You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Uncategorized' category.
Afghanistan isn’t just America’s war – a total of 15 countries have military and/or reconstruction personnel in the country. America isn’t the only one debating the strategy and timeline in Afghanistan either - popular support for the war has decreased in countries such as Italy and Germany as well. Here’s a look at the current coaltion forces in Afghanistan from teh BBC:
Image originally posted Mon Sept 21 2009 at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8266072.stm
Guest Post by Amanda Young with commentary from Laura Kavanaugh
Earlier this week, comments made by General McChrystal concerning the strategy in Afghanistan were leaked to the press. He called for a new strategy because he believes the current one will lead to mission failure (a strong statement that has raised concerns). The military has already begun to relocated troops from the sparsely populated mountainous regions that are difficult to cities. This move is in hopes that we can begin to rebuild cities, protect the Afghan people, and help strengthen the government.
After eight years in Afghanistan a mission focused on civilian protection, reconstruction, and strengthening the Afghan government that will lay the groundwork for a responsible exit sounds like the right plan, but the General believes more resources are needed for this strategy to succeed. In this case “resources” means American soldiers. Many people speculate that the general will ask President Obama for more troops to be sent to Afghanistan today, even though President Obama made it clear during his interview on Meet the Press that, “Until I’m satisfied that we’ve got the right strategy I’m not gonna be sending some young man or woman over there- beyond what we already have”. President Obama’s decision has become even more difficult now that current polls show that the majority of Americans no longer support the war.
Afghanistan has witnessed 30 years of war and America and its allies have an important responsibility to establish security and support the reconstruction of the country’s infrastructure and rule of law systems. Many agree on this goal, but disagree on the correct strategy – will a troop surge further reconstruction efforts or fuel discontentment in the region and among Americans impatient to bring our troops home? Are we repeating mistakes made in Iraq by burdening the military with reconstruction missions typically carried out by civilian specialists? How can we increase the capacity of USAID (still w/o an administrator) and the State Dept quickly to ensure that the military’s efforts are appropriately supported?
To learn more about General McChrystal’s recommended strategy and President Obama’s interview with Meet the Press click here:
General McChrystal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8266072.stm
President Obama: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32935603/ns/meet_the_press//
Post by John Deans, It’s Getting Hot In Here
Pittsburgh, United States — Greenpeace activists rappelled off of a Pittsburgh bridge (Wednesday) with a massive banner displaying our message to G20 leaders gathering for tomorrow’s summit. The banner takes the form of stylized “road sign” that warns of the political maneuvering and delay that have put a international climate treaty in jeopardy as the world enters the final stretch on the road to Copenhagen.
“It is imperative that developed world leaders do not fail again in Pittsburgh. They must put money on the table to support developing countries” said Damon Moglen, Greenpeace USA’s global warming campaign director. “It is also critical for G20 leaders agree to kick-start economic recovery through clean energy investment. Both of these elements are vital to achieve a good deal in Copenhagen and avert catastrophic climate change.”
Previously this week, AID was invited to a discussion with Feministing.com blogger Ann Friedman, who provided some fundamental information on how to utilize blogging as a tool for advocacy. For anyone who is interested in guest posting on our blog, or starting your own social justice or advocacy blog, don’t be daunted! Though some of it may seem a bit self-evident, here are some basic ideas and tips Ann had for creating an interesting and relevant blog to engage supporters and advocates:
As Iranians around the world head to the polls for a hotly contested presidential election, I thought I would post some of the most interesting stories and analysis I have seen…
The New York Times thinks that regardless of who wins this election, the democratic energy that has been rocking the country will leave its mark on the political process. “If [Ahmadinejahd] wins a second term, many here are now asking what will become of the “green wave” — the name given to the vast crowds of people who have filled the streets in recent weeks dressed in the signature color of the Moussavi campaign, demanding change.”
There is expected to be record high voter turnout. This could be extremely important, given the fact that Ahmadinejahd has strong support in the rural areas and Mousavi has mobilized urban voters. The election could boil down to which demographic group shows up to the polls.
Foreign Policy has a photoessay covering the recent campaigning. I find it interesting that so many of the photos feature women. I wonder if this is representative of the campaigners: are women actually the majority of the crowd? Or is this just because foreign journalists are fascinated by the idea that veiled women are politically active?
Global Voices Online has some great election coverage, including a piece on Iranian bloggers’ reactions to the televised debate between Ahamadinejahd and Mousavi.
Finally, and most importantly, Foreign Policy is already reporting that more than 70% of eligible Iranian’s voted and that some are already declaring Mousavi the winner. We’ll have to wait to for the officical results, but what some have been calling the “Green Revolution” may have prevailed.
As many as 100 of indigenous protestors were killed early Friday morning in the northern Peruvian province of Bagua, as 600 Peruvian riot police were ordered to disrupt a peaceful road blockade launched in April as a part of a national protest against a new series of laws that would allow an unprecedented wave of logging, oil drilling, mining and mono-crop agriculture in the Amazonian jungle.
Police fired live ammunition and teargas into the crowd armed with indigenous spears. Peruvian authorities report 22 police were killed and 2 missing, while the indigenous community says at least 40 people, including 2 children were killed. If you think the numbers don’t add up, you’re right. Police have been accused of burning indigenous bodies, throwing them in the river and removing wounded from the hospital in order to hide the real number of casualties.
A state of emergency has been declared in the region, a military curfew imposed, and police continue to patrol Amazonian towns.
I am reminded of an interview I had last month with rebel rocker and peace activist, Michael Franti. “Now is the time when we need to stand up and yell fire,” Franti said. “If ever there was a time that we need to say something is happening, let’s deal with it, it’s now.”
This week, Vladimir Putin was generous enough to provide me with a wealth of blog fodder in an interview with Japanese media (linked below).
Putin addressed two issues of major concern to U.S. foreign policy (before going on to suggest that he might have to become president again): the North Korean nuclear standoff and the European Missile defense shield.
North Korean Nuclear Standoff
Recently, North Korea conducted another missile test, launching a “satellite” into space via ballistic missile (with the quotes questioning both the existence of the satellite and the intent of it should it exist). The nation, which has abandoned the six-party talks regarding its nuclear ambitions, is now planning yet another test (according to South Korea).
These tests violate UN mandates that bar North Korea from ballistic missile activity, and as such have received rebuke from the international community. In response, Pyongyang threatens more missile tests, unless the UN will apologize for their rebuke of the initial missile test. Round and round we go…
Putin has weighed in on the issue, declaring that everyone needs to calm down and return to the table so that we can work it out. Coincidentally, this rosy position is shared with the U.S. administration.
The international community is right to try to bring North Korea back to the table. Just as no one seems to consider the alternative, which would bring about a difference of opinion between the U.S., Russia, and China on necessary responses, it is also a slight blow to the legitimacy of the UN when its members continue to allow UN resolutions to be ignored.
The U.S. and the rest of the UN parties take a slightly harder-line approach, and intend to impose further sanctions on North Korea if it continues to stay away from the negotiating table while flouting international regulations.
European Missile Defense Shield
At the same time, Putin has presented the Obama administration with an “out” regarding the missile shield in Poland: make a new deal on nuclear proliferation, and we will allow the shield.
This, of course, makes sense for Russia, as it benefits from having the U.S. limit nuclear defense spending because Russia could not keep up.
But such a plan is also consistent with the ethos of the Obama administration, where a nuclear arms deal is seen as a positive step toward Russian reconciliation and long-term stability.
It seems that this change in policy could be a great opportunity for the administration, and do a lot to bring about the positive change in the temperament and attitude in foreign relations that Obama has pledged to provide in the long run.
*****
If you are interested in the entire interview, it is available here:
Hello Everyone! It’s good to be back in the game. I have been largely severed from the internet world from several weeks as I traveled across Europe and Northern Africa. I have returned to London, but am still in limbo as I prepare to return to the states. Still, I wanted to make sure this week’s edition of the BRIC Roundup got to press! Of course, much has occurred in the past weeks in these nations.
The overarching story of the BRIC nations in the past weeks has been one of steadily increasing importance in international affairs as the economic crisis is re-leveling to some degree the playing field. The G20 conference here in London a few weeks ago emphasized this point as it agreed to flood money into the IMF and reorient policy around the World Bank.
These organs are set up with the express aim of preventing crises throughout the world by monitoring dangerous economic policies in all countries; and these aims will be furthered by Brazil’s suggestion that developing countries gain more control over the fund. It is a measure of the growing influence of Brazil in particular that it is paying into the fund to help other countries and able to take a larger role in demanding policy innovation.
Meanwhile China is making the first moves to bring its strategic asset fund, derived from its foreign reserves, out of its short hibernation. China is hoping, of course, that the financial crisis is bottoming out, and its returns will therefore be great at current investment prices. While this strategy is risky, it underscores the country’s relative economic power to be able to spend at all, and reinforces the international clout that China holds that such expenditures have a significant worrying effect on some Western policymakers.
Of course, the BRIC Roundup is not the only one to notice the emerging importance of countries such as Brazil. For example, Israel’s El Al Airlines has begun direct flights this week to Brazil, strengthening Brazil’s international cache, at the same time that the International Olympic Committee has sent positive messages considering Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Olympic Games.
In a more foreboding sense, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted this week that Iran and China have made "quite disturbing" gains in Latin America, and President Ahmadinejad is planning ot visit Brazil just this week. The U.S. might do well to encourage these emerging countries to become stronger allies.
Thus, the overarching story of the BRIC countries in the past week weeks has indeed been such a resurgence of growth–in stature, importance, and influence—despite the tough economic times. Do you have any thoughts concerning how the U.S. should respond to the changing international scene? Besides involvement with the G20 summit in London, the U.S. has seemed relatively muted in the past few weeks regarding international affairs, as the emphasis has been placed squarely on domestic matters. Should more be done, or is the current focus on domestic affairs correct? Sound off in the comments!
As we await the official adoption and written release of the Declaration of the IV People’s Summit of the Americas later today, here are a few additional thoughts and resources from colleagues at the Alliance for Responsible Trade, Grassroots International, and Professor Imary Reyes-Santos of the University of Oregon, who are also in attendance at the People’s Summit here in Trinidad.
http://www.grassrootsonline.org/news/blog/report-peoples-summit-americas
