Five most influential Blogs

The best blogs the exemplify my best on the spot writing are: Where will the failures end; How to stop a Hemorrhage; The Long Trek Home; The continuing struggle of the Chadian Refugees; and Who else shall aide the flood of Iraqi refugees.

Where will the failures end in this never ending War?

On top of mounting civilian deaths and the increasing violence, the failed plans and strategies, on top of all that has gone wrong in this war, probably the most tragic part has been the over looking of the Nations in this conflict of the displaced persons from Iraq who have fled for their lives. The Inter Press News Agency cites the Refugees International as saying that this is “the world’s fastest growing displacement crisis.”

This being the case why aren’t more countries helping out? It would seem to me that the responsibility for the care of these people would be those persons who made it necessary for them to move. As of 2006 the UNHCR budget for refugees was 700,000 dollars. What can you hope to accomplish with this little amount of money. The IPS states that this would come down to less than one dollar per refugee. How could a person sustain themselves on this ineffectual amount?

The question that burns in my mind is, what are the rest of the U.N nations doing? Shouldn’t they be aiding in at least the protection and care of the refugees. It is good that some of them take in Refugees into their countries and provide them with shelter, but what about the ones that aren’t so lucky as to be picked up and taken into the First World? Since this would seem to be where most of the Iraqi refugees would seem to be in Camps where sanitation and basic human needs are hard to come by this would seem to be the obvious choice in being a primary recipient of aid from donors. What keeps other nations from participating in the relief of these souls?

If Refugee camps are the main breeding grounds for terrorism then what does this say when some of the largest refugee camps are being constructed by displaced Iraqis? How will the Nations combat this new wave of violence being issued forth from these impoverished zones? The most clear, concise answer that I can give is to provide the necessary funding to these camps to construct semi-permanent housing structures and sanitation facilities that provide adequate support for the number of people living in that area. Most of these refugees seem to be looking at staying in these camps for extended periods of time, as seen with one refugee interview in the IPS Article on this situation who said “I don’t expect to go back for at least 15-20 years. I have left everything behind, and now I have nothing but a small food store I run here.” With these types of responses from displaced persons, action must be taken to accommodate them to the best of the International Communities abilities. The current conditions in which they live are unacceptable and if this is representative of the UN or the UNHCR’s best efforts then something is definitely, drastically, wrong.

How to stop a Hemmorhage?

The Gulf News article “Telling the Dark, Sordid Truth” Discusses what is one of the most important issues of this decade, which is the fleeing of Iraqis to safe havens outside of Iraq. The article is right to say that the Iraqis live in a state of terror, that they risk their lives by staying another day in their country, not knowing if tomorrow they will be murdered. This is the reason that many Iraqis are trying to get out of the country as soon as they can. The question is, that I seem to have difficulty understanding, is “is the lifeblood of Iraq is being drained away?” as the article suggests it is. The Iraqi refugees flee to save their own lives, but one day they will return, soon hopefully. This isn’t a permanent drain, only a temporary one which is necessary for their own well-being. Any place is better than Iraq, as the article itself mentions that the refugees are aware that the first safe havens they find will be “miserable”.

The fact that the article points out, which is that 1,500 Iraqis flee their homes every day is testament to the worsening situation in the country. How could a person want to return to their former homes where they are not guaranteed to live out the night? Despite the U.S efforts to propagate the notion that things are getting better, how can they be if they can not even stem the tide of refugees leaving the country. Things cannot be getting better if the U.S, Iraqi police, and the Iraqi army cannot ensure the safety of the land.

The only way to stop the Iraqis from fleeing and becoming refugees is to make them feel safe enough to stay, safe enough that they would stay not only themselves but also their families. What the Gulf News calls a Hemorrhage of the land can be fixed with the proper surgical procedures of cleaning the corrupt police force, stopping the militias, and fixing the economy of the land by stopping corrupt contracts. This Hemorrhage drains the country of the very people that is needed to fix the problems that plague this part of the world. The unstoppable drain of the land, this “Hemorrhage” is bound to get worse as the situation deteriorates.

The long Trek Home

On a momentous move the UNHCR plans on returning 250,000 refugees back to their home land on Afghanistan according to the Dawn News Service. This is a great start on the repatriation of those individuals who have been with out homes for so long. Unfortunately this number of repatriations pales in comparison with the number of refugees still living abroad in Iran and Pakistan. According to the UNHCR report on Afghan refugees there are just about a million Afghans living in each of those countries. There are even more refugees living abroad in other countries including Germany, the U.K. and Canada.

The return of the refugees to their homeland is a symbolic step in showing the security of their homeland. While conflict may still rage on in some parts of the country it is deemed safe enough to begin the process of repatriation. Of course the number of people being returned to their homeland is insignificant to the number that remain abroad, but the fact of the matter is they are steadily being returned.

You can see how slow the process of repatriation is by examining the UNHCR report which includes the refugee spread sheet. Out of 10,000 refugees that were brought to the U.S only three were returned to Afghanistan in 2005.

Of course at the end of 2005 populations of refugees in other States such as Iran saw a sharp decrease in numbers, from the initial number of 952,802 which declined to 662,355 refugees living in the State.

The UNHCR is part of the UN, which is a IGO (Intergovernmental Organization). Since this is the case all decisions are based on policies and bureaucratic measures that dictate how many will have to leave, stay, and any logistical issues that come up with sustaining large populations of refugees. This means that it will be a very slow process that may never be complete as UNHCR spokesman Ron Redmond says “This displacement has been going on for two decades or more and many of the Afghans in neighbouring countries are integrated in local society, they have businesses or jobs and families”

On the Australian standing of recent refugees.

On February 20, the Australian Navy intercepted a boat (read the article from CNN) heading towards Australia near the territory of Christmas Island and in accordance with their SOP which is called their “Pacific Solution” could be sent to a detention camp for temporary holding.

The refugees came from a couple different countries which included Sri Lanka and Indonesia. These nations are part of the Global South which are countries that countries that are less-developed than the countries in the Global North. These refugees were heading to Australia in order to become members of a country that resides in the Global North which is characterized as a area where “Peace, Wealth, and Democracy prevail” (The Global Future A brief Introduction to World Politics; Kegley).

The issue at hand is the the detention of the refugees on a offshore detention facility located on Nauru which processes the claims of the individuals. Do these individuals deserve to be placed in a detention facility, offshore non-the less? How long will it take to process the cases of these individuals (previous cases have taken up to three years)? Do refugees fleeing certain aspects of their homeland such as extreme poverty and violence in search of a better life merit the detention and criminalization of their plight?

Of course in order to under stand the situation better other questions need to be asked, in particular regarding the detention center itself. Some question are: What are the conditions of the detention centers like? What restrictions are placed on the interned? How are the facilities guarded? Are the detainees regarded as prisoners or temporary residents?

These are important questions that will in the end show whether or not the Australian Government is upholding what the Amnesty International describes as its “International Obligation”.

The continuing struggle of the Chadian Refugees

The plight of the tribes of Chad has been gradually getting worse due to Arab Janjaweed militias continuing their raids on the non-arab tribes of the region. According to The Indepentant article “Please send UN troops, say desperate refugees in Chad” more than 120,000 people were displaced over the past nine months. This spur in violence has created the demand for the UN to send in a peacekeeping force of which has already diliberated sending some 6,000 trooops to the region in order to help stem the tide of violence which has wracked the area for some time.

While the main focus for peacekeeping efforts has never really been the focus of any countries, as seen time and time again with genocide or refugee crisis in the African states, this conflict in Chad should be addressed becuase in a time of intense refugee flows not only from Africa but also the middle countries of which are in conflict due to the “War on Terror” (i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq) becuase it displays the political and humantarian commitment to human rights and the quest to make the human condition of suffering lessened. It would seem to be the moral obligation of all nations to help those who cannot be helped within their own borders and protected by their own government.

The Dajo people (the tribal people who are fleeing the violence) cannot defend themselves against the heavily armed miltias that hunt them down relentlesly. The most that the Dajo have to defend themselves are bows and arrows along with spears. The militias are armed with rifles, machine guns, and RPGs. Kind of a unfair advantage to the Dajo. It is no wonder that they are fleeing in such numbers.

A proximate cause of the push by the arab militias and the native tribes is one of resources. As explained by one Ms. Bennet “The conflict is about a lack of resources, This is an area where traditionally there have always been rivalries between different groups around water, land and pasture. Previously there may have been small tensions. But these rivalries are spiralling out of control. People are forming armed groups and attacking each other.”

The push for resource conquest is an issue that has gone on for generations. On a larger international scale it still occurs. A resolution for the distribution of equal resources is a issue that should addressed in the conflict resolution process. Once both parties get the resources of which they lack, perhaps they will be less inclined to engage hostile actions towards their neighbors which with whom they may have previously had good relations.

In a area with as sparse resources as Chad, control and management of resources will aid in lessing the tribal conflicts. In order to manage the resources between the tribes a good infrastructure between the government and the outlying areas need to first be established. Communications between the tribes is imperative to lessen the tensions brought on by resource exploitation.

And who else shall aid the flood of Iraqi refugees?

In the BBC article “Sweden urges EU to take in Iraqis” The Swedish governement basically is asking for more involvement in the aid of the Iraqi refugees. The swedish ministry is quoted as saying “Sweden can help many of them but Sweden cannot help all of them,”. This shows in some aspects how the Swedish government is feeling a little overwhelmed, especially these days where the number of asylum seekers is pegged at 9,000 just in 2006. The total number of Iraqis who now live in Sweden is at 80,000.

Sweden is definitaly doing its part in this grave humanitarian crisis. Allowing that number of foreigners into their country shows a commitment to humanitarian services. If the rest of the EU would stop its usual rhetoric of the war being ill-conceived and live in the present I am sure that many more lives could be made better and even saved.

Of course one must also see that the Iraqis need to receive aid from their own neighbors, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the rest of the middle east. What ends up happening more often then not is the refugees will only go to countries that are dominated by the same sect of islam that they follow, which should morally not be the case, but it is what it is.

The article states that “Authority expects the number of Iraqis applying for asylum to double in 2007.” This is most likely a accurate forecast especially since the sectarian violence is at its all time high and the flow of asylum seekers only grows with each passing month. With this tide of refugees, it is the international communitie’s moral obligation to provide aid and shelter a people left homeless by a war with no end in sight. Of course this is only the liberal, idealist position.

A challange on the U.S as a safe haven?

In the article Refugee groups challenge U.S. status as safe third country for asylum seekers Refugee groups challenge U.S. status as safe third country for asylum seeker published by The Gazette of Toronto, Canada it is discussed that the U.S is no longer a suitable place for asylum seekers due to (in my opinion justified) extraditions of certain individuals.

One case of extradition mentions “The matter before the court stems from the case of “John Doe,” a refugee claimant who was arrested in the U.S. on Friday. The claimant had been in the U.S. since 2000, but did not apply for refugee status within the mandated one-year time frame…he’s in detention and faces extradition to Colombia.” A few questions seem to arise with this statement. One question that comes to my mind is why didn’t this particular refugee take the appropriate steps to ensure his continued stay in the U.S, after all he had been in the United States since 2000? What was his background? Why was he wanted in Colombia?

To me this case does not render special attention nor does it qualify as a excuse to declare that the United States is not a safety zone for refugees. If the refugees are only running from persecution from others and not a criminal past then they have nothing to worry about. If they are running from say a possible narcotics arrest warrant as in the case of the claimant reffered to earlier then they should rightfully be deported.

This article attempts to further its case by stating that “The deportation of Maher Arar to Syria and the treatment of detainees in Guantanamo Bay are evidence of “continual breaches” carried out by the U.S., lawyer Lorne Waldman told the court.” Before any analysis can be made the case of Maher Arar needs to be addressed. Maher Arar is a Canadian citizen who was arrested in New York on a stop over coming from Tunisia. A while after being arrested he was sent to Syria where he claims he was tortured during his captivity which lasted for over one year.

Upon further investigation it is revealed that Maher Arar was arrested by U.S authorities based on information given to them by Arar’s own country of residence. When a country receives so called “intelligence” from a trusted source (in this case the Canadian government) action is expected to be taken to neutralize a perceived threat, Mr. Arar just so happened to be a victim of faulty information, whose origins lay in Canada. This is a drastic case of “Being in the wrong place at the wrong time” as it is said. Since the U.S received this information from the Canadian government it was taken on their word that all information provided was relavent, correct, and sensitive. Obviously the Canadians got it wrong in this particular case. I am not condoning his being sent to Syria, merely, stating the facts.

As far as Guantanamo Bay is concerned, the prisoners in that facility are prisoners of war who are members of violent organizations such as Al-Qaeda, Ansar Al Sunna, Jaysh Al Mahdi, the Taliban, and many more. These prisoners would continue to be a dangerous threat were they to be anywhere else. They receive what is considered first class prison treatment, three square meals a day, regularely scheduled prayers (Five times a day which are announced from speakers), and the opportunity to have outdoors areas. They are afforded the luxury of their prayer mats and are treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions.

Having these individuals in isolation on a remote area of the world where there is no chance or hope of escape is the best solution for high value individuals.

It is imperative to remember that the actions of individual guards are not representative of the entire military structure. When infractions are realized, the guilty parties are immediately investigated and punished. Though these prisoners deserve much worse, they are treated as most other prisoners within the U.S are, with respect for human life.

The article which is based off of these examples now seems overblown and weakly supported. A better topic to write about would have been how the United States is one of the few places in the world where legitamate refugees can seek and gain asylum and not fear persecution.

A Response to the Blogging of Mr. Payne

The author of “Iran Update” is Roger A. Payne. He is a proffesor of political science at the University of Louisville and has been there since 1991. He has published numerous academic works such as Deliberate before Striking First? and Deliberating Preventive War: The Strange Case of Iraq’s Disappearing Nuclear Threat . This shows that the author of this blog is proffesionally educated and quite capable of presenting his arguments in a clear concise manner which will help the reader to evaluate his writings in a manner cognizant of a educated person. The links he has listed as regular reading sources are fairly mixed with some that are plain news sources and others that are left leaning blogs, many of which just post transcripts of news or speeches in their blogs. Due to this mixture of blogs I believe that Mr. Payne is a left leaning person and as such will write his articles in such a manner.

Much of Mr. Payne’s blogs contain links to other sites on which he has posted his longer articles such as The Duck of Minerva . The blogs directly on this page are mixed with his personal life (which aren’t so much useful for our studies) and his writings are fairly informative even if you do have to click on the links to read more about what he is talking about or to read his own writings (which can get a bit edgy over the material seen on his Iran Update blog ).

His comments in the Iran Update blog are designed to discredit the argument that Iran is supplying arms to Iraqi factions but in doing so his comments come off as sarcastic, which is distinguished by his choice of words. He also only presents informations that points to his general point of view on the subject matter which does not accurately present the whole picture of the affaire.

So in the end Roger Payne’s blog is a useful tool to read one point of view on a subject and also to get links to more information on a particular subject which may or may not come from another blob or news outlet. It would be useful to read more sources on the same subjects that he discusses in order to get a better, more complete perspective on the material at hand.

The Insanity out of OIF continues…

Setting aside all reasons on why starting OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM was started wrong (or right whichever you choose), a look at the current situation seems in need of discussion, that is the demands put forth by the leaders of the nation of Iraq. The recent comments made be Prime Minister AL-Maliki shows the level on incompetence of the Iraqi government. Al-Maliki states “The situation would be much better if the United States had immediately sent our security forces more adequate weapons and equipment. If they had committed themselves more and with greater speed we would have had a lot fewer deaths among Iraqi civilians and American soldiers,”. His comment just highlights the complete failure of the Iraqi Security Forces (who you can never trust by the way). The United States continually sends the Iraqi forces the same level of equipment (body armor, weapons, and other such supplies). An example of the quality weapons we provide them are the pistols which they are issued. The standard issue pistol for the U.S forces is the 9mm Beretta. The Iraqi security forces are issued the Glock 9 (also a 9mm weapon) which is a very high quality pistol.

Many of the security forces will either sell their equipment or get it stolen due to their gross negligence. If the Iraqi security forces would shape up and eliminate the corruption that has become synonymnous with their service maybe they wouldn’t be in a constant demand for more and more weapons and other equipment. The question that begs to be asked here is “why should we even supply the Iraqi Forces to the extent that we do when their “Ministry of Interior” should be taking care of Iraqi Forces, instead of being babysat by the U.S forces and why are we still responsible for most of the secuity in Iraq”?

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh was quoted saying “We feel Iraqi needs for equipment (are) more than that money,” he said, speaking in English. “We are expecting also assistance and help from the multinational forces in order to have proper training and manning as well as arming the Iraqi force.” Mr. Dabbagh while plainly stating the needs of the Iraqi forces, seems to overlook what should be obvious to most Iraqis at this point. That is that the country of Iraq needs to begin to ween itself off of American aid and begin to focus on becoming independant in all matters Iraqi, not just aid for their security forces but security for their own country, peoples, and borders.

Of course this mentality that the Americans provide more (if not all) logistics and security for the different ministries is not just unique to the politicians of Iraq, but is prevelant among the common peoples of that country. The attitude that the Americans are responsible for all things related to security is a strong indicator of the direction that this conflict will continue to take.

There was recently a boycott by Muqtada al-Sadre on the Iraqi parliament. This boycott is representative of the influence of the militias within the government. Al-Sadr’s influence dictates the changes in policy that occure within the different ministries and also affects the public opinion of certain individuals within the goverment. This influence is one source of the corruption that occures within the the Iraqi parliament.

So when you hear of discussions of time-tables for the withdraw of US forces from Iraq as seen here in a excerpt from CNN’s coverage of the boycott by the militia “At a joint news conference with members of the al-Sadr bloc, parliamentary speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said the boycott ended after negotiations with parliament members who said they would consider the group’s demands — which al-Mashhadani called “national demands.” Those demands include setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition troops from Iraq.” know that due to Iraqi dependany on American aid in all matters security, the notion of withdraw is one certainty that will never change in this war, that we will not withdraw until the Iraqis can manage their own affairs without killing each other off. So in the tone of a cynic I say this will not happen for another few years, or until they do manage to kill each other off.

In order to understand why Iraqis depend on US aid for security you have to understand the level to which the government, as well as the ISF are corrupted.

It is important to note the Muqtada al-Sadre’s militia (The Mehdi Army, or more commonly known and the Jaysh Al-Mahdi) is responsible for the mass murder that occures daily in Iraq. JAM sends out its death squads (whose sole purpose is to kill Sunnis and any one who opposes the authority of the militia) with impunity. This militia has infiltrated the ISF and uses it as a cover for their operations. This is the reason why the iraqi citizens have little or no faith in the protection provided by their own security forces. Of course JAM isn’t the only organization that uses the ISF as a cover. Other insurgent organizations are known to enter into the security services such as the Iraqi Police and use the training, weapons, and equipment for their own covert operations.

To wrap up this blog and answer my question from earlier “why should we even supply the Iraqi Forces to the extent that we do when their “Ministry of Interior” should be taking care of Iraqi Forces, instead of being babysat by the U.S forces and why are we still responsible for most of the secuity in Iraq?” We provide the ISF with the needed weaponry and equipment in a vain effort to make them a independant and most importantly a formidable force to be reckoned even knowing that there will be individuals in the forces that work against coalition efforts becuase that is all it can do.

excerpts from taken from:

CNN. “400Mehdi Army militants arrested, al-maliki says” Febuary 18, 2007

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/18/iraq.main/index.html

CNN. “25 US troop die on one of deadliest days in Iraq, Febuary 21, 2007″

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/21/Iraq.main/index.html