Zed Books

'A Liberal Peace?' Book Launch

2012-02-13T14:20:00.000Z

Zed Book - 'A Liberal Peace?'

Hosted by the University of Westminster Department of Politics and International Relations

Editors David Chandler and Meera Sabaratnum will be guest speaking

Time - 5:30

Address - Westminster Forum, 5th Floor

Department of Politics and

International Relations

University of Westminster

32-38 Wells Street

(Near Oxford Circus Station)

Royal African Society Event- DR Congo: Beyond the 2011 elections

2012-02-13T12:11:00.000Z

Title:: DR Congo: Beyond the 2011 elections
When:: 14 February, 2012
Where:: SOAS, Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square - London,WC1H 0XG
Category:: Events/Meetings

DR Congo: Beyond the 2011 elections

Date/Time: February 14th

- Panel 1: 16:00 - 17:30

-Panel 2: 18:00 - 19:30

Venue: School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), Lecture Theatre G2, Russell Square Campus

The official results of the recent presidential elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) gave incumbent Joseph Kabila victory with 48.95% of the vote against 32.35% for the runner-up, Étienne Tshisekedi.

President Kabila campaigned for his second term in office under the slogan "for a united Congo". However, the country now stands divided into two camps, between those who believe his re-election to be legitimate and those who don’t.

International observers have also cast doubts over the integrity of the polls, citing allegations of vote-rigging, reports of electoral violence and media restrictions.

DR Congo is a vast, resource-rich country with a painful history of international interference - from Belgian colonialism and Cold War politics to war with Uganda and Rwanda and the recent economic partnership with China.

How then can the people of Congo build a more stable and effective democracy? Is there scope to find long-lasting solutions to the many challenges facing the country - from reform in the natural resource sector through improved infrastructure and wealth distribution to putting an end to the on-going violence? What can both domestic and international actors do to this end?

Join the Royal African Society and the Oxford Central Africa Forum in this high profile event, which will consider the consequences of the DRC’s 2011 elections both at home and abroad and discuss the possibilities for the country’s future.

Panel 1 – THE ELECTIONS AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, 16:00 - 17:30

Professor Koen Vlassenroot, Director of the Conflict Research Group, Ghent University
Koen Vlassenroot is the Director of the Conflict Research Group at Ghent University. He is a political scientist specialising in the political economy of conflict, non-state armed actors, the processes of identity formation, land access and food security. His work has mainly focussed on Central Africa, especially the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Théodore Trefon, Belgian Royal Museum for Central Africa
Théodore Trefon is a Congo expert specializing in the politics of state-society relations. He has devoted the past 25 years to Congo as a researcher, lecturer, author, project manager and consultant. He heads the Contemporary History Section of the Belgian Royal Museum for Central Africa and is Adjunct Professor of International Relations at Boston University Brussels. Trefon is also the author of Congo Masquerade: The Political Culture of Aid Inefficiency and Reform Failure (African Arguments / ZED Books).

Madame Marie-Thérèse Nlandu Mpolo Nene, human rights lawyer & political leader
Marie-Thérèse Nlandu is a leading human rights lawyer from the DRC. She is also the President of Congo-Pax, the Party for Peace in Congo. Due to her work as a political leader and lawyer, Marie-Thérèse has been in exile twice: From 1993-2002 in Belgium and from 2007-present in the UK. In November 2006, Marie-Thérèse was arrested by agents of the Special Services police and charged with “organising an insurrectionary movement” and “illegal possession of firearms”. She was subsequently detained in Kinshasa's central prison and became an Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience. Pressure from Amnesty International and other human rights groups allowed for her eventual acquittal and release. Marie-Thérèse is married with 4 children.

Chair: Harry Verhoeven, Oxford University
Harry Verhoeven has just finished a doctorate at the Department of Politics and International Relations at Oxford University, St Cross College. Harry has a keen interest in the issues of regional conflict, relations between regimes and rebel movements and natural resources, writing on Sudan, Ethiopia, Congo, Uganda and Rwanda. He is the Convenor of Oxford University’s China-Africa Network (OUCAN) and Oxford’s Central Africa Forum (OCAF) and is writing a book on the internal dynamics of Africa's Great War.

Panel 2 – THE FUTURE OF CONGO POST-ELECTIONS - 18:00 - 19:30

Kris Berwouts, Independent Expert on Central Africa

Kris Berwouts studied African languages and history at the University of Ghent in Belgium. Over the past 25 years, he has worked with both Belgian and international NGOs on peace and reconciliation, security and democratic processes. He was the director of the Belgian-based European Network for Central Africa (EurAc) between 2007 and 2012. Now he works as an independent expert on Central Africa.

Eric Joyce MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Great Lakes Region of Africa
Eric Joyce has been a Member of Parliament for Falkirk since 2005. As well as having an interest in defence and military issues, Eric is also interested in Africa and development issues and he is currently the Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Great Lakes Region of Africa.

Devon Curtis, Cambridge University
Devon Curtis is a University Lecturer in the Department of Politics and International Studies (POLIS) and has been a Fellow of Emmanuel College since 2007. Both her research interests and written work have largely focused on power-sharing and governance, post-conflict, rebel movements in Africa, conflict, peace-building and development. Her field research has taken her to various parts of the Great Lakes Region, including Burundi, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. She has also worked with both the Canadian government and the UK’s Department for International Development (DIFID) as well as the Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

Chair: Marco Jowell, School of Oriental and African Studies
Marco Jowell is a former Senior Research Analyst at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office with a particular focus on Central Africa. He is currently a doctoral candidate at SOAS.

Please rsvp to rsvp@royalafricansociety.org

For more information on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, check out Congo Masquerade by Theodore Trefon, available from Zed Books

BBC: Greece MPs pass austerity plan amid violent protests

2012-02-13T10:56:00.003Z

Greek MPs have approved a controversial package of austerity measures, demanded by the eurozone and IMF in return for a 130bn euro ($170bn; £110bn) bailout.

The vote was carried by 199 in favour to 74 against.

Coalition parties expelled more than 40 deputies for failing to back the bill.

Tens of thousands protested in Athens, where there were widespread clashes and buildings were set on fire. Violent protests were reported in cities across the country.

Protesters outside parliament threw stones and petrol bombs, and police responded with tear gas. Scores of police and protesters were injured.

Prime Minister Lucas Papademos urged calm, insisting that the austerity package would "set the foundations for the reform and recovery of the economy".

Late into the night, buildings in Athens were burning. It was clear that in some areas of the city police had effectively lost control, if only for a short time.

Violence has occurred during votes before, but buildings have not been set ablaze for some time. Every event chips away at the confidence that the state is holding things together.

Emotions were also running high in parliament, with no-one voting for the plan with much enthusiasm. Greeks on the streets feel that the country cannot bear any more austerity. The eurozone's strategy for its survival is feeling the full force of public anger.

"Vandalism, violence and destruction have no place in a democratic country and won't be tolerated," he said in a speech in parliament before the vote.

The bill passed parliament easily as the two largest parties in the coalition - Pasok and New Democracy - account for more than two-thirds of the deputies.

The austerity measures include:

15,000 public-sector job cuts
liberalisation of labour laws
lowering the minimum wage by 20% from 751 euros a month to 600 euros

Eurozone ministers must now ratify the measures at a meeting in Brussels on Wednesday before bailout funds can be released.

The ministers rejected proposals put forward by the Greeks last week, which they said fell 325m euros short of the cuts needed.

The BBC's Mark Lowen in Athens says the public are increasingly angry with the austerity measures and feel that the impact is beyond the value of the bailout.

At least 80,000 people were reported to have joined demonstrations in Athens, with another 20,000 protesting in Thessaloniki.

Running battles with police continued in the capital until late on Sunday, although no new clashes were reported after the vote.

Protesters hurled flares and chunks of marble torn up from the square. Some had tried to break through a cordon of riot police around the parliament.

Several historic buildings, including cafes and cinemas, were set alight.

Ioannis Simantiras, 34, said the protesters were boxed in by police.

"Nobody could get away from the gas," he told the BBC.

"When it engulfed everybody, and everybody was choking the police drew back and opened up a corridor for us away from the parliament - that's when everybody made a run for it."

Violent protests also spread to other Greek towns and cities, including the islands of Corfu and Crete, according to state TV.

Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos said the question was not "whether some salaries and pensions will be curtailed, but whether we will be able to pay even these reduced wages and pensions".

"When you have to choose between bad and worse, you will pick what is bad to avoid what is worse," he said.

Greece needs the bailout the make its next repayment on its huge sovereign debt.

If it cannot make the payment, it will default and in effect become bankrupt.

Analysts say such a "chaotic default" could endanger Europe's financial stability and possibly even leading to a break-up of the eurozone.

As part of the deal with international lenders, Greece will also be able to write off 100bn euros of privately held debt.

Earlier this week several ministers from the coalition government, including two from Pasok, quit in protest at the measures.

The leader of the far-right Laos party, the junior coalition member, announced his 15 deputies would not back the austerity measures.

George Karatzaferis complained that the measures amounted to Greeks being "humiliated" by Germany.

The eurozone bloc has demanded "strong political assurances" that the packages will be implemented regardless of which party wins a general election due in April.

BBC © 2012

To learn about the current economic crisis occurring in Greece and across the Eurozone, check out The Global Minotaur available from Zed Books

An Eerie Calm in the DRC

2012-02-10T16:16:00.001Z

Following heavily disputed elections, why has the violence many predicted not been seen?

Source: Think Africa Press by Alistair Smout

Western writers commentating on the Democratic Republic of the Congo are more used to describing political violence than accounting for its absence. However, since Joseph Kabila was re-elected president last month in elections that were described as “too flawed to be credible”, the violence that followed, although tragic, has been less extensive and damaging than many feared.

John Campbell, in his article for the Atlantic “Anti-Christian Violence, and Maybe Worse, in Congo” attempts to account for the “apparent passivity of the Congolese population” while comparing it to the more impassioned responses of other citizenries, specifically Kenya in 2007 and Zimbabwe in 2008. But while Campbell poses an interesting question and points to important factors of diversity and ethnic rivalry, he fails to qualify or contextualize them. In the course of his argument, however, Campbell makes some substantive claims, which are worth examining in more detail.

Alienation

Campbell argues that in Nigeria and Congo much of the population has historically felt alienated from the government, which is seen as following its own agenda with little input from the general populace. This sense of alienation may empower secessionism, as seen historically in the Biafran War, or movements in Katanga or Kasai. However, Campbell seems ready to ascribe both political apathy and secessionist politics to the effects of alienation. This is not implausible, but other variables must be taken into account to provide a comprehensive explanation of these varying responses.

The idea of alienation as engendering resignation rather than anger has some traction, particularly in the case of the DRC. In her book In the Footsteps of Mr Kurtz, Michela Wrong, for example, traces such a culture in Congolese history, in which political hegemony is established by King Leopold II, transformed yet maintained by Mobutu, and the Congolese people are blunted into acceptance, diverting their efforts into pursuits other than changing politics. Similarly, Adam Nossiter observes that daily struggles to find food are enough without needing to be concerned by Kinshasa politics.

While there is truth in this interpretation, however, it may be overly deterministic. Before the recent elections in the DRC there was a great deal of hope and optimism that the elections might bring about real change.

Pre-election optimism, however, turned to resignation amidst post-election violence. And it seems that alienation is not inevitable but at least partly a consequence of repression.

The opposition

What could lift the sense of resignation and alienation from politics and provide a sustained threat to a policy of repression? A well organised opposition seems a good place to start.

Etienne Tshisekedi, who has been placed under house arrest by Kabila since declaring himself the true president of the DRC, can talk coherently of the DRC’s problems and how he might tackle them. Having served in some of Mobutu’s early governments, he has managed to stay consistently in opposition for 30 years. He played a lead role in the attempted democratisation of Zaire in the early-90s, and at one time managed to hold the position of Prime Minister while managing to frustrate both Mobutu-ists and former president Laurent Kabila’s AFDL.

He has also managed to emerge from years of war in the DRC without being implicated in the violence, a big step for Congolese opposition politicians, given that Joseph Kabila’s main opponent in the 2006 elections of 2006, Jean-Pierre Bemba, is now on trial at the ICC from war crimes.

However, Tshisekedi is not always perceived as the most unifying of figures and Michela Wrong describes him as “mulish”. Theodore Trefon puts it more bluntly, commenting, "stubborn and megalomaniac, Tshesikedi (sic) is also unpredictable”. This makes him far from the ideal opposition leader. And indeed, his political strategies neither enabled him to win the majority of votes in the election nor handle the post-election environment in a way that would be politically beneficial for him.

This may be to the collective benefit of the Congolese people, and maybe Tshisekedi should take credit for maintaining the fragile peace over the Congo. Such credit might be more deserved, however, if he had been advocating peaceful resistance, for example. Instead there has been a strange mixture of bullish defiance and belligerent rhetoric, occasionally bordering on delusional. Any hope that his supporters had that he is substantially different to previous leaders, or that he can somehow harness political discontent in a peaceful way, has been dwindling.

Gérard Prunier wrote of Tshisekedi’s similarly erratic approach to the 2006 elections (where he flip-flopped as to whether he was going to contest them) that:

Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo

“The old fighter seemed oddly unresponsive to the new political environment, and the often heard remark about him was that 'he was frozen in 1992', the year of his greatest glory, when he had become prime minister of the Conférence Nationale Souveraine during Mobutu’s aborted 'democratic transition'”

Perhaps this antiquated “mandate” was the basis of his declaration that he had won the 2011 elections before they’d even happened. Either way, his tactics have played straight into Kabila’s hands.

Electoral process

Kabila didn’t win the election when polls opened on November 28, 2011. Nor did he win it when the results were announced on December 9, 2011. He won it almost a year earlier on January 5, 2011.

That was the day the government amended the constitution, abolishing the need for a second round presidential run-off. Unlike his opponent, Kabila has proved himself to be a shrewd political operative. Ten other candidates are easier for an incumbent to beat than one. Even a fantastically charismatic opposition leader, with broad-based support, might find it hard to gain a plurality in such circumstances.

If Tshisekedi had won a plurality of the vote, there is a good chance we would not have known about it. But given that debates on electoral irregularities have focused on the technical side of things (such as on how turnout in some districts exceeded 100%) rather than the consequences of the vote, the assumption seems to be that Tshisekedi was not the true winner.

As it was, Tshisekidi’s parallel inauguration appeared like a bizarre sideshow, not the anointment of a rightful king. And this explains the differing response by the international community that this presidential election received compared to that in the Ivory Coast.

This does not, however, mean the elections were legitimate. Nevertheless, it is still the case that opposition responses have been defanged by Tshisekedi’s failure to demonstrate that he would be a more legitimate leader. Anger, where there is anger, seems to be on the whole directed at the fact that Kabila did not really win, not that Tshisekedi did win. Tshisekedi does not have much political capital to go on to fulfil any mandate he feels he has gained. He can order the government to resign or for a boycott of parliament, but no-one will listen. And the eerie silence over the DRC will remain.

Find out more about CONGO from this fasicnating book by Theodore Trefon

BBC: US tribe sues beer makers for $500m over alcohol abuse

2012-02-10T11:50:00.001Z

An American-Indian tribe in South Dakota has sued some of the world's biggest beer firms over severe alcohol-related issues in the community.

The Oglala Sioux Tribe are asking for $500m (£316m) for healthcare, social services and child rehabilitation.

Tribal elders say the lawsuit is a last resort after efforts to curb abuse through protests and policy failed.

On the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation one in four children suffers foetal disorders caused by alcohol abuse.

The lawsuit, filed in the district court of Nebraska, targets Anheuser-Busch InBev Worldwide, SAB Miller, Molson Coors Brewing Company, MillerCoors LLC, and Pabst Brewing Company.

There was no immediate response from those firms.

'Notorious sales'

The lawsuit also names the nearby town of Whiteclay, Nebraska, which has four beer shops that sold nearly five million beer cans in 2010 despite having only about a dozen residents.

Alcohol is outlawed on the reservation and the nearest town which allows alcohol is 20 miles (32km) away, Mark Vasina, president of Nebraskans for Peace, told the Associated Press news agency.

The lawsuit alleges that beer makers and the shop owners knew the alcohol would be smuggled into the reservation for consumption or resale.

The legal documents allege: "The illegal sale and trade in alcohol in Whiteclay is open, notorious and well documented by news reports, legislative hearings, movies, public protests and law enforcement activities."

Meanwhile, Tom White, the lawyer representing the tribe, told the Associated Press news agency: "You cannot sell 4.9 million 12oz [356ml] cans of beer and wash your hands like Pontius Pilate, and say we've got nothing to do with it being smuggled."

The reservation has grappled with alcohol problems and poverty for generations, and the tribal council has said it hopes the case will help protect the community's youth.

"Like American parents everywhere, we will do everything lawful we can to protect the health, welfare and future of our children," Tribal President John Yellow Bird Steele told the Associated Press news agency.

The reservation, which is about the size of the state of Connecticut, includes Shannon County, the third poorest county in the US.

The median income in the area is $27,300 and almost half of the population is considered to be living below federal poverty standards.

The life expectancy in the community is between 45 and 52 years - the lowest in North America except Haiti - and far below the national average of 77.5 years.

Nebraska State Senator LeRoy Louden has said that after struggling with the problem for years, the state has introduced legislation that would impose restrictions - on the types of alcohol that can be sold and business hours.

To learn more about this lawsuit along with other topics affecting native populations, read The Politics of Indigeneity, available from Zed Books

Perth Writers Festival: Meet the Neighbors

2012-02-10T10:46:00.000Z

Zed Author Paul French, who wrote Oil on Water and North Korea, will be a guest speaker at this event.

India and China seem on track for world domination in the next century. So apart from knowing they have a hunger for our minerals, what else should we know? Paul French, Michael Wesley and Chetan Bhagat. Chair: Krishna Sen.

BBC: Somalia- Al-Shabab bombs Mogadishu cafe

2012-02-09T15:25:00.000Z

At least 15 people have been killed and more than 20 people injured when a car bomb exploded near a cafe in Somalia's capital, Mogadishu, officials say.

The vehicle was parked close to the Hotel Muna, often frequented by Somali politicians and itself the target of an attack by militants in August 2010.

The al-Shabab group said it carried out the Wednesday afternoon blast.

But the militant Islamists denied that it was a suicide attack as earlier reported by the police.

The attack is the latest of a series of suicide attacks staged by the al-Qaeda-linked group in Mogadishu - after being pushed out last August by the Somali government and African Union troops.

Drinking tea

The BBC's Mohammed Dhore in Mogadishu says that seven people died at the scene.

Mogadishu Mayor Mohamed Ahmed Nur said the blast had killed 15 "innocent civilians".

Our correspondent says people were drinking tea at a popular cafe in the heart of Mogadishu's government district, when the bomb exploded.

"There was a heavy explosion, a car full of explosives was detonated," MP Mohamed Iro told the AFP news agency.

The attack took place on the day of a visit to the city by the European Union's new special envoy to the Horn of Africa, Alexander Rondos.

Last week, William Hague was also in Mogadishu, the first visit by a British foreign secretary in 20 years.

The UK government is holding a conference in London on 23 February to try to find a political solution, and tackle piracy and extremism.

On Wednesday, Mr Hague said it would mark the beginning of an enduring engagement to end their country's crisis and announced a series of new approaches.

The mandate of the current transitional government could not be extended after seven years of minimal progress, he said.

But the international community would provide support for internal political discussions now under way between Somalis inside the country on how to replace the government, whose mandate expires in August, the UK foreign minister said.

This might involve a constitutional assembly drawn from all Somalia's communities, he said.

He added that the new major diplomatic push to restore stability in Somalia would include dealing directly with the country's many regional administrations.

This will put areas like the semi-autonomous Puntland on a new footing and provide them with additional aid, BBC Africa analyst Martin Plaut says.

Somalia has been without an effective central government since 1991 and the government in Mogadishu is propped up by a African Union force from Uganda, Burundi and Djibouti.

Kenya and Ethiopian troops are also in Somalia, and analysts say the military fortunes of al-Shabab have dramatically worsened in the last year.

All Africa: Somalia- Rebel Commander 'Killed in Ambush'

2012-02-09T11:50:00.001Z

An Al-Shabaab commander is among 14 militants reported dead after they were ambushed by Kenyan troops in Southern Somalia, the military claimed on Wednesday.

The Kenya Defence Forces named the top Al-Shabaab commander suspected to have been killed by Kenyan troops on Tuesday as Abu Yahya.

"Abu Yahya, who is Al-Shabaab's field commander in the southern sector is suspected to have been gunned down during the allied forces ambush at an Al-Shabaab camp in the area at 4pm," KDF spokesman, Major Emmanuel Chirchir, said in a statement.

The statement added that during the ambush at the Dalayat area, 13 other Al-Shabaab fighters were killed by Kenyan troops while scores escaped with serious injuries.

Major Chirchir said that the Kenyan troops also recovered eight machine guns during the attack.

The area where the fighting took place is a stronghold of the militants and doubles up as their command centre for the southern region.

Major Chirchir said that one Kenyan soldier was injured during the ambush and was flown to Garissa military camp for treatment while two others who suffered minor injuries were treated and had resumed duty.

The military crossed into Somalia last October to flush out the militants blamed for frequent attacks at the Coast and parts of northern Kenya.

The military's ultimate aim is to capture the port of Kismayu used by the militants to collect billions of shillings in illegal taxes.

For a more in-depth look at the current situation in Somalia, check out Mary Harper's Getting Somalia Wrong?, now available from Zed Books.

Al-Jazeera English: The seed emergency: The threat to food and democracy

2012-02-08T16:54:00.002Z

New Delhi, India - The seed is the first link in the food chain - and seed sovereignty is the foundation of food sovereignty. If farmers do not have their own seeds or access to open pollinated varieties that they can save, improve and exchange, they have no seed sovereignty - and consequently no food sovereignty.

The deepening agrarian and food crisis has its roots in changes in the seed supply system, and the erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty.

Seed sovereignty includes the farmer's rights to save, breed and exchange seeds, to have access to diverse open source seeds which can be saved - and which are not patented, genetically modified, owned or controlled by emerging seed giants. It is based on reclaiming seeds and biodiversity as commons and public good.

The past twenty years have seen a very rapid erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty, and the concentration of the control over seeds by a very small number of giant corporations. In 1995, when the UN organised the Plant Genetic Resources Conference in Leipzig, it was reported that 75 per cent of all agricultural biodiversity had disappeared because of the introduction of "modern" varieties, which are always cultivated as monocultures. Since then, the erosion has accelerated.

The introduction of the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement of the World Trade Organisation has accelerated the spread of genetically engineered seeds - which can be patented - and for which royalties can be collected. Navdanya was started in response to the introduction of these patents on seeds in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - a forerunner to the WTO - about which a Monsanto representative later stated: "In drafting these agreements, we were the patient, diagnostician [and] physician all in one." Corporations defined a problem - and for them the problem was farmers saving seeds. They offered a solution, and the solution was to make it illegal for farmers to save seed - by introducing patents and intellectual property rights [PDF] on those very seeds. As a result, acreage under GM corn, soya, canola, cotton has increased dramatically.

Threats to seed sovereignty

Besides displacing and destroying diversity, patented GMO seeds are also undermining seed sovereignty. Across the world, new seed laws are being introduced which enforce compulsory registration of seeds, thus making it impossible for small farmers to grow their own diversity, and forcing them into dependency on giant seed corporations. Corporations are also patenting climate resilient seeds evolved by farmers - thus robbing farmers of using their own seeds and knowledge for climate adaptation.

Another threat to seed sovereignty is genetic contamination. India has lost its cotton seeds because of contamination from Bt Cotton - a strain engineered to contain the pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium. Canada has lost its canola seed because of contamination from Roundup Ready canola. And Mexico has lost its corn due to contamination from Bt Cotton.

After contamination, biotech seed corporations sue farmers with patent infringement cases, as happened in the case of Percy Schmeiser. That is why more than 80 groups came together and filed a case to prevent Monsanto from suing farmers whose seed had been contaminated.

As a farmer's seed supply is eroded, and farmers become dependent on patented GMO seed, the result is debt. India, the home of cotton, has lost its cotton seed diversity and cotton seed sovereignty. Some 95 per cent of the country's cotton seed is now controlled by Monsanto - and the debt trap created by being forced to buy seed every year - with royalty payments - has pushed hundreds of thousands of farmers to suicide; of the 250,000 farmer suicides, the majority are in the cotton belt.

Seeding control

Even as the disappearance of biodiversity and seed sovereignty creates a major crisis for agriculture and food security, corporations are pushing governments to use public money to destroy the public seed supply and replace it with unreliable non-renewable, patented seed - which must be bought each and every year.

In Europe, the 1994 regulation for protection of plant varieties forces farmers to make a "compulsory voluntary contribution" to seed companies. The terms themselves are contradictory. What is compulsory cannot be voluntary.

In France, a law was passed in November 2011, which makes royalty payments compulsory. As Agriculture Minister Bruna Le Marie stated: "Seeds can be longer be royalty free, as is currently the case." Of the 5,000 or so cultivated plant varieties, 600 are protected by certificate in France, and these account for 99 per cent of the varieties grown by farmers.

The "compulsory voluntary contribution", in other words a royalty, is justified on grounds that "a fee is paid to certificate holders [seed companies] to sustain funding of research and efforts to improve genetic resources".

Monsanto pirates biodiversity and genetic resources from farming communities, as it did in the case of a wheat biopiracy case fought by Navdanya with Greenpeace, and climate resilient crops and brinjal (also known as aubergine or eggplant) varieties for Bt Brinjal. As Monsanto states, "it draws from a collection of germ-plasm that is unparalleled in history" and "mines the diversity in this genetic library to develop elite seeds faster than ever before".

In effect, what is taking place is the enclosure of the genetic commons of our biodiversity and the intellectual commons of public breeding by farming communities and public institutions. And the GMO seeds Monsanto is offering are failing. This is not "improvement" of genetic resources, but degradation. This is not innovation but piracy.

For example, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) - being pushed by the Gates Foundation - is a major assault on Africa's seed sovereignty.

Agribusiness

The 2009 US Global Food Security Act [PDF] also called the Lugar-Casey Act [PDF], "A bill to authorise appropriations for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to provide assistance to foreign countries to promote food security, to stimulate rural economies, and to improve emergency response to food crisis, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and for other purposes".

The amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act would "include research on bio-technological advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including genetically modified technology". The $ 7.7bn that goes with the bill would go to benefit Monsanto to push GM seeds.

An article in Forbes, titled "Why Uncle Sam Supports Franken Foods", shows how agribusiness is the only sector in which US has a positive trade balance. Hence the push for GMOs - because they bring royalties to the US. However, royalties for Monsanto are based on debt, suicidal farmers and the disappearance of biodiversity worldwide.

Under the US Global Food Security Act, Nepal signed an agreement with USAID and Monsanto. This led to massive protests across the country. India was forced to allow patents on seeds through the first dispute brought by the US against India in the WTO. Since 2004, India has also been trying to introduce a Seed Act which would require farmers to register their own seeds and take licenses. This in effect would force farmers from using their indigenous seed varieties. By creating a Seed Satyagraha - a non-cooperation movement in Gandhi's footsteps, handing over hundreds of thousands of signatures to the prime minister, and working with parliament - we have so far prevented the Seed Law from being introduced.

India has signed a US-India Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture, with Monsanto on the Board. Individual states are also being pressured to sign agreements with Monsanto. One example is the Monsanto-Rajasthan Memorandum of Understanding, under which Monsanto would get intellectual property rights to all genetic resources, and to carry out research on indigenous seeds. It took a campaign by Navdanya and a "Monsanto Quit India" Bija Yatra ["seed pilgrimage"] to force the government of Rajasthan to cancel the MOU.

This asymmetric pressure of Monsanto on the US government, and the joint pressure of both on the governments across the world, is a major threat to the future of seeds, the future of food and the future of democracy.

Check out some of Dr Vandana Shiva's titles, available from Zed Books such as Soil Not Oil and Earth Democracy

BBC: Greece bailout: Coalition 'to finalise' austerity deal

2012-02-08T13:20:00.000Z

Greek Prime Minister Lucas Papademos is due to meet coalition parties in an attempt to seal an austerity agreement to secure a new EU/IMF bailout.

The three parties were handed the draft after final touches were agreed between the PM and EU, ECB and IMF officials.

The accord is likely to include a 20% minimum wage reduction, pension cuts and 15,000 civil service lay-offs.

Public transport came to a standstill on Tuesday as an estimated 20,000 people protested against the cuts.

At one point a German flag was set alight outside parliament.

The meeting with party leaders was postponed for a few hours on Wednesday - it had already been put back twice before, because they were yet to see the document.

Mr Papademos held talks late on Tuesday night with representatives from the troika - the European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund.

A meeting that had already been delayed on Monday night was postponed again on Tuesday evening as the heads of the three coalition parties said they had not seen the document outlining the austerity deal.

The 50-page text was eventually given to officials from Pasok, New Democracy and the far-right Laos party on Wednesday morning, reports said.

The main issue for the coalition was said to be plans to reduce monthly pensions from 360 euros.

If the parties give the text their "agreement in principle" it will then be put before the Greek parliament.

As part of Greece's new 130bn euro ($170bn; £110bn) bailout deal, Mr Papademos and Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos have also been engaged in a separate strand of negotiations with private creditors over a write-off of up to 70% of the value of the money owed by the Greek government.

On Tuesday night, a spokesman for the International Institute of Finance (IIF) which is negotiating on behalf of the private creditors said the talks had been constructive and its three officials were returning to Paris for further consultations.

For more information on the current economic crisis, check out The Global Minotaur, available from Zed Books

The Guardian: Colombia's Nukak Maku tribe faces extinction

2012-02-07T14:48:00.001Z

Race is on to halt nomadic Amazonian community's rapid population decline as malnutrition and illness take hold.

Restrictions on Colombia's indigenous Nukak Maku tribe's ability to roam leaves them threatened with extinction.

Link to this video

Only a decade ago, the Nukak Maku, a Colombian indigenous community, lived a peaceful life disconnected from the modern world.

Nomadic hunter-gatherers, they roamed a chunk of the Amazon three times the size of London, spending days trekking to one corner just to fish, then weeks to another to hunt.

Now driven out of their territory by the Farc left-wing guerillas, the tribe occupies a shabby glade half the size of a football field on the outskirts of a frontier town, San José del Guaviare.

"We fled day and night through the jungle," a young woman, Monica, says. "Finally we arrived in this place, no one is happy here."

The Nukak say their new home is poor for hunting and fishing. Local farmers get angry when they hunt in the forests.

To make up for the loss of food, Acción Social, the government's aid organisation, delivers rations. However, the women say it is not sufficient. "They often forget to bring us the rations, and sometimes it is not enough," says Sandra, a young Nukak mother. "We do not like some of the things they give us, our bodies are not used to it."

The change in diet has harmed the Nukaks' health. Many of the children and adults are visibly malnourished. At the time of this reporter's visit, Sandra's daughter, Kelly, was in hospital with severe malnutrition. "She is a one-year-old, but has the body of a six-month-old baby," says Luza Marina, who is in charge of monitoring the Nukak community's health.

The community suffers from skin infections, respiratory diseases, diarrhoea and other common illnesses. "We never had these diseases before," says Monica. As a result of daily difficulties and the inability to hunt, many are depressed and have other mental health problems.

Since the Nukak were first "contacted" in 1988, the illnesses of the modern world have had devastating effects. Anthropologists estimate they used to number more than 2,000 but the population has fallen to fewer than 600, bringing fears of extinction.

"For thousands of years the Nukak lived peacefully in their forest. Then the white man arrived. In the 20-odd years since, half their population has been wiped out, their territory has been invaded, and they've been driven out of the forest," says Stephen Corry, director of Survival International in the UK.

"There's little doubt that if the authorities allow this to continue, the Nukak stand little chance of survival."

Another concern is the Nukak's loss of culture. Since leaving the jungle, they have almost lost their traditional ways. Missionaries have taught them to wear clothes and eat modern food.
Whereas previously they had no sense of money, the Nukak people now spend their days begging in the town.

"It is very sad to see our people change their ways so much," says Fellipe, a man in his 50s. "Now I'm not sure we could even survive in the jungle, it feels like we are doomed to the modern world."
Responding to the threatened extinction of indigenous communities such as the Nukak, and the nearby Jiw and Sicuani, the Colombian government has started a national safeguard plan. This aims to legally enforce protecting these communities. Few of the Nukak have faith in the government, and many are concerned it is already too late.

"The idea is to guarantee their survival," says Javier Sanchez, who is coordinating the plan. "If the state does not act quickly, they will be responsible for the disappearing of an indigenous community in our country."

In the meantime, the Nukak continue to languish in hammocks, longing to return to their nomadic life.

"If we stay here much longer, our people will completely lose our ways, and we will just die off, far from the land where we belong," says Monica.

William Lloyd-George guardian.co.uk, Sunday 5 February 2012 18.30 GMT

Read more on this subject in The Politics of Indigeneity

Yanis Varoufakis' Blog: Reporting the Eurozone’s Crisis: Lessons from the Greek Front (*)

2012-02-07T12:49:00.001Z

Over the past two years, the economic crisis that has engulfed Greece has also thrust me in front of the microphones and note pads of the myriad journalists who descended upon Athens to report on the unfolding drama. In this sense, I have not only been witnessing the evolution of Greece’s (and the eurozone’s) meltdown but also the struggle of the world’s media to make sense of it. In this article I summarise what I think are three important lessons to be drawn from this experience on behalf of journalists attempting to strike the difficult balance between (a) the need to produce stories that resonate with their editors, readers, audiences, viewers and (b) the almost infinite complexity of the underlying story. The three lessons that I want to focus on I shall refer to, respectively, as the error of generalisation, the fallacy of aggregation, and the perils of compartmentalisation.

The error of generalisation

The Crash of 1929, and the subsequent Great Depression, ought to have taught us an important lesson: that a cascade of both private and public bankruptcies (which begins with the collapse of the big banks, then spreads to the public debt of the weaker nations and, later, infects the real economy with the virus of recession) ends up not only threatening the common currency of the era (the Gold Standard in 1929, the euro today) but also engendering a breakdown of the vision of shared prosperity. In the absence of some supra-national Leviathan (like the one Keynes proposed in 1944) to “keep us all in awe”, and thus maintain cross border cooperation in the aftermath of a crisis, a Hobbesian war of “all against all” looms.

The war of words starts the moment we utter sentences beginning with “The Greeks do this” or “The Germans think that”. In 1929, that war of words, the ‘blame game’ if you want, led to another type of war which, paradoxically, killed millions and the crisis itself. One might have hoped that, this time around, we will have learnt our lesson. For while the armoured brigades have not moved (and will hopefully remain in their barracks), the war of words is now alive and well in Germany and in Greece, in the Netherlands and in Spain, in Austria and in Ireland.

Our very own generation’s 1929, the Credit Crunch of 2008 and the subsequent Great Recession, has occasioned much talk in Europe about The Germans, The Greeks, The British even (especially after David Cameron decided to break ranks with the European Union on the issue of the recent Treaty changes). Our collective task, and in particular that of enlightened journalists, is to shout from the rooftops that there is no such thing as The Greeks or The Germans or, for that matter, The Brits. We are all individuals, as Brian famously struggled to convince his self appointed disciples. And we have more diversity among our people, both in terms of views and character, than we have differences across our nations.

So, when reporting from the frontlines of the economic collapse, journalists have a duty to highlight the breadth of opinion within Greece, within Germany, within Britain, rather than gloss over that diversity opting instead for the comforting, yet potentially destructive, familiarity of national stereotypes. Maintaining a healthy resistance to generalisation is not only the journalist’s humanist duty but, also, a prerequisite for accurate reporting of the crisis’ causes.

Take, once again, the case of Greece. Journalists need metaphors with which to help their audience get a handle on an economic collapse, its causes and nature. One such allegory that has been employed extensively in order to narrate the eurozone’s drama is Aesop’s fable of the Ant and the Grasshopper. The Germanic Ant is pitted against the Greek Grasshopper in the context of a morality tale that combines northern industry, southern sloth and some flimsy economic analysis of the monetary dislocation that follows.

The trouble with metaphors of this sort is that they are almost irresistible. So, journalists hard pressed to produce a story that resonates nicely with their constituency’s prejudices end up slavishly reproducing the metaphor’s logic; e.g. Germans are portrayed as hard workers that must bail out the spendthrift Greeks, just like the ants etc. etc. It is as if, the moment the metaphor was chosen, the story had already been written up with no serious thought given to its analytic value.

Now, I am all for metaphors. There is nothing like them for conveying complex stories to a readership, or an audience, that allocates a severely limited amount of time to them. Nevertheless, it is incumbent upon journalists to use the metaphor to approach reality, as opposed to being ‘used’ by their own metaphor in order, effectively, to distort reality. To succeed in this task, journalists must bend their chosen metaphor to the demands of truth-telling. Resisting the lure of generalisation is essential.

In the case examined here, of Greece and Germany, the fact is that the ants and the grasshoppers are distributed across the division separating surplus from deficit eurozone nations. Once we recognise that both Germany and Greece, indeed the whole of the eurozone, contain neglected ants and over-pampered grasshoppers, we suddenly have the makings of a more nuanced story. One that allows us to ask probing questions about the way in which both Germany’s and Greece’s hard working ants feel disgruntled and shortchanged by the Greek and German grasshoppers which, during the ‘good’ times lived parasitically off them while now, during the ‘lean years’, once more, they are again demanding, from the ants, bail out money and higher taxes.

In short, metaphors are crucial for storytelling and analytical purposes. But we must hone them in a manner that helps, rather than hinders, our grasp of the underlying causes. And this means escaping the error of generalisation.

The Fallacy of Aggregation

When visiting a country in economic meltdown (Greece being a useful case in point) it is important to come equipped with a simple, yet counter-intuitive, insight: Recipes for tackling debt do not add up! By this I mean that journalists must always interrogate their instinctual views on the causes of the crisis that they are covering and, in particular, of what ‘common sense’ dictates as the remedy.

For example, what recipe does common sense recommend for getting out of financial trouble as a person, a family, a firm? The answer surely is to lower your expenses in order to rein in the red ink on your balance sheet. And to work harder and more intelligently. However, when this recipe is taken to a higher level of aggregation, it simply does not add up. To see this, suppose that, in a bid to reduce our individual and collective debt during a crisis (what financial economists refer to as deleveraging), each one of us follows this same recipe and at the same time. The result, I submit to you, may be quite the opposite of that intended. Indeed, aggregate real debt may rise!

To see why these individual recipes do not add up to a collectively efficacious strategy, consider the great difference between your family (or firm) and the economy at large. In the case of your family, if your income has declined, and you are facing a shortfall at the end of each month, cutting down on expenses is a sensible course of action for one simple reason: Your income is independent of your expenses. For instance, if you do not eat out tonight (and, instead, cook at home), your income has not suffered and, as you have reduced your expenses, your balance is healthier.

In sharp contrast, an aggregate economy’s income is not independent of its expenditure. Indeed, the two are one and the same thing! (The nation’s aggregate income equals exactly its aggregate expenditure.) To see why this matters, suppose that the whole country is tightening its proverbial belt, with families and firms ‘deleveraging’ at once. Private expenditure will be, naturally, falling (in aggregate). Now if, on top of that, the government also reduces its expenditure (in an effort to shrink its deficits), then the sum of private and public expenditure will decline. But what is that sum equal to? The answer is: National income! As national income shrinks, the state’s tax revenue falls, families have less money to pay down debt, and the nation’s overall capacity to repay its debts diminishes. Thus, we all fall collectively into the trap of ‘common sense’; of the fallacy of aggregation; of mistakenly thinking that a recipe which is good for families and firms must be good for an indebted country in aggregate.

For many months, since the eruption of the Greek debt saga, I was struggling to put this simple point across to the many journalists that I met. It was hard work. The fallacy of aggregation was deeply entrenched in their minds. When asking me questions about Greece’s ‘bail out’ loans, and the importance of the austerity conditions that were attached to these loans, my claim that the whole idea was flawed did not resonate with them. However hard I tried to explain the flawed logic, the journalists seemed wedded to the idea that when a country like Greece has a large deficit, and a huge debt, a substantial reduction in government spending, and a hike in taxation, must be the answer.

Months later, when the government spending cut backs and the tax rises caused the recession to deepen and the debt-to-national income ratio to balloon, I noticed that the mood amongst journalists changed. Alas, in the meantime, they had authored piece upon piece that misinformed their readers and misled their audiences.

With this in mind, and as the crisis continues to weave its poisonous web across countries and sectors, I hope that journalists will weave into their reporting a modicum of doubt that economic ‘recipes’ add up the way that ‘conventional wisdom’ has it.

The perils of compartmentalisation

During my ‘tenure’ as frequent interlocutor of the international press corps ‘flying by’ Athens, I noticed an interesting division of labour. Reporters and television or radio crews would fall in three more or less distinct categories: The hard news crew, the background briefing mission and, less frequently, the human interest angle.

The hard news folks’ approach was of the ‘hardnosed’, quick off the mark, no nonsense type. They wanted the ‘facts’ and the figures, the insider information, the instant prediction of what-the-government-would-do or the how-the-market-would-move kind of response. The background briefing lot were more relaxed, operated under longer deadlines and, thus, had the time and space to ask similar questions but in a manner that allowed us, the interviewees, more room to unravel some narrative on the background and the unseen aspects of the story. Lastly, journalists working on human interest pieces had no time for the ‘causes’ of the economic crises, next to no interest for the underlying tectonic plates whose movements caused ruptures in the social economy. What they sought out was tales of woe, images of suffering, sounds of desperation; the raw materials that would allow them to piece together some short piece that would, I suspect, play the role of balancing out the harshness of the facts and figures in some preceding report by one of the other crews.

This compartmentalisation of the storyline of an economic meltdown into three distinct types of report causes two failures: First, it weakens the journalist’s own analytical capacity to make sense of the crisis. Secondly, it diminishes the value of each of its parts. Let me explain both allegations in the context of the eurozone debacle. Any tale of the trials and tribulations of, say, a Greek family that lacks an analytical connection between their suffering and the anguish of an equivalent German family (whose living standards have been falling less but for much longer) will surely fail to account (as well as it might have) for both: (a) the depth of ill feeling that Greek and German families experience and (b) the crisis’ causes. Put simply, when the hardnosed analysis is kept separate from the human interest angle, then the analysis turns ‘soft-nosed’ and the human interest story swaps humanism for melodrama.

Epilogue

Language and its love affair with metaphor often lures us into the trap of generalising that which is best left un-generalised. Our tongue is prone to talking about a ‘foreign’ people as if capable of having a single character whose moral defects can explain their plight; as if, for instance, Margaret Thatcher and Harold Pinter were collapsible into one character whose failing might explain Britain’s economic woes. Then, as if that were not enough, our mind gives the resulting misunderstanding another twirl by moving in the opposite direction, confusing the particular with the general, e.g. assuming that what is prudent for one family must be prudent for an economy. Lastly, following a long standing error in the Western mindset, we are convinced that economic and financial ‘facts’ are sentiment-free zones.

These three failures come natural to us when we fly into a country that has suddenly melted down for the purposes of preparing, within tight constraints, a piece of journalism on what is happening, why it happened and how it feels to be caught up in it. They must be resisted. My argument has been that journalists will throw much more useful light on an economic crisis unfolding in a foreign land if they manage to avoid the error of generalisation, the fallacy of aggregation, and the perils of compartmentalisation.

(*) An edited version of this article will appear in the March (2012) issue of the British Journalism Review. My thanks to the BJR for commissioning the paper.

Check out the rest of Yanis Varoufakis' Blog here "Thoughts for the Post-2008 World"

Deutsche Welles.de: Is Greece still viable?

2012-02-07T12:43:00.001Z

As Greece grapples with debts and deadlines, Yanis Varoufakis, writing for DW's Transatlantic Voices column, argues that the country has been skirting the edge of a debt crisis since its inception.

Yanis Varoufakis is Director of Political Economy at the Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Law, Politics and Economics at the University of Athens.

"Perhaps it is historically true that no order of society ever perishes save by its own hand."

Most Greeks, deep down, know that John Maynard Keynes was right. Our current destitution and indignity are the natural repercussions of our own past errors of commission and fallacies of omission.

Modern Greece has been skirting the edge of a debt crisis since its inception. After its mini postwar industrial revolution unravelled during the 1970s, it kept pulling back from the abyss through frequent devaluations and bursts of austerity. Entry into the eurozone removed the main instrument of containment in exchange for the empty promise of some alternative shock absorbing mechanism.

For almost a decade after the euro's birth, Northern European commercial capital kept flowing into countries like Greece in search of returns higher than those the stagnant core economies could deliver. A semblance of convergence was thus founded on a series of bubbles that kept the underlying structural imbalances well hidden. In countries like Ireland, the bubble inflated within the private sector (with the connivance of the state). In Greece, the same bubble sprang up within the state sector (aided and abetted by the developers and the private banks).

From Crash to Bailout to a festering wound

Once the bubbles started bursting (first in Wall Street and Europe's larger banks, then in Dubai, later in Greece and, finally, in the rest of the periphery), a postmodern 1930s was upon us. Just like in 1929, the Crash of 2008 sparked off:

a) the unravelling of the common currency of the era (the Gold Standard then, the euro today),

b) the implosion of the deficit countries (which were forced to shoulder the burden of adjustment), and

c) recessionary winds that blew across the world.

While these sinister developments were universal in scope, the question on everyone's lips remains: Is Greece viable? Do the Greeks believe it to be? Why are the targets set by the troika never met?

I am very much afraid that these are the wrong questions. It is not a question of whether Greece can be viable within the eurozone but whether the eurozone, as currently constructed, is viable with or without Greece. Put, differently, the question those outside of Greece need to ask is: Why are we still talking about Greece, two long years after its implosion?

Of course the reason is that the expensive remedies applied to the festering wound that is Greece are worsening, rather than improving, the infection. One explanation is that Greece was a recalcitrant patient who refused to take the medicine as prescribed. There is a large element of truth here. However, the Greek state's incompetence at introducing the agreed reforms is preventing us from seeing the deeper cause: the way that the eurozone bound together the fates of our peoples by means of an edifice that (a) magnified the underlying imbalances and (b) could not absorb a shock like that of the financial meltdown of 2008.

When the eurozone's weakest link snapped, its government added to the country's past mistakes another grave error of commission. It denied its bankruptcy and sought loans under conditions that were impossible to meet. In Keynes' words:

"Greece's insincere acceptance… of impossible conditions which it was not intended to carry out made Greece almost as guilty to accept what she could not fulfil as the European Union to impose what they were not entitled to exact."

Naturally, these are not Keynes' precise words. But they are close. All I had to do to produce the above ‘quotation' was to substitute ‘Greece' for ‘Germany' and ‘European Union' for ‘Allies.'

While pondering the implosion of Greece's social economy, Keynes' insights regarding the great paradox that was the Versailles Treaty are quite instructive. Just like Germany in 1920, so too Greece in May 2010 grudgingly accepted its ‘punishment' in the form of a ‘treaty' that placed impossible demands upon it. And just like the Allies were to discover in the 1920s, the imposition of these conditions not only depleted the capacity for recovery of the weak, defeated, demoralised nation but, alas, it is proving a constant drain and torment for Europe's strong nations.

Now what?

To err twice in two years is imprudent. The second bailout package, comprising more loans and deeper austerity, together with the fraudulent ‘voluntary' haircut negotiations, must be set aside. Until a rational plan is in place that renders both Greece and the rest of the eurozone viable, the Greek state must spend not a euro more than it takes in taxes, while all loan repayments are suspended. An end must be put to the scandal of asking German taxpayers, in the name of ‘solidarity', to guarantee loans that the Greek state passes on to banks already living off the kindness of the ECB and the taxpayers.

As for Germany, it must decide swiftly between disintegrating the eurozone and reinforcing it by adding to our monetary union that which has been missing from the outset: a mechanism for shifting surpluses to the deficit regions in the form of productive investments (as opposed to handouts or loans). Turning failed states like Greece into sundrenched wastelands within the eurozone, and forcing the rest of the currency area into a debt-deflationary spiral, is a most efficient way of undermining the long term viability of Europe's core. Even if one thinks that Greece would be getting its just deserts, do the hard-working Germans deserve to be quickmarched in that direction? I do not believe they do.

Check out Yanis Varoufakis' blog to keep up with his latest analysis of the current global economic crisis.

Also, for more information on this topic, read The Global Minotaur available from Zed Books

All Africa: Somalia: Getting Country Wrong - a History of International Misreading

2012-02-07T11:57:00.000Z

Writing a book about Somalia has become a cotton industry of late. Countless pundits with little or no experience of the country try to reduce its extraordinarily intricate conflict to images of destruction, decay and death.

But Mary Harper's book, "Getting Somalia Wrong: faith, war and hope in a shattered state" is a rare account of exceptional intellect, combining stellar reporting with sharp analysis. Well-organised and succinct, the book simplifies some of the most complex and primordial issues facing Somalia, such as the role of clans in a modern nation state. It also demystifies the equally complex identity of Somalis - an amalgamation of lineage-based clans with Islamic and African roots.

Living up to its title, Harper's book shows how (and why) the international community has misread the situation in Somalia over the past 20 years. Harper recounts the U.S. and UN intervention in the early 1990s, which ended in the now infamous "Black Hawk Down" episode, where 18 members of the American Special Forces (and countless Somalis) died in an epic battle across the dusty streets of Mogadishu.

"[this] was probably the most dramatic example of getting Somalia wrong," Harper writes. But, in fact, I think the 1993 events were just the first example of the book's title. More than 10 years later, Washington would again misdiagnose Somali conundrums, with potentially disastrous effect.

Harper correctly observers that the U.S. made another ill-judged intervention in Somalia in 2006, when it helped organize some of the most notorious warlords into an anti-terrorism coalition. The CIA was bankrolling the Mogadishu-based alliance until a popular revolt backed a loose union of Islamic courts to oust the warlords. But instead of learning from its mistakes, Harper notes that Washington went into an anti-terrorism overdrive by essentially outsourcing a war to Ethiopia. Addis Ababa "would carry out the dirty work" of the U.S., writes Harper, and soundly crush the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC).

Harper's book details how the defeat of the UIC had the polar opposite effect: al-Shabaab, a more militant faction within the UIC, would exploit the Ethiopian intervention to its advantage and emerge as a real threat to the U.S. and its allies. The group now controls nearly half of Somalia, and swears allegiance to al-Qaeda.

Harper traces "violent political Islam" to the "Mad Mullah," the 19th century freedom fighter whose lacerating poetry galvanized the nation to fight against the British Empire. Many Somalis would however find Harper's portrayal of Sayyid Muhammad Abdulle Hassan as a "violent" Islamist profoundly injuring. In the eyes of the vast majority of Somalis, he's the foremost hero of the people. To frame him any less would conjure up a colonialist mentality.

In her book, Harper goes into great lengths to contextualize the loaded term "failed state," which is casually applied to Somalia in the news media and popular culture. The absence of central authority since 1991, she writes, is not an appropriate yardstick to measure Somalia. To this incredibly clannish society, Harper argues that the notions of 'state' and 'failure' are western misfits. "It would therefore be misleading to describe Somalia as ever having a stable, fully-functioning nation state, democratic or otherwise," she writes.

That assertion is contentious. The academic Ali Mizrui, who is widely cited in Harper's book, says that 1960s Somalia was the closest thing that Africa had to modern day stable and democratic state.

Unlike your average journalist, whose description of Somalia is the fait accompli gloom and doom, Harper goes out of her way to report on the vibrant civil society and business community in the country. She documents successful entrepreneurs who have helped Somalia become one of the most technologically advanced countries on the continent.

Politically, Harper also spends a great deal of her book decoupling Mogadishu, the capital city - and consistently the most chaotic corner since 1991 - from the rest of the country. She points out that clan-based polities in the northwest (Somaliland) and northeast (Puntland), among others, are self-governing with a remarkable degree of success in terms of local governance.

Somaliland, the former British protectorate, features significantly in Harpers book. She shows how this island of calm in an ocean of chaos has managed to strike a balance between traditional leadership (Guurti) and modern state systems. "Somaliland held elections that are far better than many African countries," she correctly observes. Harper criticises the international community for ignoring these local stability initiatives by overemphasizing the importance of that most evasive of Somali institution - 'central government. To this end, Harper suggests some type of "federalism" for Somalia, allowing local communities to exert greater control over local governance.

While Harper is correct to lash out at the international community's idiosyncratic approach to Somalia, she hasn't sufficiently explained the 'federalism' she casually refers to. Flirting with the word is deeply troubling to many Somalis who feel that the whole notion is being foisted onto them by neighboring countries, chiefly Ethiopia, which is a historical enemy. Put simply, Somalia does not have the characteristics of a federal state, such the U.S., Russia or Nigeria. Somalia is figuratively small and it's too homogeneous to federalize. A decentralized state, much like the UK, is more apt.

In a nutshell, Harper's book is one of the most comprehensive accounts written about Somalia in recent years. The author neatly packs so much information into a relatively small book. It's a refreshing take on what is a deeply complex conflict.

Abdi Aynte is a journalist at Al Jazeera English

To read Getting Somalia Wrong?, check out Zed Books

Getting Somalia Wrong Book Launch TONIGHT!

FRONTLINE CLUB: Getting Somalia Wrong

2012-02-07T10:31:00.001Z

http://www.royalafricansociety.org/events/details/1137-getting-somalia-wrong-faith-war-and-hope-in-a-shattered-state.html

Next week I'm planning to attend this event at the Royal African Society, where BBC journalist Mary Harper will be launching her new book 'Getting Somalia Wrong'. Mary has a long history of association with Somalia, she's travelled there many times. One of her best stories came about when she was trying to get through to Somali pirates on her mobile phone; she gave up because they didn't answer, and then gave the phone to her daughter. When it rang her daughter answered and said 'mummy it's the pirates on the phone'; a story immortalised on the BBC's From Our Own Correspondent.

I'm looking forward to reading the book as I'm sure Mary's viewpoint will be different to some of the other experts who've written about it over the years. She's spent a lot of time talking to Somalis and really trying to understand what's going on there. Great that Zed Books exists so that these less well-known topics can be written about.

By Celeste Hicks

on February 2, 2012 2:09 PM

Independant Voice: EthioSun: Getting Somalia Wrong? – Signs of wish in a cracked state

2012-02-07T10:28:00.000Z

It’s always been tough to find a horizon for examining Somalia. It has one of a many ethnically homogenous populations in Africa – Somalis share a same language, culture, sacrament and house structure – nonetheless a republic seems constantly riven by conflict. Somalia has prolonged been noticed in a West as a basket box state in a basket box continent, as assent discussion after assent discussion and unfamiliar interventions came and went while house fighting continued. Maybe a answer is embankment your frameworks and review Mary Harper’s new book on Somalia.

Her informed, keen and penetrable book could not be entrance out during a some-more good time, with a republic experiencing a vital Kenyan troops intrusion and a stability African Union troops goal in support of a exposed and substantially unviable government. It’s a work that demonstrates a significance of intent though usually broadcasting and clear, uncluttered suspicion voiced simply though effectively.

Harper’s research supports a evidence done by Richard Dowden (African Arguments, 20 Ooctober 2011) about not forcing statehood on Somalia. He righteously points out that “Strong centralized states are a bequest of colonial rulers and unsurprisingly a heir governments have kept it that way.” This has been attempted in Somalia and failed. If a African Union and a West, aroused of a Somalia though a clever centralized authority, try to pound not usually a Islamists like Al Shabaab, though also other unconstrained army in sequence to artificially say in energy an unrepresentative and mostly neglected executive government, they will usually replicate a errors of a past and lengthen conflict. Centralized management is not partial of Somali domestic enlightenment – usually a Islamic courts transformation had any genuine success with unification. This was a totally Somali answer to a problems, though one that did not greatfully a United States or Ethiopia and so was swept divided by outward intervention.

All this is clearly accepted by Harper, a publisher with a BBC African Service for some-more than 20 years and one who had reported from Somalia and frequently visited a republic given 1991. Above all in her work she tries and succeeds in conveying understanding, and where bargain is formidable or impossible, to communicate because this is so.

Harper describes a catastrophic images that quarrel any other to get on TV screens or journal pages on a few and fundamentally sensationalized occasions when events in Somalia are reported – drug-crazed teenagers with guns, cut-down Land cruisers with weaponry mounted on a back, pirates, fundamental women and children. She righteously says of Somalia that ‘these images act as barriers to other ways of saying Somalia”. They browbeat a news to a ostracism of all others representations of Somalia or Somalis, generally a signs that amid a dispute and crisis, Somalis are themselves inventing choice mercantile and domestic systems and effective presence strategies

Mary Harper is a BBC publisher specializing in Africa.

Somalia is a ultimate image, for many, of a unsuccessful state. It has seen roughly consistent dispute given a overpower of Siad Barre in 1991. It has also suffered a array of ill-conceived, feeble executed and exceedingly deleterious unfamiliar interventions – from a catastrophic US involvement finale after a now barbarous Black Hawk Down episode, around a US-backed Ethiopian advance to overpower a Union of Islamic Courts, to a unconstrained and mostly purposeless assent conferences hold in plush hotels around East Africa.

These events are described clearly in their historical, domestic and general contexts and uncover how a miss of bargain of Somalia, a history, enlightenment and domestic growth led to attempts to force change that were cursed from a start as they worked opposite existence – ‘Outsiders tend to find it a tough place to understand, and there is generally a far-reaching opening between a several attempts done to deliver solutions to a problems and a existence lived by a population’.

This opening in bargain is not usually a European or American phenomenon. Somalia differs hugely in a culture, normal structures, economy and spontaneous political/social institutions from many of Africa. The clan-based rural complement that encompasses a economic, amicable and domestic spheres creates Somalia a bad sourroundings for centralised supervision on a Western or hybrid Western/African pattern.

Siad Barre unsuccessful to forcibly centralize a state. Peace conferences formed on a appearance of elites distanced from a grassroots, perplexing to produce out Western-backed deals involving centralised transitory governments have constructed diseased regimes that have not usually unsuccessful to finish dispute though have all too mostly worsened it. These attempts are described, picked detached and roundly and cogently criticised by a author, as is a bent to perspective Somalia by a prism of a ‘War on Terror’.

For me, a many profitable territory in what is a well-written and really well-informed study, is that traffic with Somaliland and a slow, clever and, above all, Somali-generated swell from a break-away state raid by competing clans or movements to one of a many fast and resourceful polities in Africa. Denied general recognition, though also mostly giveaway of outward interference, Somaliland has grown a operative economy and an inland hybrid complement of deputy supervision that involves though doesn’t usually centre on a clans and that is increasingly accountable – ‘Because Western models of peace-making and state-building have not been imposed from a outside, Somaliland has in many ways saved itself from a predestine of Somalia. The instance of Somaliland has demonstrated that when left to themselves, Somalis can form a viable republic state’.

This is a book that contingency be review by those who wish to know Somalia. It is intent though offset and really transparent in a probable faith that ‘until Somalia is some-more clearly accepted and a opposite proceed is found, it will continue to perplex, alarm and bluster a general community, and it will be really formidable to find a proceed brazen for a opposite that works for a Somalis themselves and for a outward world.’ And, as Harper righteously concludes, a universe needs to be some-more creative, like a Somalis themselves, in a exchange with a republic and ‘recognize that Somalis can be really good during doing things for themselves’.

Keith Somerville runs his possess website Africa, News and Analysis –www.africajournalismtheworld.com – and teaches in a Politics and International Relations Department during a University of Kent, Canterbury. K.Somerville@kent.ac.uk

Email this story

By Qalinle Hussein

Africa Report: The dangers of carving up Somalia

2012-02-06T14:27:00.003Z

Here is an unprecedented build-up of military force in Somalia. African Union peacekeepers are set to double to more than 17,000 while Kenya and Ethiopia have launched their own invasions. Soldiers from the USA, Britain and France are targeting insurgents with foreign terrorist links. This military influx could prove counter-productive, given the lack of resources for stabilising local politics and strengthening the economy .

 Charming and jovial, Tanzanian diplomat Augustine Mahiga worked the room hard as he talked about tangible progress in Somalia to an array of stern faces at the African Union's (AU) Peace and Security Council on 5 January in Addis Ababa.

"This is the moment when years of investment in Somalia could finally pay off if we stay the course and move forward together," Mahiga intoned in his role as the UN secretary general's special representative to Somalia.

 It was a hard sell convincing fellow diplomats about progress in Somalia after another year of famine, piracy, fist fights in parliament and battles with jihadist militias.

The irrepressible Mahiga wants to show that he believes that the progress is real by moving his UN office to Mogadishu following an offensive by the AU troops that drove the Islamist Al-Shabaab militia out of the capital last year.

  THE AU AND MAHIGA have asked the UN Security Council to approve funding to add 5,700 troops to the current total of 9,500.

That will add to what has become a multi-million-dollar business in pacifying, or at least neutralising, Somalia.

African defence officials and private military consultants are in hot pursuit of funding from the UN and intervening governments for operations and procurement.

Governments in the region earn $1,000 for each peacekeeper per month, and it also builds up their armies' combat experience.

 With anti-pirate flotillas from more than 24 countries patrolling the Gulf of Aden, and French and United States forces monitoring terrorist targets from Djibouti (and occasionally sending special forces into Mogadishu on covert operations), there is an unprecedented build-up of military force in and around Somalia.

There is quieter talk of the mineral and fishing resources off the longest coastline of any African state.

 This new militarisation could result in political progress, according to the executive secretary of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development.

Kenya's Mahboub Maalim told The Africa Report: "Somalia is closer to being stabilised than at any other time.

It is mostly due to the lifting of the UN Security Council resolution limiting border countries from intervening in Somalia."

That change by the UN has legitimised the operations by Kenyan and Ethiopian troops over the past few months.

The Kenyan government wants to join the AU mission so its troops can be eligible for funding from the UN.

 For Maalim, the next critical stage in Somalia will be political: "There will be some far-reaching changes. Elections must be held by the end of August. A new government will be formed, and one that hopefully comes without the baggage of the current one."

 This is where Somalia's divided political class is meant to work with African governments and Mahiga's UN office.

Few Somalis outside the partisan political groupings have much of a voice: civic organisations have taken a terrible hit in the past two decades.

Some UN officials are now trying to reinvigorate the reconciliation strategy launched by veteran Algerian diplomat Mohamed Sahnoun that worked with clan organisations, the foundation of Somali society.

 President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed's Transitional Federal Government (TFG) in Mogadishu is meant to hand over power in August when a new constitution based on the principle of decentralisation comes into force.

The transitional parliament, which has voted itself a three-year extension, will be central to any transition: its members want to push out Sheikh Sharif but cannot agree on a replacement.

 For Simon Mulongo, former director of the Eastern Africa Standby Brigade and now a Ugandan MP, there is a clear imperative for regional states to intervene: "Somalia represents a black spot, an ungoverned space, and therefore precipitates concerns of organised crime, bandit economies, etc., which affect the region directly and indirectly ... This invites those affected to take charge of the situation ... especially when they have Somali elements that also operate in their countries."

  al-Shabab organised a bomb attack in Kampala in July 2010, so Mulongo insists that the Ugandan government has vital security interests there: "Somalia is not just a problem for Somalia alone.

Terror groups operating in the region are creating relationships. The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF) have links with groups also operating in Somalia.

Jamil Mukulu, the ADF leader, trained in the Middle East and has organised some of his elements to be linked with some of the groups.

The ADF is based in the western slopes of the Rwenzori and western Uganda."

An intelligence source said Britain has growing concern about Somali-linked terrorists

 The headline news is that Somalia – whether its rebel groups are deploying terrorist militias across Africa and Europe or sending daring pirates to the Gulf of Aden, through which half the world's container traffic passes – is a global threat.

Little attention is paid to the harsh living conditions that most Somalis have to endure or to the breakdown of health and education services.

It took another famine last year, which put five million Somali lives at risk, to take the world's focus away temporarily from the outside obsessions of piracy and terrorism.

 That explains some of the scepticism about British Prime Minister David Cameron's plan for a conference in London on 23 February "to deliver a new international approach to Somalia."

In November, Cameron listed the reasons for calling the meeting: "Protecting merchant ships passing through the Gulf of Aden, tackling pirates, pressuring the extremists, supporting countries in the region and addressing the causes of conflict and instability in Somalia."

 A European diplomat knowledgeable about the preparations plays down expectations: "We'll see a call for stronger support for the AU and the UN. There may be some changes in the international management of diplomacy on Somalia. They want to find a way to give Turkey and Qatar bigger roles, but we're not expecting any policy breakthroughs."

The tight timetable would preclude wider consultation or much innovative thinking, he argues.  A London-based intelligence source added that Britain has growing concern about Somali-linked terror groups.

After Al Qaeda operative Fazul Abdullah Mohammed was killed in fighting in south-central Somalia in June 2011, files were found on his computer detailing plans for attacks on the 2012 Olympics and other targets in London.

Jermaine Grant, a Briton also known as Ali Mohammed Ibrahim, was arrested in Mombasa in early January and charged with possession of explosives.

Police say he was one of the 200 or so foreign fighters working with Al-Shabaab, of whom about 50 are said to have British passports.  

Whatever the agenda for the conference, Cameron's team has drawn up an impressive guest list including Ethiopia's Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, Kenya's President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga, Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni and Somalia's President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed.

  AL-SHABAAB LEADERS Ibrahim Haji Jama Mee'aad and Hassan Dahir Aweys, both under UN sanctions, are not invited even though their organisation will be under discussion.

Some African diplomats will urge talks with what they see as a more tractable faction of Al-Shabaab under Mukhtar Robow, while others argue that AU troops must press home their military advantage before opening talks.

 Experts such as BBC journalist Mary Harper warn that "one of the biggest failures of policy towards Somalia has been the fixation with lengthy and expensive internationally sponsored peace conferences."

 In her new book Getting Somalia Wrong, Harper argues that these conferences "have produced a succession of weak transitional governments [which] have paid lip service to federalism but have tended to be highly centralised. They lack popular legitimacy because Somalis tend to see them as foreign creations."

 A better policy course, she says, would be to focus on the more stable regions and administrations such as Puntland and Somaliland.

Belatedly, the US and Britain have backed those strategies, speaking of a "dual track" approach which means recognising the Mogadishu government but building up independent relationships with the self-governing areas.

 Working with other semi-autonomous areas such as Galmudug, Ximan and Xeeb may be more problematic, although there are signs that UN and AU officials are moving in that direction.

Attempts by governments such as Ethiopia and Uganda to back self-governing areas are often dismissed by Somalis as attempts to carve up the country.

 Uganda's Mulongo describes a web of competing interests among the states intervening in Somalia: "For Ethiopia, it is about control of the sea."

Ethiopia has been landlocked since Eritrea's independence in 1991. According to Mulongo, Eritrea's President Isaias Afewerki believes in stabilising southern Somalia "to stand up to Ethiopia and counter its hegemonic interests."

The status of Ethiopia's own Somali-speaking population in the country's Ogaden region is of obsessive importance to the government in Addis Ababa.

An all-out war was fought between Ethiopia and Somalia over the Ogaden in the late 1970s.

 Mulongo says this complicates regional policy: "The Ogaden war still lingers in the minds of Ethiopians. They cannot just sit back and allow the formation of a semi-autonomous Jubaland region led by the Kenyans. It will obviously reopen the Ogaden issue."

 Mulongo and others see an escalating contest for influence among regional states in Somalia. Few, even in Nairobi, seem clear about why Kenya invaded Somalia with a more than 2,000-strong expeditionary force in October on the narrow pretext of hot pursuit against attacks by terrorist groups based in Somalia.  It quickly emerged that Kenya's intervention would not be over in the promised 'matter of weeks'.

Instead, Kenya's army is bedding down for a lengthy operation aiming to seize the southern port of Kismayo, which provides Al-Shabaab with revenues and taxes of more than $70m a year, according to UN investigators.

A tough battle looms ahead.  Prime Minister Odinga has tried to calm TFG fears about the motives behind the invasion, saying that Kenya had no territorial interest in Somalia.

Questions persist about the creation of Jubaland last April, a semi-autonomous region in south-central Somalia, akin to Puntland and Somaliland.

Led by former TFG defence minister Professor Mohamed Abdi Gandhi, the new authority is meant to help force back Al-Shabaab and create a buffer zone for Northern Kenya.

 Somali nationalists see it as another incursion by Kenya, whose last major dispute with Mogadishu sparked the 1964 Shifta War in Northern Kenya.

Because the TFG is politically weak in the south, Jubaland has never been popular in Mogadishu.

Ethiopia and Djibouti also oppose the creation of Jubaland, arguing that with a fragile government in Mogadishu, it's a bad time to encourage more balkanisation.

 Kenya's expanding campaign raises questions about its relationship with Uganda, the senior partner in the AU peacekeeping effort.

Ethiopia prefers to stay out of the AU forces but sent its troops into western Somalia in December where they seized Beledweyne and a cluster of other towns from Al-Shabaab.

Addis Ababa remains profoundly sceptical about plans for a buffer zone – known as the Jubaland project – between northern Kenya and southern Somalia.

It would be yet another division of Somalia's territory and a useful enclave for oppositionists who could easily cross into Ethiopia's Ogaden region.

  THERE IS ALSO an immediate problem of command and control for operations in Somalia.

After four years in the field, Uganda's commanders may be unwilling to cede command of the AU mission, suggests a Kampala-based security expert: "Who will give orders to the Kenyan troops – [Uganda's] General Fred Mugisha or the Kenyan command? Will we see a reorganisation into sector commands or will there remain an overall command structure?"

 As diplomats and commanders grapple with these organisational complexities, many Somalis worry about the implications of this influx of outside interests.

Some fear that instability and terrorism could increase, arguing that Al-Shabaab will resort to more car bombings and targeted assassinations once it is evicted from its current bases.

 Diplomats warn that those intervening should not ignore some of the successes of the regional administrations and that the country is still far from the picture of universal anarchy as commonly portrayed.

Despite the debilitating conflict in Mogadishu and Kismayo, there has also been some impressive economic growth in areas such telecommunications, financial services and livestock farming.

Widespread internet access offers Somalis a vital link to the diaspora and the wider world.

The tremendous success of Somali traders in Johannesburg, Cape Town and Nairobi's Eastleigh district points to the potential for the country's economy, if Somalia's people can find their own political solution as international pressure mounts.

Posted on Monday, 06 February 2012 11:01
By Parselelo Kantai and Patrick Smith in Nairobi

Read more about the current situation in Somalia in Mary Harper's Getting Somalia Wrong

Reuters: Greece lets another deadline slip in bailout poker

2012-02-06T12:59:00.001Z

(Reuters) - Greece let yet another deadline slip on Monday for responding to painful terms for a new EU/IMF bailout as patience in Brussels wore thin over drawn-out negotiations among its feuding political leaders.

Failure to strike a deal to secure the 130 billion euro ($170 billion) rescue risks pushing Athens into a chaotic debt default which could threaten its future in the euro zone.

Panos Beglitis, spokesman of the PASOK socialist party, said on Sunday that leaders of the three parties backing technocrat Prime Minister Lucas Papademos' government had to give their responses in principle by noon (5 a.m. ET).

However, a government official denied that the parties had been given an ultimatum to respond on Monday.

Asked whether the parties had to respond in time for a Euro Working Group meeting of finance ministry officials in Brussels, the Greek official said: "No, there is no deadline."

He said the entire Greek side had to agree terms of the rescue, which would be the second for Athens since 2010, with international lenders before the next meeting of the Eurogroup of euro zone finance ministers.

"The only deadline is to have a staff agreement for the second bailout and the agreement of the political leaders before Eurogroup," said the official, who requested anonymity.

No date has yet been set for the Eurogroup meeting, although it is expected this week.

In Brussels, frustrated EU officials said Greece was already in "overtime" after failing to clinch an agreement at the weekend on a package including wage and pension reductions, job cuts and tougher tax enforcement measures.

"It will be very bad if there is no white smoke from Athens today," said one euro zone government source.

"We have already missed deadlines. In order to prepare the fresh tranche of money and reschedule debt in the first half of March, a whole series of technical steps must be taken. We need a decision now to put the mechanism of rescheduling in place."

Beglitis said the deadline had merely slipped to Tuesday due to the changing timetable of euro zone meetings.

Leaders of PASOK, the conservative New Democracy and the far-right LAOS party - who may face an angry electorate in parliamentary polls as soon as April - still have to agree on unresolved problems.

These include labor market reform and shoring up domestic banks. Greece needs the bailout money by March to meet big debt repayments but tempers are rising in the European Union over what it sees as Greek dithering on implementing reforms.

BANK HOPES
Papademos said after five hours of talks on Sunday that party chiefs had agreed measures including wage cuts and other reforms as part of spending cuts worth 1.5 percent of gross domestic product.
Hopes rose on Monday that they had also made progress on recapitalizing domestic banks, which are up to their necks in Greek government bonds now worth a fraction of their face value.

Greek bank stocks were up 8.8 percent at midday on hopes that lenders would be recapitalized without being nationalized after a debt swap under the latest bailout deal, which will radically cut the value of their bond holdings.

"Banks are concerned with the way they will be recapitalized, so that they remain independent ... It seems it will be done through a combination of instruments, which will reduce the risk of their nationalization," said Natasha Roumantzi, head of analysis at Piraeus Securities.

The euro fell broadly on investor concern that the parties had yet to sign off on the terms of a new bailout with a deadline imminent, keeping alive the risk of a messy default which could rock the currency bloc. The single currency slid by 0.6 percent to stand at $1.3070.

Talks on the bailout have dragged on for weeks.

WORN DOWN
Greeks have been worn down by a deep recession, now in its fifth year, and wave after wave of austerity measures imposed under the first bailout.

Alarmed by the prospect of yet more budget cuts, Greece's two main trade unions said they would call a 24-hour strike for Tuesday in protest against policies they say have only driven the economy into a downward spiral.

"Despite our sacrifices and despite admitting that the policy mix is wrong, they still ask for more austerity," Ilias Iliopoulos, secretary general of public sector union ADEDY, told Reuters.

ADEDY and its private sector sister union GSEE, which will join Tuesday's strike, represent about 2 million workers or roughly half the country's workforce.

Leftist and communist-affiliated groups will rally at around 11 a.m. ET on Monday to march to parliament.

With Greece facing 14.5 billion euros of debt repayments in March, a bill it cannot meet without further bailout funds, the stakes could not be higher.

Officials have emerged increasingly despondent after each round of talks, complaining that the troika of European Central Bank, European Commission and International Monetary Fund was refusing to yield on demands to cut the minimum wage, axe holiday bonuses and fire public sector workers.
New Democracy and LAOS in particular have staunchly opposed further wage and spending cuts, arguing they risk precipitating an even deeper recession and imposing more pain on Greeks.

The slow progress has angered Greece's European partners. Euro zone officials say finance ministers told Greece on Saturday it could not go ahead with an agreed deal to restructure privately held debt until it guaranteed it would implement reforms.

"There is a great sense of frustration that they are dragging their feet," one euro zone official said.

©2011 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.

For more information on the economic crisis, check out Yanis Varoufakis' The Global Minotaur available from Zed Books

The Guardian: China bans its airlines from paying EU carbon tax

2012-02-06T12:17:00.002Z

China has banned its airlines from paying the EU carbon tax on flights. Photograph: Greg Baker/AP

China has banned its airlines from paying the new European Union carbon charge, state news agency Xinhua has reported – stepping up the international battle over the scheme.

The levy applies to all airlines flying to and from EU countries. Companies that do not comply face fines and ultimately could be banned from using EU airports.

The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) said on Monday that airlines were not allowed to pay the EU charge, increase freight costs or add other fees, according to Xinhua. It cited authorisation from the state council, China's cabinet.

Hinting at possible retaliation, Xinhua added: "China will consider adopting necessary measures to protect interests of Chinese individuals and companies, pending the development of the issue."

The EU's ambassador in Beijing, Markus Ederer, told a press briefing it hoped to resolve the issue through negotiation. Beijing's announcement came one week before a China-EU summit.

Although the scheme came into force from 1 January, fees do not have to be paid until March 2013. Supporters believe including aviation in the emissions trading scheme is crucial because the industry's carbon output is soaring.

China, the US, India and others are bitterly opposed to the scheme, leading to fears it could spark a trade war.

A US attempt to overturn the scheme was rejected by the European court of justice in December.
Chinese airlines have already vowed to ignore the scheme. China argues it is unreasonable to apply the levy to developing nations and wants the costs of reducing carbon to be passed on to aircraft manufacturers.

Critics also argue that regulation of the industry should be negotiated at the United Nations' International Civil Aviation Organisation. But European leaders say they have been waiting for years for the ICAO to act.

Connie Hedegaard, the EU's climate action commissioner, has stressed the scheme allows for "equivalent measures" – other forms of carbon reduction – to be taken into account.

Chai Haibo, the deputy secretary of the China Air Transport Association, told Bloomberg: "I believe all sides will negotiate again and find a solution … I can't imagine that the worst case, such as the EU grounding Chinese flights, could happen."

Tania Branigan in Beijing guardian.co.uk, Monday 6 February 2012 06.48 GMT

If you're interested in reading more about sustainable avaiation try Peter McManner's Fly and be Damned available for review, inspection and pre-order now at http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/fly-and-be-damned

The Peter McManners Sustainability Blog

2012-02-06T12:13:00.001Z

UK Aviation Policy

The UK government has a difficult and important task to craft policy for aviation. It is difficult because of widely divergent viewpoints and multiple stakeholders. It is important because aviation policy has long-term consequences with decisions taken now influencing the type of aircraft and the associated ground infrastructure that will be operating in the middle of this century. The key stakeholders, in approximate order of the political power they wield, are:

Business – concerned that in a globalised world it is important to have an efficient transport infrastructure.
Passengers – a large proportion of the electorate enjoy, and would like to retain, cheap flights.
Airlines – working to tight margins with fuel a high proportion of operating costs.
Airport Operators – concerned that they will run out of capacity, particularly in the South East around London.
Environmentalists – providing the inconvenient grit in the negotiations, concerned at the growth of emissions from aviation as a cause of climate change

Politicians tend to make decisions with input from focus groups, which in this case would be drawn from the stakeholder groups listed above. However if politicians were to take a principled approach, they would be assessing the priorities asking the question what is the key issue that has long-term consequences. Despite the protestations of other stakeholders, that issue is the rapid growth in emissions. On a principled long-term basis, the environmentalists have logic on their side. In reality that counts for little; the electoral cycle sets the timeframe and the first four categories of stakeholder have louder voices. What is very strange about this particular policy stalemate is that putting long-term environmental concerns as the foundation of aviation policy will lead to a golden age of aviation. The price is severe disruption in the short-term but the outcome is better for all stakeholders.

Fly and Be Damned: What now for aviation and climate change?

Politicians should read my book, and take a principled approach launching the next golden age of aviation.

Monday, 6 February 2012

All Africa: Somalia- Kenya Takes Control of Two Key Al Shabaab Towns

2012-02-06T12:11:00.001Z

Kenyan forces have taken over two al Shabaab controlled towns after two airstrikes left the towns of Hosingo and Badade, in Southern Somalia, under the control of Kenyan forces and the Somalia's Transitional Federal Government.

The two towns were home to al Shabaab camps said to have been destroyed in the military offensive. An unspecified number of al Shabaab fighters died in the attacks.

Among the dead were top eight al Shabaab fighters. Both towns were key transit points for improvised explosive devices and contraband goods to the rest of Somalia and Northern Kenya.

Colonel Cyrus Oguna, the Kenya's military spokesman, described the move as a major victory for the Kenyan forces: "Al Shabaab is completely weakened. They have lost a source of revenue in Hosingo, because of the contraband they were passing there. They have lost control of the southern sector through the loss of Badade, and therefore they have receded back towards Kismayu".

Away from the battleground of Somalia, Kenya continues to lobby the international community to step-up its support for the country.

Moses Wetangula, Kenya's Foreign Affairs Minister has met with William Hague his British counterpart as well as the Danish Minister for International Cooperation and made the case for more international support.

Lindsay Kiptiness the Kenya Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman says that the conflict in Somalia cannot be solved without the strengthening of Amisom, the African Union Mission in Somalia.

"Expanding Amisom means it requires more money," Kiptiness explains. "We have done our best to lobby other members of the international community to ensure that they are ready to finance an expanded Amisom because it will be fruitless to have a big Amisom force without finances and enablers."

Meanwhile, Kenya continues to attack al Shabaab on both military and diplomatic fronts.
These recent military gains further reinforce the need for victory on the diplomatic front, which will in turn reinforce the military strength of the overall African Union Mission in Somalia.

© 2012 AllAfrica

Check out Mary Harper's Getting Somalia Wrong? for more information on the current political crises in Somalia or attend the book launch, this Tuesday, February 7.

Washington Post: UN declares Somalia’s famine over, but says millions across East Africa still in crisis

2012-02-03T12:39:00.002Z

NAIROBI, Kenya — The United Nations said Friday that Somalia’s famine is over, but the world body’s Food and Agricultural Organization warned that continued assistance is needed to stop the region from slipping back.

The world body moved the crisis from the top step of a five-point scale — based on the death rate — to the fourth step, formally reducing it from a “famine” to a “humanitarian emergency”.

However, the U.N. said that 2.3 million people remain in a food crisis situation in Somalia and still need assistance. That represents 31 percent of the country’s population. Across the Horn of Africa region the total is 9.5 million who need help.

The international body declared famine in Somalia last July after successive failed rains. Hundreds of thousands of Somalis fled to refugee camps in Kenya, Ethiopia and the Somali capital Mogadishu in search of food.

The famine was exacerbated by the Somali militant group al-Shabab, which has let few aid agencies into the area it controls in south-central Mogadishu.

Jose Graziano da Silva, the director general of the U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization, warned that without assistance in the region over the next three months “those people will not survive.”

“The Horn of Africa will be for FAO the most important region and we’ll be doing our best here to improve food security,” he said. “We do believe it is possible to have a Horn of Africa free of hunger.”

Mark Bowden, the U.N.’s humanitarian coordinator for Somalia, said that a massive increase in assistance last year helped lift Somalia out of famine conditions. But he said the international community needed to keep helping.

“The gains are considerable but they are also very fragile and one of the things I want to highlight is we have a temporary respite in terms of addressing the crisis in Somalia,” Bowden said.

He later added: “The years of conflict and poor rains have left millions of Somalis vulnerable. The mortality rates in southern Somalia are still among the highest in the world.”

The militant group al-Shabab this week banned the international Red Cross from operating in southern Somalia. Bowden said any reduction in assistance “is of critical concern to us,” and he urged all sides of the conflict not to impede humanitarian aid.

The U.N. does not have a death toll from Somalia’s famine and will say only that it knows tens of thousands of people died, mostly between April and September last year. A study will be commissioned to look at the death toll in more detail, one U.N. official said Friday.

Senait Gebregziabher, the head of Oxfam in Somalia, lauded the gains against hunger but said that Somalia “is still in the throes of its worst humanitarian crisis in decades” and said that insecurity is disrupting aid supplies, warning the world not to turn its back on the crisis.

“We are seriously concerned that if people do not have the security to tend their crops and animals, or the freedom to access clean water and food in the markets, the humanitarian situation will deteriorate once again,” Gebregziabher said.

After months without rainfall across the region, the U.N. on July 20 declared several parts of Somalia a famine zone. Exhausted, rail-thin women were stumbling into refugee camps in Kenya and Ethiopia with dead babies and bleeding feet.

The journeys sometimes took weeks, and weaker family members — children and the elderly — were left behind on the way to die alone. The U.N. expanded Somalia’s famine zone a couple weeks later, defined as when two adults or four children per 10,000 people die of hunger each day and a third of children are acutely malnourished.

Aid groups quickly sent in planes and boats full of food, though a critical report written by two prominent aid agencies has found that government and aid groups were much too slow to respond despite early warnings of impending disaster. The crisis was the worse since 1991-92, when hundreds of thousands of Somalis starved to death.

This time, the British government estimates that between 50,000 and 100,000 people died, most of them children. Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti were all badly affected, but the famine hit hardest in areas of Somalia suffering from a toxic mixture of drought, war, high taxes levied by armed groups, and rising food prices.

Read more about the current political situation in Somalia in Getting Somalia Wrong by Mary Harper, BBC Journalist.

Available for Review and Inspection on http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/getting-somalia-wrong.

Book Launch with Mary Harper, author and journalist, Rageh Omaar, writer and broadcaster and Mohammed Adow, Africa correspondent - Al-Jazeera English on Tuesday 7th Feb at the Brunei Suite, School of Oriental and African Studies, Thornhaugh Street, London, United Kingdom.

Electronic Intifada: Why is the BBC so afraid of the word "Palestine"?

2012-02-03T11:52:00.000Z

This week, the BBC issued its final ruling on a controversy which has been raging for nearly a year after the words “Free Palestine” were censored from a freestyle rap played on Radio 1Xtra.

Appearing on the popular Charlie Sloth Hip Hop M1X last February, the artist Mic Righteous performed a rap which included the lyrics: “I can scream Free Palestine for my pride/still pray for peace.”

BBC producers replaced the word ‘Palestine’ with the sound of breaking glass and this is the version that was aired and which can be seen on a video on the BBC website (the censorship occurs at 2:59).

The edited performance was repeated in April on the same show.

BBC upholds censorship decision

Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) has spent the last eight months trying to find out why the decision to censor an artist who raised the issue of Palestine was made.

During the course of a long correspondence, the BBC’s head of editorial standards for audio and music, Paul Smith, wrote that the show’s producer “did not edit out the word ‘Palestine’ because it was offensive — referencing Palestine is fine, but implying that it is not free is the contentious issue.”

In that single sentence, a senior BBC executive revealed the BBC’s complete disdain for the Palestinians and their suffering, and its shameful disregard for international law when it is being broken by Israel.

The United Nations is clear in its recognition of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and UN Resolution 242 calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank and Gaza. The chant “Free Palestine” is basically shorthand for the same demand.

It is obvious why Israel, the occupier, would want to silence calls for a free Palestine, but not so clear why the BBC feels the same. PSC’s attempts to find out, backed up by a concerted campaign of pressure from members, resulted on 31 January 2012 with the BBC’s ruling that it had been “overcautious” in making the edit but that the final content broadcast on the Charlie Sloth show had not been biased and therefore did not breach its editorial guidelines.

And so this taxpayer-funded public broadcaster evaded our accusation that it had displayed bias against Palestine through its censorship of an artist’s work, and instead defended itself by saying that the final content, from which the word “Palestine” had been removed, was not biased against Palestine.

It is a level of manipulation and duplicity that would not be out of place in Joseph Heller’s novel of self-contradictory, circular logic, Catch 22.

Artists speak out against censoring Palestine

The musician and political activist Lowkey, who has made regular appearances on the Charlie Sloth Hip Hop M1X, said of the BBC’s decision: “This censorship sets a dangerous precedent for the future of the BBC, where it seems people are free to criticize any state in the world, even their own, but not Israel. Moreover, it seems you are free to recognize the plight of any group of people in the world, apart from Palestinian people. One can only wonder why.”

Lowkey was one of 19 artists, MPs, academics and lawyers who signed a letter to The GuardianPalestine on the BBC”). newspaper on 23 May 2011 protesting the edit as “an attack on the principles of free speech” (“

The film and television director Ken Loach was another signatory, and he also condemned the BBC’s final ruling this week, accusing the corporation of making “a perverse, political judgement.”

He added: “The BBC’s bias towards Israel is consistent, relentless and has been clearly documented by the Glasgow Media Group in Bad News from Israel and More Bad News from Israel. One small example: when Palestine was admitted to UNESCO, Radio 5 Live’s news bulletin in the afternoon had one interviewee to comment. Guess what? It was an Israeli. No Palestinian was allowed to speak. In general, the Palestinian voice is not heard.”

Palestinian voices missing from flagship BBC program

The absence of the Palestinian voice from the BBC’s considerable output is glaring. Even more so when compared to the frequency with which Israeli government ministers, opposition leaders and spokespersons are invited to air their views.

The Today program on BBC Radio 4 is promoted by the BBC as being its flagship news and current affairs program. Broadcast daily except Sundays, it is widely acknowledged as setting the political agenda for the day.

In the 12 months from February 2011 to February 2012, Today conducted at least six in-depth one-on-one interviews with Israeli spokespersons, including Danny Ayalon, Israel’s deputy foreign minister, and Tzipi Livni, the leader of Kadima, now Israel’s opposition party which previously led the government and ordered Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s 2008-09 massacre in Gaza. There was also an interview with the outgoing Israeli ambassador to London in June 2011 and with his successor three months later.

The outstanding characteristic of each interview is that the BBC’s heavyweight journalists, including John Humphreys and James Naughtie, both famous for their aggressive interviewing style, conducted them without challenge or interruption. Moreover, the interviews focused on the issues of “Israel’s security in the light of the Arab Spring” and “the threat of Iran.” Israel’s aggression towards the Palestinians and its daily violations of international law were not considered topics for discussion.

In that same period, not a single Palestinian leader or spokesperson was accorded a similar one-on-one interview on the Today program. While Israelis were interviewed, on average, once every two months, the Palestinian viewpoint was simply not sought.

This culture of promoting the Israeli perspective while denying the same rights to the Palestinians was vividly highlighted during the three day visit of Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas to London last month. Abbas met Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, as well as the Archbishop of Canterbury, the principal leader of the Church of England, to discuss the Jordanian-backed peace talks.

During a press conference with Abbas, Clegg condemned Israel’s West Bank settlements and described them as “an act of deliberate vandalism” to peace negotiations.

Yet on the Today programme, and across the BBC, it was as if Abbas’ visit had never happened. The BBC’s self-proclaimed flagship news and current affairs program made no mention of it over the three days he was in London, it found nothing newsworthy to report on from the press conference with Clegg, and there was certainly no long, uninterrupted interview with any Palestinian figures, despite this being the ideal opportunity to seek their views.

Even more incredibly, on the first day Abbas was in London, the Today program not only ignored him, but chose instead to interview Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, who happened to be in Manchester, for a full six minutes during which he wasn’t challenged on any of Israel’s well-documented violations.

Palestine “does not exist”

This is all shocking enough, but it doesn’t end there.

In the same letter in which he disputed the occupation, the BBC’s Paul Smith went on to say: “Palestine does not exist at the moment … ‘Palestine’ refers to a historical state or an aspiration.”

According to BBC journalists who have spoken to PSC, this is the BBC’s unofficial policy on “Palestine” and hence the desperate attempts to keep the word out of its broadcasts. An exception, they say, will be made during the Olympics when reporting on the efforts of the Palestinian competitors.

But this does not go far enough. In November, PSC wrote to the BBC to ask why Canon Giles Fraser, the recently departed Canon Chancellor of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, had been allowed to say he was visiting Israel during a report for the Sunday program when, in fact, the towns he visited were Bethlehem and East Jerusalem — both in the occupied West Bank.

We received this reply: “He didn’t refer to going to Palestine because at the moment there is no independent state of Palestine. The aim of the peace process is to establish a state of Palestine alongside a state of Israel but until this happens many people prefer not to use the word.”

So there you have it — as far as the BBC is concerned, Palestine is a dirty word. It’s controversial and using it may offend people who deny its existence.

Who benefits from the erasing of Palestine from our news reports? The same people who benefit from the BBC’s complete failure to place news events from the occupied territories in the context of occupation, blockade, house demolitions, land theft, arbitrary arrest and trial of civilians, including children, in military courts, the destruction of farmland and olive groves by settlers, air and land attacks and much more. The same people who benefit when the BBC consistently invites Israeli spokespeople onto its programs to voice their fears for Israeli security, without mentioning the daily terror of the Palestinians under occupation.

The result is coverage which is incomplete and misinformed at best and complicit in an illegal occupation at worst. Frighteningly, it is produced and broadcast by a media organization which commands the lion’s share of the audience in the UK and has a worldwide reach.

And, in the time of the Arab uprisings, when the BBC is covering the struggles of millions of people for freedom, its greatest shame is that it remains committed to editorial practices that make Palestine invisible.

Check out The Palestine Nakba by Nur Masalha, available from Zed Books to learn more about this topic

The Guardian: UK appoints first ambassador to Somalia in 21 years

2012-02-03T10:05:00.003Z

Britain has appointed its first ambassador to Somalia in 21 years, as the foreign secretary visited the country.

Arriving in the capital, Mogadishu, amid tight security on Thursday, William Hague appointed Matt Baugh as the senior UK Somalia representative. Baugh will be based in Kenya's capital, Nairobi, until security conditions permit the opening of an embassy in Mogadishu.

Picture from the British Office for Somalia

The UK is hosting a global conference on Somalia on 23 February. Hague described Somalia as "the world's most failed state".

The last British foreign secretary to visit Mogadishu was Douglas Hurd in 1992, when Somalia was collapsing into civil war.

Hague's 10-minute drive from the city's airport to the presidential
residence at Villa Somalia was made in a small fleet of heavily protected armoured vehicles.

He met the Somali president, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, and said the UK would help Somalia during a year of political transition.

Somalia descended into chaos after the dictator Mohamed Siad Barre was ousted in 1991. A western-backed transition government has been battling the al-Qaida-linked insurgents al-Shabaab for the past five years.

A 10,000-strong African Union force, Amisom, has helped drive al-Shabaab out of the capital, but much of the south remains in the hands of the rebels. Kenya and Ethiopia have both sent forces into Somalia to battle al-Shabaab.

The removal of militants from the capital, combined with the offensives by neighbouring states, have raised hopes of defeating al-Shabaab, although Mogadishu remains prone to almost daily bomb attacks.

"We need to step this up," Hague was quoted as saying by news agencies. "We are not complacent about it."

In 2010 the MI5 director-general, Jonathan Evans, warned that it was "only a matter of time" before terrorists trained in Somali camps inspired acts of violence on the streets of Britain.

Hague said: "For the security of the UK, it matters a lot for Somalia to become a more stable place. Some progress has been made on this, partly because of the progress of the Amisom force.

"One of the objectives of our conference in London is to strengthen counter-terrorism co-operation to make it easier for countries in this region to disrupt terrorist networks, to disrupt their financing and the movement of potential terrorists."

Among the officials meeting Hague was the mayor of Mogadishu, Mohamoud Ahmed Nur. He warned that with 350,000 Somalis currently living in the Britain, it could not afford to ignore his country's problems.

He said disaffected young British Somalis were leaving to train in al-Shabaab terror camps before returning to the UK.

"Whatever happens in Mogadishu, in Somalia, will happen in Great Britain," he said, according to the Press Association. "We have interlocking interests.

"There are Somali British fighting alongside al-Qaida and al-Shabaab. They may go and they may come back. Those who leave school with no qualifications, those who go to prison, they say: 'Why should I stay in Britain?' So they go and they fight. They have revenge in their hearts."

Hague's visit came as Kenyan and Somali troops seized two towns in southern Somalia from al-Shabaab in an attempt to consolidate control of border areas ahead of an eventual push on rebel strongholds, a Kenyan military spokesman said.

There are six diplomatic missions in Mogadishu, representing Djibouti, Ethiopia, Libya, Sudan, Turkey and Yemen. The UN's special envoy to Somalia moved to Mogadishu last month.

David Smith in Johannesburg guardian.co.uk, Thursday 2 February 2012 13.48 GMT

Read more about the current political situation in Somalia in Getting Somalia Wrong by Mary Harper, BBC Journalist.

Available for Review and Inspection on http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/getting-somalia-wrong.

CNN: Green wing: eco friendly flying?

2012-02-02T17:41:00.000Z

(CNN) -- Next time you board a plane and jet off on holiday to somewhere hot, spare a thought for the fact that by flying there you are probably helping to make that somewhere even hotter.

The aviation industry has become a notable contributor to atmospheric carbon pollution -- pollution that is in turn helping to accelerate global warming and climate change.

Every day, according to the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), over 85,000 flights take off from airports around the world. Those flights burn 130 million tonnes of fuel annually, a figure that is projected to rise to 300 million tonnes by 2015, and 450 million tonnes by 2050.

To give a specific example, a single trans-Atlantic flight will consume a whopping 60,000 liters of fuel -- more than the average motorist uses in 50 years -- and add approximately 140 tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

Altogether it is calculated the aviation industry is responsible for 0.55 billion tonnes of CO2 pollution annually, some two percent of global carbon emissions.

While this is considerably less than the 18 percent contributed by the motor industry, the detrimental impact of even that small percentage is undeniable.

Nor is it simply carbon dioxide that is the problem. Air travel produces significant levels of other greenhouse gases such as Nitrogen Oxide -- 750 kilograms of it on the aforementioned trans-Atlantic flight -- while the damaging effects of those pollutants are amplified by the fact that they are being emitted at high-altitude.

Indeed IPCC scientists have estimated that greenhouse gas pollution from high-flying jets is up to four times more damaging to the environment than identical levels of pollution emitted at ground level.

Quantum shift

None of this is especially earth-shattering news. For over a decade the ecologically damaging aspects of flying have been acknowledged and publicized, and the airline industry -- partly of its own volition, partly under pressure from governments, green lobby groups and public opinion -- has taken significant steps to address the issue.

According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA) jet engines today are 40 percent more fuel-efficient than those designed in the 1960s, with pollutants such as soot and sulphur now almost completely eliminated from jet exhaust.

Carbon-emissions trading is becoming increasingly widespread within the industry, as is carbon off-setting, the latter involving passengers paying a voluntary surcharge to help finance the planting of trees or other green projects and so balance out the environmental damage caused by their journey.

Many airlines -- Virgin being one example -- are actively developing bio-fuel technologies in an attempt to reduce their reliance on carbon-emitting fossil fuels, while a great deal of work is being done in the area of improving air-traffic management.

In particular aviation planners are focusing on ways of cutting the amount of time planes spend queuing to take off and land, in the process burning large and unnecessary amounts of fuel (IATA estimates that airlines could cut their annual CO2 emissions by 12 percent if air-traffic control operations were more efficient).

While such initiatives are certainly helping to reduce aviation's environmental footprint, however, the rapid growth of the airline industry, with an ever-increasing number of flights catering to an ever-increasing demand for air travel, means that their impact is at best limited.

Many commentators are arguing that what is needed to tackle the problem are not simply measures such as those outlined above, but rather a quantum-shift in the technology of air travel, with a radical re-think not only in how planes are designed, but also what they are actually made of.

Only by re-configuring the technological basics, they argue, can the airline industry square the circle of meeting increased demand for air travel while at the same time reducing the environmental damage caused by such travel.

Laminar flow

What sort of technological innovations are being considered?

One area that is attracting an increasing amount of interest is "laminar flow control." This involves reducing the friction between the aircraft and the surrounding air, thereby lessening the plane's drag and making its fuel consumption more efficient.

For optimum flying performance the thin glove of air that hugs the surface of the aircraft should flow as smoothly as possible (something aeronautical engineers refer to as "laminar flow").

In practice, however, the air closest to the aircraft, especially around the wings, becomes extremely disturbed during flight. This in turn creates localized turbulence that accounts for up to 40 percent of the plane's drag.

To rectify this engineers have been investigating ways of improving laminar flow, with one idea being to install thousands of tiny holes along the aircraft's wings.

Fans within the wings would then suck the disturbed layer of air tight back against the wing surface, thereby restoring a smooth airflow and cutting drag by anything up to 20 percent.

A variation on this theme, first explored way back in the 1960s and pioneered more recently by U.S. commercial pilot David Birkenstock, is to combine a system of laminar flow control with modifications in the actual shape of the plane, specifically the substitution of the traditional tapered rear fuselage with one shaped like a cone.

Such a modification, combined with an effective laminar flow system, could, it has been estimated, reduce an aircraft's power requirement by anything up to 60 percent, with a concomitant reduction in fuel usage.

Flying wing

Revolutionary changes in fuselage shape are at the heart of another innovative technological option, the so-called "blended wing body" or "flying wing".

Here the alterations are more fundamental. Instead of the traditional cylindrical fuselage with wings extending off it to either side, the flying wing, as the name suggests, comprises two vast V-Shaped wings with engines, cockpit and cabin incorporated into them.

The design was actually mooted as early as the 1940s by U.S. aircraft manufacturer Northrup, and has already been realized in the field of military aviation in the form of the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber (Boeing are currently working with the US Air Force on a similarly shaped bomber, the X-48B).

Whereas military interest in the design has been driven by its radar-defying properties, it also has significant commercial possibilities due to its dramatic drag-reducing (and thus fuel reducing) potential.

Unfortunately the flying wing, as with a workable system of laminar flow control, is still a decade if not more away from achieving any sort of viable commercial application (not to mention billions of dollars of R & D investment).

A far more promising, short-term area of technological development, and one that is already bearing fruit, involves the materials from which aircraft are actually constructed. Specifically, the replacement of aluminum with lightweight composite materials such as plastic carbon fibre.

Composite materials

"Advanced materials are a huge issue in aviation at the moment, and have massive potential," Paul Everett, Director of Communications for the Society of British Aerospace Companies, told CNN.

"The advantage of such materials is that they are extremely light and thus substantially reduce fuel use."

Approximately 25 percent of the Airbus-380 is already made of composite materials, and it is estimated that percentage will rise to 50 percent for both the Airbus-350 and Boeing 787.

"This is a technology that is deliverable now and that will address a significant part of the polluting issue," says Everett.

"Within the next decade we could well see a 100 percent composite aircraft. It is a technology that will absolutely be the key differentiator for major aircraft programmes of the future, dividing those companies and countries that have the capability to employ it, and those that don't."

Technology clearly has a huge role to play in reducing the detrimental environmental impact of flying.

Despite that, there are many who argue that unless mechanisms are found to actually reduce the numbers of people who fly, no amount of high-tech innovation -- or, for that matter, carbon off-setting, carbon trading or air-management streamlining -- is going to genuinely improve the situation.

"We simply have to tackle the growth issue, "says Richard Dyer, aviation campaigner for Friends of the Earth.

"To its credit the aviation industry is making improvements in technology and efficiency. Unfortunately, however, those improvements are far outstripped by the increase in air traffic.

"Until we find a way of reducing demand, most of the environmental problems associated with flying are going to remain unresolved."

POSTED: 1306 GMT (2106 HKT), June 8, 2007

By Paul Sussman for CNN

Read more about the impact of flying on the environment in Peter McManner's Fly And Be Damned available for review or inspection on http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/fly-and-be-damned

Charles Taylor’s Interminable Trial: Dragging on and spinning out

2012-02-02T17:36:00.001Z

From Zed Author Colin M. Waugh

Thisweek Charles Taylor’s defence team petitioned the Special Court for SierraLeone to allow a reopening of the almost six-year long case against theirclient, due to the publication late last year of the findings of a UN Panel ofExperts Report which, the defence states, supports its so-called “privateenterprise” theory of the behaviour of mercenaries generally and Liberians inparticular, in West Africa’s recent civil wars.

Asection in the December 7 report entitled “Liberian Mercenaries and the IvorianMilitia,” refers to the activities of Liberian mercenaries in last year’s civilwar in Cote d’Ivoire and the non-complicity of the current Liberian governmentof Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in their activities. It refers to the porous nature ofthe borders of Liberia and its neighbours and the fact that mercenaryparticipation by Liberian (and other) combatants is an endemic and persistentphenomenon in the region, something that is often hard for national securityforces to effectively prevent.

Byimplication, the defense would allege, the prosecution case that there wasdeliberate design by Charles Taylor and forces under his command to wage waragainst Liberia’s neighbour in the late 1990s and to commit war crimes againstthe Sierra Leonean people is weakened by the release of the new report. Taylor’s defence thus could argue that Liberianmercenary forces might have easily acted without his knowledge and authorityduring the period of the Sierra Leonean conflict that was under scrutiny in thetrial.

Thisis not the first such request for a re-opening of the Taylor trial by thedefence team. On December 21 last year a similar request was made, this timerelating to a Wikileaks report about collaboration between the United Statesand former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo as well as Obasanjo’s supportin 2002-03 for Liberian rebel forces opposed to then President Taylor’s regime.The request for a re-opening of the trial was rejected.

Whateverthe court’s ruling in relation to the most recent application by the defence,the long-drawn out nature of the Taylor trial and its enormous cost to the internationaltaxpayer are not in dispute.

The Taylor trial has been characterized by delays of all kinds, fromchanges of counsel, to procedural objections, to large numbers of witnessescalled and cross-examined by both sides. There have been extensive testimoniesand cross-examinations which lasted far longer than anticipated at the outset.In June 2007,Charles Taylor sacked his defence representation and hired a new counsel and completelegal team, which itself delayed the proceedings by around six months.

Nine months after the official closure ofthe trial the court has still failed to announce a verdict in the eleven countsagainst the accused relating to his actions in the decade-long war in Liberia’sneighbour Sierra Leone, a conflict which itself ended some ten years ago; therelease of the judgment has been subject to numerous delays, and indeed afterits eventual announcement, it is believed that an appeal by the losing side isalmost certain meaning a likely further extension of what is fast-becoming a farcicallyexpensive and wasteful legal process.

During the proceedings Taylor has received legal assistance of $100,000 per month, which together with the location of the court in one ofEurope’s wealthiest capital cities, and the five-star calibre of the legalrepresentation of both sides, has contributed to making the trial an enormouslycostly affair, estimated at some $30–$35 millionper year. By the time of its conclusion, it may finally end up costing theinternational taxpayer (mostly in the United States) over $200 million.

Read more about the trial and Charles Taylor
in ColinWaugh’s new book:
“Charles Taylor and Liberia: Ambition and Atrocity in Africa’s Lone Star State”

The Daily Beast: Somalia Pirates Adopt Troubling New Tactics

2012-02-02T17:01:00.001Z

The stunning rescue by Navy SEALs of two hostages in Somalia points to a worrying new trend of pirates leaving their ships for vicious land-based attacks. Expert Jay Bahadur on what’s next.

The deployment of an elite unit of US Navy SEALs to a remote airstrip in central Somalia last Tuesday night was an unprecedented move on the part of the United States. Acting under explicit orders from the White House, in less than an hour the team had freed aid workers American Jessica Buchanan and Dane Poul Hagen Thisted from their harrowing three-month captivity in the hands of Somali pirates, leaving eight of the pair’s captors dead in their wake.

Not only was it the first time U.S. military boots had touched Somali soil since pulling out of the war-wracked nation in 1993, the daring rescue occurred more than 150 miles inland, a place few expect to find high-seas marauders.

Yet kidnappings on land are increasingly becoming part of the Somali pirate MO, which has traditionally consisted of ocean-based attacks on commercial vessels transiting through the Gulf of Aden shipping choke point. Hijacked vessels are typically held hostage off the lawless coast for months on end; in the most tragic case to date, the Iceberg 1, a Panamanian-flagged cargo ship, has been held for 22 months, with no clear end in sight for her 23 crewmembers.

While the shift to land-based kidnappings may seem, well, very un-piratelike, it has been a logical reaction to the drop in the success rate of hijackings. Viable seaborne targets are declining by the day, as vessel owners and charterers increasingly turn to armed guards to protect their assets. As of yet, pirates have failed to board, let alone successfully commandeer a vessel so equipped, and gangs tend to abort attacks upon the mere sighting of an armed security team.

Looking year on year, the drop-off is striking. In the last three months of 2011, pirates managed to hijack just four vessels, a decline made all the more stark when compared with the 17 ships taken over the same period in 2010. The financial ramifications for pirate organizations have been significant; with their coffers running low, the desperate and increasingly violent hijackers have turned inland for fresh victims.

A national guard patrols the coast of Somalia, March 30, 2011, Tony Karumba, AFP / Getty Images

Foreigners on Somali soil are indeed proving easier prey. Over the last few months Somali pirates have held a number of foreigners for ransom, including two Spanish Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) workers, British vacationer Judith Tebbutt, and, most recently, American journalist Michael Scott Moore, who was kidnapped on the same road as Buchanan and Thisted only a week ago while researching a book on piracy. Paul and Rachel Chandler, two British yachters kidnapped in 2009 and held in Somalia for 388 days before garnering a $1 million ransom, were perhaps responsible for triggering the realization that Western hostages are supremely valuable commodities, whether accompanied by an oil tanker or not.

While Somali pirates are often described as a disorganized bunch of ragtag gunmen wielding rusty AK-47s, they are relatively sophisticated criminals; their weapons may require a bit of tape and WD-40, but they possess a network of experienced ransom negotiators at their fingertips, and have successfully brought in hundreds of millions of dollars in ransoms and sent the multibillion-dollar shipping industry into a panic. The latest diversification of their revenue stream is but another example of pirates adapting their tactics.

Pirates hardly follow a nondiscrimination policy with respect to the treatment of hostages, often targeting citizens of countries deemed too robust in capturing, prosecuting, and in some cases employing deadly force against the gangs.

In some instances, pirate organizations have begun to move up the supply chain, abandoning the troublesome business of kidnapping by directly purchasing hostages from less experienced inland gangs for cents on the ransom dollar. Such was the case with both Judith Tebbutt and the late Marie Dedieu, kidnapped by opportunistic thugs while vacationing in the northern Kenyan resort town of Lamu late last year. Dedieu, a diabetic cancer patient with a serious heart condition, was literally dragged out of her wheelchair, and, left without critical medication, died within weeks of her abduction. Her kidnappers opted against cutting their losses by attempting to ransom Dedieu’s body to her bereaved family.

Tebbutt, however, remains alive and captive in central Somalia, after a pirate gang purchased her from her abductors. More recently, pirates paid $200,000 to al-Shabaab Islamist militants who last October kidnapped Montserrat Serra and Blanca Thiebaud, two Spanish MSF workers, from the Dadaab refugee camp in northern Kenya.

Jan 31, 2012 8:59 AM EST

Read more about the current political situation in Somalia in Getting Somalia Wrong by Mary Harper, BBC Journalist.

Available for Review and Inspection on http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/getting-somalia-wrong.

AllAfrica: Liberia: Prosecuting for Crimes Against Humanity - Why Not Nation, Too?

2012-02-02T16:51:00.000Z

That life - any, yea, the world - is not fair is evinced in various ways. One of those ways has to do with the international community's selective prosecution of those who commit war crimes and crimes against humanity in various parts of the globe. It's mind-boggling that the decision-makers of the world would vehemently fight for and seek the prosecution of certain perpetrators of crimes against humanity, while at the same time wink at - and, sometimes, out rightly reject or oppose - the prosecution of others, including those whose crimes are well-known and well-documented.

A case in point is Liberia, a country whose people experienced some of the worst acts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The civil-war period produced notorious perpetrators - many of them still alive - whose nefarious words and deeds are well-known, well-remembered and well-documented, both nationally and internationally. Yet, these individuals not only move around freely, but also openly glory in their deeds. Besides, those who have the power to effectuate the establishment of a war crimes trial are unwilling and unready to stand up for justice. Is it because this place is Liberia?

Take, for instance, the recent development in Kenya. It has been announced that the International Criminal Court in The Hague will prosecute some Kenyans - comprising senior politicians, government officials and business people - who are believed to be the most responsible for the post-poll violence that engulfed the country in 2007 and 2008, causing the death of some 1,200 people and leaving hundreds of thousands homeless, following the December 2007 elections. These individuals are associated with President Mwai Kibaki's Party of National Unity and Prime Minister Raila Odinga's Orange Democratic Movement. The unfathomable aspect of the news of their prosecution is that these individuals are to be prosecuted for being responsible for post-election violence - yes, just post-election violence - yet, individuals who committed serious war crimes and crimes against humanity in Liberia go Scott-free. If the International Court is prosecuting perpetrators of post-election violence, why aren't we prosecuting those whose criminal and atrocious deeds are so well-known and well-documented? Why is this so? Is it because this is Liberia, and not Kenya?

Let's look at Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone went through a ten-year civil war. At the end, a war crimes court was set up to prosecute those playing greater role in the carnage and mayhem that consumed the country during that period. In fact, the international community was at the forefront of the campaign that effected the creation of the prosecution process. Ex-President Taylor is being prosecuted before the court. Here, in Liberia, we experienced a fourteen-year war, a period during which warlords and/or their foot soldiers unleashed terror on the population, committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. However, there is no war crimes trial for individuals whose war-time records are so glaringly fiendish. If Sierra Leone can prosecute its war crimes perpetrators, why isn't Liberia doing the same? The annoyingly unbearable part is that some of those who should be thinking or talking about defending themselves before a war crimes tribunal are the very ones anxious to run for office or to be appointed to public posts. Isn't this insulting? Isn't this what has caused some to opine that Liberians don't know the essence and role of justice in such an undertaking? Isn't this the mindset that has caused some to glory in their fiendish words and deeds, suggesting that crimes pay? Why should only Sierra Leoneans feel proud in prosecuting their war criminals, while Liberians walk with shame for protecting war criminals? Is it because this place is Liberia and that country is Sierra Leone?

Furthermore, at the end of the Rwandan civil war, a war during which heinous crimes were committed, a vigorous campaign for the establishment of a tribunal to prosecute those most responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity was launched. Actively participating in the campaign was the international community. In the case of Liberia, no such campaign or seriousness is there. The perpetrators are moving around remorselessly, with some of them calling themselves honorable men and women, instead of criminal and dishonorable men and women. Why isn't Liberia following Rwanda's example? Is it because this country is Liberia and that country is Rwanda?

Besides, in 2004, the International Criminal Court began investigation into reports of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The trial has seen the investigation of warlords like Jean-Piere Bemba, Germain Katanga and Matthieu Ngudjolo Chui. If this can happen to the DRC, why is it not happening to Liberia? Why does justice continue to weep in Liberia without any powerful individual or institution coming to its consolation or rescue? Why is justice treated like this when it comes to Liberia? Isn't this annoyingly funny? Is it because this place is Liberia and that country is the DRC?

In 2003, the International Criminal Court announced investigation into war crimes allegedly committed in the Central African Republic between 2002 and 2003. Why the Central African Republic, but not Liberia? Is it because this place is Liberia?

Even in Sudan, in connection with the Darfur crisis, a crisis going on, individuals, including President Omar al-Bashir, have been indicted and prosecution has been sought and supported. Yet, in the case of Liberia, it seems the international community is telling us to sweep everything under the rug. But, why? Is it because this place is Liberia and that country is Sudan?

Similarly, in connection with the Ivorian crisis, President Laurent Gbagbo was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity and sent to The Hague for prosecution. In Liberia, suspected war criminals live freely. It makes one to ask, "Why?" Is it because this land is called Liberia and that country is called the Ivory Coast?

Also, in the case of the Libyan conflict, the late Muammar Gaddafi was accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. He was even indicted by the International Criminal Court, and an arrest warrant was issued. However, when it comes to Liberia, no one in the international community seems to have any interest in prosecuting individuals suspected of violating humanitarian laws. This is the kind of thing that can almost want to make someone stand on Mt. Wologisi or Mt. Nimba and shout at the highest pitch of their voice, "WHY NOT LIBERIA, TOO?"

To conclude this article, I will return to the Kenyan prosecution news. Crimes committed in post-election violence are prosecuted in Kenya, but war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Liberia are treated like virtues. Why do these known perpetrators continue to defy justice? Why do they continue to lord over us? Why do they think they are some gods that must be feared and venerated? Why do they feel that their vices are virtues, for which they should be told: "Thank You"? This is baffling! This is insulting! This is incomprehensive! This would be funny, if it were not connected to a serious issue - the need to dispense justice. Oh, I forgot. This country is called Liberia.

It is my prayer and hope that the gods and our Ancestors will one day have mercy and put these killers and destroyers in their proper places - the defendant's box before a war crimes tribunal.

Believe me, my people. We will never stop following the issues.

Liberian Press By Paul Y. Harry, 2 February 2012

Read more about Charles Taylor and Liberia at http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/charles-taylor-and-liberia

AllAfrica: Liberia: Charles Taylor's Lawyers Apply to Reopen Defense Case

2012-02-02T16:49:00.000Z

Former Liberian President Charles Taylor at the UN-backed court. (Photo Courtesy Liberian Observer)

Charles Taylor's defense lawyers have made a request for judges to allow the former Liberian president to reopen his defense, almost one year after arguments in the case were concluded.

The motion, filed on January 31, 2012, requests that the defense be allowed to "re-open its case in order to seek admission of Panel of Experts Report on Liberia."

The motion relates to a December 7, 2011 Panel of Experts Report on Liberia that discusses the participation of Liberian mercenaries in the conflict in neighboring Ivory Coast. Taylor's defense lawyers seek to submit in evidence Section III of the report titled "Liberian Mercenaries and Ivorian Militia." This section, defense lawyers argue "describes the continuing phenomenon and underlying causes of mercenary activities in West Africa."

According to defense lawyers, this section of the report supports the defense "private enterprise" theory that during Sierra Leone's 11 year conflict, many fighters in Liberia exploited the conflict for personal gain.

The report, defense lawyers say, does not blame the current Liberian government for Liberian mercenaries crossing into Ivory Coast in 2010 and 2011 and this, they say, contrasts the Prosecution's argument that any fighters who fought in Sierra Leone and other neighboring countries were sent and controlled by Taylor while he served as Liberian president.

During the conduct of hearings in Taylor's trial, witnesses, including those who were part of Taylor's security apparatus, testified for the prosecution that the former Liberian president sent them to provide support to rebel forces in Sierra Leone. Some witnesses also testified about being sent by Taylor to fight in Ivory Coast and Guinea. Taylor, on his part, argued that porous borders in the West African sub-region and the illicit flow of small arms made it very easy for fighters to move across borders without being controlled by any persons in authority. Taylor's defense also argued during the trial that Liberian fighters who fought in Sierra Leone did so only for their own personal gain and as President of Liberia, Taylor did not have any knowledge of such movement of Liberian fighters into Sierra Leone.

In this present motion, Taylor's defense lawyers now argue this report supports their argument that during the Sierra Leonean conflict, it was possible for fighters to cross from Liberia into Sierra Leone "without being under the direction and control of Mr. Taylor and without the implicit approval of the Government of Liberia."

"Additionally...free agents or mercenaries did so in pursuit of personal profit, rather than in furtherance of a sweeping joint criminal enterprise or aiding and abetting scheme," defense lawyers have submitted.

Defense lawyers pointed out in their motion that the UN Report specifically names Ibrahim Bah, Benjamin Yeaten, Zig Zag Marzah and Sweet Candy" as persons involved in mercenary activities in Ivory Coast. These individuals, defense lawyers say, are continuing to exploit conflict situations in the West African sub-region for personal benefit. Of particular note, "the fact that Prosecution Witness Zig Zag Marzah has participated in the Ivorian Conflict as a free agent is particularly relevant to his overall credibility - on the witness stand, he seemed unable to act unless he was instructed to do so by Mr. Taylor," the defense motion states.

Defense lawyers now say this report establishes that mercenaries can easily move between Liberia and Ivory Coast without being intercepted by the Liberian government, that command structures in mercenary activities are loosely defined, and that the present Liberian government has demonstrated inadequate response tomercenary activities.

In asking judges to allow them to reopen their case, defense lawyers for Taylor argue that the present report be admitted in evidence because it could not have been obtained by the team during the conduct of its case considering that it was only presented to the UN Security Council in December 2011. They argue further that the probative value of the report is significant and that it poses no threat or concerns toTaylor's rights to a fair and expeditious trial.

This is the second time in two months that defense lawyers for Mr. Taylor have requested that the former Liberian president be allowed to reopen his defense in view of new evidence. On December 9, 2011, Taylor's defense lawyers made a similar request after the release of two WikiLeaks cables suggesting that there was cooperation between former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo and the United States Government to remove Taylor from Liberia with promise of asylum and immunity from prosecution if he were to leave willingly and that Obasanjo provided support to Liberian rebels who were fighting to oust Taylor from Liberia.

The judges, however, on December 21, 2011 rejected the defense application.

With the most recent application that has been made by the defense, the prosecution will have a chance to file a response, with an option to the defense to file a reply before the judges issue a decision on the motion.

Judges have taken several months since the conclusion of hearings in March 2011 to prepare their final judgment, which will determine whether Taylor is guilty or not of the charges against him. It is expected that such judgment will be delivered shortly.

By Alpha Sesay, 1 February 2012

Read more about Charles Taylor and Liberia at http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/charles-taylor-and-liberia