Jun 28, 2010

I am writing this from Sarajevo, the capital city of Bosnia Herzegovina where for the past week I have been attending a conference on International Peacebuilding in conflict-affected societies. It is a journey that will also take me through Zagreb in Croatia to Slovenia. Having visited several cities that have experienced war and conflict in Africa and Central America, scenes of urban centers devastated by wars and armed conflict are not unfamiliar.

Yet, visiting Sarajevo was an eye opener. This is a distinctly modern European city and for someone who has come to associate Europe with order and cosmopolitan sophistication, the sight of one bearing the same fresh scars of war that I have come to associate with the troubled regions of the developing world was unsettling.

The rows of high rise concrete apartments, dating from the communist era in Tito’s Yugoslavia, reminded me of similar buildings I had seen in Jena and other parts of what used to be East Germany. Walking through the street, it was easy to see how this historic town could once have been central to the history of Europe. After all, it was in Sarajevo that Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated by a Serbian student Gavrilo Princip, sparking the First World War in 1914.

The historic character of the city as the “Jerusalem of Europe” is also evident in the landscape -- the cascading hills surrounding the city, the stone facade of the buildings in the old Jewish quarters and the mosque minarets standing beside church towers. This is a city where the three monotheistic religions have long coexisted. I could hear the ringing of the church bells down the road one moment and in the next, the unmistakable sound of the “adhan” (Muslim call to prayer). One does indeed feel a sense of being at the crossroads of history.

Yet, in all these, it is difficult to escape the real legacies of war in this city. Almost every building still has bullet or shrapnel holes on the walls. Some were gaping holes. Although there were signs of reconstruction and repair, many buildings are still in ruins.

I asked my colleague and guide Goran, who works with a local Peacebuilding NGO, how so many buildings could have been destroyed in the war. He explained that during the siege on the city, Serb/Yugoslav army occupied the hills surrounding the city, making it an easy target for bullets, mortar rounds and RPGs. Most of the devastation I saw came from exploding mortar rounds that killed thousands.

We came across a street in which over 50 people were killed on a single day in mortar explosion. The buildings on the street bore little bronze plaques with the names of those killed -- many of them were women and children. War is devastating everywhere and those who bear the brunt are often the innocent and most vulnerable.

As I walked through the city centre with Goran, I asked how such intense ethnic hostility and animosity could have existed among a people that looked to me so homogenous. How was it possible to tell a Serb from a Croat and a Croat from a Bosnian during the war? They all look the same to my untrained eyes. Goran replied that most people in the former Yugoslavia speak the same Serb-Croat language and “pretty much look alike racially.” “During the war," he continued, it was your neighbor, friend and colleague who pointed you out as being ethnically different – an enemy or traitor.” It reminded me of Rwanda.

It was Jonas Savimbi, the Angola warlord, who defined peace as the “space between two wars.” The most we can do, he argued, is to make that space as wide as we can but at some point men must war. I disagree. There is nothing inevitable about war and the pain and devastation that it brings to humanity. We can choose a different destiny -- PEACE. Visiting Sarajevo convinces me even more of this.

Bosnia Herzegovina: Confronting the Legacies of War

Jun 13, 2010

“The fear of finding oneself in bad company is not an expression of political purity; it is an expression of a lack of self-confidence.”
- Arthur Koestler

Quote of the Week

May 21, 2010

“Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves

- Confucius (551-479 BC)

Quote of the Week

May 15, 2010


One of my favorite movies is the 1930s comedy, Ninotchka starring Greta Garbo. In the movie, three Soviet agents are dispatched to Paris to sell off imperial jewels to raise money to buy tractors for the USSR. When the Grand Duchess, former owner of the jewels discovers this she deploys her lover to recover her gems. He starts seducing the three bumbling Soviet agents with the luxuries of capitalist life. The delay of the sale is noticed in Moscow, and Comrade Ninotchka (Greta Garbo) is dispatched to Paris to settle the matter. The movie unfolds around the satirical image of the young idealistic Communist, Comrade Ninotchka, fighting against corrupt Western ways.

Upon arrival in Paris, the three other Russian agents meet her at the train station where she gives them an update on developments in their Stalinist Russian homeland. "The last mass trials were a great success,” she says in a thick Russian accent. “At zee end, there will be fewer, but better Russians!"

You have to see the movie to understand why I find this line so hilarious. Although the line is uttered in the context of humor and comedy, it conveys the absurd logic that dictatorships throughout history have used to justify mass killings as aspirations towards national utopias.

The line, “There will be fewer, but better Russians" conveys the need for:

  • Skepticism of aspirations of national utopias whether coming from the right or the left, or religion. Nazi Holocaust reflects genocide with right wing conservative inclination. The Cambodian genocide reflects genocide with leftist inclination (claim to communist influence, egalitarianism, anti-imperialism). Both aimed to create fewer but "better" citizens.
  • Skepticism of state and personalist nationalisms; cult of personality.
  • Skepticism of the tendency to conflate the community with the state and the state with the regime.
  • Skepticism of code words used for exclusion and repression masquerading as nationalist discourse – terms such as “upholding national purity; maintaining the sanctity of the nation; upholding national values; cultural degeneracy/ virtue.”
  • Skepticism of State prescribed sanctimony. The regimes in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan have state Committees for the “Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.” Who determines what's “virtue?” and who determines what's “vice”?

The lesson of history is that we must be alert to and skeptical of state aspirations toward national utopias. The quest for "better" citizens is often the prelude to pogroms, mass murders and genocides.

"I have heard of the arrogant male in Capitalistic societies..."

"There will be fewer, but better citizens"

As is becoming his style, Prof. Henry Louis Gates has offered a provocative exposé into the debate over reparations for slavery in the United States. He argues that “while we are all familiar with the role played by the United States and the European colonial powers like Britain, France, Holland, Portugal and Spain, there is very little discussion of the role Africans themselves played.”

But as others have noted, despite Mr. Gates' contention that "there is very little discussion" of this fact, it hardly qualifies as news; today, virtually every history of slavery and every American history textbook includes this information.

Much of Gates' arguments are valid. I do see the need for a frank and open debate about the role of Africans in the discourse on reparations for slavery.

What I find problematic, however, is that as he does in his television series, Gates tends to reinforce the erroneous assumption that African “brothers and sisters” were selling off each other to the Europeans. True, African middlemen traders sold other peoples of African descent to the European slave traders but did these middlemen see the slaves they sold as their “brothers” and “sisters?” For the most part, they did not. They saw them as enemies, war captives and foreigners. The myth of a monolithic African identity is a construct that stands in the way of proper understanding and contextualization of the role of Africans in the Atlantic slave trade.

When I teach the Atlantic Slave trade to my undergraduate students, one of the questions I frequently get is: “How could Africans have sold other Africans as slaves to the Europeans?” My standard response comes in the form of another question: “How could German Europeans have murdered 6 million innocent fellow Europeans in the 1940s?”

My students’ familiarity with European history enables them to offer cogent answers: The murderers were only a few Nazis, not all Europeans; it happened in the context of war; and the Nazis did not quite see the Jews as fellow Germans or Europeans but as an alien race. “Very well explained,” I say to my students. Now, apply the same depth of analysis to your understanding of the role of Africans in the Atlantic slave trade.

See Prof. Gates’ original article
“Ending the Slavery Blame-Game” By HENRY LOUIS GATES Jr.

Ending the Slavery Blame-Game (Erroneously!)

May 1, 2010


BBC News story
Race hate lives on in 'rainbow nation'

GIAZILO’s commentary

With all the hope and promise of building a rainbow nation following the collapse of Apartheid, racial tensions are once again brewing in South Africa and this deserves the world's attention.

The murder, recently, of South African white supremacist leader Eugene Terreblanche by two of his black workers has further polarized the country and raised the ugly specter of the kinds of racial violence that characterized the worst days of the apartheid era. This time however, the story is a bit more complex.

Eugene Terreblanche, by all accounts, was an objectionable figure who thrived on stoking racial animosities. He led the Afrikaner Resistance movement, the AWB, which viewed the end of apartheid as surrender to communism and threatened full scale civil war if President F. W de Klerk handed power to Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress. He even led a violent attempt to disrupt the dismantling of Apartheid.

The death of Terreblanche has been blamed on Julius Malema, the vocal and controversial leader of the Youth League of the ruling African National Congress. Widely seen as a divisive figure, even within the ANC, Malema is a close ally of President Jacob Zuma. White groups and opposition parties blame Malema for singing an apartheid-era song at rallies that include the lyrics “shoot the Boer [farmer].”

This is particularly sensitive given that several white farmers have been murdered in their farms since the end of apartheid. Although the ANC rejected the link between the song and Terreblanche’s murder, it accepted that the song and the debate around it was polarizing society and subsequently instructed its members to stop using it.

Julius Malema and his supporters have defied this instruction and continued to sing the songs at political rallies. Within the ANC there is talk of initiating disciplinary proceedings against Malema where he is expected to answer to an array of charges, including promoting racism. But given his influence within the party, it remains uncertain whether the ANC leadership has the will or incentive to follow through on this.

Julius Malema and his supporters justify the singing of the song with the offensive lyrics in terms of history and heritage. The lyrics “Kill the Boars,” they insist is not intended to encourage violence against white farmers but to evoke the anti-apartheid struggle. It is a lame excuse. Given the fragility of post-Apartheid peace in the country and the racial tensions that simmer just beneath the surface, nothing can justify the singing of this song – not even the evocation of history and heritage.

In the arguments of Julius Malema and his supporters, I find parallels with the arguments of those in the United States who insist on flying the confederate flag in public spaces in the name of history and heritage. Groups such as the “Sons of Confederate Veterans,” seek to preserve the history and legacy of Confederate heroes, often without regard to the sensitivity of many African-Americans, for whom the Confederate flag evokes a different history and legacy.

Like the Sons of the Confederacy, Julius Malema and his followers have chosen to turn a blind eye to the fact that their interpretation and evocation of history have adverse implications for the rights, safety and wellbeing of others. We must be wary of those who evoke history and heritage in ways that are insensitive to the pain and suffering of others. I am all for protecting the freedom of speech and expression but there must be limits imposed when one’s freedom of expression so clearly poses a threat to the sense of security of others within the community.

The South African government needs to do more to rein in the divisive racial discourses growing on all sides. It must send a strong message that history and heritage cannot provide an excuse for divisive racial discourses. Those who are keen on those symbols of their history and heritage that provoke racial animosities may continue to “enjoy” them in the dark privacy of their homes, but they have no place in the public square.

South Africa cannot afford the Hate

Apr 25, 2010

The Center for Human Rights Documentation & Research (CHRDR), part of Columbia University Libraries/Information Services, is pleased to announce the development of the Human Rights Web Archive
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/humanrights/hrwa/

As part of Columbia's larger initiative to collect free and at-risk web resources, the Human Rights Web Archive is dedicated to preserving web-based information of importance to the global community of human rights researchers, students, policymakers and advocates.

Human Rights Web Archive, University of Columbia

Apr 17, 2010

Talk delivered by Dr. Bonny Ibhawoh at the First Unitarian Church of Hamilton, March 7, 2010

Theme: Matthew 7:12 -- So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Besides the parable of the Good Samaritan, one of my favorite bible stories comes from the book of Matthew - Matthew 22:33. Jesus was teaching in the temple in Jerusalem before a crowd, when the skeptical Sadducees and Pharisees sought to trap him into saying something for which they could accuse and condemn him. One of the Pharisees, an expert in religious law, asked him: “Teacher, which is the most important commandment in the Law of Moses?" Jesus replied, “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. A second is equally important: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the other commandments and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.”

It is interesting and noteworthy that Jesus stated that loving one’s neighbor as oneself is just as important as loving God. Our relationship with one another is as central to the Christian faith as the relationship with God. Christianity can therefore provide a moral foundation for protecting and promoting human rights even in an increasingly secular world.

We think of human rights today in very secular and legalistic terms. The defining document of international human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human rights. Adopted by the United Nations general assembly in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was the world’s response to the atrocities of the Holocaust and the Second World War. The global community was appalled and horrified by the sheer brutality and inhumanity of that war. The Universal Declaration was intended to provide a framework in which the basic human rights of all peoples around the world would be protected based on certain agreed universal standards. Although not everyone in our world today presently enjoy these rights, we have as a human community at least agreed on certain basic rights that we should ideally all have.

Apart from International human rights laws, we also have national and provincial human rights laws and institutions such as the Canadian Human Rights Act which ensures equal opportunity to individuals who may be victims of discriminatory practices based on gender, disability, or religion. These laws promote and protect the basic human rights we should all enjoy as citizens of Canada and citizens of the World. They regulate how countries deal with their citizens and how we deal with each other within our communities. Take a few examples. All human rights laws whether domestic or international emphasize certain common principles – Everyone has the rights to life; No one has the prerogative to take another person’s life. Everyone has the right to property, the right to dignity and no one should be subjected to torture. Everyone accused of a crime should be given fair hearing and the opportunity to defend him or herself. Everyone has a right to practice his religion, express himself and associate with others.

Although we may think of all these human rights are secular laws, they are in fact deeply rooted in the Christian humanist call that we “love our neighbors as ourselves.” The connections between today’s secular human rights regimes and Christian teachings are not simply philosophical. They are concrete and practical. In the process of drafting the Universal Declaration of human rights, the drafters recognized that the different world religions had something to contribute to developing a modern and universal human rights document. The Human Rights Commission and UNESCO – The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization -- therefore set out to get input from the representatives of world’s religions by interviewing them. Jews, Christian, Buddhists, Hindus and Moslems were all consulted. So although the UDHR is a secular document it has benefited from religious notions of rights.

The Ten Commandments which is at the foundation of the Judeo-Christian religious tradition is made of laws regulating both our relationship with God and our relationship with our fellow men and women. In fact, it is interesting that out of the 10 commandments, 4 deal with our relationship with God while 6 deal with our relationship with our fellow men and women.
- Laws relating to God - You shall have no other gods before me; You shall not make for yourself an idol; You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God; Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy;
- Laws relating to man - Honor your father and mother; You shall not kill; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor; You shall not covet what belongs to your neighbor

There are direct similarities between the Ten Commandments and our secular human rights laws today. "Thou shall not kill" protects the right to life. "Thou shalt not covert thy neighbor’s goods" protects the right to property. "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" affirms the right to justice and fair hearing.

The other link between secular Universal human rights today and Christian teaching is the aspiration towards universality. Jesus Christ, we are told, came to take the good news to the gentiles and uncircumcised, not only to the Jews. This was a message carried on by the apostles in their missionary journeys around the world after the death of Jesus. In the book of Galatians, Apostle Paul states: “There is no such thing as Jew or Greek, slave and freemen, male and female for all of you are one person in Christ” (Galatians 3:28-29). Paul in his letter to the Romans states that God created all mankind and all races are equal before God (Acts 17-19).

Although human rights have increasingly become secular and legalistic, they are in fact also rooted in fundamental humanist Christian values. The underlying premise of universal human rights is that we should love our neighbors as ourselves; that we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us. International human rights laws are really only an affirmation of what the good Christian already knows – that his relationship with his neighbor is just as important as his relationship with God. Christian teaching can continue to play an important role in how we as individual and citizens promote the human rights of others within our communities.

As you would have them do to you: Christianity and Human Rights


Here we go again...
Taliban style fundamentalist Islamists have banned music in the failed state that is Somalia. The long suffering people of Somalia already have to face the insecurity and uncertainty that comes with living a society overun by thugs and warlords. A decade of war and banditry has taken its toll on the civilian population. Now, even the simplest pleasure of music is being denied them. More disheartening, this irrationality is being decreed in the name of God and religion… When does the madness stop?

The Washington Post has the story... Somali Islamists ban music

Somali Islamists ban music

Apr 1, 2010


Too little, too late?
- Is this really about contrition for the atrocities of Srebrenica or more about Serbia’s quest to join the European Union?
- Has this apology come at this time only to prepare the way for Serbia's joining the Union?
- Why the reluctance to use the term “Genocide”? Who is afraid of the term “Genocide?”

However, I think this is a first step in the right direction. The true measure of the apology will be how it shapes Serbian government’s relations with its neighbors and Muslim minorities. This apology should be a means to an end rather than an end in itself.

Serbian MPs offer apology for Srebrenica massacre

Serbia's parliament has passed a landmark resolution apologising for the 1995 Srebrenica massacre - Europe's worst atrocity since World War II. The motion, approved by a narrow majority, says Serbia should have done more to prevent the tragedy.

It stopped short of calling the Bosnian war killings a genocide.

The murder of nearly 8,000 Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) was carried out by Bosnian Serb forces - allies of then-Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. The massacre, in what was supposed to have been a UN safe haven, became a symbol for the atrocities of the Balkan wars.

Meanwhile, a Dutch court has rejected an attempt to hold the United Nations responsible for the killings.

The resolution - which the Serbian government sees as a crucial step in its attempts to join the European Union - was approved after almost 13 hours of heated negotiations in the Belgrade parliament.

More here…. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8594625.stm

Serbia Apologizes for Srebrenica massacre

 
GIAZILO © 2015 Templateism.com