I just wrote about the potential unrest soaring food prices could cause... Funny how it works. I have to say, I think IRIN is particularly fond of this particular topic, and reports on it quite often. Nonetheless, I really do believe that food insecurity can cause tremendous damage - not just because of its obvious consequence (food is less affordable, particularly for the poorest), but also because, as we see in above examples, the tensions it can create between the authorities and civil society can be damaging. I'm curious to see how this issue will be addressed in months and years to come.... Anyway.... I'm leaving for Ghana tomorrow, and I'm really looking forward to being there. With all that's being going on, I'm eager to see our friends and the people we work with, and get a better sense of the reality of the situation. I'm also looking forward to meeting all the new people I have been corresponding/working with over the past few weeks, and seeing what kind of long term strategy for engagement with the refugee community we can come up with. I'll write some posts from Buduburam - hopefully I will have not just bad or sad news to report. Meanwhile, please feel free to leave comments or write me an email with comments, feedback, ideas.... We're going to be shooting a promo video for Niapele with my friend Val, who has just started her own organization, Ayoka Productions. We'll try and get some footage that we can use for advocacy purposes as well - in light of recent events, it seems clear that we have a role to play in offering this community a voice, a channel to express themselves. On this note, I'll leave you with my favorite passage from the latest Secretary General's Report on the United Nations Mission to Liberia (UNMIL), which was made public on March 19th:
54. Although the humanitarian situation in Liberia has continued to improve, the country still faces serious challenges, particularly in the health, education, food, and water and sanitation sectors. So far only 62 per cent of the $110 million neededto address the high priority humanitarian needs outlined in the Common Humanitarian Action Plan, including the delivery of basic social services, the provision of productive livelihoods for returnee communities and the strengthening of civil society and local authorities, has been received. During the reporting period, UNMIL organized a number of medical outreach activities, which provided medical treatment for some 24,000 patients. 55. During the period under review, UNHCR conducted a post-voluntary repatriation verification exercise, which revealed that 75,509 registered Liberianrefugees are still residing in various countries in the subregion. There are also 10,327 refugees from Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire and other countries residing in Liberia. The United Nations, in collaboration with the Economic Community of West African States and the Government of Liberia, is trying to find durable solutions for the integration of Sierra Leonean refugees in Liberia. The successfulreintegration of returnees into communities continues to be a major challenge.
Sunset near the ARCH house, at the edge of Buduburam - August 2007
World food prices are soaring, and this is having serious consequences on people's livelihoods in the developing world. In addition, for organizations and agencies involved in food distribution or aid, the spike in food prices is also having an adverse effect on their ability to meet the needs of their beneficiaries. In recent news:
USAID announced that the cost of wheat and other food had gone up by 41 percent setting its budget back by US$121 million, which meant it would have to reduce the amount of food aid sent overseas (more here)
With local and international food shortages, merchants in Kano’s Dawanau grain market, the largest in West Africa [Nigeria], have hiked their prices. The price of a 50kg bag of maize has doubled since September from US$21 to US$42 and a bag of millet rose from US$29 to US$42, according to Magaji Ahmad, one of the merchants. Cowpeas, which sold at US$58 are now US$100, he added (more here)
In Burkina Faso, which was badly affected by floods in 2007 and has this year been roiled by violent protests over high food prices, sacks of corn are selling for double the price they were a year earlier, setting back impoverished Burkinabe 15,000 CFA francs (US$30) a sack compared to 7,500 CFA francs (US$15), according to FCPN.
“Recent assessments indicate that that food and nutritional situation could deteriorate due to a continued rise in food product prices,” FEWSNET warned.
Food riots have also recently taken place in Guinea Conakry, Mauritania and Senegal. Those countries depend heavily on imported wheat and rice which are more affected by high global commodity prices than upheavals in the regional markets [...] Stephanie Savaraud, West Africa spokeswoman for the World Food Programme (WFP) said that school feeding and supplementary feeding would be appropriate responses to help support Burkina Faso, but warned that WFP faces its own funding crunch. “Rising prices for basic commodities mean WFP needs 30 percent more money this year to feed the same number of beneficiaries,” she said. “If we don’t get that then we will need to give less food to people.”(more here)
Food Market in Ouahigouya, Burkina Faso - August 07
These problems in West Africa are obviously not happening in a vacuum - this in the context of rising food prices worldwide , due to a combination of interrelated factors, like increasing transportation costs due to the spike in oil prices, or poor crop yields in some regions because of droughts or floods. However, as usual, the poorest will bear the brunt of the current crisis - the excerpts above reveal two major consequences: one, that people are finding it increasingly harder to provide for themselves; two, that international agencies and NGOs are going to face difficulties trying to fulfill their mission - their budgets are not increasing, while their expenses are. While finding a solution to the former is a global challenge - governments all over the world are trying to address this issue - the latter problem highlights a structural problem in food aid - the fact that most food aid programs do not use local agricultural products. USAID only sends US agricultural products overseas, tapping into the giant production surplus its industry has generated
(on that topic, I highly recommend a documentary called "Famine Business" - I saw this at a film festival in Cape Town in 2003, and since then, it has mysteriously disappeared.... The only quote available on Google: "Film-maker Jihan El Tahri travels to Zambia to investigate claims that food aid is not necessarily the altruistic way of helping the poor that it seems. With the current Agriculture Minister for Zambia describing food-aid as 'the use of food as a weapon of mass destruction', El Tahri asks just who benefits from the famine business in an era of genetically modified food.")
In any case, it seems that international agencies and organizations involved in providing food aid should place the utmost importance on supporting local agricultural production by purchasing food from local farmers. The WFP has a yearly budget which reaches nearly $3 billion - and they also have some of the lowest overhead cost of any large international agency. If these funds could be used productively, by investing in local production, this could yield some large scale benefits for producers in developing nations.
Food aid could help feed people not simply through charity - giving food to the hungry. It could also be construed as a means to boost local food producers, who find it terribly hard to export on the world market. Not only would this galvanize local economies, but it would also cut down on transportation costs. As everyone not living in a cave knows, transportation costs are soaring. Not only that, but in a world where concerns surrounding climate change and pollution are becoming increasingly important, buying locally also provides food aid agencies the opportunity to do their part in protecting the environment....
I don't have all the answers to this incredibly worrying issue of soaring world food prices - in the short run, this could fuel instability in the poorest parts of the world (it already has in Burkina Faso and Egypt, for example.) In places like Liberia and Sierra Leone, where poverty prevails and where the threat of political instability is all too real, this becomes a serious issue. The Food Crisis Prevention Network recommends building stocks in high risk zones, and commended Burkina for subsidizing certain food products. But in countries where warehousing and stocking is dependent on fragile infrastructure, and subsidies strain already exiguous budgets, these are only band-aid solutions and do not address the root causes of the problem - at all.
The situation in Buduburam seems to have stabilized - at least for now. My biggest concern - which is shared by the people I am in touch with regarding this situation - is for the well-being of the women and children still in detention at the Kordeabe center in the Eastern region.
Here is a message I just received from one of the human rights advocates (name withheld for obvious reasons...)
Its very difficult here in Ghana with xenophobia and people in government making certain statements, it does not help the course.The Minister of Interior has declared Kordiabe a refugee camp and UNHCR say the place is comfortable and the women and children do not want to leave [...] In terms of items that they need immediately, I was there a week ago, they need water, food, hygiene products. Yes, your colleague can get the items and then they could be dropped off there.
If you want to make a financial contribution, please visit The Niapele Project's website - there is a link on the homepage where you can make a donation to help us provide basic necessities to the detained women and children. We have set up a special "emergency fund" specifically for this purpose.
I promise to get back to more "entertaining" posts in the near future - for now, my entire consciousness is mobilized by the ongoing crisis in Ghana...
From the International Herald Tribune, the only media who deemed news worthy this AP wire from Monrovia:
The Associated Press
Saturday, March 22, 2008
MONROVIA, Liberia: Thirty Liberian refugees expelled from Ghana were expected home on Sunday amid disagreement between the two countries about the best way to deal with thousands of refugees, government officials said.
Liberia's Information Minister Laurence Bropleh said in a radio broadcast Saturday that the "first batch" of nine women and 21 men would be met off the plane by senior officials and given temporary housing.
More than 40,000 Liberian refugees are still in Ghana, where they fled during the nation's violent civil war that began in 1989. Hundreds were reportedly rounded up last week by Ghanaian security forces in a refugee camp an hour's drive outside Accra, Ghana's capital.
The refugees, mainly women, had reportedly been staging a sit-in to protest the relief package the U.N. refugee agency was offering them to return home.
The two countries have held talks for several months about how best to deal with the refugee issue and a four-man Liberian team arrived in Ghana Saturday to try to resolve the dispute.
Liberia's civil war ended five years ago, when warlord-turned-president Charles Taylor agreed to go into exile. Since then, refugees in Ghana, as well as in Guinea and Ivory Coast have been slowly returning.
Bropleh said Ghana's government had informed them the repatriation was "due to the continued breach of Ghana's public order laws" by some refugees.
"The government of Liberia wishes to assure our citizens being returned and the general public that everything is being done to provide adequate care and support for our affected citizens, as well as continued dialogue with the Ghanaian government so as to amicably resolve this crisis," Bropleh said.
What's amazing is that there is NO word of the gross human and refugee rights abuses going on in Ghana, that there is no mention of the 500 women and children still being detained, that there is no word on the lack of due process for these individuals... The Ghanaian government is manipulating the media, trying to justify their wrong doing by saying things like "there was a total break down of law and order", and that the refugees were threatening public order... Give me a break.
Seriously. Give me a break.
How can one construe a peaceful protest by refugee women as a breach of Ghana's public order law? One might refer to the Public Order Act of 1994, which forbids large gatherings of people unless the government has been notified (hello democracy!). In any case, the protest was taking place within the confines of the refugee settlement, and in spite of causing disruption in the daily life of the community as schools were shut down and the market place slowed to a trickle, it remained orderly and peaceful.
Moreover, the grievances put forward by the refugees were mostly targeted at the UNHCR and the international community at large, asking them for greater support in repatriation packages - albeit, the women's group had a set of impractical, unrealistic demands - but shouldn't we commend them for the way in which they conducted themselves? The arrest and detention of hundreds of women and children is simply sickening - Ghanaian law does not allow detention to last more than 48 hours without a mandate to do so. And as the brilliant lawyer who's been advocating on the side of the refugees has pointed out, this is a matter for the courts to settle, not the Interior Minister of Ghana. And let's not even mention the complete inaction of the UNHCR, which, I've decided I have completely lost faith in.
I'm not well-connected - I don't know any high powered politicians, media figures or celebrities. That's a shame for the Liberian refugees. It seems, these days, that to get the world's attention on the plight of the underprivileged, you need to be listed in Fortune 100, or, alternatively, be voted as one of People magazine 50 hottest women of the year.
As C. says, "let's continue fighting the Good fight"
Yes, that's the headline news on CNN International....
Meanwhile, Liberian refugees in Ghana are fearing for their safety and well-being, their fate hanging in the balance, their rights being trampled upon by the Ghanaian authorities in total impunity.
Read the latest press release from our coalition here.
After one week of intense campaigning, I feel like our little coalition is being met by brick walls and glass ceilings, no matter who we turn to.
I have to say that I am truly disappointed by the lack of interest in this situation demonstrated by the authorities and the media - a few grassroots media organizations have been following the situation closely, but what we've read in the news so far mostly misrepresents the situation - of course, when the dominating discourse is that of the authorities it becomes the legitimate Truth, and the voice of the forgotten is suppressed, or simply ignored.
I am absolutely heart broken by the current state of affairs - following today's police raid on the camp, and ensuing beatings, arrests, and imminent deportation of innocent refugees, I am honestly considering changing the name of my blog to "Meanderings of a Young Deluded Idealist"
How is it possible that these people's rights are being so blatantly trampled upon, and that no one shows a sign of caring? Where are the Angelina Jolies of this world? I suppose painting Easter eggs with their rainbow family, while innocents' rights are being violated,as I write this.
I've contacted media organizations, press agencies, embassies, international organizations, and pulled every string I could think of - but, obviously, to no avail.
Following the recent events, a group of NGOs and individuals who work and have worked in the Buduburam refugee settlement have come together to call on the international community to insure that the rights of all refugees in Ghana are upheld.
We are gravely concerned for the fate of the 600 detained refugee women and children, who are facing imminent deportation - we humbly ask for your support in order to press authorities to respect the rights of refugees.
For a great background piece on the women's protest in Buduburam, go here - the writer actually took the time to interview community leaders, and the result is a fair, balanced piece on the original grievances put forward by the women, as well as the community reactions to it.
Who knows what the government of Liberia's real position is on this issue? According to this article, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the President of Liberia, is strongly condemning the unruly behavior of certain refugees. In this report, however, Sirleaf makes a passionate appeal to her Ghanaian counterpart and is "about to storm Accra for an engagement with Ghanaian authorities."
Here, you have the reaction of the opposition party in Liberia, headed by George Weah, which seems to confirm the first version - that Sirleaf is slamming the attitude of refugees.
Interestingly, the VOA article claims this:
Acarous Gray [national assistant secretary general for the Congress for Democratic Change (CDC)] said if the Liberian government, as it has said repeatedly, wants Liberians in the Diaspora to return home and contribute to the development of the country then it must give those returning incentives. He called on President Sirleaf to send a fact-finding mission to Ghana.
But here, we have this:
The female Liberian President, who is about to storm Accra for an engagement with Ghanaian authorities, is asking that her compatriots are allowed to stay in the country because as she put it, resources are not enough to contain the new arrivals.
So, again, which one's right? I already highlighted this blatant contradiction in a previous post. Can you, or can't you, President Sirleaf, truly handle the arrival of an additional 40,000 refugees - homeless, jobless, resourceless refugees?
Earlier today, I wrote about the BBC article entitled "Ghana to deport naked protesters", which had this defamatory title and equally demeaning content - the facts simply did not correspond to the truth.
I wrote to the BBC, explaining that they were exhibiting a very poor quality of journalistic integrity, and sharing the information I had - to my surprise, they actually modified their report, and included a link to The Niapele Project in the new version. Here it is, for your enjoyment (too bad the link to the previous story is dead, it would have been interesting to compare)
Oh look what my trusty MS has found - you can compare the two stories here
Nonetheless, the news coverage of the situation continues to be highly disturbing - for some reason, the notion that the women were naked is taking root, and I'm seeing these kinds of titles creep up all over the internet:
I plan on writing the editorial board of every media source spreading these terrible, disparaging comments. It's unbearable to see how the media spin is completely turning the story around, and how little attention is given to the real claims made by the Liberian women.
We haven't heard from our field coordinator today, probably because not much is really happening in the refugee camp at this point, with most of the attention focused on the fate of the hundreds of detained women and children facing imminent deportation....
We are talking innocent women and children, who have done nothing but peacefully protest and exercise their right to free speech. Granted, their protest is in breach of Ghanaian law - but, again, to send armed men to arrest a group of sleeping women seems completely and utterly over the top.
In the midst of all this, thankfully, a group has stepped up to the plate to advocate on behalf of the refugees - a coalition of human rights organization operating in Ghana (the Legal Resources Center and the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative) is investigating the situation and calling out the Ghanaian government on their handling of the crisis, threatening to sue them. I've already written them to see how we can support their work, and if there is anything The Niapele Project and its supporters can do to help with the situation. Here is the full text of the article, from MyJoyOnline:
The Coalition of Human Rights Organizations says it will sue the government of Ghana if it fails to resort to the courts in dealing with the arrested Liberian Refugees.
The coalition slammed the government of Ghana for what it calls an “over reaction” to the protests of the refugees.
The coalition has formed an investigative team to look into the stand off between the refugees and the government.
The team comprises of people from the Legal Resources Centre and the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.
A fact finding team was dispatched to both the Buduburam camp and holding area for the over 600 arrested refugees in Kordeabe in the Eastern Region.
The team claimed its initial findings revealled that the rights of the refugees had been grossly violated by the Ghanaian government.
The Head of the Legal Resources Centre, Mr. Edward Amuzu who was part of the team told Joy News that the public was generally misinformed on the crisis.
He said the women had not striped themselves naked as had been reported in the media and that there were no road-blocks at the Buduburam camp.
Mr. Amuzu said the government’s handling of the crisis was embarrassing to the country.
According to him only a court of competent jurisdiction could determine whether the refugees should be repatriated.
The Country Representative of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, Ms Hida Harley Mariam told the BBC that the UNHCR was concerned about the manner in which the crisis was being handled.
She said the Commission supported the government’s decision to ensure that the refugees respected the country’s laws.
It was however worried about any disproportionate action by the government.
I know that a lot of people are extremely concerned about the current situation. My pessimistic tendencies have resurged as this story is unfolding - my biggest concern is for the orphans and unaccompanied minors we work with... I wonder how authorities are planning to handle the deportation of orphans - it's my deepest hope that they will not, and that refugees in Buduburam are given options to choose from.
Here is an email I just received from Karrus Hayes, founder and director of the Carolyn A. Miller School (the ONLY tuition free school for refugee children), with an update of the situation on camp:
Dear Pen,
Many greetings and many thanks again. I am ok really. The situation here, tension is slowing down but the problem still reamains is that those who were arrested are still been held by the government and will be deported this week.
I think we all have to continue to tell the world what is going on. Dee has been writing to so many NGOs about the situation and even wrote to the BBC to correct the misleading informatuion they had about NAKED PROTESTER no one was NAKED at all. They wrote back to say that they have made a changes on that.
All schools are still closed down. Camp being safe, well everything seem to be normal but police are still at the entrance of the main gate with their cars and maybe waiting for an order.
I've been browsing the web for updates concerning the situation in Buduburam, and I've come across some extremely misleading news stories - not only do they report the situation in a skewed, incomplete manner, but there are a lot of completely wrong facts, which is very disturbing.
A group of Liberian women refugees who have held naked protests by the roadside are to be deported from Ghana, a minister has told the BBC [...]Stripping naked is a traditional form of protest amongst poor and powerless women in Africa.
Well, I don't know if it's a traditional form of protest, but it certainly never happened in Buduburam! Trust me on this, the Liberian women of Buduburam would never do this - they are a very proud group, and I know for a fact that no one ever stripped naked. How dare the BBC entitle its article that way? How demeaning for the Liberians!
In this VOA article, the number of protesters is said to have been "about two thousand", which is more than double what's been said in most other news sources, as well as from the eye witness accounts I've heard. What's the point? Kwesi Ofori, a public relations officer for the Ghana national police said
"Aside that, the demonstration degenerated into lawlessness and chaos. "
Not true either - it disrupted life on camp because schools and the market shut down, but to call it lawlessness and chaos is completely off base.
I'm extremely shocked that the Ghanaian perspective and point of view has emerged has the "official" story - no one seems to be taking a second to check their facts. What is the UNHCR doing? Why are they not protecting this group? I want to see the UNHCR publicly standing by the refugees, protecting their rights - that is its purpose, after all!
Only one article mentions this "The Ghana Refugee Board said it is yet to take a decision on what to do with Liberian refugees who remain in Ghana on the expiration of the 30 June deadline. " - at this point, Liberian refugees will become illegal immigrants. What will happen to these thousands of families? In light of recent events, I imagine it's completely possible they will be deported by the Ghanaian authorities.... This is something I cannot even fathom.
Some Burundian refugees stayed in Tanzania for 30+ years - even though their country was at peace, there was a recognition that the lack of violent conflict in a given country does not mean peace, does not mean that a normal life is possible (see theseposts to read about the current conditions in Liberia)
The UNHCR representative to Burundi, Bo Schack, said most of the returnees were presumed to have reached economic self-sufficiency in Tanzania and would not automatically benefit from aid. "The only assistance retained is the cash grant of 50,000 FBU [US$45]," he explained. "The other aspects of assistance, especially food and non-food items, will be distributed to identified vulnerable persons."
Schack, however, explained that an assessment would be conducted and the policy could be changed if necessary. "We do not want to repatriate persons in a situation of self-sufficiency in Tanzania to make them vulnerable in Burundi," he added.
In the meantime, UNHCR would negotiate with the UN World Food Programme (WFP) to include some of the returnees among its food beneficiaries. This would provide the returnees with food packages for six months.
The returnees - of whom the first wave fled Burundi in 1972 - have been living in Ulyankulu in Tabora region, at Mishamo and Katumba in Rukwa, where they stopped receiving assistance in 1985.
Their return follows a decision by Tanzania to close the three settlements by the end of 2008. The 218,000 Burundian refugees were given the option to be repatriated or seek Tanzanian citizenship. (full story here)
There are other ways of dealing with this - giving the refugees the time and space (physical and socio-political-economic) to become self-sufficient before sending them home. Or giving them the possibility of receiving Ghanaian citizenship, or even permanent residency.... I am sure that not ALL the people in Buduburam want to go back to Liberia.
Dialogue between the refugees and the authorities is vital to resolve this situation - meanwhile, let's be wary of what the media puts forward.
Today, at about 4am, Ghanaian police armed with tear gas and machine guns descended upon the Buduburam refugee settlement to arrest some of the women who have been peacefully protesting for the better part of the last month.
Police in Accra on Monday morning pounced on protesting Liberian women at the Buduburam Camp in the Central Region and arrested hundreds of them.
The Liberian nationals have been protesting for a couple of weeks now against government’s plan to reintegrate them into the Ghanaian society after more than 18 years of asylum in the country. (more here)
According to Jess Leombruno, our field coordinator, the arrests were more or less peaceful - 5 bus loads of women were taken away (for her perspective from the field, go here)
M.S. asked me how I feel about this, and what kind of support we can lend.... Honestly, I feel very powerless - I'm truly disconcerted by the situation, as are the other people connected to Buduburam I have spoken with.... I'm going to be there with Celina and Valentina in 2 weeks, and I really can't wait to be there to better understand how things are playing out, and if anything can be done.....My feeling is that the UNHCR should really be more active in this situation.
As I mentioned in a previous post, this protest is in breach of Ghanaian law - and the women, who have been openly refusing local integration, have offended the Ghanaian authorities, as well as the public. As a result, passions are running high on both sides - here is a statement by Ghana's Interior Minister, Mr. Kwamena Bartels:
"Ghana was good enough for them when there was war in Liberia but Ghana is not good enough for them now. This shows their crass ingratitude to a country that has protected them, fed them and given their children free education."
Ummm... No?! It's a bit frightenting to hear that they have received food and free education from Ghana - the only food distribution occurs through the WFP, and it reaches a very limited number of people, those considered "vulnerable". And Liberian children have never been to attend free primary school in Ghana. In any case, sending armed men with machine guns and tear gas seems a really inappropriate response - Ghana is just "upping the ante", and it seems very premature to resort to this type of method while only women, elderly people and children are protesting. Now, messages are pouring in from Buduburam mentioning that Liberian refugees are nervous, and understandably so.
***************
As I write this, I just read that the arrested women are going to be stripped of their refugee status and sent back to Liberia - which promises to aggravate tensions between the groups. The UNHCR needs to step in at this point and, at the very least, be a more active mediator! But clearly, they are not prepared to do so, almost clearly siding with the Ghanaian authorities - for instance, a meeting was held between the UNHCR, the refugees and the Ghana Refugee Board friday - the UNHCR offered $100/person for repatriation, but no compromise was reached. UNHCR Representative in Ghana, Ms. Aida Haile Mariam said that "UNHCR believes that many have been coerced, manipulated, threatened and intimidated to join the sit-in protest". Not really advocating on the side of the refugees, it seems...
Here is the UNHCR's description of its own mandate:
[...]The agency is mandated to lead and co-ordinate international action to protect refugees and resolve refugee problems worldwide. Its primary purpose is to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees[...]
Well, at this very moment, there are tens of thousands of refugees who need their rights and well-being safeguarded, and no indivial or groups can really weigh in on this issue the way the UNHCR could - I highly recommend this institution takes its responsibility seriously in this time of crisis.
I promise this won't be a long winded philosophical post about religion in the contemporary world. I just came across different stories which discuss an interesting, salient issue - how should religious leaders respond to the new forces at work in modern society?
This week, the Vatican "provided its latest update on how God's law is being violated with modern means." The expanded list of sins, which includes genetic manipulation, pollution and the use of drugs, seems to be the Catholic Church's latest attempt to adjust its "message" (for lack of a better word) to better address contemporary issues.
Of course, the Catholic Church's position on condoms and abortion isn't about to change, but you know, baby steps...It's interesting to see religions who are - by definition - dogmatic and absolute in their philosophy deal with modernity. For instance, this report highlights the positive social impact that progressive Islamic leaders can have on their communities:
"The draft text of several progressive fatwas were discussed last week by the ulama [Islamic scholars] at the International Consultation on Islam and HIV/AIDS, organised by the charity, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), in Johannesburg, South Africa.
One fatwa would approve the use of funds from the zakat (mandatory alms giving) for HIV-positive people, whether Muslims or non-Muslim, regardless of how they contracted the virus, as long as they are poor. Another fatwa would approve the use of condoms by married discordant couples, where one is HIV-positive and the other is not, to avoid infection.
The findings are not final. As first-opinions, they will be discussed next year at regional and national consultations."
I find both these stories very compelling - what role will religion have in the 21st century? From my own Western secular perspective, I often find myself at odds with most religious doctrines, but I know that billions around the world find solace in spirituality. I find it very interesting to see religions adapt to the modern world, as an external observer - clearly, the good, the bad and the ugly is coming out of these evolutions, but nonetheless, we should value these paradigm shifts for what they are: a move away from unshakable fundamentalism towards more progressive notions of spirituality, faith and religion, which attempt to give believers the tools necessary to deal with a changing world. This, of course remains elusive - here is another story which discusses the disinformation spread by some Christian church leaders in Malawi about HIV/AIDS - a very different example from the previous story, but it goes to show how vital it is for religious leaders to be socially (and morally) conscious:
"A pastor in southern Malawi recently hit the headlines when he told five HIV-positive people in his church to stop taking antiretroviral (ARV) medication because they had been treated by prayer. Dodgy traditional healers touting their "cures" for AIDS are also proliferating. The government has drawn up legislation, currently before parliament, to muzzle anyone claiming they can cure AIDS. "
Here is an interesting - and (probably) controversial - critique of microfinance by Christoph Niemann, in The New Yorker. Excerpts:
"The vast majority [of micro businesses] have only one paid employee: the owner. As the economist Jonathan Morduch has put it, microfinance “rarely generates new jobs for others.”
This matters, because businesses that can generate jobs for others are the best hope of any country trying to put a serious dent in its poverty rate. Sustained economic growth requires companies that can make big investments—building a factory, say—and that can exploit the economies of scale that make workers more productive and, ultimately, richer. Microfinance evangelists sometimes make it sound as if, in an ideal world, everyone would own his own business.
“All people are entrepreneurs,” Muhammad Yunus has said. But in any successful economy most people aren’t entrepreneurs—they make a living by working for someone else. Just fourteen per cent of Americans, for instance, are running (or trying to run) their own business. That percentage is much higher in developing countries—in Peru, it’s almost forty per cent. That’s not because Peruvians are more entrepreneurial. It’s because they don’t have other options."[...]
"Both socially and economically, microloans do a lot of good, working what Boudreaux and Cowen call “Micromagic.” But the overselling of their promise has made us neglect the enterprises that could be real engines of macromagic. The cult of the entrepreneur that the microfinance boom has helped foster is understandably appealing. But thinking that everyone is, and should be, an entrepreneur leads us to underrate the virtues of larger businesses and of the income that a steady job can provide. To be sure, for some people the best route out of poverty will be a bank loan. But for most it’s going to be something much simpler: a regular paycheck."
I find this view to be very interesting - I tend to agree with the author that microcredit shouldn't be construed as a way for developing countries to lift themselves out of poverty. So much needs to be done in terms of building infrastructure, improving the delivery and quality of basic public goods (education, health care, etc.), and creating the conditions necessary for genuine economic development, on a micro and macro level.
Interestingly, however, is that I think this is widely recognized, even by microcredit organizations, such as Kiva.org. In their FAQ, one of the questions is "Is microfinance the solution to poverty?", and this is their answer: " No. Microfinance is but one strategy battling an immense problem". They give examples of other channels for fighting poverty in the developing world: grants, investment in infrastructure, employment programs, non-financial services and legal and institutional reforms. The New Yorker article then highlights what I believe is the more interesting point here - that these other channels mentioned above aren't as "cool", or "chic" - Excerpt:
"Supplying the missing middle will require backers who want to invest in companies rather than just lend to them. There’s been some progress on this front of late; three weeks ago, Google.org, the Soros Economic Development Fund, and the Omidyar Network announced that they are setting up a firm in India that will invest only in small-to-medium businesses. But there have yet to be celebrities speaking up for the missing middle."
I'm not particularly keen celebrity advocacy, as I think it that the message they convey tends to oversimplify complex realities, and generally take away from the seriousness of the issues they support - but that is an entirely different subject. The point is that the other avenues for development that Kiva.org makes note of aren't really "sexy", and don't yet attract a lot of donor money...
It would be interesting to see private individuals get really excited about contributing to institutional reform in developing nations, although I think we are a long, long way from there. The Google/Soros/Omidyar initiative in India sort of falls in that paradigm - I am looking forward to seeing more private sector involvement in large scale poverty reduction schemes. Maybe that will help solve the "missing middle" problem.
“The situation in Liberia is a reminder that the international community has yet to come to grips with the humanitarian-to-development gap,” the OCHA [UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs] report noted. “It would indeed be troubling were Liberians to be worse off now with peace than they were when humanitarian aid was reaching them in the immediate post-conflict period.”(read full IRIN report here)
Yes, it would be troubling, if you use the word "troubling" as a euphemism.
"It is in the hopes of keeping the attention of the public, and that of our elected officials, on this subject that the writers of this collection of essays have put pen to paper. They include a former president, the speaker of the House, two former White House chiefs of staff, current and former senators, generals, admirals, intelligence officials, interrogators, and religious leaders. Some are Republicans, others are Democrats, and still others are neither. What they all agree on, however, is this: It was a profound moral and strategic mistake for the United States to abandon long-standing policies of humane treatment of enemy captives. We should return to the rule of law and cease all forms of torture, with no exceptions for any agency."
An alarming report from IRIN brushes a broad picture of the state of maternal health and child mortality in Liberia - reading reports such as these strengthens my belief that Liberian refugees in Buduburam might be better off not repatriating quite so quickly... Excerpt:
"New statistics showing an increase in maternal mortality since the end of Liberia’s civil war in 2003 have created alarm among health workers who say the country’s almost non-existent healthcare system is to blame [...]The new results, which come from the Liberia Demographic and Health Survey (LDHS) for the years 2006 to 2007, show that deaths among infants and children under five years old have gone down since the last survey was conducted in 1999 to 2000. However maternal mortality has gone up by about 71 percent with 994 women dying for every 100,000 who give birth, compared to 580 out of every 100,000 women in the previous survey. Doctors say the most common cause of death is vaginal hemorrhaging following childbirth."
The average maternal mortality rate for Sub-Saharan Africa is 900 deaths for 100,000 births, and the global rate reaches a staggering 400 deaths/100,000 births (in comparison, developed countries have a rate of 9 deaths/100,000 births). Liberia has a truly dismal rate - and what's particularly shocking from this report is that it's actually worse than it was during the war... (UNFPA Maternal Mortality Statistics)
Of course, maternal mortality figures are not the ultimate measurement of a country's post-conflict reconstruction progress, but it is very indicative of the slow pace of change that Liberia is experiencing. Reading the most recent progress report of the UN Secretary-General on the UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), it's very clear that the situation in Liberia is far from ideal.
"Liberia has become a generally stable country in a volatile sub-region. However, the prevailing peace is very fragile, and Liberia is still susceptible to lawlessness. The most immediate threats to sustained peace and stability in Liberia at this stage include increasing violent criminal activities, especially armed robbery and rape; the limited capacity of the security sector to curb violent crime; the weak justice system; the limited capacity of key national institutions to deliver on the promised peace dividend; the proliferation of disaffected groups such as unemployed ex-combatants, deactivated soldiers and police personnel, and elements from the dismantled irregular militias; economic insecurity, in particular youth unemployment; resurfacing ethnic and social cleavages; and the perception by some that the Government is not genuinely pursuing national reconciliation"
Thinking back to the women's protest in Buduburam, this comforts me in the idea that local integration efforts for Liberian refugees in Ghana need to be further developed - it seems so obvious that Liberia does not have the capacity to absorb tens of thousands of returnees (even if they each have $1,000 in cash - which they won't.) In fact, the Government of Liberia should communicate this to the refugee population, whether in Ghana or elsewhere. Life as a refugee is certainly difficult, but life in Liberia will probably be even harder - particularly for those who have been gone for a very long time, and who need to rebuild their entire livelihoods from the ground up.
"President Bush vetoed an intelligence bill Saturday, saying he objected to provisions in it that prohibited the CIA from using harsh interrogation techniques. The bill would limit the CIA to techniques approved by the Army field manual."NPR - All Things Considered
Our national security strategy cannot rely on dehumanizing others - America cannot preserve its security by whatever means necessary. Even though President Bush uses euphemisms such as "harsh interrogation techniques" instead of "torture", the result is the same - these techniques represent blatant violations of human rights. The fact that there is a movement towards making torture an acceptable practice is extremely dangerous - can we really afford to have this type of paradigmic shift on torture?
The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which prohibits, and in fact seeks to abolish the use of torture in all its forms, was ratified by the United States in 1994. Moreover, there are certain norms in international law that fall under the jus cogens category, which means that they apply to all subjects of international law, regardless of the status of ratification of treaties or conventions. The prohibition of torture falls under that category. This type of peremptory norm exists in the case of torture, slavery and genocide. Indeed, the international community – including the United States – recognizes that torture, in all its forms, is perfectly indefensible, whether morally or legally.
While torture might be efficient in obtaining information, it is even more efficient in reinforcing hatred towards those who perpetrate it. Not only does this kind of position reinforce pre-existing hatred, but this is precisely the platform used by extremists to recruit. While I am not suggesting that prisoners should not be suggested to interrogation, I believe that this can be achieved without stooping to the same level of dehumanization and complete disregard for human rights at which terrorists and extremists operate.
If we don’t abide by a minimum standard of respect for human life, then we surely cannot expect others to do so. If the use of torture is appropriate for our national security strategy, than surely it is an appropriate strategy for others as well. The world is watching. If we do not uphold fundamental values – including respect for human rights and prisoner rights – then we are implicitly allowing that same attitude from others.
Besides resettlement and repatriation, the third - and possibly most elusive - option for refugees is local integration.Interestingly, as I write this, hundreds of Liberian women are protesting in the Buduburam refugee camp, seeking "an immediate redress to [their] plight." In a fascinating turn of events, Liberian women are calling upon the UNHCR, the government of Ghana and other relevant authorities to help them resettle in Liberia.You can read an article relating these events, as well as the open letter expressing the grievances of this group here.The women are very clear - they are not interested in local integration programs, primarily because of a deeply embedded fear of discrimination. The article relates some gruesome stories about murders and attacks on refugees by the local population - when in Buduburam, I remember hearing such stories, with photos of dismembered individuals to support the claims. The women also seem to believe that true integration is simply not a possibility for them - that Ghanaian society will not be able to accomodate them.
Finally, the women ask for $1000 per household member to return to Liberia, as well as a variety of reintegration programs to be put in place for them as returnees. While the rationale for this stance is understandable from their perspective, I - unfortunately - strongly believe that these demands will never be met by the UNHCR. I truly admire these women for their tenacity - The Niapele Project field coordinator, Jessica Leombruno, is providing us with updates from the field on a regular basis, and their movement is a peaceful one, done in the pure tradition of non-violent civil action, and, for this, I commend them. We hear how they have been on the main soccer field, day in and day out, for weeks, sleeping outside, even in the rain - their determination and courage is inspiring. Nonetheless, there are some aspects of this movement that seem counter-productive - for instance, school children are encouraged not to attend school and to "strike" with their mothers, aunts and sisters. While this is a powerful way to express the seriousness of the situation, it is to the detriment of these children, for who education is an absolute necessity. The school that The Niapele Project is partenered with has been shut down due to this strike, and, as a result, the School Feeding Program is not functioning either, depriving the elementary school children of the daily meal they normally receive.
The government of Ghana is now making it clear that it will not tolerate this situation for very long, and is calling on the women to end their strike, which is in breach of the Public Order Act of 1994. Representatives from the UNHCR and the Ghana Refugee Board have apparently met with the women to discuss their grievances (unsuccessfully), and the Liberian Welfare Council (the only officiously elected body that represents the interests of the Liberian refugees in Buduburam), as well as the Camp Manager, have not been supportive. Sadly, it seems that no one is taking their claims very seriously.
At the same time, their demands are not driven by pragmatism, and reflect the lack of understanding of how the institutions that are supposed to represent and support them function. I highly doubt the UNHCR will grant each refugee $1000 (in cash!), and accede to the demands for scholarship programs for returness in Liberia. The UNHCR and the Ghana Refugee Board have been diverting funds and attention towards local integration and self-reliance programs, and towards initiatives benefiting returnees already in Liberia.
Furthermore, the UNHCR budget for programs benefiting Liberian refugees in Ghana is dwindling - from $9.6 million in 2007 to $5 million (projected) for 2009. Only $20,000/year is dedicated to income generation programs... The reality is that the UNHCR will not continue to support this community, and that asking them to spend 10s of millions of dollars on repatriation efforts is not a realistic demand. It's extremely unfortunate that this movement is not better organized and better informed.
The UNHCR, the Ghana Refugee Board and other relevant authorities cannot stand by idly while this is going on - dialogue has to occur, and these women need to acknowledged. If authorities are going to privilege local integration, then more needs to be done to communicate the benefits of this to refugees. Their concerns about insecurity and discrimination have got to be addressed, and MUCH MORE than $20,000 needs to be spent on creating economic opportunities for them. Perhaps other UN agencies or international NGOs could step in to create large scale micro-credit programs, as well as provide educational and training opportunities for this community. For now, however, apart from the UNHCR and the WFP (whose contributions to improving refugee livelihoods in Buduburam is subpar), there are absolutely no other international organizations providing that sort of service.
It's very disconcerting to see the complete lack of understanding that exists between the refugees and the institutions that are responsible for them. Local integration could actually benefit the refugees of Buduburam - Ghana is a much more economically dynamic country than Liberia, and opportunities could be created for this community, which already contributes to the vitality of the local economy by patronizing Ghanain businesses.
Perhaps a solution to this would be to provide Liberian refugees with the opportunity to become economically active, and encourage them to save money in order to return to Liberia proudly - on their own dime - when they are ready. This could be a long, difficult process, but it could be the only possible compromise between the stakeholders.
We just got a group of students together at Sciences Po for The Niapele Project- they're going to be researching and writing a paper defining and benchmarking best practices in protracted refugee crises - how governments and international agencies should structure their disengagement and construct durable solutions based on the reality of each affected community.
The events taking place in Buduburam are testament to the fact that the modus operandi adopted until now by international agencies and the Ghana Refugee Board needs to evolve - more consultations with the local population, better information and communication, as well as more implication of the refugees in identifying and implementing solutions, are vital.
"If you want something said, ask a man; if you want something done, ask a woman." ~ Margaret Thatcher
Sunset near the ARCH house, at the edge of Buduburam - August 2007
