The bishops of the North and East provinces have requested the Vatican to appoint a separate Cardinal for the two provinces of Sri Lanka. Father Joseph Pathinathar Jebaratnam, who spoke in Jaffna,
More
What constitutes a crisis worthy of global attention? When a regional bank in the United States falls victim to the inversion of the yield curve (i.e., when short-term bond interest rates become higher than long-term rates), the Earth nearly stops spinning. The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) – one of the most important financiers of technology start-ups in the United States – on 10 March presaged wider chaos in the Western financial world. In the days after the SVB debacle, Signature Bank, one of the few banks to accept cryptocurrency deposits, faced bankruptcy, and then Credit Suisse, an established European bank set up in 1856, fell due its longstanding poor management of risk (on 19 March, UBS agreed to buy Credit Suisse in an emergency deal seeking to halt the crisis). Governments held emergency Zoom conferences, financial titans called the heads of central banks and of states, and newspapers warned of system failure if safety nets were not quickly sown underneath the entire financial architecture. Within hours, Western governments and central banks secured billions of dollars to bail out the financial system. This crisis could not be allowed to escalate.
Other serious developments in the world might be called a crisis, but they do not elicit the kind of urgent response undertaken by Western governments to shore up their banking system. Three years ago, Oxfam released a report that found that the ‘world’s 22 richest men have more wealth than all the women in Africa’. That fact, which is more shocking than the failure of a bank, has moved no agenda despite the evidence that this disparity is caused largely by the predatory, deregulated lending practices of the Western banking system (as we will show in our April dossier, Life or Debt: The Stranglehold of Neocolonialism and Africa’s Search for Alternatives).
Silence greeted the publication of a key report this past January on the regression of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) being met on the African continent. The 2022 Africa Sustainable Development Report, produced by the African Union, the UN Economic Commission for Africa, the African Development Bank, and the UN Development Programme, showed that, because of the failure to finance development, African countries will not come anywhere near abolishing extreme poverty. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, 445 million people on the continent – 34% of the population – lived in extreme poverty, with 30 million more people being added to that number in 2020. The report estimates that, by 2030, the number of people in extreme poverty on the continent will reach 492 million. Not one alarm bell was rung for this ongoing disaster, much less the rapid apparition of billions of dollars to bail out the African people.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) found that women in Africa are more likely to be struck hard by the pandemic. The data, the IMF reported, is camouflaged by the prevalence of self-employment amongst women, whose economic difficulties do not always appear in national statistics. Across Africa, hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets over the past year to question their governments about the cost-of-living crisis, which has evaporated most people’s incomes. As incomes fall, and as social services collapse, women take up more and more of their households’ workload – tending to children, to elders, to those who are sick and hungry, and so on. The African Feminist Post-COVID-19 Economic Recovery Statement, written by a pan-African feminist platform, offered the following assessment of the situation:
the absence of social safety nets needed by women due to their greater fiscal precarity in the face of economic shocks has exposed the failures of a development trajectory currently prioritising productivity for growth over the wellbeing of African people. Indeed, COVID-19 has made evident what feminists have long emphasised: that the profits made in economies and markets are subsidised by women’s unpaid care and domestic work – an essential service that even the current pandemic has failed to acknowledge and address in policy.
On 8 March, International Working Women’s Day, protests across Africa focused attention on the general decline in living standards and on the specific impact this has had on women’s lives. That evocative statement from Oxfam – the world’s 22 richest men have more wealth than all the women in Africa – and the realisation that these women’s living conditions appear to be deteriorating have not provoked a crisis response in the world. There have been no urgent phone calls between the world’s capitals, no emergency Zoom meetings between central banks, no concern for people who are slipping deeper and deeper into poverty as their countries forge a path of austerity in light of a more and more permanent debt crisis. Most of the protests on 8 March focused their attention on the inflation of food and fuel prices and on the precarious conditions that this is creating for women. From the Landless Workers’ Movement’s public action against slave-like labour practices in Brazil to the demonstration against gender-based violence by the National Networks of Farmers’ Groups in Tanzania, women organised by rural and urban trade unions, by political parties, and by a range of social movements took to the streets to say, with Josie Mpama, ‘make way for women who will lead’.
At Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, we have been tracking how the pandemic has hardened the structures of neocolonialism and patriarchy, culminating in CoronaShock and Patriarchy (November 2020), which also presented a list of the people’s feminist demands to confront the global health, political, social, and economic crisis. Earlier that year, in March 2020, we released the first study in our feminisms series, Women of Struggle, Women in Struggle, in which we pointed out how economic contraction and austerity cause more women to be unemployed, put more pressure on women to care for their families and communities, and lead to increased femicide. In response to these horrendous conditions, we also wrote about the rise of protests by women across the world. At that time, we decided that one of our contributions to these struggles would be to excavate the histories of women within our movements who have been largely forgotten. Over the past three years, we have published short biographies of three women – Kanak Mukherjee (India, 1921–2005), Nela Martínez Espinosa (Ecuador, 1912–2004), and now Josie Mpama (South Africa, 1903-1979). Each year, we will publish a biography of a woman who, like Kanak, Nela, and Josie, fought for a socialism that would transcend patriarchy and class exploitation.
In the early 1920s, Josie Mpama, born into South Africa’s Black working class, joined the informal workforce, washing clothes, cleaning homes, and cooking. When the racist regime tried to enforce policies and laws to restrict the movement of Africans, she entered the world of politics and fought the oppression that came with decrees such as the lodger’s permits in Potchefstroom (in the country’s northwest). The Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA), established in 1921, provided shape to the myriad protests against segregationist laws, teaching the workers to use their ‘labour and the power to organise and withhold it’, as their flyers declared. ‘These are your weapons; learn to use them, thereby bringing the tyrant to his knees’.
In 1928, Josie joined the CPSA, finding support both for her organising work and for her desire for political education. In the 1930s, she moved to Johannesburg and opened a night school for ideological training as well as for basic mathematics and English. Later, Josie became one of the first Black working-class women to enter the senior leadership of the CPSA and eventually travelled to Moscow using the pseudonym Red Scarf to attend the Communist University of the Toilers of the East. Under Josie’s leadership as the head of the party’s women’s department, more and more women joined the CPSA, largely because it took up issues that spoke to them and encouraged women to struggle alongside men and fight for more radical conceptions of gender roles.
So much of this history is forgotten. In contemporary South Africa, there is a focus on the importance of the Freedom Charter (adopted on 26 June 1955). But there is less acknowledgement that the year before, the Federation of South African Women (FEDSAW) passed a Women’s Charter (April 1954), which – as we say in the study – ‘would eventually become the basis for certain constitutional rights in post-apartheid South Africa’. The Women’s Charter was passed by 146 delegates who represented 230,000 women. One of those delegates was Josie, who attended the conference on behalf of the Transvaal All-Women’s Union and became the president of FEDSAW’s Transvaal branch. The Women’s Charter called for equal pay for equal work (yet to be attained today) and for the right of women to form trade unions. Josie’s leadership in FEDSAW caught the eye of the South African apartheid regime, which banned her from politics in 1955. ‘Josie or no Josie’, she wrote to her FEDSAW comrades, ‘the struggle will go on and ours will be the day of victory’.
On 9 August 1956, 20,000 women marched to South Africa’s capital of Pretoria and demanded the abolition of the apartheid pass laws. That date – 9 August – is now celebrated as Women’s Day in South Africa. As the women marched, they chanted: wathint’ abafazi, wathint’ imbokodo, uzokufa (‘you strike the women, you strike the rock, you will be crushed’).
You might be interested in
On September 25, 2022, Cuba passed one of the world’s most progressive codes on families. All in one go, the small island nation legalized same-sex marriage, defined and upheld the rights of children, the disabled, caregivers, and the elderly, and redefined “family” along ties of affinity rather than blood. This opens the concept of “family” to include nontraditional forms of familial relations, which exist outside the model of the heterosexual nuclear family.
Hailed as “revolutionary” by many in Cuba, the code will help provide protections to people who would have otherwise faced discrimination in society while ensuring that Cubans in same-sex relationships who wish to marry now have the legal right to do so.
According to young Cubans and social movement leaders, whom I spoke to about the Family Code while attending a conference titled “Building Our Future” in Havana in November 2022, the code is a reflection of a dialogue between the Cuban people and their government.
In the time since the code was passed, the Cuban government remains in dialogue with the people. The Ministry of Justice is still holding seminars in provinces throughout Cuba for people seeking answers to questions that have come up during the implementation process. The Family Code has been influencing everything from sports to property relations. Notably, in just the first two months of the law being passed, 112 same-sex marriages were registered.
A Revolutionary Code
“It’s a revolutionary code that will change the thinking and the vision that Cubans have regarding… discriminations that can happen in society,” said Jose Luiz, a third-year international relations student at the Higher Institute of International Relations Raul Roa García. The Family Code legalizes and broadens the definition of a “family” far beyond the traditional definition. The code “will bring new protections to people who have, in one way or another, been discriminated against,” Luiz told me.
Cuba ratified a new constitution in 2019. The constitution was written through “popular consultations” with the Cuban people. Through this process, Cubans participated in community discussions with government officials to both discuss and amend the constitution. Article 68, which called for defining marriage as a union between two people, thus legalizing same-sex marriage, was mentioned in 66 percent of popular consultation meetings. A majority of the Cuban people involved in these processes supported maintaining the definition of marriage as being a union between a man and a woman. This is partly due to historic prejudices against LGBTQ+ people that are prevalent across the Americas, and partly due to Cuba’s growing conservative evangelical movement, which opposes progressive social reforms such as same-sex marriage.
After intense debate regarding Article 68 among the Cuban people, the constitutional commission decided not to include the proposed language in favor of same-sex marriage and instead pushed the decision of addressing the matter through a future “family code” legislation. This legislation became the 2022 Family Code.
‘Popular Consultation’: A Government in Dialogue With Its People
In order to overcome social conservatism to pass one of the most progressive Family Codes in the world, Cuba underwent a meticulous process of popular consultation, from February 1, 2022, to April 30, 2022. The National Assembly of People’s Power stressed the importance of Cubans familiarizing themselves with the code, in order to prevent feelings of uncertainty. Through this process, the Cuban people made more than 400,000 proposals, many of which were included in the finalized code. Minister of Justice Oscar Manuel Silvera Martínez said that the 25th version of the code, presented to and approved by the National Assembly, “was more solid because it was imbued with the wisdom of the people.”
Young people played a central role in the process leading up to the approval of the Family Code. “The Cuban youth… are involved in all tasks that are deployed by the Cuban revolution,” said Luiz. “We also participated in our referendum for our constitution in 2019. We were in popular committees, discussing the constitution and we contributed to that.”
In 2019, Cuba held a referendum on a new constitution. The referendum passed with a majority vote of 86.85 percent, which is about 73.3 percent of the total electorate. The referendum was preceded by a popular consultation process, in which a draft constitution was discussed in 133,000 public meetings nationwide, where the people of Cuba submitted 783,000 proposals for changes. Cuban officials stated that almost 60 percent of the draft constitution was modified based on the proposals submitted by the public during the popular consultation process.
“I remember at my college, we had meetings to explain the [Family Code], and for us as students to give our perspective of the code and propose something for the code,” Neisser Liban Calderón García, also a Cuban international relations student, told me. “But after we did that at college, we had the same thing in our community, with a different perspective because at college we are with our friends, with [other] students; but in the community, we are with people from all ages and from different families.” García, who has a boyfriend, told me that he is glad that he will now have the opportunity to marry in the future.
The results of this popular process speak for themselves: With 74.01 percent of eligible voters participating, the Family Code passed in a landslide victory with 66.87 percent of votes in favor.
“The day that… [the Cuban people] voted for the Family Code in the popular referendum, I also participated directly in the polling station,” said Luiz. “I could see the high participation of the people in the process, and the high acceptance and eagerness for the approval of the code.”
As Luiz mentioned, some young people had the opportunity to participate in an even more direct way. “Through the University Student Federation [FEU], we have meetings with the leadership of the country. For example, my institute had a meeting with the president. And in that meeting, we described the vision we have as revolutionary and communist youths, the vision we have of the change that needs to happen regarding the base and the leaders of the country,” Luiz said. “We have a voice [as youth] in every space that we have, including the president of FEU [who at the time was law student Karla Santana]. She is part of the National Assembly of People’s Power in Cuba. And she shares her perspective with the Cuban government regarding the thinking of the youth and its tradition in the Cuban revolution.”
Gretel Marante Roset, international relations officer for the Federation of Cuban Women, told me that the women of Cuba played a special role in the process of creating the Family Code. “Our commander in chief [Fidel Castro] said that the Federation of Cuban Women is a revolution within another revolution. Women in Cuba are beneficiaries and protagonists of our own development.” Women hold half of all national parliamentary seats in Cuba.
“The Federation of Cuban Women was part of the commission writing the draft of the Family Code to propose the text and interpretation of gender equality,” Marante Roset told me.
“About the Family Code, I think that the document is for the future. It is based on love… recognizing other types of families, joint human rights… I think that this is the future for Cuba,” Marante Roset said.
This article was produced in partnership by Peoples Dispatch and Globetrotter.
by Our Political Affairs Editor
If you want peace, you don’t talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies. – Desmond Tutu
Sri Lanka has experienced deep-rooted conflicts and a prolonged civil war, which have resulted in widespread human rights violations and atrocities. In the aftermath of the conflict, the Sri Lankan government established a transitional justice mechanism in various forms to address past wrongs and bring about reconciliation. The process has, however, been fraught with challenges and criticisms, including accusations of inadequate participation and engagement with affected communities and lack of progress in implementing reforms.
To address this inadequacy, the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established after the end of apartheid, offers valuable insights into Sri Lanka’s transitional justice process. The Commission was based on a forgiveness-based approach that aimed to promote healing and reconciliation through truth-telling and forgiveness, rather than retribution and punishment.
Drawing on this approach, Sri Lanka could consider prioritizing forgiveness-based reconciliation as a means to heal the wounds of the past and build a more cohesive and inclusive society. This would involve a process of truth-telling, accountability, reparations, and ultimately, forgiveness. By embracing this approach, Sri Lanka could establish a foundation for lasting peace and justice and ensure that the atrocities of the past are not repeated.
One of the most significant aspects of the TRC was its emphasis on forgiveness and reconciliation. The commission provided a platform for victims and perpetrators to come forward and tell their stories, with the aim of promoting healing and forgiveness. While the TRC was not perfect, it was a significant step towards building a more just and inclusive society in South Africa.
Sri Lanka can also learn from South Africa’s commitment to transparency and accountability. The TRC held public hearings and released its findings to the public, ensuring that the truth was not hidden from the people. This level of transparency helped build public trust in the commission’s work and ensured that the process was seen as legitimate and credible.
It is also worth noting that South Africa’s commitment to truth-seeking and reconciliation mechanisms is not unique to the country. Many other countries in the global south have established similar systems, demonstrating that these mechanisms are not exclusive to Western democracies.
In contrast, many Western democracies have struggled to establish effective truth-seeking and reconciliation mechanisms, particularly in cases where the state has been responsible for human rights abuses. The United States, for example, has yet to establish a truth commission to address the legacy of slavery and racism in the country.
That is why we strongly believe that Sri Lanka can learn a great deal from South Africa’s experience. First and foremost, Sri Lanka needs to establish an independent and impartial truth commission that is free from political interference. The commission must have the power to subpoena witnesses and compel them to testify, and it must be able to recommend reparations for victims.
Secondly, Sri Lanka must prioritize the involvement of victims and their families in the truth-seeking process. This means providing them with legal and psychological support, as well as ensuring that their voices are heard and their experiences are acknowledged.
Thirdly, Sri Lanka must be willing to confront its past and acknowledge the crimes that were committed during the civil war. This requires political will and a commitment to accountability, which can be difficult in a society that is deeply polarized and where there is a culture of impunity.
South Africa’s success in establishing a truth and reconciliation commission is even more remarkable when one considers the country’s history. Like Sri Lanka, South Africa was a deeply divided society that had suffered from years of violence and repression. However, unlike many Western countries, South Africa did not simply brush its past under the rug and move on. Instead, it confronted its history head-on and took steps to address the injustices of the past.
Within this context, we can commend the ongoing visit of the Sri Lankan delegation as a symbol of the strengthening partnership between the two nations. The discussions on nation-building, constitutional making, and building a better future for all demonstrate the commitment of both countries towards democracy, human rights, and justice.
This visit of Sri Lankan delegates has provided an opportunity for both countries to strengthen their partnership and share experiences in building a better future for their people. The discussions on lasting peace, unity, justice, and reconciliation demonstrate the shared commitment of both countries towards building a democratic and inclusive society. The importance of consensus-building and confidence-building mechanisms for national revivification, as well as the role of ordinary people in shaping constitutionalism, were also emphasized during the visit. It is hoped that this visit will pave the way for more meaningful collaboration between the two countries in the years to come.
In addition to the main theme, the Sri Lankan delegation also highlighted their responsibility as the chair of the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA). Former Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s foreign policy was marked by the pursuit of non-alignment, regional cooperation, and peace-building efforts. In the 1970s, she advocated for the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace and proposed a UN resolution to this effect. The initiative aimed to promote peace and stability in the Indian Ocean region and ensure freedom of navigation, especially for developing countries.
The resolution was tabled at the UN General Assembly in 1971, and it was eventually adopted as Resolution 2832 in December of the same year. The resolution recognized the importance of the Indian Ocean for world peace and development and called for the establishment of a zone of peace in the region. The resolution was a significant achievement for Sri Lanka and helped to promote regional cooperation and peace-building efforts. Sri Lanka continued to play an active role in promoting the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace and supported various regional initiatives to this effect. Sri Lanka, as a vital Island nation, is always inspired by its own uniqueness and value of upholding democratic values. Sri Lanka has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to regional peace and stability through its actions under any circumstances. It is in this context Sri Lanka is going to play an important role as the Chair of IORA.
However, as Minister Sabry emphasized, some sections of the Sri Lankan diaspora are unfairly involved in domestic affairs in Sri Lanka. The delegation emphasized the importance of devolution of power and supporting the required executive actions in terms of decision-making. Furthermore, they stressed the need for credible and transparent domestic accountable mechanisms, which can learn from other countries, especially South Africa, as a genuine partner. The visit of the Sri Lankan delegation to South Africa was deemed significant in this regard.
The delegation also discussed the importance of accountability mechanisms acceptable both for victims and perpetrators. The benefits of such a mechanism would be many. It would help to promote healing and closure for victims of the conflict, and it would help to create a shared understanding of the past among Sri Lankans. It would also help to promote national unity by creating a sense of ownership over the process among Sri Lankans. South Africa’s success with the TRC highlights the importance of transparency and inclusivity in establishing such mechanisms. Sri Lanka could benefit greatly from adopting these principles in its own efforts to establish a truth-seeking and reconciliation mechanism.
It is worth noting that South Africa’s success with the TRC is particularly noteworthy given that it is a country in the global south. This stands in contrast to some Western countries, which have been criticized for their own truth-seeking and reconciliation mechanisms that are perceived as hypocritical or driven by dubious motives. By learning from South Africa’s example, Sri Lanka can establish a nationally and internationally recognized and acceptable truth-seeking and reconciliation mechanism that is transparent, inclusive, and effective.
It’s time to put an end to the politically-driven pursuit of revenge through “eye for an eye” tactics. As Mahatma Gandhi once wisely observed, such a path will only lead to a world where everyone is blind. Now is the time for forgiveness and coming together to work towards a brighter future for our nation.
You might be interested in
Some U.S. politicians have hyped up the “lab leak” theory of COVID-19 again to shift responsibility for its own failure in handling the pandemic.
A group of U.S. Republican senators are pressing the Department of Justice to pursue legal action against Chinese officials after the COVID-19 leak theory was revived recently in the United States, according to a Fox News report.
This is another utterly irresponsible and senseless attempt by some U.S. politicians who try by all means to smear China, cover up the fatal incompetence of U.S. authorities in tackling the pandemic, and seek political gains for themselves.
Tracing the origins of the virus is a matter of science. To date, all the evidence that has stood up to scientific examination does not support the theory that the virus came from a laboratory.
In early 2021, experts of the World Health Organization (WHO)-China joint mission, after field trips to a lab in Wuhan, capital of central China’s Hubei Province and in-depth communication with researchers, reached the conclusion that “a laboratory origin of the pandemic was considered to be extremely unlikely.”
Fabian Leendertz, a zoonoses expert who had participated in the WHO search for the origins of the coronavirus, said that a laboratory leak as the possible origin of the COVID-19 pandemic was “purely politically motivated,” and that political power games were behind this theory.
The expert told German Press Agency recently that “there is no new data that would strengthen the laboratory hypothesis that I am aware of. It remains the most unlikely hypothesis of all.”
More and more clues from the international scientific community are linking the origins of COVID-19 to sources around the world. This study should be, and can only be, conducted jointly by scientists around the world.
China has supported and participated in global science-based origins-tracing. In contrast, the United States has never invited WHO experts to its land for joint study, or shared any early data on COVID-19 origins.
Rather, the U.S. has been politicizing and instrumentalizing the issue, and mongering its lab leak theory without any supporting evidence. By doing so, U.S. politicians just want to shift the blame for its own COVID-19 response failure and accumulate political capital as “blaming China for bad things” has become a potential consensus between the two major U.S. political parties.
Yet baselessly blaming and slandering others for one’s own failures might deflect people’s attention for a while, but it is never conducive to solving problems.
The spread of SARS, Ebola and COVID-19 demonstrated painfully that unknown, lethal viruses do exist and are able to wreak extensive havoc, making humanity’s destiny closely linked. How humanity can better cope with the next pandemic is a question demanding a good answer, and one consensus is to apply a science-based approach.
The United States should do better to respect science and facts, stop its political manipulation, and refrain from undermining global cooperation on science-based origins-tracing.
Disinformation and smear can go nowhere, but put humanity in greater jeopardy.
You might be interested in
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Tuesday called on the international community to take action to address racism wherever and whenever it arises, and eliminate all forms of racial discrimination.
Guterres made the remarks while addressing a UN General Assembly event marking the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which falls on March 21.
Racial discrimination is one of the most destructive forces dividing societies, responsible for death and suffering on a grotesque scale throughout history, he said.
Today, racial discrimination and the legacies of enslavement and colonialism continue to ruin lives, marginalize communities and limit opportunities, preventing billions of people from achieving their full potential, he added.
“Xenophobia, prejudice and hate speech are rising. Political leaders scapegoat migrants, with devastating impact,” said Guterres.
He pointed out that after a period of increased global awareness of racism, some countries are experiencing a vicious backlash against anti-racist policies and practices.
The UN chief also underscored the need to address racism in the digital age, noting that white supremacist influencers profit from racism on social media platforms, and artificial intelligence algorithms amplify and digitize racial discrimination.
“We need to resist and reverse these trends resolutely and condemn and eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms,” Guterres said. “We must take action to address racism wherever and whenever it arises, including through legal channels.”
You might be interested in
Though 20 years have passed since the United States launched a blatant invasion into the sovereign state of Iraq, justice has not been done for Iraq and its people, many of whom are still suffering from the pain created by the unjust war.
During the more than eight-year war and ensuing years of violence after the 2011 U.S. pullout, more than 200,000 civilians were killed and over 9 million others displaced in Iraq. Much of the country’s infrastructure was also destroyed during the relentless bombings launched by the U.S.-led coalition.
As a result, Iraq, a rich country before the invasion, had quickly degenerated into a poor state and is still mired in poverty and chaos due to the political instability and economic hardship caused by the U.S. invasion and its impact.
The U.S. government justified its invasion into Iraq on concocted lies about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction, but no trace of such weapons has been found until today. On this point, Washington owes Iraq and the international community a thorough explanation.
Iraq has neither received any formal apology from Washington for its illegal invasion, nor got any financial compensation for the massive destruction of its infrastructure and the crimes committed by U.S. troops against Iraqi civilians.
Meanwhile, none of those in Washington who made the decision to invade a sovereign state in blatant violation of the United Nations Charter has been brought to justice. None of those who encouraged or committed the heinous war crimes against civilians in Iraq has been truly prosecuted.
Worse still, if those who committed such crimes as invading a sovereign country could escape any punishment, they will repeat them again and again. As long as the United States continues its hegemonic and belligerent policies, the world will never be peaceful.
Indeed, with its previous crimes unpunished, the United States regards itself as being above the UN charter and other norms guiding the international order. Thus Washington is always tempted to repeat such crimes to serve its own interests, as shown by its launch of airstrikes against Libya and Syria not long after the Iraq War.
Even today, U.S. politicians insist that invading Iraq and ousting its government was a right thing to do. Washington still readily threatens to use force to interfere in the internal affairs of any other country that refuses to obey its orders. The world continues to live under the shadow of war and insecurity.
History has proven that though claiming itself as “peace lover,” the United States is indeed a “war empire.” Ever since its founding in 1776, the country has been at war for 93 percent of its existence. Even former U.S. President Jimmy Carter admitted that the U.S. is undoubtedly the most warlike nation in history.
Though little can be done to bring the American warmongers and criminals to justice for now because the United States remains the sole superpower, it is believed that the time of atonement will eventually come.
Justice could be late, but won’t be absent forever.
You might be interested in
The 2023 UN Water Conference, co-hosted by the Netherlands and Tajikistan, will be held at the UN headquarters in New York from March 22 to 24.
In nearly 50 years, this is the first such conference on water at a time when 3.6 billion people lack enough water for at least one month each year, according to the World Meteorological Organization.
There are 8 billion people on Earth today, and water demand is skyrocketing since the first UN Water Conference was held in Argentina in 1977. The UN 2023 Water Conference is, as the UN says, “the most important water event in a generation.”
This is also the halfway point of the International Decade for Action “Water for Sustainable Development,” adopted by the UN General Assembly on World Water Day, March 22, 2018.
With a lot of efforts, the United Nations is hoping that the UN Water Conference in 2023 will mark “a watershed moment” in the pursuit of UN Sustainable Development Goal 6: ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.
High hopes are placed on the upcoming conference, which will feature high-level, ministerial, multi-stakeholder, and youth events.
The United Nations hopes the meeting could support game-changing solutions for the multifaceted crises of “too much water,” such as storms and floods; “too little water,” such as droughts and water scarcity; and “too dirty water,” such as polluted water.
Among the UN’s goals for the conference are to review and assess the progresses and challenges relating to the implementation of the decade’s objectives, namely those contained in “The United Nations Conference on the Midterm Comprehensive Review of the Implementation of the Objectives of the International Decade for Action ‘Water for Sustainable Development’ (2018-2028).”
The United Nations says that the conference will also mobilize political will, financial resources, and partnerships to accelerate action on water-related issues and contribute to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 6 as well as other related goals by 2030.
“Without water, there is no life. Water is fundamental to our daily lives and has direct linkages with health, climate, economic development and so on,” Yoka Brandt, permanent representative of the Netherlands to the United Nations, said in February.
“We need a Paris moment for water,” she underscored.
“Our global water system is in crisis. Despite safe water and sanitation being a human right, billions of people lack access to these essentials for life,” according to the United Nations.
Observers believe that the relationship between water and climate change deserves a great deal of attention, which makes the conference even more attracting.
According to the United Nations, climate change affects the water cycle by changing the patterns and intensity of precipitation, melting glaciers and ice caps, increasing evaporation and sea level rise, and altering river flows and groundwater recharge.
These impacts can make water more scarce, unpredictable, polluted or all three. This can threaten sustainable development, biodiversity, human health and well-being, food security, energy production and peace.
At the coming conference, the United Nations is expected to adopt an outcome document that will provide guidance and recommendations for further action on water-related issues at all levels.
You might be interested in
It has been two years since the military coup in Southeast Asia’s Myanmar. The military junta came to power after overthrowing the democratically elected government on charges of corruption. Myanmar has been under the leadership of the country’s military chief Min Aung Hlaing since February 1, 2021. For more than two years, the military government has repressed the people’s movement and protest demanding democracy. According to various international organizations, at least 2,000 people have been killed and more than 15,000 arrested in the junta’s crackdown; At least another 1 million have been displaced. Even then, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has not seen any role in the beleaguered country.
The people of Myanmar may be in solidarity with their Ukrainian brethren, but they have every reason to be infuriated by the contrasting response from the international community to the crisis they face at home.
Western nations and key Asian allies responded within days to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with tough sanctions and weapon supplies. The international reaction to the bloody military takeover in Myanmar one year ago has been half-hearted by comparison.
There is a degree of racism. The West is quick to defend a fellow and easily identifiable Western state. In part, it speaks to diaspora politics in the West, given the presence of Ukrainian communities in the U.S. and across Europe, something Myanmar does not enjoy to the same extent.
The types of Russian weapons used in Ukraine are also killing people in Myanmar, an independent United Nations expert has said, urging countries at the UN to form a coalition — as they had done after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine — to put pressure on Myanmar’s military rulers. UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Myanmar, Tom Andrews, said that a coalition of countries should target Myanmar’s military with sanctions and an arms embargo.
Following the military coup, in April 2021, Myanmar’s pro-democracy and elected representatives formed the National Unity Government (NUG). They formed a government against the junta and announced the acceptance of the mandate of the ICC. The ICC also recognized the declaration. The NUG originally requested the ICC to investigate the junta’s war crimes and crimes against humanity in Myanmar. Because the political leaders know very well that there is no possibility of trial in the courts of that country. And that is why Myanmar, a country of 55 million, is now looking to the international organization in the hope of justice.
But sadly, the ICC is not as active in Myanmar as it is in investigating the crimes committed in Ukraine. This raises the question of many, is the ICC more concerned about the suffering of the West? Myanmar and Ukraine lend themselves to comparison, but the differences in international response are revealing. Why have many countries in the Indo-Pacific responded more forcefully to Ukraine than to Myanmar? Ye Myo Hein and Lucas Myers argue that the “democracy versus authoritarianism” framing is not persuasive to many regional actors, who are more interested in defending the norms of sovereignty and territorial integrity. Additionally, their findings expose differences in risk tolerance and interests regarding global order between Russia and China.
Russia-Ukraine recently marked one year of direct conflict. Just a few days after the start of the conflict, the ICC representative went there and started investigating the incident. The International Criminal Court even issued an arrest warrant against Russian President Putin on Friday (March 17) for war crimes. Although the Myanmar conflict has passed twice as long, there is still no ICC activity there.
Political analysts say that since the ICC has recognized the NUG’s declaration, the ICC must send a team of investigators like Ukraine to find the truth and announce a fair trial against the perpetrators. This will increase the transparency of this international organization and make it a place of trust for the affected countries.
But here comes a question. That is, whether the anti-junta NUG government can represent Myanmar at the ICC. According to an analysis published in The Diplomat, a Washington DC-based online news outlet, the Government of National Unity has the power to make this representation. According to the authors of the analysis, John Daugaard, Chris Gunes, Tommy Thomas, Yuyun Wahuningram and Ralph Wilde, according to domestic law, the NUG is the legitimate government of Myanmar. Because according to the 2008 constitution, these representatives were elected through popular vote in 2020. Thus, they have no chance of being illegitimate even if they are repressed by the junta; Their government formation is completely legal.
On the other hand, the junta seized power through a military coup, in clear violation of Articles 71(a) and 417 of the country’s constitution. These articles contain clear instructions for the impeachment of the President and the imposition of a state of emergency. But according to the rules it was not followed. On the contrary, the military has taken power by force, ignoring the protests of the people and putting the democratically elected people, including the president, in jail.
As a result, analysts say, the military’s seizure of power in this way is completely illegal.
At the end of 2021, the UN removed the junta representative from its General Assembly and allowed the NUG representative to represent Myanmar at the meeting. The International Labor Organization (ILO) also agreed with this decision of the United Nations. As a result, the ICC must now accept the NUG’s declaration as valid. There should be fair investigation and prosecution of the crimes committed and committed there.
The UN Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar was established in 2017 by the United Nations to investigate the persecution of the Rohingya minority in Myanmar. Analysts believe that a similar investigation committee should be formed against the illegal junta government. And through this they are of the opinion that justice should be ensured for the common people of Myanmar. The people of the country have been waiting for justice for a long time. So, the state, UN and ICC should take appropriate steps in this regard. ICC should be equally active not only in Ukraine but also in Myanmar.
You might be interested in
Mvuselelo Mkhabela, a 21-year-old activist of the Communist Party of Swaziland (CPS), who escaped from a hospital after being shot and tortured by the police, confirmed that he is safe in a video message released on March 9.
Mvuselelo is only the latest victim of the brutal repression unleashed by security forces of King Mswati III, Africa’s last absolute monarch, against those who criticize the king. Mvuselelo was shot on February 28 while leading a protest against a government campaign to encourage people to vote in the upcoming parliamentary election, expected to be held in the second half of 2023.
CPS International Secretary Pius Vilakati told Peoples Dispatch that these elections “have nothing to do with the interests of the people of Swaziland.” Only those approved by the king’s local chiefs—who also control the community land —can contest the elections to the parliament of the southern African kingdom, where all political parties have been banned since 1973.
On February 28, Mvuselelo was shot, and then “the police picked me up and threw me in one of the vans they had brought,” he told Peoples Dispatch, while speaking from a hideout. The police tortured Mvuselelo for hours, finally bringing him to the hospital in the afternoon. That evening, a fellow party member snuck into the hospital and helped Mvuselelo escape.
The police remain on the lookout for him. Mvuselelo said that he must soon flee the country. Most political dissidents pursued by the monarchy end up in exile, mostly in South Africa, after going underground. Others have been assassinated or imprisoned on charges of terrorism.
Credit Line: from the Peoples Dispatch / Globetrotter News Service
You might be interested in
On March 7, the western powers huddled together in Paris for a restricted meeting on Taliban and the Afghanistan situation. It was an exclusive meeting of the Special Representatives and Envoys for Afghanistan of Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The random pick was striking — on a need-to-know basis — Turkiye out, Norway in. Presumably, the West won’t trust the Turks to keep secrets. But Norway makes itself indispensable as a European country with a first-rate intelligence apparatus that has served western interests.
Curiously, Australia and Canada took part, but then, they belong to the Five Eyes. And the Five Eyes goes wherever an agenda to destabilise Russia or China is mooted. Washington decides such things.
The Paris meeting rings alarm bells. On March 7, the UN Security Council also held a meeting on women and peace at UN headquarters in New York, where, interestingly, the US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield bracketed the “the violence and oppression of women and girls” in Afghanistan, Iran and “areas of Ukraine occupied by Russia.”
France’s excessive interest in hosting the meeting comes as no surprise. France is mentoring the so-called National Resistance Front of Afghanistan [NRFA] headed by the Panjshiris loyal to Ahmad Massoud, eldest son of anti-Soviet military leader Ahmad Shah Massoud.
President Emmanuel Macron took a hands-on role to woo Tajikistan President Emomali Rahmon to lend his country as the sanctuary for NRFA to stage an armed insurrection against the Taliban government in Kabul with western help.
Macron has a chip on his shoulder that Russia’s Wagner Group replaced the French troops in the Sahel region in north Africa, which used to be France’s playpen since the deployment of troops in 2015 to Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger to set up military bases, ostensibly to fight ‘jihadists’.
But the French presence became increasingly unpopular in the region and the Islamist threat only spread while France dabbled in local politics in its former colonies, and eventually, Macron’s motives became suspect in the African eyes and the perception grew that the French expeditionary force was acting more like an occupation force.
As the African states began replacing the French contingents with Russia’s Wagner Group, Macron announced in November the end of his celebrated ‘Operation Barkhane’.
Macron is looking for opportunities to hit back at Russia in its own backyard in the Caucasus and Central Asia. But he’s punching way above his weight. Nonetheless, the Paris meeting on Tuesday expressed “grave concern about the increasing threat of terrorist groups in Afghanistan, including ISKP, Al Qaeda, Tehrik-i-Taliban-Pakistan and others, which deeply affects security and stability inside the country, in the region and beyond, and called on the Taliban to uphold Afghanistan’s obligation to deny these groups safe haven.” The joint statement is carefully drafted — an alibi for western intervention is available now. [Emphasis added.]
The Taliban has actually had considerable success on the ground in stabilising its rule against heavy odds. But the Western powers are furious that the Taliban is no longer bending over backward to seek engagement. The West’s sponsorship of NRFA antagonised the Taliban. Taliban sees NRFA as presaging the return of warlords bankrolled by the West.
The NRFA has failed to get traction. Macron’s personal diplomacy with Rahmon notwithstanding, the latter cannot afford to annoy Moscow — and the Kremlin’s top priority is to somehow stabilise the Afghan security situation. The Russians and the Chinese are willing to work with the Taliban and make them stakeholders in the security and stability of their country.
Indeed, on the same day the western powers ganged up in Paris, Delhi announced that it was shipping another consignment of 20,000 tons of wheat to Afghanistan via the Chabahar route as humanitarian assistance. The Russian Ambassador in Kabul Dmitry Zhirnov also spoke about Russia’s deepening engagement with the Taliban, focused on economic ties. (Interestingly, the ambassador disclosed that Moscow may repair and reopen the hugely strategic Salang Tunnel — a Soviet legacy — connecting Kabul with northern Afghanistan and Central Asia.)
China recently signed a $540 million oil-and-gas deal reached an agreement to extract oil in the Amu Darya basin in northern Afghanistan. One of the first phone calls the new Foreign Minister Qin Gang made after his appointment was to call up the Taliban counterpart in Kabul to stress the security concerns in Afghanistan. No doubt, similar concerns were reflected in the meeting in the Kremlin between Russian President Vladimir Putin India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval recently.
Russia is very keen to work with India regarding Afghanistan. China shares Russian concerns in Afghanistan’s security and stability. On the contrary, the US and EU visualise that Russia’s preoccupations in the Ukraine conflict is an opportune time to stir up the Central Asian pot. But that is a simplistic, self-serving assumption.
The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken who toured Central Asia last month learnt to his dismay that the regional states are simply not interested in getting entangled in Washington’s zero sum games. The joint statement issued after Blinken’s meeting with his Central Asian counterparts steered clear of any references critical of Russia (or China.)
Prof. Melvin Goodman at Johns Hopkins and noted author who used to be a CIA analyst, has described Blinken’s Central Asian tour, first by a senior Biden Administration official to the region, to be “a fool’s errand that merely exposed the futility of U.S. efforts to practice dual containment against Russia and China… All five Central Asian countries refused to support the United States in last month’s UN resolution calling for Russia to withdraw its troops from Ukraine and to recognise Ukraine’s full sovereignty over its territory. All five Central Asian countries will need support from Russia or China if faced with internal opposition in their own countries.”
The neutral stance of the Central Asian states is consistent with their independent position alike on the breakaway ex-Soviet regions of Abkhazia, Ossetia, Crimea, Lugansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhya and Kherson. The salience is: Moscow never threatened the Central Asians that ‘Either you’re with us, or are against us.’
The Central Asians witnessed the retreat of the Western alliance from Afghanistan and will not regard them as dependable providers of security. They are also wary of the West’s dalliance with extremist groups. The widely held belief in Central Asia is that the Islamic State is an American creation. Above all, the western countries pursue mercantilist foreign policies eyeing the region’s mineral resources but take no interest in the region’s development. On the other hand, they are intrusive and prescriptive.
At the Paris meeting, behind closed doors, the American input would have been that the Central Asian states will not support a regime change project in Afghanistan. Even Tajikistan, which has ethnic affinities with the Tajik population of Afghanistan, will mark distance from the NRFA lest it got sucked into an Afghan civil war. Macron fancies himself to be a born charmer, but Rahmon is a harcore realist.
Looking ahead, the real danger is that, having failed to get the Taliban to bend while also unable to build an anti-Taliban resistance movement or incite the Central Asian states to decouple from Moscow and Beijing, the US and its allies may now be left with the only remaining option, which is to create anarchical conditions in Afghanistan where there are no winners.
The ascendance of the Islamic State and its open threats to the Russian, Pakistani, Chinese, Iranian and Indian embassies functioning in Kabul are signposts. The Paris meeting of western spies and ‘diplomats’ was an exercise in stocktaking.