By Hudson Institute

By John P. Walters

With his unique appeal to the young, President Obama has suddenly transformed the “experiments” in Colorado and Washington state into an experiment involving every kid in America.

First, the administration made a unilateral decision to curtail enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in states where smoked marijuana has been defined as medicine (the only “medicine” that cannot meet modern medical standards). Next, the administration announced it would not enforce the federal law when the states of Colorado and Washington sought to permit the open sale of marijuana. Now, asked to comment on marijuana legalization by the New Yorker‘s David Remnick, President Obama tells the country that “it’s important” that legalization experiments “go forward.”

Obamacare is in disarray, and Syria is on fire, but marijuana is important? Obama offers the presidential version of a shrug. “As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol.”

While he calls smoking and toking “a bad habit and a vice,” this doesn’t seem to mean much of anything—certainly nothing serious. But it is serious. The president is cutting the legs out from under every parent and schoolteacher and clergyman across the country who is trying to steer kids away from illegal drugs. Our “coolest president” ever has made drug education into a punch line.

As it stands, the law will not be enforced (by executive directive) and the criminal drug market will be augmented by the open production and sale of marijuana. Moreover, Obama speculated that legalizing “hard” drugs, including cocaine and meth, might ultimately be a matter of creating a “negotiated” or “calibrated” dose for safer use. From a policy perspective, that leaves you with treating the wounded through programs now consolidated under the Obamacare banner. The result is appalling. Allow more and more poison to harm more and more families, destroy the respectable basis for prevention education that deters the use of these poisons, and just treat the victims, again and again and again.

As absurd as the administration’s policy has become, it is even more striking that no serving national leader, Democrat or Republican, has called the administration to task. Where is the tradition of President Reagan and the bipartisan work against the drug problem that was led for years by senators Biden, Leahy, Feinstein, Hatch, Grassley, and Sessions and representatives Rangel, Cummings, Hoyer, Issa, Ros-Lehtinen, and Wolf? Why don’t the dedicated public servants at such places as the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Drug Enforcement Administration—those who know the truth, have dedicated their professional lives to protecting Americans from substance abuse, and even risk their lives daily—speak up?

Obama’s remarks to Remnick point to the powerful role of ignorance and distortion. Obama simply ignores the known magnitude of marijuana addiction and the growing list of dangers associated with regular and frequent use, especially by young people. Even the national self-report surveys, known for undercounting, show that 79 percent of America’s 23.9 million illegal drug users in 2012 used marijuana.

Worse, over a fifth of pot smokers needed treatment according to current diagnostic criteria; that is, 4.3 million users of marijuana need treatment, more than all other illegal drugs combined. Marijuana is a much wider health problem than what Obama called the “hard” drugs of cocaine and meth (or heroin, for that matter).

And there is a reason for that. Today’s marijuana has many times the potency (as the dealers and retailers tout regularly) of the weed that Obama and his contemporaries smoked in the 1970s. This contributes to the danger of addiction, but also increases other serious risks reported by researchers over the last 10 to 15 years. These include worsening or even triggering serious mental illness (including depression and psychosis) and permanent loss of up to eight IQ points. In addition, there are the well-known risks of short-term memory loss, inhibited concentration, and impaired motor function. These are the known dangers facing the low estimate of 18.9 million users. And the best available figures show that marijuana users have jumped almost 24 percent under President Obama—from 15.3 million in 2008 to 18.9 million in 2012.

What if we did simply treat marijuana like alcohol or cigarettes? Despite all the anticigarette measures, there are still over 57 million smokers, and there are 135 million drinkers. Can we expect marijuana use to approach these magnitudes? Such questions do not seem to occur to the president.

Instead, Obama makes two moral arguments that get to the heart of the distortion in today’s attitudes about illegal drugs. First, Remnick says,

What clearly does trouble him is the radically disproportionate arrests and incarcerations for marijuana among minorities. “Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do,” he said. “And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties.”

The charge is ludicrous. No one gets “locked up for smoking pot”—federal mandatory minimums don’t even kick in below 220 pounds, and only 9 percent of federal marijuana convictions involve African Americans. No part of law enforcement in America targets pot-smoking kids or simple users of any age. No one is being frisked on the streets for the purpose of finding marijuana users.

There are two major causes of drug possession charges in our criminal justice system. The first is trafficking, which may well be pled down to a lesser charge. The second is the commission of violent or property crime, when the individual at the time of apprehension and arrest for that crime is found to have drugs in their possession. In a significant portion of these cases, the offender may be charged with the lesser drug possession rather than the more serious underlying crime. If such possession laws were repealed, the probable effect would actually be longer sentences based on charges for the original offense.

What Obama evades is the fact that there are inequities in the demography of criminal offenders, which are also reflected in the demographics of their victims. He implies this is a matter of racism, but, while all the possible causes are not understood with certainty, the most probable is the breakdown of family structure and related institutions, which are especially important in the formation of healthy young men.

Obama also seems to have missed one of the most promising public policy developments of the past two decades—drug courts, which drive tens of thousands of users into treatment every year. Law enforcement has become the single greatest source of referral to treatment of any institution in America. Our justice system, including more than 2,600 drug courts, now sorts out criminals who are not violent threats but engage in crimes because they are addicted and tries to get them clean and sober. It does this with considerable success, given the challenges of addiction. Instead of expressing pride in this achievement, Obama utterly misrepresents the reality. Inmates in state prisons make up the largest single segment of the prison population, and fewer than one-half of 1 percent are sentenced for possession of marijuana. In fact, drug offenses of all types have been declining as a percentage of arrests and sentences at both the federal and state levels.

Obama’s second moral argument may be an even more powerful force in suppressing debate than his false charge of racism. The Remnick interview includes this comment from the president:

“[W]e should not be locking up kids or individual users for long stretches of jail time when some of the folks who are writing those laws have probably done the same thing.” Accordingly, he said of the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington that “it’s important for it to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished.”

This is an absurd but politically powerful argument with baby boomers, since the subtext is that people who have smoked pot are hypocrites if they disagree. Legalization is an act of justice, and those who oppose it want to perpetuate injustice. For a political official especially (although Obama’s argument includes all of us), if you got away with marijuana use and oppose legalization, you are supporting the arbitrary victimization of those who are just like you. Even if you did not use drugs, you are unjust to support laws that punish a few when many offend. This seems to be necessarily linked to Obama’s initial claim that marijuana (and maybe other illegal drugs) is not really harmful. If illegal drugs are harmful, it would seem that not being able to stop or deter that harm in even a majority of the cases would still make it moral to protect and bring justice where possible. Most laws and principles of morality exist in this condition because human justice, even at its best, is far from perfect.

On the other hand, Obama clearly suggests that the racial and socioeconomic disparity in enforcement discredits drug laws and those who defend them. He has not faced the fact that there are racial and socioeconomic disparities in crime and punishment, but they are not caused by drug laws, and they will almost certainly get worse as drug use expands. The pervasive, willful denial of all this is a powerful driver of the moral argument for legalization.

An even stronger driver of legalization may be the simple inability of former users to admit to themselves and to others that what they did was wrong and dangerous, even if they were lucky to avoid serious harm. It is just not cool to say such things, and certainly from the point of view of the many users who were not harmed, marijuana seems harmless. To speak of the harms as a public figure is to criticize many who are just like you and who feel the risks are really not so great. This is a tricky business of denial, however. Virtually everyone has a loved one who has been a victim of substance abuse. We have all watched celebrities and public figures destroy themselves and pass in and out of treatment. We also know of or live in parts of our country that have been devastated by drugs and crime.

Antidrug liberalism has been based on protecting the vulnerable from victimization, but it has lost its way in substituting demographics for moral principle and character. Antidrug conservatism also sought to protect the vulnerable and to preserve individual freedom from addiction and self-destruction. Today some conservatives confuse the institutions and laws needed to preserve freedom with the threats to freedom—they equate willfulness with freedom.

American democracy has always needed leaders who know the truth and have the courage and skill to bring the truth to our public deliberations. That need is greater today than it has been in some time.

John P. Walters is Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President of Hudson Institute and former director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George W. Bush.

This article appeared at Weekly Standard and is reprinted with permission.

The article The Obama Presidency Goes To Pot – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By IDN

By Isabelle Ramdoo and San Bilal

The sustained commodity boom of the last decade provided a new impetus to a number of African countries, after decades of economic turmoil. High growth rates, recorded in recent years, uncovered new opportunities to finally address long-standing socio-economic challenges that had hindered the continent’s economic performance for decades. From an economic perspective, to be truly transformative, these opportunities will have to be translated into employment creation, improved productivity and industrialisation, and governments will increasingly be put under pressure to deliver on concrete results.

Among the priorities, two issues stand out as being very high on the agendas of many African countries. Firstly, the capacity to mobilise domestic revenue from extractive resources is viewed as essential to finance broader economic priorities, both within and outside the extractive sector. Secondly, it becomes imperative to define a clear strategy towards industrialisation to diversify away from the dependence on commodities and more broadly, to consolidate the economic base.

Many African countries have used export controls, in various forms, as a policy tool to mobilise revenue from the extractive sector and to foster industrial development. While the purpose is not to gauge whether export controls are good or bad policy measures, the reasons that drove governments to raise such measures have to be understood and it is important to examine to what extent it has worked (or not).

While in some economic sectors there have been positive impacts, the peculiar nature of the extractive sector soon showed the limits of export controls. In effect, contracts, special fiscal regimes and stabilisation agreements all contributed to create watertight business environments for industries, in such a way that the extractive industries were, in the end, insulated against such measures. For example, of 40 resource-rich African countries, 21 apply exports taxes and most of them are subject to other forms of export controls. Yet, most of them still have challenges to maximise fiscal revenues and are still highly dependent on commodities with little success in diversifying their export base.

To address the fiscal challenges, it is therefore important to go one step beyond, to improve the overall management of revenues from the extractive sector. Export taxes as a measure to fill in government coffers have their limits: stronger overall fiscal regimes have to be put in place and different fiscal instruments, adapted to the stage of mineral development, need to be clearly defined and implemented. Corruption, rent-seeking and patronage need to be addressed, as they distort the system. Capital flight and illicit capital flows – unsurprisingly largely present in resource-rich countries – have to be tackled as they drain currency reserves and squeeze revenue collection.

This requires strategic planning and bold and transparent mineral reforms. Beyond fixing the leakages, effective revenue collection needs to be managed prudently. This includes (i) managing government expenditures, to prevent the unwanted effects of the Dutch Disease; and (ii) managing excess revenues and foreign reserves in times of booms, with the possibility to save part of the revenue for future generations, through the creation of sovereign wealth funds.

As mentioned, industrialisation is no longer a choice in Africa, it is an imperative. While in some economic sectors (for instance the leather sector in Kenya) the use of export restrictions has indeed encouraged local processing, in the extractive sector however, there has been limited success. Zambia, for instance, moved one step up the value chain, from copper concentrates to refined copper. But successful cases are rare to find. Yet, potential to develop linkages, both with and outside the extractive sector, are quite significant.

With complementary industrial policies it is possible to develop smart productive linkages, which also need to be accompanied by spacial linkages, i.e. inclusive infrastructure corridors that can stimulate clusters and integrate local economic activities. It is equally important to  promote knowledge linkages to foster innovation, creativity, skills and capacity to maximise the economic and social potential and benefits associated with extractive resources.

Within the extractive sector, forward, backward and lateral linkages should be encouraged, if there are business cases to do so, and provided supply-side constraints such as infrastructure and energy deficits or skill mismatch or shortages are addressed. These can generate value-added activities and location-specific activities, notably for the local private sector.

A key consideration for African countries is to seek to develop activities where higher value is actually created. These are generally activities that create jobs and contribute significantly to the national output. The availability of cheap labour and relatively low costs of production confers a theoretical comparative advantage to a good number of African countries.

The manufacturing sector remains a key priority for most African countries, for obvious reasons that it is a big employer, in particular for lower-skilled  people and is relatively easy to set up (provided there is a business case to do so). More importantly, it serves as an incubator for new ideas. However, contrary to what one might think, it might not be where most value can be created. Experience has shown that much more value can be created in supportive services, at the concept phase, or during the distribution phase.

It is therefore important to rightly frame the policy objectives to be achieved. If the objective is to create value, then the focus must be on the development of services that surround manufacturing processes, such as research and development, branding and design in order to become competitive over concepts. Markets and logistics are the other types of activities that generate significant value added.

However, if the objective is to create jobs and develop an industrial base, then policies will have to focus on competition over processes, bearing in mind that this will place the country at the lower level of the value chain, unless activities are integrated globally. Here, smart industrial policies will have to be well defined and clearly implemented.

Linking with other productive sectors

Linking the extractive sector with other productive sectors, such as agriculture is also crucial. In most African countries, agriculture is a major economic sector and therefore has significant potential to be transformative. For now, many countries continue to struggle to improve productivity. Resources from extractive sectors could be used to catalyse the agricultural sector, in particular in areas where the two sectors co-exist.

The next step is to ensure that domestic industries are efficiently linked to regional and global value chains (GVCs). Over the years, production structures have become more and more structured around GVCs, as a result of technological progress, of a more liberal international trade framework and of the increasing role of emerging economies as new drivers of production structures. This has to be factored in when defining policies to boost industrial development.

But ironically, while most resource-rich African countries are crucial providers of raw materials for industrial products, unfortunately, most of them have been operating at the lowest rung of the ladder in GVCs and have not been successful in developing their own niches. They remain locked as perpetual providers of unprocessed inputs and have failed to move up. Efforts are being done to change the state of affairs.

Amongst others, reforms include requirements to use local content and procurement as a catalyst to industrial development. National efforts alone are however not sufficient to embrace economic transformation in a sustainable manner. Most extractive industries operating in Africa are connected to regional and global networks, as their raw materials are essential inputs to the production of goods.

In this context, no country can reach its full potential unless its neighbours and economic partners are successful. The most effective approach to boost Africa’s industries is to explore the potential to combine industrial strengths, deepen interconnectedness and develop competitive and functioning markets, starting with the regional level. Boosting intra-Africa trade, simplifying and reducing the costs of cross-border trade, improving the business environment, improving cross-border infrastructure are all vital conditions of a functional regional market.

Role of development cooperation

What role for development cooperation? The role of development partners in supporting African initiatives can only be modest: key impetus and drive should come from Africans themselves, and resource-rich countries have potentially greater means (i.e. revenues) to reform their economies. Yet, the role of development partners should not be under-estimated. Despite the crisis, both the European Commission and the EU member states remain significant providers of development support, often in the form of financial support but also in the form of technical assistance and capacity building. But their relative role of development partners is likely to diminish, and so will their political weight, as economic conditions improve in many African countries.

This is not to say that they will no longer be relevant or may no longer have constructive experience to share with African countries. Increasingly, constructive support may take the form of capacity and institutional support. But this needs some adjustments in the form and the content of current development strategies.

For a large part, donors have focused their support on transparency and management of resources. However, support to development initiatives remains rather thin. When it exists, it remains largely focused within donors’ own interests. The shifting geopolitical landscape in Africa however calls for a different, innovative approach, based on partnership and mutual benefits between development partners and African countries. While it is well understood that national resource strategies are meant to address first and foremost the needs of resource-dependent countries, reconciling those with the interests of resource-rich countries is likely to yield far more constructive results.

To make a difference, development support needs to pay particular attention to the political economy dynamics at play in resource-rich countries. These include understanding who are the main drivers of change (or blockage) and what are their incentives, what are the power dynamics like and in what particular country-specific institutional settings donors are involved. Once that understood, support should aim at providing incentive-compatible interventions that are political feasible and acceptable. This is not easy but may ultimately prove to be more efficient.

A complementary venue is to alter the incentives of the ruling elite, whose vested interests and power dynamics may otherwise bolster the resource curse. Such strategies may include interventions that seek to extend the time horizon of policymakers or mobilising stakeholders to increase the ranges of interests involved. Interventions that seek to ‘enclave capacity and institutions’ related to natural resources have also been advocated as an additional mechanism to promote better governance.

Last, but not least, the international development community should better anchor their actions in domestic dynamics for change. Indeed, an increasing source of dynamics for shifting domestic incentives towards a pro-development path in resource-rich countries comes from collective action in Africa, at national, regional and the continental levels.

This article is Executive Summary of Discussion Paper by Isabelle Ramdoo and San Bilal titled ‘Extractive Resources for Development: Trade, fiscal and industrial considerations’ published in January 2014 by the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), based in Maastricht, the Netherlands.

The article Making Extractive Industries Truly Transformative For Africa – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Civil.Ge

(Civil.Ge) — Most signs suggest a strengthening of democratic institutions in Georgia, but it still remains among “partly free” countries, according to an annual report by the U.S.-based rights watchdog Freedom House.

Freedom in the World 2014, a country-by-country report on global political rights and civil liberties, covers developments of 2013.

Each country or territory is given a status “free”, “partly free” or “not free” based on points in political rights and civil liberties categories on a scale from 1 to 7 with 1 representing the most free and 7 the least free.

Georgia’s rating in both political rights and civil liberties categories remained unchanged at 3 and the country remains among “electoral democracies”; Freedom House removed Georgia from this category in its 2009 report for parliamentary and snap presidential elections in 2008, but assigned “electoral democracy” status back to Georgia in its 2013 report after the October, 2012 parliamentary elections.

Freedom House said Georgia was “one of the few bright spots” in 2013 in Eurasia – the region in which the organization includes former Soviet state except of the Baltic States. The group noted “open and less polarized campaign environment and a free and fair presidential election in October” 2013.

“While there are still concerns about selective prosecutions of officials from former president Mikheil Saakashvili’s government, most signs suggest a strengthening of democratic institutions by the Georgian Dream government over the past year,” the Freedom House said.

The report by Freedom House ranks breakaway South Ossetia and Abkhazia under the category of “disputed territories.”

Like in previous reports, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are ranked as “partly free” and “not free”, respectively. In political rights category Abkhazia has 4 points and in civil liberties – 5; South Ossetia has 7 points in political rights category and 6 in civil liberties.

The article Freedom House: Georgia Remains ‘Partly Free’ appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By SAAG

By Dr. Subhash Kapila

China’s emergence as Asia’s most prominent ‘regional spoiler state’ and its strategic trajectories betraying its ambitions to emerge as Asia’s most predominant power has left Japan and India to shoulder the challenges of operating as the twin pillars of Asian security.

Argued for nearly a decade in my Papers has been the strategic reality that China alone cannot exclusively grab the Asian strategic space and that Asian strategic space has to be shared by China with Japan and India. China down the years has demonstrated that it has no intention to allow this and that on the contrary China has increasingly indulged in escalation of its territorial disputes with Japan and India thereby strategically down-size them.

Asian security and stability in 2014 stands greatly endangered by China’s military provocations and military brinkmanship extending from the India-Tibet Himalayan borders in South Asia to South China Sea in South East Asia and finally to conflict escalation at Japan’s doorsteps in the East China Sea (Senkaku Islands).

With China not emerging as the leading stakeholder in Asian security and stability, and contrarily emerging as the major challenge to Asian security, Japan and India now have to strategically operate as the twin pillars of Asian security and stability.

Indicators exist that strategic realities have dawned on both Japan and India that they not only have to add substance to the Japan-India Strategic & Global Partnership 2006 but also hasten the process of their respective defence build-ups and strive for creation of an indigenous Asian ‘balance of power regime’ incorporating other Asian nations threatened by China’s military waywardness.

Japan-India Strategic & Global Partnership 2006 comes into detailed focus with the forthcoming historic visit of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe as the Chief Guest at India’s Republic Day 2014 Parade and celebrations which was preceded by an equally historic visit of Their Imperial Majesties, The Emperor and Empress of Japan.

Related to these two significant events in the Japan-India relations extensive media analyses have appeared in the Indian media highlighting the imperatives of a continued and reinforcing Japan-India Strategic Partnership in a comprehensive sense.

In this Paper therefore I would not like to indulge in a repetitive analysis but focus on how well-equipped Japan and India are strategically and militarily to shoulder effectively the onerous challenge of emerging as the twin pillars of Asian security and stability in the face of unremitting conflict escalation and military brinkmanship by China.

China, it needs to be recalled has engaged in a massive build-up of its conventional military machine, nuclear weapons arsenal and its armoury of its nuclear ICBMs. China also has been engaged in an extensive build-up and expansion of its naval power including nuclear-powered and SLBMs equipped submarines. All in all China has amassed disproportionate military power, unrelated to its threat perceptions and now also a strategic concern for leading global powers like the United States and Russia.

Japan has exhibited a strategic will not to appease China in the face of grave and threatening military brinkmanship of China in the overall context of strategically downsizing Japan. Conflict escalation over the Senkaku Islands and ADIZs are just the opening Chinese moves in its overall strategy of ensuring China’s dominance of the Western Pacific ad converting North East Asia into China’s exclusive strategic backyard.

Japan has stiffly stood upto China recently both militarily and politically. Japan has refused to be cowed down in the face of the growing Chinese threat Militarily, Japan anticipating China’s not so benign strategic designs have been engaged in building its conventional military punch and deterrence. Japan has realigned its force deployments from its Cold War northern-bias deployments towards South and South West deployments. It has earmarked $ 240 billion for the period 2014-2019 for expansion of its submarine fleets, fighter aircraft and amphibious warfare capabilities to meet the China Threat.

More significantly, Japan in view of changed security environment has enunciated its National Security Strategy, established a National Security Bureau, all geared towards integrated national security planning and operations.

Politically also Japan has been engaged in recent times to widen its diplomatic contacts and initiatives in relation to its perceived threats from China. In a strategically significant move Japan in 2013 hosted a 2+2 Meet of Japanese and Russian Foreign and Defence Ministers to explore strategic cooperation between Japan and Russia. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in the first year of his second term as Prime Minister has visited all ten nations of ASEAN in a diplomatic overdrive to garner greater political support for Japan’s political and strategic postures in relation to China.

Prime Minister Abe’s overtures to India earlier and now in his second term as he visits India next week is geared towards adding more substantial contours to the already functioning Japan-India Strategic Partnership.

India’s record and demonstrated performance in contrast to Japan to confront China’s military provocations and brinkmanship leaves much to be desired if it has to effectively safeguard its own security leaving aside the challenge of shouldering the responsibility of being the second pillar of Asian security alongside Japan.

In terms of strategic will to face upto China’s repeated provocations and military intrusions into Indian Territory along the India- Tibet border, India has failed significantly. Sadly in the last ten years India has all along been engaged in a ‘China Appeasement’ policy and political timidity arising presumably from a lack of realistic grasp of strategic issues and overly relying on and misreading China’s protestations of sincere friendship for India. China’s actions on India’s borders do not match the talk.

Regrettably, Indian policy establishment circles even shrink and shy away from mentioning the possibility of a “Live” China Threat to India’s national security and interests.

India has consistently shirked from enunciating its National Security Strategy.. After a decade or so India’s nuclear doctrine continues as a Draft Doctrine. All this indicates how much India invests in its national security architecture.

In terms of military preparedness to cope with the China Threat the Indian Armed Forces due to bungling Ministry of Defence prevailing over a Defence Minister who values his personal integrity more, have delayed materialisation of decades-long due inductions of modern weapons and equipment. Defence infrastructure along the Himalayan borders is years behind completion dates.

India’s cutting edge combat air-power in terms of deficiency of 126 combat aircraft being fulfilled by the deal with France for Rafael fighter aircraft is in jeopardy, again because of the above attitudes.

In terms of political initiatives to off-set the China Threat to India and to Asian security as a whole, India’s political leadership has not gone into any personal over-drive to offset China’s provocative postures. It was illuminating to read how China has reacted with a propaganda offensive to decrying the political initiatives by Japanese Prime Minister in Asian capitals.

The much hyped US-India Strategic Partnership of the last decade implicit in whose evolution was to provide some sort of political if not military deterrence against a destabilising military rising China has failed to take off

Reverting back to the main theme of Japan and India being twin pillars of Asian security and stability what needs to be sated is that it is not a mere concept but a pressing strategic imperative for both Japan and India. Both Japan and India as leading powers of Asia are being incessantly being subjected to Chinese military provocations and brinkmanship. While Japan has openly recognised the China Threat, it is India that also has to recognise the same.

India can no longer indulge in complacency in shirking away from exercising its strategic will in relation to the China Threat, nor it can it afford to let its war preparedness to downslide.

Finally, India needs to learn a lot from Japan in terms of how to effectively emerge as a strong and reinforced second pillar of Asian security alongside Japan to offset China’s military provocations and brinkmanship. The Japanese Prime Minister declared in Washington some time back that Japan is determined to keep itself as Tier-I power in Asia and the world. India has yet to delineate ‘red lines’ which China should not cross in terms of impinging India’s security.

China is engaged in strategic diminution of both Japan and India as peer competitors to establish its unquestioned primacy in Asian security environment. In response Japan is finally shedding the US-imposed mantle of pacifism. Similarly India needs to shed its strategic naivety and strategic timidity in facing China’s military provocations and brinkmanship.

The article Japan And India: The Twin Pillars Of Asian Security – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Observer Research Foundation

By Abhirup Bhunia and Geethanjali Nataraj

India’s relations with Japan is likely get further fillip when Prime Minister Abe comes visiting India as the chief guest for this year’s Republic Day festival. Not only is this the first time that a Japanese PM is the chief guest on Republic Day, but the visit assumes significance at a time when the world is slowly coming out of the financial crisis and the macro-economic foundations of both countries are being tested.

India and Japan have historically been friends, right from Japan’s Meiji era through episodes in modern history, like the post-War period, up till today. The relationship has been underpinned by not just commerce but also a sense of like-mindedness with regards to world politics. Ties between the two got a further pragmatic and material boost during the post-Cold War period when Japan was faced with a rising China and a hostile North Korea, and India liberalised its economy and embraced globalisation. India has also received substantial Japanese Overseas Development Assistance since 1958, when economic cooperation between Japan and India formally began. However, the ties aren’t limited to aid or assistance.

As it stands now, there is both untapped potential for cooperation as well as a scope for strengthening existing ties. And commercial and economic engagements should be at the heart of a 21st century Indo-Japanese engagement. Of course, strategic and geopolitical cooperation at the global high tables should continue to act as a major pillar of this growing bilateralism. Already, the two countries work together in the area of UN reforms. To boot, bilateral civil nuclear cooperation between the two is slow but steady.

Interestingly, Japan and India are facing two different kinds of economic predicaments. While Japan has suffered from deflation for more than a decade now, India in recent times has reeled under price rise. Under the so-called Abenomics, Japan has been seeking to undo the depression that has long befallen the ageing nation by engaging in massive quantitative easing that would inject liquidity into the system, boost demand, unleash investments, and drive up prices. It is in testing times such as these that mutual cooperation can actually benefit both countries. Currently, the areas of cooperation between India and Japan are varied and there’s much potential for joint action.

On the strategic side of things, Japan’s economic cooperation with India is also a hedge against a rising China which is a direct threat to Japan as also India, if to a lesser extent. The geopolitical strategy adopted by Abe also fits into India’s foreign policy approach of looking eastwards. Also the trilateral talks between US, India and Japan firmly counterbalances the Chinese aggressiveness in the region. Thus, with India-Japan ties poised to reach historical heights, Chinese aspirations to establish itself as a regional hegemon may not go unchallenged.

The Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) signed between India and Japan in 2011 has cemented ties between the two and given out a clear signal to the world about the seriousness of the relationship. Under the CEPA, tariffs have been slashed on more than 8000 products, including apparel, agricultural products and machinery, and also cover services, labour and investments. Of course, with the CEPA coming into effect in August 2011, it is too early to confirm its impact. But during the one year since the CEPA came into effect, India’s exports went up by 24% while it imported 40% more from Japan. The estimated trade volume in 2014 is going to be $25bn, rising from $18.3 bn in 2013. As the figures demonstrate, India’s trade deficit with Japan grew to somewhat uncomfortable levels following the CEPA and Japan seemed to benefit more. Of course, India is yet to realise the full benefits because as per the CEPA agreement Japan will eliminate tariffs on 97% of the items over a period of ten years.

While China’s trade volume with India far surpasses Indo-Japanese trade, Japanese commercial ties with India are deep-rooted and go beyond just trade. And with Abe and Singh’s personal investments into the relationship, and the rapport that they share, ties are decidedly headed in the right direction.

Japanese firms’ interest in India is no new thing. For long, the Sonys and Suzukis were India’s household brand names. Indo-Japanese cooperation in electronics received a boost in recent times when Japanese firms started to look beyond China, even as it deals with a huge loss in market share to South Korean and Taiwanese firms. But Japanese technology remains dear to India and India’s market size, rapid economic growth and rising demand for consumer durables continue to attract Japanese firms, many of which in 2013 announced massive investments in India to set up manufacturing plants and undertake product innovation tailored for the local market.

Japanese economic cooperation in India ranges from ODA loans to investments by Japanese firms and beyond, and what’s been particularly heartening is Japan’s assistance in India’s infrastructure. It is no secret that India needs to pump in heavy investments to beef up its crumbling infrastructure. The government in fact has articulated the need for a trillion dollars of investments. Japan has strongly chipped into this effort and its cooperation reflects the growing responsiveness of Japan to India’s needs. Of course there are gains for Japan too, as Japanese firms are entering into profitable joint ventures with Indian companies. And with Japan’s capacity to invest in capital-intensive long gestation projects, it might be just what the doctor ordered for India. And Japan.

Buoyed by the incredible success of the Delhi Metro, which was largely funded by low cost loans from Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Chennai Metro Project too is funded by Japan and is a potential shining example of Indo-Japanese commercial, infrastructural and technical cooperation. That the thrust of JICA’s activities is on India is borne out by the fact that over 50% of the value of all JICA projects in South Asia is cornered by India. The projects are all in strategic sectors that offer Japanese companies a strong business opportunity. It’s a win-win partnership that one hopes will be further fortified by Abe’s visit this Republic Day.

(The writers are researchers with Observer Research Foundation, Delhi)

The article India And Japan: Asia’s Win-Win Partnership – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By COHA

By W. Alejandro Sanchez

The events of this upcoming January 27, 2014 are likely to determine the short and long-term future regarding the relations between Peru and Chile. [1] On that date, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague will announce its ruling on a long-standing maritime dispute between the two South American coastal states. [2]

The Dispute

In dispute is an area of approximately 38,000 square kilometers of the Pacific Ocean.[3] The nation that controls it will see great benefits to its fishing industry – the Peruvian media explains that this area is rich with sea life like the jurel and the anchoveta (of the anchovy family).[4] The association of artisanal fishermen of Arica in Chile have claimed that if the aforementioned disputed territory is surrendered to Peru, they could lose 40% of their fishing territory.[5]

Peru went to the ICJ to resolve this dispute in 2008; six years later, the court will finally give its verdict. [6] A December 2013 ICJ press release solemnly declares that, “It is recalled that the judgements of the Court have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned.” [7]

Both sides have put forward compelling cases by their advocates. Chile argues that Lima agreed to Santiago’s version of the border via agreements in 1952 and again in 1954. On the other hand, the Peruvian government argues that these accords addressed fishing rights, not the delimitation of the maritime border.[8] Lima also wants the ICJ to rule that the border between the two states was limited in a 1929 Treaty and a 1930 demarcation process.[9]

To protect their country’s interests at The Hague, Santiago and Lima have sent teams of international lawyers (interestingly Chile refuses to publicize the names and salaries of its lawyers) and diplomats, such as Peru’s renowned diplomat Allan Wagner.[10] Unsurprisingly, private companies involved in fishing are interested in the verdict, hence they have supported their respective governments; for example Angelini, a conglomerate of Chilean fisheries, has provided the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs with information to back Chile’s claim.[11] Representatives from both governments have optimistically declared that the ICJ will rule in their favor.[12]

Peru-Chile Relations

Historically, Peru and Chile have not had ideal inter-state relations dating back to the War of the Pacific. [13] That conflict lasted from 1879 to 1883 and involved Peru, Bolivia and Chile (the latter which received major amounts of military aid from the British Empire). This 19th century conflict has defined modern day inter-state relations between the three South American nations; due to the war, in which Chile emerged victorious, Bolivia was rendered a landlocked nation while Peru lost the copper-rich regions of Arica and Tarapaca.

Even though Chile and Peru have developed commercial and diplomatic ties, there are also occasional spikes of tensions between the two nations, such as Peruvian hackers reportedly attacking Chilean government websites and vice-versa.[14] There are also occasional low-key incidents that easily exacerbate nationalistic sentiments. For example, when a Peruvian tourist raised the Peruvian flag in Arica (a territory that Chile gained during the 19th century war’); he was arrested by the Chilean police.[15]

Moreover, there are also disputes over traditional goods such as Pisco, a famous Peruvian drink, that Chile claims was originally created in its country.[16] Additionally, both countries claim to that the potato originates in their respective territories.[17]

Furthermore, there have been occasions when ties between the governments turned tense and the possibility of armed conflict became a real option. In 1975, Peru almost initiated a war with Chile to gain back control of the territories lost during the War of the Pacific. More recently, in 2009 there was a diplomatic tiff when it was discovered that a Peruvian Air Force officer provided Chilean intelligence agencies with classified information.[18]

Nevertheless, the past and current record of disputes and incidents between the two states, Lima and Santiago actually have developed significant commercial relations between themselves. Both nations are part of the Pacific Alliance, a trade bloc of economically-vibrant Latin American nations.[19] Apart from strong trade relations there is a strong human connection between the two countries as Peruvian migrants in Chile have made a good living by opening restaurants that serve Peruvian food in the Southern nation.[20]

National Unity and Respecting the ICJ Verdict

As January 27 approaches, the question is whether both governments will respect the ICJ’s verdict. At least for the time being, this international legal dispute has served as a catalyst for different political factions within Peru and Chile to harmonize their attitudes at least for the time being.

All former Chilean presidents recently met in order to discuss the case and have a united front between Chile’s political parties.[21] Chile held elections in late 2013 and former President Michelle Bachelet (2006-2010) won a new presidential term that will begin in March 2014.[22] She and current President Sebastian Pinera have also met to discuss the ICJ verdict.[23]

As for Peru, political figures are also calling for unity: Former President Alan Garcia Perez (1985-1990 and 2006-2011) has tweeted that the government should allow for businesses to open at 11am (Peruvian time) on January 27 so that Peruvians can watch the verdict at home. In his January 12 tweet, he also called for the Peruvian flag to be raised across the nation in a sign of national unity.[24] At the executive level President Ollanta Humala gathered of former Peruvian heads of state this past Monday, January 20th, to discuss the maritime case.[25] The Peruvian leader head of state with met with leaders of major media outlets on January 13th to create a united national front before the verdict.[26]

In general, policymakers from both nations have declared that the ICJ’s ruling will be respected. Presidents Humala and Pinera met during a UN summit in New York this past September 2013, where they both declared to the media that they will respect The Hague’s verdict.[27] More recently, in early 2014, there was a meeting between the governors of Peru’s Tacna and Chile’s Arica regions. The two regional governors signed a symbolic agreement in which both regions declared that they will respect the ICJ’s verdict. [28]

Finally, it is worth noting that in early January 2014, President Humala declared that he was confident that the “Chilean political class” is “sufficiently mature” to evaluate the cost of putting bilateral relations at risk if the ICJ’s verdict is not respected.[29] This statement highlights the potential for worst case scenario regarding the future of Lima-Chile relations in the post-maritime dispute era which will commence on January 28: How will a government react if the other ends up gaining control of the disputed territory? Could an unfavorable verdict be enough of a justification to trigger a conflict between Peru and Chile? Will relations remain business as usual, or will there be some economic and/or diplomatic retaliation?

The ICJ and Supranationalism in Latin America

The issue of the ICJ’s upcoming ruling calls into question whether supranationalism is on the rise throughout Latin America, and whether regional states recognize the verdicts of international entities in order to obtain a (hopefully) impartial and a well-analyzed verdict on a dispute between Latin American nations. The maritime dispute between Peru and Chile is not the only Latin American case that the ICJ has handled in recent years. In 2010, the court ruled on a dispute over a paper mill built by Montevideo on the River Uruguay, which borders Argentina and Uruguay.[30] Additionally, in 2012 the ICJ passed a verdict on a dispute over an archipelago and maritime territory that was being disputed between Colombia and Nicaragua.[31] Currently, Costa Rica and Nicaragua also have gone to the ICJ to resolve a border dispute.[32]

So far, the governments of Buenos Aires, Montevideo, Bogota and Managua have respected the ICJ’s verdicts. This is noteworthy but it should not be interpreted as Latin America having reached a tipping point and that Latin American leaders are giving up their country’s sovereignty to international agencies. If that was the case, entities like the Organization of American States, the Union of South American Nations or the Andean Community would have far more power over their member states than obviously is the case.

Nevertheless, the ICJ’s rulings signal a trend that Latin America is turning to international bodies to negotiate their disputes instead of starting armed conflicts (the author has previously written on the lack of inter-state wars in Latin America in a 2011 essay for Small Wars & Insurgencies).[33]

Conclusions

As January 27 approaches, we will see more coverage among the Peruvian and Chilean media regarding the probable scenarios regarding the ICJ’s verdict and what the future of Peruvian-Chilean relations will be. Certainly, the ICJ judges should not be influenced by how the verdict could (and will) it is likely to impact Peru and Chile, but rather should (and must) provide an objective and impartial analysis and judgement based on the information provided by Lima and Chile as well as their interpretation of the law.

With that said, it becomes the duty of policymakers and scholars to understand and explain how this dispute will impact bilateral relations and prevent worst-case scenarios (i.e. an armed conflict) either in the short or long term.

The maritime dispute between Peru and Chile is complex with both sides believing that they are right in their demands. Over the short term, the outcome will grant a country’s fishing industry access to a greater segment of the Pacific. But this dispute also signifies a matter of national pride between two nations that, while they currently have strong economic and human relations, continue to have inter-state tensions and mistrust due to a 19th century conflict that has shaped their national identities (particularly in the case of the nations that lost, namely Peru and Bolivia)

The respect, generally-speaking, of ICJ verdicts by other Latin American states and the context in which these are found, give hope that, whatever the verdict of this dispute, Lima and Santiago will respect it and the peaceful era it will most likely usher in.

W. Alejandro Sanchez, Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

References

[1] “Fallo de La Haya sobre diferendo maritime entre Peru y Chile sera el 27 de enero de 2014.” Emol.com. December 13, 2014. http://www.emol.com/noticias/nacional/2013/12/13/634679/fallo-la-haya.html

[2] International Court of Justice. Official website. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&case=137

[3] Pablo Andres Rivero. “Stormy Waters? The Maritime Border Disputes between Bolivia, Chile and Peru.” Global Voices-English. February 4, 2013. http://globalvoicesonline.org/2013/02/04/stormy-waters-the-maritime-border-disputes-between-bolivia-chile-and-peru/

[4] “Remarcan que fallo de La Haya tendra mayor incidencia en la Pesca.” RPP (Peru). January 15, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-01-15-remarcan-que-fallo-de-la-haya-tendra-mayor-incidencia-en-la-pesca-noticia_662021.html

[5] “Los Pescadores artesanales de Arica perderian un 40% de su pesca si Peru gana en La Haya.” Soychile.cl. December 8, 2012. http://www.soychile.cl/Arica/Sociedad/2012/12/08/139797/Los-pescadores-artesanales-de-Arica-perderian-un-40-de-su-pesca-si-Peru-gana-en-La-Haya.aspx

[6] “Peru constitutes proceedings against Chile with regard to a dispute concerning maritime delimitation between the two States. International Court of Justice. Press Release – Unofficial. No. 2008/1. January 16, 2008. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/14387.pdf

[7] “Maritime dispute (Peru v. Chile) The Courte to deliver its Judgement on Monday 27 January 2014 at 3 p.m.” International Court of Justice. Press Release – Unofficial. No. 2013/40. December 13, 2013. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/17842.pdf

[8] “Maritime Delimitation between Peru and Chile.” – Translation of the document “Delimitacion Maritima entre el Peru y Chile”, edited by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Peru and published in El Comercio newspaper (Peru) on 22 March 2009. Embassy of Peru – Australia. http://www.embaperu.org.au/embassy/pdfs/Maritime%20Delimitation%20Peru%20Chile.pdf

[9] “Especial: Peru y Chile en la recta final en La Haya.” Peru21. Politica. December 2, 2012. http://peru21.pe/politica/especial-peru-y-chile-recta-final-haya-2106104

[10] “Chile rechazo reveler honorarios de abogados ante La Haya.” El Comercio (Peru). Mundo. January 13, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/mundo/latinoamerica/chile-rechazo-revelar-honorarios-abogados-ante-haya-noticia-1702526 – Also see “Representacion Peruana ante Corte de La Haya: El mejor equipo con el que se puede contar.” La Republica (Peru). Politica. December 1, 2012. http://www.larepublica.pe/01-12-2012/representacion-peruana-ante-la-corte-de-la-haya-el-mejor-equipo-con-el-que-se-puede-contar – “Ex Ministro de Defensa Allan Wagner representara a Peru ante La Haya.” Emol.com. Mundo. December 20, 2007. http://www.emol.com/noticias/internacional/2007/12/20/285958/ex-ministro-de-defensa-allan-wagner-representara-a-peru-ante-la-haya.html

[11] “El desconocido rol del grupo Angelini en la defensa de Chile ante La Haya.” La Tercera. Negocios. December 16, 2012. http://diario.latercera.com/2012/12/16/01/contenido/negocios/27-125555-9-el-desconocido-rol-del-grupo-angelini-en-la-defensa-de-chile-ante-la-haya.shtml

[12] “Coagente peruano ante la corte de La Haya confia en que el tribunal les ‘dara la razon.’” Emol.com. Chile. December 13, 2013. http://www.emol.com/noticias/internacional/2013/12/13/634719/coagente-peruano-ante-la-corte-de-la-haya-confia-en-que-el-tribunal-les-dara-la-razon.html

[13] “Documental de la Guerra del Pacifico de DIREMAR.” Direccion de Reinvindicacion Maritima (DIREMAR) – Bolivia.

[14] Manuel Vigo. “Peruvian hackers attack Chilean army website.” Peruthisweek.com. National. January 16, 2013. http://www.peruthisweek.com/news-peruvian-hackers-attack-chilean-army-website-13436 Also see “’Hackers’ Chilenos invaden el portal web oficial del Estado Peruano.” El Comercio (Peru). Politica. November 21, 2009. http://elcomercio.pe/politica/371858/noticia-hackers-chilenos-invaden-portal-web-oficial-estado-peruano

[15] “ Detienen a hincha por izar la bandera peruana en Arica.” RPP (Peru). March 21, 2012. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2012-03-21-detienen-a-hincha-por-izar-la-bandera-peruana-en-arica-noticia_463568.html

[16] David Cuen. “Agria batalla por el Pisco.” BBC Mundo.com. August 18, 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/business/newsid_5264000/5264022.stm

[17] “Peru y Chile tambien se disputan la papa.” BBC Mundo.com. March 29, 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/latin_america/newsid_4858000/4858848.stm

[18] “Espionaje Chile Peu: Caso Victor Ariza sub oficial FAP.” La Republica (Peru). Especial. http://www.larepublica.pe/especiales/espionaje-chile-peru-caso-victor-ariza-sub-oficial-fap

[19] The Pacific Alliance. Official website. http://alianzapacifico.net/en/

[20] Camara de Comercio Peruano-Chilena. Official Website. http://www.camaraperuchile.org/ – “Uno de cada tres restaurantes que abren en Chile es Peruano.” El Comercio (Peru). Economia. October 21, 2012. http://elcomercio.pe/economia/mundo/uno-cada-tres-restaurantes-que-abren-chile-peruano-noticia-1485758

[21] “Pinera se reune con expresidentes para tratar el fallo de La Haya.” RPP (Peru). Internacional. January 10, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-01-10-pinera-se-reune-con-expresidentes-para-tratar-el-fallo-de-la-haya-noticia_660841.html

[22] W. Alejandro Sanchez. “Welcome back, President Bachelet.” Blouin Beat: World. December 17, 2013. http://blogs.blouinnews.com/blouinbeatworld/2013/12/17/welcome-back-president-bachelet/

[23] “Bachelet y Pinera alinean posiciones frente al fallo de La Haya.” El Comercio (Peru). Mundo. January 7, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/mundo/europa/bachelet-pinera-alinean-posiciones-frente-al-fallo-haya-noticia-1683459

[24] Alan Garcia (AlanGarciaPeru). “El 27: #27Embanderamiento y difusion del fallo en los centros de trabajo. Ver propuesta.” January 12, 2014. 1:15PM. Tweet.

[25] “Ejecutivo convoca a expresidentes para tratar fallo de La Haya.” RPP (Peru). Lima. January 15, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-01-15-ejecutivo-convoca-a-expresidentes-para-tratar-fallo-de-la-haya-noticia_662202.html

[26] “Fallo en La Haya: Ollanta Humala se reunio con directores de medios.” La Republica (Peru). Politica. January 13, 2014. http://www.larepublica.pe/13-01-2014/fallo-en-la-haya-ollanta-humala-se-reune-con-directores-de-medios

[27] Felipe Vargas. “Pinera tras reunión con Humala: “Hemos acordado respetar, acatar y cumplir el fallo de La Haya.” Emol.com. September 25, 2013. http://www.emol.com/noticias/nacional/2013/09/25/621447/pinera-tras-bilateral-con-humala.html

[28] “Alcaldes de Tacna y Arica firman declaracion de paz antes del fallo de La Haya.” La Republica (Peru). Politica. January 10, 2014. http://www.larepublica.pe/10-01-2014/alcaldes-de-tacna-y-arica-firman-declaracion-de-paz-antes-del-fallo-de-la-haya – “La Haya: Alcaldes de Tacna y Arica esperan tranquilos el fallo.” El Comercio (Peru). Actualidad. January 9, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/actualidad/1684550/noticia-fallo-haya-alcaldes-tacna-arica-acordaron-recibir-decision-serenidad

[29] “Humala: Lo importante sera que el fallo se ejecute.” RPP (Peru). January 16, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-01-16-humala-lo-importante-sera-que-el-fallo-se-ejecute-noticia_662290.html

[30] “Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay). International Court of Justice. Official website. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&case=135&p3=4

[31] “Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia). International Court of Justice. Official website. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&case=124&code=nicol&p3=0

[32] “Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica).” International Court of Justice. Official website. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&case=152

[33] W. Alejandro Sanchez. “Whatever happened to South America’s splendid little wars?” Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2011. Volume 22, Issue 2. Pages 322 – 351. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09592318.2011.573413#.UuHRVs4o5QI

The article January 27, 2014: A Date With Destiny For Peru And Chile – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By IRIN

Aid agencies and the Philippine government are rushing to salvage the wood from some 15 million coconut trees that Typhoon Haiyan struck down in November 2013, but processing the tree debris before it rots is proving problematic, said the country’s top coconut authority.

“Even with the additional 1,000 chainsaws [that the Philippine Coconut Authority is sending to local governments], even with the help of the private sector and the… [international organizations], it is not enough,” Eucledes Forbes, administrator of the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA), told IRIN.

The generally high humidity in the Philippines is a real threat – the more moisture in the air, the quicker fallen trees rot. The downed coconut “stems”, or tree trunks, are at risk from pest infestation, most likely beetles.

“There’s a small window [of opportunity],” said James Abdul, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) area coordinator for Guiuan municipality in Eastern Samar Province, where UNDP will work with the PCA to remove some of the near two million fallen coconut palms. “We can’t talk about livelihoods until the area is cleared,” Abdul told a meeting of the two organizations earlier in January.

The PCA says there is at most six months to salvage the timber. Clearing the land of any rotting wood is critical because the pests can attack and kill newly planted seedlings, threatening the next generation of coconut trees. Re-establishing the coconut plantations, which can take more than a decade to cultivate, is vitally important for farmers, who have lost their cash crop.

The weather has not been kind to rescue efforts. On 12 January, heavy rain and strong wind from Tropical Depression Agaton caused two landslides in Southern Leyte Province, which had already lost some 27,000 coconut palms to the November super typhoon.

One-third of the tents housing evacuees in the coastal municipality of Guiuan – one of the areas hardest hit by Typhoon Haiyan – were blown over and on 18 January more than 1,000 people were re-evacuated to unoccupied government bunkhouses and privately owned warehouses.

Salvaging coconut wood

The PCA is releasing 1,000 chainsaws to local governments, international aid groups have around 600 – but this is rapidly changing as they receive donated saws or procure more – and some 500 saws are operated by private contractors, a figure based on interviews with private and public millers working on coco-timber.

At the rate of 10 trees per chainsaw processed daily, it means some 21,000 trees can be turned into timber every day. But even at this rapid pace it would take nearly two years to just process the 15 million completely damaged palms, and does not take into account the estimated 18 million less damaged ones that may also require processing.

Some NGOs are piloting small timber-milling operations. Oxfam provided chainsaws and training to a cooperative of 300 farmers in Palo municipality, Leyte Province, so they could clear their land and mill the fallen palms. The typhoon completely destroyed some 206,000 palms and affected almost 19,000 farmers in the province, according to the PCA.

Over the next three months, UNDP plans to employ typhoon survivors in its cash-for-work programme for the removal, processing and storage of timber on the islands of Panay, Samar and Leyte. Up to one-third of the recovered timber will go back to the community to rebuild housing, while the rest will be stored for use by future businesses based on wood-processing, such as charcoal production and composting fertilizer.

It could take all of the legally registered chainsaws in the Philippines -7,000 as of mid-January, according to Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which controls chainsaw registration under legislation passed to prevent illegal logging – actively cutting coconuts in affected areas to come near meeting the six-month deadline.

At least 10 portable sawmills, which can process coconut logs more quickly than chainsaws and cost anywhere from US$5,000 to $40,000 each, are to be deployed by UNDP and the government to ease the workload.

Exempt from logging ban

Getting the equipment in place is only the first step. “The challenge is now to train the chainsaw operators. It does not take too long to do that, but we [PCA] do not have enough staff to do it,” said Forbes. There are plans to recruit trainers from chainsaw and sawmill manufacturers. The training is critical due to equipment hazards, he noted.

FAO said in a recent technical note on salvaging downed coconuts and trees that any agency providing cutting equipment needs to ensure proper safety equipment and training are also provided.

Since mid-December 2013 the International Organization for Migration (IOM) has piloted a housing repair project in Guiuan and Mercedes municipalities in Eastern Samar Province, where it mills and gives coconut timber to households, along with corrugated iron roofing and tools. IOM has distributed nearly 4,000 shelter repair kits, some of which included timber.

Albert Spiteri, a consultant working on IOM’s pilot debris-to-shelter project, said finding and training chainsaw operators has been difficult due to an almost 20-year nationwide ban on coconut-logging, which lists as one of its exceptions coconut trees “damaged by typhoon or lightning”.

In areas where trees were felled by Typhoon Haiyan, and the 2012 Typhoon Bopha in Mindanao, the PCA is waiving the $22 chainsaw registration fee and the cutting fee of $2.20 per tree. “We hope this will encourage private coconut lumber dealers… This will really help with the clearing,” said Forbes, PCA’s administrator.

But bringing loggers into the industry is taking time, said Spiteri. “Chainsaws were restricted here [to prevent illegal logging] and suddenly, overnight [after the typhoon], there are millions of trees to be logged. There is a supply and demand problem.”

Once logging starts, the challenge will be to control it. “Loose chainsaws [in the hands of timber poachers] will be a problem,” Ricardo Calderon, director of the forest management bureau in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, told IRIN in a text message.

Stumped

There is also all the coconut tree debris. Chris Howe, an Australia-based debris management consultant, pointed out that the tree stumps are hard to remove, transport and process. Calderon said the unused parts of a coconut palm, including the stump, could be processed into charcoal, pelletized for use in biofuel production from sugarcane – primarily in Negros Occidental Province – or sold to furniture makers and wood carvers.

But under no circumstances can they be burnt, he said, citing the 1990 Clean Air Act, which bans open burning.

“Waste disposal is undoubtedly going to be a huge challenge,” said FAO’s senior forestry officer for Asia and the Pacific, Patrick Durst. “[It is] highly unlikely that all the fallen coconuts can possibly be processed in a timely manner.”

Coconut wood is considered a “poor man’s lumber”, he said, and it is still unclear how the wood can be treated to extend its life – FAO estimates that once wet, it can last at most four years before pests infest it – or how to store the timber safely. Some proposed treatments include a saltwater soak, chemical treatment, smoking the wood, and air-drying it, but few groups working on coco-timber are systematically treating it.

Forbes said there are plans to explore applying green muscardine fungus to the fallen trees as a way to kill beetles.

Durst pointed out that if a pest outbreak cannot be controlled, “[Then] the insect pests are left to run their course ‘til their population build-up stabilizes or declines, which will not happen as long as there are breeding grounds and food for them to feed on.”

The article Race To Salvage Philippine Coconut Wood – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Seema Sengupta

The Indian Republic turns 65 today. Sixty four years ago, this day at 10:18 a.m. Indian Standard Time, India became a sovereign democratic republic with the inauguration of her constitution at a solemn ceremony held in the grandiose durbar hall of the then majestic government house — currently the official residence of the nations’ President in New Delhi.

The proclamation announcing the birth of a new republic was read by the last Governor-General cum representative of the British Monarch, Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari.

President Rajendra Prasad, first head of state of the Indian Republic, took military salute at a spectacular parade of the defense services the same afternoon in front of 20,000 enthusiastic spectators.

A host of dignitaries, including guest of honor President Sukarno of Indonesia, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his cabinet colleagues, members of parliament, diplomatic corps posted in the Indian capital as well as jubilant men, women and children from all walks of life thronged the venue.

The date, Jan. 26, 1950, undoubtedly remains the first landmark in independent India’s struggle to realize the dreams of millions of citizens and freedom fighters who made supreme sacrifices for achieving the goal of transforming India into a democratic nation, guided by the principles of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity.

The nations’ founding fathers with all their collective wisdom have set lofty ideals of empowering the last person in the last row.

Indeed, the basic tenets of the Indian constitution aims at establishing conditions necessary for fostering social revolution in a new born country.

Granville Austin, the renowned historian and a leading authority on Indian constitution too found the hallowed book to be no less than a social document.

Constitutional drafting committee chairman Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar was of the opinion that provisions incorporated therein will ensure “that the Indian federation will not suffer from the faults of rigidity or legalism.”

And as India once again unfold the kaleidoscope of colors embedded deep within her cultural diversity, her growing economic clout and military might at the national capitals’ ceremonial boulevard called Rajpath, it is time to look back on proud achievements and also analyze whether the country has attained the target it set for itself six and half decades ago.

India is a nation with more than 5,000 years of tumultuous history behind it. A nation that many considers to be nothing short of a living museum — both ethnographic and historical due to her rich mosaic of cultural traditions, distinctive social norms and ethnicity spreading across the length and breadth.

This greatest galaxy of diversity co-existed and survived many millennia. All the great religions in the world have flourished on Indian soil and the country boasts of 15 different languages derived from divergent roots.

It is an unparalleled phenomenon that a political entity communicates in nearly 250 dialects and yet read each others’ pulse accurately.

Never before in the history of humanity did we find such colossal exhibition of brotherhood and the spirit to march in unison for reiterating the pledge of respecting each others’ fundamental rights and dignity.

This spirit is actually reflected and celebrated in the Republic Day march-past held every year.

India undoubtedly holds the patent of tolerance with the state maintaining equidistance from all faiths.

And this tradition was perfected in a predominantly Hindu country by none other than the great Mughal Emperor Akbar.

The nectar of various religious beliefs not only enriched India’s spiritual ethos but also helped to inculcate a spirit of unity amid vast diversity.

Such has been the strength of this feeling of “Indianness,” which stood the test of time despite intermittent disaffection prevailing among a section of people, that it captured the imagination of many great minds.

Even, the distinguished German scholar and Indologist, Friedrich Max Muller, was overwhelmed by the spiritual bonding that he discovered in Indians, hailing from manifold caste and creed.

He was convinced about the fact that India and only India “offered solutions to some of the greatest problems in life and instill a deep spiritual strength with which the inner life can be made more perfect, comprehensive and universal.”

This precisely is the reason why India stands united and democratic despite all odds.

Over and above, the Indian constitution held out the hope of equality by promising secularism and rule of law.

Thanks to the progressive nature of the constitutional provisions that India has survived as a vibrant democracy in a region beset with political instability.

The power of democracy has undoubtedly helped this great nation to unleash its true potential and liberate those who have been deprived for centuries.

Empowering the powerless with equal opportunities and providing voice to the voiceless through electoral franchise is surely a major achievement for the Indian republic.

Also, the nation has over the years made significant progress in vital sectors like infrastructure, agriculture, industry, science and technology, education, health care, arts and culture.

India’s progress to prosperity however has been hastened by some glorious feats namely the green revolution, milk or white revolution, industrial revolution of the 1960s, economic reforms of the 1990s, telecom revolution, space revolution, software and electronic communication revolution and power sector growth including atomic energy.

Most importantly, India has shown considerable progress in the health sector as life expectancy of Indians has shot up to 65 from 32 years in the last six decades.

The country’s overall literacy rate grew to 74.04 percent and the poverty level has registered a record decline to 22 percent.

A country fractured and bruised by partition has re-emerged like a phoenix.

It has unshackled itself from the colonial past to attain global stature. However, amid the encircling ray of hopes, there are areas of concern requiring urgent attention.

A robust nation too has its Achilles’ heel.

India is passing through the best as well as the worst of time simultaneously.

More than ever before, this Republic day, the soul of India seeks emancipation from all form of divisiveness to heal the festering sores and build a cohesive society.

This article appeared at Arab News and is reprinted with permission.

The article India Republic At 65: Still A Long Journey Ahead – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Arab News

By Aijaz Zaka Syed

As Dickens would put it, these are the best of times and worst of times for India.

As the giant of a colorful democracy marks its 65 years as a constitutional republic, there is a great deal to celebrate.

It also faces formidable and existential challenges.

The country can rightly look back on its eventful journey of the past 67 years as a nation and huge strides it has taken in the shortest possible time with immense pride and satisfaction.

Few countries can claim to have grown at such a frenetic pace in the face of such overwhelming odds without surrendering the independence of spirit and social and moral equilibrium.

Given the humble beginnings of the journey in 1947 and the tough path of self-reliance that it chose under Jawaharlal Nehru, the country’s first prime minister, we have certainly come far and have managed to accomplish has been nothing short of a miracle.

Today, India is not just one of the fastest growing economies in the world with a massive pool of talent and resources, it has established its presence in every sphere, from infrastructure to education to advances in science and technology.

But more than the progress in economic terms, if there is one single most important feat of which Indians can be truly proud of, it is their democracy.

The boisterous and unwieldy Indian democracy is nothing short of a living miracle given its size and the myriad adversities it faces in poverty, illiteracy and social and economic inequalities.

Yet Indians have never given up on their country or about a better tomorrow.

Many of them can’t read and are disillusioned with their representatives and parties.

But they have never give up on democracy and the power of their vote to deliver change.

Even during the most trying times in the nation’s history, like when Indira Gandhi imposed the Emergency, ordinary Indians — or the common man, in Arvind Kejriwal’s language — never gave up.

So if India has had such a spectacular and steady journey as a democracy, something that is rightly a source of envy to many of its neighbors, credit goes to the ordinary Indian.

In a neighborhood plagued by instability and uncertainty, India remains a comforting oasis of peace and security.

However, as the country marks another proud landmark as a constitutional democracy today, it stares at never-before-confronted challenges. Uncertainty shrouds the nation’s future.

Dark clouds gather over the horizon. In the words of Yeats: The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere/The ceremony of innocence is drowned.

The 2014 Republic Day is being celebrated at time when epic, groundbreaking changes are at the doorstep. India is on the cusp of change-and certainly not for the better.

Change of governments and leadership is a matter of course and a healthy routine in a healthy democracy. Why should then one be troubled about the change of guard in Delhi? Especially when the one demitting the office is as inspiring as this one.

The latest opinion poll by CNN-IBN and Lokniti promises the BJP an electoral windfall in the excess of 200-220 seats — its best performance yet.

Not surprisingly, the Congress is in for the most memorable drubbing in its history.

But you do not need pollsters and pundits to tell you how totally discredited and unpopular this government is.
The UPA coalition is on its deathbed and Dr. Manmohan Singh is ready to act as its undertaker.

Which is a pity considering what India has achieved under the UPA in the last ten years.

It has managed to lift nearly 200 million people out of poverty, added to the purchasing power of middle classes and brought things that were considered inaccessible within the reach of ordinary people.

The Right to Information, rural employment schemes, farmers’ welfare schemes, right to education and the recently acquired right to food and anti-graft law Lokpal are measures any government could truly proud of.

While the failure to market these achievements effectively may be a critical factor, it is the series of corruption scams surfacing over the past couple of years and the uninspiring, uncommunicative leadership that really cooked the Congress’ goose.

While Singh can be forgiven for not being a typical politician and people’s person, Sonia and Rahul Gandhi did not help with their equally remote and distant leadership style, leaving the party rudderless and creating a vast leadership vacuum at the top.

If the sudden burst of energy and proactive leadership that Rahul has lately been displaying had come a bit earlier, the party wouldn’t be in the mess it is in today. Less than three months before the polls, it’s too little too late.

If India’s young voters — and majority of them are young — identify with a divisive figure like Modi who is in his 60s, rather than with someone who is 20 years junior to him and definitely more reasonable and youthful, there is something seriously wrong with the Congress. It takes extraordinary talent to be this unpopular despite inheriting a rich political legacy and world’s largest political party.

If India is pining for someone who is seen the world over as a mass murderer and a symbol of the worst forms of fascism and religious bigotry, the Congress is squarely to blame and history will never forgive the party for it.

It is its corruption and its betrayal of people’s trust that is driving the voters into the arms of a party that has a long history of promoting religious strife and violence. It views vast sections of the nation — its religious minorities and oppressed groups — as second class citizens. The Muslims, a 200-million strong community, in its view doesn’t belong in India.

What would be the country’s future under such a divisive party and leadership? This is not an academic question and not something that only concerns Muslims and other minorities. A complex country of a billion people with myriad identities cannot afford the tyranny of one man and a divisive ideology that militates against everything that the Constitution celebrates and stands for — tolerance, freedom and equality.

What is most disturbing about the whole business is the total indifference and apathy of the so-called secular political parties.

While the Congress is in a coma-like state, there is no attempt by others to check the onward march of fascism. Twenty years ago when the BJP looked to take power in Delhi under Atal Behari Vajpayee’s leadership, a plethora of parties including the Left had rallied together to stop him. And compared to what is on offer now, Vajpayee now looks as benign as Santa Claus.

While the Left remains marginalized, people like Nitesh Kumar, Mamata Banerjee and others who had the potential to check the onward march of fascism are content in their own cloisters.

Mulayam has committed virtual political hara-kiri with his recent antics.

Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party seems to offer a tiny ray of hope amid this doom and gloom.

But it is too young and green and is yet to find its feet. It is largely confined to Delhi and other urban centers.
Besides, it doesn’t have an organizational structure on the ground to take on the challenge.

So in all probability India appears all but headed for a Modi prime ministership — something that was discounted by pundits until last year.

But it was feared all along as a real possibility by minorities and civil society activists.

As India celebrates the 65th Republic Day, there is little to celebrate.

The very constitution that the Republic Day celebrates and which promises freedom, dignity, equality and security to all its citizens is under siege.

It would be a great tragedy if all that this great nation has achieved over the past 67 years as a democracy and as a society that remains a source of inspiration to the world is squandered.

Do not let Gandhi’s dream die.

Do not let the enemies of Idea of India succeed.

- Aijaz Zaka Syed is a Middle East based writer and Editor of CaravanDaily.com. Email: Aijaz.syed@hotmail.com

The article Don’t Let The Idea Of India Die – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Radio Zamaneh

The Kermanshah and Ilam Bar Association has named Shahram Nazeri, the Iranian classical music singer and composer, as the winner of the Mehr Human Rights Award for his humanitarian efforts.

ISNA reports that the Mehr award will be officially presented to Nazeri in the coming week in recognition of the artist’s many humanitarian activities.

The head of the Kermanshah and Ilam Bar Association, Shahab Tazari, said the famous singer’s humanitarian initiatives include many charity concerts for burn victims of the Sheenabad school fire disaster and leprosy sufferers in rural areas of Mahabad.

The Mehr Award will be presented to Nazeri on January 30 at Entezar Hall in Kermanshah.

Nazeri, a veteran of Iranian classical music, has recorded 40 albums of both Persian and Kurdish music.

The article Human Rights Award Goes To Iranian Singer Shahram Nazeri appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By VOR

The pro-EU protests in the Ukrainian capital turned into fiery street battles earlier this week, while the Kiev centre, – into a medieval city square with catapults and campfires, and full of tough guys with clubs. The Voice of Russia has asked Russian and Ukrainian experts to explain why Ukraine has found itself on the verge of civil war and who stands to gain from it.

The feelings that the people who have gathered in downtown Kiev are experiencing are those of hatred, pain and aggression, while the situation is uncertain, controversial and out of control. This is what a Higher School of Economics Professor Alexei Portansky says about it in a comment.

“Victor Yanukovych has said recently that he is part of protesters. But he has simultaneously asked parliament to adopt a repressive law against the opposition.

The authorities’ conflicting stand on the situation is incomprehensible and has brought things to a deadlock. This is clearly the best time for the most reactionary, pro-Nazi elements to take to the streets. One can see this in the streets and squares of Kiev today”.

The situation in Kiev has actually driven Victor Yanukovych into a blind alley. On the one hand, the radicals should be somehow curbed or dispersed; on the other hand, he should not lose his presidency. Tough measures may serve to foment unrest, while too soft a stand may result in utter destruction, says the Deputy Director of the Moscow State University Centre for Ukrainian and Belarusian Studies, Bogdan Bezpalko, and elaborates.

“Victor Yanukovych fears that Ukrainians will see him as a bloody dictator who breaks up peaceful protests, although the protests in Independence Square and Grushevsky Street in Kiev are by no means peaceful. Protesters like this would have long since been handcuffed and sentenced to long prison terms in any civilized country. Yanukovych is marking time to show to one and all that he is on the defensive, rather than the other way around. Any video frame in Kiev today proves that the protesters are extremely aggressive”.

Political analysts believe that, besides the streets of Kiev, fighting is also under way inside Ukraine’s political and business elites. They feel that the pro-EU protests are but a way of struggle between the groups of oligarchs for power and access to financing. Bogdan Bezpalko again.

“Groups of oligarchs have been actively involved in the situation that’s taken shape. But the current developments largely stem from a struggle between the West and the East. If the European Union signed the planned Association Agreement with Kiev, the EU economy would largely feed on Ukraine. Brussels would pump loans into Ukraine, the loans that Ukrainians would rush to spend on European-made goods, only to wake up one morning some five years later to realize that they have to pay off a huge debt and interest on the loans”.

Actually, political analysts and some Ukrainian MPs believe that the pro-EU protests are by no means a display of the people’s will, but a large-scale project of the West. A German government adviser and political writer, Christoph Hörstel, pointed out in an interview with the Voice of Russia a likely involvement of the German government and NATO in training and funding the opposition and radicals who have launched fiery street battles in Kiev. Not only Europe has failed to denounce the opposition, but has, conversely, accused the Ukrainian authorities jointly with the United States of the ongoing extreme violence. Brussels and Washington have even said they are prepared to slap sanctions on Kiev. Yuri Solozobov, Director of International Projects at Russia’s National Strategy Institute, says this in a comment.

“So far, we have seen catapults and medieval knights, using “Molotov cocktails” and setting fire to buses. A “soft orange revolution”, initiated by certain politicians, has clearly failed. Oddly, we have seen a European MP Jerzy Buzek, a symbolic figure. This means that the European Union has given the go-ahead”.

The pro-EU protests enable the West to interfere in the internal affairs of another country and get a president who would be easier to persuade. The losers in the show are the ordinary people on both sides when they shed blood in street fighting. According to preliminary estimates, the damage done to the city of Kiev makes up 2 million dollars. The entire Ukraine has suffered potential losses. A Ukrainian political analyst Oleg Bondarenko has this comment.

“Damage has run into millions of hryvnias and I think it will grow to make up several million dollars. The damage I am speaking of is not the great number of secular trees that were felled in city parks for campfires, or the no end of block stones, extracted from roads and pavements to be hurled at police. What I mean is the money that has not been received from investments, from the shops that had to close, or from the tourists who were scared by the developments and cancelled their plans to visit Kiev”.

The article Why Pro-EU Protests In Kiev Turned Into Fiery Street Battles appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Paul Woodward

It would appear that whoever is behind the kidnapping of journalists in Syria doesn’t welcome the press coverage they’ve been getting during the conflict. It’s reasonable to assume that there is some kind of underlying rationale. So given that ISIS is generally believed to be the prime culprit, one has to ask: how does this benefit the al Qaeda group?

After all, for members of al Qaeda in Syria or anywhere else there’s little if any friendly press coverage. Likewise, most of the coverage ISIS gets tends to inflate perceptions of the group’s power, so in a sense all coverage, however grizzly, can be seen to serve the group’s interests.

The overall impact of the spate of kidnappings has been to greatly diminish the number of foreign journalists willing to enter Syria and to amplify the international perception of rebel-controlled Syria as a lawless and hostile environment. Who benefits from both of these factors? The Assad regime. Yet if the regime was believed to have a direct role in the kidnappings, this would seriously undermine the PR campaign that it has been waging with increasing success on the international stage. Much better to outsource the task to a group that has no image to protect.

Press Freedom Now: Syria is currently the most dangerous country for journalists. In fact, all of us at Press Freedom Now have never seen anything like it and have never had so many colleagues go missing before.

For those of us who have worked in Syria, this conflict zone makes previous experiences covering conflict look a bit like walks in the park. At least 30 journalists have been kidnapped in Syria or disappeared since the start of the conflict in 2011.

Early in the Syrian Civil War it appeared that the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the kidnappings of journalists. In recent months however, as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) has risen in prominence in Syria, it has become clear that ISIS is responsible for most kidnappings of journalists.[Continue reading...]

The article The Kidnapping Of Journalists: Further Evidence Of Collusion Between Assad And Al Qaeda? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By RT

Opposition leaders called for an early presidential election following a Saturday meeting with the government, where top government posts were offered to protest leaders and a review of the constitution was promised.

The proposal to offer positions within the Ukrainian government to opposition leaders will be considered by all three parties and discussed with the people, Batkivschina leader Arseny Yatsenyuk said.

“We are not rejecting the offer, nor are we accepting it. We are in the midst of serious consultations between all three opposition parties. This is our mutual decision,” he said. “We are ready to take on the responsibility for the country’s future, but only under the conditions that will be set by us.”

The opposition is ready to head up the government and bring Ukraine into the EU, Yatsenyuk added.

“Our task – is a new Ukrainian government … We accept that responsibility and we are ready to bring Ukraine into the EU, which calls for the release of Yulia Tymoshenko,” he continued.

“Our country is put by those at power to the brink of falling apart…We demand that Yanukovich relieves the position of Ukraine’s president and we need a new constitution.”

Following the talks, the head of the Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform party, Vitaly Klitschko, said that Yanukovich agreed to many demands. “But we do not step back and demand elections this year,” he told protesters.

“What is Yanukovich ready for? For release and amnesty of all those detained. To work on getting back to the constitution of 2004. Dismissal of government on certain conditions. [He] still does not agree to abolish dictatorial laws, but only to amend them,” Klitschko added.

“Our demands: get rid of those laws…have presidential elections this year. Negotiations are continuing and we must hold on. And we will not succumb to any provocations.”

Leader of the nationalist Svoboda opposition party, Oleg Tyagnibok, told protesters that those in power are backing down and changing their tune from two days ago.

The government’s negotiations with the opposition have so far yielded no results, which could signal that the standoff between the two sides will continue for the next couple of days, RT’s Alexey Yaroshevsky explained.

Rioters have stormed the Ukrainian House international convention center. The siege of the convention center by protesters in Kiev is now over, RT’s Alexey Yaroshevsky reported. The head of the Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform party, Vitaly Klitschko, played a key role in negotiating the policemen’s retreat.

There were around 200 riot police inside the building at the time of the siege, all of whom exited through a side window.

Protesters threw small bombs and Molotov cocktails into the convention center. Police did not retaliate.

Ambulances have been seen coming and going from the center, and numerous reports have emerged that several interior ministry troops are injured inside the building.

“Tensions are far from dying down in Ukraine’s capital Kiev. We do now know that the opposition has refused to meet proposals of the president about withdrawing protesters on the street in exchange for constitutional reforms for tweaking the laws described as draconian in the country, the anti-riot laws that were passed on January 16,” Yaroshevsky said.

Demonstrators were trying to force police out of the convention center, fearing they will use the building as an outpost to attack the protesters’ barricades from behind.

The mood of the protesters has become increasingly aggressive. After speaking to the core group on Independence Square, Yaroshevsky said that rioters “indicated that they would not be willing to move away from this position regardless of what the opposition or any other politician says.”

“Their main goal right now is to topple the government, topple the president. That is what they stand for. We also heard that the opposition leaders speaking on the stage were on numerous occasions booed by the protesters at Independence Square,” he added.

During the Saturday meeting, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich offered top government posts to protest leaders and promised a review of the constitution – a move aimed at giving more power to parliament.

Yanukovich proposed the post of prime minister to Arseny Yatsenyuk, justice minister Elena Lukash said after the president’s meeting with opposition leaders.

“The president offered the post of prime minister to Arseny Yatsenyuk. In the case of the latter’s consent to take the post, the president of Ukraine will decide on the resignation of the government,” Lukash said.

Vitaly Klitchko was offered the post of deputy prime minister for humanitarian affairs.

The president’s offer came as the government struggles to cope with the protests and violence that continue to grip the entire country.

The article Ukrainian Opposition Ignores PM Offer And Urges Snap Elections appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Published by the Foreign Policy Research Institute

By Brandon Friedman

The conventional wisdom today is that Saudi Arabia will ultimately accept recent U.S. policy decisions that currently it rejects[1] because it has no viable alternatives.[2] While it is true that there is no equivalent to U.S. power, there are certainly alternatives to it.

Historically, the Saudis have pursued regional security according to four broad principles: (1) preserving the internal security of the kingdom, (2) maintaining a regional balance of power, (3) preventing conflicts that may damage the kingdom, and (4) relying on the U.S. to be the dominant power in the region.[3] The Obama administration’s decision to reduce the role of U.S. military power in the region’s active conflicts,[4] means the Saudis are now searching for alternate sources of military power to achieve their regional security goals. Therefore, it is important to understand what the Saudis are doing and why they are doing it.

Prince Turki al-Faisal, the director general of the Saudi intelligence agency from 1977 to 2001, and a former ambassador to the U.K. and U.S., recently explained that “As 2014 begins, there is no more important question in world diplomacy than this: Has Iran changed?” He added, “Saudi Arabia has two large concerns about the Islamic Republic [of Iran]: its quest for nuclear weapons and its interference in its neighbors’ affairs.” In other words, the Saudis are concerned that Iran, through its involvement in Iraq and Syria, as well as its nuclear program, may be changing the regional balance of power. Moreover, from the Saudi perspective, this is happening with tacit U.S. approval. As Roula Khalaf points out, “Seen from Riyadh, the combination of US inaction on Syria, the interim nuclear deal in November with its arch-rival Iran and the shale gas revolution that is weaning America off Middle Eastern oil represents an unsettling shift in US commitment to the region.”[5]

Saudi Arabia is determined not to allow Iran to win Syria the way the Saudis believe the Iranians won post-2003 Iraq.[6] Today the Iraqi state is disintegrating and Syria is riven by a civil war in which Lebanon has increasingly become the rear. More than one million Syrians have been pushed into Lebanon by the war.[7] Sunni-Shi‘i sectarianism fuels the fighting between the militia proxies backed by Saudi Arabia and Iran, who have exploited the ideological divide to enhance security in what they view as a zero-sum geopolitical competition.

The Saudis fear being encircled by pro-Iranian forces. Iranian-backed Shi‘i militias have already attacked and threatened Saudi Arabia along Iraq’s border with Saudi Arabia. Only a thin strip of Jordanian desert separates the pro-Iranian government in Syria from a long, unsecured Saudi Arabian border. The Saudis’ oil infrastructure,  located in its Eastern Province, and Bahrain along the Gulf coast are within short striking distance of Iranian ballistic missiles.

The Saudis also face internal pressure to take action to prevent the slaughter of Sunnis in Syria. The Saudi monarchy runs the risk of a public outcry and an attack on its legitimacy, if the king is viewed by leading Wahhabi religious figures in the kingdom as too passive in the face of the strong Iranian military support for Bashar al-Asad’s regime in Syria.[8] Many Wahhabi religious leaders in Saudi Arabia view ‘Alawis and Shi‘is as unbelievers, and the death of tens of thousands of Syrian Sunnis at the hands of Asad and Iran is unacceptable to them. Therefore, in order to maintain regime stability at home, the Saudi royals believe they must do everything they can to stop the slaughter of Sunnis in Syria.

Contrary to what some believe, the Saudis are not exclusively seeking a military solution to Syria. They want the slaughter and gassing of Sunni civilians to end and they insist that any solution must include removing Asad from power.[9] To these ends, they are pursuing a two-pronged strategy to ensure a satisfactory political deal to end the conflict.

First, many believe the Saudis had a hand in using their vast wealth as leverage to broker the November 22, 2013 unification between all non al-Qa‘ida Islamist militias in Syria. In essence, this means the Saudis are backing groups in Syria that are fighting both Asad and al-Qa‘ida at the same time.[10] The Saudi-backed Islamic Front (al Jabha al Islamiyya) is a large, unified (in relative terms) fighting force (some estimates say more than 40,000).[11] Recent gains by these forces, particularly against the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), will give the Saudi-backed opposition more negotiating leverage at the Geneva II conference, if and when it takes place. Second, the Saudis removed Qatar and its Syrian Muslim Brotherhood clients, and reorganized the opposition leadership outside of Syria into a Saudi-backed government-in-exile led by Ahmed Ta’meh al-Khadr.[12]

The Saudis are gambling that its clients in the Syrian opposition leadership in exile will assure the Saudis of strong post-Asad influence in Syria. Therefore, if the Saudis, working through the provisional government-in-exile, can negotiate Asad’s exit and reasonable post-Asad terms at Geneva II, they would likely reduce their funding, support, and arms supplies to the Islamic Front on the ground. However, they are only likely to do so if they believe Iran will, as part of a negotiated agreement, reduce its support and funding to the the varied Shi‘i militias from Iraq that are fighting in Syria and order Hizballah to withdraw its forces from its embattled neighbor. In this scenario, the fighting in Syria would eventually wind down because the belligerents would soon be starved of resources and support from regional patrons, and a negotiated solution would create a means to share power and reach political accommodations on essential interests.

The Saudis also believe the ongoing crisis in Syria may provide an opportunity to weaken Hizballah’s grip on Lebanon. For example, the Saudis recently offered $3 billion in military aid to the Lebanese army, which is nearly double the Lebanese military’s annual budget and may be intended to prompt sitting President Michel Suleiman to abandon the March 8 coalition and weaken Hizballah’s political influence.

For example, an authoritative source on Saudi political rumors, who tweets under the pseudonym “mujtahidd,” and who has been described as “the Saudi Julian Assange,” recently posted a series of blog entries about a Saudi intelligence operation that secretly listened in on sensitive Hizballah communications during the last few months of 2013.[13] The operation revealed that Hassan Nasrallah was frustrated with the way Maher al-Asad was using Hizballah forces in Syria because it repeatedly led to heavy losses for Hizballah.[14] Mujtahidd claims that the Saudi intelligence operation discovered that Nasrallah asked Iran to intervene with Maher al-Asad, fearing that Hizballah’s “enormous sacrifices” (tadhayat ha’ila) would lead to the disintegration of the party.[15]

Further, mujtahidd claims the Iraqi militias fighting with Iran’s support in Syria have lodged similar complaints against Maher al-Asad.[16] The Iranians have been reluctant to press Maher too hard on these issues because they believe Bashar al-Asad would not survive without Maher.[17] The Iranians, according to mujtahidd’s report, are concerned that the dynamic between Maher and Hizballah could lead to a dismantling of Hizballah and Iran’s defeat in Syria.[18] The Saudis appear to believe Hizballah’s weakness may give them more leverage to break the political stalemate in Lebanon and secure a pro-Saudi government. A key component of the Saudis’ $3 billion military aid offer to the Lebanese army included revealing the identity of the prospective arms supplier: France.

After the U.S.-Russia deal on Syrian chemical weapons, it appears the Saudis turned to France to achieve some of their regional goals. During November and December 2013, there were several reports of joint French-Saudi military exercises.[19]

Further, the French share the Saudi view that the U.S. negotiated interim deal on Iran’s nuclear program is a bad one. While some believe French and Saudi interests on Iran and Syria converge, others see the French alignment with the Saudis as a cynical ploy to win commercial military contracts at the U.S.’s expense during a period of French economic weakness.[20] Be that as it may, from the Saudi point of view, the French are providing an alternative means to achieve Saudi regional goals.

Just as the Saudis have turned to the French as a tactical ally to achieve strategic interests in Lebanon and Syria, they appear to be backing a $2-3 billion deal between Russia and Egypt to supply the ‘Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi government with military aid. The Saudis view a strong military government in Egypt as a vast improvement over Muhammad Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood led government. The Saudis would also like to see a strong Egypt, friendly to Saudi Arabia, assume its natural position of leadership in the Arab world. If the U.S. is unwilling to back al-Sisi’s military, then the Saudis appear willing to fill the void by funding alternative sources of the military equipment necessary for Egypt to maintain its hard power.

Mustafa Alani argued in Anne Barnard’s article in the New York Times that the Saudi offer of billions to fund French military aid to Lebanon was a sign that the Saudis “are washing their hands of Obama.” This is undoubtedly an overstatement, but it may accurately reflect the Saudi frustration with recent U.S. behavior in the region.

Looking beyond the Fertile Crescent, and assuming the U.S. and Iran extend their “detente” beyond the initial six-month period outlined in November 2013, Saudi Arabia has at least three potential alternatives given the new U.S. regional posture, and it may choose to pursue all three options in parallel in order to address its short, medium, and long-term security.

First, in the short term, it may turn to enhanced security cooperation with China as an alternative or insurance policy for what it perceives as unreliable U.S. security commitments. Second, it may begin improving and developing the fighting capabilities of its own military forces. This might include importing a greater number of former Pakistani, Moroccan, and Jordanian military officers, as well as the possibility of offering citizenship to non-native Sunni Muslim mercenaries in exchange for military service. In combination with this step, Saudi Arabia appears to be showing interest in building its own military manufacturing and production industries. Improving its military fighting capabilities is likely a long-term process that will take decades to achieve meaningful results. And, third, Saudi Arabia is likely to coordinate with Pakistan, and perhaps China, to develop its own indigenous nuclear weapons capability, particularly if the current Western negotiations with Iran result in institutionalizing Iran’s nuclear breakout-capability.

While Obama adviser Bruce Riedel argues that the Saudis have “consistently cited” the objective of a WMD-Free Zone in the Middle East, he ignores the true thrust of Turki al-Faisal’s remarks on three separate occasions in 2011, when Turki strongly suggested that there should be an Arab nuclear weapon if Iran obtains such a capability.[21] More recently and explicitly, Prince Turki wrote that “Faced with a nuclear-armed Iran, theGulf Cooperation Council members, for example, will be forced to weigh their options carefully – and possibly to acquire a nuclear deterrent of their own.”

If the Saudis indeed have nuclear ambitions, they will need considerable time to develop the infrastructure, personnel, and institutional knowledge necessary to make rapid progress toward a nuclear capability. And Saudi Arabia is not likely to place all of its eggs in the Pakistan basket when it comes to developing its nuclear program. Turki al-Faisal has claimed Saudi Arabia will invest $100 billion to build 16 nuclear reactors by 2030. On January 16, 2012, Saudi Arabia signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with China. A joint statement outlined a legal framework to build scientific, technological, and economic cooperation between Riyadh and Beijing. On a practical level, a nuclear cooperation agreement with China would provide Saudi Arabia with the means, experience, and expertise to develop and supply nuclear-power plants and research reactors, and manufacture nuclear-fuel elements. China has adopted advanced technology from Westinghouse Electric Co. to develop a domestic version of the company’s AP1000 nuclear reactor.[22] Saudi Arabia may be looking to China to provide it with a stable nuclear supply chain as well as training facilities for a new generation of Saudi nuclear technicians and scientists. Saudi Arabia also has nuclear cooperation agreements with France, Argentina, and South Korea, but the agreement with China may be the most significant and symbiotic, in terms of the strategic goals of both states.

Unlike the U.S., China is not likely to achieve energy independence in the near term. Saudi Arabia and China have similar authoritarian postures toward domestic dissent, and they both resist outside pressure to accelerate domestic political reform. China is also looking to expand the reach of its sea power by creating port facilities from Asia to Africa in the Bay of Bengal, Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea in what some have characterized as a thinly disguised “string-of-pearls” strategy of naval military expansion. The western coast of Saudi Arabia, along the Red Sea leading to the Suez Canal, might be an attractive location to the Chinese navy given China’s energy interests in Sudan, South Sudan, and elsewhere in Africa. Finally, Saudi Arabia and China have a historical track record of discreet security cooperation. In the mid-1980s, Saudi Arabia secretly acquired Chinese DF-3A intermediate range ballistic missiles.

Steven A. Cook, the Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, has argued that there is no reason to fear that the Saudis will obtain a nuclear weapon. He wrote that “given the fact that the Saudis have very little nuclear infrastructure to speak of, this kind of statement is little more than posturing designed to force the U.S. hand on Iran.” He added that “Riyadh’s rhetoric about acquiring nuclear weapons is empty. What is amazing is how many people take the Saudis seriously.”[23] Cook is right to be skeptical, Saudi Arabia is often noted for being risk averse and cautious, yet it engaged in high risk behavior by going behind the backs of its major security ally, the United States, in order to acquire the Chinese made DF-3A ballistic missiles in the 1980s. What triggered the Saudi deviation from its traditional behavior?

In Prince Khalid bin Sultan’s book, Desert Warrior, published after the 1990/1 Gulf War, he states: “In brief, our aim was to give us the capability to counterattack in the event of an attack on us by either Israel or Iran, both in their different ways hostile at that time.”[24] Yet Prince Khalid devotes only a brief paragraph to explaining the Israeli threat, while devoting two full pages to explaining the Iranian threat to Saudi Arabia. He finishes the explanation with perhaps even a sharper statement on the Saudi decision to acquire the Chinese ballistic missiles: “It was against this background of Iranian violence and belligerence that, I assume, King Fahd decided we needed a weapon to improve the morale of our armed services and our people; a deterrent weapon not intended to be used, except as a last resort when it should be able to demoralize the enemy by delivering a painful and decisive blow; a weapon which, once launched, could not be jammed or intercepted; a weapon which would make the enemy think twice before attacking us.”[25] In short, Prince Khalid, the former deputy defense minister of Saudi Arabia, framed the Saudi acquisition of the Chinese missiles as a deterrent in response to Iranian belligerence in the 1980s.

Today, it is likely that outside of the Fertile Crescent Saudi behavior will appear to remain much the same. The Saudis are slow to change and despite the very real Saudi discontent with current American leadership, it is unlikely that the Saudis will take any radical public action that signals an abrupt shift in its security policies. It is more likely that they will move incrementally on a number of fronts, hedging their bets depending on the regional and international security context. It is not just the Iranian nuclear program that concerns the Saudis. They also sense that the shifting fortunes of supply and demand in world energy markets may be moving against them in the medium to long-term, and vast cash reserves they have generated during the past decade may not be a permanent feature of the budget in the long-term. In line with the possibility of diminishing energy resources due to rapidly increasing domestic consumption,[26] a fast growing and youthful population will tax the regime’s resources and force it to move a bit more aggressively than usual to create suitable employment opportunities for its youth. In other words, the Saudis are going to assess the future impact of major shifts in international energy markets, domestic demographic changes, regional security threats, domestic dissent and regime cohesion, and the nature of the current leadership of the international system. Ultimately, Saudi Arabia’s decision to pursue nuclear weaponization will depend on a multi-dimensional calculation of how best to protect Al Saud rather than a narrow response to one specific external regional security threat.

At the end of 2011, following the tumultuous changes in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, the Washington Post’s foreign affairs columnist David Ignatius noted, perhaps somewhat prematurely, “that Saudi Arabia has increasingly replaced the United States as the key status-quo power in the Middle East – a role that seems likely to expand even more in coming years as the Saudis boost their military and economic spending.” Ignatius noted that Saudis described the kingdom’s expanding security role as “a reaction, in part, to the diminished clout of the United States. They still regard the U.S.-Saudi relationship as valuable, but it’s no longer seen as a guarantor of their security. For that, the Saudis have decided they must rely more on themselves – and, down the road, on a wider set of friends that includes their military partner, Pakistan, and their largest oil customer, China.”

The Saudis were clearly using Ignatius to deliver a message that if the U.S. is not a reliable security partner, then the Saudis have other options — namely, Pakistan and China, and, perhaps in the medium and long-term, themselves. Whether or not this was a Saudi bluff, intended to refocus the U.S.’s attention on the Middle East during a period when it seemed as if Washington was focused on its security “pivot” to East Asia, simply discussing a turn toward Pakistan or China as a regional security partner represents a sea-change in terms of Saudi perceptions.

Today, the Saudis are worried, not confident (if indeed they were in fact confident in 2011). They fear the U.S. will make a deal with Iran that will leave Iran’s nuclear program intact. The Saudis believe that a deal that legitimizes Iran as the threshold nuclear weapons state is a deal that comes at the expense of their security. It would be a mistake for Obama officials to accept today’s conventional wisdom, which holds that the Saudis will simply accept that they have no alternatives, for the Saudis are trying to cobble together a patchwork of tactics to achieve their regional goals. Yet it remains to be seen whether these moves will bring the Saudi monarchy more security or in fact lead the kingdom and the region into a period of even greater security competition and instability.

About the author:
Brandon Friedman is a Research Fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle East and African Studies at Tel Aviv University and a Senior Fellow of FPRI. Brandon is also the Managing Editor of the Dayan Center’s journal Bustan: The Middle East Book Review. Brandon teaches in Tel Aviv University’s international Master’s in Middle East Studies program and its B.A. in Liberal Arts program. His research interests include contemporary Middle East geopolitics and strategic analysis, nuclear arms proliferation, and the political history of the Middle East during the modern period. Brandon’s PhD research focused on the political relations between the rulers of the Persian Gulf littoral during the period of British military withdrawal from the region (1968 to 1971). Prior to beginning his academic career in Israel, Brandon spent seven years working for a risk advisory consulting firm in the U.S.

This article was published at FPRI and may be accessed here.

Notes:

[1] See also: Jay Solomon, “Saudi Royal Blasts U.S.’s Middle East Policy,” The Wall Street Journal, December 15, 2013.

The article Alternatives To US Hard Power: The Saudi Response To US Tactics In Middle East – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By IDN

By Jaya Ramachandran

More partnerships and investments are needed to support the pan-African Great Green Wall Initiative, which has become Africa’s flagship enterprise in tackling the detrimental social, economic and environmental impacts of land degradation, desertification, drought and climate change, experts say.

The initiative brings together more than 20 African countries across North Africa, the Sahel and the Horn, international organizations, research institutes, civil society and grassroots organizations, supporting local communities in the sustainable management and use of forests, rangelands and other natural resources in dryland areas. It also seeks to contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well improve the food security and community livelihoods in the Sahel and the Sahara.

The significance of the initiative, adopted in 2007 by African heads of State and Government, is underlined  by the fact that 83 per cent of rural people in Sub-Saharan Africa depend on the land for their livelihoods, but 40 per cent of Africa’s land resources are currently degraded. Poverty, hunger, unemployment, forced migration, conflict and security issues are just some of the many threats arising from this situation.

In the Sahel, seasonal temperatures have risen between 1.5-2.0 degrees Celsius, making land and the local populations all the more vulnerable to weather events that have become more and more unpredictable and severe.

This calls for bold coordinated action and more investments in sustainable land management to boost food production, help people adapt to climate change and mitigate its effects, support biodiversity, enhance businesses based on land resources and contribute to a green economy.

With this in view, the Initiative hosted an international forum to take stock of the achievements and future challenges of the Initiative. A two-day event, organized by Global Mechanism of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations under the auspices of the African Union Commission (AUC), took place on December 16-17, 2013 at FAO Headquarters in Rome.

Experts founds that a mosaic of natural resource management programmes underway in some of the countries, demonstrate the potential of sustainable land management to boost food security, improve community livelihoods and build the resilience of the land and the people to the changing climate.

In southern Niger, for instance, farmers have rehabilitated over 5 million hectares of land, using a low cost land restoration technique called farmer-managed natural regeneration. This has boosted crop and livestock yields, as well the production of medicine and firewood.

In Senegal, 27 000 hectares of degraded land were restored by the planting of 11 million trees. Part of this re-greened area is being converted into a community-based reserve for eco-tourism.

A mechanized technology, known as the Vallerani-system inspired from traditional practices has helped to restore more than 50 000 hectares of agro-forestry systems in Burkina Faso, Niger and Senegal. It is seeding native trees, shrubs and herbs, boosting the production of crops, gums and resins, and providing fodder for livestock.

“The time has come to break the vicious cycle of crises in Africa’s Sahel by building up the ability of rural communities to weather drought and other shocks, rather than merely helping them recover from disaster,” said Maria-Helena Semedo, FAO’s Deputy Director-General, at the opening of the event.

An opportunity

“The Great Green Wall initiative is an opportunity to bring a coordinated and harmonized response to the issues of forced migration, food security and peace in Africa”, Monique Barbut, Executive Secretary of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), said to the representatives of African countries, international organizations, development banks, civil society and the private sector.

With less than three per cent of Sub-Saharan Africa’s total cropland currently benefiting from sustainable land and water management, she warned that a major effort would be required to build the resilience of people in the region and the natural systems on which they so intimately depend.

EU Development Commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, added: “I am pleased to support the Green Wall initiative – it is very much in line with the EU’s own commitment to doing all we can to help people in those countries most affected by climate change to be able to better adapt to its impact in the future, as well as improving food security and making agriculture more sustainable.”

“Partnerships are crucial to support governments in mobilizing the necessary technical and financial resources for the implementation of their Great Green Wall plans,” said Dr. Abebe Haile Gabriel, Director for Rural Economy and Agriculture of the African Union Commission.

“New partnerships are needed to strengthen the global alliance that has emerged under the leadership of the African Union,” he added, stressing the need for streamlined coordination among partners and the importance of close monitoring and evaluation of the impact of their actions.

To date, the African Union – in cooperation with the European Union, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the Global Mechanism of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the Royal Botanic Gardens of Kew and the Walloon Region of Belgium – has mobilized more than 50 million Euro in support of the Initiative.

The World Bank and Global Environment Facility are financing the US$1 billion Sahel and West Africa Program (SAWAP), active in 12 countries together with a regional hub project called Building Resilience through Innovation, Communication, and Knowledge Services (BRICKS), implemented by the Permanent Interstates Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS), the Sahara and Sahel Observatory (OSS) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

The article Africa’s Great Green Wall Seeks New Partners – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By IRIN

Unprecedented levels of chronic non-communicable diseases are prompting health experts and indigenous activists to highlight a need to revert to the diets of our ancestors to regain lost nutrients. This would also assist in improving society’s relationship with the earth, and to restoring both human and environmental health.

“The rise of the industrial model of agriculture has contributed greatly to people being disconnected from the food on their plates,” said Sarah Somian, a nutritionist based in Nice, in France.

Nutritionists say many traditional and non-processed foods consumed by rural communities, such as millet and caribou, are nutrient-dense and offer healthy fatty acids, micronutrients, and cleansing properties widely lacking in diets popular in high- and middle-income countries.

Indigenous diets worldwide – from forest foods such as roots and tubers in regions of eastern India, to cold-water fish, caribou, and seals in northern Canada – are varied, suited to local environments, and can counter malnutrition and disease, according to experts.

“For many tribal and indigenous peoples, their food systems are complex, self-sufficient, and deliver a very broad-based, nutritionally diverse diet,” said Jo Woodman, a senior researcher and campaigner with Survival International, a UK-based indigenous advocacy organization.

But the disruption of traditional lifestyles due to environmental degradation, and the introduction of processed foods, refined fats and oils, and simple carbohydrates, contributes to worsening health in indigenous populations, and a decline in the production of nutrient-rich foodstuffs that could benefit all communities.

“Traditional food systems need to be documented so that policymakers know what is at stake by ruining an ecosystem, not only for the indigenous peoples living there, but for everyone,” Harriet Kuhnlein, the founding director of the Centre of Indigenous Peoples’ Nutrition and Environment (CINE) at McGill University, Canada, told IRIN from Montreal.

Dying diets

Since the early 1960s, economic growth, urbanization, and a global population increase to more than seven billion people, have multiplied the consumption of animal-sourced foods, including meat, eggs and dairy products, which contributed 13 percent of the energy in the world’s diet in 2013, according to the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Nairobi, Kenya. Farm-raised livestock consume up to one-third of the world’s grains, the ILRI notes.

Agricultural expansion – some of it to cultivate more grains – accounts for 80 percent of the world’s deforestation, says the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP).

With the global population expected to rise to some nine billion by 2050, 50 percent more food must be produced to feed these prople – depending on whether there is a healthy ecosystem. “When environments are destroyed or contaminated, this affects the food they can provide,” said Kuhnlein.

Indigenous food “systems” – gathering and preparing food to maximize the nutrients an environment can provide – range from nomadic hunter-gatherers like the Aché in eastern Paraguay, the Maasai pastoralists in northern Kenya, and herding and fishing groups like the Inuit in northern Canada, to the Saami of Scandinavia and the millet-farming Kondh agriculturalists in eastern India.

But the trait these groups share is a keen knowledge of how to eat nutritiously without damaging the ecosystem. “Indigenous peoples’ food systems contain treasures of knowledge from long-evolved cultures and patterns of living in local ecosystems,” said an FAO-supported study on indigenous food systems, nutrition, and health co-authored by Kuhnlein in 2009.

Nutrient-dense foods

In recent years, grains such as quinoa, fonio and millet – long harvested by indigenous and rural communities in developing countries but increasingly overlooked by a younger, richer generation that prefers imported foods – have instead grown in popularity in developed countries.

Research, marketing and donor-funded financing have helped raise awareness of the ability of these high-protein grains to reduce cholesterol, provide micronutrients and lower the risk of diabetes.

“Because of the many health benefits of these forgotten, or until [recently] unknown foods, valuing the wisdom of indigenous cultures [and] earlier generations is vital for reducing disease and inflammation,” said Somian, the nutritionist.

The Kondh community in eastern India’s Odisha state traditionally grows up to 16 varieties of millet, according to Debjeet Sarangi, the head of Living Farms, a local NGO that has worked with marginalized indigenous farmers since 2005.

But millet growing among the roughly 100,000 Kondh, who are spread over about 15,000 villages, has dropped by nearly 63 percent from around 500,000 hectares in 1975 to just over 200,000 hectares in 2008. This is because land is being converted to paddy in exchange for government-subsidized rice programmes offering polished white rice, even though refined white rice carries health risks.

“When there is so much malnutrition existing in the area, why do you replace land which has been growing nutritious food [with rice paddies]?” asked Sarangi, whose NGO reported in 2011 that 75 percent of all children under five years old in Kondh suffered from wasting (weighed too little for their age), and 55 percent were stunted (too short for their height group) – a sign of chronic malnutrition.

“Superfoods” fading

Another so-called superfood now declining in popularity is spirulina, scientifically known as Arthrospira platensis, a type of cyanobacteria that grows in ponds – a staple in many traditional food systems, such as among the Kanembu in northwestern Chad.

Medical studies have found that spirulina has the potential to boost immunity, reduce inflammation, decrease allergic reactions and provide a healthy source of protein, according to the Langone Medical Centre of New York University in the US.

“There is a deep irony in the fact that many dieticians are advocating [traditional and indigenous foods and diets] and yet [the] modern [Western] diet is what is being pushed on tribal peoples around the world, with devastating results,” said Survival International’s Woodman.

Unwise choices

“We have lost our primary relationship with our world around us,” said Dr Martin Reinhardt, an Anishinaabe Ojibway citizen of the Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa Native American people in Michigan state in the US, who is also an assistant professor of Native American studies at Northern Michigan University (NMU).
“Humans can, and need to, reconnect with nature in such an intimate way as to depend on it for survival ”

Native American elders historically planned seven generations ahead when creating food systems, teaching each generation that it was their responsibility to ensure the survival of the seventh one, said Reinhardt. They did this by hunting and gathering only what they needed, conserving resources such as wood and water, and protecting food biodiversity.

But when native Americans were forced to assimilate, historical access to this nutritional knowledge was lost, said Reinhardt. According to the Special Diabetes Program for Indians (SDBI) run by US federal government’s Indian Health Service (IHS), the 566 registered indigenous peoples in the US now have a rate of diabetes nine times higher than the national average.

Similarly, diabetes rates among First Nations and Inuit groups in Canada are up to five times higher than the countrywide average, according to the Canadian government’s federal health department.

In Laos, northern highland minorities such as the Yawa, Htin and Khmu traditionally eat forest-based diets, including wild pigs, birds, bamboo shoots, banana flowers, and yams rich in vitamin C. But in recent decades the Laos government has moved thousands of people from the highlands to towns for economic reasons, documented in a 2012 report by the International Fund for Agricultural Development.

“Communities [have less access] to natural resources than before,” said Jim Chamberlain, an anthropologist and former World Bank consultant based in the capital, Vientiane, who explained that their traditional diet relies on forests and the move has led to a decline in nutritional status. Malnutrition rates in Laotian children under age five are currently among the highest in Southeast Asia.

Finding a balance

While reinstating traditional food systems is key for everyone’s health, as well as for the environment, the lack of a market to support so-called superfoods poses serious challenges, say advocates.

In northern Canada, many of the fishes that are rich in omega-3 fatty acids, a staple in the traditional diets of Arctic tribes, spawn and live in waters increasingly tainted with mercury, according to the Canadian government.

Deforestation worldwide, often to make way for large-scale agricultural production, curtails the nutrients that can be gathered from forests.

Much environmental destruction is a consequence of modern society’s detachment from its food systems, said Reinhardt, who coordinated a UNM project called Decolonize Your Diet, which ran from 2010 to 2012 and aimed to teach people the link between food, culture, health and the environment.

“Humans can, and need to, reconnect with nature in such an intimate way as to depend on it for survival,” he said. “I hope we have not yet passed the thresholds [of what the earth can tolerate].”

The article Turning To Ancient Diets To Alleviate Modern Ills – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Eurasia Review

We owe it to MLK to carry his torch and create an economy for all.

By Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese

A paradigm shift is taking place. It is coming from the awareness that all of our crises are connected to an economy rigged for the wealthiest. The symptoms of big finance capitalism create the poverty, low wages, economic insecurity and environmental destruction so a handful can profit. While these facts have been hidden by political leaders and corporate mass media, now people are seeing them and understand the task we have before us.

The Radical Dr. King

This past Monday, we celebrated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday. History books and the new Memorial in DC commemorate Dr. King for his 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech and his work for civil rights. Most people have been led to celebrate this limited version of Dr. King’s life. In fact, there has been an attempt to erase the last 5 years of his life, a time when he espoused a deeper political analysis, dared to question capitalism and militarism; and broke with the status quo groups.

Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report tells us that Dr. King did not “break with the legacy of grass roots organizing and direct action” as some of his Lieutenants did when they entered business and the Democratic Party. He understood that direct action “meant bringing a social institution or the society itself locally to a halt, to make the system scream, just like its victims screamed, to bring contradictions to a head, so that everyone could see what the real problem was, that is, to confront authority.”

Some reclaimed the celebration of this Dr. King. In Portland, day laborers and people without housing marched on Dr. King’s birthday to honor his radical legacy. In Washington State, peace activists honored Dr. King’s day through direct action by protesting a naval base that deploys the Trident nuclear submarine. Kellogg’s workers in Birmingham, AL remembered Dr. King and are still fighting for their rights. They’ve been locked out since October.

Dr. King would have turned 85 on January 15 if he had not been assassinated. In a wrongful death suit brought by King’s family the jury found the murder was a conspiracy involving the Memphis police as well as federal agencies.  He was assassinated in part because he was a powerful leader who threatened the power structure.  The Poor People’s Campaign he was organizing when he died would have brought waves of thousands of people to Washington, DC in the longest lasting occupation the city had ever seen to highlight poverty and economic injustice. Using the Stratfor system, King would have been classified as a “radical” and when marginalization doesn’t work to stop radicals, elimination is the next step.

What was radical about Dr. King is that he called for independent politics and he made the connections between racism, poverty and militarism. He was calling not just for a few concessions and improvements, but for change of the whole system.  In his 1967 speech at Riverside Baptist Church, Dr. King said, “But one day, we must ask the question of whether an edifice which produces beggars must not be restructured and refurbished.” The work the social justice movement is doing today is the unfinished work of Dr. King’s last campaign.

What Is The Edifice That Creates Beggars?

This is the question that people are asking. As we wrote in “Our Tasks for 2014,” during this phase of the social movement, deep political education is essential. Activists must understand that ‘their issue’ is a symptom of a fundamental disease, a system that creates these crises. Without changing the system, the crises cannot be resolved. Through reforms, some may be reduced and perhaps delayed such as the current health care law is doing for the ongoing health care crisis. But some will continue to worsen such as climate change and the growing wealth divide.

Professor C. J. Polychroniou calls the current system “Predatory Capitalism.” We have passed the era of industrial capitalism and have entered finance capitalism based on expansion of the neoliberal economic model globally. This is fundamental to understand because it is this model that is driving all of our crises.

Neoliberal economics is not related to liberalism in ideological terms, but liberalism in terms of a freeing of the market from any regulation and a freeing up of our resources to be used by private corporations for profit. In this model, government actively serves the financial elite, as Polychroniou describes: “Policies that increase the upward flows of income and the availability of public property for private exploitation rest at the core of the global neoliberal project, where predatory capitalism reigns supreme. So does privatizing profits and socializing losses.”

It is predatory capitalism that drives the race to the bottom in worker rights and wages and that drives the dismantling of our public institutions and privatization of education, transportation, health care, the postal service, prisons and more. Predatory capitalism sells our resources to the highest bidder without regard for destruction of the planet, displacement of families or poisoning of communities.

The United States is in the Driver’s Seat

The United States, through trade policy, is a lead driver of the neoliberal march across the planet. We have written frequently about the Trans-Pacific Partnership because it will destroy sovereignty, placing governments, even down to the local level, at the service of transnational corporations.  Leaked Wikileaks documents from the TPP reveal that the US is the most extreme nation advocating for corporate power and neoliberal economies.

This week, the EU announced that it will delay negotiation of a key section, the Investor State Dispute Settlement, of the Atlantic version of the TPP known as TAFTA. They are concerned that giving corporations the power to sue governments for loss of expected profits will undermine their laws to protect the health of people and the planet and are seeking greater public input. Contrast that with a case that is going forward in Mora County, NM in which Shell Oil is suing a community over its fracking ban. If Shell is able to sue a community for loss of expected profits, that community would never be able to afford that and would have to change its law; and other communities will be afraid to enact laws in the public interest or to protect the planet.

Momentum is building to stop the TPP. Organizations from across the spectrum and across the continent are working together to stop the President from being given authority to Fast Track the TPP through Congress and to unite in a day of action. Visit StopFastTrack.org to join the Ten Days of Action to Stop Fast Track which culminates in a day of protest on January 31.

Systems to Control the Masses

Predatory capitalism is directly linked to the growing national security state and militarism. As poverty and suffering increase, so does resistance by the people and those in power fear mass revolt. As corporations require access to resources around the world, the military is necessary to secure them. And it also happens that the national security and military industrial complexes profit greatly by finding new markets for their weapons and security products.

Spying on people in the US and around the world continues to become more sophisticated. The New York Times reports that the NSA can retrieve data stored in computers or USB cards using radio waves even when the computer is turned off.  In Kiev this week, the government used cell phone technology to locate people and send them a text message warning them that they were considered to be part of a mass protest, which has now been deemed illegal.

The overreach of the state is starting to backfire. Recently, an independent federal review board concluded that the collection of cell phone calls by the NSA is illegal and must be stopped. Obama’s own review board called for an overhaul of the NSA, but last week the President announced only minimal reforms that protect the surveillance program. Instead of announcing real changes, he worked to reassure the public that spying is perfectly normal and acceptable. Chris Hedges interpreted his speech for us describing how faux reforms were designed to mollify Americans while “as our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, along with our courts, continue to eviscerate those rights.”  And the Electronic Frontier Foundation decoded the proposed reforms, giving Obama a 3.5 out of a possible score of 12 for what is considered the bare minimum of necessary overhaul.

The expansion of the security state is a boon for the corporations that produce scanners and other technology. In order to profit and grow, they must find new markets. Perhaps this is behind the announcement that all entrances to Major League Baseball stadiums will be equipped with metal detectors in 2015. We wonder what is next.

At some point, we as the public must draw the line. Concerted action to protest this encroachment through boycotts of places that use them is one effective way to stand up for our rights.

Protesting War, Pipelines and Wealth Inequality

This week, so-called peace talks for Syria are taking place in Switzerland. Ajamu Baraka explains the politics behind the talks. He writes that “it would be more accurate to call a ‘war conference’ rather than a ‘peace conference’ due to U.S. Secretary of State Kerry’s insistence on keeping the scope of the agenda confined to the terms of the Geneva I communique, which calls for a political transition in Syria.”

It is doubtful that real solutions to address the crises in Syria will come from the talks. Relief from the extreme violence and displacement are not part of the conversation. This is all about regime change and as expected, the propaganda is rolling out. Human Rights Watch released a report this week on Syria that lacks all credibility, as described by Dan Murphy of the Christian Science Monitor.

To raise the urgent need for peace and support for the 3 million Syrian refugees, CODEPINK and allies brought a delegation of women to Switzerland. They are demanding an immediate ceasefire and that women be included in the talks. They demonstrated outside of the talks on Wednesday.

Also this week, tar sands bitumen started flowing in the Southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline. There has been strong opposition to the tar sands and pipeline for years now. It brought together a broad coalition which has used the courts, blockades and protests to try to stop this project, which James Hansen calls ‘Game Over’ for the planet, from proceeding. There was an urgent action at the White House and a protest at a TD Bank, a major financier, in Maine to express solidarity with communities like Manchester, TX that are being poisoned by oil processing and others protested megaloads traveling through Montana to the Alberta tar sands.  A new study was released that also showed increased cancer rates in a community downstream from the tar sands.

And the World Economic Forum is taking place this week at a Swiss resort in Davos. One of the main topics is wealth inequality. Bill Gates, who is attending, doesn’t think wealth inequality is a problem as long as poverty is decreasing, but the majority of Americans , and we suspect the world population, disagree. Oxfam reports that 85 of the richest people have the same wealth as 3.5 billion of the poorest people. And there is no confidence that real solutions to reduce wealth inequality will come out of the meeting of the wealthy at Davos.

Organizers from around the world are calling for a Commission for Truth and Justice in Switzerland. Sign the petition here.  They write, “This is not asking for charity, we are demanding justice and to create the conditions that ensure equal opportunities for all.” Charity is not the solution, though it is likely the only solution that the wealthy can come up with.

Solidarity not Charity

Charity undermines the peoples’ rights to self-determination and allows the status quo to continue. Polychroniou makes the point that “philanthropy serv[es] as a means to disguise the exploitation of the poor and deny the structural problems of the capitalist system.” Further, charity is arbitrary and anti-democratic. Those with the wealth decide who receives and can use their wealth to divide communities against each other and further disempower them.

The people of the world are rejecting this ‘plantation politics’ and are uniting instead. We see this in all of the circles in which we exist. This past weekend in Chicago, activists from across the country and from different areas of advocacy met to organize “Earth Day to May Day – Ten Days to Change Course” actions as part of a Global Climate Convergence. In addition to connecting our struggles and showing that the system is the problem, one of the goals is to reclaim the meaning of these holidays.

This convergence is also in line with the tasks of this moment in history. In joining our efforts and maintaining a position of what is necessary, not what we are told is on the table, we shift the realm of the possible. And as we shift the cultural acceptance of what is possible, those who have operated within the current system will shift as well and more will join the new effort. Why? Because those who stand for justice in all of its forms represent what the majority of people already want.

A task of the day is solidarity. And the new economy that is emerging to replace predatory capitalism is a solidarity economy, which we call economic democracy. In a democratized economy, people have more input into decisions about the economy and more benefit from it as well. This is an economic model that will solve the crises of our era and prevent them from returning.

The new economy is taking shape on a number of different levels from communities that are putting democratic economic institutions in place to students who are recreating their economic curriculum to economists who are working together to define the new economy more concretely.

Completing the Campaign for Economic Justice

The centerpiece of so many of the issues that confront us stem from an economy that works for only the wealthiest.  The poverty of tens of millions, the low-pay of hundreds of millions, and economic insecurity of virtually all but the wealthiest, as well as the destruction of the environment all stem from this rigged economy of predatory capitalism.

While Occupy made “We are the 99%” famous, this wealth divide is not new.  In fact, in a 1956 sermon, Dr. King said:

“The misuse of Capitalism can also lead to tragic exploitation. This has so often happened in your nation. They tell me that one tenth of one percent of the population controls more than forty percent of the wealth. Oh America, how often have you taken necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes. If you are to be a truly Christian nation you must solve this problem.”

Now, the task falls to all of us, we must educate and mobilize people to create a broad national consensus that recognizes the unacceptable injustice of the rigged economy and the need to transform to economic democracy that brings economic fairness and leads to a government that functions with the participation of the people and is not dominated by the ‘rule of money’.  The transformation is before us, it is our task to achieve it.

Sign up for the daily news digest of Popular Resistance, here.

This article is produced by PopularResistance.org in conjunction with AlterNet.  It is based on PopularResistance.org’s weekly newsletter reviewing the activities of the resistance movement.

Kevin Zeese, JD and Margaret Flowers, MD are participants in PopularResistance.org; they co-direct It’s Our Economy and co-host Clearing the FOG. Their twitters are @KBZeese and MFlowers8.

The article America’s Biggest Crises Are Rooted In The Fact That The Economy Is Rigged For The Wealthiest – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By EurActiv

(EurActiv) — In his speech to the annual gathering of world political and economic leaders in Davos, Switzerland, UK Prime Minister David Cameron said  24 January he saw a chance for his country to become the “Re-Shore Nation” and pull jobs and economic activity “back home”.

Cameron said that globalisation did not mean that “the East wins while the West loses” and that it was time to bring jobs that were once offshored back from East to West.

He said that his government had set out a long-term economic plan to secure the country’s economic future. This program, he believes, reduces taxes to help hard-working people become more financially secure, and drives job creation by backing small business and enterprise with better infrastructure and lower jobs taxes, among other things.

He added that there were more than 1.6 million new private sector jobs since early 2010, when he took over as Prime Minister, leading the first coalition government in the UK since World War II. Also, he said that since then, there were around 400,000 more small businesses and that over 25 million people benefited from tax cuts.

He made reference to his campaign to cut red tape, saying that £1.2 billion (€1.45 billion) of red tape has been saved. “Pushing for the removal of the most problematic EU regulations” contributed to this, he said.

“Ernst & Young now say Britain is the best place in Europe for new entrepreneurs […]We are proud of the Indian investment in Jaguar Land Rover, proud that Emirates invested in a new stadium for Arsenal and Etihad have invested in Manchester City”, Cameron said.

Corporation tax will soon be as low as 20%, the lowest in the G7 and as low as 10% for companies that turn innovation into manufacturing, Prime Minister also said.

But Camron added that his country could do more than that and bring back home jobs that once fled to Asia.

“The food manufacturer Symingtons is moving its factory from China to Leeds. Hornby the model train manufacturer is bringing some of its manufacturing from India to Britain,” Cameron said, adding that millions of jobs could be available for re-shoring globally.

Among the factors for pulling back companies back home he mentioned shortening supply chains, more customisation, new technologies such as 3-D printing.

EU can do it as well, but…

Cameron said that much as Britain could be the “Re-shore nation”, Europe could benefit from this too, but only if it would act to make re-shoring as attractive as possible.

“Right now, economies in Europe have a unique opportunity to accelerate this new trend of jobs coming back home”, Cameron said, adding that Europe’s main strengths was liberal democracy and “an unashamedly pro-business regulatory environment – with labour market flexibility, low jobs taxes and a willingness to pave the way for new business and new business models”.

But he added that the fight had not yet been won, attacking “some in the European Commission” who according to him “seem to think that if they’re not producing new regulations they’re somehow not doing their job”.

He didn’t omit to criticise the European Parliament as well, where according to him some MEPs were “tempted to gold plate every piece of legislation”.

Cameron also made a passionate plea in favour of shale gas, warning that if the EU imposed “burdensome, unjustified or premature regulatory burdens” on shale gas exploration in Europe investors would “quickly head elsewhere”.

The article Cameron Dreams Of ‘Re-Shoring’ UK’s Economy appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By American Forces Press Service

By Nick Simeone

A day after ordering an independent review of the military’s nuclear force amid allegations of cheating on proficiency exams by Air Force officers overseeing the nation’s ballistic nuclear missiles, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel vowed to restore confidence in the Air Force’s nuclear mission.

“Whatever the factors — historical, institutional, cultural — the Department of Defense and the Air Force will do whatever it takes to continue to ensure the safety, security, reliability and effectiveness of our nuclear enterprise,” Hagel said at a ceremonial swearing-in ceremony for Deborah Lee James, the 23rd secretary of the Air Force.

The service has suspended 34 launch officers overseeing intercontinental ballistic missiles after an investigation implicated them for cheating or failing to report cheating on exams. A Pentagon spokesman told reporters yesterday the allegations “raise legitimate concerns about the department’s stewardship of one of our most sensitive and important missions,” prompting Hagel to call for an independent, broader examination of the strategic deterrence enterprise as it relates to personnel.

At today’s ceremony, Hagel said he, James and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark. A. Welsh III are deeply concerned “about the overall health and professionalism and discipline of our strategic forces,” and called the problems facing the new Air Force secretary daunting. But he credited James with a “swift, decisive and thoughtful response,” to the matter after she visited missile bases around the country in recent days. Even so, he said, “restoring confidence in the nuclear mission will be a top priority.”

Hagel called James well suited to lead the Air Force as the nation faces an increasingly uncertain security environment.

“The rise of emerging powers, dangerous rogue states, affiliated terrorist organizations, and the proliferation of technology will mean more contested and complicated domains, from space to cyber to sea lanes,” he said.

James, who was officially sworn in as secretary last month, pledged to “leave this Air Force some years from now on a path toward greater capability and better affordability for our taxpayers while always remembering and protecting the important people who underpin everything we do.” But she cautioned the service will continue to face difficult challenges and trade-offs brought on by shrinking budgets.

Hagel noted that James has spent the last 30 years serving on the staff of the House Armed Services Committee, at the Pentagon, where she served three secretaries of defense, as well as in the private sector. Her approach, he said, “has been to understand the problems and opportunities, listen carefully, and then act decisively.” This, he added, will make her a success leading the Air Force.

The article Hagel Vows To Restore Confidence In US Nuclear Mission appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Tierramerica

By Marianela Jarroud

An organisation that brings together some 10,000 peasant and indigenous women from Chile is launching an agroecology institute for women campesinos, or small farmers, in South America.

For years, the National Association of Rural and Indigenous Women (ANAMURI) has been training thousands of people through La Vía Campesina, the international peasant movement, working on the basis of food sovereignty, which asserts the right of people to define their own food systems.

But today it is undertaking its most ambitious project.

The Agroecology Institute for Rural Women (IALA) will be the first in Latin America to only target women. It is taking shape in the town of Auquinco – which roughly means “the sound of water” in the Mapuche indigenous language – in the district of Chépica, 180 km south of Santiago.

The training sessions have already started, even though the building isn’t ready yet.

“We aren’t pursuing a dream, but a challenge,” the international director of ANAMURI, Francisca Rodríguez, who will run IALA, told Tierramérica*.

The project has a political core: “food production to resolve the problem of hunger.”

“It is essential to find ways to make it possible for us to continue surviving and existing as an important segment of agriculture amidst the fierce attack on campesinos, which has to do with productive sectors but also with the models of consumption,” she said.

IALA is focused on defending campesino family agriculture, she said.

It’s an effort to join in “the big task” of the Agroecology Institutes of Latin America, from which it took its acronym, she said.

These projects began in Venezuela, where the first agronomists – all children from campesino families – have graduated.

The IALA institutes were replicated later in Brazil and Paraguay, as well as Ecuador and the rest of the Andean region. The latest major achievement has been the SURI Campesino University, which opened its doors in Argentina in April 2013.

“It’s important for us to have professionals in the field of agriculture, in order to help achieve food sovereignty, and to continue along this route which requires specialists who have come from the land itself,” Rodríguez said.

“No one better than campesinos can feel the need to continue developing agriculture that is at the service of humanity,” she added.

Rodríguez said that in ANAMURI “we understand the challenge,” and while the institute will initially focus on women from the Southern Cone of South America, it could later be expanded to incorporate men.

In Auquinco, they have a one-hectare plot and a large house where the students will stay, purchased for just 23,000 dollars. They said the price was low because after the former owners, a couple who had gone into exile during Chile’s 1973-1990 dictatorship, returned to the country, they decided to sell the property to the women so the group could do good work with it.

Because of the damages it suffered during the February 2010 earthquake, however, the house needs extensive repairs, though the architects that evaluated the damage assured them it will maintain its character as a traditional rural dwelling, after the renovation.

The repairs must begin as soon as possible, said ANAMURI director of organisation Alicia Muñoz.

“During the current [southern hemisphere] summer, we have to organise brigades of volunteers to help us fix up the house and the grounds, so that it won’t lose its original character,” Muñoz said.

ANAMURI decided that 2014 would be “the year of restoration” – a volunteer campaign that starts Jan. 4 with a visit to the building to clear the overgrown vegetation and begin the most urgent part of the remodeling: fixing the roof.

“Our dream is having an institute for the conservation of the kind of agriculture that women know how to do, that is truly trustworthy from the point of view of health and nutrients,” Muñoz said.

In the history of Chilean agriculture, men have always dominated the scene, “with women relegated to the domestic sphere, to the processing of food, keeping house and raising the small livestock,” anthropologist Juan Carlos Skewes told Tierramérica.

But “their contribution, in my view fundamental, to agricultural work and to the alternative development project that is the vegetable garden, has been forgotten,” he added.

“Every vegetable patch, every campesino family farming practice, involves biodiversity, conservation of genetic material, the possibility of reproducing seeds and making better use of local resources,” said Skewes, director of the School of Anthropology at the Alberto Hurtado University.

“There is also the question of better coordination of resources, self-sufficiency and strengthening local economies,” he added.

“So, summing up, there are autonomous projects, a capacity for self-management, autonomous sustainable production, and management of non-genetically-modified material, and there is a chance to counteract, resist or challenge industrial processes in agribusiness, as well as the food processing industry,” he said.

The expert said that “in these tremendously contemporary aspects, the key player is the rural peasant woman, organised in the protection of seeds for self-consumption and the sustainable management of agriculture.”

In ANAMURI, the new year is full of hope. The participants are confident that the new government, to be headed by a woman, socialist former president Michelle Bachelet, will open up doors for them to strengthen their work.

They are also confident in receiving support from the United Nations, which declared 2014 the International Year of Family Farming.

“Many people are going back to the countryside, which means there is hope,” said Rodríguez. “We know we’re helping to strengthen the country on our parcel of land in Auquinco.”

* This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network.

The article Women Farmers In Chile To Teach The Region Agroecology appeared first on Eurasia Review.