History lessons for Chávez

One day he signs a deal to export petrol to Iran, the following one he walks the red carpet and becomes the spotlight at the Venice Film festival, and the next one he announces a weapon deal with Russia.

Seeing a man frequently described as a “dictator” by the American media on such close terms with Hollywood director Oliver Stone, was without a doubt interesting and controversial.

But it is not the first time or the last that Venezuela´s president Hugo Chavez steals the headlines. Demonized by some and adored by others, his actions often cause clashes between opponents and defendants.

Just recently he was criticized for an educational law which requires schools to base their teaching on “the Bolivarian Doctrine”. But perhaps what Mr. Chavez should do if he plans an educational reform is to reinforce history lessons, in particular concerning the country´s national hero Simón Bolívar.

Bolivar is rightly invoked today as the father of Latin American integration. He fought passionately for the cooperation between new republics. But what Mr Chavez seems to forget is that Bolivar admired the government of United States and Britain.

Unlike Chavez, Bolivar was not himself a caudillo. He believed in the institutionalisation of authority. But his name has often been misused by authoritarian rulers of less noble qualities.

Chavez might considers himself an encarnation of Bolivar, but there is no reason to believe that Bolivar, the patrician aristocrat who admired British parliamentary, the man who tried to sell his mines to British investors, would have felt represented by Chavez´s military populism at all.

The aftermath of a civil war

As Sri Lanka celebrates the end of a 26 year civil war, the hidden costs and high casualties become public despite the government´s effort to keep them hidden.

 

Was Mahinda Rajapaska, the president of Sri Lanka being sarcastic when he said that Tamil Tigers were defeated without causing civilian casualties or did he really expect no one to have access to the many hospitals guarded by soldiers and police were thousands of casualties are being hidden away from public view?

 

Hiding the true scale of the disaster form the public eye, fabricating figures, promoting a don´t talk policy and barring access to the hospitals is surely not going to improve the conditions of a population that have witnessed almost three decades of bloody civil war.

 The methods by which the 26 year insurgency was finally defeated are  still questionable. Behind the celebrations of victory over the Tamil Tigers lies the hidden human cost of Sri Lanka’s final unslaught. Sri Lanka pursued a military offensive up until the end, killing thousands of civilians who were on the way. According to the unofficial UN figures, more than 8000 civilians were killed in the last four months of the war and more than 17000 wounded.

It can be argued however that the rebels themselves defined the kind of war they would fight by using suicide bombings and often holding civilians as human shields, leaving the government with few other alternatives if any at all.

 

Hiding the consequences is not helping 

But now that the Tamil Tiger rebels have been defeated and the civil conflict has come to a brutal end, what is the reason for bringing more pain to the civilians caught in Tamil territory?

 The government has rejected UN calls to allow aid agencies immediate access to Tamil refugee camps under the excuse that the authorities first had to identify any remaining rebel fighters in the camps.

 The truth is that they dont want the world to see the magnitude of the disaster and the many children who suffered horrendously and disproportinatley.

 Is it vanity, pride, or fear? Whatever it is stopping Sri Lanka´s government from receiving aid will only increase the already high death toll. Health workers and human rights activists say that the country´s medical services can´t  handle the huge numbers of children that need treatment.

 Thousands of civilians have sustained burn, blast and bullet wounds, many require surgery, even amputation.

 But the government is determined to follow a “keep it under wraps” policy. Patients or relatives at hospitals are not allowed to be interviewed without the permission of the hospital director.

 Unfortunately, I fear this is one of the many cases where the UN can go as far as to observe, pressure and condemn the war strategies and the treatment given to injured civilians. But as it is the rule for most developing countries, it will remain as a mere condemnation and civilians will keep on suffering.

Anyway, why should the rest of the world care of what happens in Sri Lanka? No oil, no terrorist threaten, no concern…

From Hero to Zero

In past times, soldiers were regarded as heroes. Statues and memorials were built to glorify them. They enjoyed prestige and recognition from government and civilians. Today, they have to queue for hours to receive health assistance and are even seen by some as villains.

As wars become less and less popular in the UK, soldiers seem to be suffering the consequences. Today, it is hard to picture in Britain a wounded soldier returning home greeted by hundreds of proud citizens in a patriotic parade, as it is expected in the USA. However, it is not hard to run into an anti-war demonstration demanding the withdrawal of armed forces and condemning British invasions.

The UK government has clearly not succeeded in providing civilians a justified reason for their presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and as casualties increase, so do the protests. But whether the current wars are justified or not, it is the soldiers who seem to be paying the price.

“In the U.S.A, you would get up rated for wearing a military uniform while in Britain it is different, we can not even wear our uniforms for example in the train because we are afraid that people will give us a bad look,” said Adam Cox, a 25 year old British soldier who was injured in Afghanistan one year ago.

As if dealing with an injury or a posttraumatic disease was not enough, some of them, mainly the veterans, have to wait to receive health treatment. Lance Corporal Johnson Beharry, Britain’s highest-decorated serving soldier even told the BBC it was “disgraceful” that some veterans struggled to get treatment. He personally had to wait three hours in hospital to see an NHS doctor about his trauma.

The e-true serviceman story

While soldiers in the UK serve the army, they enjoy first class treatment, but the truth is that once they are discharged , they are left on their own to cope with their physical injuries, posttraumatic disorders and depressions.

In theory, the government has special pensions to guarantee the welfare of ex servicemen and their family and as a policy, military veterans have a priority treatment in the NHS. But this is nothing more than an empty promise. In real life, they are far from receiving the treatment they need.

New cases of mental disorders have been diagnosed and are likely to increase. If the UK is determined to keep troops in Afghanistan and Iraq for a couple of more years, ministers need to understand that the duty of care towards injured soldiers lasts a lifetime.

Questions and contradictions

Policies need to be review. Questions need to be answer.

How can you explain that a serviceman who is away for 6 months in Afghanistan is forced to pay taxes in the UK? Taxes which he clearly does not benefit from.

Why do servicemen at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan are forced to share a hospital ward with enemy fighters who could have fired the shots that injured them, or killed their friends?

Why is it that the well being of wounded and veteran soldiers depend mainly on charities? What will happen when civilians reduce contributions to those charities because of a financial crisis?

Why is it that the soldiers have to pay the costs of absurd wars just to find out they don´t have the fame nor the care anymore?

Is this the end of the banker´s era?

The day bankers never imagined would come, when they would have to give account of their management to the public has finally come

 For decades, the heads of the world’s largest banks could make decisions that compromised large sums of money and receive heavy bonuses without any questions, but today the game is over for some, or at least that’s what it seems.

If the financial heads thought they could get away with millionaire earnings while the world sank paying for their excesses and lack of regulation, they were mistaken. As the banks were rescued through a scheme that involved public debt, at least in England,citizens have all the right to know how the federal bail out money (coming from their taxes) is being used, and even more, to demand an explanation of why bonuses are still paid despite poor performances.

 

The million dollar questions

Given the current climate, bank bosses will not face an easy interrogation. Public anger keeps growing as the financial crisis turns deeper and more bank practices are revealed.

They will have to explain and convince why they were enjoying huge rewards when times were good but now want to share losses and seek public assistance when times are bad. Does this mean profits should be private but losses socialized? If that is the case, I would be more than tempted to become a banker.

Another question that strikes me is when did they see this coming and why they did not stop it then? Because if they did not realise the system was about to collapse it proves they had a poor understanding of the market. But bankers are not exactly characterized by being naïve, so I am much more convinced by the idea that they saw it coming, but wanted to make the last profits out of it before all taxpayers were forced to pay for it. And finally the failure of banks to pass on interest rates is totally unacceptable. Why is it that they can still have a final saying when the government (and therefore taxpayers) are now shareholders?

 

The controversial scheme of the bonus

Despite all the questions and criticism that surround the banking directors, it is the increase in bonus payment what angers the public the most. Originally, bonus were created to provide an incentive but evolved into a pay scheme in most banks, insurance companies and brokers. From call centre workers to directors, employees are given an incentive to achieve targets, which can be paid in cash, or in shares. In accordance to these rules, there should be circumstances when no bonus is paid, but the truth is that has rarely happened in the last years.

Bonus payments in the financial sector have doubled in 8 years from 6.5 bn pounds in 2001 to 16 bn pounds in 2008.  Critics of the bonus culture also claim that it creates an incentive for individuals to take risks for their own benefit. But what has created a more than justified indignation is the fact that after asking for a billion pound rescue plan, some Banks are in fact considering spending millions in bonuses. Royal Bank of Scotland for instance, which is now 68% publicly owned, is considering spending 1bn in bonus. Shouldn´t the current shareholders (taxpayers) have a saying on that?

Under great pressure and a clear evidence of the mistakes, bankers on the hot seat are not expected to do other than say sorry, but of course that´s not a difficult word for one who has already  filled his pockets, ask Fred Goodwin about it.

 

 

Brothers in Arms

Every year, we hear how many soldiers are injured coming back from Afghanistan but what are their stories? Myself and two coleagues, journalism students are doing a short current affairs story about injured servicemen. If you have a story that you would like to share that we are hopping filming in the next week – 9th to the 12th February -, please get in contact, we are based at the University of Westminster. We are looking forward to hearing from you…

Music in the war on terror

Many of the legendary rock bands used their music to protest peacefully against war and government abuses. Ironically, today it is being used at high levels to torture prisoners

A collective of bands and artists have come together to demand the US stops using their work as an instrument of war.

In the frame of the 60 th anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights, artists such as Massive Attack, Bruce Springsteen, Rage Against the Machine, Mathew Herbert and the Magic Numbers will include minutes of silence at their concerts to protest against the tactic.

“What we’re talking about here is people in a darkened room, physically inhibited by handcuffs, bags over the heads and music blaring at them. That is nothing but torture,” said musician David Gray.

According to the legal charity Reprieve, many of the detainees have reported being subjected to listening to loud hard rock music for hours, in an attempt to break them.

“There was loud music. Slim Shady and Dr Dre for 20 days… plenty lost their minds”, Binyam Mohammed, the British resident held in Guantánamo told the director of legal charity Reprieve.

“There was a lot of Nine Inch Nails. I couldn´t tell you how many times I heard Queen´s We Will Rock You, said Donald Vance, another former prisoner in Guantánamo.

 

Songs as weapons

The tactic has been common in the U.S. so called war on terror, with forces systematically using loud music on detainees in Raq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.

One of the reasons for using loud music as an instrument of torture is that it leaves no marks in the body.

Some prisoners have said it can be even worse than more traditional methods of physical torture.

The UN and the European Court of human rights have condemned the tactic and have already banned the use of music at interrogations.

Reprieve launched a campaign urging the British musicians to voice their anger and protest against the use of music as torture.

 The campaign, Zero dB, is backed by the Musicians Unions and attempts to stop the practice. It will feature minutes of silence during concerts and festivals while a petition will call on governments and the UN to uphold their obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture.

 

Torture Playlist

Reprieve revealed that Enter Sandman  by Metallica, Bodies  by Drowning Pool, Hells Bells  by AC/DC, I Love You from the Barney & Friends children’s television show and Born in the USA  by Bruce Springsteen were among the songs more frequently used at loud volume to torture prisoners.

 Other bands like Aerosmith, Don McLean,  Limp Bizkit, Meat Loaf, Rage Against the Machine, Red Hot Chili Peppers and even Britney Spears were frequently played  at detantion sites  according to the British organization.

Bruce Springsteen has already voiced anger at how his music has been devalued in this fashion

 

Nearly 20 years ago, US armed forces used loud music to drive Panama´s president to surrender. A tactic was born. Since then, music played at high volumes is a common practice by the US army to torture detainees  

The tactic of using music as a torture tool first came to mainstream attention in 1989, during the US invasion of Panama, as part of George Bush Sr.’s War on Drugs. 

The target of the invasion was Manuel Noriega, president of Panama and associate of the famous cocaine dealer Pablo Escobar and the Medellin Cartel.

The dictator had been an ally of the CIA and US government in their clandestine operations against various Central and South American left wing guerrilla groups. 

American troops landed in Panama with the intention of deposing Noriega.  The dictator went to ground in Panama’s Vatican Embassy.

US forces surrounded the building, but did not dare to physically attack for fear of ruining relations with the Vatican.  Instead, troops bombarded the embassy with constant loud heavy rock music in an effort to drive Noriega out. 

Music of Guns N’ Roses and Elvis Presley, was played at maximum volume over loudspeakers.

The effort lasted days before complaints from the Vatican forced the operation to stop the military sonic experiment.

Noriega subsequently surrendered and a new tactic was born.

 

Evolution

In 1993, the military sound system was used again for the siege of Mount Carmel in Waco, Texas.

The operation, led by the FBI, targeted David Koresh and other followers of the Branch Davidian sect.  

For 51 days, the Branch Davidians were subjected to sessions of loud music in order to disturb their sleeping patterns and break morale inside the camp.

The music was just one element of the FBI’s psychological operations to break the siege.

As the siege wore on, the event turned into a global media circus that ended with the deaths of many Branch Davidians as Mount Carmel went up in televised flames .

Music in the war on terror

Music has also been used as a weapon during the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Before the military attack on Fallujah in 2004, US troops engaged in psychological operations in an attempt to weaken resistance. 

The operations lasted for three weeks before the tanks and troops headed to the city, and involved the use of high powered speakers mounted on tanks.  

The army played AC/DC, Metallica, Led Zeppelin, Eminem and Barney the Purple Dinosaur at high volume for long stretches of time to disorientate and confuse the enemy, in the hope of flushing out insurgents or weakening their ability to fight . 

In the so called War on Terror, music has been an instrument in many ways. It has even become a common practice to subject enemies to loud music in detention centres and interrogation rooms in an attempt to gain information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assisting suicide: a right or a crime?

Most of the countries in the world prosecute relatives who assist the terminally ill to commit suicide.

 However, recent cases had led to an important political debate on the issue. What was once considered an offence, could now be regarded as a necessary action to exercise a human right: the right to die with dignity.

English Daniel James was 23 when he decided to end his life at Dignitas. The rugby player was paralyzed when a scrum collapsed in a training ground accident. Before travelling to the assisted suicide clinic with his parents, he had three failed suicide attempts.

 Besides the seriousness of the offence and the fact that there was sufficient evidence,  the Crown Prosecution service announced it would take no action against the family sending a clear message that future similar cases might be ruled in the same direction.

 You can not please all

However, the decision no to prosecute in this particular case is not enough. There needs to be some clarity on the “law” at some stage.

 The government has to make up its mind whether it will or will not prosecute the families for assisting. It can`t take decisions case by case depending on how moving the story is and the circumstances.

 A bill proposing a new legal framework for assisted suicide is expected next year in England. The controversial law criminalising assisted suicide which has not been changed since 1961 might suffer a reverse.

 Anti-euthanasia and pro life campaigners oppose the view but the number of those demanding the right to die with dignity is growing fast.

 Last month, voters of he US state of Washington legalized assisted suicide, joining the list of  safe havens for the practice which includes the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Switzerland and the US state of Oregon.

 Everything points to an official recognition that the law will no longer be acted upon by prosecuting authorities in case of terminal and serious illness.

 Just like abortion and every other moral issue, some will be unhappy with the final decision.

Zimbawe: another ignored call for help

Zimbawe´s devastating situation is a desperate call for help. International condemnation is turning into frustration as no actions are taken while Zimbabwe slides into chaos

With hundreds dying of a controllable disease, hunger stalking the land, a broken economy, soldiers rampage and an increasing humanitarian crisis, Zimbawe´s scenario could not get any worse.

Despite having some of the greatest diamond fields, people in Zimbawe have suffered terribly from malnutrition and poor health conditions, having the lowest life expectancy in the world- 34 for woman and 37 for men- and an unemployment rate of 80%.

A current Cholera outbreak, which has claimed 600 lives, has leaded to deserved condemnations from international figures and organizations against Robert Mugabe´s regime.

But condemnation is not enough for a country where people are still forced to drink contaminated water and are dying of starvation. The cholera outbreak is just the result of miserable health and humanitarian conditions by a corrupt government deaf to international condemnations.

Abuses and human right violations are the every day bread in Zimbawe. The discovery of rich diamond fields have leaded to police abuses against illegal leaders in what has become a new version of the “blood diamonds” that once fuelled conflicts in Congo and Sierra Leona.

The Question of Intervention

Zimbabweans are suffering and the world is witnessing.  Intervention should mean removing Mugabe from office immediately. What needs to be done could not be clearer, the question is who and how?

Mugabe is a “legal” president who was re elected earlier this year in a heavily disputed election he stole from Morgan Tsvangirai and the Movement for Democratic Change. He has shown a desire to remain in power despite several international condemnations, so a peaceful resignation is too much to expect.

Some believe that Zimbabweans starving forces should kick him out. Others have gone further arguing that African governments should interfere and take decisive action to push him out of power. And there’s also those who have called on the United Nations to urgently take action and indict Mugabe in the International Criminal Court.

It is the UN´s purpose to promote justice, human dignity and the well-being of all people. Therefore, it should justify the use of outside forces under the new doctrine of ‘responsibility to protect’. Further inaction is inexcusable and will mean tolerating even more abuses in a suffering country.

The world has sat idly watching Mugabe brutalising his people in one way or another. International community has allowed devastating violations in an attempt not to interfere with a country’s sovereignity. But it`s about time the UN steps in with actions rather than words.

It is the time to set an example and send a message  that such abuses will not be tolerated.  We have already allowed too many injustices, let’s not repeat the same mistake. But as usual,  in 2 months, this whole situation will be forgotten, the headlines will be others and Africans will keep on dying.

 

Towards the colombianization of Mexico

Mexico is being hit by an unprecedented wave of violence in the middle of a drug war. For the mexicans, the situation is already terrifying. But for foreigners, the panorama is not inviting at all.

The image of Mexico worldwide can´t be worse. It has now achieved international notoriety as a major narcotics trafficking center. Whenever Mexico appears in the headlines of the world´s newspapers or websites is to report drug related murders or kidnaps.

Ever since Felipe Calderon declared war to curb drug-related killings in December 2006, more than 5000 people have died. The number is astonishing, specially if we compare it to the estimated 4200 US soldiers who have lost their life since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

With more than 36,000 soldiers deployed across the country, combats between drug cartels and policemen taking place daily and the number of victims continuously increasing, the scenery is not exactly “tourist friendly”.

Even though official numbers do not show an important drop of tourism, the negative image this war is creating is evident. International journalists are now publishing more books about drug cartels in Mexico than ever and movies on the subject will aslo damage the international perception.

The fact that more and more police officers turn out to be involved exposes the high level of corruption mexicans knew existed, but foreigners ingonred.

The government will try to convince nationals and the world that this is just a difficult “phase” to ensure a better future. Whether it turns out to be true or not, the image of a dangerous and unsafe Mexico will not fade easily from foreigner’s mind.

Mexico is condemned to be immediately associated with drugs the way Colombia is. Even though it might not affect the country in monetary terms, as the Tourism Minister assured, in terms of reputation there’s too much to be lost.

The fact that Mexico is the neighbour of the most powerful country in the world attracts even more attention. This is not one of those wars in a far away country that nobody seems to care about. American’s interests are involved, and that means that international media is watching.

Whether it is possible to win a war against drug cartels infiltrated all across the country I don´t know. But what I do know is that Mexico’s image throughout the world has suffered irreversible damages.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!