House votes to withold UN dues!!!

I literally am shocked in disbelief at what our House Representatives have just done! They passed a bill* that would "withhold up to half of the country's dues from the United Nations if the world body does not cut its bureaucracy, redirect its budget and tighten its accountability", as it requires "the creation of whistle-blower protections, an independent oversight board with broad investigative authority and an ethics office to thwart possible conflicts of interest". Blackmail? This is not they way I thought "politics" worked for some reason. I thought all involved parties come together to discuss issues, and resolve conflicts... not issue ultimatums that a democratic body (in which we play a large part) must suddenly transform itself to our demands?!!

Kofi Annan, General Secretary of the United Nations, recently established an independent review board to recommend reform decisions for the U.N. and is acting on them now. For our representatives to do something like this, is just a spit in the face to a world body of nations... this definately cannot win us any favor in global nations view!

Kofi Annan warned that the House bill could "jeopardize" his own effort to streamline the U.N. bureaucracy at a summit on U.N. reform for world leaders in September, and it said he "believes that U.S. engagement and leadership in this process is very important but does not feel that withholding dues is a productive route to achieving reform."

This was largely a Republican effort, here is what they had to say in their own words:

Mike Pence (R-Ind.). Rep. Eric I. Cantor (R-Va.) said "bloated bureaucracy" and "anti-Israel bias" at the United Nations "goes against the grain of common sense in America." Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), issued a statement... saying that the United Nations needs "greater oversight, accountability and transparency" to "prevent another scandal like Oil-for-Food."

Let me just remind everyone, from this common misunderstanding... The U.N. is NOT a nation. It is a global body of nations, and the U.S. is the most influential leader in it! To somehow point blame of "bloated bureaucracy", "anti-Israel bias", and particularly the "Oil-for-Food program scandal" is misdirected... since we, the United States, as a leading body in the U.N. are just as much to blame ourselves. There have been several reports to suggest that the U.S. was involved, or at least largely knew of the Oil-for-Food problems and did nothing to stop it. To point the blame collectively at every other nation represented in the U.N., instead of taking responsibility ourselves and working through these issues of reform through the proper diplomatic means... there is no hope for the U.S. to forge any leadership role in directing this epitome of democratic governance.
* article on washingtonpost.com, see bugmenot.com to access full story

Leaders Agree on Debt Relief for Poor Nations - NYT

Leaders Agree on Debt Relief for Poor Nations - New York Times: "The world's richest countries agreed Saturday on a historic deal to write off more than $40 billion of debt owed by the poorest nations. The debt relief package backed by finance ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations is part of a British-led effort to lift Africa out of poverty." (bugmenot.com for full story)

This is great news! I'm going to write my congressional leaders now and pass my appreciation on to them. The next step comes in early July, when the G8 will meet to vote on "boosting international development aid by $50 billion a year" to Africa now that their debt has been canceled, then increased fair trade relations are needed of course - as that is essentially the only way modern nations can develop - especially those on the African continent. Bush's current stance is that increased aid to Africa is 'not in the budget', and his $680-million concession of food aid to the Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somalia (in respone to Blair's visit) was already budgeted for. There is concern that the funds would go to governments in Africa that are still corrupt and be wasted. Note: the current issue of People magazine has a note about Brad Pitt's committment to the ONE Campaign to end poverty in Africa.

A message from the ONE campaign

Dear Friend, This summer, President Bush and seven other leaders from the world's wealthiest nations will gather to discuss the fate of the ONE billion people around the world living in extreme poverty. In early July, the Group of Eight (G8) will discuss the major social, political and economic conditions that contribute to extreme poverty.  There are historic plans in place to beat poverty in Africa and the poorest countries. This is our chance to support our leaders in making these plans a reality. Let's raise our voices as ONE to Make Poverty History. Tell your friends about ONE today! Your voice is already making a difference.  Yesterday's Washington Post featured ONE  and our efforts to build "a permanent big-tent movement" to urge President Bush and other world leaders to take action at the G8 and lead an entire generation out of poverty.  Together we can build this movement.

Iraq is no Vietnam - in the Media

I was just watching the video on DemocracyNow.org about Unseen Pictures, Untold Stories: How The U.S. Press Has Sanitized The War in Iraq and encourage you to all check it out! Amy Goodman has a great video interview (with several viewpoints presented) and transcript examining media coverage in Iraq. Several reporters took a survey of the 6 major national newspapers and Times and Newsweek and found that, none showed any dead American soldiers (except for 1 with a blanket covering him) but did show Iraqi dead (but rarely a back-story) which creates an "obscured view of the cost of war". The journalists who are there live though speak of seeing and experiencing a much different reality than what is presented in the media. It is true that American newspapers naturally tend to draw away from graphic photos in newspapers (even car accidents) compared to other countries, but there is still a great disparity in what is presented.

Aaron Glantz, in returning the U.S. from Iraq in May of 2004 found "that people here ... were not talking about Fallujah. They didn't know about Fallujah. People knew about the Abu Ghraib prison scandal because of the photos that were played on CBS News and published in The New Yorker magazine, but people had no idea about what happened in Fallujah, ... the mass slaughter of civilians at the hands of U.S. military, all shown on satellite television to everyone throughout the country." Glantz said he also felt threatened or "targeted" when U.S. soldiers would point their guns at him, as a journalist, perhaps because they were young, scared and trigger-happy in a foreign land, yet he never felt threatened among the Iraqis.

Glantz also criticized, "by not informing people, we make them -- we infantilize them so that they are shocked when they hear there's torture, and they are shocked when something terrible happens that does get covered". When this does happen though, we do have the child-like tendency to want to hide our heads under the covers and think, "no - it can't be, it must be exaggerated" when actually it's the truth all along that's been exaggerated d into a more ideal reality that's easier for us Americans to digest on a day-to-day basis.

James Rainey, who wrote "Unseen Pictures, Untold Stories" in the L.A. Times said about David Leeson whose photos where shown in the story, "he is a terrific journalist and person. He said -- he -- the way he felt when he was working in Iraq was that 'if I am hurting inside, then I want you,' that means the reader, the viewer, the audience, 'I want you to hurt inside. And if I am brought to tears, I want you to be brought to tears, too.'", concluding that he agrees also, and sometimes it feels like you are throwing a tantrum and trying to say, "Pay attention! Pay attention! People are dying here!"

It's been said that the photos coming out of the Vietnam war helped to end it. James Rainey in the interview adds, "the photographs had played an important role, but that really the American public sort of led in that regard". So not only does the news and photos need to get out, but people need to do something about it for it to have an effect.

This all reminds me of the quote Goodman said at the Peace & Justice Expo here in Omaha when describing the difference between Fox News and Al Jazeera - "Fox shows where the missles take off, Al Jazeera shows where they land."

- Brian Wiese

April 29th - US & UN was a Success!

April 29th Speakers and AID Officers
Originally uploaded by aidomaha.

Over 70 people turned out on the Friday night before finals to the UNO campus not to study for approaching tests, but to more accurately understand the sometimes tense relationship between the United States and United Nations in international politics. With John Bolton's nomination for US ambassador to the UN under hot debate on his suitability to represent the US as chief international diplomat, and the current plans for reform initiated by Kofi Annan for the United Nations - there was a lot of media attention on the UN at the time.

Mike Kelly of Creighton University open up the meeting and relaxed the crowded atmosphere with a bit of an ice breaker. He asked everyone to check the shirt collar of the person beside them, to see where the shirt was made. The countries rattled off, El Salvador, Canada, China, United States, Taiwan, ... the point was made, "we live in an interdependent world".

Kelly proceeded into a discussion of Force Theory over the course of recent history, in which there has been a shift in military doctrine to target "emerging" instead of "imminent" threats. The last preemptive strike by the US was on December 7, 1941 - upon which shortly there after the UN outlawed such actions and the Nuremburg trials found judgment that "world order is best achieved by restraining the military options of states". Israel was criticized and condemned for sending F16s to blow up a nuclear reactor in Iraq years ago, by the UN and the US even. The world did not agree with a "preemptive strike" strategy such that "any state could attack another" and because if a state is weak, they'll simply look to nuclear weapons "as a deterrent" to a possible invasion by their mightier neighbors - perhaps on the other side of the globe.

Kelly recalls that, with the Bush administration's disregard for international law (e.g. Kyoto Protocol, Antiballistic missiles, International Criminal Court, disregard of Geneva Convention restrictions against torture and standards of treatment in Guantanamo Bay) - the U.S. is now reaping the whirlwind of lowest regard by foreign nations in decades. If the U.S. wants to lead and be respected in the U.N. - it needs to embrace legitimacy instead of going it alone in the world. John Bolton (which Kelly analogized to "Oscar the Grouch" on sesame Street), with his history of character and actions of pure disregard for the U.N., doesn't seem to be quite the answer we need to put U.S. and U.N. relations back on track.

Panelists discuss US role in the UN
Originally uploaded by aidomaha.

Dr. Sajda Qureshi of the University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO) drew upon the international interdependence on technology in our globalized society, and how it flattens the landscape of distant societies and people to "work in interesting ways" while mentioning there is a perception gap in what the U.N. does and what Americans think it does. Dr. Qureshi has worked with the U.N. on economic development, and feels that one of the issues for people to understand about the U.N. is that it is simply such a large organization doing so many things in the world, it's nearly impossible to keep up with it all. All Kofi Annan can say, is that "the U.N. is bringing peace and development to this world" but can't possibly explain the details of every program. With the allegations of rape in the Congo and other reprehensible acts by U.N. employees, the U.N. is still making a profoundly positive difference in the world in many places by increasing food production, providing telecommuncation infrastructure, and is key capacity building by teaching people to do something productive.

Qureshi said the perception of the U.N. in the U.S. is off target. The U.N. is a run by a collection of world leaders in a very diplomatic way, and many of these countries have a hard time agreeing and coming to terms on things. Look at the U.S. bipartisan system and it's troubles finding an agreement, then try to multiply that to the scale of the world and the picture becomes quite distraught - but still a lot amazingly gets done, on a shoestring budget to no larger than that of the state of Arkansas is used to support world-wide endeavors.

In her closing remarks, Qureshi turned the tables on the Bolton nomination, regarding it as a "useful appointment for China, Mexico, Brazil and big emerging economies" ready to reap the benefits of globalization, while the U.S. is stuck fighting about needs for security to prevent against threats real or perceived.

Large Crowd in Gallery Room
Originally uploaded by aidomaha.

Dr. Wogugu of UNO also played along into the emphasis on security in the U.S. perception of the U.N. instead of it's development efforts. He mentioned the story of a plumber who came by and said, "I have no respect for the U.N" and Dr. Wogugu, a 20 year veteran of the U.N., could only see that this must be based on a misunderstanding perceived from the press on what the U.N. does in the world. He mentioned that often times, when member states in the U.N. do not get their own personal agendas through (read U.S. on security - and right to "preemptive strike"), they turn against the U.N. This could explain the perception that trickles down through the media to the masses.

Wogugu said he was of course very happy to be present to speak about the topic of U.S. and U.N. relations but that he was definitely not here for "Bush or Annan bashing", but rather to put the facts as the are out on the table. He highlighted his experiences of U.S. misunderstanding related to his work in population and family planning issues at the U.N. In the 70s, the U.S. was in the forefront of family planning with the U.N. but then the policy changed with Reagan when the U.S. pulled their funds thinking the U.N. supported abortions as that was going on in China. Then also the U.S. had pulled out of UNESCO in the 70s because it was "no in their political interests" at the time, but later came back. This has been a common history of the U.S. withholding U.N. dues and funds of support for some U.N. programs and it's evident that this must strain relations between the two bodies.

Dr. Wogugu also made the important point, that many tend to forget, is that the U.N. is NOT a sovereign, and they can only do so many things. In fact, the U.S. has a large stake in forming the u decisions - the UN is headquartered in New York, the U.S. is its largest donor, and the U.S. gets the most benefits out of it. Also Dr. Wogugu highlighted Dr. Qureshi's point, but changing the term, to say the U.N. is a "multifaceted" organization and has it's challenges, and needs reform. In closing, he commented that in the long run we need dialog and cooperation with the U.N. for ideas to be pushed through - just like winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis and Afghans, so to it applies in the U.N. and world political system. It was neat to remark, that when Bush was asked of the U.N.s work in Lebanon and Syria, he said that they were doing a fantastic job. So, in the end, the U.N. is "wonderful" when it plays along with U.S. interests, yet "chastised" when it sides democratically with the other couple hundred nations represented.

Dr. Sung Pae of Bellevue University carried on this "perception" difference the past speakers brought up as well. He cited from Plato's "The Republic" in that we all live in our own cave, of our own backgrounds: religious, legal, social and other perspectives. With some short lessons in political science, Pae touched on the 2 schools of thought in foreign policy: realism and idealism. He said we could live in a world like the "wild kingdom" where there is only a "survival of the fittest" among nations who are each trying to dominate each other, or we could live in "peace loving world" where nations are willing to cooperate instead of working isolation. Examples of each are the U.S. unilateral preemptive attack on Iraq, and also the founding of the League of Nations and United Nations to help ensure peace. Dr. Pae went on to say that sometimes we choose the "realistic" way and other times the "idealist" way all depending upon the circumstances of the situation. For instance, is the situation urgent, threatening a national interest, dependent on secret intelligence, and an exchange their analysis on costs versus benefits of a desired action are some examples to consider.

Discussion After the Townhall
Originally uploaded by aidomaha.

Dr. Pae closed with an analogy to the fall of the Roman empire after 200 years - while the US is just beyond that time. The causes for Rome's fall were considered to be imperial overstreatch by trying to extend power in the world at costs of large economic debts ($300 billion just for Iraq) and social overstreatch leading to debt by extending to many hand-outs to people.

Questions from the audience brought up points that:
* In the cold war it was easier, countries just sided up with the USSR or U.S. - one of the sides that had the nukes.
* Lest we forget, the League of Nations collapsed when Germany invaded Poland, and now the U.S. is in Iraq.
* Policies often change with self interests of the people in charge.
* World Bank/IMF is not part of (but linked to the U.N., and is heavily dominated by Western powers which uses 3rd world for cheap labor, not the U.N.
* Before judging the U.N. (which is not sovereign) look at one's own country first.
- Brian Wiese

Why Hungary?

One of the first questions most international students (at least those that go off the beaten path) get is, "Why _insert_country_ ?" I got asked, "Why Norway?" even by the Norwegians! =) So, I met Chris Hayes in Berlin (photos) at the AID conference there. He is spending one year experiencing life in Hungary as a complete culture shock (he didn't speak any Hungarian, his host family didn't speak any English) and blogging about it -- check out: whyhungary.typepad.com to learn more about his experiences. It's fascinating!

7th Annual Inter-Tribal Pow Wow, April 30th

Tribal drums will sound on campus Saturday, April 30, for the seventh annual UNO Inter-Tribal Student Council Pow Wow. The event, which is free and open to the public, will be held at Sapp Fieldhouse beginning at noon. This year’s theme is “Back to Traditions.” See more information on UNO Whats up.

Communication Week

It is Communcation Week at UNO, and some of the events posted on UNO Whats Up of significant interest to our group to be more effective communicators include:
Tuesday, April 26 - News Blog: Media & Morality - 112 Arts & Sciences Hall, 5 p.m
Wednesday, April 27 - International Communication -MBSC Jenkins Room, 11 a.m.

• This session will address the need to understand communication in a global context, and global communication study opportunities for broadcasting, journalism and speech communication students.

CFA Packing April 30 and May 7

Computers for Africa will have their annual prepacking day on Saturday April 30th, and then the full packing day the following week on May 7th. This should still take place at the warehouse downtown - computer recyclers. See comments for updates.

Ethnic Norwegian - April 18th

The Omaha Elveby chapter of the Sons of Norway have an ethnic food and social night set for Monday April 18th! The dinner of traditional Norwegian food (norsk mat) will start at 6:30pm at the Scandanivian American Society Hall - 7575 Crown Point Ave (just a block W off 72nd street on Crown Point). A donation of $5-6 is asked to cover the cost of food.

If you have Norwegian items to display, please bring them and explain. All students considering studying abroad in Norway or just interested in this club of great people are encouraged to attend! I will show some pictures from my study abroad there last semester, and provide details on making it possible. - Brian

The Draft and Conscientious Objection

Announcement: Ms. JE McNeil, the Executive Director at Center of Conscience & War, will be hosting public forums to discuss conscientious objection and the draft at the following locations:

Omaha: 7:00 pm, Thursday, April 21
• First United Methodist Church—72nd/Cass
Lincoln: 7:00 pm, Friday, April 22
• Antelope Church of the Brethren—36th/Normal
Kearney: 1:00 pm, Saturday, April 23
• The Newman Center Chapel — 813 W. 27th
Grand Island: 7:00 pm, Saturday, April 23
• College Park — Hwy 34 across from Stuhr Museum

CO Counselor Workshop! If you would like to counsel prospective Conscientious Objectors, then this day-long workshop is a must. Class is quickly filling for Sunday, April 24. Call or email Caryl Guisinger for more details: 308.358.0400 or Caryl@DesignInsight.net

We Can End World Poverty

Doesn't that give you a great feeling -- that we actualy can do it? Or are you more skeptical -- thinking that there is just not the initiative in global leadership to do anything about this?

I'd encourage you to check out the One Campaign in the U.S. or the Make Poverty History campaign in the U.K., which are both local components of the White Band Campaign for the Global Call to End World Poverty. With the G-8 summit in July 2005, the world's most powerful leaders will come together, and collectively they could decide to improve the fate of those millions of people who live in the least developed countries - where poverty kills thousands every day. Also, the U.N. Millennium Campaign has been working on this for years, hopefully the nations of the world can come together and do something great like this, through one united voice of the United Nations. In a timely effort, Jeffery Sachs, director of the UN Millennium Project, has as just published The End of Poverty which defines the reality that this actually is possible through the science of economics.

The First Casualty in War - is Truth

It's been long disputed, even before the War in Iraq began, that the media coverage in the U.S. was particularly biased in what was called "patriotic" or "gung-ho" support for a war instigated by the Bush administration. Looking back in retrospect, we can see now that it may not have been primarily the strength of military might, but rather the supreme influence and power of U.S. media and the use of PSYOP that truly helped to win this war, by gaining support of the American people through timely news and entertainment, while also defeating the moral of Saddam's regime. This bias in the current profit-based media landscape is a concern, and that's why AID seeks to bring various viewpoints into discussion so that we can make an better informed decision, with access to all viewpoints. Amy Goodman, host of DemocracyNow.org will discuss the topic of "Independent Media in a Time of War" and it's need for an accurately informed public, at her 1:00pm keynote address tomorrow, April 9th, at the Peace and Justice Expo.

Moving Forward To a Better World.

This month we will be taking the oppurtunity as a group to look at the relationship between the UN and the US. Many questions come to mind when dealing with the policy of the US's current administration and the current administration of the UN.

The questions for are speakers should be hard hitting from all angles. If you completely oppose the current moves, let us hear it. If you support the current moves, let us hear it. What I am trying to say is their is no wrong opinion in our group. Now are there opinions I don't agree with...of course. Are there opinions of mine that the majority of our group do not share with me...of course. Any of those opinions should have a voice and that is our intention. Why do you disagree with John Bolton's appointment, let me hear it and come prepared. Why do you agree with cutting the budget to the UN, let me hear it and come prepared. Because I guarantee that our speakers will come prepared. Let's get the word out that we are an informed delegation to be sure. Most of all share what you think....from the left, right, center, etc.
- Craig Martin

Plight of Radio Free Nepal

With the current administration feeling some satisfaction at bringing democracy to Iraq by force, I know there are several other places in the world that would welcome the U.S. help in bringing democracy to their country as well (without the pre-emptive military strike of course)... one example being Students of Nepal, who must anonymously try to get their message out. In a second press release, former Secretary General of the Nepal Student Union, Gagan Kumar Thapa, speaks without the protection of anonymity to describe the conditions that have arisen in their country over the past months, in their appeal for help by the international community. Basically, their dictator-King revoked all the citizens rights and liberties such as freedom of speech and travel, all in an effort to fight terrorism by Maoist repels. They are calling for an end of development aid to Nepal which is only fueling the corrupt government.

Just how much attention does our current administration pay to address cries for help like this in a country such as Nepal, Tibet (Students for a Free Tibet), or even further developing countries and world-wide human rights issues -- when there's not a corporate national interest at stake? I did hear that the Peace Corps have moved their people out of Nepal.