Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

dinsdag 14 september 2010

The Empire 658

A Must Read!!!


Do Not Pity the Democrats

There are no longer any major institutions in American society, including the press, the educational system, the financial sector, labor unions, the arts, religious institutions and our dysfunctional political parties, which can be considered democratic. The intent, design and function of these institutions, controlled by corporate money, are to bolster the hierarchical and anti-democratic power of the corporate state. These institutions, often mouthing liberal values, abet and perpetuate mounting inequality. They operate increasingly in secrecy. They ignore suffering or sacrifice human lives for profit. They control and manipulate all levers of power and mass communication. They have muzzled the voices and concerns of citizens. They use entertainment, celebrity gossip and emotionally laden public-relations lies to seduce us into believing in a Disneyworld fantasy of democracy.
The menace we face does not come from the insane wing of the Republican Party, which may make huge inroads in the coming elections, but the institutions tasked with protecting democratic participation. Do not fear Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin. Do not fear the tea party movement, the birthers, the legions of conspiracy theorists or the militias. Fear the underlying corporate power structure, which no one, from Barack Obama to the right-wing nut cases who pollute the airwaves, can alter. If the hegemony of the corporate state is not soon broken we will descend into a technologically enhanced age of barbarism.
Investing emotional and intellectual energy in electoral politics is a waste of time. Resistance means a radical break with the formal structures of American society. We must cut as many ties with consumer society and corporations as possible. We must build a new political and economic consciousness centered on the tangible issues of sustainable agriculture, self-sufficiency and radical environmental reform. The democratic system, and the liberal institutions that once made piecemeal reform possible, is dead. It exists only in name. It is no longer a viable mechanism for change. And the longer we play our scripted and absurd role in this charade the worse it will get. Do not pity Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. They will get what they deserve. They sold the citizens out for cash and power. They lied. They manipulated and deceived the public, from the bailouts to the abandonment of universal health care, to serve corporate interests. They refused to halt the wanton corporate destruction of the ecosystem on which all life depends. They betrayed the most basic ideals of democracy. And they, as much as the Republicans, are the problem.
“It is like being in a pit,” Ralph Nader told me when we spoke on Saturday. “If you are four feet in the pit you have a chance to grab the top and hoist yourself up. If you are 30 feet in the pit you have to start on a different scale.”
All resistance will take place outside the arena of electoral politics. The more we expand community credit unions, community health clinics and food cooperatives and build alternative energy systems, the more empowered we will become.
“To the extent that these organizations expand and get into communities where they do not exist, we will weaken the multinational goliath, from the banks to the agribusinesses to the HMO giants and hospital chains,” Nader said.
The failure of liberals to defend the interests of working men and women as our manufacturing sector was dismantled, labor unions were destroyed and social services were slashed has proved to be a disastrous and fatal misjudgment. Liberals, who betrayed the working class, have no credibility. This is one of the principle reasons the anti-war movement cannot attract the families whose sons and daughters are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. And liberal hypocrisy has opened the door for a virulent right wing. If we are to reconnect with the working class we will have to begin from zero. We will have to rebuild the ties with the poor and the working class which the liberal establishment severed. We will have to condemn the liberal class as vociferously as we condemn the right wing. And we will have to remain true to the moral imperative to foster the common good and the tangible needs of housing, health care, jobs, education and food.
We will, once again, be bombarded in this election cycle with messages of fear from the Democratic Party—designed, in the end, to serve corporate interests. “Better Barack Obama than Sarah Palin,” we will be told. Better the sane technocrats like Larry Summers than half-wits like John Bolton. But this time we must resist. If we express the legitimate rage of the dispossessed working class as our own, if we denounce and refuse to cooperate with the Democratic Party, we can begin to impede the march of the right-wing trolls who seem destined to inherit power. If we again prove compliant we will discredit the socialism we should be offering as an alternative to a perverted Christian and corporate fascism.
The tea party movement is, as Nader points out, “a conviction revolt.” Most of the participants in the tea party rallies are not poor. They are small-business people and professionals. They feel that something is wrong. They see that the two parties are equally responsible for the subsidies and bailouts, the wars and the deficits. They know these parties must be replaced. The corporate state, whose interests are being championed by tea party leaders such as Palin and Dick Armey, is working hard to make sure the anger of the movement is directed toward government rather than corporations and Wall Street. And if these corporate apologists succeed, a more overt form of corporate fascism will emerge without a socialist counterweight.
“Poor people do not organize,” Nader lamented. “They never have. It has always been people who have fairly good jobs. You don’t see Wal-Mart workers massing anywhere. The people who are the most militant are the people who had the best blue-collar jobs. Their expectation level was high. When they felt their jobs were being jeopardized they got really angry. But when you are at $7.25 an hour you want to hang on to $7.25 an hour. It is a strange thing.”
“People have institutionalized oppressive power in the form of surrender,” Nader said. “It is not that they like it. But what are you going to do about it? You make the best of it. The system of control is staggeringly dictatorial. It breaks new ground and innovates in ways no one in human history has ever innovated. You start in American history where these corporations have influence. Then they have lobbyists. Then they run candidates. Then they put their appointments in top government positions. Now, they are actually operating the government. Look at Halliburton and Blackwater. Yesterday someone in our office called the Office of Pipeline Safety apropos the San Bruno explosion in California. The press woman answered. The guy in our office saw on the screen that she had CTR next to her name. He said, ‘What is CTR?’ She said, ‘I am a contractor.’ He said, ‘This is the press office at the Department of Transportation. They contracted out the press office?’ ‘Yes,’ she said, ‘but that’s OK, I come to work here every day.’ ”
“The corporate state is the ultimate maturation of American-type fascism,” Nader said. “They leave wide areas of personal freedom so that people can confuse personal freedom with civic freedom—the freedom to go where you want, eat where you want, associate with who you want, buy what you want, work where you want, sleep when you want, play when you want. If people have given up on any civic or political role for themselves there is a sufficient amount of elbow room to get through the day. They do not have the freedom to participate in the decisions about war, foreign policy, domestic health and safety issues, taxes or transportation. That is its genius. But one of its Achilles’ heels is that the price of the corporate state is a deteriorating political economy. They can’t stop their greed from getting the next morsel. The question is, at what point are enough people going to have a breaking point in terms of their own economic plight? At what point will they say enough is enough? When that happens, is a tea party type enough or [Sen. Robert M.] La Follette or Eugene Debs type of enough?”
It is anti-corporate movements as exemplified by the Scandinavian energy firm Kraft&Kultur that we must emulate. Kraft&Kultur sells electricity exclusively from solar and water power. It has begun to merge clean energy with cultural events, bookstores and a political consciousness that actively defies corporate hegemony.
The failure by the Obama administration to use the bailout and stimulus money to build public works such as schools, libraries, roads, clinics, highways, public transit and reclaiming dams, as well as create green jobs, has snuffed out any hope of serious economic, political or environmental reform coming from the centralized bureaucracy of the corporate state. And since the government did not hire enough auditors and examiners to monitor how the hundreds of billions in taxpayer funds funneled to Wall Street are being spent, we will soon see reports of widespread mismanagement and corruption. The rot and corruption at the top levels of our financial and political systems, coupled with the increasing deprivation felt by tens of millions of Americans, are volatile tinder for a horrific right-wing backlash in the absence of a committed socialist alternative.
Advertisement
“If you took a day off and did nothing but listen to Hannity, Beck and Limbaugh and realized that this goes on 260 days a year, you would see that it is overwhelming,” Nader said. “You have to almost have a genetic resistance in your mind and body not to be affected by it. These guys are very good. They are clever. They are funny. They are emotional. It beats me how Air America didn’t make it, except it went after [it criticized] corporations, and corporations advertise. These right-wingers go after government, and government doesn’t advertise. And that is the difference. It isn’t that their message appeals more. Air America starved because it could not get ads.”
We do not have much time left. And the longer we refuse to confront corporate power the more impotent we become as society breaks down. The game of electoral politics, which is given legitimacy by the right and the so-called left on the cable news shows, is just that—a game. It diverts us from what should be our daily task—dismantling, piece by piece, the iron grip that corporations hold over our lives. Hope is a word that is applicable only to those who grasp reality, however bleak, and do something meaningful to fight back—which does not include the farce of elections and involvement in mainstream political parties. Hope is about fighting against the real forces of destruction, not chanting “Yes We Can!” in rallies orchestrated by marketing experts, television crews, pollsters and propagandists or begging Obama to be Obama. Hope, in the hands of realists, spreads fear into the black heart of the corporate elite. But hope, real hope, remains thwarted by our collective self-delusion. 
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

maandag 13 september 2010

Israel as a Rogue State 99

 
       
THE PEACE PROCESS: From Breakthrough to Breakdown
    Afif Safieh,
former Palestinian Ambassador in London, Washington and Moscow
 
OUT NOW IN HARDBACK - £16.99
 
 
 
 
“The Palestinian struggle for independence embodies a noble idea and a just cause. In Afif Safieh it found one if its most intellectually powerful, articulate and eloquent spokesmen. His book makes a vital contribution to our understanding of the cause that he has served with dignity and distinction for over three decades. It deserves the widest possible readership.” Avi Shlaim
 
"Afif Safieh's book makes both depressing and inspiring reading - these pages demonstrate Afif's commitment, his deep knowledge of history, his frustrations and his sparkling good humour." Lord David Steel
 
"A welcome addition to the literature written on the Peace Process. It is formidable in its eloquence, humanity and the description of his hopes for a just peace for all Palestinians." Judge Eugene Cotran
 
Afif Safieh served as Palestinian Ambassador in London, Washington and Moscow from 1990 to 2009. During this time he met and interacted with the leading politicians of our times: from Yasser Arafat, John Major and Tony Blair; to Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush, and Pope John Paul II.
The Peace Process: From Breakthrough to Breakdown brings together Afif Safieh's articles, lectures and interviews from when he was a staff member in Yasser Arafat's Beirut office, to 2005, at the end of his mission in London, revealing the political and intellectual journey of one of Palestine's most skilled and distinguished diplomats.
His writings, which centre on the Palestinian struggle for independence, are a testament to his vision and humanity provide a unique map of Palestinian diplomacy over the last three decades.
Born in Jerusalem in 1950, Afif Safieh is Roving Ambassador for Special Missions for the PLO and the Fatah Deputy Commissioner for International Relations. He served as Head of Mission in London, Washington and Moscow, as well as the Holy See and The Netherlands. During his service in The Netherlands from 1987 to 1990, he was involved in the Stockholm negotiations which led to the first official and direct American-Palestinian dialogue. From 1976 to 1978, her served as Deputy Director of the PLO Observer Mission to the United Nations Office at Geneva. He later worked as a staff member in Yasser Arafat's office in Beirut from 1978 to 1981, in charge of European Affairs and UN institutions. He lives in London with his wife and daughters.
To contact Afif Safieh please email: AFIFPLO@aol.com
To order copies of The Peace Process by Afif Safieh please visit the Al Saqi website http://www.alsaqibookshop.com/ or call the Al Saqi Bookshop on  +44 (0) 207 229 8543  (Books - £16.99)
For publicity enquiries please contact Charlotte Allen at Saqi Books: E - charlotte@telegrambooks.com T -  +44 (0) 20 7221 9347


zondag 12 september 2010

The Empire 657

How Much “Success” Can Afghans Stand?

photo
Soldiers of Alpha Company(A Coy) in the Panjwaii District of Kandahar Province. (Photo: Sgt Lou Penney / lafrancevi)
With the arrival of General David Petraeus as Afghan War commander, there has been ever more talk about the meaning of “success” in Afghanistan. At the end of July, USA Today ran an article titled, “In Afghanistan, Success Measured a Step at a Time.” Days later, Stephen Biddle, a Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, held a conference call with the media to speak about “Defining Success in Afghanistan.” A mid-August editorial in theWashington Post was titled: “Making the Case for Success in Afghanistan.” And earlier this month, an Associated Press article appeared under the headline, “Petraeus Talks Up Success in Afghan War.”
Unlike victory, success turns out to be a slippery term. As the United States approaches the tenth anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan, pundits have been chewing over just what “success” in Afghanistan might mean for Washington. What success might mean for ordinary Afghans hasn’t, however, been a major topic of conversation, even though U.S. officials have regularly promised them far better lives and trumpeted American efforts to reconstruct that war-torn land.
Between 2001 and 2009, according to the Afghan government, the country has received $36 billion in grants and loans from donor nations, with the United States disbursing some $23 billion of it. U.S. taxpayers have anted up another $338 billion to fund the war and occupation. Yet from poverty indexes to risk-of-rape assessments, from childhood mortality figures to drug-use stats, just about every available measure of Afghan wellbeing paints a grim picture of a country in a persistent state of humanitarian crisis, often involving reconstruction and military failures on an epic scale. Pick a measurement affecting ordinary Afghans and the record since November 2001 when Kabul fell to Allied forces is likely to show stagnation or setbacks and, almost invariably, suffering.
Almost a decade after the U.S. invasion, life for Afghan civilians is not a subject Americans care much about and so, not surprisingly, it plays little role in Washington's discussions of “success.” Have a significant number of Afghans found the years of occupation and war “successful”? Has there been a payoff in everyday life for the indignities of the American years -- the cars stopped or sometimes shot up at road checkpoints, the American patrols trooping through fields and searching homes, the terrifying night raids, the imprisonments without trial, or the way so many Afghans continue to be treated like foreigners, if not criminal suspects, in their own country?
For years, American leaders have hailed the way Afghans are supposedly benefiting from the U.S. role in their country. But are they?
The promises began early. In April 2002, for instance, speaking at the Virginia Military Institute, President George W. Bush proclaimed that in Afghanistan “peace will be achieved through an education system for boys and girls which works.” He added, “We're working hard in Afghanistan: We're clearing mine fields. We're rebuilding roads. We're improving medical care. And we will work to help Afghanistan to develop an economy that can feed its people without feeding the world's demand for drugs.”
When, on May 1, 2003, President Bush strode across the flight deck of theUSS Abraham Lincoln to deliver his “mission accomplished” speech, declaring an end to “major combat operations in Iraq,” he also spoke of triumph in the other war and once again offered a rosy picture of Afghan developments. “We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals, and educate all of their children,” he said. Five years later, he was still touting American aid to Afghans, noting that the U.S. was “working to ensure that our military progress is accompanied by the political and economic gains that are critical to the success of a free Afghanistan."
Earlier this year, President Barack Obama seemed to suggest that efforts to promote Afghan wellbeing had indeed been a success: “There is no denying the progress that the Afghan people have made in recent years -- in education, in health care and economic development, as I saw in the lights across Kabul when I landed -- lights that would not have been visible just a few years earlier.”
So, almost 10 years on, just what are the lives of ordinary Afghans like? Has childhood mortality markedly improved? Are women, if not equal in terms of civil rights, at least secure in the knowledge that men are not able to rape them with impunity? Have all Afghan children -- or even most -- started on the road to a decent education?
Or how about a more basic question? After almost a decade of war and tens of billions in international aid, do Afghans have enough to eat? I recently posed that question to Challiss McDonough of the United Nation’s World Food Program in Afghanistan.
Food Insecurity
In October 2001, the BBC reported that more than seven million people were "at risk of malnutrition or food shortages across Afghanistan.” In an email, McDonough updated that estimate: “The most recent data on food insecurity comes from the last National Risk and Vulnerability Assesment (NRVA), which was conducted in 2007/2008 and released in late October 2009. It found that about 7.4 million people are food-insecure, roughly 31 percent of the estimated population. Another 37 percent are considered to be on the borderline of food insecurity, and could be pushed over the edge by shocks such as floods, drought, or conflict-related displacement.”
Food insecurity indicators, McDonough pointed out, are heading in the wrong direction. “The NRVA of 2007/08 showed that the food security had deteriorated in 25 out of the 34 provinces compared to the 2005 NRVA. This was the result of a combination of factors, including high food prices, rising insecurity and recurring natural disasters.” As she also pointed out, “About 36 percent of the population lives below the poverty line and cannot afford basic necessities. Staple food prices remain higher than they are in neighboring countries, and higher than they were before the global high-food-price crisis began in 2007.”
Recently, the international risk management firm Maplecroft put togethera food security index -- using 12 criteria developed with the United Nations’ World Food Program -- to evaluate the threat to supplies of basic food staples in 163 countries. Afghanistan ranked dead last and was the only non-African nation among the 10 most food-insecure countries on the planet.
Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons
During the Soviet occupation of the 1980s and the grim years of Taliban rule in the later 1990s, millions of Afghans fled their country. While many returned after 2001, large numbers have continued to live abroad. More than one million registered Afghans reportedly live in Iran. Another 1.5 million or more undocumented, unregistered Afghan refugees may also reside in that country. Some 1.7 million or more Afghan refugees currently live in Pakistan -- 1.5 million of them in recently flood-ravaged provinces,according to Adrian Edwards, a spokesman for the U.N.'s refugee agency.
Many Afghans who still remain in their country cannot return home either. According to a 2008 report by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), there were 235,833 internally displaced persons nationwide. As of the middle of this year, the numbers had reportedly increased to more than 328,000.
Children’s Well-Being
In 2000, according to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), mortality for children under five years of age stood at 257 per 1,000. In 2008, the last year for which data was available, that number had not budged. It had, in fact, only slightly improved since 1990, when after almost a decade of Soviet occupation and brutal warfare, the numbers stood at 260 per 1,000. The figures were similar for infant mortality -- 168 per 1,000 in 1990, 165 per 1,000 in 2008.
In 2002, according to the U.N., about 50% of Afghan children were chronically malnourished. The most recent comprehensive national survey, done two years into the U.S. occupation, found (according to the World Food Program’s McDonough) about 60% of children under five chronically malnourished.
Childhood education is a rare area of genuine improvement. Afghan government statistics show steady growth -- from 3,083,434 children in primary school in 2002 to 4,788,366 enrolled in 2008. Still, there are more young children outside than in the classroom, according to 2010 UNICEF numbers, which indicate that approximately five million Afghan children do not attend school -- most of them girls.
Many youngsters find themselves on the streets. Reuters recently reportedthat there are no fewer than 600,000 street children in Afghanistan. Shafiqa Zaher, a social worker with Aschiana, a children’s aid group receiving U.S. funds, told reporter Andrew Hammond that most have a home, even if only a crumbling shell of a building, but their caregivers are often disabled and unemployed. Many are, therefore, forced into child labor. “Poverty is getting worse in Afghanistan and children are forced to find work,” said Zaher.
In 2002, the U.N. reported that there were more than one million children in Afghanistan who had lost one or both parents. Not much appears to have changed in the intervening years. “I have seen estimates that there are over one million Afghan children whose father or mother is deceased,” Mike Whipple, the Chairman and CEO of International Orphan Care, a U.S.-based humanitarian organization that operates schools and medical clinics in Afghanistan, told me by email recently.
Increasingly, even Afghan youngsters with families are desperate enough to abandon their homeland and attempt a treacherous overland journey to Europe and possible asylum. This year, UNHCR reported that ever more Afghan children are fleeing their country alone. Almost 6,000 of them, mostly boys, sought asylum in European countries in 2009, compared to about 3,400 a year earlier.
Women’s Rights
In his 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush told Congress: "The last time we met in this chamber, the mothers and daughters of Afghanistan were captives in their own homes, forbidden from working or going to school. Today women are free and are part of Afghanistan's new government." Last year, when asked about a new Afghan law sanctioning the oppression of women, President Obama asserted that there were “certain basic principles that all nations should uphold, and respect for women and respect for their freedom and integrity is an important principle.”
Recently, the plight of women in Afghanistan again made U.S. headlines thanks to a shocking TIME magazine cover image of Bibi Aisha, an Afghan whose ears and nose were sliced off after she ran away from her husband’s house. “What Happens When We Leave Afghanistan” was TIME’s headline, but reporter Ann Jones, who has worked closely with women in Afghanistan and talked to Bibi Aisha, took issue with the TIME cover in the Nation magazine, pointing out that it was evidently not the Taliban who mutilated Aisha and that the brutal assault took place eight years into the U.S. occupation. Life for women in Afghanistan has not been the bed of roses promised by Bush nor typified by the basic rights proffered by Obama, as Jones noted:
“Consider the creeping Talibanization of Afghan life under the Karzai government. Restrictions on women's freedom of movement, access to work and rights within the family have steadily tightened as the result of a confluence of factors, including the neglect of legal and judicial reform and the obligations of international human rights conventions; legislation typified by the infamous Shia Personal Status Law (SPSL), gazetted in 2009 by President Karzai himself despite women's protests and international furor; intimidation; and violence."
Her observations are echoed in a recent report by Medica Mondiale, a German non-governmental organization that advocates for the rights of women and girls in war and crisis zones around the world. As its blunt briefing began, “Nine years after 11 September and the start of the operation ‘Enduring Freedom,’ which justified its commitment not only with the hunt for terrorists, but also with the fight for women’s rights, the situation of women and girls in Afghanistan still is catastrophic.” Medica Mondiale reported that 80% of all Afghan marriages are still “concluded under compulsion.”
The basic safety of women in Afghanistan in, and well beyond, Taliban-controlled areas has in recent years proven a dismal subject even though the Americans haven’t left. According to the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), for instance, 87% of women are subject to domestic abuse. A 2009 report by the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) found that rape “is an everyday occurrence in all parts of the country” and called it a “human rights problem of profound proportions.” That report continued:
"Women and girls are at risk of rape in their homes and in their communities, in detention facilities and as a result of traditional harmful practices to resolve feuds within the family or community... In the northern region for example, 39 percent of the cases analyzed by UNAMA Human Rights, found that perpetrators were directly linked to power brokers who are, effectively, above the law and enjoy immunity from arrest as well as immunity from social condemnation."
Afghan women are reportedly turning to suicide as their only solution.
A June report by Sudabah Afzali of the Institute for War & Peace Reporting noted that, according to officials in Herat Province, “cases of suicide amongst women… have increased by 50 per cent over the last year.” Sayed Naim Alemi, the director of the regional hospital in Herat, noted that 85 cases of attempted suicide recorded in the previous six months had involved women setting themselves on fire or ingesting poison. In 57 of the cases, the women had died.
A study conducted by former Afghan Deputy Health Minister Faizullah Kakar and released in August gave a sense of the breadth of the problem. Using Afghan Health Ministry records and hospital reports, Kakar found that an estimated 2,300 women or girls were attempting suicide each year. Domestic violence, bitter hardships, and mental illness were the leading factors in their decisions. “This is a several-fold increase on three decades ago,” said Kakar. In addition, he found that about 1.8 million Afghan women and girls between the ages of 15 and 40 are suffering from “severe depression.”
Drug Use
Rampant depression, among both men and women, has led to self-medication. While opium-poppy cultivation on an almost unimaginable scale in the planet’s leading narco-state has garnered headlines since 2001, little attention has been paid to drug use by ordinary Afghans, even though it has been on a steep upward trajectory.
In 2003, according to Afghanistan's Public Health Minister Amin Fatimie, there were approximately 7,000 heroin addicts in the capital city, Kabul. In 2007, that number was estimated to have doubled. By 2009, UNAMA and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) estimated that the city was home to up to 20,000 heroin users and another 20,000 to 25,000 opium users.
Unfortunately, Kabul has no monopoly on the problem. "Three decades of war-related trauma, unlimited availability of cheap narcotics, and limited access to treatment have created a major, and growing, addiction problem in Afghanistan," says Antonio Maria Costa, the Executive Director of UNDOC. Since 2005, the number of Afghan opium users nationwide has jumped by 53%, while heroin users have skyrocketed by 140%. According to UNODC’s survey, Drug Use in Afghanistan, approximately one million Afghans between the ages of 15 and 64 are addicted to drugs. That adds up to about 8% of the population and twice the global average.
AIDs and Sex Work
Since the U.S. occupation began, AIDS and HIV, the virus that causes the disease, have reportedly also been on the rise. In 2002, only eight peopletested positive for HIV. In 2007, Public Health Minister Fatimie reported61 confirmed cases of AIDS and 2,000 more suspected cases.
Fatamie blamed intravenous drug use for half the cases and the NGO Médecins du Monde, which works with intravenous drug users in Kabul,found that HIV prevalence among such users in the cities of Kabul, Herat, and Mazar had risen from 3% to 7% between 2006 and 2009. A 2010 report by the Public Health Ministry revealed that knowledge about HIV among intravenous drug users was astonishingly low, that few had ever been tested for the virus, and that of those who admitted to purchasing sex within the previous six months, most confessed to not having used a condom.
This last fact is hardly surprising, given the findings from a recent study by Catherine Todd and colleagues of 520 female sex workers, almost all mothers, in the Afghan cities of Jalalabad, Kabul, and Mazar-i-Sharif. Only about 30% of the women surveyed reported clients had ever used a condom with them and about 50% had received treatment for a sexually transmitted infection in the three months prior to being interviewed.
The same study also sheds light on the intersection between high-risk behaviors, socio-economic conditions, and the freedom and opportunities promised to Afghan women by Presidents Bush and Obama. The most common reasons Afghan women engaged in sex work, Todd and colleagues found, were the need to support themselves (50%) or their families (32.4%). Almost 9% reported being forced into sex work by their families. Just over 5% turned to prostitution after being widowed, and 1.5% were forced into the profession after they were sexually assaulted and, consequently, found themselves unable to marry.
A Decade of Progress?
In the near-decade since Kabul fell in November 2001, a sizeable majority of Afghans have continued to live in poverty and privation. Measuring such misery may be impossible, but the United Nations has tried to find a comprehensive way to do so nonetheless. Using a Human Poverty Index which “focuses on the proportion of people below certain threshold[s] in regard to a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard of living,” the U.N. found that, comparatively speaking, it doesn’t get worse than life in Afghanistan. The nation ranks dead last in its listing, number 135 out of 135 countries. This is what “success” means today in Afghanistan.
The United Nations also ranks countries via a Human Development Index which includes such indicators of wellbeing as life expectancy, educational attainment, and income. In 2004, the U.N. and the Afghan government issued the first National Human Development Report. In its foreword, the publication cautioned:
“As was expected, the report has painted a gloomy picture of the status of human development in the country after two decades of war and destruction. The Human Development Index (HDI) value calculated nationally puts Afghanistan at the dismal ranking of 173 out of 178 countries worldwide. Yet the HDI also presents us with a benchmark against which progress can be measured in the future.“
The only place to go, it seemed, was up. And yet, in 2009, when the U.N. issued a new Human Development Report, Afghanistan was in even worse shape, ranking number 181 of 182 nations, higher only than Niger.
Almost 10 years of U.S. and allied occupation, development, mentoring, reconstruction aid, and assistance has taken the country from unbearably dismal to something markedly poorer. And yet even worse is still possible for the long-suffering men, women, and children of Afghanistan. As the U.S. war and occupation drags on without serious debate about withdrawal on the Washington agenda, questions need to be asked about the fate of Afghan civilians. Chief among them: How many more years of “progress” can they endure, and if the U.S. stays, how much more “success” can they stand?
Nick Turse is the associate editor of TomDispatch.com. An award-winning journalist, his work has appeared in the Los Angeles Times, the Nation, and regularly at TomDispatch. His latest book, The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan (Verso Books), which brings together leading analysts from across the political spectrum, has just been published. He discusses why withdrawal from Afghanistan hasn't been on the American agenda in Timothy MacBain's latest TomCast audio interview, which can be accessed by clicking here or downloaded to your iPod here. Turse is currently a fellow at Harvard University’s Radcliffe Institute. You can follow him on Twitter @NickTurse, on Tumblr, and onFacebook. His website is NickTurse.com.


http://www.truth-out.org/how-much-success-can-afghans-stand63182

Israel as a Rogue State 98

CounterPunch Weekend Edition
September 10 - 12, 2010

The Military and the Academy

The Silence of the Israeli Intelligentsia

By LISA TARAKI
The ongoing buzz in the Israeli media around statements issued by artists and academics against lecturing or performing in the colony of Ariel – built on occupied Palestinian land – betrays a stark contradiction in the positions of the Israeli intelligentsia. While they are now calling for a boycott of settlements, they have remained apathetic or even content regarding the far more significant heavy hand of the military-security-political establishment in society, including in academia and cultural institutions.
Another recent controversy has raged around academic freedom and the autonomy of the university. It was occasioned by attacks by two right-wing organizations, the Institute for Zionist Strategies and Im Tirtzu, on the alleged post-and anti-Zionist bias in social science departments at some Israeli universities.

The connection between the two controversies may not be apparent at first. However, they both demonstrate that the liberal-to-left Israeli intelligentsia’s mindset is fully in line with the reigning orthodoxy that accepts the military as a benign fact of life.

In response to the attacks on the universities, statements defending academic freedom and the autonomy of the university were quickly issued by the heads of Israel’s major universities, the association of academic faculty, and individual academics. Even the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities gave an opinion: “we cannot accept attempts by external and foreign bodies to intervene in appointing faculty members, determining curricula, and the manner in which material is taught."

Does the Academy consider the military and the defense establishment “foreign bodies?” Apparently not.

The Ariel cultural center controversy was defined by prominent economics professor Ariel Rubinstein as an issue of normalization. He said of the petition signed by 150 academics and artists in support of the boycott of Ariel: "the petition's objective is to undermine the normalization in the relationship between Israel and the occupied territories."

It is remarkable that Rubinstein ignores the fact that his own institution, Tel Aviv University, provides a case par excellence of the close partnership between the Israeli academy and the occupation regime. Yet, neither he nor any of the other academics who have enthusiastically endorsed the boycott of a colonial outpost in the occupied Palestinian territory have been willing to examine their own institutions with the same critical eye.

Indeed, Tel Aviv University is among the major academic institutions involved in military R&D activities as well as work with the weapons industry. A recent publication of the university boasts of fifty-five projects there funded by the R&D authority at the ministry of defense.
It is instructive to note that while American academics are up in arms about the collaboration of their colleagues with the army under the Pentagon’s Human Terrain Teams and the Minerva Research Initiative, we find no similar protest from the professional associations of physicists, geographers, mathematicians, political scientists and others in Israel about the moral and professional implications of collaboration with their army.
The rare exceptions prove the rule, as in the case of the ineffective protests that accompanied the appointment of Colonel Pnina Sharvit-Baruch in the law faculty at Tel Aviv University. The protesters asserted that her interpretation of the law during Israel's Gaza assault allowed the army to act in ways that constitute potential war crimes. The appointment went ahead. This is the same army colonel whose invitation to participate in Harvard’s International Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum last year created an outcry from American human rights activists.

The ease with which academics have weaved in and out of the military, the government – even the Israeli “civil administration” before the establishment of the Palestinian Authority – and the academy is quite natural and normal.

In fact, the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations renewed last week likely involve Israeli soldier-scholars steeped in this academic-military collusion that has for decades undercut Palestinian rights.

It might be claimed that the service of the Arabist professors in the occupation regime is a thing of the past. But their role in colonial governance is not a lone episode in the history of the Israeli academy. In fact, the collaboration of the academy with the military and intelligence services has moved to a new plane with the establishment of strategic studies institutions and think tanks and security studies departments and institutes, many of which are located at or affiliated with universities.

Only as an example, the Institute for National Security Studies, an external institute of Tel Aviv University, was instrumental in developing the doctrine of “disproportionate force” and the targeting of civilian infrastructure, based on the lessons of the war on Lebanon and later applied to deadly use in the war on Gaza in 2008-2009. Needless to say, this doctrine is a gross violation of international humanitarian law. Finally, and closer to home for Palestinians, both incidents show that when Israeli academics and intellectuals will it, they, and even their institutions, can speak in one voice in defense of principles.

In Israel, this voice has been silent for the past four decades in the face of repeated closures of Palestinian universities by military order and the imprisonment of thousands of students and academics for resisting the occupation. Palestinian cultural centers and initiatives have been stifled, from Jerusalem to Gaza. Discrimination against Palestinian students -- citizens of Israel – at Israeli universities has hardly caught the attention of the academy.

I do not see universal values at work here.

Lisa Taraki is a sociologist at Birzeit University in Palestine.



http://www.counterpunch.org/taraki09102010.html

Robert Fisk 61




Nine years, two wars, hundreds of thousands
dead – and nothing learnt
by Robert Fisk
The Independent
11 September 2010



Did 9/11 make us all go mad? How fitting, in a weird, crazed way, that the
apotheosis of that firestorm nine years ago should turn out to be a crackpot
preacher threatening another firestorm with a Nazi-style book burning of the
Koran. Or a would-be mosque two blocks from "ground zero" – as if 9/11 was
an onslaught on Jesus-worshipping Christians, rather than on the atheist
West.

But why should we be surprised? Just look at all the other crackpots spawned
in the aftermath of those international crimes against humanity: the
half-crazed Ahmadinejad, the smarmy post-nuclear Gaddafi, Blair with his
crazed right eye and George W Bush with his black prisons and torture and
lunatic "war on terror". And that wretched man who lived – or  lives still –
in an Afghan cave and the hundreds of al-Qa'idas whom he  created, and the
one-eyed mullah – not to mention all the lunatic cops and  intelligence
agencies and CIA thugs who failed us all – utterly – on 9/11  because they
were too idle or too stupid to identify 19 men who were going  to attack the
United States. And remember one thing: even if the Rev Terry  Jones sticks
with his decision to back down, another of our cranks will be  ready to take
his place.

Indeed, on this grim ninth anniversary – and heaven spare us next year from
the 10th – 9/11 appears to have produced not peace or justice or democracy
or human rights, but monsters. They have prowled Iraq – both the Western and
the local variety – and slaughtered 100,000 souls, or 500,000, or a million;
and who cares? They have killed tens of thousands in Afghanistan; and who
cares? And as the sickness has spread across the Middle East and then the
globe, they – the air force pilots and the insurgents, the Marines and the
suicide bombers, the al-Qa'idas of the Maghreb and of the Khalij and of the
Caliphate of Iraq and the special forces and the close air support boys and
the throat-cutters – have torn the heads off women and children and the old
and the sick and the young and healthy, from the Indus to the Mediterranean,
from Bali to the London Tube; quite a memorial to the 2,966 innocents who
were killed nine years ago. All in their name, it seems, has been our
holocaust of fire and blood, enshrined now in the crazed pastor of
Gainesville.

This is the loss, of course. But who's made the profit? Well, the arms
dealers, naturally, and Boeing and Lockheed Martin and all the missile lads
and the drone manufacturers and F-16 spare parts outfits and the ruthless
mercenaries who stalk the Muslim lands on our behalf now that we have
created 100,000 more enemies for each of the 19 murderers of 9/11. Torturers
have had a good time, honing their sadism in America's black prisons – it
was appropriate that the US torture centre in Poland should be revealed on
this ninth anniversary – as have the men (and women, I fear) who perfect the
shackles and water-drowning techniques with which we now fight our wars. And
– let us not forget – every religious raver in the world, be they of the Bin
Laden variety, the bearded groupies in the Taliban, the suicide
executioners, the hook-in the arm preachers, or our very own pastor of
Gainesville.

And God? Where does he fit in? An archive of quotations suggests that just
about every monster created in or after 9/11 is a follower of this quixotic
redeemer. Bin Laden prays to God – "to turn America into a shadow  of
itself", as he told me in 1997 – and Bush prayed to God and Blair  prayed –
and prays – to God, and all the Muslim killers and an awful lot of  Western
soldiers and Dr (honorary) Pastor Terry Jones and his 30 (or it may  be 50,
since all statistics are hard to come by in the "war on terror")  pray to
God. And poor old God, of course, has had to listen to these prayers  as he
always sits through them during our mad wars. Recall the words  attributed
to him by a poet of another generation: "God this, God that,  and God the
other thing. 'Good God,' said God, 'I've got my work cut out'."  And that
was just the First World War...

Just five years ago – on the fourth anniversary of the twin
towers/Pentagon/Pennsylvania attacks – a schoolgirl asked me at a lecture in
a Belfast church whether the Middle East would benefit from more religion.
No – less religion! – I howled back. God is good for contemplation, not for
war. But – and here we are driven on to the reefs and hidden rocks which our
leaders wish us to ignore, forget and cast aside – this whole bloody mess
involves the Middle East; it is about a Muslim people who have kept their
faith while those Westerners who dominate them – militarily, economically,
culturally, socially – have lost theirs. How can this be, Muslims ask?
Indeed, it is a superb irony that the Rev Jones is a believer while the rest
of us – by and large – are not. Hence our books and our documentaries never
refer to Muslims vs Christians, but Muslims versus "The West".

And of course, the one taboo subject of which we must not speak – Israel's
relationship with America, and America's unconditional support for Israel's
theft of land from Muslim Arabs – also lies at the heart of this terrible
crisis in our lives. In yesterday's edition of The Independent, there was a
photograph of Afghan demonstrators chanting "death to America".  But in the
background, these same demonstrators were carrying a black banner  with a
message in Dari written upon it in white paint. What it actually said  was:
"The bloodsucking Zionist government regime and the Western  leaders who are
indifferent [to suffering] and have no conscience are again  celebrating the
new year by spilling the red blood of the Palestinians."

The message is as extreme as it is vicious – but it proves, yet again, that
the war in which we are engaged is also about Israel and "Palestine".  We
may prefer to ignore this in "the West" – where Muslims  supposedly "hate us
for what we are" or "hate our democracy"  (see: Bush, Blair and a host of
other mendacious politicians) – but this  great conflict lies at the heart
of the "war on terror". That is  why the equally vicious Benjamin Netanyahu
reacted to the atrocities of 9/11  by claiming that the event would be good
for Israel. Israel would now be  able to claim that it, too, was fighting
the "war on terror", that  Arafat – this was the now-comatose Ariel Sharon's
claim – is "our  Bin Laden". And thus Israelis had the gall to claim that
Sderot, under  its cascade of tin-pot missiles from Hamas, was "our ground
zero".

It was not. Israel's battle with the Palestinians is a ghastly caricature of
our "war on terror", in which we are supposed to support the last  colonial
project on earth – and accept its thousands of victims – because  the twin
towers and the Pentagon and United Flight 93 were attacked by 19  Arab
murderers nine years ago. There is a supreme irony in the fact that one
direct result of 9/11 has been the stream of Western policemen and spooks
who have travelled to Israel to improve their "anti-terrorist expertise"
with the help of Israeli officers who may – according to the United Nations
– be war criminals. It was no surprise to find that the heroes who gunned
down poor old Jean Charles de Menezes on the London Tube in 2005 had been
receiving "anti-terrorist" advice from the Israelis.

And yes, I know the arguments. We cannot compare the actions of evil
terrorists with the courage of our young men and women, defending our lives
– and sacrificing theirs – on the front lines of the 'war on terror".  There
can be no "equivalence". "They" kill innocents  because "they" are evil.
"We" kill innocents by mistake.  But we know we are going to kill innocents
– we willingly accept that we are  going to kill innocents, that our actions
are going to create mass graves of  families, of the poor and the weak and
the dispossessed.

This is why we created the obscene definition of "collateral damage".  For
if "collateral" means that these victims are innocent, then "collateral"
also means that we are innocent of killing them. It was not our wish to kill
them – even if we knew it was inevitable that we would. "Collateral"  is our
exoneration. This one word is the difference between "them"  and "us",
between our God-given right to kill and Bin Laden's  God-given right to
murder. The victims, hidden away as "collateral"  corpses, don't count any
more because they were slaughtered by us. Maybe it  wasn't so painful. Maybe
death by drone is a more gentle departure from this  earth, evisceration by
an AGM-114C Boeing-Lockheed air-to-ground missile  less painful, than death
by shards from a roadside bomb or a cruel suicider  with an explosive belt.

That's why we know how many died on 9/11 – 2,966, although the figure may be
higher – and why we don't "do body counts" on those whom we  kill. Because
they – "our" victims – must have no  identities, no innocence, no
personality, no cause or belief or feelings;  and because we have killed
far, far more human beings than Bin Laden and the  Taliban and al-Qa'ida.

Anniversaries are newspaper and television events. And they can have an
eerie  habit of coalescing together to create an unhappy memorial framework.
Thus  do we commemorate the Battle of Britain – a chivalric episode in our
history  – and the Blitz, a progenitor of mass murder, to be sure, but a
symbol of  innocent courage – as we remember the start of a war that has
torn our  morality apart, turned our politicians into war criminals, our
soldiers into  killers and our ruthless enemies into heroes of the
anti-Western cause. And  while on this gloomy anniversary the Rev Jones
wanted to burn a book called  the Koran, Tony Blair tried to sell a book
called A Journey. Jones said the  Koran was "evil"; Britons have asked
whether the Blair book should  be classified as "crime". Certainly, 9/11 has
moved into fantasy  when the Rev Jones can command the attention of the
Obamas and the Clintons  and the Holy Father and the even more Holy United
Nations. Whom the gods  would destroy...

11 Sep 2001 
The World Trade Centre and the Pentagon are hit by aeroplanes hijacked  by
al-Qa’ida terrorists. George Bush says that America will stand with  “all
those who want peace and security in the world”.

7 Oct 2001

The US and Britain launch air strikes against Afghanistan.

13 Nov 2001

The Northern Alliance liberates Kabul from the rule of the Taliban.

11 Jan 2002

The first prisoners arrive at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

9 Jan 2003

Top UN weapons inspector Hans Blix tells reporters that “we have now been
in [Iraq] for some two months and? we haven't found any smoking guns”.

15 Feb 2003

Protests are held across the world against impending war in Iraq.

20 Mar 2003

US-led coalition launches invasion of Iraq.

9 Oct 2003

Toppling of statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad is taken as symbol of
coalition  triumph.

11 Mar 2004

A series of bombs explode within minutes of each other on four commuter
trains  in Madrid, killing 191 people and wounding a further 1,841.

29 Apr 2004

Photographs emerge showing the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US soldiers at
Abu Ghraib,  inflaming anti-US feeling.

2 Oct 2004

Video footage appears of British hostage Kenneth Bigley being beheaded by  Iraqi militants.

2 Nov 2004

Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh is murdered after making a film about
violence against  women in Islamic societies.

7 Jul 2005

Four suicide bombers kill 52 passengers and injure almost 800 others in a
series of attacks on London’s transport network.

30 Sep 2005

A series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohamed are published in a Danish
newspaper. The pictures are reprinted elsewhere amid widespread outrage and
violent  protests in the Muslim world.

30 Dec 2006

Saddam Hussein is hanged in northern Baghdad for crimes against humanity.

21 Sep 2009 
A leaked report by Gen Stanley McChrystal, commander of US forces, suggests
that  the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan could be lost within a year
unless  there are significant increases in troops.

29 Nov 2009

A ban on building minarets is voted in by the Swiss public, reflecting a
hostile  attitude to the country’s rising Muslim minority.

21 Jan 2010 
43 per cent of Americans say they feel some negative prejudice towards
Muslims, according to a poll by Gallup.

1 Sep 2010

At the end of a month in which 295 civilians were killed by violence, Barack
Obama declares that the US combat mission in Iraq is at an end.

LINK: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-nine-years-two-wars-hundreds-of-thousands-dead-ndash-and-nothing-learnt-2076450.html
Sonja Karkar
Editor
Australians for Palestine
http://www.australiansforpalestine.com

Controlled Demolition

George van Houts 💻📣 @georgevanhouts Toen hij zich openlijk ging uitspreken over 9/11 werd hij op een dag naar de militaire medische keurin...