Month: June 2009

By James J. Brittain (Upside Down World)

Dr. Miguel Ángel Beltrán Villegas

It has been well publicized that on March 1, 2008 the Colombian government, with support from Washington, carried out a series of attacks on Ecuadorian soil which violated the sovereignty of a foreign nation (and international law) and resulted in the murder of Raúl Reyes and two dozen other members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People’s Army (FARC-EP). Less attention, however, has been given to the five Mexican academics present in the FARC-EP encampment at the time of the attack conducting research on the insurgency movement. Of the five only Lucía Andrea Morett Alvarez survived while Soren Ulises Aviles Angeles [29], Fernando Franco Delgado [28], Veronica Velazquez Ramirez [30], and Juan Gonzalez del Castillo [29] were violently killed.

Since arriving to power in 2002, the administration of Álvaro Uribe Vélez has repeatedly targeted any faction of society – be they human rights advocates, oppositional political parties, investigatory journalists, unionists, and so on – as terroristic if they demonstrate tendencies critical to government and military policy (see Isacson, 2008; Reuters, 2006; O’Shaughnessy and Branford, 2005: 62; Stokes, 2005: 127, 128). One sector of Colombian society increasingly silenced has been that of the academy (Brittain and Hristov, 2004). The past seven years have seen an escalation of harassment and imprisonment for scholars who have conducted research on Colombian society and politics and have published material critical of the state.

The most common tactic has been to classify such academics as members of the FARC-EP or, more recently, the ‘intellectual bloc’ of the guerrilla (also applied to left-of-centre politicians). Flatly associating professors and young scholars – without a shred of credible public evidence – with said revolutionary movement is exceedingly dangerous, as the accused subsequently become ‘justified’ targets of paramilitary (and state) reaction. For example, this past November 67 university students and professors had warrants issued under the belief they were members of the FARC-EP whom infiltrated Colombia’s university system (Colombia Reports, 2008c). Yet, in Colombia, things are not always as they seem and every rule has an exception. When concerning the November events it was not the state that acted first but rather it was paramilitaries who first labelled the above individuals as guerrillas and the state followed suit. Once again, the international community bares witness to the Colombian state mirroring paramilitary forces policy.

In mid-November the Águilas Negras (Black Eagles) issued what it declared to be a final ‘warning’ to various faculty and students at the Universidad Nacional de Colombia in Bogotá. The paramilitary, which admitted they had already dispersed members on campus, stated roughly three-dozen individuals (and their families) at the university were connected to the FARC-EP and/or the Clandestine Colombian Communist Party (PCCC) thus making them ‘military targets’ (Colombia Reports, 2008a).

Rather than issuing a statement to protect those threatened or secure the university by sifting out the Águilas Negras therein the state began an investigation of some 55 students throughout various public universities thought to be associated with the FARC-EP. Ironically, no investigation was administered concerning paramilitary infiltration in these same institutions even though the Universidad Nacional de Colombia has received over 312 threats from paramilitaries (Colombia Reports, 2008b).

The threat of academic freedom and integrity has been greatly jeopardized and restricted by the actions of the state. One can only imagine how critical they can be in classes, lectures, or debates if they know right-wing paramilitary networks are in the midst. Nevertheless, arguing the FARC-EP has acquired a significant presence throughout Colombia’s public universities the Uribe administration established a specific wing of the Department of Administrative Security (DAS) to exclusively gain intelligence on campuses. In 2007, Cecilia María Vélez White, Colombia’s then Minister of Education, argued the government/military must “watch those students who might be recruited by rebels” and suggested universities and the state must start working together “to follow up on students and their professional futures to prevent them joining guerrilla groups … This is why we will insist on a campaign that strengthens young people’s social values” (as quoted in Xinhua, 2007).

On May 22, 2009 this fascist attack on higher education reared is ugly head once more when Dr. Miguel Ángel Beltrán Villegas, an internationally recognized and respected sociologist, was arrested under the charge of ‘rebellion’. Beltrán Villegas was expelled from Mexico where he was working on his post-doctoral studies related to Mexican politics with the Centre of Latin American Studies in the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences at the Independent University of Mexico (UNAM).

Upside Down World for more

By Zafar Sobhan (Economic & Political Weekly)

The Awami League-led government in Bangladesh, which completed 100 days in office, has received public approval, as expressed in opinion polls, for its management of the economy and for how it tackled the Bangladesh Rifles mutiny. The one explicit concern of citizens is that the AL cadre, including the student wing of the party, have begun to be involved in criminal acts, exactly as they did during the 1996-2001 government of the party. Overall, despite tensions that continue to simmer beneath the surface and in the face of economic problems, the elected government of Sheikh Hasina seems to be in a stable position.

Zafar Sobhan (zsobhan@hotmail.com) is op-ed editor, The Daily Star, Dhaka.

The first 100 days of the new Awami League (AL)-led government have come and gone, and the indications are both that the government seems to be performing in a reasonably creditable manner, but, equally important, that the popularity which swept it to a landslide victory in national elections last December shows no immediate signs of ebbing.

The Daily Star conducted a country-wide poll on the first 100 days, carried out by the polling firm, A C Neilsen, and the results can only be read as highly encouraging for Sheikh Hasina and her government. Fully 70% of the poll’s respondents thought that the country was heading in the right direction following the December 2008 elections, and 80% indicated that they were either satisfied or highly satisfied with the incumbent government’s performance so far. Similarly, almost 60% of respondents indicated that they approved of the fledgling government’s handling of the economy, and over 70% approved of the government’s measures to address inflation and bring down the prices of essentials, which had been the public’s number one concern prior to the election.

Managing the Economy
Indeed, the polls merely reflect the stewardship of the economy by the government, with two veteran ministers, A M A Muhith at finance and Motia Choudhury at agriculture at the helm of the two ministries that are most crucial in terms of keeping the prices of essentials within the reach of the ordinary citizen and ensuring that the economy remains on an even keel.

Despite the economic devastation being wrought all over the planet, Bangladesh’s economy has remained remarkably buoyant, with no major fallout yet observed in its garment exports or in the flow of remittances, which are the two pillars of the economy and the foreign exchange reserves.

The central bank has tussled with the World Bank and other independent analysts on the figures for economic growth, but there seems to be a general consensus that growth will not dip below 4.5% in the current fiscal year, with the government putting the figure closer to 6.5% right at par with the country’s average over the past 15 years of democratic rule. Even the lower estimate would be a creditable showing for the government in these difficult times.
In addition to the global financial crisis, the government has also inherited a power crisis, and, as the nation is finding out due to excellent media coverage over the past month, environmental pollution threatens to render the capital city Dhaka unlivable within a decade unless drastic and immediate steps are taken to curtail industrial pollution and to ensure that the rivers in and around the environs of Dhaka city are free of untreated sewage and toxic waste.
Of course, the solutions to crises such as these take years to implement, but the encouraging thing for the government is the indication that the average voter is well aware of the limitations of what can be achieved in a short period of time, and has the patience and maturity to give the government both the time required to make a dent into pre-existing problems and the benefit of the doubt while the processes are ongoing.

Deteriorating Law and Order
The noteworthy exception to the government’s quietly competent performance and the only one that has raised the ire of the public is the deteriorating law and order situation. It is a sad but true observation that law and order is typically better both under a state of emergency and under a non-elected government, and certainly there has been a rise in crime since the lifting of the emergency and the elections of 29 December 2008.

Economic & Political Weekly for more

By Harsh Kapoor (South Asia Citizens Web)

Having just spoken to ‘Islam’, wonder when President Obama plans
speaking to Hinduism, to Christianity and other such enterprises.
Given the nature of the widespread disease I am not surprised not to
read any voices from the progressive circles so far to stop Obama and
his advisors in their tracks and tell them not to peddle Huntington.
The Inter Faith / Inter Civilization industry is a booming business
in these times of crisis. Remember Divide and Rule is an old ploy. We
in South Asia have paid a heavy price in the past, and killing in the
name of religion, ethnicity, culture etc continues play havoc in
Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal. A programme for bread
and butter and social -civil rights for all and a clear separation of
Religion from the affairs of the State is the best route take. Stand
up for real secular democracy that acts and sets aside all this
religicised, culturalised, and essentialised way of looking at the
world that divides and separates. Posted below are three comments on the pitfalls of Obama’s religion laced diplomacy.

(Harsh Kapoor is the editor of South Asia Citizens Web)

By Marieme Helie Lucas (SIAWI)

It is beyond doubt that many people around the world, of various political opinions and creeds, will feel relieved after the discourse the President of the USA delivered in Cairo today. It is apparently a new voice, a voice of peace, quite far from Bush’s clash of civilisations. But is it so?

I presume that political commentators will point at the fact that Obama equates violence on the side of occupied Palestinians to violence on the side of Israeli colonizers, or that he has not abandonned the idea that the USA should tell the world how to behave and fight for their rights, or that the Israelo-Palestinian conflict is reduced to a religious conflict, or that he still justifies the war in Afghanistan, etc…

All those are important issues that need to be challenged. However, what affects me most, as an Algerian secularist, is that Obama has not done away with the idea of homogeneous civilisations that was at the heart of the theory of the ’clash of civilisations’. Moreover, his very American idea of civilisation is that it can be equated to religion. He persistantly opposes ’Islam and the West’ (as two entities- civilisations), ’America and Islam’( a country vs a religion); he claims that ’America is not at war with Islam’. In short ’the West’ is composed of countries, while ’Islam’ is not. Old Jomo Kenyatta used to say of British colonizers : ’when they came, we had the land, they had the Bible; now we have the Bible, they have the land’. Obama’s discourse confirms it: religion is still good enough for us to have, or to be defined by. His concluding compilation of monotheist religious wisdom sounds as if it were the only language that we, barbarians, can understand.

These shortcomings have adverse effects on us, citizens of countries where Islam is the predominant and often the state religion.

First of all, Obama’s discourse is addressed to ’Islam’, as if an idea, a concept, a belief, could hear him. As if those were not necessarily mediated by the people who hold these views, ideas, concepts or beliefs. As Soheib Bencheikh, former Great Mufti of Marseilles, now Director of the Institute of High Islamic Studies in Marseilles, used to say: ’I have never seen a Qur’an walking in the street’…

siawi or Secularism is a Women’s Issue for more
via South Asia Citizen’s Web

The Tango dance scene from the movie Scent Of A Woman (1992). The one and only Oscar given to Pacino for this film. Scandalous. The music is “Por una cabeza” by Carlos Gardel.

(Submitted by reader)

By Felicity Barringer (New York Times)

A new appraisal of existing studies documenting the links between tiny soot particles and premature death from cardiovascular ailments shows that mortality rates among people exposed to the particles are twice as high as previously thought.

Dan Greenbaum, the president of the nonprofit Health Effects Institute, which is releasing the analysis on Wednesday, said that the areas covered in the study included 116 American cities, with the highest levels of soot particles found in areas including the eastern suburbs of Los Angeles and the Central Valley of California; Birmingham, Ala.; Atlanta; the Ohio River Valley; and Pittsburgh.
The review found that the risk of having a condition that is a precursor to deadly heart attacks for people living in soot-laden areas goes up by 24 percent rather than 12 percent, as particle concentrations increase.

A variety of sources produce fine particles, and they include diesel engines, automobile tires, coal-fired power plants and oil refineries.

New York Times for more

By B. R. Gowani

Critics, including this author, may have many valid arguments critical of Obama, the current emperor of the declining US Empire. However, they have to acknowledge that he presents great change and welcome relief to his predecessor whose hand, it seemed, was always on the trigger, i.e., a policy of shoot first and asking never.

Unlike the former president George W. Bush, Barack Hussein Obama is well read and aware of world history, including the European colonial and US imperial histories.

Many Muslims may appreciate his applauding the Islamic Civilization’s contributions to algebra, magnetic compass, “elegant” calligraphy, “timeless poetry and cherished music,” etc.

In his Cairo speech he freely quoted from the Muslim scripture Qur’an, drawing applause from the audience. (To quote from the literature, religious or otherwise, of the host country has been a common practice among the business, religious, and political leaders to earn goodwill and make the natives feel good and at ease.)

Obama said his government would work with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. A very noble thought, but only if implemented.

Given his personal history, his past efforts, and as is evident from his speeches, the genuineness of his feelings to improve relations with the Muslim world cannot be denied. Also in Cairo, his African roots enabled him to be accepted as one of their own.

So far so good.

Let us now examine some important issues that he raised:

Palestine/Israel

Obama, unlike his predecessor, accepted the fact that Hamas does have the support of the Palestinian people. Also, his critical mention of Israel that the US “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements … This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop” was welcome. However, he did not elaborate on any timetable for these settlements to stop.

So in the final analysis, his solution can be summed up in this one sentence from his speech: “Palestinians must abandon violence.” He should have instead asked Israel to stop the violence, given that it commits several-fold more violence as the occupying force. To be totally fair, he should have also warned the Israeli government to remove all the Jewish settlements, Israeli police, and the army from the 22% land returned back to the Palestinians, or else face a total cut off from US aid: both, government and private.

But then Obama would become to first US president to be deposed in a coup de tat and would probably be sent in exile to Kenya.

September 11, 2001

He reminded his audience worldwide about the estimated 3,000 people killed on September 11, 2001. However, no figures were supplied by him about the thousands of Afghans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed as a result of the US “war on terror.” In addition to the misery, the refugees, hatred, new “terrorists,” and the economic devastation the US war on terror has caused.

Nuclear weapons

“When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations,” Obama said. He was speaking to the Muslims and so it was not North Korea (who is already a nuclear power) but it was Iran that he was talking about. Israel’s stockpile of nuclear weapons remained unmentioned. The US is committed, he pointed out, “to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.”

The question arises that if such is the case, than why be bothered about Iran developing a few nuclear weapons? As when the nuclear disarmament begins, Iran will have to join the rest of the nuclear nations to get rid of its nuclear weapons; provided it has developed such weapons by then.

Overthrow of Muhammad Mussadiq

Obama acknowledged one of the many US crimes committed against Iran when he stated: “In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.” But in the same breath, he tried to balance out the US act by accusing Iran: “Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians.”

The US did not stop at removing Prime Minister Mussadiq in 1953 (whose crime was that he had nationalized Iran’s oil), but continued supporting the Shah of Iran (who was re-installed by the CIA) until he was forced to abdicate his throne in 1979. The then US President, Jimmy Carter, supported the brutal Shah until the very end of his rule.

Overall, the speech was good and the Muslims (and non-Muslims) who were listening must have felt good for a while. But once the Obama spell is over and the reality of how much power the US president has, and what he can accomplish, remains to be seen.

Let us all pray to the AIPAC (American Israeli Political Action Committee) that President Obama may overcome the forces/interest groups working against peace and cooperation, provided Obama truly wants all the things he mentioned in his speech. Until then, basically, not much is going to change; Iran will be pressured to give up its nuclear program, the “war against terror” will continue, the Palestinians will continue to suffer under Israeli occupation. Meanwhile, the Jewish Lobby and Benjamin Netanyahu along with AIPAC’s very large wings in the US Congress will be celebrating their legendary power over the US government.

A Request

If the US is really going “to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who’ve been displaced” as Obama mentioned, it should go through the United Nations, or some other organization and should appoint an advisory board consisting of people like Asma Jehangir, Pervez Hoodbhoy, and others. Because the current Pakistani leader and the former leader waiting to become the new leader are not capable of realizing these lofty goals as they have been proven to be thieves.

The same is true in regards to the following Obama proposal. “And that is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.” Indeed.

B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com

[The White House website has the following note: The State Department has been busy translating the President’s speech, click here to find links to translated transcripts, and later versions of the video with translated captions as they come in. Languages will include Arabic, Chinese, Dari, French, Hebrew, Hindi, Indonesian, Malay, Pashto, Persian, Punjabi, Russian, Turkish, and Urdu.]

Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning; and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement. And together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I’m grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. And I’m also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: Assalaamu alaykum. (Applause.)

We meet at a time of great tension between the United States and Muslims around the world — tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of coexistence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. All this has bred more fear and more mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles — principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. I know there’s been a lot of publicity about this speech, but no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have this afternoon all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” (Applause.) That is what I will try to do today — to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Now part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I’m a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.)

I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they’ve excelled in our sports arenas, they’ve won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas Jefferson — kept in his personal library. (Applause.)

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. (Applause.)

White House for more