Congo situation still dire

Serious fighting, displacement, and rapes are again flaring up in the DR Congo as rebel troops under Rebel commander Nkunda, government troops and other militias have clashed repeatedly since August in the eastern parts of the country. The situation worries the UN which released a statement earlier this week (whatever good that may do).
However amidst this grim state of affairs, is a particularly dark humanitarian disaster taking place, specifically sexual violence and rape on women and girls. Canadian journalist Stephanie Nolen writes about this here and here. While rape has declined in the rest of the country, nominally at peace, it has continued, and possible worsened in the East, described as a "weapon of war" by a Congolese social worker in the 2nd article.
The rapes and sexual violence are able to be committed in such high numbers because of the tremendous lawlessness and chaos in that region, including the DRC's border with Rwanda, where there is a mix of ethnic and natural resource competition at play.

The thing about China that some people don't seem to get, especially those in the media or academia, is that much as China's economic and geopolitical progress during this past decade is extremely impressive, so too is the extent of its problems. So while having the world's largest foreign reserves or the most internet-users in the world seem impressive, China also has serious problems that are characteristic of poorer developing countries and often in larger quantity. One such problem is that of child kidnapping and trafficking, which this Toronto Star article describes a sad case.
From the article:
"A 2007 U.S. State Department report said there may be 20,000 victims of human trafficking in China annually. Others claim as many as 70,000 children are kidnapped each year. State media say one of the key factors driving the stolen child market is the deeply rooted Chinese tradition of having a male heir in the family."
Besides children, women are also kidnapped and trafficked for prostitution or for marriage. I'm not saying this is the fault of the government, though their actions mentioned in the Star article are certainly heartless, and it is definitely a main responsibility for them to deal effectively with problems like these. This post is mainly to describe a serious problem, one of many, that China still faces and which precludes it from becoming a real superpower.

This fine article from the WaPost gives a great overview of China's geopolitical status in the world, one which is rarely stated or believed by many in the media. Although my reading of it is a bit belated- the article having been printed this July- this is a minor issue because the main gist of the article is still as relevant and effective now.
Basically the writer states that despite the tremendous frenzy over China from the media, the government, economists and others in society, the country is a long way from becoming a true superpower, especially one like the United States. Although this might be kind of obvious to some, one would never know it based on the amount of attention (hype) given to China such as nonfiction books and media stories proclaiming China to be the next superpower or the next big threat to the US or think-tanks releasing reports saying that China's economy will become the largest sometime by 2020 or 2050 and so on.
He gives 4 main points for his contrary opinion: "dire demographics, an overrated economy, an environment under siege and an ideology that doesn't travel well -- China is more likely to remain the muscle-bound adolescent of the international system than to become the master
of the world."

Using a combination of facts and personal experience, the writer effectively makes his case and states things that usually aren't said or explained in many articles about China, for instance its looming senior population explosion.

So earlier this week, the U.S. Congress failed to pass a federal bailout plan that would provide US$ 700 billion to help the economy cope with the current crisis. There were mixed reactions with many not surprised or glad that most Congressmen and women would reject it, as many of the U.S. public feel revulsion for what seems like a giant and costly bailout of the financial sector or even socialism for the rich, as I saw it described in one article. Others were disappointed because they believe that this bailout is necessary, not only for the Wall Street firms and financial institutions, but for the broader public who have borrowed any kind of loans from banks and such. Whatever the real situation is, there is a strong sentiment that the plan was presented badly and that the general public has a legitimate reason to feel disgust and apprehension over this plan being passed. There is also a lot of effort being made by U.S. federal officials like the President, the Treasury Secretary and the two main presidential candidates to convince the public that the bailout plan is absolutely essential for the nation. I think that this is true but not because the wellbeing of the financial institutions and banks are themselves intrinsically vital for the nation's wellbeing. The second article I linked to above, from Time, claims that the majority of the bailout plan is not going to help common people but financial assets held by the firms themselves. I do think what the writer says is largely true and I don't care much about the financial firms themselves. What I also think though is that these financial assets, much of them virtual garbage, comprise so much of the economy that if these firms go down, they will take America down with them.

This Newsweek article describes the inefficiency of india's PM Manmohan Singh's reign, much of which is not actually attributed to him personally but to party politics and general corruption and incompetence.

Following the wave of infant sickness in China stemming from milk deliberately added with a hazardous chemical, as well as other similar products, there has been a lot of outrage, both domestic and international, over food quality in China. This Toronto Star piece talks about how this crisis is symptomatic of the "Two Chinas" which exist in that nation. This dual state of affairs, in which proud achievements such hosting a great Olympics and developing a space program is contradicted by tremendous problems on the domestic front such as widespread low food and product quality and significant environmental pollution. What makes it worse is the milk crisis has two dimensions, the first being the roles of the milk companies who processed and distributed these contaminated products, and the second being the government cover-up which prevented and then delayed the release of information on the sicknesses.

Royson James of the Toronto Star has a good piece on the sad state of affairs in Haiti, which has suffered from 4 hurricanes this year. Not only is it in a seriously dire situation but it has been largely ignored by media and has not received as much aid as it needs. One of the poorest nations on Earth and so close to 2 of the wealthiest nations in the world- US and Canada. As James describes it poignantly: "the first black republic of the new world, the seat of a slave revolt that would send the pillars of Caribbean and American slavery toppling within 60 years. Maybe it's because France, America and other imperialists have never forgiven the country."
Famed activist, writer and medical doctor Paul Farmer has an article on Haiti's tremendous need for help in Counterpunch.

Here's an interesting piece on globalization by former HK governor Chris Patten (extracted from his new book) in the Guardian which might at first glance probably infuriate some of the good folks I went to school with who persist in seeing globalization as this great Western-led system of dominance.
Rather than bash it, people should understand it better, he says and points to the ironic use of globalisation by anti-globalisation activists to rally and fight it. He does say that in several developed nations like the US and the UK, most respondents in a survey thought globalization had a more negative than positive effect.
He then makes some thoughtful and effective criticisms of world trade but without blaming it on globalization itself as many do. He slams the protectionism of wealthy countries in imposing heavy tariffs on imports or banning them altogether which are hypocritical and exploitative to poor countries, as well as the obscene agricultural subsidies which powers like European nations and Japan grant to their farmers which thus enable them to keep their prices down and even export to poor countries. Of course, some might say that these unfair protectionist measures are main aspects of globalisation itself and which can't be seen as separate.

He also speaks out on the current financial crisis, saying that globalisation isn't to blame but the incompetence and greed of the financial players like banks and so on.

"I remember a banker once trying to explain to me how the mortgage of, say, an unemployed single parent in St Louis could be morphed into a triple-A rated financial investment in London, New York or Paris. Magically, impoverishment became a "special investment vehicle". Try as hard as the banker did to get me to comprehend the beautiful simplicities of the whole process, I remained baffled. It was, I suppose, some sort of relief later on to discover that it was not me who was stupid."

It's a very long article which goes all the way to the bottom but which is well worth the read.

The world is in the midst of the alleged worst economic global crisis (since the 30s with no end in sight, as the powerful USA got caught up with the closure of a venerated brokerage firm and the potential loss of another before being saved by the government. Here's some readings on this crisis:

The bailout of AIG may actually signal more potential financial turbulence up ahead as other larger firms also indulged in the same things it did.
This AsiaTimes article explains why an insurance giant was so affected by the financial crisis.

Whatever the specific financial causes of these events, it's not surprising that a system driven by high lending and borrowing and hence, often unsound loans, would collapse over time. It's smething that's always struck me as unsustainable in the long run, like a "house built on cards" sort of thing.

The world economy has been sputtering a lot this year and Asia's strong economies are showing serious signs of vulnerability. This Newsweek piece asserts "why Asia won't save the world" as Asian economies so dependent on export growth and on the American consumer are beset by inflation and unable to maintain their own growth. Asian powers like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have all been seriously affected which gives an idea of the extent of economic slowdown, with Japan and Taiwan's governments having to introduce hefty stimulus packages .
One wonders if these problems are indeed confirmation of the error in focusing on economic growth rather than a steady approach addressing domestic social problems which many of these countries especially India and China certainly have a lot of.

Is Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe starting to come to his sense? A power-sharing deal has been agreed upon which will see opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai become Prime Minister, though Mugabe will remain as President. Rightly so, people are skeptical and even worried like opposition leaders and even Tanzania's President. It will be interesting to check back in the near months to see how this joint government holds up.

The recent brief conflict between Russia and Georgia, fought over two disputed Georgian territories proved to be one of the most significant events of the year. Auspiciously, or inauspiciously, starting on the same day as the opening of the Beijing Olympics, this conflict set off a load of alarms all over the world, especially in Europe and the US, over the aggressiveness of Russia and the possibility of a new era of global confrontation with the heir of the West's Cold War foe Soviet Union. Several issues were perceived from the conflict including that of the right of places to secede due to ethnic or cultural differences (Kosovo being a striking example), which brought up inevitable comparisons with Taiwan's situation, Russia as a resurgent foe and possibly wanting to invade other nations namely Ukraine, and the role of the US as global superpower being brought into question, in its inability to directly assist Georgia. The biggest issue has to be that seemingly overnight, the possibility loomed of a new military conflict with a dangerous Russia and the West. Notwithstanding the many civil wars and conflicts happening all over the world and the US troubles in Afghanistan and Iraq, the closeness of the threat of Russian military actions on Europe aka the developed world and the European dependency on Russian oil supplies, shocked the EU.
There's no doubt that Russia delivered a savage retribution to Georgia which was far destructive and brutal than Georgia's initial aggression. In the interest of being a cooperative and moral power it should retreat from Georgian territory and allow for international probe and peacekeeping in the disputed areas. But there is also no question that Georgia was the aggressor, sending tanks and soldiers into the disputed territories and attempting to take control by force. The real question which should be asked is was there any substantial Western or American role in this action or was it solely the Georgian leader's prerogative?
Back in April earlier this year, there were already signs of possibly military action by Georgia which was detected by Russia who warned of retaliation.

A roundup of interesting reading:
Here's the French President warning of a "new Cold War" before an emergency NATO meeting in mid-August.
This piece written as the conflict broke out, claims that the conflict is mainly about Russia's concern and anger over Georgia's NATO yearning. The writer does make a good point about Russia's hypocrisy in crushing separatists in Chechnya while endorsing the rights of South Ossetia to separate.
Foreign affairs expert columnist Gwynne Dyer says a new Cold War might be possible.
This article from Canadian Dimension examines the role of the US as an instigator in the conflict given its support for Georgia's leader Saakashvili and its foreign policy moves.
Commentators such as this one think a Russian move on Ukraine is very plausible.
This Guardian editorial slams Russia for its military action and claims that this is a sign of its weakening.
And finally to get a good overview of the conflict, check the BBC here.

The Toronto Star has a touching story on a survivor of Sierra Leone's vicious civil war now making a new life in Toronto. Mariatu Kamara suffered through a double hand amputation as well as losing a baby from a prior rape, and she recalls these events in a book that was recently released-The Bite of the Mango. As the article points out, her story brings a new perspective to the conflict
because mostly the story has been told about the blood diamonds and former child soldiers, not of
civilian victims like her.

Some light on the Georgia-Russia conflict

The recent Georgia-Russia conflict which stemmed from Georgia's surprise attempt to retake a disputed region and Russia's equally surprisingly swift attack on Georgia has been one of the biggest stories in world news presently. Now coming to a probable close, the conflict raised significant fears and concerns, especially that of a resurgent and powerful Russia acting out against a smaller and weaker neighbor. A lot of the Western media has seemed to overlook the fact that Russia's move into Georgia was instigated by Georgia's bloody offensive to retake the disputed region of South Ossetia and the fact it is Georgia and not Russia who is the aggressor. This piece from the Nation talks about this while trying to provide a clearer understanding of the conflict. The writer admonishes the West for its hypocrisy in failing to recognise or ignoring the situation of South Ossetia especially in light of its aid and support for Kosovo's independence from Serbia.

Rabble also has an article on the link between cellphones and the crisis in the DR Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo, but referred to as "Congo" in the article). It shows the link that Canada, including 2 former Prime Ministers, have with this exploitative relationship. For those who don't know about the Congo crisis, here's a good little primer from Democracy Now.

Rabble news features an interesting conversation with the author of Planet of slums on the socioeconomic disparities and other details of Dubai, the extravagant world-famous city in the UAE known for its plethora of ambitious architectural and economic projects. Yet the excessively grand schemes of this opulent city also contains a significant undercurrent of shame and exploitation, as the author Mike Davis talks about. Dubai mainly relies on a huge number of migrant foreign laborers, who actually outnumber the locals, from South Asian countries like India and Pakistan to build its buildings and perform menial tasks like domestic labor and waitering. Many of these workers experience poor living conditions like cramped quarters, long hours of work, dangerous work environments and low pay. This has led to outbreaks of unrest and attempts at reforms by the authorities but which are not adequate.
Davis also tells how on a broader regional plane, while Dubai's extravagance might make it a juicy target for being in the midst of much poverty and conflict, it protects itself through its connections with major regional players like Iran and the US.

So hopefully the next time you hear about or see Dubai and its grand projects in the news, consider the vast socio-economic inequalities behind their constructions and how superficial that grandeur is.

The poorest billionaires in the world

This article shows how low the economy has sank in Zimbabwe. Inflation has been sky-high for a long time now but it seems new heights are always being reached.
According to the IRIN article:
"A loaf of bread costs Z$100 billion at the official rate, a kilogramme of meat Z$450 billion, (around US$5.60) and a half-litre sachet of milk sells for Z$200 billion (about US$2.50)."

Just a few days ago in July 19, Zimbabwe's Central Bank released $100 billion notes, actually "bearer checks". This is a rapid increase from earlier this year in January, when it issued bills in denominations of $1 million, $5 million, and $10 million -- and then in May, bills from $25 million and $50 million up to $25 billion and $50 billion.

The IRIN article also says that the official inflation rate is at 2.2 million percent and rising every day. What this means is that money is constantly depreciating so that what may cost, say $10 million today may cost $15 million Friday. The casual labourer quoted in the article tells of having to line up outside the bank for 4 hours to withdraw $100 billion, the daily limit imposed by Zimbabwe's Reserve Bank, and that he will have to come back the next day to do the same because of fears the money will depreciate even more, not to mention the fact that he will need more money because the $100 billion withdrawn will not last more than a few days.

A look at India-China relations.

This Taiwan Journal article offers an interesting commentary on India-China relations, painting a not so rosy picture despite increased ties between the two. The article instead claims that on different issues like India's push for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, border and territorial negotiations and most importantly, a proposal by India for an "open and inclusive security architecture" in Asia, China has not responded warmly. The article also describes the alarming incursion by Chinese troops into Indian territory, such as this one.
One would think that if these two Asian heavyweights were ever to truly cooperate in any sort of vital issue, they could indeed wield some substantial influence on the world stage. Instead there's still lingering suspicions between the two despite growing trade.

The Toronto Star's Haroon Siddiqui writes about the huge cost to Iraq that has been caused by the American occupation and which America needs to take full responsibility for solving.
"An age-old civilization and its remnants have been destroyed.

A whole generation of Iraqi civilians has been killed, maimed and uprooted. Between 80,000 and 1.2 million are dead (depending on which estimate you go by). More than 4 million have been made refugees – half forced into exile in Jordan and Syria, and the other half internally uprooted."

This just has to be the largest catastrophe in the world in this decade, surpassing those of even the Darfur genocide, Afghanistan (which also involves the US) and even the great natural disasters like the Asian tsunami. The DR Congo might be the only one to rival it though.

The Kielburger brothers always write interesting and informative articles on many international social issues. Here they've written something different from their regular articles, as their latest article is about the relationship between China and the US which binds them more tighter than many would think. Specifically this is referring to their economic trade relations in which China has a huge surplus with the US, exporting more to the US than importing, while also buying up a lot of American treasury securities.
As the authors note:

"China is now so deeply invested in U.S. securities, any disruption to the value of the dollar would be a serious blow to its own reserves. Reliant as they are on the U.S. market for goods, the Chinese are forced to buy up new securities as soon as they're issued to prevent their currency, the yuan, from appreciating against the U.S. dollar. Neither country holds a significant advantage over the other."

The thing is not only does China depend on the US to buy a lot of its products, but it also needs the US to keep a strong economy and currency in order for its own vast holdings of American treasuries to maintain their value, to the point of propping up the US currency by continuously buying up American treasury securities. In essence, the US has little leverage over China.

Of course, China does realise the vulnerability of their situation and raised some concerns by suggesting selling off some of their US dollars last year which they later retracted. They have also tried to invest in more US-dollar non-treasury investments such as Morgan Stanley.
See this table for the list of foreign countries who own American treasury securities. As you can see, China is by far the number two owner though it is relatively a little behind Japan. Keep in mind Japan's economy is greater than China's.

The Economist has a decent article on the recent direct flights between China and Taiwan which clearly describes the intricacies in the visits by Chinese tourists which outline the delicate relationship between the two "Chinas". For instance, the flights still have to fly through Hong Kong airspace rather than directly between Taiwan and China "because Taiwan's military is on constant alert for an air attack from the mainland, and analysts say it cannot afford to let civilian flights clutter cross-straits radars."
There seems to be a lot of goodwill and hope surrounding these visits by politicians and leaders of both sides, as these visits are a potential significant step to improving and closer relations. One wonders how the majority of Taiwanese feel.

Straight out of some James Bond or Tom Clancy Rainbow six novel, longtime hostage and cause celebre Ingrid Betancourt was rescued from captivity in a bloodless operation carried out Wednesday involving some admirable ingenuity, trickery and betrayal. In all seriousness, this was great news, not just because of her status and length captivity but also the fact no blood was shed.

The background of this event is the recent declining fortune of FARC-Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the leftist rebel army that has been fighting a longstanding guerilla war against the Colombian state for over 40 years. Over the past year, they've suffered some defeats and setbacks including the assasination of top leaders, the capture of key documents which almost precipitated a Colombia-Venezuela war a few months ago, and numerous defections. The US government has helped Colombia a lot with confronting the FARC, providing over $4 billion in military aid (Plan Colombia) since 2000 such as training and providing equipment. While this aid is ostensibly for anti-narcotic actions on cocaine, which the FARC also derives a significant income from, much of the military aid goes towards anti-FARC military operations.
The FARC has its origins in the aftermath of concentrated state campaigns against Marxist enclaves in the sixties but it seems over time their goals have shifted from Marxist revolutionary social change to greed, trafficking and wanton thuggery. Newsweek has a recent piece on this decline of the FARC to "a bunch of crooks".

This does not mean they are wholly responsible for this enduring civil conflict because right-wing paramilitaries and even the state have also engaged in oppressive and violent acts as well.
Global exchange has a bunch of articles critical towards the role of the US and Colombian state in the civil conflict. But in all essence, this is a guerilla movement who has lost its purpose, fighting for no one but itself.

McClatchy has a good article on the human toll in Zimbabwe and the probable reasons for Mugabe's resurgence through using violence and intimidation. The main reason- the hardliner former "freedom fighters" from Zimbabwe's independence struggles in the seventies and eighties who still retain a lot of power in Mugabe's ZANU-PF ruling party and the armed forces. Former ZANU-PF high-ranker and presidential contender Simba Makoni also lost substantial support because of these hardliners. This makes a lot of sense because in reality, oppressive regimes are often more than just the work and actions of one man and Zimbabwe is no different. As notorious and infamous as Mugabe is, he alone cannot be held responsible for Zimbabwe's failings and oppression. Kind of similar with the US where George W. despite the widespread amount of loathing for him, also cannot be solely blamed for all America's actions under his rule.

So the election in Zimbabwe came and went with the expected result. Mugabe won easily due to the pullout of the opposition candidate Tsvangirai because of serious intimidation, violence and expected tampering by the state, though apparently some voters still were able to voice displeasure by writing on ballot papers. Sure the UN and other Western powers criticised the result but this just highlights their impotence because Mugabe will continue to paint them as imperialists who want to dominate Africans. I think that the regional body SADC and Zimbabwe's neighbors have to take the main initiative to confront Mugabe.

The ordeal in Zimbabwe continues with no end in sight as events have deteriorated significantly since elections back in March. By ordeal, I'm referring to the political crisis which began in March and also the general situation for most many Zimbabweans in which basic necessities of life such as food, water, electricity, jobs and of course, personal safety, have been severely reduced. Since the March elections in which the opposition won the majority of seats in parliament, a presidential run-off was announced for June 27, 2 days from now and there have been killings committed by the state and Mugabe supporters on opposition members and supporters, not to mention widespread torture, imprisonment and intimidation, all in an effort to dissuade opposition supporters from voting. Things have gotten so bad that opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has pulled out of the run-off because of fears that it will be unfair due to state tampering and intimidation. Zimbabwean leader (tyrant) Robert Mugabe's reign seems set to continue unimpeded for the near future.
The international community, the regional community and Zimbabwe's heavyweight neighbor South Africa have all been helpless in creating a solution to this crisis and force Mugabe to cease his oppression, reduced to weak criticisms and a non-binding resolution. The regional body of state, SADC (Southern African Development Community) has called for a postponement of the poll and talks to be held between the ruling party Mugabe's ZANU-PF and the opposition MDC.
Even with the tremendous amount of state oppression and violence in Zimbabwe, regional leaders are still divided in their stance towards Mugabe with sentiment of old shared anti-colonial struggle still playing a role, no doubt concerning Mugabe's past as an African independence hero, a past which seems less and less real.

The economic troubles of the West, specifically in the US and to a lesser extent Europe has led some pundits to highlight the coming decline of the West while the East rises. This Asiatimes article proclaims that while Western capitalist bastions have fallen into serious debt, unemployment and inflation, Eastern powers like China and India as well as lesser former communist countries are experiencing the opposite fate as their economies power on. While my first sentence was a bit simple and filled with cliches, it still features some truth. What's really interesting is the writer's reference to an academic's claim that the defeat of communism emboldened and enabled Western capitalist elites to ramp up their economic dominance at the expense of the broader cross-section of their countries' society. The article also criticises Western economic elites and institutions for unsound economic policies such as reckless spending and actions like "collateralized borrowing and lending" in which certain assets are packaged into markets and borrowed over and over. Now my understanding of the complexities of economics and finance are virtually non-existent but I do think that reckless spending by both the public and the state, increasing budgetary deficits and capital based on over-valued assets is not very healthy.
I do find that this critique is much too optimistic of the "rise" of Asian countries, as with many similar pieces on the growing economic power of developing powers, because there are so many significant mostly domestic problems they face which can't or aren't yet addressed by their economic progress.

Burundi peace

A rebel group in Burundi has finally signed a peace agreement with the government after recent fighting which lasted for 6 weeks and threatened to escalate. This now means that peace has been agreed to with all major rebel groups in this small, blighted country. Why this is so important is also why Burundi is so blighted. The country has the misfortune of suffering a civil war which has lasted for about 15 years and killed over 250,000 people while situated next to Rwanda. By now, Rwanda's genocide in 1994 is world-famous and an extremely notorious example in human rights abuse and neglect by world powers and the UN.
By comparison, extremely little has been written or reported about Burundi's civil war, which also has a Hutu-Tutsi emnity like Rwanda. Situated right next to each other and formerly part of the same colony, they both have the same ethnic groups and similar clashes and conflicts between the Hutu and Tutsi. Doubtless the tremendous loss of life in Burundi's civil war has been largely ignored or overlooked by international media as it is overshadowed by Rwanda's genocide and the DR Congo's conflicts and wars, both of which have higher death tolls.

This very recent peace agreement which I mentioned above, represents a hope that things can continue to improve, in light of successful elections in 2005 and a relative stability since at least 2006.
This excerpt from a yahoo news article gives a decent brief summary of the civil war:

"Burundi, like neighbouring Rwanda, has been marked by differences between Hutus and Tutsis.
The central African country's civil war broke out in 1993. That year, the country's first Hutu president was assassinated during a failed coup organised by Tutsi military officers.
The conflict stretched more than a decade and killed 300,000 people, and the country today faces a stagnant economy and a paralysed parliament.
A ceasefire agreement was signed in December 2002 by the government and the main Hutu rebel movement, the Forces for the Defense of Democracy (FDD), which finally entered government in November 2003. The FNL, however, also a Hutu group, refused to enter into talks with the government at the time."

This article gives a good summary of China's rescue attempts for the Sichuan earthquake aftermath. So China does have good infrastructure in general and its leaders do have a bit of empathy and concern of its citizens, in stark contrast to many authoritarian regimes like Burma's junta or going way back, Ethiopia's Marxist regime in the eighties during its infamous famine. The author does reiterate an allegation I've seen elsewhere that several buildings like schools collapsed very quickly while some government buildings remained upright, signifying local corruption in terms of possibly using cheaper or less material to build schools while money saved is pocketed by others. Anyways, assuming the writer is reliable and knows his stuff, I am impressed by his complimentary description of China's capabilities in physical infrastructural-wise sense:

Within hours of the quake, China was able to mobilize its vast human resources and target them at a massive disaster in a remote and forbidding region. More than 100,000 troops, police, medical workers and volunteers of every kind were astonishingly quick to reach the worst-hit cities, to search for survivors, offer relief, and evacuate the homeless to sports stadiums and tents.

It may have seemed chaotic at first, but a closer look revealed it as an impressive display of China's economic prowess. China's modern infrastructure - expressways, bridges, airports, bulldozers, excavators, cranes, trucks and vast fleets of private cars - allowed most of the quake victims to get help within days (even though many villages were bypassed in the early response).

As an organizational feat, it was extraordinary. Much of the response was improvised and instinctive, yet it meshed together in unexpectedly efficient ways, using the best of government muscle, military power, corporate resources, individual volunteerism and grassroots creativity.

On the other hand:
Chinese rescue workers readily admitted that their efforts were hobbled by a severe shortage of life-detecting equipment and sniffer dogs, which the foreign teams would have provided.

Overall, I would think that China, in terms of its authorities and its people, are making a very solid, conscientious effort to deal with this disaster such as rescuing trapped victims and helping survivors. Long term, the challenge will be to help the survivors rebuild their lives and to enforce more stringent building regulations to ensure this amount of destruction will never occur again.

Earthquake photos

This page, again from EastSouthWestNorth, has literally hundreds of photos of scenes from the Sichuan earthquake-affected areas in China such as debris, searchers, debris and unfortunately victims.

EastSouthWestNorth has some gripping coverage, from Chinese news agencies, of the earthquake including a girl who had to undergo a foot amputation and a man who was trapped in debris for 3 days and at the end, talked to reporters while still trapped.
In addition, there is also criticism of the response by the authorities to the earthquake by writers, bloggers and online forum users. This isn't surprising given that authorities have been criticised for other disasters such as the transportation pileups caused by snow storms and several environmental pollution problems. There are complaints of the slow response times by the authorities and the inadequacies of China's disaster response efforts, the bulk of which are conducted by the army. The structural designs of many of the buildings which collapsed were also called into question because they may have been inferior or poorly designed to withstand physical disasters like earthquakes.

This writer writes a critical well-articulated letter which openly criticises the government but also stresses the right to do so, in the face of criticisms against him by others. Unity in the time of disasters like this is important but just as, or more important is accountability which letters like this serve to enforce.
What is certain is that despite China's roaring economy and gigantic foreign reserves, it still lacks in vital areas such as physical infrastructure and disaster response capabilities.

The recent earthquake in China's Sichuan province has exacted a gigantic toll in terms of lives, infrastructure and other resources. Yet it may also provide a significant example of China's actual rescue, military and other capabilities through China's response to this tragedy.
The reason why this issue is relevant is because of popular line of thinking of China as an emerging superpower. This is a notion that sounds good and might have some merits but on the whole, it is not very true. This Asia Times Online piece tries to debunk this thinking with some comparative facts of China's economic growth. The author also questions the soundness of China's institutions like its legal framework and social welfare capabilities as being inadequate. While the bleak predictions may be a bit farfetched-China breaking up into separate regional zones for one- most of the descriptions of China's weaknesses and the falseness of claims of China as an "emerging superpower" are spot on, in my opinion.

This Newsweek article is a fine piece of work which makes several good points regarding China's military spending which are often not found in many other articles and news stories. Primarily that China's military spending, as large as it may seem, is nothing significant at all compared to the US as well as in the context of its geostrategic position. The writer notes accurately, that the majority of China's fighters, submarines and army vehicles are old. Regarding the geostrategic position, here's a short paragraph from the article:

"The Middle Kingdom, moreover, sits in the middle of a tough neighborhood. It's not only the U.S. fleet off its shores Beijing must contend with. Of China's four nuclear neighbors—Russia, India, Pakistan and North Korea—two (Russia and India) spend almost as much on defense as China does (so does nonnuclear Japan), and at least two (Pakistan and North Korea) are potentially unstable. Just a generation ago, China was defeated in war by tiny Vietnam."

I just saw this and I was quite taken aback though not in a bad way. Taiwan will allow direct chartered weekend flights between China and Taiwan from July 4, and then plans are in place to expand the service to daily flights, by the end of the year, which is even more astounding and impressive.
Recently the Vice-President elect Vincent Siew held a one-on-one meeting with China's President Hu Jintao at the Boao forum in Hainan, the most high-level interaction between China and Taiwan in over half a century. It seems progress is definitely being made on cross-straits relations and better economic performance will happen for Taiwan, at least in tourism due to the expected influx of visitors from China.
Direct air links will bring about a significant impact of normalization in cross-straits relations due to enabling the actual arrival of Chinese and Taiwanese on each other's soils after taking direct flights. This will obviously bring both "countries" closer together and some might believe, eventual reunification. How would people in Taiwan react to having loads of visitors from the mainland coming into Taiwan every week? Of course, people from Taiwan constantly visit China anyways but then Taiwan is always the one on the defensive in this cross-straits geopolitics.
I'm personally a bit skeptical of course, because of my personal experience of hearing how strong some Taiwanese people identify with Taiwan. I think some people, including from Hong Kong, underestimate the pride and faith that many Taiwanese feel for Taiwan and I don't think they will easily accept losing any of their current autonomy and allow China to regain Taiwan in their present state. Despite the idealism, for some Taiwanese, things like democracy, free media and a vibrant open society are things to be treasured. I guarantee that the time when China has a reasonable level of those three things, Taiwan would lose a lot of its reluctance and defiance for reunification.
But certainly this latest development-the announcement of direct air flights-bodes well for the near future.

The situation in Zimbabwe continues to muddle along as Robert Mugabe prolongs his reign by any means necessary with the latest being to hold recounts in several constituencies which were supposedly won by the opposition MDC, helped by the less-than-firm remarks by South African leader Thabo Mbeki. One must sympathise a bit with the opposition who have had to endure so much tribulations in the past and in the recent weeks. Kofi Annan speaks out to demand more action by African leaders, especially regional leaders to resolve this issue. As long as Mugabe has the support of Mbeki, however lukewarm and reluctant, as well as access to arms and control of the army, he stands a good chance of maintaining his dictatorial control for now.

While the situation in Tibet, China seems to have calmed down in terms of the street violence, international repercussions still persist and the uproar over China's supposed oppressiveness of Tibet has grown. It is clear that negative feelings towards China from many people in the West have arisen, not just from this recent Tibet situation but also from Darfur where blame has been put on China for maintaining economic relations with the Sudanese government.
Feelings of anger and indignation have also arisen in many Chinese as well however, judging from the reaction on online Chinese forums and websites. One of the most notable is anti-cnn.com which, though I can't read chinese (shame on me), features several pictures and adjoining explanations in english which show clearly what's going on. Before you dismiss this site as pure chinese propoganda garbage, go to the site and scroll down the whole page and look at the pictures.
Apparently news outlets like CNN have put up pictures of protests where Tibetan Buddhist monks protesting have been restrained and arrested by police and then state in the captions that the pictures are of crackdowns in China. The problem is that these pictures are clearly showing people and events in Nepal and India, places that are near but not China.
This doesn't change the fact that Tibetans have been arrested in China for protesting but the point is that the anti-cnn website does have a point, that CNN and other outlets were very erroneous and certainly unprofessional in making these kinds of mistakes. In fact there are quite a number of media websites and tv broadcasts in America, Germany and England which anti-cnn show featuring mistaken identifications of Tibet for scenes in Nepal and India.
HK-based media professor and journalist Rebecca MacKinnon also has a post about anti-cnn.com and its criticisms which are accurate, the view from many Chinese over the Tibet protests and government reaction such as unblocking youtube to allow anti-Western and pro-China videos to be accessed. Media manipulation or misrepresentation has occurred on both Western and Chinese media so strong levelheadedness has to be exercised to determine the true events and forces.

March has proven to be a very tumultuous month for China as protests in Tibet broke out and continued despite state crackdown. This event has been in the news a lot lately and it doesn't seem as if it's going to end soon. While mainly I'm talking about the international ramifications of the Tibet protests, things in China don't seem to be ending quietly either.
It's been a rough chain of controversies for China over the past 8 months or so as the Beijing Olympics come closer to starting this August. There was the monk riots in Burma last year, then the outcries and accusations against China for the continuing genocide in Darfur, Sudan and now this in Tibet.
I've argued before that China doesn't deserve much of the blame levelled against it for Darfur, but the cases do seem overwhelming against China now. Another major issue which is at play here is the status of China in the world. Is it a major power which is one of the world's most glamourous and heralded nations or is it still a developing nation bedeviled with serious internal social flaws combined with an indifferent foreign policy?
Imagethief states this quandary pretty well here-
"The Chinese expected the Olympics to change foreign perceptions of China for the better. Foreigners expected the Olympics to change China for the better."

This looks to be the biggest blow to China's reputation in regards to holding this year's Olympics Games. Steven Spielberg, the famous director has quit his role as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics because of his differences towards China's relationship with Sudan, which has been accused of supporting genocide in Darfur. While this seems a brave move full of integrity by Spielberg, one wonders whether criticism of China is getting out of hand. The criticism, especially those made by American actress Mia Farrow including at one point saying in a Wall Street Journal editorial that Spielberg risked becoming seen as a latter-day version of a film director who collaborated with the Nazis to become a "chief propagandist" for them, is full of ridiculous hyberbole. To compare China to the Nazis of WWII is a foolish claim that has no substance. Similarly, accusations of China "underwriting" genocide are also very foolish and verge on the point of discrimination and slander. The main reason I believe so has to do with looking at intentions, specifically China's own. Is China selling arms and buying oil from Sudan because China wants to support or encourage atrocities against the Darfurians? No, I really do not think so. The main purpose of China conducting economic relations with Sudan and other not so benevolent regimes is for its own economic gain and to guarantee energy supplies which are especially needed for China's giant energy needs.
I do think that China needs to be more aware of the consequences however, such as the negative perceptions when it does business with regimes like Sudan's, and has to realize how with a wider world profile, there is also an accompanying responsibility. Or is it? I mean, judging from certain powers such as the US and the UK, doing business with shady regimes and rulers has been a common practice. Nevertheless China does need to show more recognition of the tremendous suffering being inflicted in Darfur by Sudanese government-supported forces,and should do all that it can to influence the government to somehow stop or cut down on such actions. But the world, especially supposedly nice, caring activists like Farrow need to realise that the world is a complicated place and that focusing on China as such an evil villain is naive, foolish and erroneous.

Rebels attack Chad's capital

Large-scale armed violence broke out recently in Chad as rebel forces stormed the capital N' Djamena before being driven out by government forces. Tensions are high in Chad where rebel groups oppose the nation's leader, President Idriss Deby who they view as corrupt and authoritarian. The Chadian authorities are blaming Sudan for supporting the rebels. Conversely Sudan has accused Chad's government of supporting anti-government Darfurian rebels in Darfur. Many refugees from the Darfur conflict have gone across to Chad, which lies on Darfur's Western border. While the circumstances behind these events seem complicated, they provide a perfect illustration of the complexity surrounding many African conflicts. Not only do they affect local peoples, but neighboring countries are often affected and sometimes, actively involved. The Congo War during the late nineties which involved at least 5 other African nations is a significant example, as is the West African civil wars in Sierra Leone and Liberia.

This Walrus blog post offers another take on the situation there, a somewhat more reserved perspective from many other articles about the electoral violence. At the same time, there's no doubt that serious problems are going on. Hundreds of people killed, tens of thousands fleeing from their homes, places burning, of course this is terrible.
The post tries to say that inspite of these problems, the country is not falling apart or being consumed by violence and barbarity, as much as certain parts may be. I have a sad feeling though that in reality, the sheer amount of tragedy and suffering in Africa means there's a high threshold for true disaster and what's going on in Kenya now maybe isn't there yet.

This BBC article gives a good commentary on the ethnic tensions apparent in the Kenya crisis. It's important to understand that these tensions aren't necessarily products of pure ethnic hatred or prejudice but exacerbated and exploited by political leaders. Thus when one leader or governing regime favors its own ethnic group by giving land and high-status jobs, then consequently other groups will feel very resentful.

Major violence has broken out in the past few weeks in Kenya over election result disputes, resulting in lots of deaths, injuries and people fleeing their homes. All this mainly stems from overwhelming anger by the opposition and its supporters over the election results which they believe contained significant vote-tampering. The incumbent, President Mwai Kibaki won by a very small margin of 230,000 out of a total of 10 million.
However, it is unfortunate that this great anger and violence that has broken out is strongly based on ethnic tensions. This ethnic tension is a result of continued corruption and patronism during Kibaki's rule in which his fellow Kikuyu were perceived to have benefited whilst many other Kenyans have suffered from poverty and unemployment.
The incumbent party is mainly Kikuyu-supported whilst the opposition has their support mainly based on other, smaller tribes such as the Luo.

This goes to show that ethnic-based tensions and conflicts are still apparent in Africa. Even more disturbing though is the fact that this has taken place in a country considered one of Africa's more stable and even prosperous nations. Ethnic-based politics and tensions have been around since independence as Kenya's first leader Jomo Kenyatta favored his fellow Kikuyus. His successor Daniel arap Moi was a member of another group, the Kalenjin and they were rewarded accordingly during his reign. As the current President Kibaki is also a Kikuyu, many Kikuyu have become the victims of violence and resentment.

Nevertheless it's hard to understand exactly why ethnic violence has broken out when in previous years there has been relative peace and coexistence between the different groups of Kenya. Media pieces like this from Newsweek describe the stability that existed in places like the Mathare slum and of how surprised some Kenyans themselves are of this outbreak of ethnic tension.
This other Newsweek story presents a grim account of gang violence in Nairobi, again based on ethnic identities. This was preceded by violence last year concerning a sect, the Mungiki, which committed atrocities and engaged in firefights with Kenyan police.

"Throughout much of last spring, in part because of the run-up to the elections but also for a host of other reasons, huge swaths of Kenya were succumbing to a particularly undulant, brutal kind of gangsterism. In episode after episode, many of which were documented by Kenyan reporters, innocent people were beheaded, skinned, raped, murdered and tortured by members of a secretive outlawed sect called Mungiki."

China's economic growth has been described as staggeringly impressive in many quarters especially in the last few years. One of the most recent examples of this impressive is the huge amount of foreign reserves that China has amassed which now stands at around 1.4 Trillion $US. With this amount, China has a lot of potential to impact world financial markets significantly especially through using some of its reserves to make investments and purchases of foreign assets.
Well apparently, not so fast as the following article says.

This article in Asian Times warns of a coming crash in China's stock market but it also paints a pessimistic picture of China's financial health, specifically that many of China's banks which are state-owned, are basically unprofitable and holding onto bad loans which combined total over a trillion. Many Chinese state-owned enterprises borrow large amounts from these state-owned banks which many do not pay back.
The following excerpt explains this scenario:

"To see why a crash may be coming, it is worth examining the behavior of the China Investment Corporation, the US$200 billion sovereign wealth fund set up by the Chinese government in September.
...
Six weeks ago, the power of sovereign wealth funds was celebrated and China Investment's moves into the market were awaited with bated breath.
Well, so much for that. A third of China Investment's portfolio is to be invested in Central Huijin Investment Company, a purchaser of bad loans from the Chinese banks, and another third will recapitalize China Agricultural Bank and China Development Bank, to shape them up for privatization.
....
The lackluster investment strategy of China Investment exposes a central flaw in the Chinese economy, its lack of a rational system of capital allocation. For more than a decade, Chinese state-owned companies have made losses and have been propped up by the banking system.
...
None of these losses have resulted in bankruptcy; instead the cash flow deficits have been covered by the Chinese banks. As a result, these banks have an enormous volume of bad loans $911 billion at May 2006, according to a later-withdrawn estimate by Ernst & Young, which must surely have ballooned to $1.2 trillion to $1.3 trillion now.

That explains why China Investment is somewhat unaggressive in its international investment strategy. China's $1.4 trillion of reserves will in fact almost all be required to prop up the banking system when the inevitable liquidity crisis occurs."

The writer goes on to say that with this huge banking problem, China will experience an economic downturn such as what happened to Japan in the nineties after exorbitant corporate overspending and the subsequent bursting of their economic bubble. Slow economic growth or huge inflation will ensue and then China might experience significant domestic turmoil. This will surely have a very negative effect on the world economy especially as the US economy isn't doing so good lately.

Iraq doesn't exist anymore?

That's the bold opinion that is stated in this interview that Counterpunch has with a writer, Nir Rosen who spent 2 years in Iraq.

"Now Iraq doesn't exist anymore. ........ There is no Iraq. There is no Iraqi government and none of the underlying causes for the violence have been addressed, such as the mutually exclusive aspirations of the rival factions and communities in Iraq."

Lots of interesting stuff, but nothing that's said is really surprising, such as that the US had no real plan for Iraq after they invaded in '03, that the exodus of middle and upper-class Iraqi professionals is devastating for society and that ultimately the current decrease in violence is only a temporary lull which is likely to intensify in future. Rosen also says that he does not believe that the sectarian conflict which has ravaged Iraq in the last few years was deliberately facilitated by the US as they did not know enough about the state of affairs in Iraq before they invaded. I'd think that was reasonable, as the US administration was really narrow-minded, or just plain ignorant and idiotic, in the way they envisaged how the situation would turn out to be after they invaded and deposed Saddam. This doesn't take away from the American responsibility from the mess they caused in Iraq with the fighting, the deaths,the internal and external refugee exodus and all that.

2008 Prediction for Africa from the Economist

The Economist puts out a bold prediction for Africa in its World in 2008 report by stating frankly that African will be worse.
China will wear out its welcome but the main point is that in spite of economic growth, there will not be enough jobs to bring people out of poverty, whether in urban slums or the rural areas.
As the article says, lack of infrastructure and foreign investment will make it very difficult for governments to provide much jobs to locals. Less understandably, the article also mentions that hurdles to foreign employees such as small numbers of available work visas will also affect improvement. Why exactly do there need to be more foreign employment if there are already a lack of jobs. The author might be referring to Africans who have immigrated abroad and want to return to work in their home countries. If so there might be a valid point though I didn't know that they would need work visas.

Almost every time one reads about Africa, it's bad news and the sad part is that there's a lot of truth in them. There are some little pieces of optimism such as the renewed purpose of the African Union in dealing with continental issues, ineffective though it may be for now and NEPAD, as well as the rebuilding in Sierra Leone and Liberia, but they only represent a small part of the state of affairs in Africa, much of it not good.

Why is there so much international focus on humanitarian violations of enemies of West, especially by Western liberals but not on allies of the West who commit humanitarian violations of their own? This article asks and states a very interesting point relating to human rights violations and oppressions and the focus in the West. For instance, Sudan and Zimbabwe receive a lot of bad press, and deservedly so, and their leaders made to look like devils or psychos (Mugabe), but others like Western allies Uganda and Ethiopia do not receive much attention.
It's very interesting and it really makes you think about atrocities and injustices happening in Africa, in that even in supposedly clearcut cases of oppression, there might be others that are just as bad but are not mentioned much at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't massive atrocities occurring in Sudan, Darfur but that the author makes a really good point.

Following the mass street marches led by monks against the military junta in Burma, repressive measures have been fully undertaken by the junta to crush these marches including mass arrests, raids on monasteries and military presence in the streets. Around the world, concerned activists held rallies on October 6 to call on their governments to take action and to show support for the people of Burma.
While concerns arise over whether Western governments have the will and means to mount any form of intervention, the bigger question is over the stance of China and India to the situation in Burma, as they are both trading partners of the regime. This would be a great opportunity for China to use its moral powers in persuading the junta to allow more freedoms and to gain goodwill from the world. But given the official Chinese stance of non-involvement in "internal affairs" of other countries and respect for sovereignty, it's hard to see Beijing agreeing to Western intervention or to press hard on the Burmese junta to stop its repression.

This past week Buddhist monks in Myanmar (Burma) marched in the streets for days to protest the military junta that rules the country. With the junta being one of the most oppressive regimes in the world and having ruled for over 19 years, many Myanmar citizens went out onto the streets as well to support the monks and criticize the government. Predictably the junta responded with armed suppression, firing on and arresting many protesters and critics. Some were even killed but the actual death toll remains unclear.
The junta even cut the nation's Internet, after images and blogs on the protests were posted within Burma, allowing the world to see and know what was going on. Some of the photos quite clearly showed the protestors as well as the troops, as these from racoles on flickr. It's very remarkable how technology can make us seem close to events yet be so far away and helpless. Also knowing the about backdrop to these protests, of the military regime and how back in 1988 thousands of Myanmese were killed in similar street protests, makes me understand how poignant and desperate the situation is.
The protestors, as well as Myanmar diaspora around the world are putting hope on the UN and the world in general, and even the US to help them overcome junta rule. To me, it seems unlikely though that the military junta will bow to world pressure and relinquish their rule, especially given they have tacit support from some neighboring countries who do a lot of trade with Myanmar for its natural resources. The junta has enjoyed a long and relatively stable rule and have endured a lot of world criticism that they do not care much about their lack of legitimacy on the world stage.

"you got rid of one Saddam and you left us with 50."

This is a good article from the Guardian on the situation in Iraq. A historian visited Iraq and not surprisingly came up with the conclusion that the Americans really messed up the invasion, ignored realities of the nation and made things much worse than it was under Saddam. This is best summed up by what one Iraqi said in the article which is both the title of the article and of this post. By ignoring skeptics, critics and informed experts on Iraq, the American Bush-led administration, as well as UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, rushed into Iraq with a simplistic and short-sighted mission to topple Saddam and take over the country. This initially succeeded but when it came to the nitty-gritty of running the country and helping Iraqis rebuild a post-Saddam society, they failed miserably. Of course, there are accusations, quite a lot of them actually, that the Americans were never really interested in helping the Iraqi people and were just interested in oil. But that's another story of course.

About the civil struggles that have broken out between Sunni, Shiite and Kurd elements, historian Charles Tripp had this to say- "...we were trying to say that there was a complex society in Iraq which shouldn't be reduced to the caricature of Saddam Hussein sitting upon the oppressed masses. The oppressed masses have their own agenda - and sometimes they're very nasty indeed."

It's getting harder to post more here, not just because of school but also because of a change of heart. I'm still interested and concerned in world affairs but more and more it seems this will decrease in the future. Anyways, for now I'll just post this on Israel's declaration of Gaza as hostile. Israel bases this decision on the firing of rockets by militants in Gaza. Since last year Gaza has been under an embargo as Israel maintains a tight grip over it. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says it best with this, "There are 1.4 million people in Gaza, including the old, the young and the sick, who are already suffering from the impact of prolonged closure. They should not be punished for the unacceptable actions of militants and extremists."

Interesting points made by Gwynne Dyer on Asian dynamics among several powers and China. Apparently the growing "might" of China is causing enough alarm and concern to Japan, India, the US and Australia to cause them to want to form some sort of unofficial alliance and work together. Of course the situation is not as simple as it sounds like here. However that doesn't mean that the gist of it isn't correct. I've read of the US desire for a stronger India acting as a counterpart to neighboring China in several sources. As Dyer and others have written, that is what the US nuclear deal with India in 2005 was about as the cooperation offered by the US was very significant.
China isn't trying or going to be very belligerent (except over Taiwan) as they have been increasing cooperation and agreements with many of its neighbors especially SouthEast Asia. It's no secret that China is trying to upgrade and strengthen its military but so what? Why is this not allowed, why is there so much furor over China's military spending when much smaller England and France spend just as much or even more. If there is any evidence that China will use its military to attack or invade any other country, then that'd be a very serious concern.

These Guardian articles focus on the harshness of the situation in Afghanistan and the serious toll on British troops. What's really telling is the underlying point that the Taliban have regrouped and rearmed enough that they have become a serious threat to the British. While this is true for the Canadians as well, the British military is supposed to be more competent and feared. For instance, this quote from the second article- "In terms of soldiering, the conflict has offered some of the most intense fighting for 50 years, with two million rounds of ammunition so far fired by British forces." gives an idea of the fierceness of the fighting there for the British.

This Toronto Star article suggests that if fighting the Taliban isn't working in bringing peace to Afghanistan, maybe it might be better to talk with them. The article details several reasons why American, NATO and Canadian forces are ineffective such as the limited use of force which cannot provide full victories over insurgents, the confusion over differing commands operating in the same areas and the contradicting strategies and actions.

While Canadians are wondering whether their troops should pull out from Afghanistan because of the constant vicious attacks and casualties they face, a senior British commander in Afghanistan has said that it could take many years, possibly even 30, of British armed occupation in Afghanistan to create real stability and peace in that country.
That sounds very bleak and hopeless but judging from past experience as mentioned in the article and also from the conditions of Afghanistan in terms of the physical size and terrain, the population size and the divisive social relations, it's not an unrealistic judgement. Of course, it's going to take more than military occupation from Western countries to improve conditions, but it is a prerequisite because if not them, how is some sort of stability and order going to be maintained or upheld? The central government is weak, and so is their army and given the fractiousness of the politics, with the various warlords based in different home provinces, it would not take much for the Hamid Karzai and his government to be overthrown if Western troops pull out.
I'm not naive to the possible self-serving motives and overbearing conduct of the West but I think in some ways, those people who constantly protest Canada's involvement in Afghanistan are naive as well. To pull out of a country that you are involved in for humanitarian intervention reasons because of military casualties means a weakness and superficiality to your humanitarian intentions. If Canada should exit Afghanistan now or soon, then it shouldn't promise any more troops to any peacekeeping and intervention missions again anywhere else including Darfur.

Over the past month and longer, there has been a growing concern and unease over unsafe food, food-based and similar products from China especially with the deaths of the dogs and cats in America from unsafe petfood ingredients from China, as well as toothpaste that led to deaths in Panama. I think that while these concerns are valid, they also expose the problems of mainstream Western media, in always trying to follow each other and never being innovative.
Back then, China was supposed to be the next big superpower, a belief that many still believe, now China is a chaotic mess with unsafe and dangerous exports that are fit for no human (and pet) consumption. Add in China's Darfur issues and its growing environmental problems and it's clear the picture is far from rosy. I think that while many focus on China's massive growth in economy and modernity, many widely ignore that China's problems are also growing at a massive rate.
Hence the media exaggerated China's economic growth and power, and they are also exaggerating China's export problems.
It's not that there aren't any problems. While it is likely, in my opinion that is, that non-electronic exports from China probably have had problems in the past, it is only now because of the deaths of dogs and cats in America that has led to such a wide outcry and concerns. I was so annoyed while that pet crisis was going on because the coverage by the american media was so intense and overdramatic. It seems highly unlikely that all these years Americans have imported tons of items from China yet all of a sudden this year they have discovered so many problems such as with "Thomas and friends". Ridiculous.

Shopping, even if it's "green" isn't as good for the environment than shopping less. This also goes for "carbon trading" as well where people buy carbon shares to offset their polluting. I mean, it just doesn't make sense that spending more money and consuming more products will save the earth's resources. Rather, reduced consumption and shopping, more recycling and thrift, and the need for more responsible and efficient protection and management of our environment are better ways.

http://alternet.org/environment/54208/?page=1

This article suggests what people can try with their shopping habits to reduce their environmental impacts.

http://alternet.org/environment/54215/?page=1

So the fighting in Gaza has culminated in Hamas victory and total control of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian state which was always geographically split finds itself politically split as well with Ftah retaining control of the West Bank. This Guardian article provides some interesting insight into the Hamas fighting and victory, claiming that Hamas was targetting key elements of Fatah "one group of Fatah agents who were following the Zionist agenda", not Fatah as a whole and that some Fatah members provided assistance. Furthermore according to some people including civilians, Hamas won so decisively because they were motivated and disciplined while many Fatah fighters were simply criminal thugs who took advantage of their status and uniform for money and power. This also meant Hamas fighters were ruthless and much better soldiers.
The article has Hamas announcing that they still recognise Palestinian President (and Fatah leader) Abbas as President though he has formed a new Cabinet, dropping all Hamas members.
The most obvious outcome for now, would be that Abbas and Fatah would hardly want to reconcile with Hamas. However taking into account past proliferation of Palestinian peace deals and the sobering fact that refusal to deal with Hamas would cause a definite breakup of Gaza and West Bank, it is a bit likely that the 2 sides might negotiate.
Whether one believes Hamas' account and feels this fighting was for the better of the Gaza Palestine or that this is a ruinous occasion, it is apparent that the rule of the gun.

Did those peace talks in Saudi Arabia really happen or were they just a figment of my imagination? Yes, those peace talks really did happen, earlier this February when the Saudis brokered a peace between Hamas and Fatah after some violence. Well, this violence is much worse and talk abound that it has increased from conflicts to all-out civil war. Hamas, after capturing several Fatah bases including their security headquarters in Gaza City seems to have gained complete control of Gaza. Terribly tragic and one wonders what Hamas and Fatah could be thinking. I think though that maybe they have been living in so much violence and oppression that when violence against their oppressor is ineffectual and impractical, then violence against each other is the only way to release their anger and hatred. The Palestinians have been under sanctions since last year after Hamas repeatedly refused to acknowledge Israel and to denounce their aim of destroying that country. So of course this frightening state of affairs in Gaza must be blamed indirectly on the US and the European Union, not to mention Israel whose sanctions have caused so much deprivation and desperation for the Palestinians.
This article, published just a week ago, mentions the problem very clearly:

"Western donors led by the United States cut off direct financial aid to the Palestinian Authority in March 2006 after Hamas defeated President Mahmoud Abbas's secular Fatah faction in parliamentary elections.
Coupled with Israel's withholding of tax revenues that it collects on the Palestinians' behalf -- the Authority's main domestic source of funding -- the sanctions have pushed the Hamas-led government to the brink of financial collapse. "

Palestine, as if it hasn't had enough sorrow and hopelessness, is undergoing 2 different conflicts. One is of Hamas, the ruling party, battling Israel by firing rockets into Israel and paving the way for Israeli retributory air strikes. The other is of civil conflict between Hamas and Fatah, the former ruling party which Yasser Arafat led.
Of course, Hamas being Hamas, has not backed down and vowed continued defiance, fighting a bttle it cannot win but which it thinks is better than nothing. It's not surprising as it represents both Hamas' hardline stance and the fatalistic attitude prevalent to many Palestinians.
I think back to when Hamas came to power in the elections unexpectedly and they tried to reach out to Fatah. I realise that Hamas probably did that because they were shocked and unprepared to lead, not just because of lack of experience but possibly because they did not want to be in charge as this meant they would have a burden of representing the whole Palestine nation, not just their own suppporters and being more responsible and moderate.
They were always a hardline, fundamentalist organisation with lots of support which were trying to gain more political power by competing in elections, but not to win.

Well instead, things haven't changed much with Hamas as their stance towards Israel hasn't changed much as they still refuse to acknowledge Israel's right to exist as a nation and this has caused the US and the EU to criticise them harshly and withhold aid. This action reflects badly on Hamas but also that of the US and EU themselves, who can't seem to care that their sanction policies affect people who are already severely affected and causes more suffering.

Thursday's Toronto Star had several interesting articles on unrest and violence around the world.

This article is on Haiti which is plodding along under a democratically-elected government for about a year now, whilst going through serious violent crime, poverty, HIV/AIDS and environmental troubles. Haiti, with its proud history as the first (and only) black country to win independence through force against the French, is actually the Western Hemisphere's poorest country and faces a bleak future. The article's author believes that Haiti needs continued foreign aid in order to experience any improvement at all, otherwise it might become a "failed state"- a country where the government and rule of law has "failed" completely and cannot serve society or maintain order at all. The current political stability is however one good aspect of the country and needs to continue in order for the country to improve any more.
The UN, including Canada, has been trying to help the country since the civil conflict and coup that forced former Prime Minister Jean-Bertrand Aristide out. This help has been seen as dubious by some who heavily criticise the UN for helping maintain an oppressive regime. For instance UN forces have trained Haitian police who, both UN and Haitian police, have engaged in raids and gunfights that have killed many and detained political prisoners. Zmag maintains a section dedicated to Haiti which accuses the US of facilitating regime change in the overthrow of Aristide and supporting an oppressive Haiti government in carrying out massacres, tortures and jailings of opposition figures.
I certainly think the US was complicit (or even gleeful) in allowing Aristide to be overthrown and for the rebels to take charge though I am not sure about other details, especially in what the US would gain from that turn of events.

This past week, serious fighting broke out in Lebanon as a Palestinian fundamentalist group Fatah al-Islam carried out a bank robbery which caused the Lebanese army to respond with strikes on the Palestinian refugee camp where the group is based in. Many people in the camp have been killed and thousands affected. The Lebanese army and government has been criticised for the attack on the camp as many civilian refugees were killed or injured. However the government defended these actions by saying that they were necessary to defeat the fundamentalists as well as to uphold the integrity and strength of the state.
It's interesting to see that the state does not have any rule over the Palestinian refugee camps as they are run by the refugees themselves. The continued existence of these refugee camps is a tragedy as it signifies that the Palestinians have not been able to integrate into society and so improve their wellbeing and be accepted. These Palestinians were originally from lands in Israel and were forced out when Israel was being created. Given that this was in the late 40s, this means that many of these Palestinians were born and grew up in the camps. Such a sad fate for a people who have suffered much including being stripped of their land.

Fighting in Somalia causes several more deaths for Ugandan peacekeepers, members of an African Union (AU) peacekeeping force, of whom most are yet to be deployed. And judging from the worsening conditions it doesn't seem likely the rest of these peacekeepers would ever be deployed soon, as there is no actual peace to be kept as a person quoted says.
I personally don't think the AU can handle the situation, especially since they're trying to deal with another crisis at the same time, in Darfur. The article also has a South African security studies researcher stating how Somalia can descend into "Islamist extremism" which would be exactly what the West (the US) would fear.

While Somalia has calmed down a bit with a tentative cessation of hostilities, people in Iraq are not so fortunate and still going through the same crisis as always. It would be justified though to say that that is not true because their crisis is worse than before and always so. The situation there is so tragic. If the Americans leave the bloodshed in Iraq might intensify. If the Americans stay, as they are doing now, the bloodshed intensifies as does the suffering of the country because America cannot govern Iraq well at all and still have no real idea of how to improve the situation. This piece explains some of the problems with America and how dire the situation really is.

Clearly the Iraqis, with the exceptions of the Kurds up North, are trapped in an Earthly Hell as their country falls apart and becomes awash with blood. Which is why many Iraqis are fleeing their country, to Syria, Jordan, Saud Arabia and even Iran, as this article made clear in December 2006. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates there are about 2 million now as well as 1.9 million internally displaced.

An innovative non-governmental organisation is JHR- Journalists for Human Rights, founded in 2002, which strives to highlight human rights issues and abuses in Africa. It does this by sending Canadian journalists to Africa to train African journalists in journalism to help them to report and write on their own countries, thus generally speaking, strengthening the media's capability to do its job. JHR's site features news articles and a blog by its reporters and trainers in Africa. The organisation has set up operations in countries like Ghana, South Africa, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Tanzania and Uganda and is starting up in Sierra Leone.
For African countries themselves, JHR's mission is a really important and worthy one. The obvious concerns for those countries are health, education, security and economy but having an efficient and active media is also important. It's not only about writing the news but it's also about empowering society and creating accountability by leaders, politicians, the police and other bodies in society. Of course, African journalists face much more hardships than North American journalists such as in having computers or even reliable electricity power.
On the domestic front- Canada and the US, JHR raises awareness through events, press releases and media pieces, as well as having university chapters in many schools. Besides raising knowledge of African issues among people, JHR's efforts also helps build students and future journalists understand the importance of human rights and Africa. Hopefully this will lead to more journalists focusing on Africa and more news coverage in the future.

This is a hectic time for me because of exams, personal issues and other stuff. I've been reading over all kinds of info about Development, China, International Law, world poverty and so on.
In the real world though, there's been a lot of tragic and violent acts happening. From the continuing fighting in Darfur and Afghanistan to the opposition crackdown in Zimbabwe to the bombing in Algeria, it's obvious our world is not a peaceful one at all. The saddest and worst place though, is still Iraq, where dozens of people die daily in car and suicide bombings including today. This is in addition to gunfights, murders, religious and sectarian violence and resistance against the US army. Is there any chance circumstances will improve? Iraq's breakdown worries its Arab neighbors terribly.

Zimbabwe is gaining some really notorious attention in the world and incurring major international criticisms for the recent beating of opposition leaders including Morgan Tsvangirai who suffered a cracked skull. Conditions in that Southern African country have been declining severely in the last few years with massive inflation and political repression. The BBC has some articles on the recent troubles in Zimbabwe including this one detailing the lives of 3 people, each one suffering from the poor economic situation and this one describing long-time ally South Africa now openly criticising Zimbabwe.

This is a subject that usually gets little attention but it could be one of the main factors to potential crisis in Asia. The looming situation of large numbers of men living in a society with a deficit of women is a serious issue in China, India and other countries. The problem is especially marked in rural-based peasant communities of which there're many in China, where girls are valued much less than boys for several reasons including the lack of manual labor usually provided by boys and the need for somebody to remain and take care of old parents which girls cannot fulfill when they leave after marriage. I can't imagine what can solve this problem given that huge inequalities already exist and it's only a matter of time when these boys grow up and the effects of female deficit are felt. There're a range of actions governments can take to try to curb and reduce the gender inequality to prevent it from getting worse but the fact is the ineqaulity is already bad.

Peace talks are set to begin soon in Saudi Arabia.
Both Palestinian PM Ismail Haniyeh and President Mahmoud Abbas, of Hamas and Fatah respectively havearrived in Mecca for the planned peace talks.
It's about time too. Violence has continued for weeks now with killings, gunbattles and kidnappings occuring regularly. The Palestinians are already living in terrible conditions, thanks to Israel, and they don't need this factional civil war. It's simply not going to achieve anything and one wonders at how depraved and psychotic the soldiers/ militia of both organisations are to be indulging in this.