The case concerning the right of return of the Chagos Islanders, who were forcibly removed from their homeland by the British authorities between 1968 and 1973 to make way for the U.S. base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, is before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. In the near future, the judges will rule whether the case falls within the court’s jurisdiction. If it does, a verdict is expected by July or August.
Diego Garcia Atoll, Chagos Islands, British Indian Ocean Territory. WikiCommons
In the meantime, a petition to the Obama Administration is calling for the Chagossian exiles to be able to return to the outer islands of the Chagos Archipelago like Peros Banhos and Salomon, along with financial compensation and targeted employment programs. The petition has just been launched by the SPEAK Human Rights and Environmental Initiative. The organization was founded in 2010 by a small group of Mauritian lawyers, and is working with the Port Louis-based Chagos Refugees Group led by Olivier Bancoult.
The aim of the petition is to collect at least 25,000 signatures by April 4. A successful number of signatories on the “We the People” website will oblige White House staff to review the issue, seek expert opinion and provide an official response. Details can be found here.
On December 2nd, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi at her house in Burma (renamed Myanmar by the military government in 1989). It was truly a historic meeting. Aung San Suu Kyi had spent most of the past 22 years under house arrest, but was freed in November 2010. President Thein Sein, a former military general who was inaugurated in March 2011, has surprised Burmese citizens and the world by introducing tentative political and economic reforms and reaching out to Aung San Suu Kyi and the United States. United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meets with Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, December 2, 2011. Wikimedia Commons
Hillary Clinton’s visit was meant to encourage the government to commit to further reforms, as well as to demonstrate support for Aung San Suu Kyi and the democratic movement. Hillary Clinton and Aung San Suu Kyi gave a joint press conference on Aung San Suu Kyi’s porch, which ended with a heartfelt embrace. Clearly these two women feel great affection for each other, and for Burmese inside and outside the country, it was an ecstatic moment.
In the press conference and other recent statements, Aung San Suu Kyi emphasized the need for the rule of law and the cessation of civil war in Burma. If there were rule of law, meaning independent courts as well as protections for freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, there would be no more political prisoners.
Currently there are several hundred prisoners of conscience, including a number of women. In 2009, Hla Hla Win was sentenced to 27 years in prison for her undercover reporting on the second anniversary of the monks’ 2007 protests and other sensitive stories for an exile media outlet. In 2008, Nilar Thein was sentenced to 65 years in prison because of her leading role in non-violent political protests in 2007 and earlier. Her husband is also a political prisoner, and their young daughter must now be raised by her husband’s parents.
In the ethnic states, decades of civil war have resulted in widespread destruction and displacement, while countless girls and women have been raped. As Burmese women’s groups and the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for Burma have documented, Burma Army soldiers commit rape with impunity. While for decades, the Burmese military leadership has sought to force the country’s non-Burman populations into submission, Aung San Suu Kyi has called for a genuine union of Burma in which the rights of ethnic minorities would be respected. If she, the United States government, and others can persuade Burma’s military leadership that a federal system of government is viable, then genuine peace can be restored and the healing process can begin.
If all goes according to plan, Aung San Suu Kyi will run for parliament in an upcoming by-election for a number of vacant seats. She is encouraging other women to run as well. They are likely to push for more attention on health, education, poverty alleviation, and humanitarian assistance.
Should the reform process continue, Burma could at last move toward recognizing and valuing the contributions of all its citizens. That would really be something to celebrate.
Christina Fink is a professor at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs. An anthropologist who has focused on Burma for many years, she is the author of Living Silence in Burma: Surviving Under Military Rule (2009).
If “monk-politician” strikes you as somewhat of a contradiction… well, you might be right. Meet Samdhong Rinpoche, Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile. His title contains within it a sad reminder of the current plight of the Tibetans.
Samdhong Rinpoche discusses the politics of exile at the Elliott School of International Affairs, GW, July 14, 2011. Photo courtesy of Bradley Aaron.
Rinpoche began with an apology for his English skills, which proved to be better than many native speakers. He then declared that he was “not comfortable” with politics. (I am reminded of Plato’s hypothetical philosopher-kings, who would likely be not at all interested in the political position. Perhaps reluctance should be a prerequisite for public office!)
His lecture delved into the history of Tibet and its people. What struck me most, however, was Rinpoche’s constant reiteration of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s longstanding position: what is important is not political autonomy, but cultural and religious freedom.
“We are not concerned with who is ruling Tibet,” said Rinpoche, “but how they are ruling Tibet.”
During the Q&A session, a reporter asked how Samdhong Rinpoche felt about President Obama’s failure to meet with the Dalai Lama. With that blend of rigorous logic and holistic wisdom that so-perfectly characterizes Buddhism, Rinpoche pointed out that ascribing such a “failure” to the President before His Holiness had left the country was premature.
Two days later, at the White House:
His Holiness the Dalai Lama with President Barack Obama, July 16 2011. Flickr, Creative Commons
Majid Razvi received his B.A. in 2011 from Virginia Commonwealth University where he majored in Philosophy and Religious Studies. He has a strong interest in Tibetan epistemology, logic, and argumentation. He intends to pursue graduate study in philosophy.
A distinguished scholar and leading Tibetan public intellectual, Professor Samdhong Rinpoche has served as the first elected Tibetan Prime Minister in Exile from 2001 to 2011. He was professor of Tibetan studies and director of the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies in Varanasi, India, from 1971-1988. In 1990, he was a member of the Drafting Committee Constitution of the Future Polity of Tibet and Law for the exiled Tibetans. From 1991 to 1995 he was appointed by His Holiness the Dalai Lama as one of the deputies of the Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies and was later unanimously elected as its Chairman. Samdhong Rinpoche was born in eastern Tibet in 1939. He received his Geshe Lharampa degree in 1968 and his Ngarimpa degree in 1969.
Opening remarks by: Tashi Rabgey
Visiting Scholar, CIGA, George Washington University
Fellow in Public Intellectuals Program, National Committee on US-China Relations
Director, Tibet Sustainable Governance Program, University of Virginia
Thursday, July 14, 6:30 – 7:45 pm
Reception beginning at 6:00pm 1957 E Street NW, Room 213, Harry Harding Auditorium, The Elliott School of International Affairs
The Chagos Regagne conference at the Royal Geographical Society in London on May 19 focused on the possibility of establishing an eco-village and research station on one of the outer islands of the Chagos Archipelago, part of the disputed British Indian Ocean Territory. It turned out to be extremely interesting.
Source: Chagos International Support. This is an historic image. The MPA was officially recognized in April 2010.
The event was the brainchild of bestselling novelist, Philippa Gregory, and conservationist and adventurer, Ben Fogle.
But this wasn’t just a “scientific” conference for marine and other scientists. Instead, there were conservationists, lawyers, development geographers, cultural anthropologists and a good number of former U.K. Foreign Office personnel, including David Snoxell, the former British high commissioner to Mauritius, as well as John MacManus, the newly appointed administrator of the British Indian Ocean Territory.
Mauritius High Commissioner Abhimanyu Kundasamy attended. Mauritius is host to the largest group of Chagossian exiles and their descendants, around 3,000 people, who live in the capital, Port Louis, and surrounding areas. Mauritius wants the return of the archipelago. In 1965, under international law, the archipelago was illegally excised from its territory by the U.K. in order to provide the U.S. with a military base on Diego Garcia.
Also in attendance were around 150 Chagossians. They had travelled from Crawley and Manchester where they have settled since leaving Mauritius and the Seychelles and becoming British passport holders in 2002.
I met David Vine, of American University in Washington, D.C., who gave an excellent and impassioned summary of his book, Island of Shame, as well as sharing his more recent thoughts on why the U.S. prefers isolated, unpopulated islands for its military bases. Put simply, it’s all a question of “no people, no problems.”
On April 4, 2011, the Asia Society and the Japan Society co-sponsored a Japan town hall meeting in New York City to discuss questions related to the recent earthquake. Several prominent experts constituted the panel which was moderated by Fred Katayama. Topics and questions for discussion were formulated by Jin Sato of the University of Tokyo and visiting democracy and development fellow at the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies, Princeton University.
The event was taped and can be viewed by clicking on the image below.
Questions were clustered into three areas in order to generate broad discussion about the disaster’s impact on Japanese politics, economics and social life, as well as to assess the extent of the uniqueness and historical significance of the changes for the Japanese people, and for Japan as a nation:
1. Japan’s Reliance on Nuclear Energy: The Politics of Risk Sharing
Japan has only 20 percent self-sufficiency in primary energy supply and more than half of that is nuclear power. Historically, the main rationale for advocating nuclear power was to enable Japan to be more self-sufficient. More than 30 years ago, during the incidents of “oil shock” and petrochemical shortage in the 1970s, the Japanese people learned the lesson of dependence on fossil fuels. Given the magnitude of the ongoing catastrophe, questions such as these arise:
Is it time to question Japan’s dependence on nuclear energy as the primary domestic source of electric power?
Given this kind of catastrophe, is it appropriate for Japan to allow the private sector to continue to manage this kind of high-risk operation?
What should be the role of the government?
How do we democratically control high-risk operations?
Will a growing awareness of the inequitable distribution of risk lead to the Japanese public questioning of the reliance on nuclear energy?
2. The Future of the Japan Brand: Economic Fallout of the Disaster
Historically, the myth of superior Japanese technology has prevailed and even in this tragic series of events, the international community was shocked to discover the failure of the “failsafe” Japanese nuclear technology and safety mechanisms. Questions include:
Will this incident signal the beginning of the end to the myth of Japanese technological superiority?
What will be the impact of the current nuclear crisis on Japan’s reputation as a high-tech exporter and more generally on the “Japan brand”?
Safety. Flickr/Jonathan Warner.Barbara Rose Johnston, an environmental anthropologist at the Center for Political Ecology at the University of California in Santa Cruz, prompts us to consider what we mean by “safe” when it comes to radiation and the nuclear industry.
She says:
As the world’s nations reassess nuclear power operations and refine energy development plans, now — more than ever — we need to aggressively tackle this question: How do we define the word “safe”?
This event next week might be of interest to readers in DC:
Haiti, One Year On: Realizing Country Ownership in a Fragile State
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
B-340 Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC
Speakers will include:
Angela Bruce Raeburn, Senior Policy Advisor for Humanitarian Response, Oxfam America, Moderator
Robert Maguire, Chair, Haiti Working Group, U.S. Institute of Peace, Associate Professor of International Affairs, Trinity Washington University, Discussant
Thomas C. Adams, Special Coordinator to Haiti, U.S. State Department, Discussant
Russell Porter, Director, USAID Haiti Task Force, Discussant
Raymond C. Offenheiser, President, Oxfam America, Discussant
The distinguished panelists will discuss the reality of the situation in Haiti, examine lessons learned from the past year, and explore how to improve country ownership as we move forward towards a stable and productive Haiti. The discussion will focus on how U.S. foreign aid to Haiti is being delivered while seeking ways of strengthening the efficacy of future U.S. assistance.
The roundtable will include ample time for questions from the audience and will be followed by a reception.
Imagine that you live in a region that comprises Washington, DC, and Maryland (roughly the size of Haiti). Then imagine that you are one of many experiencing extreme poverty, lack of education, and other forms of deprivation. If that’s not bad enough, then imagine an earthquake of the magnitude that struck Haiti in January. Then picture 1.3 million people living in tents in the DC area.
With this thought exercise, Ray Offenheiser, President and CEO of Oxfam America, opened his talk on October 20 at the Elliott School of International Affairs of George Washington University. His presentation was titled “Let’s Start with Haiti: Making President Obama’s New Vision for Development Work.” It was sponsored by the Elliott School’s Culture in Global Affairs (CIGA) Program. Robert E. Maguire was moderator. Maguire is associate professor of international affairs at Trinity Washington University in DC; Chair of the Haiti Working Group of the United States Institute of Peace; and a Visiting Fellow with CIGA. To watch a video of this talk, click here.
Ray Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America; Photo credit: Oxfam America
After that stark opening, Offenheiser turned to considering President Obama’s new approach to international development in the context of Haiti. Speaking at the United Nations in September, President Obama argued that the United States needs to change the way it handles development aid. This speech proposed the first ever global development policy of the United States and offered the only major rethinking of the approach established in 1961 by President Kennedy to shape development during the Cold War.
In this new approach, Offenheiser explained, America is redefining development. Instead of controlling development through a focus on aid, it will take a comprehensive approach to sustainable development. America is now poised to focus on results, especially long-term results that support institutions rather than providing assistance in perpetuity. Broad-based economic growth is a goal through support to market infrastructure. Mutual accountability between the US government and partner countries is the new goal for bilateral aid relationships.
Offenheiser hailed Obama’s vision as breathtaking and most welcome in its emphasis on country ownership: countries must own the process of development, the investments, and the partnerships. The rationale is that poverty can only be solved by poor people and their governments, in partnership with other countries. In the past, too little attention was given to the hopes, dreams, and plans of people in developing countries. Aid projects were likely to be driven by earmarking in the US. From now on, aid will go toward investing more in country-designed ideas.
Making President Obama’s New Vision for Development Work A Presentation by Ray Offenheiser, President, Oxfam America
This talk will consider President Obama’s new approach to development and explore its impact on how international agencies, governments, and NGOs seek to assist Haiti. Drawing on experience in other countries, the speaker will also present Oxfam’s view on good development practice.
anthropologyworks 