Oct 28

Voluntourism and the Job Market

Over the summer I gave a webinar presentation about the positive and negative aspects of voluntourism (you can watch the video here or read the summary here, in case you missed it!), and today I would like to discuss the other side of voluntourism.  Namely, what to do after you’ve gone on a voluntourism trip (or several trips) and want to incorporate that experience into your work.

I recently read an article on CNN money about whether or not you should include volunteer work on your resume since it is unpaid experience.  The article suggested that people who have serious commitments to volunteer work—as in, they volunteer regularly for a particular organization and feel very dedicated to the cause, as opposed to volunteering once or twice a year for a cause they don’t particularly care about—include the experience on their resume, even if it is not directly related to the job field they are applying for.  In such a tough job market something like volunteer work can help single out a candidate.  If you’ve taken on a lot of responsibilities or show a lot of dedication and commitment to a particular organization or goal, employers will take notice.  If the volunteer work you do involves some of the same skills as the job you’re applying for that’s even better, but any kind of consistent volunteer work experience can show commitment and character.

There’s no reason why this article could not apply to voluntourism, as well.  Voluntourism is a new field, so of course when I google searched “voluntourism experience resume” (as well as several similar variations) I wasn’t able to find much.  But that doesn’t mean it isn’t something to consider.  Obviously the same rules from volunteer work apply: only include voluntourism experience if you’ve gone on multiple voluntourism trips/long-term voluntourism trips and intend to continue doing so, if you’ve taken on several responsibilities during the trip, and if you’re dedicated to the cause.  If you’ve only gone on one trip or if it isn’t something you particularly care about then there’s no reason to put the experience on your resume, as it won’t really help you stand out.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that you should use voluntourism to pad your resume.  Voluntourism is expensive, for one thing, so if you’re not interested in learning about other cultures or travel then it would make more sense to volunteer locally if you’re interesting in making a difference.  Also, if you’re going on a trip just so you can have some more experience to include on your resume, then it would be more pragmatic to volunteer locally, to find an internship, or to take a class. Those are all things that will help you build skills in your relevant field, but are less expensive and less time consuming.   With the job market the way it is you want to do everything you can to set yourself apart, but you have to be smart about it.  If voluntourism is something you’re very interested in and you feel you’ve gained something significant from it, put it on your resume.  If you don’t intend to continue voluntouring or you don’t feel it helped you develop any skills or gain any experience, find something else you can do to make yourself stand out.

If you are serious about your volunteering/voluntourism and want to put it on your resume, there are several ways to do so.  LinkedIn recently added the ability to add volunteer work and causes you care about to your profile, and while voluntourism is not currently it’s own category, it is a start.  Adding your experience–or even your interest in voluntouring in the future–can be a way to round out a profile and draw attention to yourself.  If you’re interested in going on a voluntourism trip to add experience and skills to your resume, though, be sure to look for trips that are related to your field, not just general voluntourism programs.  You wouldn’t want to end up helping to dig a well if you want to add medical experience to your resume!  A quick search for voluntourism programs in your area of interest can yield lots of results. For example, I searched “teaching voluntourism” and was able to find lots of programs that offered volunteers the opportunity to teach abroad.  Sites like Travelocity.com also have voluntourism sections, which often list programs offered in a variety of different fields.  Just remember to look for voluntourism trips that are sustainable and seem to be legitimately giving back to the destination communities, not trips arranged by foreign travel companies that have volunteers work on unnecessary projects!

Michelle Bovée is a SISGI Group Program and Research Intern focused on international affairs, economic development, and responsible tourism. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org

Share

Oct 27

Escaping Environmental Change

Every winter, Floridians see an increase of “snowbirds” in their communities. Snowbirds are Northerners who migrate South during the winter. Their migration is due to the harsh winters in the North and their seeking the warmth found in the Sunshine state. While their experience is due to difficult weather conditions, it is very different to that of the 50 million people that have been forced to leave their home because of climate change.

They have been called “environmental refugees”, as well as “environmental migrants”, “climate refugee”, “environmentally displaced person (EDP)”, and “environmental-refugee-to-be (ERTB)”.  This issue is a recent phenomenon to researchers and scientist and there are many gaps in what is known. However, all the different terms are used to refer to people who are forced to flee their home region due to sudden or long-term changes to their environment. Usually this is due to droughts, a rise in sea level, and changes in seasonal weather patterns such as monsoons.  There are three types of environmental migrants:

Environmental emergency migrants: people who flee temporarily due to an environmental disaster or sudden environmental event. (Examples: someone forced to leave due to hurricane, tsunami, earthquake, etc.). Here’s an example:

Mahe Noor left her village in southern Bangladesh after a cyclone flattened her family’s home and small market in 2007. Jobless and homeless, she and her husband moved to the capital, hoping that they might soon return home.

Environmental forced migrants: people who have to leave due to deteriorating environmental conditions. (Example: someone forced to leave due to a slow deterioration of their environment such as river erosion).

Environmental motivated migrants also known as environmentally induced economic migrants: people who choose to leave to avoid possible future problems, like Mukhles below:

Mukhles Rahman and his brother Mohammad left their village eight years ago because of river erosion. Their family once grew rice, sugar cane, mustard seed and radishes on 10 acres. Over a couple of decades, the local river washed away the farmland and the family home. These days, the two brothers live in a tiny shack. “We are trying to find another place to go, because all the land back home is dissolving,” said Mukhles, who works as a security guard at a garment factory.

Unlike traditional refugees, who flee their homes due to persecution, the most vulnerable people to climate change are least likely to move because they can’t afford to do so.  These refugees are much more likely to relocate locally rather than internationally, simply because the people most affected by these changes lack the resources to finance a move abroad.

Environmental refugees are not included in the Geneva Convention, which legally defines who falls under the category of refugees. People who migrate to escape climatic conditions do not meet this definition. Currently, a refugee is defined as an individual who was forced from their country of origin because they fear harm due to their race, religion, nationality, participation in a particular group.  In not being formally recognized by the government, climate migrants are not eligible for assistance in rebuilding their lives, and the same services and benefits as traditionally-defined refugees. Therefore, they find a way to move far enough from their former home to temporarily escape the climatic conditions, but remain close enough that it is inevitable that they will once again be impacted by future environmental change.

What do you think? Are they really refugees? Should the legal definition of refugees be changed to include climate migrants? How can the 50 million affected individuals be helped? Who should do it? Many questions still remain.  It is still too early to tell the long term impact this issue has on the individual and our communties.

Regina Bernadin is a doctoral student at Nova Southeastern University focusing on Conflict Analysis and Resolution.  As a SISGI intern, her primary areas of interest are conflict resolution, human rights and Latin American political, economic and socio-cultural issues. Her interest in the development of human rights abroad has taken her to several Latin American countries, including Colombia, Ecuador and Suriname.
Share

Oct 27

Freedom Theater: Building peace with arts

Creating freedom and peace in Palestine

I’ve previously written about how art, and in particular music, can help to solve social and economical disparities (read post). I recently learned about another great example of how art can be useful to alleviate social conflicts.

I attended a talk by Palestinian actors from The Freedom Theater. The Freedom Theater is a theatre and cultural center in Jenin Refugee Camp. It is the only venue for theatre and multimedia in the north of the West Bank in Palestine. For the first time, an institution offers art related educational experiences to children and youth. It also creates an audience and educates, by offering performances and workshops.

The Freedom Theater is a space where children and youth can have healthy growth and development experiences. Living in military surroundings, having to deal with constant death and violence, the young generation in the Jenin area struggles with ongoing fears, depression and trauma. At the same time, few opportunities exist for these youngsters to find positive and creative outlets for their emotions.

The Freedom Theatre offers children and young adults in the Jenin area a safe space in which they are free to express themselves, to explore their creativity and emotions through culture and arts. It provides them with opportunities to develop the skills, self-knowledge and confidence, which can empower them to challenge present realities.

To end war, it is essential to be able to imagine alternatives to war, to imagine a better world. If you grow up in an environment where everything is violence, you cannot think of solutions that do not include violence. That is why the Freedom Theater is so important. It gives people an alternative to obtaining peace that do not include war. By encouraging freedom of expression and respect for individual rights through arts, the cultural activities that take place in the Freedom Theater break taboos, stimulate cooperation and enhance understanding of others. People that work at the freedom theater are “creative peace activists”. They are creating sustainable change by changing the way people think and perceive themselves.

Based on what one of the actors said, the freedom theater is a liberating space in more than one way.

“Freedom Theater not only refers to the freedom of our land, it also refers to the freedom of our mind”.

To grow up in a refugee camp in Palestine means that life and death are interchangeable. Tanks, guns and fear are not news. Children have no space left to imagine, no space to dream. Freedom Theater allows them to imagine better worlds, to see beyond the military reality. It gives them hope; it teaches them to value life.

To give an example of the change they’re creating, they described their first Continue reading

Share

Oct 26

Disarming the Developing World

The debate on the use of weapons is heated, personal and wide-ranging. As a conflict resolution student, I’d like to think that conflict can be resolved in other ways besides using deadly force. This particular blog doesn’t try to address the debate on whether weapons should be used or not. It accepts that in today’s society, the commonly accepted view is that at times to maintain peace; deadly force is necessary and has to be used. Also, that the use of weapons in war, in particular, is inevitable. And while the military procurement of arms and the legal manufacturing of weapons to sell domestically and abroad to others is very different from the use of weapons by gun runners and militia, there are consequences. No matter its legality, the repercussions of the sale of weapons is such that it is felt by society at every level and directly and indirectly affects members of much of the developing world.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children… This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron — Former U.S. President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, in a speech on April 16, 1953.

Social problems around the globe abound not because of a lack of funding, but because of the scarce resources dedicated to address the issue. According to reports, some governments spend more on their military than on social development, communications infrastructure and health combined. Each year, approximately $50 billion USD worth of weapons are sold worldwide, with three quarters going to developing nations. What I found staggering is that 85% of all the arms sold between 2002 to 2009, were done by the 5 permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (the United States, Russia, France, United Kingdom and China), together with Germany and Italy. This is note-worthy as this UN body is tasked with ensuring peace globally and sanctioning rogue regimes. The sad truth is that in most of the developing world, these weapons are not used to promote peace by to inflict fear and maintain the status quo, which most times means a corrupt state.

Another huge problem with those countries providing the arms to the rest of the world is that there is no guarantee in whose hands they will end up. According to an Amnesty International report, the United States, Russia and several European nations provided the majority of the weapons used by oppressive governments in the Middle East and North African regions before this year’s Arab spring. They also found that in the last five years approximately $2 billion USD was spent on security equipment such as small arms, tear gas, and armored vehicles by Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen, five of the countries that faced or are facing uprisings.

While indirectly, arms trading promotes corruption and lack of accountability in how they will be used and by whom, directly, it is responsible for a high rate of deaths. The growing access to small arms, in particular, has been a major factor in the increase in the number of conflicts and fatalities worldwide. In today’s conflicts over 80 percent of all casualties have been civilian; 90 percent of those were caused by the use of small arms.

What’s called into question here is not to stop the manufacturing and selling of weapons, it is to recognize the implications beyond the amount of income their sale brings to a nation.

In 2009, 153 UN members voted on forming an arms trade treaty to address accountability issues and stop human rights abuses. The US and European Union have also developed some regulations, but they are not adequate, full of loopholes and lack transparency. In the end, I am left with one question: does the prospect of such large profits and gains, blind the governments to the plight of individuals who live in the perpetual unrest caused by weapons that have infiltrated their society?

Regina Bernadin is a doctoral student at Nova Southeastern University focusing on Conflict Analysis and Resolution.  As a SISGI intern, her primary areas of interest are conflict resolution, human rights and Latin American political, economic and socio-cultural issues. Her interest in the development of human rights abroad has taken her to several Latin American countries, including Colombia, Ecuador and Suriname.
Share

Oct 25

The US Focus on Uganda: Why Now? (part 2)

In my blog post last week I addressed the history of the Lords Resistance Army (LRA) in an effort to show who they are and what this organization is doing in Uganda and other countries in Africa. I hope that I was able to convey that the LRA are not, as Limbaugh seemed to think “Christians… fighting the Muslims in Sudan”. While I hope that I clarified what the LRA are, I was still left with questions about our administration’s decision to send troops to the address ongoing issues surrounding the conflict. Why now? Why only 100 peacekeepers? What can they actually accomplish?

I would like to take my lesson one more step in a brief clarification of what the troops will be doing on the ground. According to the exact memo written from the White House, the teams are “combat-equipped…headquarters, communications, and logistics personnel…These forces will act as advisors to partner forces that have the goal of removing from the battlefield Joseph Kony and other senior leadership of the LRA. Our forces will provide information, advice, and assistance to select partner nation forces.” While these soldiers are ready for combat, they will be in predominantly advising and educating roles as opposed to front line violence. Only if they are directly attacked will they employ force. I feel like this is an important distinction to make between this situation and the role of our troops in other parts of the world who are facing extraordinary daily violence.

The decision to help Uganda against the LRA has been in works as early as 2008, so this decision is not entirely out of context. Back then Invisible Children hosted Lobby Days for Northern Uganda, which grew through May of 2010 where a finalized bill was sent to Obama’s desk signed by 267 members of Congress. This was the most cosponsored bill with a focus on an African issue as far back as records show. The LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act passed by the House and Senate unanimously, with support from both parties.

This begins to answer my questions why Obama decided that it was time to begin addressing his promise to send troops. However, the successful history of this bill has not translated into full bipartisan support today. Senator John McCain was quoted on the topic of looking back towards failed peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and Somalia, warning that they resulted in outcomes that we had never intended.  I fear that because we are in the midst of a Presidential race, this timing may not be the most opportune.

 

Even for people who are well versed on the background of the LRA, I think Obama will be criticized for his decision to send only send 100 people to Uganda. One side will say that 100 people are already too much for a nation America does not see as politically powerful or threatening. However, others will say that 100 individuals are nowhere near enough to tackle the jungle comprising lands in three nations in the search of one person.  In my opinion, I feel as though Obama is safe in sending only 100 troops initially. If the decision is reached that more are necessary, I am sure more soldiers will be made available. The only caveat to this would be if a public outcry erupts from our countrymen being put in harms way. However, with all surrounding countries in agreement towards a common goal hopefully the US troops will find support from all fronts because Kony will inevitably try to slip away through neighboring borders

 

If this resistance to sending troops becomes the case before the 2012 election, then I know this will be manipulated into a key issue for the Republican candidate to capitalize upon. Again, this leads me back to my question of why Obama has chosen this time to follow through with this law. After all, the US has shown no pressing desire to fight the LRA for the last 20 years, why do they need to rush it before next November? My only response to this decision is that Obama is hoping that this proves to be a short and successful mission. If he predicts this will be a brief task then this will be another feather in the hat of accomplishments for the President. If this becomes a long drawn out mission, then the length of fighting will be the least among his worries for his reelection campaign.

 

Over all, I am happy to hear that President Obama has followed through with his promise to address the LRA. While I would argue that he might not be sending them at the right time (with the current outcry and focus over bringing our troops home from the Middle East as well as the current budget mess) I think that his humanitarian aims are in the correct place. Similarly, I think he was smart in only sending 100 troops. Without setting a timetable, he can always send more after initial assessments are made, and similarly there will be less pressure or focus when only a small number of solders remain abroad.

 

I think that no matter how this mission to Uganda turns out, we will look back on it as an important legacy from Obama’s administration. With a humanitarian goal, it will either be a great success, or he will loose in the reelection with having initiating something good. While the debates will continue to circulate about whether we are doing it for oil or political power, I believe that this mission of bringing down the LRA is a promise that President Obama sees as worth addressing. After all, there is no shortage of grievances with regards to his undelivered promises. Lets just hope that this promise is a successful and succinct one.

–Katherine Peterson is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focused on theories of development, globalization, and political ramifications of development work

 

Share

Oct 25

Información y consumo

Pocas veces tienes una idea clara de dónde viene el producto que nos obtenemos en el supermercado del vecindario. No sabemos lo que implica la cadena de producción o cómo el producto llegó hasta tus manos. La mayoría de nosotros somos consumidores extremadamente ignorantes, ciegos a lo que pasa en la cadena de producción. Como consumidores, estamos expuestos a un mundo inmenso de productos y tenemos que hacer decisiones día a día. Pero que tanto conocemos o sabemos lo que pasa en los productos que compramos? Las cadenas de producción se han vuelto tan complicadas y complejas que muchas compañías ni siquiera están completamente seguras de los orígenes e impactos de sus productos.

Hace poco me impresioné mucho cuando vi un impactante video de Greenpeace: un empleado de oficina comiendo el dedo de un orangután al abrir un paquete de Kit Kat. Me impacté no sólo por la morbosidad del video sino también porque jamás me imaginé que comer un Kit Kat podría estar relacionado con la muerte de un orangután. No es hasta que investigué un poco que pude entender la complicada relación: para producir un Kit Kat se necesita aceite de palma (el aceite se mezcla con el chocolate para darle la durabilidad y la textura). El aceite de palma que se usa en los Kit Kat viene de territorios que fueron deforestados (muchos de ellos de Indonesia), los territorios que solían ser el hábitat de los orangutanes. Ya que Nestlé compra aceite de palma que viene de territorios deforestados, al comer un Kit Kat estás técnicamente matando al orangután. Esta relación no es evidente y no es fácil que el consumidor ordinario la haga.  Por consiguiente me puse a pensar en todos los otros productos de los cuáles no sabemos sus origines (casi todos!).

Cuando compramos algo, obtenemos acceso a un servicio o a un producto. Pero cuál es la historia detrás de todo lo que pagamos? Como consumidores, tenemos derecho a acceder y a entender la historia detrás de los productos. Entender los productos que compramos es uno de los problemas más importantes de nuestra sociedad globalizada ya que nuestro impacto como consumidores es más importante que nunca.

Para intentar informar al consumidor, muchas compañías y organizaciones dan certificados a ciertos productos que tienen ciertos estándares de producción (compañías como Rainforest Alliance, Faire Trade, USDA organic). Estas certificaciones ofrecen un control de calidad externo a la compañía, lo que permite más transparencia. Aun así,  muchas veces sucede que certificaciones se obtiene de manera corrupta (sólo se tiene que pagar para obtener el certificado), subjetivas, o incompletas. Este es el caso de los productos que llamamos “orgánico” o “bio” y que no son completamente orgánicos ni completamente naturales.

Las cadenas de producción son tan complicadas hoy en día que muchas veces es muy complicado evaluar lo que realmente es orgánico, “socialmente justo”, o reciclado. Este es otro gran problema de las certificaciones. Muchas veces, la definición de estos términos varían según las compañías y según los países. Además, muchas veces incluyen medidas abstractas y definiciones superfluas  que exigen mucho tiempo si se quieren comprender (como consumo total de energía y emisión total de carbón).

Muchas veces tenemos que escoger entre los “certificados” y los “no certificados”. ¿Qué decir de los productos que no tienen ningún certificado? Representan la mayor parte de los productos que compramos. Como consumidores, tenemos que estar conscientes de esta falta de certificados. Debemos hacernos la pregunta ¿porqué es que no tiene la certificación? Debemos de hacer el esfuerzo de conocer a nuestro producto un poco más.

Para poder conocer nuestros productos evitando los problema que traen las certificaciones una buena idea seria narrar las etapas de producción. El consumidor así podría evaluar por él mismo la calidad de la cadena de producción y si es socialmente y/o ambientalmente responsable. Por ejemplo, la marca de ropa Patagonia ha empezado una iniciativa llama “the footprint chronicles”, en donde se puede rastrear cada etapa de la producción (diseñado en California, producido en China, tejido en México). Esta es una muy buena iniciativa que podría ser implementada y establecerse como obligatoria para todos los productos. Cada producto que sale al mercado tiene una historia detrás de el, una historia de cómo, cuando y porqué existe. Esta historia involucra y afecta a personas y a la naturaleza. Conocer esa historia es responsabilidad del consumidor porque al comprar, nos volvemos parte de esa historia, nos volvemos responsables de sus impactos y de sus consecuencias. Si yo compro un Kit Kat, tengo el derecho de saber quién es afectado por la decisión que tomo.

Claramente las compañías tendrán incentivos para ocultar o silenciar las prácticas que no sean socialmente responsables o ambientalmente amigables. Patagonia querrá hacer pública la historia de la camisa que es socialmente responsable, pero ocultará la parte de la historia que no es tan linda. Es por esto importante que investigadores independientes empiecen a juntar las historias de los productos y a hacerlas públicas. Ya existen proyectos muy buenos que hacen esto (ver “la historia de las cosas”). Si suficiente información es recolectada sobre los productos, fácilmente podríamos crear una página internet o una aplicación en donde podríamos escanear un código de barras y conocer los orígenes y las historias de los productos.

 
 Julia Naime (@julianasah) es Asistente a la Investigación y Programas del SISGI Group. Es estudiante de Economía en New York University. Durante su pasantía en el SISGI Group, investigará sobre Desarollo rural, Problemas ambientales y Economía internacional 
Share

Oct 24

Barbie’s Looking Pretty Grown Up

Every year, Mattel sells millions of Barbie dolls to young girls and avid doll collectors across the world.  Barbie’s image has changed from year to year, and she has managed to be everything from a veterinarian, supermodel, to the most perfect, stiletto-wearing teacher.  None of these images and professions has drawn a great degree of anger from parents, but that has come to an end with the new Tokidoki Barbie.  Parents believe that the pink haired and tattoo sporting Barbie is a bad influence on young children, and will cause them to follow the bad example the doll sets.  However, looking at the Barbie doll, who is dressed rather modestly in a long shirt and leggings, what is the big issue?

Apparently, parents are in an uproar because they believe young girls will be negatively influenced by the fashion sense and tattoos of the new Tokidoki Barbie doll.  The doll, which is the brain child of Italian artist Simone Legno, depicts his love for Japanese fashion.  It is quite literally a plastic tribute to Legno’s admiration of the Japanese lifestyle, and is in fact not meant for young children at all.  The Tokidoki doll is an adult only collector’s item that is neither mass-produced nor sold in stores like Target and Walmart.  Legno’s unique Barbie is just another collaboration effort, one that the company has done with other major names such as Hello Kitty, Skull Candy, and LeSportsac.  Thus, the brand’s unique imagery has been in the public eye numerous times, and children of all ages have been exposed to it at some point or another.

However, the doll has managed to cause parental anxieties to rise in the span of a few short weeks due to the fact that Barbie is now sporting tattoos.  Though the doll is not meant for Mattel’s younger audience, parents are still convinced that their young daughters will be clamoring for tattoos though they are too young to get them.  The response over the tokidoki doll is truly astounding because it seems like a very strange paradox.  Young children are already exposed to tattoos since temporary ones have been on the market for years.  Furthermore, one in four Americans between the ages of 18 and 50 already have tattoos, which means young girls are seeing tattoos left and right on a daily basis.  In today’s society, tattoos have become quite common, and it seems strange that parents would be outraged over a limited edition, geared towards adults, collectible doll.

So what are the reasons behind why parents are upset over the tokidoki Barbie doll?  Perhaps, the issue is not so much the tattoos, but the fact that children’s toys have become more and more adult-like.  The clothing, poses, and mannerisms of many toys for both boys and girls are extremely mature, and in many cases sexual.  Society seems to be moving towards an era in which children are treated like miniature adults that are exposed to adult themes from an early age.  The lines between children and adulthood are slowly being blurred, and this phenomenon is probably frightening many parents.  Even though the tokidoki doll is meant for adults, the fact is that the doll is equated with young girls playing house and dress-up.  It seems silly to be so upset over a tattooed doll that is only sold on the internet, but there may be a deeper reasoning behind why parents are so upset by Barbie’s new look.  Nevertheless, parents might find it more important to focus on overly mature toys that are actually geared towards young children, and sold at their local Toys R’Us.

Share

Oct 21

US Focus on Uganda: the LRA (part 1)

In a previous post, I wrote about the indigenous populations in Uganda. Once again, Ugandans are in the news thanks in large part this time to Rush Limbaugh. On October 14th, Mr. Limbaugh became aware that President Obama was sending peacekeeping troops to Uganda in an effort to curb the brutality of the Lords Resistance Army (LRA). Transcripts of his radio show have been published where he has since been criticized for being considerably misguided in his understanding of the LRA and political situation surrounding President Obama’s decision.

After first making me laugh at his fact checkers (and ensuing parodies), Limbaugh’s speech made me nervous because I am not sure if Americans are truly aware of the violence the LRA is imposing. Is the American population as blinded by the name “Lords Resistance Army” as Limbaugh was? Is there a chance that pundits and presidential nominees will potentially capitalize upon this assumption for use against Obama? And why would Obama chose a reelection time to send more peacekeeping troops to another part of the world, when US influence is already spread so thin?

I hope to get to the bottom of these questions in a two part blog series, outlining what the LRA is exactly, and then discussing why Obama made the decisions he has. Only in understanding the impact that the LRA has had over a number of Sub-Saharan countries over the past 20 years can Americans reach a decision as to if they support this cause.

Background:

Joseph Kony is the leader of the LRA, beginning the organization in 1986. He is currently on the “Specially Designated Global Terrorists” list for the US and believes himself to be a medium of the Holy Spirit. The LRA is currently instilling terror in Uganda, eastern Congo, and South Sudan. With most operations based in northern Uganda, the LRA is still terrorizing communities across three frontiers and no nation can seem to expel them.

The LRA are most famous for their recruitment and brutality towards children. After bandit groups of the LRA decimate villages, they kidnap the boys and force them to become soldiers while forcing the girls to become bush wives. Because of this, Invisible Children has taken notice and are actively trying to bring awareness to this problem. I found the video they made about the history and motives of the LRA. I found it educational as well as moving (warning, a few graphic images):

Who is the LRA from INVISIBLE CHILDREN on Vimeo.

As this clip explains, the “Lord” behind the LRA is actually Kony himself. While Limbaugh was correct in the fact that at one point in the early history of the LRA there was a political mission to unite the people of Uganda under political and religious veils, the group has since abandoned that goal. Now, they wield both weapons and fear, working for the personal enrichment of Kony directly.

In the war that has raged for over 20 years, deaths have been estimated in the tens of thousands of people. Maraudering groups kill and capture as they see fit, and often these bands are brainwashed (or drug addicted) child soldiers. Tom Malinowski, the Washington director of Human Rights Watch sadly stated, “they are incredibly vicious and have committed numerous massacres. It’s a group that seems to exist for no other purpose than to kill.”

After reading the facts about what is happening on behalf of the LRA, do you think Obama was right in sending troops? On one hand, we can not allow these rebels to keep promoting such violence across so many borders. However, we must also ask, why now? The situation has been fairly ignored for the last decade, so why would we send troops now when we are already involved in so many other nations. I hope to further understand the political implications next week.

–Katherine Peterson is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focused on theories of development, globalization, and political ramifications of development work

 
Share

Oct 21

Mujeres Admirables: Rigoberta Menchú

La semana pasado escribí sobre Wangari Maathai, la primer mujer Africana en haber Ganado un premio nobel. Este artículo lo dedicaré a Rigoberta Menchú. Rigoberta Menchú es la primera mujer latinoamericana en recibir el Premio Nobel de la Paz. Lo recibió por el trabajo que hizo en material de derechos indígenas y protección de derechos humanos.

Rigoberta y Wangari tienen muchas cosas en común, y no hay duda de porque ganaron el premio nobel. Su lucha por la protección de los derechos humanos significó la amenaza a su seguridad y a sus vidas, pero el miedo nunca las detuvo. Las dos fueron inteligentes y astutas para encontrar maneras en como traer la atención internacional a su lucha y en como facilitar su resolución. Para proteger los valores en los que creían, ambas mujeres se enfrentaron a la discriminación, a la violencia, y a la violación de derechos humanos. Es probablemente esas experiencias que realmente las armaron para seguir con su lucha y que les dio aún mayor determinación.

La vida de Rigoberta y sus logros son bastante impresionantes. Nació en 1959 en Guetamala y creció en una familia indígena Quiché. Su activismo empezó durante la Guerra civil de Guatemala. Rigoberta recibió poca educación pero a una edad temprana se involucró en movimientos sociales, luchando por reformas políticas y justicia social. Rigoberta se convirtió en un símbolo de su país y de la lucha por la paz y la estabilidad.

Se involucró en los movimientos de la guerra. Se unió al movimiento de su padre, el Sindicato de Campesinos Unidos. A medida que el impacto de la organización creció, el gobierno de Guatemala la empezó a perseguir. Después de la muerte de su madre, se exilió a México. Una vez en México, escribió su autobiografía Yo, Rigoberta Menchú (1984), diciéndole al mundo no sólo su historia, pero también la historia del resto de los indígenas de Guatemala. En 1988 regresó a Guatemala pero fue detenida. Eventualmente la liberaron gracias a la ayuda internacional.

En 1992, se le asignó el premio Nobel de la Paz a Rigoberta Menchú. Usó el dinero (1.2 millones) para fundar una organización con el nombre de su padre que tendría por misión continuar la lucha por los derechos de los indígenas. La organización ahora tiene su nombre. Los objetivos de la organización representan las luchas personales de Menchú. Ella no tuvo acceso a educación, creció en un ambiente en donde sus derechos no eran respectados y donde existía represión del gobierno. Es por eso que la Fundación apoya a muchas causas, desde la ayuda de los que buscan justicia por genocidios de Guatemala hasta defender los que han sufrido discriminación y racismo. La organización también ofrece apoyo a la educación en comunidades marginadas.

El código de ética de la organización es:

No existe paz sin justicia,

No existe justicia sin equidad,

No existe equidad sin desarrollo,

No existe desarrollo sin democracia,

No existe democracia sin el respeto de la identidad y dignidad de todos los pueblos y culturas.

Estas líneas resumen los combates de Rigoberta Menchú. Su lucha por la paz es una lucha para proteger la diversidad cultural y el respeto mutuo a través de la democracia y del desarrollo. El código de ética representa lo que Rigoberta sufrió en su vida. Al crecer en un país en guerra, su preocupación principal fue la de encontrar paz y estabilidad, que solo se podría obtener a través de la democracia y la protección de los derechos de los pueblos.

Es por eso que la visión de democracia de Rigoberta es tan interesante. Entendía que la paz  la estabilidad sólo serían posibles a través de la democracia real, es decir, a través del respeto de la identidad y dignidad de todos. Para ella, solo existe la paz cuando existe democracia. Sin embargo, para obtener democracia es necesario tener justicia, igualdad, y desarrollo. Es eso lo que su fundación busca. Buscan los medios para obtener democracia y respeto de derechos humanos, no por democracia por si sola.

Creo que este enfoque da a la organización una voz mas importante, que les permite tener un impacto más importante en el corto y largo plazo. Por ejemplo, uno de sus proyectos principales es educación. Educación es un requisito para los derechos humanos porque es lo único que verdaderamente empodera a las comunidades. Otra iniciativa de la organización es el de promover leyes guatemaltecas que aseguren la igualdad de oportunidades y la no-discriminación (leyes que le den voz a diferentes grupos étnicos, a diferentes sindicatos o asambleas). A través de estas iniciativas, la organización se compromete a un cambio de corto y largo plazo.

El caso de Rigoberta Menchú es ejemplar para la causa de los derechos humanos . Promoviendo temas como el desarrollo, la educación y la justicia, defiende a los derechos humanos de manera integral. Por consiguiente, el impacto es mas poderoso.

Julia Naime (@julianasah) es Asistente a la Investigación y Programas del SISGI Group. Es estudiante de Economía en New York University. Durante su pasantía en el SISGI Group, investigará sobre Desarollo rural, Problemas ambientales y Economía internacional 
 
To read the English Version Click Here
Share

Oct 20

Child Exploitation.Com

This week my blog posts have been exploring the topic of child exploitation. My viewpoint is that children are our most vulnerable population due to their mental and physical fragility. Yesterday, I explored how children have been exploited during the chaos caused by natural disasters. Today, the focus is the use of technology to trick, coerce and exploit youth in the United States.

The use of a computer is now integral in our daily lives. Not only on how we conduct business, but also in how we manage our daily lives. Decades ago, children from certain socio-economic levels were exposed to computers and subsequently the internet. Today, schools are requiring that all their students take exams online and also apply for extracurricular activities and college using the World Wide Web.

In this new century, computers have also changed the way that we communicate at the macro-level making a community 5,000 miles away seem near and familiar. It’s also altered how we as a nation communicate with our families and how we make friendships and linkages with others in our lives.

Children have shown themselves to be computer savvy. They have shown a grasp for all the new technology. Nonetheless, predators have also learned to use this against them and turn this medium, that can open the doors to many opportunities, into a vehicle for danger and deceit.

Until recently, the terms cyber bullying, cyber stalking, online predator, cybercrime and internet child pornography were not widely known or used. Television shows such as Dateline NBC’s segment “To Catch a Predator” were a novelty and not on everyone’s radar. Today, our newspapers and television headlines are full of stories of missing children and exploited youth that were recruited in their own homes through their exposure online.

This shows us that it is our responsibility to teach, guide and monitor the use of computers by our children so that it becomes a safe environment from exploration and not a nightmare scenario. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) posted a success story that can also serve as a case study of the prevalent misuse of the internet to prey on children.

In 2008, the NCMEC received a report from a concerned mother who reported that a 20-year-old male was engaging in sexually explicit conversations with her 12-year-old son via Xbox Live chat. According to the suspect, he would meet the boys online using Xbox Live chat and eventually meet them in person. It is unclear whether the suspect has sexually molested any children, but he was reportedly meeting children online and producing child pornography videos using Xbox Live.

It is not uncommon for child sexual exploiters, traffickers and predators to use legitimate means to entice children to communicate with them. In the scenario above, they used a well-known forum to coerce a relationship with young boys. While controlling the internet seems like a daunting task for any individual, parent or caregiver, we can still be more vigilant and look out for some of the signs that a child may be at risk online:

  • If your child spends large amounts of time online, especially at night, your child may be at risk.
  • You find pornography on your child’s computer.
  • Your child receives telephone calls from men or women you don’t know or is making calls, sometimes long distance, to numbers you do not recognize.
  • Your child receives mail, gifts, or packages from someone you don’t know.
  • Your child turns the computer monitor off or quickly changes the screen on the monitor when you come into the room.
  • Your child becomes withdrawn from the family.
  • Your child is using an online account belonging to someone else.

So what do you do if you see these signs?

To empower the public to act to stop child sexual exploitation, NCMEC launched the CyberTipline which offers a way to report incidents of child sexual exploitation including the possession, manufacture, and distribution of child pornography; online enticement; child prostitution; child sex tourism; extrafamilial child sexual molestation; unsolicited obscene material sent to a child; and misleading domain names, words, or digital images. The CyberTipline is staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and can be reached at www.cybertipline.com or 1-800-843-5678.

Regina Bernadin is a doctoral student at Nova Southeastern University focusing on Conflict Analysis and Resolution.  As a SISGI intern, her primary areas of interest are conflict resolution, human rights and Latin American political, economic and socio-cultural issues. Her interest in the development of human rights abroad has taken her to several Latin American countries, including Colombia, Ecuador and Suriname.
Share