Humans love stories where a hero overcomes a threat to mankind. The theme of overcoming a monster goes back at least as far as Beowulf (who strangled a monster that kept eating the king's best warriors) and appears in our modern mythology in the Bond series and many other popular films.
In fact, seven of the ten highest grossing films are about defeating a threat to all people: Avatar, Star Wars, Jurassic world, the Avengers (twice), Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and Iron Man 3. In all, we spent a cool $12 billion on these films.
The details vary, but the basic plot is that a threat to a large group of people, if not all the inhabitants of the planet, emerges, and a hero comes forward to deal with the threat, at risk to himself (the saviour is nearly always a man), and overcomes it, usually, if not always, by violent means. The threat may be from another planet (Independence Day, The Alien), but in the Bond series, the threat is often a super-rich sociopath. It is interesting that in Avatar, the threat is from a private corporation, a mining company, and in Star Wars, it is a trading federation that offers the threat to freedom.
So we enjoy watching universal existential threats happen to other people, and we like to see a hero come forward and defeat the monstrous threat. Overcoming the Monster is the first of the seven basic plots in Christopher Booker's classification, the other themes being Rags to Riches, the Quest, Journey and Return, Comedy, Tragedy (where a character flaw leads to death), and Rebirth (where a character flaw is understood and overcome).
Of course, there is nothing wrong with our drinking up these myths. We are humans, that is what humans do. It is pleasant to watch the suffering and danger of other people, and to experience the relief when the threat is overcome. But does this process actually help us to deal with the real drama that is unfolding in our lives? Or does it hinder us? Or is it just neutral?
In our real world, a threat as big as any of the threats portrayed in the movies is unfolding. It is developing more slowly than a film script, but in the long run, the disaster scenario is equal to the magnitude of the most disastrous disaster movie ever conceived.
Let's transform our current situation into an imaginary film script, because that's the kind of thing we understand. It opens with a flood scene. A lone scientist is monitoring flooding events, and is noticing that the frequency of flood events is increasing. She takes her data to a scientific conference, where her findings are laughed out of court. However, another scientist, who has been studying droughts, comes alongside with his own, similar data. A third, who has been studying heat-waves, joins their company. They try to communicate their findings, unsuccessfully, until astronauts in an orbiting space station detect anomalous infra red waves coming from the vicinity of the moon. The source of the warming energy beams is located on the surface of the moon. Further investigation reveals an alien base on the moon that is directing energy at Earth. World leaders gather and decide to destroy the source, but all human weapons, including nuclear, are disabled before they reach the target. The warming continues; crops fail, massive migration movements take place, wars break out. An expedition is organised consisting of a group of courageous diplomats and people of action. Contact is made with the aliens, who turn our to be impeccably well-mannered, highly intelligent and technically sophisticated. They also speak very good English. They are apologetic about the the disruption to Earth weather, but they had calculated that we would have made the diplomatic overtures at a far earlier time. Turns out that they are marketing managers for an intergalactic solar energy and numismatic corporation, and they hope that we will wish to buy their product. It transpires that their energy prices are in fact distinctly lower than our carbon-based energy technologies, due to vagaries of intergalactic currency exchange mechanisms, so a deal is struck. The aliens reverse the energy imbalances that their beams have brought about, give us some effective general advice about sustainability, and zip off home.
It's a script, no better and no worse than some of the scripts in the top 10 highest grossing films. Would it help? No, because our problem is not caused by aliens, it is caused by ourselves. Violence does not work, and there is no hero that can deal with global warming, because it is caused by our appetite for wasteful consumption of carbon-based energy. There are corporations involved, of course, but although an increasing number of well-informed people are learning to dislike them, the vast majority of us still buy their products, for many reasons, chiefly habit and convenience. We face a slow awakening from sleep. It is true that we are moving forward, but progress is far too slow, not least because our information systems and political parties are dominated by the fossil corporations who feed lies and disinformation to distort public opinion.
So we are actually living in a real disaster movie, one of our own making, where we are the population at risk, we are the dupes, with a fifth column in our midst. We are also the potential heroes. It is clearly a species of Overcoming the Monster plot. It is not a Rags to Riches plot, rather the reverse. There is no Quest or Journey involved, because all the action is taking place at home. It is certainly not a Comedy. It could easily turn out to be a Tragedy. All we can do is hope that the Rebirth theme will kick in, and as a result of experience, probably an accumulation of adverse experience. We must hope that we can learn to deploy reason, science and logic instead of passively absorbing entertaining fantasies. We must learn to change our ways and live within the boundaries that our planetary environment lovingly sets for us.
Showing posts with label conflict. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conflict. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Haiti: stop hyping up the security threat!
Great letter in the Guardian yesterday
Obsessive foreign concerns with "security" and "violence" are refuted by actual levels of patience and solidarity on the streets of Port-au-Prince. In keeping with a long-standing pattern, US and UN officials continue to treat the Haitian people and their representatives with wholly misplaced fear and suspicion.
This is very noticeable in the BBC reportage. The main man there seems to be desperate to film acts of violence. I have mentioned here the total irrationality of the determination to shoot "looters" and shown evidence that black people "loot" while white people "find" things.
Much was made of the escape of prisoners from the jail in Port-au-Prince, but it was not mentioned that many of them were political prisoners, and not a threat to security.
The perceived need to maintain "security" has led to the massive number of flights of US military planes, which have been prioritised over aid flights, and delayed aid.
This view is endorsed by a doctor on the ground. Media Tracker tells CNN to stop hyping the violence.
Like the Iraq war effect on Muslim radicalisation, (below) the military mindset just makes things worse.
Link: Reconstructing Haiti
Mercenaries circling for the kill
Obsessive foreign concerns with "security" and "violence" are refuted by actual levels of patience and solidarity on the streets of Port-au-Prince. In keeping with a long-standing pattern, US and UN officials continue to treat the Haitian people and their representatives with wholly misplaced fear and suspicion.
This is very noticeable in the BBC reportage. The main man there seems to be desperate to film acts of violence. I have mentioned here the total irrationality of the determination to shoot "looters" and shown evidence that black people "loot" while white people "find" things.
Much was made of the escape of prisoners from the jail in Port-au-Prince, but it was not mentioned that many of them were political prisoners, and not a threat to security.
The perceived need to maintain "security" has led to the massive number of flights of US military planes, which have been prioritised over aid flights, and delayed aid.
This view is endorsed by a doctor on the ground. Media Tracker tells CNN to stop hyping the violence.
Like the Iraq war effect on Muslim radicalisation, (below) the military mindset just makes things worse.
Link: Reconstructing Haiti
Mercenaries circling for the kill
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Newsnight 13/1/10 :Islam and the War on Terror; a choice
Interesting contrast on BBC Newsnight last night.
First, Islam4UK spokesman Anjem Choudary and Maajid Nawaz, from the counter-extremism think tank the Quilliam Foundation, joined Jeremy Paxman to debate the implications of a government ban on the radical Islamist group Islam4UK.
Chaos. Maajid Nawaz put two very relevant questions to Mr Choudary, the first being, "Is it not the case that if Isalm4UK succeeded in its aim of turning the UK into an Islamic state, that you would have me executed". We never heard the reply, because Maajid began talking over him, in best BBC fashion. Clearly, Choudary was not going to give a straight answer, which raises the question of how interviewers should treat non-answers. I would suggest that the interviewer should respond with a comment that the interviewee is not answering the question, and then putting it a second time in a Yes or No format. After that, proceed as if the answer is the least comfortable option, and discuss that.
Maajid Nawaz does deserve an answer, because if it is affirmative, as seems to be the case, then he is issuing a death threat, which is or should be against the law in the UK.
Islam4UK an offshoot of Al-Mahajaroon. Seven ex-members or people connected to this group, have been involved in acts of terrorism. In this respect, it could be described as a proto-terrorist organisation. Its aim is to replace democracy in the UK with Sharia law.
Alan Johnson has moved to ban it, and the ban will come into force on January 14th if Parliament agrees.
There will be hand-wringing in some quarters over this kind of ban. On one hand it is reasonable in view of the death threat against those the group considers apostate, and the violent acts that ex-members have committed. On the other hand, bans on political groups are a slippery slope.
The war on terror is a total nonsense, and there can be no doubt in the minds of reasonable persons that the military action in Iraq and Afghanistan has only created more terrorists, and more with the kind of mindset that Choudry shows. But society is right to defend itself by efficient and accurate action by police and intelligence services, and also by banning organisations that foment hatred and violence.
What was clear on Newsnight was that there was no dialogue, no meeting of minds, just polarisation of views. Listening Choudry talk was like hearing a paranoid schizophrenic talk. They can be perfectly rational in their own terms, but without any overlap with the views of anyone else.
The following piece was a pleasant contrast, a report on the reunion between former Guantanamo prison guard, Brandon Neely, and two of his former prisoners from Britain, Shafiq Rasul and Ruhal Ahmed. Brandon came to say sorry. There was a real human dimension to this contact, which gave grounds for hope for humanity. If there is such a thing as human spirit, it was operating here.
Strict adherence to fundamentalist ideology leads to violence and death, but the exercise of humanity gives life. They should teach that in schools.
[Update 14th Jan 2010]
In the Guardian, Deborah Orr argues that the ban allows Choudry to claim that democracy is not absolutely liberal. We know that already, Debs. He presents us with a koan, a rationally insoluble problem - neatly expressed by and Islam4UK banner reading "Freedom=Dictatorship" (see the next link).
Politicians have to make a choice, based on what is the best way to protect British citizens from attack. Military action is counter-productive, police and intelligence action is productive. Let's hope the ban is more like the latter than the former.
Also today in the Guradian, Timothy Garton Ash says "Banning these showmen is not a clever way to tackle [the real danger]". TGA believes that the ban gives Choudry a propaganda victory. How much better to ignore them until they go away, with "civic and civil intolerance" as meted out to the BNP (or indeed, media ignoral of the kind meted out to the pre-leader Green Party).
TGA writes: "But if you discriminate against a whole social group, you not only violate the basic principles of a free society, you may also achieve the opposite of the desired effect".
Will the ban be as counter-productive as the invasion of Iraq, or UK support for Israel?
I doubt it.
Mainstream Muslim opinion is as offended by Islam4UK as they are by the British invasion of Islamic lands.
He goes on: "A recent report by the Quilliam Foundation produced alarming evidence of how some people are actually being turned into violent Muslim extremists inside British prisons."
This is a different problem, a failure of control in prisons, which is to do with low staff-prisoner ratios, which is in turn due to mistaken use of imprisonment of offenders who pose no real threat to society, and who should be given Community Service orders.
TGA concludes that the ban is another instance of the Government's worrying and undeniable use of the terrorist threat to undermine civil liberties. I still see it as a reasonable response to a proto-terrorist groupuscule.
First, Islam4UK spokesman Anjem Choudary and Maajid Nawaz, from the counter-extremism think tank the Quilliam Foundation, joined Jeremy Paxman to debate the implications of a government ban on the radical Islamist group Islam4UK.
Chaos. Maajid Nawaz put two very relevant questions to Mr Choudary, the first being, "Is it not the case that if Isalm4UK succeeded in its aim of turning the UK into an Islamic state, that you would have me executed". We never heard the reply, because Maajid began talking over him, in best BBC fashion. Clearly, Choudary was not going to give a straight answer, which raises the question of how interviewers should treat non-answers. I would suggest that the interviewer should respond with a comment that the interviewee is not answering the question, and then putting it a second time in a Yes or No format. After that, proceed as if the answer is the least comfortable option, and discuss that.
Maajid Nawaz does deserve an answer, because if it is affirmative, as seems to be the case, then he is issuing a death threat, which is or should be against the law in the UK.
Islam4UK an offshoot of Al-Mahajaroon. Seven ex-members or people connected to this group, have been involved in acts of terrorism. In this respect, it could be described as a proto-terrorist organisation. Its aim is to replace democracy in the UK with Sharia law.
Alan Johnson has moved to ban it, and the ban will come into force on January 14th if Parliament agrees.
There will be hand-wringing in some quarters over this kind of ban. On one hand it is reasonable in view of the death threat against those the group considers apostate, and the violent acts that ex-members have committed. On the other hand, bans on political groups are a slippery slope.
The war on terror is a total nonsense, and there can be no doubt in the minds of reasonable persons that the military action in Iraq and Afghanistan has only created more terrorists, and more with the kind of mindset that Choudry shows. But society is right to defend itself by efficient and accurate action by police and intelligence services, and also by banning organisations that foment hatred and violence.
What was clear on Newsnight was that there was no dialogue, no meeting of minds, just polarisation of views. Listening Choudry talk was like hearing a paranoid schizophrenic talk. They can be perfectly rational in their own terms, but without any overlap with the views of anyone else.
The following piece was a pleasant contrast, a report on the reunion between former Guantanamo prison guard, Brandon Neely, and two of his former prisoners from Britain, Shafiq Rasul and Ruhal Ahmed. Brandon came to say sorry. There was a real human dimension to this contact, which gave grounds for hope for humanity. If there is such a thing as human spirit, it was operating here.
Strict adherence to fundamentalist ideology leads to violence and death, but the exercise of humanity gives life. They should teach that in schools.
[Update 14th Jan 2010]
In the Guardian, Deborah Orr argues that the ban allows Choudry to claim that democracy is not absolutely liberal. We know that already, Debs. He presents us with a koan, a rationally insoluble problem - neatly expressed by and Islam4UK banner reading "Freedom=Dictatorship" (see the next link).
Politicians have to make a choice, based on what is the best way to protect British citizens from attack. Military action is counter-productive, police and intelligence action is productive. Let's hope the ban is more like the latter than the former.
Also today in the Guradian, Timothy Garton Ash says "Banning these showmen is not a clever way to tackle [the real danger]". TGA believes that the ban gives Choudry a propaganda victory. How much better to ignore them until they go away, with "civic and civil intolerance" as meted out to the BNP (or indeed, media ignoral of the kind meted out to the pre-leader Green Party).
TGA writes: "But if you discriminate against a whole social group, you not only violate the basic principles of a free society, you may also achieve the opposite of the desired effect".
Will the ban be as counter-productive as the invasion of Iraq, or UK support for Israel?
I doubt it.
Mainstream Muslim opinion is as offended by Islam4UK as they are by the British invasion of Islamic lands.
He goes on: "A recent report by the Quilliam Foundation produced alarming evidence of how some people are actually being turned into violent Muslim extremists inside British prisons."
This is a different problem, a failure of control in prisons, which is to do with low staff-prisoner ratios, which is in turn due to mistaken use of imprisonment of offenders who pose no real threat to society, and who should be given Community Service orders.
TGA concludes that the ban is another instance of the Government's worrying and undeniable use of the terrorist threat to undermine civil liberties. I still see it as a reasonable response to a proto-terrorist groupuscule.
Monday, June 08, 2009
Vote to Seat ratio with d'Hondt , UK Euro Elections 2009 and the BNP
During the election campaign, my line was, "This election is under a weak form of Proportional Representation, so there is a very reasonable chance that Ricky Knight may become an MEP".
First, there is absolutely no doubt that the d'Hondt electoral system that was used is far better than the moronic First Past the Post system used for electing MPs to Westminster.
But this is because it would be very hard to find anything less fair than FPTP, apart from letting the media choose the MPs, or simply selling them to the highest bidder.
But d'Hondt discriminates against any that proportion of the will of the people which is more evenly spread out, or in a minority of under about 10%.
Here is the data for the 2009 European Parliament 2009:
% of votes cast----- % of seats won----- vote/seat ratio
Con--------27.7------------------34.7---------------0.80
Ukip-------16.5------------------18.1---------------0.91
Lab--------15.7------------------18.1---------------0.87
LibDem----13.7-----------------15.2---------------0.90
Greens------8.6------------------2.7----------------3.2
BNP---------6.2------------------2.7----------------2.3
SNP---------2.1------------------2.7----------------0.78
Plaid--------0.8-----------------1.4-----------------0.78
The seat-vote ratio is the percentage of votes divided by the percentage of the votes won. In a perfect system, it would be unity (i.e. in the fairest possible system the figure would be 1) in all cases. Of course, mathematical perfection is not possible, but fit-for-purpose system should
have a not unexpected scatter either side of unity. The smaller the ratio figure, the more the party has benefited from the d'Hondt system. The bigger the figure, the more the party has been frustrated by d'Hondt.
So the parties can be ranked thus, with those who benefited most at the top.
Like FPTP, dHondt also rewards larger parties.
Many will argue that it is an advantage to load the dice against smaller parties, in order to keep the BNP well away from the levers of power. Ironically, though, this also keeps the antidote to the BNP out of power, namely the Greens. Greens and BNP are in many ways, polar opposites:
They aim for division, we aim for coalescence
They value violence, we value non-violence
They are authoritarian, we seek consensus
Of course, we Greens could out-grow the BNP, join the ranks of the larger parties, and join in the attempt to exclude them.
We have been in this excluded place for 30 years. We have borne the frustration patiently. Nobody should reasonably expect the BNP to remain peaceful in a position of electoral exclusion. They have more friends in the police and armed forces than we do - possibly in the civil service too. Papers like the Mail are useful idiots for the BNP, with their daily drip-drip of weighted news items about migrants.
In other words, trying to exclude the BNP from Parliament, using them as an excuse to block Proportional Representation, is not a very wise idea. It may lead to violence, could even lead to an attempted coup.
It is better to have the BNP in the Parliamentary tent pissing outwards, like all the other members of the Oldest Gentleman's Club in the World, than outside the tent hurling lit matches at it.
If it were only possible for rational political debate to be carried out in this country, it might be that the electorate would see that their views are indistinguishable from those of Hitler, but with immigrants in the crosshairs instead of Jews. But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were only possible for jobless workers to find work in the Green sector of the economy, the Griffin would not be able to say, "Look! He's got your job!" But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were possible for us to use all the empty buildings, brownfield sites, and unemployed housebuilders to build enough houses for all, Griffin would not be able to say, "Look! He's got your house!" But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were possible for us Brits to stop exportiong arms and wars and torture equipment, and if it were possible for us to lessen human rights abuses worldwide, and if it were possible for us to avoid catastrophic climate change, we might find that Griffin would be denied the net inflow of migants that lifts his hot air balloon. But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
"I'll let you be in my dream if you let me be in your dream". Dylan said that.
"Nothing's perfect. But everything does not have to be as imperfect as this".
I said that.
First, there is absolutely no doubt that the d'Hondt electoral system that was used is far better than the moronic First Past the Post system used for electing MPs to Westminster.
But this is because it would be very hard to find anything less fair than FPTP, apart from letting the media choose the MPs, or simply selling them to the highest bidder.
But d'Hondt discriminates against any that proportion of the will of the people which is more evenly spread out, or in a minority of under about 10%.
Here is the data for the 2009 European Parliament 2009:
% of votes cast----- % of seats won----- vote/seat ratio
Con--------27.7------------------34.7---------------0.80
Ukip-------16.5------------------18.1---------------0.91
Lab--------15.7------------------18.1---------------0.87
LibDem----13.7-----------------15.2---------------0.90
Greens------8.6------------------2.7----------------3.2
BNP---------6.2------------------2.7----------------2.3
SNP---------2.1------------------2.7----------------0.78
Plaid--------0.8-----------------1.4-----------------0.78
The seat-vote ratio is the percentage of votes divided by the percentage of the votes won. In a perfect system, it would be unity (i.e. in the fairest possible system the figure would be 1) in all cases. Of course, mathematical perfection is not possible, but fit-for-purpose system should
have a not unexpected scatter either side of unity. The smaller the ratio figure, the more the party has benefited from the d'Hondt system. The bigger the figure, the more the party has been frustrated by d'Hondt.
So the parties can be ranked thus, with those who benefited most at the top.
- Scots and Welsh Nationalists
- Lab
- Con
- LibDem
- Ukip
- BNP
- Greens
Like FPTP, dHondt also rewards larger parties.
Many will argue that it is an advantage to load the dice against smaller parties, in order to keep the BNP well away from the levers of power. Ironically, though, this also keeps the antidote to the BNP out of power, namely the Greens. Greens and BNP are in many ways, polar opposites:
They aim for division, we aim for coalescence
They value violence, we value non-violence
They are authoritarian, we seek consensus
Of course, we Greens could out-grow the BNP, join the ranks of the larger parties, and join in the attempt to exclude them.
We have been in this excluded place for 30 years. We have borne the frustration patiently. Nobody should reasonably expect the BNP to remain peaceful in a position of electoral exclusion. They have more friends in the police and armed forces than we do - possibly in the civil service too. Papers like the Mail are useful idiots for the BNP, with their daily drip-drip of weighted news items about migrants.
In other words, trying to exclude the BNP from Parliament, using them as an excuse to block Proportional Representation, is not a very wise idea. It may lead to violence, could even lead to an attempted coup.
It is better to have the BNP in the Parliamentary tent pissing outwards, like all the other members of the Oldest Gentleman's Club in the World, than outside the tent hurling lit matches at it.
If it were only possible for rational political debate to be carried out in this country, it might be that the electorate would see that their views are indistinguishable from those of Hitler, but with immigrants in the crosshairs instead of Jews. But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were only possible for jobless workers to find work in the Green sector of the economy, the Griffin would not be able to say, "Look! He's got your job!" But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were possible for us to use all the empty buildings, brownfield sites, and unemployed housebuilders to build enough houses for all, Griffin would not be able to say, "Look! He's got your house!" But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
If it were possible for us Brits to stop exportiong arms and wars and torture equipment, and if it were possible for us to lessen human rights abuses worldwide, and if it were possible for us to avoid catastrophic climate change, we might find that Griffin would be denied the net inflow of migants that lifts his hot air balloon. But that is of course just a bit of Green dreaming...
"I'll let you be in my dream if you let me be in your dream". Dylan said that.
"Nothing's perfect. But everything does not have to be as imperfect as this".
I said that.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Agony in Somalia
I received this email today from the Chairperson of the Center for Peace and Democracy in Somalia. The TFG he refers to is the nominal government of Somalia.
The ongoing agony of Somalia numbs the brain. What can we do? I have no idea, apart from starve the area of ammunition ... get control of the sea back from the pirates...get aid in by land...freeze the assets of the warlords...force the Ethiopians to withdraw...I have no idea.
I am once again writing to you but only reporting another shocking and negative incident from Mogadishu . I am afraid my colleagues and friends around the world would read me as a pessimist who always reports only the bad parts of things; I am not really that kind of a person, but there is no good news to report from Mogadishu nowadays.
The ongoing agony of Somalia numbs the brain. What can we do? I have no idea, apart from starve the area of ammunition ... get control of the sea back from the pirates...get aid in by land...freeze the assets of the warlords...force the Ethiopians to withdraw...I have no idea.
I am once again writing to you but only reporting another shocking and negative incident from Mogadishu . I am afraid my colleagues and friends around the world would read me as a pessimist who always reports only the bad parts of things; I am not really that kind of a person, but there is no good news to report from Mogadishu nowadays.
The humanitarian situation in the southern and central Somalia only deteriorated for the past few weeks. Many more thousands of innocent civilians have been displaced and hundreds more killed with thousands wounded and huge properties lost in the war. Still corps of innocent civilian’s caught under fire were lying in the streets and in houses in southern Mogadishu .
People in Mogadishu witnessed the past couple of days the fiercest fighting in months in this year. This month together with April and March of the same year will be recognized as the worst months in human rights violations in Somalia as a whole. Together these months more than half a million persons have been displaced from their residents and estimated two thousand or more killed with an uncountable wounded. Always the worst affected are the civilians who were already so desperate with hunger and diseases.
Once again the TFG forces broke into CPD office in Mogadishu and this time they have taken out two of CPD staff members (Ali Farah Mohammed and Amir Hashi Ibrahim) at the office. This shocking incident happened three days ago and so far no we do not knows the whereabouts of the kidnapped staff. I have tried to reach members of the government, particularly the interior ministry but no signs of our staff have been found yet. The main gate of our office in Mogadishu was broken, some equipments taken by the TFG forces and the rest looted by freelance militias and other opportunists around. The same happened to a number of business and non profit organizations in Mogadishu .
Now then we are trying to move the remainder of CPD office equipment and documents to a safe place probably somewhere in Lower Shabelle - Merka is our main target for relocation at the moment. Shabelle radio which is also close to CPD office has been broken into and been shut down by the TFG forces and even though some staff members were taken primarily they were later released. We are running in the worst dilemmas of our time and it is not yet comprehensible to us how to handle this mysterious event. However, we will be using all possible mechanisms available to enable the release of our staff in a timely. Any suggestions and recommendations on what to do next would be a good asset for us at this critical moment.
Every body is suffering in Mogadishu and no one is left immune from the ongoing crises and violence. However, as of humanitarian and human rights organization we will not be abstracted from helping the needy and helpless suffering communities in southern and central Somalia . We are all being made IDPs by the current awful situation in Mogadishu but we will not give up helping the vulnerable communities and at least become their voices to the outer world.
On the other hand, thousands more displaced families arrived at Galgadud region with huge number of them in Adado town for the past couple of days. Thousands more are reported on the way from Mogadishu . This is only making the situation of the already desperate communities in Adado worse and needier. The influx of IDPs to Lower Shabelle region has also become uncountable.
I am once again asking the international community particularly the US, UK, EU and other governments involved as well as the humanitarian and human rights organizations to do all they can to help protect the civilians under fire. The civilians in Mogadishu are now asking themselves whether they are inferior and second degree humans. We are shocked by the muteness of the world powers from the genocide in the making in Mogadishu . What is the hidden agenda behind this muteness? Doesn't the world have a responsibility to stop such atrocities?
Even those who have been displaced and made homeless by the fighting in Mogadishu cannot be reached by humanitarian assistance? I hope time will come when all perpetrators will be held accountable for their actions and deeds. Why the world is only crying against the violence’s in Darfur and Burma where the worst is happening in Somalia ? Are the Somalis - particularly civilians in Mogadishu second degree to those other communities around the world or no one cares what is happening? The answer of all these questions lies with YOU?
I, however, have a responsibility as a civil society activist to call for international assistance. Please for those of you who have the power and the responsibility; try to act as fast as possible and stop the killings of Mogadishu civilians. The TFG, the Ethiopians and the insurgent/resistance militias have a responsibility to protect the civilians and restrain them and preserve the international humanitarian laws and regulations but it is all clear to us that none of these actors cares the consequences of their deadly actions. Both the TFG and the Ethiopian forces in Mogadishu tried all they could to silence the free media and the civil society organizations in Mogadishu .
I think time has come to advocate for the dying innocent civilians in Somalia and we all have a responsibility to take prompt and meaningful action against that?
Best Regards
Ali Said Omar Ibrahim, Chairperson
Center for Peace and Democracy (CPD)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
