and paramedical schools just to make sure that this is not something which is going to regress.

If the present trend continues, there will still be as many as 30 million girls below the age of 15 that will still be at risk. We need to continue to give visibility to the issue to ensure that we can avoid the unfortunate extent of girls being cut.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Culture, Diplomacy, Gender, Human Rights, Interview Tagged With: , ,

Think Tank Urges “More Ambitious” U.S.-Mexican Agenda

February 6, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

mariposa_640-629x353

Border leading into the desert at the Mariposa port-of-entry. Credit: Jeb Sprague/IPS

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Feb 06 (IPS) – The electoral and political stars are aligning in ways that offer the United States and Mexico major opportunities to substantially deepen their cooperation, particularly on trade, energy, and immigration, according to a report released here Wednesday by a special commission of the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD).With Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto taking office at virtually the same time as Barack Obama begins his second presidential term, the two leaders have four years to address some of the most difficult and longstanding bilateral challenges, according to the report, entitled “A More Ambitious Agenda”.

Like a longer one on the same subject released two weeks ago by the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars here, the IAD report comes at a particularly auspicious moment, given both the strong performance of the Mexican economy and the apparent willingness of long-resistant Republicans in Congress to make key compromises on immigration reform.

These include finding ways to legalise the status of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S., more than half of whom are believed to be Mexican.

“There is an enormous amount of optimism right now in the bilateral relationship, and the reason of that is because there’s an idea that this is a new beginning,” said Duncan Wood, co-author of the Wilson Center report, entitled “New Ideas for a New Era”.

“There’s optimism about the Mexican economy and the real potential for immigration reform in the United States,” he told IPS.

“So you have the opportunity for a much more positive dialogue, particularly when you compare it with what we saw during the (Felipe) Calderon administration, when the primary focus was on security, violence and death. There’s now an opportunity to reframe the relationship, and I would say the economic issues lead that.”

The IAD report highlights Pena Nieto’s proposed reforms of Mexico’s energy sector which, among other things, could result in the exploitation of its huge deposits of shale gas and oil. This would not only assure the country’s status as a major oil producer, but also “bring North America closer than ever to energy independence".

In addition, the “decisive role” played by the Latino vote in the November elections here has propelled immigration reform to the top of the U.S. political agenda for the first time in a generation, according to the commission which was co-chaired by former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo and former U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills.

Hills also serves as IAD’s co-chair, along with former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet.

“(T)he prospects are better than they have been in decades for a sensible reform of U.S. immigration policy – which should produce significant economic gains for both nations while easing a long-standing source of bilateral tension and mistrust,” the report concluded.

While opportunities for breakthroughs may be less obvious with respect to their approaches to fighting drug cartels and the violence that has killed an estimated 60,000 people in Mexico over the last six years, the cooperation between their security and police agencies has reached unprecedented levels.

“This is the right time to reassess the (U.S.-backed) Merida Initiative, reinforce efforts to shrink U.S. drug use, and stop the flood of weapons (from the U.S.) into Mexico,” according to the report.

It also noted the Obama administration’s willingness to discuss alternative approaches to the “war on drugs”, as well as recent initiatives, both within the U.S. and Latin America to consider legalising the production, sale and use of marijuana.

Since the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1992, bilateral trade has expanded by some 500 percent, making Mexico Washington’s third largest trading partner amid predictions it could overtake Canada for the top position within a decade. At the same time, Mexican-Americans now make up more than 10 percent of the U.S. population and seven percent of its electorate.

The report calls for the two nations to pursue three “high-priority goals. On the economic side, the two countries should work to make their shared labour markets more efficient and equitable; create a more-coherent North American energy market; and co-ordinating with Canada in negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership with selected South American and East Asian nations.

“There’s a perception that the Pena Nieto government can get things done,” said Wood, who noted that his Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which ruled the country for 71 years, “knows how to reach a consensus” in contrast to Cardenas’s National Action Party (PAN), whose 12-year reign ended in December.

On the immigration front, the U.S. should implement an expanded and predictable temporary labour programme for both professional and low-income workers, ensuring a larger flow of legal migrants whose homes would remain in Mexico.

In addition, immigration legislation must include a pathway for undocumented immigrants here to legalise their status. Such a step, according to the report, “could hugely benefit both the U.S. and Mexican economies,” in part by increasing both tax payments to local, state and federal governments and remittances sent to Mexico.

Given the results of the November elections and the pressure on Republicans to ease their opposition to any such “amnesty” scheme, such reforms are considered more likely to pass the Congress than at any time since the last major immigration reform in the mid-1980s.

The challenges posed by public insecurity, organised crime, and drug trafficking and abuse “may be the most harrowing test” for both governments, according to the report, which recommended that they should jointly review Washington’s policies toward illicit drugs and firearms, whose export to Mexico has fuelled the violence there.

Pena Nieto should follow through on campaign pledges to create an elite federal police force that would sharply reduce the role of Mexico’s military in the anti-crime campaign, while Obama should allocate significantly more resources to prevention and treatment programmes that help reduce demand for illicit drugs, it says.

The report’s recommendations to consider U.S. drug policy reform and legalisation of marijuana – as well as reassessing the five-year-old security-assistance programme, the Merida Initiative – were welcomed by Laura Carlson, director of the Mexico City-based Americas Program of the Center for International Policy as “bright spots” in the report.

But she expressed disappointment that the commission “repeats the formulas that have led to increased poverty under NAFTA and made Mexico one of the most unequal nations in the world.”

“That this group would come out with a recommendation of …more free trade, more privatisation, more guest workers, more oil drilling is not surprising,” she told IPS in an email. “But it’s particularly hard to swallow when no mention is made of poverty alleviation, shared environmental crisis, human rights or corruption on both sides of the border.”

*Jim Lobe’s blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.lobelog.com.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Diplomacy, Featured, Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Politics, United States Tagged With: , ,

Davos Puts Protests Behind

February 6, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Ray Smith

DAVOS, Feb 05 (IPS) – Barbed wire and safety fences are dismantled, the police and army are withdrawn and freedom of movement is restored. The 43rd annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) ended last month with negligible protests against the ‘global leaders’.Every year in late January, the Swiss mountain town Davos is temporarily turned into a fortress. On the streets, policemen, soldiers and bodyguards outnumber unarmed citizens by far.

More than 2,500 ‘global leaders’ met in Davos this year “to improve the state of the world.” as the WEF claims. It’s difficult to make much sense of this year’s motto ‘Resilient Dynamism’. Nevertheless, a lot was discussed, much optimism spread but no decisions taken; at least in front of the cameras.

Even though temperatures were frosty, sunshine reigned at this year’s annual meeting. At least from the business perspective, the global economic crisis is receding. “The worst is behind us. The optimism for recovery is there,” Axel Weber, chairman of the board of directors of the scandal-ridden bank UBS proclaimed.

Meanwhile Davos mayor Tarzisius Caviezel couldn’t stop raving about the WEF’s economic importance for Europe’s highest city: “The pictures broadcast throughout the world are invaluable advertising for Davos.”

Indeed, visual publicity was much worse a decade ago – trashed fast food restaurants, broken windows, a martial police presence, clouds of tear gas, peaceful protesters beaten and showered by water cannons.

This year, barbed wire was cleverly covered by large white canvas. The security personnel’s only challenge was to guide the countless SUVs and limousines through the town’s narrow streets.

A decade ago, thousands of protesters challenged the ‘global leaders’, threatening to shut down the World Economic Forum. It wasn’t just about expressing alternative opinions in Davos, but about chasing the rich and powerful out of town. “Wipe out WEF” was their slogan.

In past years the police did everything possible to keep protesters away from Davos, and put up with riots in other Swiss cities. Whoever tried to travel to Davos was stopped; trains and coaches were blocked in the lowlands.

About 50 people joined a rally in Davos. Rolf Marugg, secretary of the local Green Party was pleased, though he had expected more. “It’s important that we as locals protest against the meeting, the order of the globalised economy and the often dirty doings of the WEF participants,” Marugg said.

Pointing at the WEF’s rather vague motto, the Green politician said that the world doesn’t need dynamism and resilience but a slowdown and change. “The current crisis proves that those self-appointed global leaders’ only ability is to drive economy, society and the environment against the wall. ‘Resilient Dynamism’ therefore only means to keep up the current crisis system by any means possible.”

Over the last few years, small demonstrations are tolerated in Davos; they no longer constitute a threat. The rally went almost unnoticed. Additionally, Greenpeace temporarily shut down a Shell gas station, criticising the company for planning to drill for oil in the Arctic. In another token protest, three activists approached the congress centre with smoke flares to protest against the exploitation of women in the global economy.

A decade ago going up to Davos in late January was on every left-wing activist’s agenda. David Böhner, now in his forties, was a leading figure in Switzerland’s anti-globalisation movement. “Our protest was fundamentally anti-capitalist and directed against the increasingly powerful multinational corporations,” he said.

“Any social movement needs some kind of point of reference. In our case, the World Economic Forum provided a suitable projection screen.” At that time, no meeting of the G8, the European Union or the WTO was safe from resistance protests.

Böhner didn’t travel to Davos this year. “The demonstrations against the WEF don’t interest me any more.” The political capacity to ignite has long gone, he said, and a ritualised form of protest carries little potential.

It was in the early 2000s that opposition was loudest and most radical. Even though the authorities were quick to deflect from political content by nurturing a debate on violence at the protests, it was then when the activists’ arguments were most heard.

“Another major reason for the decline of the anti-WEF movement surely was the police repression,” David Böhner added. The turning point was in 2004, when 1,082 demonstrators were held in the freezing cold in the town Landquart, 40 kilometres from Davos, after violently being pulled out of a train by the police.

The authorities succeeded, because disputes flared up within the movement. Mobilising for demonstrations in Davos became senseless, unwise and unattractive. In the following years, increasingly smaller rallies were held in other Swiss cities.

Meanwhile, the WEF facilitated media access and invited ‘civil society leaders’ to their debates to counter critique. The Open Forum to run parallel to the WEF was invented.

But despite its polished image, the World Economic Forum remains a dubious platform for politicians and business leaders to consult behind closed doors, far from any accountability. The official programme is just one side of the coin.

On behalf of the World Economic Forum, Nicholas Davis argues that if every meeting was made public, nothing would get decided. “Some conversations – over delicate or sensitive issues – frankly have to be held behind closed doors. Our aim is to be as open as possible without jeopardising our mission to improve the state of the world.”

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Analysis, Diplomacy, Economic Crisis, Economic Policy Tagged With: ,

World Social Forum Faces Criticism, Tragedy and the Arab Spring

February 5, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

8436855076_edf0528065_o-629x472

Participants at a debate during the Thematic Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil in January. Credit: Clarinha Glock/IPS

By Clarinha Glock

PORTO ALEGRE, Brazil, Feb 05 (IPS) – The tragedy at the Kiss nightclub cast a dark shadow on proceedings at the Thematic Social Forum held in Porto Alegre, the southern Brazilian city renowned for hosting the first World Social Forum in 2001.People around the world were deeply shaken by the deaths of hundreds of young people who perished in a fire at the Kiss nightclub, located in the university city of Santa Maria, 292 kilometres from Porto Alegre, early on Jan. 27.

By Friday Feb. 1, 236 fatalities had been confirmed, while dozens of young people remained in critical condition. The fire was apparently caused by negligence and a series of errors on the part of the club’s management and the band.

The organising committeee of the Thematic Social Forum (TSF), held Jan. 26-31, immediately cancelled the cultural events that had been planned, but decided to go ahead with the debates on this year’s overall themes: democracy, cities, sustainable development and decent work.

The World Social Forum (WSF) is the largest global meeting for open debate for thousands of civil society groups and organisations, whose common denominator is criticism of the ethos and effects of capitalist globalisation.

A few days before the TSF, Brazil’s foremost trade union confederation, the Central Única dos Trabalhadores (CUT), and the World March of Women announced they would not be participating in the debates, in protest of what they called the "institutionalisation" of the forum by the Porto Alegre local government, which passed a law providing for the WSF to be held annually.

Another criticism was aimed at the participation of "right-wing" organisations, such as representatives of the business community and religious groups.

Perhaps because of the criticisms, the cancellation of the entertainment or the sobering effects of the tragedy in Santa Maria, expectations that 40,000 people would come to Porto Alegre were not fulfilled.

According to Cícero Pereira da Silva, a delegate from the União Geral de Trabalhadores (UGT) and one of the coordinators of the group debating the world of work, 15,000 people registered as participants, including visitors from Latin American countries, Europe and the United States.

The "Carta de Porto Alegre", which documents the conclusions and proposals of the TSF, will be presented in March to the International Council of the WSF, which will be held in Tunis, the capital of Tunisia.

With regards to the world of work, "We decided on uncompromising struggle for human rights and quality of life in big cities," Pereira da Silva told IPS. "We had a major debate on decent work, which was always one of the overarching issues at the International Labour Organisation (ILO), and we focused a great deal on the tragedy in Santa Maria. We blame the authorities for lack of regulation and oversight," he said.

Regarding health issues, the Movimento Saúde +10 — a movement of professional medical organisations, university bodies, trade unions and religious groups — proposed collecting 1.5 million signatures in support of a bill that would allocate 10 percent of the federal budget for healthcare.

The Carta de Porto Alegre also emphasises the need for a new ethic, for education and for preservation of traditional farming techniques.

The group that participated in discussions about racial equality condemned religious intolerance, violence against women and the absence of local government plans to increase participation by the Afro-descendant population.

José Antônio dos Santos da Silva, coordinator of the Fórum Permanente de Educação e Diversidade Etnicorracial (Permanent Forum on Ethno-Racial Education and Diversity) for the state of Rio Grande do Sul, mourned the nightclub deaths and, simultaneously, recalled that many young black people are murdered every day in this country of nearly 200 million people. However, the press does not publicise these facts, he said.

"The lack of employment opportunities for young black people and their co-option into drug trafficking (schemes) are alarming," Silva told IPS. "This strengthens our demand for a quota policy in public education. Violence indices show that seven out of 10 young people who are killed are black, and 90 percent of them live in the shanty towns" surrounding cities.

At the same time as the TSF was being held, social activists were meeting in the southern city of São Paulo for the "Dialogue toward the World Social Forum" organised by the Group of Reflection and Support for the WSF Process.

Messaoud Romdhani, one of the organisers of the Tunis WSF, was optimistic about the gathering — in spite of the uncertainties and tensions currently plaguing his country, the cradle of the popular movements that shook the Middle East and North Africa two years ago, which the press dubbed the "Arab Spring".

Romdhani, a 56-year-old English teacher and human rights activist, hopes the WSF will boost positive exchanges between the Tunisian population and representatives of international civil society organisations.

"We want them to see the situation in Tunisia and we hope they can help us get over the transition that has been very difficult, because the government has so far not shown any interest in (fostering) democracy and guaranteeing human rights," Romdhani told IPS.

After the uprising that overthrew dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January 2011, there was a series of reforms in Tunisia including the election of a constituent assembly to write the constitution, and the formation of a provisional government, in which the moderate Islamist Ennahda Party holds a majority.

But Romdhani maintained that "the practices of the old regime persist, and there are threats from the religious party that dominates the government."

The activist fears a lurch towards Islamist extremism, hence the importance of maintaining the struggles for gender equality and freedom of expression. "The WSF will help us to attract attention towards Tunisia and it will supply fuel and solidarity for these struggles," he said.

According to Romdhani, the Tunisian authorities have not put any restrictions in the way of the WSF, "perhaps because they want to show the international media that the government is behaving properly."

The Arab Spring — mass protests in which people demonstrated for freedom, dignity and equality — sparked a dream, he said. "We who had fought for all this for such a long time became aware that overthrowing a dictator is much easier than (instituting) a democracy.

"Democracy takes time to overcome years of oppression, vested oil interests and intolerance," he concluded.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Development, Diplomacy, Latin America, Report Tagged With:

Turkey’s EU Hopes Could Free Media

February 3, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

DSC_0200-629x418

Newspapers on sale in Istanbul. But the freedom of Turkish journalists is seriously threatened. Credit: Jillian Kestler-D’Amours/IPS.

Jillian Kestler-DAmours

ISTANBUL, Feb 01 (IPS) – As negotiations in Turkey’s efforts to join the European Union remain stalled, many worry that the Turkish government has little incentive to curb its ongoing crackdown on media freedoms and freedom of expression.“Reviving Turkey’s accession process to the EU is crucially relevant to press freedom in the country for the simple reason that the process provides the government with a fundamental incentive to make progress,” wrote former European ambassador to Turkey Marc Pierini in a policy paper for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“The EU needs a prosperous, stable and democratic Turkey irrespective of whether it is a member, a strategic ally, or a neighbour. More importantly, it needs a Turkey that is at peace with itself and manages coexistence and tolerance between various strands of its society,” Pierini wrote.

In recent years, local and international human rights groups have condemned the Turkish government under Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and his Justice and Development Party (AKP), for placing severe restrictions on media freedoms, and, in particular, for jailing large numbers of journalists.

According to a report from the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) titled Turkey’s Press Freedom Crisis, Turkey imprisoned the largest number of journalists in the world in 2012, ahead of Iran, Eritrea and China.

In August alone, 76 Turkish reporters were in imprisoned; 70 percent of these were Kurdish citizens of the state. Many journalists were charged for their coverage of the banned Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, which Turkey deems a terrorist group.

“Authorities have imprisoned journalists on a mass scale on terrorism or anti-state charges, launched thousands of other criminal prosecutions on charges such as denigrating Turkishness or influencing court proceedings, and used pressure tactics to sow self-censorship,” CPJ stated.

In response, Turkish Justice Minister Sadullah Ergin called the allegations included in the CPJ report “exaggerated” and stated that criticism of press freedom in Turkey was being used as a political tool against the government.

“We, as the Government, would not want any single person, whether a journalist or not, to be victimised because of their thoughts or expressions,” Ergin wrote. “Turkey is making an effort to strike the right balance between preventing the praising of violence and terrorist propaganda, and the need to expand freedom of speech.”

Still, many have pointed to Turkey’s flawed penal code as a major factor in suppressing freedom of the press. The country’s vague anti-terror legislation – writing an article can lead journalists to be accused of belonging to, or aiding, a terrorist group, for example – has been especially condemned.

According to Hugh Pope, a researcher on Turkey at the International Crisis Group (ICG), the upcoming fourth judicial reform package which the Turkish government is expected to unveil shortly must address this problematic definition of terrorism.

“The definition of terrorism is completely out of sync with the European norm and it has to change,” Pope told IPS. “It’s absolutely essential to adjust the definition of terrorism to something that is more rational and thereby allow the release of several thousand people currently in jail on terrorist charges that wouldn’t be considered to be terrorists anywhere else in Europe.”

Turkey was declared eligible to join the European Union in 1997, and accession negotiations began in 2005. The process has been stalled since 2006, however, largely due to Turkey’s conflict with Cyprus over Turkish control of half the island territory.

“It doesn’t help that in Europe, Turkey is perceived as a gagger of the press, but I think that’s not the main problem. The main problem is the major European reservations about Turkey,” Pope added. “But if Turkey had a more defensible media scene, that would make Turkey seem more European.”

Last year, the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) launched a solidarity campaign for imprisoned Turkish journalists, called “Set Turkish Journalists Free”. EFJ representatives also attended court hearings in Turkey in solidarity with the jailed reporters.

“It is very important (for Turkish journalists) to feel that they are not isolated, (that) they are not alone. The visits to the court hearings have shown enormous support,” EFJ director Renate Schroeder told IPS.

“All journalists know what it is to want to write the truth even though we all know how difficult it is. Just to be critical, that’s why you are a journalist. There is a real bond and solidarity,” Schroeder said.

In its last progress report on Turkey’s EU accession aspirations released in October, the European Commission said while space exists for debating sensitive issues, and opposition views are expressed in Turkey, the state’s reforms on freedom of expression fall short.

It stated that the arrests and imprisonment of journalists, the application of the state’s anti-terror legislation, and high-ranking government and army officials who have launched cases against journalists are the most pressing problems.

“All of this, combined with a high concentration of the media in industrial conglomerates with interests going far beyond the free circulation of information and ideas, has a chilling effect and limits freedom of expression in practice, while making self-censorship a common phenomenon in the Turkish media,” the Commission found.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2012.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Diplomacy, Media, Middle East, Report Tagged With: ,
«Older Posts