April 2010
Vol 10, No.4
IRAQ: NATIONAL UNITY GOVERNMENT OR RETURN TO SECTARIANISM? By Juan Cole
P
atrick Martin of the Toronto Globe and Mail gets the diction right when he says that Iyad Allawi’s list won a thin plurality. The official results of the March 7 Iraqi parliamentary elections have been announced by the Independent High Electoral Commission. Of 325 seats, 91 went to the National Iraqi List (“Iraqiya”) of former interim prime minister Iyad Allawi. The State of Law grouping of incumbent Nuri al-Maliki came in at 89. The Shiite fundamentalist coalition, the Iraqi National Alliance, which includes the followers of clerics Ammar al-Hakim and Muqtada al-Sadr, garnered 70 seats. The Kurdistan Alliance won only 43 seats. That leaves 33 seats in the hands of smaller parties, many of them wild cards. Shortly before the results were announced, two large bomb blasts in Khalis, in Diyala Province northeast of Baghdad, killed 53 persons. Diyala is still the site of violent struggle between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. Most Sunni Arabs in Iraq have moved on from the violence and fundamentalism of groups such as the ‘Islamic State of Iraq,’ and most voted for the Allawi list
as a way of reentering national politics. Despite some breathless headlines, the outcome of the elections is not very different from previous elections. Allawi put together a coalition of Sunni Arabs and secular Shiites. In the December, 2005, parliamentary elections, those two groups received about 80 seats, only 11 less than Allawi’s just list won. If the two major Shiite religious lists (State of Law and Iraqi National Alliance) had run on the same ticket, they would have nearly a majority, about what they won in December, 2005. The Kurdistan Alliance only has 43 seats, down from 54 in the last parliamentary election, but the overall number of Kurdish Members of Parliament is not so different from that in the last polls. In spring-summer of 2006, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki put together a government of national unity, with the help of the US ambassador. It included Sadrists and Allawi’s Iraqiya. But it gradually fell apart. This election is an opportunity for alMaliki to attempt to repeat that feat. Indeed, a national unity government may be the first preference of the Iraqi National Alliance, which has, according to al-Sharq al-Awsat, swung into action
STATEMENT C ONDEMN B OMB B LASTS
to convince the other major lists that such a path is the only right one for Iraq at this juncture. Although Allawi’s list won the most seats, he is very unlikely to be the next prime minister. Al-Maliki’s State of Law list is anti-Baathist and hasn’t gotten on well with Sunni Arabs, while ex-Baathists and Sunnis are the backbone of Allawi’s constituency. Likewise, the Shiite religious party, made up of Sadrists and members of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), among others, are unlikely to ally with secularist ex-Baathists. Allawi says that he is dialoguing with the parties led by Hakim and Sadr, as well as with the Kurds. But Allawi rejects a role in politics for Shiite clerics, which would make for an uneasy alliance with lists headed by clerics. Without the two big Shiite blocs, Allawi could only become prime minister by attracting the Kurdistan Alliance and all of the smaller parties and independents. Keeping such a disparate coalition together would be difficult in the extreme. Allawi is supported by Sunni Arabs who have sharp differences with the Kurds over the future of the mixed province of Kirkuk, which the Kurds covet. Allawi may therefore have a continued next page
ARTICLES IN
R USSIA !
...........The International Movement for a Just World condemns the series of bomb blasts in Russia in the last three days which have killed more than 50 people................................................................p.2
EDUCATING CHILDREN IN CONFLICT ZONES By Catherine Rottenberg & Neve Gordon ......... page 4
IS ETHICAL CAPITALISM POSSIBLE? By Kamran Mofid ...........................................page 5
THE WORLD IN 2020 (PART 2) By Michael T. Klare ....................................... page 7
THE BASIC MORAL VALUES
ARTICLES WAR C RIME TRIBUNAL IN B ANGLADESH : A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE By Dr S.Serajul Islam and Dr M.Saidul Islam ... page 3
OF THE
KORAN
By Yoginder Sikand ....................................... page 9
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT ................ page 10 STATE OF THE VILLAGE REPORT By ODT.org ................................................. page11
2 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 1 plurality that is incapable of growing into a majority. It is also true that al-Maliki is deeply disliked by Muqtada al-Sadr and the Sadrists because he used the Iraqi Army to crush their Mahdi Army militia in Basra and East Baghdad in spring-summer of 2008. His party, however, the ‘State of Law,’ groups Shiite religious parties such as his own Islamic Mission Party (Da’wa), and the natural ally of Da’wa is the Sadrists and ISCI. Still, as Sadrist and ISCI officials admitted on Wednesday, their parties are natural allies with the State of Law. The easiest way to form a new government would be to dump alMaliki and choose another leader of Da`wa as prime minister. The State of Law and the Iraqi National Alliance can form a coalition of 159 at a time when only 163 is needed for a majority. By picking up just 4 independents, these two could form a strong, stable government. Al-Maliki has gathered a lot of power into his hands, however, and unseating him may prove difficult and time-consuming. In the end, the Iraqi National Alliance may decide that he is their best bet for dominating Iraq in the near to medium term. Al-Maliki said Friday that he rejects the announced outcome and demands a manual recount of the ballots. He had earlier warned of “violence” if the votes were not recounted. The reason for his adamant stance is that if he could nose
FOR
A
JUST
MAIN ARTICLE
WORLD
ahead of Allawi by even a single vote, he seems to feel that he would have more of a mandate to remain prime minister. The Iraqi constitution stipulates that the president ask the head of the largest single party or coalition to attempt to form the government. As it now stands, alMaliki will not be asked, while Allawi could be. One possibility is for his State of Law to form a coalition with the Iraqi National Alliance [Hakim and Sadr] while easing al-Maliki out in favor of some candidate more acceptable to both. Iraqi courts have ruled that post-election coalitions will be counted as legitimate for the purpose of installing a government. The Shiites are thus still in a position to remain dominant, though if they remain divided then Allawi could pick up the pieces. A Shiite electoral alliance accompanied by the elegance of the numbers would detract from the quality of life. It seems unlikely that anyone can become prime minister without the Sadr Bloc, now the majority component inside the Iraqi National Alliance. Sadr may well demand as a quid pro quo for joining any Iraqi government that the new PM pledge to accelerate the timetable for US troop withdrawal from Iraq, and also promise to end that troop presence altogether. The difficult road ahead is indicated by the recent denunciation of al-Maliki by both Muqtada al-Sadr and Ammar alHakim for his initial warning that
“violence” might break out if the ballots are not recounted. Muqtada called the implied threat of violence “political terrorism,” thus ironically turning the tables on al-Maliki, who had hunted down Sadr-linked Mahdi Army commanders on the grounds that they were terrorists. The big question now in Iraqi politics is whether the new government will look like the sectarian Shiite coalition with the Kurds in 2005, or more like the national unity government forged in summer, 2006. Each proved unstable in its own way, it should be remembered, so neither is a guarantor of a good outcome for these elections. The other question is how many concessions smaller parties can wring from the majority in order to form a government. It seems to me that if the Sadrists demand with sufficient vigor, they should be able to get a faster US troop withdrawal. Their platform since 2003 has been the removal of the American military from Iraq. They may finally be in a position to effect via the ballot box what they could not by their armed paramilitary, the Mahdi Army. 29 March, 2010 Juan Cole is an American scholar, public intellectual, and historian of the modern Middle East and South Asia. As a commentator on Middle Eastern affairs, he has appeared in print and on television, and testified before the United States Senate. His weblog can be found at www. juancole.com Source: http://www.countercurrents.org
STATEMENTS CONDEMN BOMB BLASTS IN RUSSIA! The International Movement for a Just World condemns the series of bomb blasts in Russia in the last three days which have killed more than 50 people. The Russian authorities should conduct a thorough investigation of both the blasts in Moscow on 29 March 2010 and the Dagestan region on the 31st of March, to determine the identities of the culprits and their motives. The culprits should be brought to book and punished severely. If the bombings are linked to the longstanding conflict in the Chechen
region, the Chechen rebels should know that such heinous methods of fighting for their cause will not bring them any closer to their objectives. On the contrary, militant violence will only increase the anger and antagonism of the Russian people towards the Chechens.
whatever the circumstances.
The Chechen rebels should eschew senseless, mindless violence in their campaign to compel the Russian government to address some of their grievances. The deliberate targeting of civilians is an abominable crime for which there is no justification,
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, President, International Movement for a Just World (JUST). 1 April 2010.
JUST calls upon civil society groups everywhere — especially Muslim NGOs — to take a principled stand against the bomb blasts in Russia. They cannot remain silent in the face of such starkly un-Islamic conduct.
3 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
A R T I C L E S
WAR CRIME TRIBUNAL IN BANGLADESH: A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE By S.Serajul Islam and M.Saidul Islam While Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) got its independence from Pakistan in 1971 following a bloody war, some issues of the past are still inflicting the nation. Today, the ruling coalition led by Bangladesh Awami League (BAL) has formed a special war crime tribunal to try the ‘war criminals’ not of Pakistani forces but of its own people who opposed the idea of an independent Bangladesh and fought for a united Pakistan. The tribunal will not however try ‘war crime’ rather ‘crime against humanity.’ This move of the government is highly contested. It is evident in history, however, that war crimes, alongside grievous oppression of civilians were committed in the 1971 war by the Pakistani forces and some of their local allies against Bengali civilians, and by some Bengali freedom fighters against Bihari Muslims. Following the independence of Bangladesh, 195 Pakistani army officers were identified as war criminals in the preliminary investigation by the then Bangladesh government. Following the Simla Agreement signed on 2 nd July 1972 between Indira Gandhi, Prime Minister of India and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, President of Pakistan, a number of agreements were signed between India and Pakistan regarding repatriation of the POWs. On 9th April 1974, an Agreement was signed between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan in New Delhi in which, among other issues, the question of the trial of the 195 POWs was raised and finally it was decided that they would be repatriated to Pakistan along with the other prisoners without trial (The Daily Tribune, Wisconsin, 10 April 1974). For a better understanding, paragraph 15 of the 1974 Agreement is quoted here: ‘In the light of the foregoing and, in particular, having regard to the appeal of the Prime Minister of Pakistan to the people of Bangladesh to forgive and forget the mistakes of the past, the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh stated that the Government of Bangladesh had decided not to proceed with the trials as an act of clemency. It was agreed that the 195 prisoners of war may be repatriated to Pakistan along with the other prisoners of war now
in process of repatriation under the Delhi Agreement.’ On 24 January 1972, the government of Bangladesh enacted another law, Collaborators Act, 1972, to try those who did not side with the liberation war, or politically opposed the call of liberation war, or willingly cooperated with the Pakistan Army or committed criminal acts. Among thousands arrested, 752 people were found guilty and punished under this law. Taking into account the overall situation (of discontent) obtaining in the country, in November 1973 the Government of Bangladesh under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the father of the current Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, declared a general amnesty. By virtue of the general amnesty, those accused or convicted for minor crimes under the Act were all set free. But those accused of rape, murder, arson or plunder were not pardoned. In other words, the general amnesty kept the scope of prosecution and trial of those accused of such serious crimes under the Act. On December 31, 1975, the Collaborators Act was repealed by a Presidential Order. After the amnesty, the Act remained in force for a little over two years. In that period, no case was filed for the said four serious offences. Perhaps that was the logic behind repeal of the law in 1975. While the issue was resolved before both nationally and internationally, the attempt of the Bangladesh government for trials of war crimes after 39 years is, however, according to many, a politically motivated act. A list of 36 war criminals has already been announced even before the trial has started, the majority of whom are from Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islam (BJI), the mainstream liberal Islamic party in Bangladesh that formed a coalition government with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) during 2001-2006. A few of them in the list were between 48 years old during the war in 1971 (Daily Amar Desh, 28 March 2010). It is claimed that “while the issue of war crimes was resolved internationally (through Simla Agreement) and nationally (through Collaboration Act), bringing it up again shows that it is highly politically motivated. Moreover, the Bangladesh
judiciary is now being subjugated by the current regime and therefore a fair judgment is absolutely unexpected from this politically motivated trial” (Daily Amar Desh, 16 February 2010). Analysts and legal scholars apprehend that the trial will simply be a miscarriage of justice. First, the International Bar Association (IBA) found over a dozen loopholes in The Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, by which the accused would be tried (bdnews24.com, Dhaka, 14 March 2010). ‘Crimes against humanity’ described in section 3(2)(a) of the Act are very easy to prove through producing false witness-evidences in a domestic perspective. It is easy to manipulate a witness for ‘crime against humanity’ than for ‘war crime’. Most importantly, the Evidence Act [1872 (I of 1872)] and the Criminal Procedure Code [1898 (V of 1898)] application have been excluded by section 23 of the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973. Therefore, newspaper reports and hearsay evidence will be accepted thus making the tribunal a kangaroo court. Second, the tribunal will neither try the actual war criminals, the 195 Pakistani army officers, nor Bengali freedom fighters who were responsible for ethnic cleansing of Biharis, but try only some ‘collaborators’ belonging to an opposition party who supported a united Pakistan but do not have any proven record of war crimes, such as killing, rape, arson etc. Third, it is not clear whether the judges of this court are either trained or neutral for this specialized kind of trials. According to various reports, most of the appointed judges and prosecutors are former party men of, and therefore loyal to, the ruling coalition. Finally, many feel that the legal apparatus is being manipulated and therefore expectation of a fair and free trial is a mere dream. Even as it is, there have been rampant violations of human rights without any justice, such as the 154 extra-judicial killings in 2009 in the hands of law enforcement authorities (Odhikar 2009 Report). More importantly, if the trial is not conducted freely and fairly for all criminals irrespective of any kind of political affiliation, the nation may have continued next page
4 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 3 to pay a severe price. In the first place,, if it targets only the members of Islamic parties, reconciliation with the Muslim world will be very difficult. Since Bangladesh needs to build strong relations with the Muslim countries for financial support and for supplying manpower to those countries, this will have a negative impact. Second, having no alternative, the BJI which is openly involved in the democratic process of politics may go underground due to the unjust trial. If that happens, it will be dangerous for the nation. Third, the unfair trial will divide the whole nation as BJI has millions of supporters which
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
is evident from last few elections. Finally, if the regime fails to conduct the trial, it will also backfire upon the party in power. The whole move of the government so far seems to be interpreted by the international community as nothing but an extreme political vendetta intended to subdue the opposition party/parties. This ‘victor’s justice’ is always a questionable justice. The regime has already started a nation-and-worldwide campaign for this trial and obstructed the free movement and overseas travel of the BJI leaders. If this highly disputed trial is conducted unfairly, Bangladesh will certainly enter into another dark chapter of political
A R T I C L E S chaos, uncertainties, and most likely, a civil war. If the trial is held, the government must ensure a free and fair trial beyond any doubt. The best way is to form an international tribunal under the auspices of the United Nations. It will not only provide credibility to the current regime, but also remain a reference for trying other war crimes committed elsewhere. 2 April 2010 Dr S. Serajul Islam and Dr M. Saidul Islam are both University Professors and columnists. They can be reached at sserajul99@yahoo.com and msaidul@gmail.com respectively.
EDUCATING CHILDREN IN CONFLICT ZONES By Catherine Rottenberg & Neve Gordon Educating children in a conflict zone is no simple matter. More often than not, those responsible for the curricula succumb to the masters of war and adopt a pedagogical approach that exacerbates rather than diffuses strife. Israel, unfortunately, is no exception. Consider the way Jewish and Palestinian children are educated. Segregation in the classroom is the rule so that Jewish and Palestinian children only rarely mix. This strict segregation exists despite the fact that the Palestinians are citizens of Israel, comprising 19.5 percent of Israel’s population—around 1.37 million people—and 25 percent of all school children. Unlike the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, these Palestinians vote and pay taxes like Jewish citizens. Notwithstanding their incorporation into the citizen body, Palestinian citizens do not enjoy full equality. In comparison to their Jewish counterparts, Arab schools receive half the per capita budget. It is therefore not very surprising that Palestinian students have the highest dropout rates and lowest achievement levels in the country. Equality in education is reserved to the uniformity of the school curriculum, particularly the texts dedicated to teaching the history of the Israeli state. The existing history textbooks adopt the Zionist historical narrative, erasing all trace of the Palestinian nakba (Arabic for “catastrophe”, referring to the events of 1948, when approximately 750,000 Palestinians out of a population of
900,000 either fled or were expelled from their homes). Furthermore, these textbooks emphasise the significance of the Land of Israel for Jews and attempt to prove that the State of Israel could only have been created in historical Palestine, while simultaneously portraying the connection between the Arabs and Palestine as purely incidental. Along similar lines, the study of literature in the Arab schools is oriented toward Zionist portrayals and is conspicuously lacking in any patriotic or nationalistic Palestinian sentiments. It is, no doubt, a truism that public schools in modern liberal democracies inculcate their students with the dominant national worldview. In the US, for example, children still recite the pledge of allegiance and in France children sing La Marseillaise. But while the public schools in these democracies are today more willing to provide students with a multicultural curriculum that includes the historical narratives of those who have been oppressed and marginalised over the centuries, Israel is arguably becoming less tolerant to any pedagogy that challenges the dominant Zionist national narrative. This increasing intolerance does not bode well for the future of the Israeli-Palestinian relationship. It has therefore become more urgent than ever to consider alternative educational models. Since educating for tolerant thinking within a conflict zone is no easy task, there are very few such projects in Israel. The bilingual Arab-Jewish Hagar School in
Beer-Sheba is the only one of its kind in Israel’s southern region—a region that is home to over half a million people, 25 percent of whom are Palestinian citizens. While Hagar is a public school supported by the Ministry of Education, it is also the exception that proves the rule. Hagar’s uniqueness stems from the fact that it has created a venue in which Jewish and Arab children not only mix (each ethnic group makes up 50 percent of the student body) but learn together in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Currently 67 children, nursery through first grade, attend this bi-lingual school, whose commitment to equality informs every aspect of its educational agenda. To ensure that Hebrew and Arabic are awarded equal status, for example, two teachers, one Jewish and the other Arab, are present in every classroom. By creating a bilingual space that encourages direct contact with the heritage and customs of the different cultures, Hagar promotes tolerance, while being sensitive to nurture the personal continued next page
5 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 4 identity of each child and each tradition. Thus, by the time the children are old enough to learn that there are two conflicting national narratives, both of which will be taught, they already have the necessary emotional and intellectual tools to deal with conflict through dialogue.
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
Hagar is an educational island that is expanding against all odds. Indeed, the school’s achievements within the current political context—especially following the assault on Gaza and the sporadic missile attacks on Beer-Sheba—are astonishing. But ongoing local support and international financial assistance are necessary to guarantee the future success of this educational space—a
A R T I C L E S space that is actively translating a pedagogy of mutual respect into practice within a conflict zone. 16 October, 2009 Catherine Rottenberg is a founding member of Hagar School and sits on its pedagogic committee. Neve Gordon is the author of Israel’s Occupation. Source: Common Groung News Service
IS ETHICAL CAPITALISM POSSIBLE? By Kamran Mofid We live in a time of transition, a time when all is changing and being challenged – weather systems, ecosystems, our interaction with nature, our understanding of other beings. We now understand that we are all interconnected and interdependent. Somewhere along the line, our actions as human beings have created enormous instability to the planet and the millions of species who reside here.
The tragedy is that we have now discovered that what we were pushing on others, which we thought was good for us - the so-called market-forces driven Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism - was nothing but a huge cancerous cell which at the end brought the house of cards down. The emperor has no clothes, so to say.
deeply ethical and spiritual:
What to Do Now?
* How can the global financial system become more responsive and just?
Much of which is familiar to us and deemed the ‘norm’ is no longer working and is being challenged. Sometimes change brings with it destruction. Sometimes destruction is beneficial. It can alert us to practices that do not work. With destruction also comes new birth, and new avenues open wide to be explored. There are many choices as to which route to take; the issue is which route is the one that will provide life for all. The golden opportunity presented by the current ongoing crises is to make the right choices that will affect the long term future for us, our descendants and our planet.
The current global economic crisis is deeply complex and perplexing. Many world politicians, business people, academics, activists, and civil society representatives, as well as religious and spiritual leaders, have called for a new kind of “ethical capitalism” - a moral, spiritual and virtuous economy. People everywhere are calling for an international framework of standards for an equitable and sustainable global economy to replace the current economic system of unbridled growth and increasing ecological degradation. While some look for quick short-term solutions that would perpetuate the current economic model, others see the need for more fundamental changes of the model itself. Our challenge is great. In a time of continuing crisis and polarizing viewpoints, can the world agree on an ethical approach to the global economy?
There is no denying the fact that we are in a serious state of crises, a crises of our own making, all of us and not the bankers alone. They responded to what we wanted: cheap, available, unregulated money and loads of it. They in turn were responding to the neoliberal agenda of the so-called Washington Consensus: Privatisation, deregulation, market forces, liberalisation, low taxation, free trade, and one glove fits all policies and more. No regards, no respect for different cultures, civilisations, religions and history. What is good for America and the West, then, must also be good for everybody else, regardless of all other factors, we were told again and again.
I propose a comprehensive examination of the major attempts to integrate economics with ethics and spirituality, along with an exploration of the theoretical underpinnings of these activities. In considering the need for bold economic initiatives, we must keep in mind the deeper questions that rarely find their way into political debate or public discourse. We should explore the emerging economic issues as well matters that are
* What is the source of true happiness and well-being? What is the good life? * What is the purpose of economic life? What does it mean to be a human being living on a spaceship with finite resources?
* How can the world make the global trade system more equitable and sustainable? * What paths can be recommended to shift the current destructive global political-economic order from one of unrestrained economic growth, profit maximisation and cost minimisation, to one that embraces material wealth creation, yet also preserves and enhances social and ecological wellbeing and increases human happiness and contentment? * How can society overcome poverty and scarcity with limited natural resources? * How should we deal with individual and institutionalized greed? * What are the requirements of a virtuous economy? * What religious or spiritual variables should be considered in economic/ business ethics and economic behaviour? * How are these components to be integrated with economic theories and decisions?
continued next page
6 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
continued from page 5 * What role should universities play in building an integrity-based model of business education?
false. Nothing in life is morally neutral. In the end, economics cannot be separated from a vision of what it is to be a human being in society.
* What should be the role of the youth?
In order to arrive at such understanding, my first recommendation must surely be for us to begin a journey to wisdom, by embodying the core values of the Golden Rule (Ethic of Reciprocity): “Do unto others as you would have them to do to you”. This in turn will prompt us on a journey of discovery, giving life to what many consider to be the most consistent moral teaching throughout history.
* How might the training of young executives be directed with the intention of supplying insights into the nature of globalisation from its economic, technological and spiritual perspectives, to build supporting relationships among the participants that will lead toward action for the common good within their chosen careers? * Indeed, is ethical, profitable, efficient and sustainable capitalism possible?
It should be noted that the Golden Rule can be found in many religions, ethical systems, spiritual traditions, indigenous cultures and secular philosophies. Applying this universal principle can provide an enabling mechanism for the dialogue and development essential to resolving the challenges we face globally, nationally, and locally. 2. Now is the Time for a Revolution in Economic Thought
These questions and more need to be reflected upon, debated, and ultimately, answered and put into policy formation, guiding us to a more humane globalisation. A concrete framework for understanding what has gone wrong and possible remedies, including both broad perspectives on policies and specific recommendations, must include not only an economic perspective, but also a spiritual, moral and ethical understanding. Steps can be taken towards a sustainable economy, to turn the current crisis of casino capitalism into an opportunity for a successful, sustainable and everlasting change, where all people, wherever they may be, can live fulfilling, healthy, and yet more ecologically compatible lives. Here are the steps I suggest: 1. Begin a Journey to Wisdom Economics and business are all about human well-being in society and cannot be separated from moral, ethical and spiritual considerations. The idea of an economics which is value-free is totally
“An economist who is only an economist cannot be a good economist”. Therefore, the focus of economics should be on the benefit and bounty that the economy produces, how to let this bounty increase, and how to share the benefits justly among the people for the common good. Moreover, economic investigation should be accompanied by research into subjects such as anthropology, philosophy, politics and most importantly, theology, to give insight into our own human mystery, as no economic theory or no economist can say who we are, where have we come from or where we are going to. Humankind must be respected as the centre of creation and not relegated to short-term economic interests, as has been the case for the past few centuries. 3. Don’t Repair the Economy, Change It The current financial meltdown is the result of under-regulated markets built on an ideology of free market capitalism and unlimited economic growth. The fundamental problem is that the underlying assumptions of this ideology are not consistent with what we now know about the real state of the world.
A R T I C L E S The financial world is, in essence, a set of markers for goods, services, and risks in the real world and when those markers are allowed to deviate too far from reality, “adjustments” must ultimately follow and crisis and panic can ensue. To solve this and future financial crises requires that we reconnect the markers with reality. What are our real assets and how valuable are they? To undertake this readjustment requires both a new vision of what the economy is and what it is for, proper and comprehensive accounting of real assets, and new institutions that use the market in its proper role as servant rather than master. We have to first remember that the goal of the economy is to sustainably improve human wellbeing and quality of life, not the promotion of materialism, consumerism and “shop till you drop” values especially when they are done with borrowed money! Ultimately we have to create a new model of the economy and development that acknowledges this holistic context and vision. This new model of development would be based clearly on the goal of sustainable human well-being. It would use measures of progress that clearly acknowledge this goal. It would acknowledge the importance of ecological sustainability, social fairness and real economic efficiency. Ecological sustainability implies recognising that natural and social capital are not infinitely substitutable for built and human capital, and that real biophysical limits exist to the expansion of the market economy. Social fairness implies recognising that the distribution of wealth is an important determinant of social capital and quality of life. The conventional model has bought into the assumption that the best way to improve welfare is through growth in marketed consumption as measured by GDP. This focus on growth has not improved overall societal welfare, which is why explicit attention to distribution issues is sorely needed. 4. Recognise That the Economy Is Part of the Biosphere A comprehensive economic plan must be based on the scientific fact that the global continued next page
7 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
continued from page 6 economy is a subsidiary of the natural order. Economic policies should be attuned to the limited capacity of Earth’s biosphere to provide for humans and other life and to assimilate their waste. Photosynthesis and sunlight are as essential to the framework for economic budgets and expenditures as the laws of supply and demand.
poverty only with growth reflects a tragic lack of moral imagination. Indeed, in pushing for more “free” trade as it is currently understood, we would entrench an ongoing addiction to consumption, pursued in a manner that often ravages the bio-productivity of developing countries.
5. Acknowledge That We Need New Institutions
The new knowledge that will forever mark this period in human history is the overwhelming scientific evidence that we are over-consuming the planet and accelerating toward ecological catastrophe. The short-term approaches of most ministers of finance and professional economists don’t account for how the planet works, or even that the economy exists on a finite planet. Scientists morally committed to protecting the global commons and researching ecological limits to the global economy need more funding and influence in policy-making.
An economic renewal tailored to the 21st century would establish institutions committed to fitting the human economy to Earth’s limited life-support capacity. We need something like the central reserve banks which will look after shares of the Earth’s ecological capacity, not just interest rates and the money supply. Money should be recognised as a social licence for using part of Earth’s lifesupport capacity. Some functions of governance will have to operate at a global level through a federation modelled perhaps on the European Union, with enforceable laws designed to assure that individual nations don’t overrun Earth’s limits. The rules for the developed countries that are responsible for the current ecological crisis should be different from those of developing ones. 6. Fairness Matters A “right” human-Earth relationship would recognise humans as part of an interdependent web of life on a finite planet. The economy must recognise the rights of the human poor and of millions of other species to their place in the sun. In a world awash in money, addressing
A R T I C L E S
WORLD
7. Expand the Discussion
8. Look beyond Neoliberal Education and Short-Term Fixes We must begin a serious debate on the role of education and what education is all about. We must greatly increase investment in educational and civic institutions that teach that we are not “consumers,” but citizens of the Earth and guardians of life’s prospects on a small, beautiful and finite planet. In today’s largely decadent, money-driven world, the teaching of virtue and building of character is no longer part of the curriculum at many of our universities around the world. The pursuit of virtue has been replaced by moral neutrality -
the idea that anything goes. For centuries it had been considered that universities were responsible for the moral and social development of students and for bringing together diverse groups for the common good. Given the above, it is clear that we need a new economic model, enabling us to deal with new challenges, rather that rescuing and bailing out a discredited and bankrupt model, philosophy and theory. The long-term solution to the financial crisis is therefore to move beyond the “growth at all costs” economic model to a model that recognises the real costs and benefits of growth. We can break our addiction to fossil fuels, overconsumption, and the current economic model and create a more sustainable and desirable future that focuses on quality of life rather than merely quantity of consumption. It will not be easy; it will require a new vision, new measures, and new institutions. It will require a redesign of our entire society. But it is not a sacrifice of quality of life to break this addiction. Quite the contrary, it is a sacrifice not to. 15 March 2010 This article is an abridged version of a presentation delivered at the Biltmore Hotel, Santa Clara/Silicon Valley, California, on 1st December 2009. Kamran Mofid is the Founder of the Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative (Oxford, 2002), Co- founder/Editor of Journal of Globalisation for the Common Good and a member of the International Coordinating Committee of the World Public Forum, Dialogue of Civilisations Source: Share The World’s Resources
.
THE WORLD IN 2020 By Michael T. Klare Part 2 The Rising South The second decade of the century will also witness the growing importance of the global South: the formerly-colonized, still-developing areas of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Once playing a relatively marginal role in world affairs, they were considered open territory, there to be invaded, plundered, and dominated by the major powers of Europe, North America, and (for a time) Japan. To some
degree, the global South, a.k.a. the “Third World,” still plays a marginal role, but that is changing. Once a member in good standing of the global South, China is now an economic superpower and India is well on its way to earning this status. Second-tier states of the South, including Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, and Turkey, are on the rise economically, and even the smallest and
least well-off nations of the South have begun to attract international attention as providers of crucial raw materials or as sites of intractable problems including endemic terrorism and crime syndicates. To some degree, this is a product of numbers — growing populations and growing wealth. In 2000, the population of the global South stood at an estimated continued next page
8 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
continued from page 7 4.9 billion people; by 2020, that number is expected to hit 6.4 billion. Many of these new inhabitants of planet Earth will be poor and disenfranchised, but most will be workers (in either the formal or informal economy), many will participate in the political process in some way, and some will be entrepreneurs, labor leaders, teachers, criminals, or militants. Whatever the case, they will make their presence felt. The Planet Strikes Back The nations of the South will also play a growing economic role as sources of raw materials in an era of increasing scarcity and founts of entrepreneurial vitality. By one estimate, the combined GDP of the global South (excluding China) will jump from $7.8 trillion in 2005 to $15.8 trillion in 2020, an increase of more than 100%. In particular, many of the prime deposits of oil, natural gas, and the key minerals needed in the global North to keep the industrial system going are facing wholesale depletion after decades of hyper-intensive extraction, leaving only the deposits in the South to be exploited. Take oil: In 1990, 43% of world daily oil output was supplied by members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (the major Persian Gulf producers plus Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Libya, Nigeria, and Venezuela), other African and Latin American producers, and the Caspian Sea countries; by 2020, their share will rise to 58%. A similar shift in the center of gravity of world mineral production will take place, with unexpected countries like Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Niger (a major uranium supplier), and the Democratic Republic of Congo taking on potentially crucial roles. Inevitably, the global South will also play a conspicuous role in a series of potentially devastating developments. Combine persistent deep poverty, economic desperation, population growth, and intensifying climate degradation and you have a recipe for political unrest, insurgency, religious extremism, increased criminality, mass migrations, and the spread of disease. The global North will seek to immunize itself from these disorders by building fences of every sort, but through sheer numbers alone, the inhabitants of the South will make their presence felt, one way or another.
A R T I C L E S change will accelerate destructively in the second decade of this century, that conventional (liquid) petroleum and other key resources will become scarcer and more difficult to extract, and that food supplies will diminish in many poor, environmentally vulnerable areas.
All of this might represent nothing more than the normal changing of the imperial guard on planet Earth, if that planet itself weren’t undergoing far more profound changes than any individual power or set of powers, no matter how strong. The ever more intrusive realities of global warming, resource scarcity, and food insufficiency will, by the end of this century’s second decade, be undeniable and, if not by 2020, then in the decades to come, have the capacity to put normal military and economic power, no matter how impressive, in the shade. “There is little doubt about the main trends,” Professor Ole Danbolt Mjøs, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in awarding the Peace Prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Al Gore in December 2007: “More and more scientists have reached ever closer agreement concerning the increasingly dramatic consequences that will follow from global warming.” Likewise, a growing body of energy experts has concluded that the global production of conventional oil will soon reach a peak (if it hasn’t already) and decline, producing a worldwide energy shortage. Meanwhile, fears of future food emergencies, prompted in part by global warming and high energy prices, are becoming more widespread. All of this was apparent when world leaders met in Copenhagen and failed to establish an effective international regime for reducing the emission of climatealtering greenhouse gases (GHGs). Even though they did agree to keep talking and comply with a non-binding, aspirational scheme to cut back on GHGs, observers believe that such efforts are unlikely to lead to meaningful progress in controlling global warming in the near future. What few doubt is that the pace of climate
Scientists do not agree on the precise nature, timing, and geographical impact of climate-change effects, but they do generally agree that, as we move deeper into the century, we will be seeing an exponential increase in the density of the heat-trapping greenhouse-gas layer in the atmosphere as the consumption of fossil fuels grows and past smokestack emissions migrate to the outer atmosphere. DoE data indicates, for example, that between 1990 and 2005, world carbon dioxide emissions grew by 32%, from 21.5 to 31.0 billion metric tons. It can take as much as 50 years for GHGs to reach the greenhouse layer, which means that their effect will increase even if — as appears unlikely — the nations of the world soon begin to reduce their future emissions. In other words, the early manifestations of global warming in the first decade of this century — intensifying hurricanes and typhoons, torrential rains followed by severe flooding in some areas and prolonged, even record-breaking droughts in others, melting ice-caps and glaciers, and rising sea levels — will all become more pronounced in the second. As suggested by the IPCC in its 2007 report, uninhabitable dust bowls are likely to emerge in large areas of Central and Northeast Asia, Mexico and the American Southwest, and the Mediterranean basin. Significant parts of Africa are likely to be devastated by rising temperatures and diminished rainfall. More cities are likely to undergo the sort of flooding and destruction experienced by New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. And blistering summers, as well as infrequent or negligible rainfall, will limit crop production in key food-producing regions. Progress will be evident in the development of renewable energy systems, such as wind, solar, and biofuels. Despite the vast sums now being devoted to their development, however, they will still provide only a relatively small share of world energy in continued next page
9 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 8 2020. According to DoE projections, renewables will take care of only 10.5% of world energy needs in 2020, while oil and other petroleum liquids will still make up 32.6% of global supplies; coal, 27.1%; and natural gas, 23.8%. In other words, greenhouse gas production will rage on — and, ironically, should it not, thanks to expected shortfalls in the supply of oil, that in itself will likely prove another kind of disaster, pushing up the prices of all energy sources and endangering economic stability. Most industry experts, including those at the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, believe that it will be nearly impossible to continue increasing the output of conventional and unconventional petroleum (including tough to harvest Arctic oil, Canadian tar sands, and shale
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
oil) without increasingly implausible fresh investments of trillions of dollars, much of which would have to go into war-torn, unstable areas like Iraq or corrupt, unreliable states like Russia. In the latest hit movie Avatar, the lush, mineral-rich moon Pandora is under assault by human intruders seeking to extract a fabulously valuable mineral called “unobtainium.” Opposing them are not only a humanoid race called the Na’vi, loosely modeled on Native Americans and Amazonian jungle dwellers, but also the semi-sentient flora and fauna of Pandora itself. While our own planet may not possess such extraordinary capabilities, it is clear that the environmental damage caused by humans since the onset of the Industrial Revolution is producing a natural
A R T I C L E S blowback effect which will become increasingly visible in the coming decade. These, then, are the four trends most likely to dominate the second decade of this century. Perhaps others will eventually prove more significant, or some set of catastrophic events will further alter the global landscape, but for now expect the dragon ascendant, the eagle descending, the South rising, and the planet possibly trumping all of these. 6 Janauary 2010 Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College A documentary film version of his book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media Education Foundation at Bloodandoilmovie.com.
Source: http://www.countercurrents.org/ klare060110.htm
THE BASIC MORAL VALUES OF THE KORAN By Yoginder Sikand Chandra Muzaffar is one of Malaysia’s best-known human rights activists and public intellectuals. While being critical of western global hegemony, he says Muslims have to fundamentally reevaluate their understanding of Islam and its traditions. Author of numerous books, Muzaffar is a prolific writer, having published widely in Malaysia and abroad. One of his principal concerns, in his writings and activist involvement, is to promote an Islamic ethic of inter-religious dialogue. Such dialogue, he believes, is an Islamic imperative, besides being indispensable in today’s multi-ethnic and multi-religious Malaysia. But it is also crucial at the global level, he stresses, particularly since many conflicts across the globe, while rooted in economic and political factors, are sought to be projected and legitimised as religious conflicts between Islam and other faiths and ideologies. Muslim, Dialogue and Terror is Muzaffar’s principal work on Islam and inter-faith dialogue, in which he seeks to articulate an inter-faith ethic rooted in an expansive understanding of Islam. Like many other contemporary sociallyengaged Muslim scholars, Muzaffar seeks to directly approach the Koran in order to understand and interpret his faith, largely by-passing the corpus of
traditional fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), and making only passing reference to the corpus of Hadith. This is hardly surprising since the latter two sources contain numerous prescriptions that are plainly inimical, to put it mildly, to harmonious relations between Muslims and others. Stressing ethical values Muzaffar describes the Koran as “in essence, a Book whose fundamental aim is to raise the spiritual and moral consciousness of the human being.” This understanding of the Koran leads him to stress what he sees as the underlying spirit or ethical values of the text over its letter. Some of the fundamental values that he discerns in the Koran are freedom, accountability, justice, kindness, mercy, love, equality, honesty, compassion, fairness, and devotion to the cause of the poor and the oppressed. These values he regards as universal, not limited in their applicability to fellow Muslims alone. In this way, Muzaffar is able to articulate an Islamic ethic of inter-faith dialogue that is Koranic, that prioritizes the spirit over the letter of the text, that is based on what he regards as the fundamental and universal values of the text, and one that is also contextually-relevant. Muzaffar describes this way of relating
to the Koran as a “values-based approach”. He contrasts this with the traditional “fiqh-based approach”, which prioritises the letter of the Koran over its spirit, draws heavily on the cumulative fiqh tradition, and stresses, to the point of obsession, forms, externalities, symbols, rituals, laws, regulations and narrowlyconstrued understandings of Muslim identity. The former is universal, flexible, open, and inclusive, while the latter is particularistic, rigid, closed and exclusive. The former stresses justice, freedom, love, compassion and equality, the latter authoritarianism, control, harshness and hierarchy. The former is open to nonMuslims, actively embraces them as fellow human beings and appreciates the common values that their religions share with Islam. The latter is stridently hostile to people of other faiths, or only grudgingly tolerates them at best. Historical necessity Appealing for this fundamental transformation in Islamic thought based on the “values-based” approach to the Koran, Muzaffar argues: “It is only too apparent that a nondogmatic approach to Islam, which recognises the primacy of eternal, continued next page
10 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
continued from page 9 universal spiritual and moral values while acknowledging the importance of rituals, symbols and practices, is the most sane and sensible way of living the religion in today’s world. The values approach to Islam – the antithesis of the rituals and symbols approach – is not only legitimate from the perspective of the religion but also necessary at this juncture in history.” Making a broad survey of relations between Muslims and others in various countries, and at the global level as a whole, Muzaffar argues that a host of factors have contributed to increased polarization between them in recent years, particular after 9/11. Much of the responsibility for this rests on the Muslims themselves, he says, but he also regards what he calls “the politics of global hegemony emanating from Washington’s imperial ambitions” as a major factor. This latter point leads him to argue, as he does in many of his other books, that interreligious and inter-communal solidarity for peace and justice must necessarily also require a forceful challenging of the structures of power at the global level, most importantly Western, and, in particular, American, political, economic and cultural hegemony, because this is one of the major causes for conflict between Muslims and others. Human beings as brothers and sisters
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
This task, Muzaffar insists, must go handin-hand with a willingness on the part of Muslims themselves to introspect, and to cease blaming others for all their ills. In turn, this requires a fundamental reevaluation of the way Muslims understand their religion, identity and tradition. In particular, it requires, Muzaffar says, “breaking through the hardened crust of exclusive, dogmatic thinking”, and embracing “an inclusive, universal approach”. Seeking to pre-empt critics who would regard this as compromising on Islamic teachings, he insists that it is perfectly in consonance with Islam, which “regards all human beings as brothers and sisters, imperilled by the same human condition.” The pathetic state of most contemporary Muslim societies and states, including the increasingly strained relations between Muslims and others, have much to do, he says, with a dogmatic understanding of Islam that negates the fundamental Koranic values that he distils from the text. The basis of shared beliefs and values For this new approach to Islam and Islamic morality to emerge as a dominant paradigm would require Muslims to “reorientate their thinking on Islam”, focusing particularly on what Muzaffar regards as the basic moral values of the Koran. From this would emerge
A R T I C L E S understandings of Islamic theology and jurisprudence that are rooted in these values – values that are universal, not limited just to Islam alone. Aware of the growing influence of conservative as well as radical groups that are vehemently opposed to inter-faith dialogue and interpret Islam accordingly in a narrow, exclusivist fashion, Muzaffar insists that Islam calls upon Muslims to dialogue with others. He points out, for instance, that the Koran exhorts Muslims, Jews and Christians to come together on the basis of certain shared beliefs and values. He also regards the Pact of Medina, between the Muslims, led by the Prophet, and the Jews and pagans of the town, and the Pact of Najran between the Prophet and Christians, as the Prophet’s practical expression of the Koranic call for inter-faith dialogue and solidarity and the imperative of “coming to terms with ‘the other’.” 10 December 2009 Yoginder Sikand is a writer-academic and the author of several books on Islamrelated issues in India. He is the editor and primary writer of Qalandar, a monthly electronic publication covering relations between Muslims and followers of other religions. Source: http://www.qantara.de/webcom/ show_article.php/_c-478/_nr-978/i.html
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT FOR A JUST WORLD 2010-2013 At the International Movement for a Just World Triennial General Meeting held on 20 March 2010, the following were elected to the Executive Committee:PRESIDENT,
VICE PRESIDENT,
Dr Chandra Muzaffar
Dr Abdullah Al-Ahsan
TREASURER,
SECRETARY-GENERAL,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY-GENERAL,
Mr K Haridas
Mr Anas Zubedy
Tengku Ahmad Hazri
COMMITTEE MEMBERS 1. Dr Arujunan Narayanan 2. Dr Asma Abdullah 3. Dr Chin Yoong Kheong 4.
Mr Gan Teik Chee
8.
Dr Michael Allan
6. Ms Evelyn Khoo Lyn Yin
9.
Dr Muddathir Abdel-Rahim
7.
10. Dr Nooraini Mohd Ismail
5.
Mr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos
Tengku Iskandar
11 I N T E R N AT I O N A L
MOVEMENT
FOR
A
JUST
WORLD
A R T I C L E S
ODT's version of the "State of the Village Report" has been updated and revised to 2005 statistics and is the most current version available. Research for the first twenty facts for the updated version was done by Donella H. Meadows' think tank: the Sustainability Institute. The rest came from a variety of sources including David Smith's children's book: If the World Were a Village. The author of some things "to ponder..." is unknown. This conclusion to the piece was also adapted and revised by ODT, with support from Bette Abrams-Esche. ODT distributes their updated version with every copy of their Population Map. In the same spirit of Donella Meadows' initial work, ODT has made the material available copyright-free, as long as the source is acknowledged in any reproductions. More info at www.odt.org/pop.htm. It can be viewed as a Flash film at luccaco.com/miniatureearth. Donella Meadows' original "State of the Village Report" may be found at: vn338villageed
P.O BOX 288 Jalan Sultan 46730 Petaling Jaya Selangor Darul Ehsan MALAYSIA www.just-international.org
TERBITAN BERKALA
The International Movement for a Just World is a nonprofit international citizens’ organisation which seeks to create public awareness about injustices within the existing global system. It also attempts to develop a deeper understanding of the struggle for social justice and human dignity at the global level, guided by universal spiritual and moral values. In furtherance of these objectives, JUST has undertaken a number of activities including conducting research, publishing books and monographs, organising conferences and seminars, networking with groups and individuals and participating in public campaigns. JUST has friends and supporters in more than 130 countries and cooperates actively with other organisations which are committed to similar objectives in different parts of the world.
INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT FOR A JUST WORLD (JUST)
Bayaran Pos Jelas Postage Paid Pejabat Pos Besar Kuala Lumpur Malaysia No. WP 1385
About the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)
It would be much appreciated if you could share this copy of the JUST Commentary with a friend or relative. Better still invite him/her to write to JUST so that we can put his/her name on our Commentary mailing list.
Please donate to JUST by Postal Order or Cheque addressed to: International Movement for a Just World P.O. Box 288, Jalan Sultan, 46730, Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia or direct to our bank account: Account No. 5141 9633 1748 Malayan Banking Berhad, Damansara Utama Branch, 62-66 Jalan SS 21/35, Damansara Utama, 47400, Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MALAYSIA Malaysian Tax Exemption no. LHDN.01/35/42/51/179-6.5755 Donations from outside Malaysia should be made by Telegraphic Transfer or Bank Draft in USD$