Realism View of Apartheid South Africa

Image via Wikipedia

Apartheid, a form of racial discrimination institutionalized in South Africa, was first enacted into law in 1948. Apartheid means separateness. The masterminds of white South African racial superiority and idea of separateness were realists. Realism drove apartheid’s foreign and domestic policies, and in particular the notion of the ‘Total Onslaught’. [1] Thus apartheid was born during the first phase of Hans Morgenthau’s “Politics Amongst Nations”. United Nations investigators, human rights groups, and critics of Israel have likened Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to apartheid. Even former U.S. president Jimmy Carter has used it in the title of his book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

The African National Congress

It can be argued that the African National Congress of South Africa to which Nelson Mandela belonged before and after his release was more of a socialist and a nationalist movement than a political movement from 1912 till 27 April 1994 when it replaced the apartheid system. Thus, the ANC espoused communism as its driving force in its fight against White supremacy. The African National Congress (ANC) fought for what Frantz Fanon termed “the wretched of the earth”. Having mandate from the people, the South Africa state, under Mandela, forged alliance with the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (the Tripartite Alliance) while having working relationship with the South African National Civics Organization. This strengthened the state and gave the government greater legitimacy to overcome unrests and strikes by students and workers.

Internal protests and insurgency, as well as boycotts by some Western nations and institutions, led to the regime's eventual willingness to negotiate a peaceful transition to majority rule.[2]

South Africa’s white minority government has been wary of the political ideology of the ANC before outlawing it and imposing restrictions on its top echelons the likes of Mandela and Walter Sisulu who received prolonged jail terms. Accumulation of wealth by the capitalist white regime infuriated leaders of the ANC and their followers. This deep-rooted resentment culminated in the ANC’s affirmation of Marxist ideology as its guiding principle. On the other hand, the minority white regime, beset by fear and the desire to dominate or be dominated by the majority blacks within South Africa and within its surroundings (neighboring countries), embarked on competition, security enhancement, and hegemonic war resulting in protracted engagements.

Some of the causes that led to the break-up of apartheid include the rise of nationalism (deep causes) among people of color, white leaders’ mercurial temperament (intermediate causes), and the drastic rise of consciousness (immediate causes) among the marginalized majority population.

Underlying Causes of Apartheid’s Collapse:[3]
1. 1955-UN disapproval of South Africa's apartheid politics.
2. 1961-South Africa withdraws from British Commonwealth.
3. 1962-UN General Assembly adopts resolution condemning South Africa.
4. 1964-British Labor Party installs weapon embargo against South Africa.
5. 1966-UN deprives South Africa of Namibia.
6. 1971-South Africa national debt hits 5.45 billion.
7. 1976-UN General Assembly condemns apartheid in South Africa.
8. 1980-UN Security Council calls for South Africa to free Nelson Mandela.
9. 1985-President Reagan orders sanctions against South Africa.
10. 1986-President Reagan criticizes South African state of emergency.
11. 1986-U.S. Anti-Apartheid Act.
12. 1993-UN lifts remaining economic sanctions against South Africa.

Realist Apartheid versus Communist Black Struggle

Mandela turned out to be a true political realist at the time of guiding his nation’s transition to democracy. Because South Africa was isolated politically and its economy crumbling, F.W. De Klerk felt that there was no other option other than releasing Mandela and negotiating with him for a change in the nation’s political landscape. [4] The bitter fight between liberalism and communism gave birth to liberalism with the birth of the Liberal Party of South Africa (LPSA) in 1953. Unfortunately, fifteen years later, it was forced to halt its operation after the National Party (NP) government passed the Prohibition of Improper Interference Act, which made non-racial political parties illegal. The main aim of the Liberal Party was to establish a free and democratic non-racial society in South Africa. [5] It took another 26 years before South Africa came to realize, at least on paper, what the Liberal Party had envisaged: free non-racial elections, a democratic constitution, and a bill of rights.[6]

Policies of the LPSA [7]

The Liberal Party was a non-racial party based on the following principles:
1. Respect for the dignity of every human being irrespective of race, color or creed, and the maintenance of his/her fundamental rights;
2. Every human being to have the right to develop to the fullest extent of which he/she is capable consistent with the rights of others;
3. The maintenance of the rule of law;
4. That no person be debarred from responsibility and participation in government by reason only of race, color or creed.

Analysis

In the context of international Relations, neither the realist thoughts of the apartheid regime of the National Party nor the communist ideological foundations of the African National Congress were compatible with the demands of South Africa’s multi-racial society.

Sources

[1] In Defense of Realism: Confessions of a Fallen Idealist by Hussein Solomon; Published in African Security Review Vol. 5 No. 2, 1996
http://www.iss.co.za/pubs/ASR/5No2/5No2/InDefence.html

[2] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sf.html

[3] Today in South Africa, http://www.historyorb.com/countries/south-africa

[4] Not a Mandela Moment by Gwynne Dyer, The Telegraph, Calcutta, India,
Monday, November 22, 2210
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1101122/jsp/opinion/story_13183421.jsp

[5] Liberalism in South Africa, http://www.factbites.com/topics/Liberalism-in-South-Africa

[6] The Liberal Party of South Africa, Hayes Family of South Africa, http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/liberal1.htm

[7] The Liberal Party of South Africa, Background to the South African political situation: 1948 onwards
http://paton.ukzn.ac.za/liberalparty835.aspx

Clash of Civilization or Clash of Perceptions and Ideas?

Image via Wikipedia

To Samuel Huntington, it is “the True Clash of Civilization” while, according to learned Muslim scholars, it is a “Clash of Perceptions or Ideas”. Polly Toynbee’s argument, “what binds a globalized force of some extremists from many continents is a united hatred of Western values that seems to them to spring from Judeo-Christianity”, is true because these are few individuals who harbor hatred and not all Muslims. The Qur’an states …nearest in friendship to Muslims are those who say “we are Christians”. Polly is the granddaughter of historian Arnold Toynbee. The problems in the Muslim world stem from corrupt rulers and it has nothing to do with Islam. Islam means peace. In Islam, religion and state cannot be separated. The Qur’an is a guiding force for Muslims. The true meaning of Islamic Sharia has been misunderstood in the West. Sharia incorporates divinely inspired rules, prophetic insights, human philosophical thoughts, and jurisprudence.

Some societies practice Polyandry (Greek: poly - many, Andros - man) refers to a form of marriage in which a woman has two or more husbands at the same time. This is prohibited in Islam. Sororal polygyny is a type of marriage in which two or more sisters share a husband. In Islam, this type of polygyny is specifically prohibited. Reference from Quran (Chapter 4, verse 23): Forbidden unto you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your father's sisters, and your mother's sisters, and your brother's daughters and your sister's daughters, and your foster-mothers, and your foster-sisters, and your mothers-in-law, and your step-daughters who are under your protection (born) of your women unto whom ye have gone in - but if ye have not gone in unto them, then it is no sin for you (to marry their daughters) - and the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins. And (it is forbidden unto you) that ye should have two sisters together, except what hath already happened (of that nature) in the past (before this revelation). Lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

Mormons of the U.S. practice plural marriage-a form of polygyny. King or Father Jigme Singye Wang-chuck of Bhutan is married to four queens (all of whom are sisters) and has five sons and five daughters.
Polygamy Practiced by Revered Men in the Bible
The great Hebrew patriarchs equally revered by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - Abraham, Moses, Jacob, David, and Solomon, to name a few – were polygamous. According to the Bible:
Abraham had three wives (Genesis 16:1, 16:3, 25:1)
Moses had two wives (Exodus 2:21, 18:1-6; Numbers 12:1)
Jacob had four wives (Genesis 29:23, 29:28, 30:4, and 30:9)
David had at least 18 wives (1 Samuel 18:27, 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:3, 3:4-5, 5:13, 12:7-8, 12:24, 16:21-23)
Solomon had 700 wives (1 Kings 11:3).
Polygamy in the Quran
The Muslim scripture, the Quran, is the only known world scripture to explicitly limit polygamy and place strict restrictions upon its practice: … marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one.

(Quran 4:3)

The primary purpose of marriage in Islam is regulating sexuality within marriage as well as creating an atmosphere for the continuity and extension of the family. This is in sharp contrast to growing trends on marriage in the West. In recent decades, there are more alternatives to marriage than ever before. Cohabitation - living together outside of marriage - has greatly increased among young, never-married adults, as well as the divorced. More American women are having children outside of marriage, ignoring the traditionally sanctioned sequence of marriage followed by childbearing.

Also, marriage and polygamy in Islam is a matter of mutual consent. No one can force a woman to marry a married man. Islam simply permits polygamy; it neither forces nor requires it. Besides, a woman may stipulate that her husband must not marry any other woman as a second wife in her prenuptial contract. The point that is often misunderstood in the West is that women in other cultures - especially African and Islamic - do not necessarily look at polygamy as a sign of women’s degradation. Consequently, to equate polygamy with degrading women is an ethnocentric judgment of other societies.

Even though we see the clear permissibility of polygamy in Islam, its actual practice is quite rare in many Muslim societies. Some researchers estimate no more than 2% of the married males practice polygamy. Most Muslim men feel they cannot afford the expense of maintaining more than one family. Even those who are financially capable of looking after additional families are often reluctant due to the psychological burdens of handling more than one wife. One can safely say that the number of polygamous marriages in the Muslim world is much less than the number of extramarital affairs in the West. In other words, contrary to prevalent notion, men in the Muslim world today are more strictly monogamous than men in the Western world.

Islamic teachings on abortion
Muslims regard abortion as wrong and haram (forbidden), but many accept that it may be permitted in certain cases. All schools of Muslim law accept that abortion is permitted if continuing the pregnancy would put the mother's life in real danger. This is the only reason accepted for abortion after 120 days of the pregnancy. Sir Arnold Toynbee, great-grandfather of Polly Toynbee on Islam:

Two conspicuous sources of danger - one psychological and the other material - in the present relations of this cosmopolitan proletariat, i.e., [westernized humanity] with the dominant element in our modern Western society are race consciousness and alcohol; and in the struggle with each of these evils the Islamic spirit has a service to render which might prove, if it were accepted, to be of high moral and social value.

The extinction of race consciousness between Muslims is one of the outstanding moral achievements of Islam, and in the contemporary world there is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue ... It is conceivable that the spirit of Islam might be the timely reinforcement which would decide this issue in favor of tolerance and peace.

Islam and Homosexuality
1. The Hanafite School (currently seen mainly in South and Eastern Asia) teaches that no physical punishment is warranted.
2. The Hanabalites, (widely followed in the Arab world) teach that severe punishment is warranted.
3. The Sha'fi school of thought (also seen in the Arab world) requires a minimum of 4 adult male witnesses before a person can be found guilty of a homosexual act.
Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi of the ISNA said:

Homosexuality is a moral disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin and corruption... No person is born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar or murderer. People acquire these evil habits due to a lack of proper guidance and education.
The near or total seclusion of women is alien to the prophetic period.

Islam and Democracy
“One of main reasons of the West fearing political Islam is that most of the leaders in Arab nations are Islamists — groups that embraces a political view of Islam and rejects secular forms of government. The West also feels that these groups are anti-Western. But religious ideals within Islam always favor democracy. The holy Quran contains a number of ideas that support democratic ideals. In fact, sharia applies to all aspects of religious, political, social, and private life. So this leads us to agree that political Islam has all the democratic norms.”

Contemporary Muslim Women Leaders

• Indonesia, the most populous Muslim-majority country, elected Megawati Sukarnoputri as president
• Pakistan, the second most populous Muslim-majority country, twice (non-consecutively) elected Benazir Bhutto as prime minister
• Bangladesh, the third most populous Muslim-majority country, elected Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina as prime ministers
• Turkey, the fifth most populous Muslim-majority country, elected Tansu Çiller as prime minister

Honor Killing

It is cultural-as in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Forced marriage is prohibited under Islamic Sharia (law). The illegitimate child is not to be blamed for the crime of its parents and shouldn’t be shunned.
1. Islam does not condone domestic violence
2. Islam opposes any form of oppression and slavery
3. Islam does not sanction taking anybody’s life
4. Islam opposes prebendalism or the use of state offices as “prebends” (instruments) for creating wealth and gain for individuals and their ethnic brethren.
5. Islam calls for strong state institutions; equal distribution of wealth (2.5% of annual earnings known as Zakat*); Islam encourages private enterprises; Islam calls for the support of the disadvantaged like orphans, widows, wayfarers, parents, the sick and elderly.

Education and freedom is encouraged at all levels
*Zakat or obligatory charity is the 3rd pillar of Islam. Zakat functions as a social security for all. Those who have enough money today pay for what they have. If they need money tomorrow they will get what is necessary to help them live decently. This is done before the beginning of the month of Muharram, the first of New Year.
Types of wealth on which Zakat is imposed:
1. Gold and silver, in any form.
2. Cash, bank notes, stocks, bonds etc.
3. Merchandise for business, equal to the value of specified Nisaab (minimum).
4. Live stock.
5. On income derived from rental business.

Classification of Recipients of Zakat

1. FUQARA: people who are poor and who possess more than their basic needs but do not possess wealth equal to Nisaab.
2. MASAKEEN: people who are destitute and extremely needy to the extent they are forced to beg for their daily food rations.
3. AL-AMILEEN: people appointed by an Islamic Government to collect Zakat.
4. MU-ALLAFATUL-QULUB: persons who have recently accepted Islam and are in need of basic necessities who would benefit from encouragement by Muslims which would help strengthen their faith.
5. AR-RIQAAB: slaves who are permitted to work for remuneration and have an agreement from their masters to purchase their freedom on payment of fixed amounts.
6. AL-GHAARIMEEN: persons who have a debt and do not possess any other wealth or goods with which they could repay that which they owe. It is conditional that this debt was not created for any un-Islamic purpose.
7. FI-SABILILLAH: persons who have to carry out an obligatory deed which has become obligatory on them and subsequently (due to loss of wealth) are unable to complete that obligation.
8. IBN-US-SABEEL: persons who are travelers and during the course of their journey do not possess basic necessities, though they are well to do at home. They could be given Zakat in order to fulfill travel needs to return home.

Sources

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigme_Singye_Wangchuck
2. http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/325/
3. http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/aqeedah/bpsc.html
4. http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm
5. Gender Equality in Islam by Jamal Badawi, PhD
http://www.jannah.org/genderequity/
(Accessed August 25, 2010)
6. Are Islam And Democracy Compatible? By Rahil Yasin
http://www.countercurrents.org/yasin210309.htm
(Accessed August 25, 2010)
7. http://www.zpub.com/aaa/zakat-def.html

Indonesia: Key Wars and Conflicts

Image via Wikipedia

Indonesian Conflict (1955-1966)

Between the years 1955 and 1966 Indonesian was embroiled in conflict that took the lives of millions. War erupted between Indonesia and Malaysia in 1962 and 1966. It was a small, undeclared war that came to involve troops from Australia and Britain. The conflict resulted from a belief by Indonesia's President Sukarno that the creation of the Federation of Malaysia, which became official in September 1963, represented an attempt by Britain to maintain colonial rule behind the cloak of independence granted to its former colonial possessions in south-east Asia. Indonesia's Foreign Minister, Dr Subandrio, coined the word “confrontation” in January 1963 which came to refer to Indonesia's efforts to destabilize the new Federation of Malaysia instituted by Britain. Indonesia launched a series of cross-border raids into Malaysian territory the same year. A band of Indonesian insurgents attempted to seize the enclave of Brunei only to be defeated by British forces.

By 1964 military activity increased along the Indonesian side of the border with regular Indonesian army getting involved in the conflict. Under the banner of the larger British Commonwealth and fighting within the framework of its membership in the Far East Strategic Reserve, Australian units carried out operations against Indonesia in Borneo and West Malaysia. Later to be replaced by the 28th Brigade, the Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR) arrived in Borneo in March 1965 and served in Sarawak until the end of July.

Strategic and Historical Setting

Indonesia is a Southeast Asian archipelago located between the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean. It has borders with Timor-Leste (228 km), Malaysia (1,782 km), and Papua New Guinea (820 km). Dutch colonists brought the whole of Indonesia under one government as the Dutch East Indies in 1900. And in 1928 a youth conference undertook to work for "one nation, one language, one people" for Indonesia. Four years into the Second World War Japan invaded Dutch East Indies. The Japanese helped independence leader Sukarno to return from internal exile and declare independence in 1945. The Dutch recognized Indonesian independence in 1949 after four years of guerrilla warfare. The Islands of the Maluku (Moluccas) declared independence from Indonesia and fought an unsuccessful separatist war in the 50s. After a successful period of UN administration, the Dutch agreed to transfer West Papua to Indonesia.

Moluccas Islands in Indonesia are an archipelago and are part of the Maritime Southeast Asia region. They are geographically located east of Sulawesi (Celebes), west of New Guinea, and north of Timor. By 1961, the Island of Borneo was divided into four separate states namely: Kalimantan (Indonesia), the Sultanate of Brunei (a British protectorate), and two colonies of the United Kingdom (UK)-Sarawak and British North Borneo (later named Sabah). British protectorate for Brunei ended on January 1, 1984. Borneo is divided between three countries: Brunei, Indonesia, and Malaysia. Approximately 73% of Borneo is the Indonesian territory of Kalimantan. Of the rest, 26% comprise the Malaysian Islands of Sarawak and Sabah (East Malaysia) and 1% is the Sultanate of Brunei.

Discussion

In 1950, a year after Indonesia proclaimed independence, a group of Christians in the southern Moluccas islands, backed by Moluccan Christian soldiers from the Dutch colonial army, proclaimed the short-lived independent Republik Maluku Selatan (or RMS, Republic of the South Moluccas). Dutch-educated Moluccan civil servants, soldiers, and loyalists saw no future in a government dominated by hostile Muslim majority and thus on April 25, 1950 proclaimed the Independent and Sovereign Republic of the South Moluccas (RMS). This proclamation of independence by Moluccan Christians led the Indonesian Army to intervene. Several leaders of RMS escaped to Holland. Even though a vast majority of Moluccan Christians currently do not support independence, what resonate to this day in Indonesia are the past aims of the RMS and support for a separatist state. Muslims often accuse Christians of aiming for independence. Currently, Diaspora Moluccan Christians’ support for RMS remains the galvanizing force among Muslims. [1]

The surrender of Japan on August 15, 1945 paved way for the independence of Indonesia. The Dutch who were devastated by the Nazi occupation were unable to hold onto Indonesia and so Admiral Earl Louis Mountbatten, the Supreme Allied Commander in Southeast Asia, took over command. The aim of the Allies was not to occupy the Islands of Indonesia but to disarm and repatriate the Japanese and liberate the Europeans held in internment camps by the Japanese.

Between 1962 and 1966, an undeclared war that came to be known as the Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation, erupted between Indonesia and Malaysia backed by the United Kingdom over the future of the Island of Borneo. The confrontation evolved after Indonesia’s attempts to destabilize the new Federation of Malaysia which came into being in 1963. Negotiations between Indonesia and Malaysia ended the conflict after the two sides signed a peace treaty in Bangkok in August 1966.

Impacts

Under Suharto, Indonesia restored diplomatic relations with the western world. He quickly eliminated the Communist Party of Indonesia and severed ties with Communist China forged under Sukarno’s reign though relations with China were reestablished in the 80s. He ended hostility with Malaysia and allowed Indonesia to be a member of the United Nations from which Sukarno had withdrawn in 1965. Suharto ordered the invasion of East Timor after Portugal ended its colonization of the territory in 1975. Indonesia occupied East Timor within days of Portuguese departure after the East Timorese declared independence. The plight of East Timorese captured world attention in 1991 after pro-Indonesian militia opened fire on a funeral procession killing 250 people in the capital Dili. After intense world pressure, Indonesia allowed for a referendum to be held to determine the fate of East Timorese. Finally, East Timor declared independence on 20 May, 2002 after twenty-five years of Indonesian occupation. Through the intervention of the UN Mission of Support in East Timor (Unmiset), the rebuilding of East Timor became a success story. In2006, after an outbreak of gang violence, the UN was prompted to set up a new peacekeeping unit, Unmit. With the end of the Indonesian conflict, newly independent sovereign states have emerged; democracy has become the driving force in the region, and economies continue to flourish aggressively.

Indonesia is a partner of the U.S. in the global War on Terror. Indonesia has been a victim of several terror attacks in the past, most notably the Bali bombings of 2002 that resulted in the deaths of 202 people and 209 injured. The archipelago’s current president is retired general Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. He received his master’s degree in management in 1991 from Webster University while attending military training at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, KS. The legacy and impacts from Indonesia’s wars and conflicts seem promising to the U.S. and to Indonesia’s past adversaries. President George W. Bush visited Jakarta in November 2006 despite escalating insecurity and mass protests while his successor, Barack Obama, undertook a more historical venture in 2010 by retracing his steps in the land of his childhood years. Obama forged cordial relationships with an archipelago that has transformed from a cornucopia of conflicting ideological foundations to that of a plural liberal democracy. For now, both Malaysia and Indonesia remain beacons of peace in Asia-Pacific. Despite the dwindling of the global economy, both nations seem to be doing fairly well for the moment.

Biographies of Key Personalities

Sukarno
Born in 1901 in Blitar, East Java, Sukarno was the first president of Indonesia. Sukarno was a key nationalist and an opponent of Dutch and Japanese occupation. The most popular figure among Indonesians, Sukarno became a symbol of independence. Known for his forthrightness and eloquence of speech, Sukarno was passionate about having Indonesia among the international community of nations. By proclaiming independence on 17 August, 1945, Sukarno picked Mohammad Hatta as his vice president. Upon taking the reigns of power, Sukarno suspended parliamentary democracy and the system of Guided Democracy. He was known to explicitly castigate western imperialism. His inclination to the Partai Komunis Indonesia (PKI) or the Communist Party of Indonesia angered the military and student movements. He was deposed by General Suharto who took over power in a bloody coup on March 11, 1966. He died under house arrest on 21 June, 1970. [2]

Muhammad Hatta
Sukarno’s follower in the liberation of Indonesia was Muhammad Hatta. He has been described as a diligently modest, sincerely Muslim yet open to all faiths, and unswervingly direct. Before and after assuming office, Muhammad Hatta aspired to have an Indonesia that would be egalitarian and tolerant land with dignity for all. Hatta was born in Sumatra in 1902 but moved to the Netherlands in 1921 where he lived for over a decade as a student. While in the Netherlands, Hatta formed the Indonesian Association in the Netherlands. This happened at a time when mention of the name Indonesia was a crime (the Dutch called the archipelago Netherlands Indie). By launching “non-cooperation” campaign, Hatta managed to draw a wide range of nationalists and supporters to his cause. He was jailed by the Dutch in 1927 for being anti-government and then released after being found innocent. He returned to Rotterdam to continue with his studies. In 1932, Hatta returned to Indonesia to found an anti-Dutch movement. This placed him in the wrong side of the Dutch colonial administration who jailed for ten years. He served eight of his ten-year term. He was released from prison in 1942 after the Japanese ousted the Dutch. The Japanese wanted the help of Sukarno and Hatta in running the sprawling archipelago. After the surrender of the Japanese and in the run-up to independence, Hatta “persuaded Islamic leaders to drop their demand that the President had to be Muslim and that shari'a law be enacted for Muslim citizens, and enshrined in the constitution the recognition of other religions and the rights to assembly and expression”.[3] After breaking up with Sukarno a decade later, Hatta taught economics and history at a university in Yogyakarta. He died in 1980 at the age of 77 and was buried in a common graveyard.

General Suharto
Suharto, the man who came to be known as the “smiling general”, was born to ethnic Javanese parents of peasant background on 8 June, 1921 during the era of Dutch East Indies in the village of Godean, 9 miles west of Yogyakarta. His parents divorced when he was an infant and he was placed under the care of different relatives often changing homes until he came of age. He attended local Javanese schools; in a brief period, young Suharto worked in a village bank and thereafter plunged into a long military career after enlisting in the Dutch colonial army in 1940. By 1942 he had risen to the rank of sergeant. That same year, the Japanese captured and occupied much of Indonesia. Suharto switched allegiance by joining the Japanese-led militia that gave him further military training. He did join the Japanese believing they offered hope for Indonesian independence.

When the Japanese surrendered in August of 1945 and Indonesia proclaimed independence, Suharto hurriedly joined the newly established Indonesian army. He fought a five-year war against the Dutch who wanted to reoccupy Indonesia to fill the vacuum left by the withdrawing Japanese. The Dutch prevailed and captured much of Java in 1947 and Yogyakarta the following year. However, in March of 1949, troops under the command of Suharto recaptured Yogyakarta prompting the Dutch to leave the whole of Indonesia except Dutch New Guinea (West Irian) later that year. Suharto rose steadily through the ranks of military over the next fifteen years. In 1957, Suharto took command of the central Javanese division and in 1960 he was promoted to brigadier-general. In 1962 Suharto was put in-charge of a military operation to recover West Irian (now the province of Papua; formerly Irian Jaya) from the Dutch. By 1963 he was in-charge of the military strategic command. Suharto came to power on March 11, 1966 in a military coup.

References

[1] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-inde.htm

[2] Dr Katharine E. McGregor, Sukarno, Online Encyclopedia of Mass Violence, [online], published on 31 July 2009, accessed 17 January 2011, URL : http://www.massviolence.org/Sukarno, ISSN 1961-9898

[3] Mohammad Hatta: Indonesia's other hero of independence was a leader of quiet strength by Emil Salim, Retrieved 17 January 2011 from http://www.time.com/time/asia/2006/heroes/nb_hatta.html

Maoist Insurgency in Nepal

Image via Wikipedia

Background

Nepal is a small, landlocked country located in South Asia and sandwiched between India and China. It is also bordered by Bhutan and Bangladesh. Its capital is Kathmandu. Slightly larger than Arkansas or about the size of Tennessee, Nepal is a mountainous country and contains eight of the world's 10 highest peaks, including Mount Everest and Mount Kanchenjunga-the world's tallest and third tallest-on the borders with China and India respectively. Nepal is the birthplace of Prince Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism who was born c. 563 B.C. and thereafter received enlightenment. Officially, Nepal proclaimed independence from Britain in 1923.Nepal changed its leadership style in 1951 after the ruling monarch of that time instituted a new cabinet system of government that replaced the century-old tradition of governance that was based on a succession of prime ministers.

Discussion

Nepal was gripped by a devastating massacre of the royal family in 2001. It all started after crown prince Dipendra allegedly argued with his mother over his choice of a bride. The rampage resulted in the gruesome death of King Birendra and Queen Aishwarya of Nepal, three of the king’s children, his two sisters, one more member of the family by marriage and Prince Niranjan. “King Birendra, 55, ascended the throne in 1972”. [1] Reforms geared towards the creation of a multiparty democracy were established in 1990 within the framework of a constitutional monarchy. However, an insurgency led by Maoist rebels broke out in 1996. An ensuing ten-year civil war resulting from the Maoist insurgency led to the suspension of the cabinet and parliament and assumption of supreme power by the king. Mass protests in April 2006 followed by several months of reconciliations involving the Maoists and government officials culminated in a November 2006 peace accord and the promulgation of a temporary constitution. Eventually, the constituent assembly, after a nation-wide election in April 2008, declared Nepal a federal democratic republic and abolished the monarchy at its first convention the following month. “It is the country's first elected government since the 239-year-old monarchy was abolished earlier this year (sic 2008)”. [2]

In July of 2008, the Constituent Assembly elected the country's first president. The Maoists, despite receiving a plurality of votes in the Constituent Assembly election and despite forming a coalition government in August 2008, resigned in May 2009. The Maoists took this unanimous decision after being angered by the president’s action of overruling the firing of the chief of staff of the army. Finally, the Communist Party of Nepal and the United Marxist-Leninist Party and the Nepali Congress formed a new coalition government in collaboration with several smaller parties. In June 2010, the prime minister resigned but, as of December 2010, continued to lead a caretaker government while the parties debate who should lead the next government. With a new constitution due in May 2011, still, disagreements remain among the political parties over issues such as the future of ex- Maoist fighters.

Legacy

Despite human rights advocates decrying Nepal’s human rights records, the United States enjoys diplomatic relations with the Himalayan republic. The U.S. has in the past “provided development and security assistance while seeking to promote democracy and human rights”. [3] However, the rise of the Maoists and their taking over of Nepal has been a worrying trend for the Bush Administration. According to Teresita Schaffer, a former State Department South Asia specialist and U.S. ambassador to Sri Lanka, “the U.S. government was taken by surprise”. [4] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) of Nepal draws a good picture that exists between Nepal and the United States. According to MOFA web site, “the USA is the second country after the United Kingdom with which Nepal entered into diplomatic relations on 25 April 1947”. [5]

Nepal and the U.S. have had deep diplomatic exchanges and state visits in the past. Since 1951, the U.S. has provided over $1 billion assistance bilaterally and multilaterally. Nepal earns over $100 million every year from tourism ventures originating in the U.S. and from the sale of garments and carpets.

Through the Peace Corps, over 4,000 volunteers have provided assistance to Nepal since 1962. The United States Agency for international Development (USAID) has been actively involved providing developmental assistance to the people of Nepal. The Peace Corps, USAID, and UN organizations have been working tirelessly promoting water systems, rural income generation, urban planning, community forestry, appropriate technology and education for years until the escalation of Maoist insurgency interrupted the running of vital projects resulting in the abrupt suspension of programs in 2006.

References

[1] 2001: Nepal royal family massacred, Retrieved February 28, 2011 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/1/newsid_3987000/3987183.stm

[2]Nepal's Maoists form coalition government
Retrieved February 27, 2011 from http://www.france24.com/en/20080823-nepals-maoists-form-coalition-government-nepal-politics

[3] Nepal: Background and U.S. Relations, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Retrieved February 27, 2011 from http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/44927.pdf

[4] U.S.-Nepal Relations Complicated After Terror Group Wins Elections, Associated Press (April 24, 2008), Retrieved February 28, 2011 from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352432,00.html

[5] Bilateral Relations: Nepal-United States of America Relations, Retrieved February 28, 2011 from http://mofa.gov.np/bilateralRelation/nepal-USA.php

India: Asia Country Study

Image via Wikipedia

Geography and Demographics

India is located in Southern Asia, bordering the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal, between Burma and Pakistan. It is slightly more than one-third the size of the US. It is the 7th largest country in the world and has a total area of 3,287,263 sq km. The length of its coastline is 7,000 km and its total land boundary is 14,103 km. It is bordered by Bangladesh (4,053 km), Bhutan (605 km), Burma (1,463 km), China (3,380 km), Nepal (1,690 km), and Pakistan (2,912 km). The climate of India varies from tropical monsoon in south to temperate in the north. Terrains constitute upland plain (Deccan Plateau) in the south, flat to rolling plain along the Ganges, deserts in the west, and the Himalayas in the north. Geographically, India dominates South Asian subcontinent; it is near important Indian Ocean trade routes; Kanchenjunga, third tallest mountain in the world, lies on the border with Nepal.

History and Society

The history of India stretches back to 2500 B.C. when the inhabitants of the Indus valley practiced an urban culture based on commerce and sustained by agricultural trade. Unfortunately, this vibrant civilization declined around 1500 B.C., perhaps due to ecological collapse. Migrating from northwest into the Indian subcontinent, Aryan-speaking peoples settled in the middle Ganges River valley and thereafter adapted antecedent cultures during the second millennium B.C. The ancient and medieval political map of India had a display of myriad kingdoms with fluctuating boundaries. Unifying under the Gupta Dynasty, in a period known as the India’s Golden Age, northern India with its Hindu culture and political administration reached its new height in the 4th and 5th centuries A.D. Islam had great influence on India for over 500 years. In the 10th and 11th centuries, India was invaded by Turks and Afghans who established sultanates in Delhi. In a period lasting over 200 years, descendants of Genghis Khan swept over the Khyber Pass and established the Mughal (Mogul) Dynasty. However, in the southern part of India, different types of administrative systems flourished. Leaving behind lasting cultural legacies, Hindu and Islamic Dynasties intermingled in the 11th and 15th centuries. These were the dominant Hindu Chola and Vijayanagar Dynasties.

In 1757, the British East India established its authority over India. Modern India proclaimed independence from England on August 15, 1947 after what was known as the Indian Subcontinent was split between India and Pakistan. India became a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic nation when its constitution came into effect on 26th January, 1950. Jawaharlal Nehru became the first prime minister of modern India. He served two terms. India and Pakistan fought three successive wars immediately after the tumultuous partition. The name Pakistan was originally derived from an idea suggested by a student called Chaudhuri Rahmat Ali in 1933. The name was formulated from: P for Punjab, A for the Afghanis of the north-west frontier, K for Kashmir, S for Sind and Tan denoting Baluchistan. The word also means land of the pure in Urdu. [1]


India and Pakistan fought a devastating war in 1971 over East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The fighting drove an estimated 10 million East Pakistanis to India. In support of the East Pakistanis, India invaded East Pakistan in December of 1971 forcing the Pakistani army to surrender at Dhaka. The subsequent surrender of the Pakistani army resulted in more than 90,000 troops becoming prisoners of war. East Pakistan became a sovereign republic on 6 December 1971. Post-independence India was famous for championing the cause of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) that “had its origins in the 1947 Asian Relations Meeting in New Delhi and the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung, Indonesia.” [2] India is the 2nd most populous country in the world after its neighbor China. It has a population of 1,173,108,018 (July 2010 est.). India’s ethnic groups include Indo-Aryan 72%, Dravidian 25%, Mongoloid and other 3% (2000).

Diplomacy and Domestic Politics

India is a nuclear power nation with diplomatic relations with the U.S. and other major European powers. The U.S. reached “full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India”. [3] Such nuclear cooperation was intended to boost U.S. strategic partnership with India, a partnership that was an important priority for the Bush administration.” [4] The transfer of civilian technology, such as nuclear energy reactors required amending U.S. laws and international guidelines that could weaken the global nonproliferation regime. The Bush administration’s negotiation with Indian counterparts has led to securing of nuclear restraints involving the separation of India’s civilian and military nuclear facilities.

Economic Situation

India has some viable economic resources that include coal (fourth-largest reserves in the world), iron ore, manganese, mica, bauxite, rare earth elements, titanium ore, chromites, natural gas, diamonds, petroleum, limestone, and arable land. Its cultivable arable land is 48.83%. According to 2011 Index of Economic Freedom by the Heritage Foundation, India’s economic freedom score is 54.6, making its economy the 124th freest in the 2011 Index. Despite the challenging global economic environment, the Indian economy has recorded average annual growth of around 8 percent over the past five years, propelled by domestic demand and continuing strength in services and manufacturing. [5]

Protracted hunger looms wide in almost every Indian state, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute of 2008. The States of Bihar and Jharkhand rank lower than Zimbabwe and Haiti whereas Madhya Pradesh falls between Ethiopia and Chad. [6] However, on the side of industrial growth, India has immensely benefited from outsourcing of work from developed countries, and a strong manufacturing and export oriented industrial framework. The country’s public debt, according to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), has surged to over 50% of the total GDP and that RBI has started printing new currency notes.

Security Situation

India launched a security and foreign policy dialogue with China in 2005. The dialogue pertained to dispute over a rugged, militarized boundary, and regional nuclear proliferation. However, India believes China has in the past transferred missiles to Pakistan. Since the October 2005 earthquake in the region, various talks and confidence-building measures have been held between India and Pakistan to defuse tensions over Kashmir. Still, Kashmir remains the most contentious issue since it is the site of the world's largest and most militarized territorial dispute having portions under the de facto administration of China (Aksai Chin), India (Jammu and Kashmir), and Pakistan (Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas).

India and Pakistan still maintain the 2004 cease fire in Kashmir. The two nuclear neighbors have initiated discussions on defusing the armed stand-off in the Siachen glacier region. The government in Islamabad has voiced its concerns at New Delhi’s fencing of the highly militarized Line of Control and construction of the Baglihar Dam on the Chenab River in Jammu and Kashmir which is part of the larger dispute on water sharing of the Indus River and its tributaries. Since 1949, a UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) has maintained a small group of peacekeepers. India refuses to recognize the historic Kashmir lands ceded to China in 1964 by Pakistan.

To defuse tensions and prepare for discussions on a maritime boundary, the two nuclear powers seek technical resolution on the disputed boundary in Sir Creek estuary at the mouth of the Rann of Kutch in the Arabian Sea. Pakistani maps display claim on Junagadh in the Gujarat State of India. Discussions with Bangladesh have been stalled to demarcate a small section of river boundary. Territorial swap of 51 Bangladeshi exclaves in India and 111 Indian exclaves in Bangladesh remain stalled. India feels the territorial exchange will pave way for divided villages and eventually bring an end to illegal cross-border trade, migration, violence, and transit of terrorists through the porous border. On the other hand, Bangladeshis bitterly protest India's attempts to fence off high-traffic sections of the border. India is seeking cooperation from Bhutan and Burma to keep Indian Nagaland and Assam separatists from hiding in remote areas along the borders. Joint Border Committee with Nepal continues to examine contested boundary sections, including the 400 square kilometer dispute over the source of the Kalapani River. India maintains a strict border regime to keep out Maoist insurgents and control illegal cross-border activities from Nepal.

Critical Current International Issues

India is engaged in unrelenting rivalry with China. It is a dispute related to contentious border issues and territorial claims. The two nations’ territorial disputes lack historical record when it comes to demarcating the borders. [7] China’s occupation of Lhasa in 1962 and India’s subsequent retaliatory occupation of the Tawang region resulted in prolonged and unsolvable simmering of tensions. China was alarmed by India’s signing of nuclear cooperation with the U.S. China’s feels it is being encircled and in imminent danger. Besides, India has problems with Maoists rebels who claim to be fighting for the rights of the poor. It is believed that the rebels control large parts of the state of Chhattisgarh and that they are active in more than two-thirds of the country. Manmohan Singh, India’s Prime Minister, described the Maoist rebels as India’s greatest internal security challenge. [8]


Currently, India is confounded by deforestation; soil erosion; overgrazing; desertification; air pollution from industrial effluents and vehicle emissions; water pollution from raw sewage and runoff of agricultural pesticides; tap water is not potable throughout the country; huge and growing population is overstraining natural resources. It is a party to: Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic-Marine Living Resources, Antarctic Treaty, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Hazardous Wastes, Law of the Sea, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling signed, but not ratified: none of the selected agreements. India is the world's largest producer of licit opium for the pharmaceutical trade. An undetermined quantity of opium is diverted to illicit international drug markets. India is the transit point for illicit narcotics produced in neighboring countries and throughout Southwest Asia. India is vulnerable to narcotics money laundering through the hawala system. India is a source, destination, and transit country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation.

Sources

[1] Retrieved January 29, 2011 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/1947.stm

[2] Library of Congress Country Studies, Retrieved January 29, 2011 from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+in0182)

[3] “Joint Statement between George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,” Office of the Press Secretary, the White House, Washington, D.C., July 18, 2005.

[4] This priority was outlined well before the Bush administration entered office. Condoleeza Rice, “Promoting the National Interest,” Foreign Affairs 79:1 (January/February 2000).

[5]Heritage Foundation, India Information on Economic Freedom, Retrieved January 25, 2011 from http://www.heritage.org/Index/Country/india

[6] Comparisons of Hunger Across States: India State Hunger Index, International Food Policy Research Institute
Retrieved January 25, 2011 from http://www.ifpri.org/publication/comparisons-hunger-across-states-india-state-hunger-index

[7] India-China Relations: Current Issues and Emerging Trends, Atlantic Council, January 25, 2010, Mohan Guruswamy, Chairman of the Center for Policy Alternatives in New Delhi, discussed India-China relations with the Atlantic Council's South Asia Center
Retrieved January 24, 2011 from http://www.acus.org/event/india-china-relations-current-issues-and-emerging-trends

[8] Profile: India’s Maoist Rebels, Retrieved January 25, 2011 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8605404.stm

Arab World's Fight for Democracy

"Self-respect cannot be hunted. It cannot be purchased. It is never for sale. It cannot be fabricated out of public relations. It comes to us when we are alone, in quiet moments, in quiet places, when we suddenly realize that, knowing the good, we have done it; knowing the beautiful, we have served it; knowing the truth, we have spoken it”. Whitney Griswold

The departure of Zein el-Abidine bin Ali of Tunisia from the political scene and the subsequent upheavals in the streets of Cairo, Amman, and Sana’a attest to the growing discontent among traditionally-inclined and politically-impervious Arabs who endured decades of misrule imposed by bureaucracies composed of miscreants and tyrants with ties to western powers who have mastered the art of double-standards. The spread of self-immolation by disgruntled youth besieged by unemployment and poor living conditions in several Arab cities could not even attract the attention of the brazenly Bedouin Arab leader reclining in a golden chair surrounded by concubines deep inside a well-fortified golden palace.

After harrowing decades of ill-treatment and oppression by dreaded police forces, ordinary Arabs have awoken from heavy slumber ready to take charge of their destinies without any interference of any sorts. Having squandered the national wealth of Tunisia for years, autocrat Zein el-Abidine bin Ali finally packed his possessions stealthily under the cover of darkness to seek refuge among the Saudis before being apprehended unawares by an overwhelmingly rowdy youth baying for his blood.

In Cairo, Muhammad Hosni Mubarak mysteriously exited the political spectrum after handpicking a ruthless vice-president and dissolving parliament indefinitely. Mubarak’s attempts to quell civil disturbances by deploying his despised police force failed to materialize after being overtaken by an ocean of angry demonstrators who kept vigil at the famous “Tahrir Square” in the heart of Al-Qahira. Mubarak has been in power since the assassination of Anwar Sadat by the Islamic Brotherhood in 1981. Mubarak, the man perceived by the West as a darling, ally, and impeccable for strictly adhering to the West’s never-ending laundry list of wishes, remains culpable in the eyes of ordinary Egyptians primarily for imposing on them thirty-one years of curfew, mismanagement, and political miscalculations. The thousands of demonstrators who gathered in the historic liberation square of Cairo decried the years of extra-judicial killings, arbitrary arrests, unemployment, embezzlement, political subjugation, and many other forms of injustices committed by Mubarak’s regime.

After the unprecedented departure of the authoritarian rulers of Tunisia and Egypt respectively, another hot-headed leader, Muammar Ghaddafi of Libya-a man who has been on the helm for over forty years-remains cornered by a ruthless and unrelenting rebellion. Sardonically, Ghaddafi has resorted to using full-scale military tactics including scotched-earth pounding of civilian populated areas by Libyan airforce jet fihters and artillery fire to subdue an uncontrollable opposition that has already spilled to every part of the desert-whipped country. There have been reports of machette-wielding, gun-totting pro-Ghaddafi loyalist hoodlums indiscriminately killing unarmed opponents.

Judging by his quest for prestige and power in the international stage, Ghaddafi seems to have all the attributes of Hannibal, the Carthaginian general who is regarded by many historians as the father of strategy. Hannibal son of Amilcar Barca, was reputedly the leading Carthiginian commander during the First Punic War (264-241 BC) that was fought between Ancient Carthage and the Roman Republic. For 23 years, Carthage and Rome fought for supremacy of the western Mediterranean Sea especially over the Island of Sicily and and to a lesser extent including surrounding waters and north Africa. As the war of liberation intensifies in Libya, many political analysts and historians keep guessing whether Ghaddafi will keep fighting courageously like Hannibal who finally succumbed to a humiliating betrayal and defeat.

In Bahrain, a tiny kingdom in the Middle East separated from Iran by the Persian Gulf, mounting violence in the main city of Manama triggered by embittered protesters finally ended after the ruling theocratic sheikhs agreed to full political transformations. Likewise, in Yemen, a nation bordering Saudi Arabia to the south, there had been media reports of massive protests against the dictatorial regime of Ali Abdalla Saleh. President Saleh, a former army colonel in the Yemeni army, has been in power since 1978. Beginning with the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings, demonstrations calling for regime changes and democratic governance have jolted the nations of Jordan, Djibouti, Oman, Iraq, Iran, and others.

For a long time Muslim scholars associated democracy with western values and ideals. Some scholars even went as far as describing democracy as un-Islamic, corrupt, and contrary to Islamic political thought. On the contrary, after witnessing abrupt changes in the behavior of the mainstreet Arab/Muslim, novel interpretattions keep sprouting from many mosque pulpits calling for political reformations and democratization of Muslim lands. Despite castigating democracy in the strongest terms, vocal Muslim scholars kept aloof from denouncing corrupt leaders for fear of repercussions. Instead, their surmons revolved around human rights, equality and justice, freedom and governance, respect and dignity, and topics of like nature that abound in the genesis of democracy.

The term democracy incorporates: (a) freedom to form and join organizations; (b) freedom of expression; (c) right to vote; (d) eligibility for public office; (e) right of political leaders to compete for support; (f) right of political leaders to compete for votes; (g) alternative sources of information; and (h) free and fair elections. On the other hand, democracy is about majoritarian rule.

It could be argued that the current clashes visible in Arabian/Muslim cities is a harbinger for impending political changes and a stepping stone for future globalization of democracy. From a realist perspective, the internationally televised self-immolation ritual demonstrated by the irritated, unemployed Tunisian degree-holder seems to have globally spread far and wide leaving many autocrats in looming danger.

Is Maritime Piracy Coming to an End in the African Horn?

Image via Wikipedia

After the collapse of the Somali central government in 1991, the coasts of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden became breeding grounds for vicious maritime pirates despite joint international naval operations. Many analysts and even powerful governments whose merchant fleets fell victim to piracy and whose navies took part in the maritime endeavors meant to cleanse the Indian Ocean and Red Sea shipping lanes from the piracy menace saw the solution in the stabilization of Somalia. But that theory has been proven wrong by the navies of Malaysia and South Korea after lightning speed assaults carried out by the two nations' naval commandos successfully released two ships and their crew that had been held hostage by Somali pirates in the waters off the coasts of Somalia.

As a result of the maritime blitzkrieg conducted by the forces of the two Asia-Pacific nations, several pirates died during fire exchanges while a dozen surrendered and now await trial in Kuala Lumpur and Seoul respectively. In the meantime, the use of hard power as opposed to the soft power tactics employed by the commanders of the multi-national force in the past seem to be bearing fruit.

Recently, the media was abuzz with a French envoy's theorization that piracy elimination in Somalia depends on the capture of twelve powerful tribal elders who have been suspected of being behind the operation. Killing or apprehending the said piracy chieftains will only increase piracy activities because there are many unemployed elders and youth willing to sacrifice their lives to fill the vacuum.

It is preposterous and utterly outrageous to use private armies or mercenaries to fight piracy as previously envisaged by the current weak Somali transitional government. Piracy can be eliminated off the coasts of Somalia indefinitely only if the international community implements long-term concrete strategies in place.

South Sudan: Africa’s Newest Republic

Image via Wikipedia

After two-decades of devastating armed rebellion, representatives of the Sudanese government and the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M) finally signed a peace treaty in 2005 under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). Led and represented by Dr. John Garang de Mabior (June 23, 1945 – July 30, 2005) in the 2005 historic signing ceremony, the inhabitants of South Sudan looked forward to a day when they would cast their votes in order to determine their future. That anticipated time has finally come. An internationally-supervised voting referendum is currently underway in north and south Sudan. Other polling stations have been set up in several regions of the world where substantial number of registered South Sudanese people reside. The week-long voting has so far been peaceful apart from a few isolated incidents. According to Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States, the referendum meets international standards. On the other hand, the inhabitants of the natural resources-rich Abyei region of Sudan are also expected to hold a referendum at a later date.

Since gaining independence in 1956 Sudan has been led by a bureaucracy of predominantly Arab leaders professing Islam. Demographically, north Sudan is dominated by people of Arab origin who are for the most part Muslims while the south is divided between followers of Christianity and traditional African religions. For over half-century Sudan has been at the mercy of a succession of military leaders with appalling human rights records. In the past, there had been relative ethnic harmony between the northerners and southerners until unequal distribution of wealth and imposed hierarchy practiced by north Sudanese leaders plunged the nation into systemic violence. Following the toppling of Prime Minister Sadiq al-Mahdi in a coup d’état instigated by the current sitting president Hassan al-Bashir in 1989, Sudan descended into a cycle of violence consequently setting the stage for a prolonged conflict. The imposition of Islamic Sheria and the discovery of oil in the south further agitated the predominantly black population who aggressively intensified their fight for self-determination.

Salva Kiir Mayardit, the current president of the semi-autonomous government of Southern Sudan and the Vice President of Sudan, the man slated to be the future president of Southern Sudan, has in the past called for the separation of the south from the north. While commenting on the current referendum in 2009, Kiir admonished southerners to either choose being “a second class in your country” or “a free person in your own independent state”. Political pundits and analysts and commentators and media personalities who are closely watching the political events in southern Sudan, note unifying sense of euphoria and a yearning for national sovereignty that is visible on the faces of millions of southerners casting their votes.

Countries like Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo DRC), and the Central African Republic (CAR) that share border with Southern Sudan have a lot to gain from Africa’s newest republic. For example, apart from having cordial relations with the anticipated republic, Kenya has vast business dealings ranging from banking, energy, transportation, and education in Southern Sudan. An estimated 70,000 Kenyans reside in Juba alone. In the past, the Kenya government played major roles in Sudan’s quest for peace and reconciliation. Top SPLA/M cadres established residences in Kenya’s major cities with John Garang being the top most to own a palatial home in Nairobi. Likewise, Kenya settled thousands of South Sudanese refugees in its northern camp of Kakuma and a vast number of Sudanese students call Kenya home. Chances are that thousands of ordinary Kenyan citizens will flood Southern Sudan once the votes are cast in favor of separation. There was even mention in the Kenya press about modeling future Southern Sudanese education from the Kenyan system. The East African Community (EAC), a regional body whose members have been drawn from nations within East Africa for the purpose of boosting the regions economy with an eye on future confederation, has reserved a space for the newly emerging nation of Southern Sudan.

Final Results Emerge

Finally, the votes have been cast and the people of Southern Sudan overwhelmingly voted for total separation. As a final verdict, global media reported that voting results exceeded international expectations. After decades of armed struggle, the new nation of Southern Sudan is now ready to embrace the international community of nations. And as its people rejoice in adulation and collectively celebrate with melodious applause, the type of political culture and mode of administration to be charted by the nation's technocrats will determine its future. For now, the nation's leadership is in the hands of Salva Kiir, doyen of political and armed struggle. Presumably, the way forward for a region like southern Sudan that has been devastated by military incursions, carpet bombings, inter-clan rivalry, disease and malnutrition, drought and locust invasions, is to embrace liberal democracy.

In conclusion, respect for the rule of law, educating ordinary citizens as a means to combating illiteracy, enhancing the foundations of the economy through aggressive agriculture, land consolidation and soil conservation, advancing political deliberations for the attainment of political maturity, inviting credible foreign investors, exploiting potential natural resources, and equitable distribution of the nation's wealth should be the foremost priority.

Kampala-Bound Luxury Coach Attacked in Nairobi

Image via Wikipedia

A Ugandan luxury liner destined for Kampala was attacked today in Nairobi causing the death of two passengers and injuring 41 others. According to media reports, bomb experts from the Kenya police are busy putting together pieces of evidence that will eventually shed light on the sources behind the explosion after investigations are concluded. Reports indicate that the explosion happened as the bus was being loaded with general cargo and passenger belongings.

There have been conflicting reports regarding the nature of the incident. One of Nairobi’s heavyweight newspapers narrating eyewitness accounts cited that a box in the possession of three men who were hastily attempting to evade security screening exploded after it was dropped at the bus station suddenly igniting a powerful and loud explosion that created pandemonium minutes before the bus was due to depart for Kampala, the capital of Uganda. However, Kenya’s Standard online newspaper, reported that only the assailant died after being admitted to Kenyatta National Hospital and that two others died while being attended to at M.P. Shah Hospital.

So far the attack has not been linked to any party and has not been ruled out as a terrorist attack. The three East African nations of Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania have in the past suffered acts of revenge coordinated by al-Qaida, an internationally-known constructivist/idealist non-state actor that is at war with the forces of Western liberal democracy.

In 1998, the simultaneous bombing of the cities of Nairobi and Dar es Salaam caused devastations of historical proportions after hundreds of civilians were killed and thousands injured in what leaders of al-Qaida described as global jihad efforts aimed at reining the forces of infidelity. In 2002, an attack on Kikambala Hotel, a luxury tourist resort in Mombasa, Kenya, left a dozen people dead and many others injured.

After a brief reprieve from acts of intimidation, the world awoke to another simultaneous attack in July 2010, this time in Uganda, after suicide bombers targeted an Ethiopian restaurant and another venue where peple had gathered around TV screens to watch a world soccer match. Both targets were located in the heart of Kampala. The double coordinated blasts instantly killed 74 revelers. Al-Shabab, Somalia’s armed Islamist faction that is battling the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) in Mogadishu, claimed responsibility for the Uganda bombing. Uganda has a large contingent of its armed forces in Mogadishu providing protection to the TFG and battling al-Shabab.

Part of a fleet of luxury liners operated from and owned in Uganda, Kampala Coach is often frequented by students who are attracted to the expediency and quick service it provides. Uganda has recently seen an upsurge of foreign students mainly from neighboring countries because of the quality education provided by its advanced educational institutions. Students from neighboring states and the great lakes region and especially those from the East African Community take advantage of the lower tuition rates and the state-of-the-art education and cheap standards of living available only in Uganda. Today’s Uganda would rather solicit funding for road construction than for educational purposes.

Post-independence Uganda was the envy of many sub-Saharan countries because it enjoyed superior educational system inherited from the British colonial administration. The University of Makerere in Kampala was reputedly the best in Africa south of the Sahara until the abrupt rise of a military junta headed by Idi Amin Dada that briefly lasted from 1971 to 1979. The expulsion in 1972 of 60,000 Asians from Uganda by Idi Amin and his declaration of “economic war” that was aimed at the expropriation of properties owned by Asians and Europeans resulted in decline in education and the economy.

Leaders of Somalia’s armed factions, human rights groups, and residents of Mogadishu, the Somali Diaspora, and even Somali parliamentarians have voiced their objections an decried the indiscriminate shelling of civilian populations by Ugandan troops. Often, little is mentioned of the presence of the troops from Burundi in Mogadishu’s volatile environment probably because Uganda has stolen the show by providing the bulk of the required force.

Uganda’s strongman, Yoweri Museveni, recently showed up at Mogadishu International Airport unannounced. Local media reported that he conferred with his trusted commanders and also had secret discussions with President Sharif Ahmed, the man who is leading the onslaught against the insurgency. For now, until someone claims responsibility for yesterday’s bombing, we will never know the truth nor prophesy whether retaliatory measures will follow soon. But we certainly know many innocent civilians will be held accountable for crimes they never committed.

Hon. Abdi Aress Mohamed: An Unsung Hero in Kenya’s Political History

Image via Wikipedia

In the Western world, scholars, researchers, and authors painstakingly endeavor to unearth hidden historical personalities and artifacts for the sake of identification and for the purpose of acknowledging roles played in social and political life. Upon stumbling on the remains of a revered or detested figure, the process of recovery and documentation gets off the ground. Finally, the lost glory and human dignity of that person is restored. That is why in the developed world even the wretched of the earth have their place in history. In developed nations, children rehearse names of prominent people that impacted the lives of their forefathers and their nation.

Western history is replete with wastrels who frittered away their nation’s resources, spurious aficionados, destructive infidels, false prophets, lackadaisical leaders, cantankerous and indolent impostors, treacherous assassins and wretched killers whose names appear in the golden pages of historical antiquity. Unfortunately, in the developing world, factors like human envy, corruption, lack of resources and expertise hinder projects of like nature. Because humans are naturally selfish, there is the tendency to shower praise on the dead and not on the living.

Honorable Abdi Aress Mohamed, Member of Parliament for Garissa Central constituency within the district of Garissa in Kenya’s North Eastern Province, may be remembered for initiating various developmental projects during his tenure of politics from 1969 to 1983. In a period spanning 15 years, Hon. Abdi Aress tirelessly represented his constituents in parliament and in government bringing in projects that tremendously altered the living conditions of a pastoral society wedged between insecurity, poverty, illiteracy, and disease. The honorable leader may be credited for laying the groundwork for what today’s leaders are unable to initiate.

During his tenure as an elected representative, the Honorable Member of Parliament carpeted the dusty streets of Garissa town with tarmac-a marvelous project undertaken by Nurudin Construction Company. The National Youth Service (NYS), a government administered program, and the Ministry of Roads, oversaw repair of damaged gravel roads and the construction of new macadamized roads to the various towns and settlements dotting the district. Besides a 9 km stretch of tarmac added long after his departure by his successor Hon. Hussein Maalim Mohamed who represented Dujis Constituency from 1983 to 2007, the 4 km tarmac laid down by political doyen Abdi Aress is the only civilized visible familiar sight to first time visitors. Hon. Abdi Aress left behind an enduring legacy of progress and civilization that add up to his political career. He brought in a succession of projects including electricity, schools, farming, hospitals, and water. His departure from politics resulted in the abrupt retardation of infrastructural developments he envisaged. Drastic rise in the population of Garissa town as a result of urbanization led to negative consequences and increased demand for county council services consequently leading to water shortages that lasted for over two grueling decades. Increased vehicular and human traffic, menacing stray animals, unpredictable rain and weather patterns, and laxity on the part of the county council accelerated the dilapidation of the only tarmac town residents had known for years.

The construction of the massive Garissa General Hospital (GGH) kicked-off when Abdi Aress was in power. This medical facility alleviated rising cases of killer diseases like tuberculosis, tropical malaria, and waterborne diseases. In later years, the establishment of a nursing school elevated the hospital’s status to that of a training hospital. To this day GGH serves people of all walks of life including patients from war torn Somalia. The introduction of modern veterinary services and the eradication of tsetse fly, the primary biological vectors of trypanosomes that cause human sleeping sickness and animal trypanosomiasis, got a boost during Hon. Abdi Aress’ leadership.

Unquestionably, he is an unsung hero who deserves to be recognized for the tremendous contributions he made to advance the living conditions of his constituents. Hon. Abdi Aress rose to prominence during the devastating shifta menace of the sixties. He served the administrations of Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel Arap Moi respectively. It must have been a daunting task initiating projects of such nature at a time when the Somali-inhabited North Eastern Province suffered calculated instances of cattle rustling, poaching, social dissent, and protracted insecurity.

Unlike modern politicians who usurp power and wealth through corrupt practices, Mheshimiwa Abdi Aress did not amass wealth of any kind. He has gone down in Kenya’s political history as the most honest and diligent political figure since Kenya’s attainment of independence in 1963.

Century of Corruption

Image via Wikipedia

Corruption is a dangerous human interaction and has been in existence ever since the formation of human settlements. It is common for people regardless of sex or gender to indulge in selfish dealings. However, some nations are more corrupt than others. It all depends on the type of administration, the tautness of the constitution, the seriousness of authority in power, and the inflexibility of law and order.

Democratic nations are less likely to be corrupt and also less likely to descend into chaos while totalitarian regimes tend to be more lax and ineffective in fighting corruption of all types of vice. Authoritarian regimes usually compose of a cornucopia of unprofessional and untrained cadres who initially seized power by unconstitutional means. Corruption is more common in the global south or in developing countries than in the global north where leaders in power are more responsible and are known to uphold the rule of law. Corruption is most critical in flawed democracies, communist nations, and theocratic countries. In developed countries, corruption is rife in insider dealings, among lobbyists, and those who survive on commissions.

Once the police force of a nation is corrupt, dishonesty will seep to all sectors of society. Policemen and policewomen who solicit bribes may set a bad precedent for an entire nation. These are the people who are supposed to be setting good examples or act as role models in the first place. According to Transparency International (TI), Somalia, Chad, Angola, Iraq, Myanmar, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Afghanistan top the list of the most corrupt states. Since 1995, TI has published the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Despite criticism of the validity of method used by TI, TI continues to sound bells on countries perceived to be the most corrupt.

The latest report by TI lists the Kenya Police as the most corrupt institution in the country. 92% of respondents in the country reported to have bribed police officers. However, corruption in Kenya is not only restricted to the police force; in fact it has affected all sectors of society. It is everywhere.

Kyoto Protocol

Image via Wikipedia

The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or FCCC), intended to combat global warming. [1] The primary focus of UNFCCC is the prevention of hazardous gases interfering with the global climate. It was mainly founded to fight rising atmospheric temperatures and overcome anthropogenic interference in a world besieged by rapid industrialization and calculated human pollution. The rules for the implementation of the Protocol were adopted in Marrakesh, Morocco, in 2001, and are called the “Marrakesh Accords”. [2]

Since its inception in 1997 and since going into effect in 2005, the Kyoto Protocol has remained contentious and unsolvable. Of the 191 countries that have ratified the protocol, only 37 countries remain committed to the reduction of four main greenhouse gases (GHG). These gases are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and sulfur hexafluoride plus two other gases hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons. Disagreements remain between developed or industrialized nations and those in the developing category regarding reduction of gases and protocol ratification. French scientist Jean-Baptiste Fourier became the first to sound the alarm and hypothesize the dangers of greenhouse gases in 1827.

“The greenhouse effect is the natural process by which the atmosphere traps some of the Sun's energy, warming the Earth enough to support life.”[3] The United States signed the Kyoto Protocol on November 12, 1998. Unfortunately, in late March 2001, the Bush administration rejected the Kyoto Protocol. However, the U.S. continued to attend annual Conference of the Parties (CoPs) to the UNFCCC though it did not participate in Kyoto Protocol-related negotiations. The United States’ displeasure with ratifying the protocol is related to its failure to meet the targets and timetables and its inability to come up with the potentially required high costs. [4] Spain ratified Kyoto in 2002 while Russia ratified the treaty in 2004. US emissions have been slower than other counterparts in the industrialized rim although its emissions volume remained much higher. In the 2007 global emissions, the US and China jointly accounted for 40% of emissions. To this day, the legacy of the Kyoto Protocol remains mixed with no defining remedy because developing countries oppose dividing up a fixed emissions budget. [5]

Developing countries blame developed countries for contributing to the demise of the ozone layer. With over a decade of negotiations, member nations have not been able to curb emissions or reach credible and tangible consensus. Developing countries are certainly opposed to limiting their developmental potentials and goals and definitely do not want to be committed to stringent emissions target.

The recent pronouncement by Jun Arima, a Japanese government official, that “Japan will not inscribe its target under the Kyoto protocol on any conditions or under any circumstances” was a big blow to the delicately balanced Cancun global climate talks. [6] This stern message from an official whose country is one of the largest emitters of greenhouses caught delegates by surprise. Economists describe carbon emissions as a negative externality. This implies that emitters do not shoulder the full cost of the damage they cause. Hence they produce unnecessary carbon dioxide that ultimately pollutes the environment and affects fauna and flora disproportionately (Nye 313). [7]

To be able to secure a more effective approach to the Kyoto Framework, member nations will need to come up with an alternative approach which means focusing on actions rather than focusing on outcomes. In view of the realist political wrangling between developed and undeveloped countries regarding disagreement over the Kyoto Protocol and the unbalanced dispersal of carbon waste pilfering into the atmosphere, the only political theory that could bring an everlasting settlement to the conflict would be to collectively embrace liberalism. Nations will have to come with acceptable targets and timetables and budgets commensurate with a nation’s financial ability.

References

[1] http://timelines.com/1997/12/11/kyoto-protocol-to-reduce-greenhouse-gases-is-agreed-on

[2] http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php

[3] Guide to Climate Change, Greenhouse Effect,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/04/climate_change/html/greenhouse.stm

[4] Peter Saundry, Kyoto Protocol and the United States, Encyclopedia of Earth, Published December 25, 2006
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Kyoto_Protocol_and_the_United_States

[5] Warwick J. McKibbin and Peter J. Wilcoxen, Building on Kyoto: Towards a Realistic Global Climate Agreement, Security Initiative Working Papers Number 3, December 2008 http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/11_global_climate_agreement_mckibbin.aspx

[6] John Vidal, Cancun Climate Change Summit: Japan Refuses to Extend Kyoto Protocol, guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 1 December 2010 18.16 GMT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/01/cancun-climate-change-summit-japan-kyoto

[7] Joseph S. Nye, Jr. and David A. Welch, Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation: An Introduction to Theory and History (8th Ed.), Pearson Education Inc.
www.pearsonhighered.com

Somalia: Proliferation of Cantons and the Quest for Tribal ‘Lands’

Image via Wikipedia

All of Somalia’s so-called leaders share one mindset: the dismemberment of the country into cantons ruled by ruthless tribal chieftains whose goal is to ensure the security and protection of their clans. Previously, it was Somaliland that seceded in 1992 though not recognized by the international community.

In 1998, Somalia’s former Eastern region, declared autonomy with established governing institutions in place headed by a president and seconded by a cabinet. During the colonial era, this part of Somalia currently called Puntland was known as Majertinia-a reference to the Majertein clan that is the dominant clan in the region. Now we have proliferation of cantons led by politically inexperienced former cabdrivers from the Diaspora-each drawing governing styles from Somaliland and Puntland.

The current transitional government of Somalia has no mandate over the rest of the country because it is surrounded by hostile Jihadi forces determined to enforce sharia law by sheer force. With his mandate restricted to an area the size of the Vatican, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, the current transitional president, relies on African Union forces for protection. There has been mixed reactions among Somalis at the selection and endorsement of a Somali-American prime minister. With the mandate of the current transitional government ending eight months from now, one wonders how he can work miracles within such a short time.

The inhuman expulsion by the Puntland autonomous government of internally displaced persons from central and southern Somalia to the unforgiving city of Galkayo demonstrates the sadistic and appalling behavior of Somali tribal leaders and their total disregard for harmony and coexistence of Somali tribal groups. The subsequent arrest and marginalization of internally displaced families fleeing the unrest in the south by Somaliland and Puntland sets a bad precedent. Increased harassment of displaced families and the explosive territorial divisions currently visible in areas outside of the Islamists’ domain will set the stage for a future federal government based on tribal demarcations.

The current sorry state of Somalia is synonymous of an overflowing cooking pot being stirred by many unqualified chefs each struggling to set a nutritious meal on the table. Having too many cooks prepare one dish leads to poor results. Somalia has become a testing and breeding ground for a plethora of political theories and conflicting ideologies.

The boosting of AMISOM peacekeeping forces with an extra battalion from Burundi is to some, a way of accelerating peace and stability and the best approach to tranquilizing the powerful Islamists. To the contrary, more peacekeepers from African nations will open a can worms including escalation of hostilities, increased human displacements, and rapid dismemberment of the entire nation into ungovernable cantons.