There has been a cat-mouse game between International Community represented by UN against Iran on nuclear development. This followed the revelations, in fall 2009, which indicated that Iran was developing nuclear plants secretly, facts that Iran admitted,of course, with justification. The issue took centre stage during the UN summit held in USA forcing the Security Council to order International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to carry further investigations. Meanwhile, Iran has continued to plead innocence claiming their plants were meant to produce nuclear energy for its own people while world leaders accuse her of lying.
It is known that Iran started its nuclear ambitions in 1957 with the aim of ‘increasing military, economic and civilian assistance’, http://www.cfr.org/publication/16811/= Iran’s Nuclear Program) but slowed down thereafter only to resurface in the last decade. The US government has been on the front line challenging Iran to stop the nuclear development arguing it is a security threat to the international community. It was the admission in fall 2009 by Iran that the UN took the threat seriously and after some investigations the IAEA has, today 27th Nov 2009, (BBC news) censured Iran over nuclear cover-up, demanding freeze of secret uranium enrichment site.
The report accuse Iran of being uncooperative in many fronts and alleges that she makes 2.75kg of uranium and by February she will be making low-enrichment uranium (LEU) capable of feed stocking 2 bombs http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1103/p02s01-usfp.html ‘Iran nuclear program: clock ticking as Uranium collects’. Despite all this Iran continues to deny these findings and continues to make promises that do not convince the international world. Iran joins the bandwagon of North Korea and their sympathizers who are hell bent to flex their muscles with nuclear plants. Other leaders have used all sorts of language to persuade or warn Iran and North Korea but no concrete plan has been proposed.
One can only hope that the world is not plunged into the nuclear insanity or even another war. This calls for a sober approach to the issue but then dialogue cannot continue forever without an apparent change of conduct on the part of Iran. However, it is time the leaders come clean in the way to do politics and relations. It is possible that some of the countries who delve into such dangerous trends do so to protect themselves from super powers or to gain some negotiating power in uneven playing field of economics.
However, such power games should not be played at the expense of the world security, thus Iran should denounce her ambitions if they are not about nuclear energy for her people. If we are to believe Iran that her project is for the good then we ask she cooperate with IAEA to avert the looming danger. Meanwhile, we pray and wait hoping the sadists who are encouraging Iran to play hard do not win nor should the politics of domination and isolation.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
World food situation require more than statements to stabilize.
World food situation require more than statements to stabilize.
The meeting organized by FAO just ended last week with calls from various quarters sounding an alarm over food situation and the need to act fast. The meeting brought together various world leaders including the Pope who noted dragging of feet to eliminate hunger that kills 17m children annually. Missing in action were the leaders of the G8, apart from Italy’s PM who was the host. It would be expected that a question as serious as food crisis would be at the centre stage in world matters yet from the look of things this is not the case. The statistics issued by FAO, reveal that millions of people are starving despite the rise of technology and development.
It beats logic that food is a basic human need yet millions go without it or receive less than is expected in terms of quantity and quality. Consequently, there is need to look at what is not adding up and make plausible proposals to sort out this shame once and for all. As the Pope noted in his address ‘Win the battle against Hunger’ (www.zenit.org )the problem of food is not the scarcity of material but the scarcity of institutional political will that would stabilize the right to sufficient, healthy and nutritious food to all.
The lack of such institutions among nations, skewed market policies, skyrocketing prices of basic necessities, and having world priorities upside down demonstrated by the skipping of such an important meeting by top leaders explains why this situation is a time bomb. I would actually think that with the economic crisis the issue of food be a top priority needing urgent attention and long term solution. However, all is not lost but we must act together and very fast as the Director General, FAO, Jacques Diouf urged in his speech to reach ‘broad consensus on the total and rapid elimination of hunger’.(www.fao.org ) by pulling down all the structures that cause food crisis, stop price speculation on food and set policies that guide the international market to respect weak economies. When this is said and done, then I dream…
I imagine of a world that spends more resources to put in place mechanisms of food sustenance, one that spends resources teaching people how to fish than give them handouts; one that recognizes the basic needs of man as rights and provides the necessary to realize what that means; other than a world where unwarranted wars are mega-funded, where scientific studies that degrade the dignity of man are the order of the day; where rich countries tie funding to conditions that harness corruption and condemn a nation to perpetual begging and mind boggling unjust debts.
But I cringe to know that this is only a pipe dream. Were it not a dream the ‘big ones’ would have come knocking, calling for a united affront against the common enemy. However, they were busy elsewhere visiting the East that has become a giant or were celebrating some historical event somewhere in France as the minnows shouted themselves hoarse. I am afraid and indeed afraid that recommendations from the FAO meeting asking for $44M annually to combat hunger will only dust in some shelves somewhere.
The meeting organized by FAO just ended last week with calls from various quarters sounding an alarm over food situation and the need to act fast. The meeting brought together various world leaders including the Pope who noted dragging of feet to eliminate hunger that kills 17m children annually. Missing in action were the leaders of the G8, apart from Italy’s PM who was the host. It would be expected that a question as serious as food crisis would be at the centre stage in world matters yet from the look of things this is not the case. The statistics issued by FAO, reveal that millions of people are starving despite the rise of technology and development.
It beats logic that food is a basic human need yet millions go without it or receive less than is expected in terms of quantity and quality. Consequently, there is need to look at what is not adding up and make plausible proposals to sort out this shame once and for all. As the Pope noted in his address ‘Win the battle against Hunger’ (www.zenit.org )the problem of food is not the scarcity of material but the scarcity of institutional political will that would stabilize the right to sufficient, healthy and nutritious food to all.
The lack of such institutions among nations, skewed market policies, skyrocketing prices of basic necessities, and having world priorities upside down demonstrated by the skipping of such an important meeting by top leaders explains why this situation is a time bomb. I would actually think that with the economic crisis the issue of food be a top priority needing urgent attention and long term solution. However, all is not lost but we must act together and very fast as the Director General, FAO, Jacques Diouf urged in his speech to reach ‘broad consensus on the total and rapid elimination of hunger’.(www.fao.org ) by pulling down all the structures that cause food crisis, stop price speculation on food and set policies that guide the international market to respect weak economies. When this is said and done, then I dream…
I imagine of a world that spends more resources to put in place mechanisms of food sustenance, one that spends resources teaching people how to fish than give them handouts; one that recognizes the basic needs of man as rights and provides the necessary to realize what that means; other than a world where unwarranted wars are mega-funded, where scientific studies that degrade the dignity of man are the order of the day; where rich countries tie funding to conditions that harness corruption and condemn a nation to perpetual begging and mind boggling unjust debts.
But I cringe to know that this is only a pipe dream. Were it not a dream the ‘big ones’ would have come knocking, calling for a united affront against the common enemy. However, they were busy elsewhere visiting the East that has become a giant or were celebrating some historical event somewhere in France as the minnows shouted themselves hoarse. I am afraid and indeed afraid that recommendations from the FAO meeting asking for $44M annually to combat hunger will only dust in some shelves somewhere.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Berlin. Fall of the 'wall of shame'.
World leaders gathered to celebrate with the Germans the fall of Berlin wall on the 9th Nov 2009. Thousands were the numbers that watched on television the event, so were the hundreds who gathered to witness the memorable event. This was in remembrance of the fall of the wall (so called wall of shame) that separated the East from the West Germany during the cold war. The event united those who were actively involved in bringing down the wall to those who were opposed; those who had never closed the wall into Berlin to those who lived in Berlin; those who lived the experience to those who read in history. The only missing part was that many who played vital roles in bringing down the wall and who never lived long enough to savor the sweetness of the liberty they fought for especially John Paul II and solidarity labor movement, who was nevertheless given a glowing tribute by US secretary of state, Hilary Clinton and Lech Walesa, Nobel peace prize winner, for unifying Europe in freedom.
The separation of the two German states started in August 1961 and lasted until 9th Nov 1989 when President Mikhail Gorbachev led the re-union of Germany. The wall was the culmination of the state of atheism that fostered ideologies that were inimical to God and the human person. The celebrations on Monday marked 20years since the fall and reminded the people of the role Christianity has played in shaping the culture and civilization of Europe. The question that came to mind as I watched the staged domino -fall -of- the –wall is what would all the people who fought for re-unification of Germany say to the leaders of the 21st century were they to rise again? Did the fall of the wall mean anything to anyone in the world? Was the liberty so desired realized?
Reading some of the newspapers the next morning some of my possible fears were somehow confirmed. I posed a question, ‘was the falling of the wall a true revolution’? Who benefitted from the fall of the wall? One article said in Italy “il muro e il sogno di Un’era liberale che ancora non e` cominciata. (The wall and the dream of a free era that is not yet started’).The world continues to witness walls some physical, economical or social as if the Berlin wall was not enough lesson: a physical wall separates the Jews from Palestinians in Holy land even after the holy Father asked for its destruction; many nations are subdivided in North and south or East and West in terms of development; there is still the division of the first and third world countries; and there are still millions who cannot access the world resources due to various forms of walls that have condemned them. The only conclusion plausible from this kind of walls is that mankind has not made a flea-hop-step from being a Neanderthal.
The separation of the two German states started in August 1961 and lasted until 9th Nov 1989 when President Mikhail Gorbachev led the re-union of Germany. The wall was the culmination of the state of atheism that fostered ideologies that were inimical to God and the human person. The celebrations on Monday marked 20years since the fall and reminded the people of the role Christianity has played in shaping the culture and civilization of Europe. The question that came to mind as I watched the staged domino -fall -of- the –wall is what would all the people who fought for re-unification of Germany say to the leaders of the 21st century were they to rise again? Did the fall of the wall mean anything to anyone in the world? Was the liberty so desired realized?
Reading some of the newspapers the next morning some of my possible fears were somehow confirmed. I posed a question, ‘was the falling of the wall a true revolution’? Who benefitted from the fall of the wall? One article said in Italy “il muro e il sogno di Un’era liberale che ancora non e` cominciata. (The wall and the dream of a free era that is not yet started’).The world continues to witness walls some physical, economical or social as if the Berlin wall was not enough lesson: a physical wall separates the Jews from Palestinians in Holy land even after the holy Father asked for its destruction; many nations are subdivided in North and south or East and West in terms of development; there is still the division of the first and third world countries; and there are still millions who cannot access the world resources due to various forms of walls that have condemned them. The only conclusion plausible from this kind of walls is that mankind has not made a flea-hop-step from being a Neanderthal.
Friday, November 6, 2009
No Crucifixes;Rules EU court
The decision last week by the European Union to ban crucifixes in schools is weird, queer and borders sheer madness to say the least. During the court session the judges arrived at the decision to ban the crucifixes claiming they violate the rights of parents to bring their children according to their conviction and that it violates religious freedom for the students. One wonders why this is so at this point in time and for whose interests it is meant for.
This case is not in isolation. There have been attempts over years to drive out religion form public sphere whose roots can be traced from the French revolution. Religion has been seen as an obstacle by many in exercising ‘their freedom’ and therefore an opportunity to trample it undercurrent is seized with pleasure. However, careful consideration of such positions faults the logic. Indeed, religion cannot be against man for it is meant to be man’s way of relating with his creator and fellow brothers.
So when EU court says crucifixes violate rights of parents and the students I fail to understand this logic. First, because Europe, as it were, cannot deny its fundamental link to Christianity: trying to deny this link is folly and risks allowing other cultures taking over in Europe. Thus, if Europe were to abide by this decision, then she would be shooting her own foot. Second, one wonders which countries are behind this move or put another way for whose interest is this new law? At least the Italian government has raised her dissatisfaction and plans for an appeal. I hope the consciences of other European countries will grow up and challenge such discriminative law.
It consoles to note that some Muslim students have expressed their opinion saying they do not think the crucifix in the classroom violates their freedom of religion. I wonder if the Muslim countries would allow the removal of their symbols from their schools let alone public celebration of another faith. So are we trying to Islamize the whole world by denying what defines us just to accommodate others in the name of rights and freedom? I believe that all have equal rights and freedoms. Keeping what defines what we are does not deny anyone his freedom or violate his rights. Indeed, the cross has become folly to the European Union judges but to those who value their origin, culture and religion the cross remains central.
This case is not in isolation. There have been attempts over years to drive out religion form public sphere whose roots can be traced from the French revolution. Religion has been seen as an obstacle by many in exercising ‘their freedom’ and therefore an opportunity to trample it undercurrent is seized with pleasure. However, careful consideration of such positions faults the logic. Indeed, religion cannot be against man for it is meant to be man’s way of relating with his creator and fellow brothers.
So when EU court says crucifixes violate rights of parents and the students I fail to understand this logic. First, because Europe, as it were, cannot deny its fundamental link to Christianity: trying to deny this link is folly and risks allowing other cultures taking over in Europe. Thus, if Europe were to abide by this decision, then she would be shooting her own foot. Second, one wonders which countries are behind this move or put another way for whose interest is this new law? At least the Italian government has raised her dissatisfaction and plans for an appeal. I hope the consciences of other European countries will grow up and challenge such discriminative law.
It consoles to note that some Muslim students have expressed their opinion saying they do not think the crucifix in the classroom violates their freedom of religion. I wonder if the Muslim countries would allow the removal of their symbols from their schools let alone public celebration of another faith. So are we trying to Islamize the whole world by denying what defines us just to accommodate others in the name of rights and freedom? I believe that all have equal rights and freedoms. Keeping what defines what we are does not deny anyone his freedom or violate his rights. Indeed, the cross has become folly to the European Union judges but to those who value their origin, culture and religion the cross remains central.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)