The Williams Globalist Issue 1

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: BIBI AND THE ISRAEL LOBBY • CHINA’S AGRICULTURAL CRASH • INSIDE MAURITANIA

THE WILLIAMS

GLOBALIST WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

Changing people in a changing world

Norway’s Wildest Party p. 23 Kurdistan’s Moment? p. 5

Pentecostalism in Global Slums p. 25 Remembering the Commonwealth p. 27

CONTENTS

: Focus on this region

: Broad regional focus

T : Theme this issue, Identity

POLITICS

Bibi’s Bomb

by Claire Swingle Opportunity Amongst Unrest

by Lauren Nevin T In Search of Monsters

by Sean Hoffmann The Devil We Know

by Christopher Huffaker T

CULTURE

Unequal Rites

by Lani Willmar T Spiritual Development

by Philip von Hahn T

ECONOMICS p. 3 p. 5 p. 7

India’s Ascent

by Phonkrit Tanavisarut Mourning in Marikana

by Refiloe Damane China’s Farming Dilemma

by Laurel Jarombek

p. 15 p. 17 p. 19

p. 10

FEATURES

Open Letters To President Obama p. 13

by Aldis Inde and Laurel Jarombek Country Feature: Mauritania p. 21 p. 25

by Stanislas Monfront Obituary: The Commonwealth of Nations p. 27

by Sauman Cheng p. 23

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

1

STAFF

DEAR READERS,

Executive Director Burhan Aldroubi Editor-in-Chief Christopher Huffaker

(The Devil We Know, p. 10)

Production Editor Benjamin Eastburn Executive Editor Amir Hay Managing Editors Philip von Hahn

(Spiritual Development, p. 25)

Aldis Inde

(Open Letters to President Obama, p. 13)

Laurel Jarombek

(China’s Farming Dilemma, p. 19

Open Letters to President Obama, p. 13)

Phonkrit Tanavisarut (India’s Ascent, p. 15)

Associate Editors Jesper Bodd Benjamin Nathan Rumbidzai Ndoro Financial Manager Griffith Simon Contributors to this issue Sauman Cheng

(Obituary: The Commonwealth of Nations, p. 27)

Refiloe Damane

(Mourning in Marikana, p. 17)

Sean Hoffmann

(In Search of Monsters, p. 7)

Stanislas Monfront

(Country Feature: Mauritania, p. 21)

Lauren Nevin

(Opportunity Amongst Unrest, p. 5)

Claire Swingle

(Bibi’s Bomb, p. 3)

Lani Willmar

(Unequal Rites, p. 23)

Cover Secret Identities Winnie Ma 2

We are proud to present the inaugural issue of The Williams Globalist. With this magazine, we hope to bring to you, our readers and fellow students, an opportunity to increase your awareness of global affairs and an avenue through which to discuss them. We intend to facilitate the sharing of the diverse and fascinating ideas found in the purple bubble. Furthermore, while the Globalist is a new publication at Williams, it is also part of Global21, a worldwide endeavor to connect students through journalism and international relations.

Our goals and subjects are far-reaching, but magazine has more personal roots. We, the founders of the chapter, Burhan, Amir, Ben, and Chris, were randomly thrust together by Williams’ diversity-geared first-year housing policy. We are a Syrian, an Israeli-Chicagoan, a Californian, and the son of two American Foreign Service Officers. Between us, we have three citizenships, are fluent in five languages, and have lived in seven countries. From these disparate histories, a clash of perspective was inevitable. In our time together we discovered that barely an hour would pass before an argument about politics or culture arose, and we wanted to bring as many people into the spirit of that discussion as possible. That spirit of discussion, or of argument, is the essence of what we want this magazine to be.

Finally, with our own differences in mind, we formulated with our board a theme for the first issue. In these pages, you will find a bent towards articles about identities, be they national and linguistic ones like those listed above, or others, like religion and class. You can read about how Norway’s youth expose their differences through their celebration of success, or how Venezuela has become dangerously split along rigid social and political lines. Another examines the prospects of the world’s largest stateless ethnic group, the Middle East’s Kurds. Whatever your interests, we hope you can find something to catch your attention. When you put down the Globalist, our wish is that you are not satisfied, but that a thirst has been piqued. Pursue it, and tell us what you discover.

With love and aspirations, Chris Huffaker, Ben Eastburn, Amir Hay and Burhan Aldroubi

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

BIBI’S BOMB

Did Netanyahu’s failed backing of Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney jeopardize Israel’s already strained US relations?

Claire Swingle A prime minister presenting a cartoon drawing of a bomb at the United Nations is hard to ignore, but it is of greater import that the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu, interfered in an unprecedented manner in the U.S. presidential election to try to elect an administration ostensibly more receptive to his fear of Iranian nuclear weapons. His conspicuous attempts to do so could prove damaging for the pro-Israel lobby in America.

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, a self-described hawk on Iran, wrote in Haaretz that Bibi’s actions have “left [him] in a state of stunned disbelief ” because “the cardinal rule of American-Israel relations is that neither country interferes in the national elections of the other.” Bibi has publicly rebuked the Obama administration’s policy towards Iranian nuclear capability on programs such as Meet the Press. He even scolded Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her statement that the U.S. setting deadlines for Iran by infamously saying, “Those in the international community who refuse to put deadlines in front of Iran do not have the moral right to put a red light before Israel.” Because Netanyahu desires the “red line” that Obama is hesitant to draw, the prime minister therefore looked to a different “special relationship,” one with Mitt Romney, with whom he worked at Boston Consulting Group and with whom he shares many donors. David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker, wrote that “Netanyahu seems determined, more than ever, to alienate the president of the United States and, as an ally of Mitt Romney’s campaign, to make himself a factor in the 2012 election.”

Netanyahu’s interference has angered many.

U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, who has long been close to AIPAC, wrote a letter to Netanyahu expressing her “deep disappointment” over his remarks that called into question U.S. support for Israel. Joe Klein of Time called Netanyahu’s recent behavior “outrageous,” as well as “an unprecedented attempt by a putative American ally to influence a US presiden-

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu delivers a heavy-handed presentation to the United Nations

tial campaign.” Not surprisingly, Democrats have been most upset by the Prime Minister’s support of Romney, continuing a trend which, since 1999, has shown Republicans adopting an increasingly favorable opinion of Netanyahu while Democrats’ views have moved in the opposite direction.

Reaction to Netanyahu within the pro-Israel lobby has also varied. J-Street, one of the two most influential pro-Israel lobbies and an advocate of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, is upset that attention has been diverted from what it sees as the most important issue -- peace with Palestine. Conversely, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), arguably the most influential pro-Israel lobby, has tried, but failed, to garner widespread support of a “red line” against Iran. AIPAC has also had to focus on countering comments by Netanyahu that could be seen as disrespectful; it has even thanked Obama for his support of Israel.

The varied responses to Netanyahu’s aggression have highlighted the fact that the pro-Israel lobby is not one unified group, which undermines its power. As James McAllister, professor of political science at Williams College, told me, “There is no singular ‘Israel Lobby.’” In reality, it is not mono-

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

3

lithic; over 51 organizations comprise it, with rang- billion in bilateral assistance. It is also the only couning views on key issues such as the Israel-Palestine try in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. This conflict. Since the Pro-Israel lobby relies largely on imbalance causes Mearsheimer and Walt to argue in the perception of strength and unity, this is a prob- The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy that Israel is a lem. “Those who criticize Israeli policy invite painful “strategic liability,” involving America in destructive and relentless retaliation, and even loss of their live- wars and placing it at odds with opinion throughout lihood, by pressure by one or more parts of Israel’s the world, like when the U.S. protected Israel from lobby,” wrote researcher Kahlil Marrar. This increas- international sanctions in 2006, after Israel invaded es the power of the lobby because “at the heart of Lebanon. support for the Jewish state was (as it remains today) It must be noted, however, that the majorthe perception that its lobbying machine would destroy ity of the American public does not share Mearanyone that would dare challenge it.” The lobby also sheimer and Walt’s view. Rather, they see Israel as relies on perceived support from public opinion. the only true democracy in the Middle East, and as Former Republican Congressman Paul Findley once a representative of the United States’ interests in said of the Pro-Israel lobby that “‘House and Senate the region. Moreover, the weakening of the lobby members do its bidding, because most of them con- might be attributable to causes unrelated to Netsider AIPAC to be the direct Capitol Hill representa- anyahu’s actions. In a different piece, Walt suggests tive of a political force that can make or break their that “it is also harder to defend that relationship chances at election time.’” Jewish voters, however, when the costs to the United States -- in terms of have prioritized different issues from rising anti-Americanism and declin“While 70% of those advocated by Netanyahu. Even ing influence in the region -- are more American Jews while expressing dissatisfaction with apparent.” The weakening could also Obama’s handling of Iran, Americans voted for Obama, represent a divide emerging between want to avoid military conflict, with 57% of Israeli Jews the views of American Jews and those seventy percent of those polled by the of Israeli Jews. Israel is moving away preferred Mitt Chicago Council on Global Affairs from the left and currently only about Romney.” saying they are opposed to a unilateral 17% of the Jewish public identifies U.S. attack on Iran and solid majorities opposed to themselves as left or moderate left while 55% define involvement in either a joint attack with Israel or a themselves as right or moderate right. Meanwhile, war authorized by the UN. And only one percent Galit Hasan-Rokem, professor of Jewish studies at named Iran as their top issue in a J-Street poll. To Williams College, suggests that American Jews are the extent that Netanyahu’s actions have led to the having a generational shift to the left (explaining the bifurcation of public opinion and of the pro-Israel emergence of many left-leaning organizations like lobby, Netanyahu may have, in the words of David Jewish Voice for Peace and J-Street in the past twenRothkopf, “killed the Israel Lobby.” ty years). While 70% of American Jews voted for It is significant to note that while Netanya- Obama, 57% of Israeli Jews preferred Mitt Romney. hu’s failed attempts to get the US to commit itself to Israel received a disproportionally high a war on Israel’s behalf may signal a weakened lobby, number of mentions in the final presidential debate, Israel still receives benefits unknown to other allies. but it seems to have had very little effect. This mainThese include “an endless stream of U.N. Security tained the Republican strategy to try to out-pro-IsCouncil vetoes that place [the United States] at odds rael the Democrats, even asserting that Israel has with [its] other democratic allies” and “U.S. officials been “thrown under the bus” by Obama, making offering only the mildest of complaints when Isra- Democrats even more reluctant to criticize Israel. el builds another settlement, bombs Gaza, or kills If the accepted post-election view is that the Israel an American peace activist,” as Stephen Walt wrote Lobby is weaker, a more open discussion of Middle in Foreign Policy. Israel, 27th in the world for per East policy may be possible, and the United States capita income, has also been the largest recipient of may be able to pursue a more balanced foreign polU.S. foreign aid since World War II, receiving $115 icy in that unstable region.

4

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

OPPORTUNITY AMONGST UNREST

The aftermath of Assad’s rule may be the Kurds’ best chance for autonomy, as Turkey’s involvement in the Syrian conflict escalates Lauren Nevin

In the spring of 2011, the al-Assad government of Syria granted citizenship access to the Syrian Kurds, centralized in the northern region of the country, near its border to Turkey. Such gains for Syrian Kurds emboldened Kurds in Turkey, who live mainly in the Turkish Southeast, to resist their own government with more tenacity and to pursue partnerships with the newly galvanized Kurds in Syria.

This past August, while members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (Partiya Karkere Kurdistan, PKK), a major Kurdish militant group, roused conflict with Turkish officials in the Hakkari district (along Turkey’s eastern border with Iran and Iraq), al-Assad removed Syrian government officials from several Kurdish areas along Syria’s Turkish border, leaving local control in the hands of the Kurdish Democratic Union (Partiya Yekitiya Demokrat, PYD). In addition, around the same time, the Iranian government was working to manipulate the PKK as a pawn in its efforts to “punish” the Turkish government for its support of opposition forces in Syria’s civil war.

Due to the Syrian conflict, complications and obligations are piling up for the Turkish government, while the PKK gains both support and inspiration.

Despite the concessions the Assad regime offered to Syrian Kurds, many resist the notion that they are at all interested in involving themselves in Syria’s current civil conflict. Rather, Syrian Kurds, including Kurdish defectors from the Syrian Army, have set their sight on a different battle: the future power struggle following Assad’s eventual fall. Many Syrian Kurds envision the power and security vacuum left in Assad’s wake as the ideal condition to assert their claim for an autonomous Kurdish region that links with Kurdish minorities in Iran, Turkey, and Iraq to form an independent Kurdistan. Some

Wikimedia Commons

Kurds, who live mostly in four Middle Eastern countries, are the world’s largest stateless ethnic group

Kurds, however, envisage more moderate objectives, particularly increased political influence, similar to recent advancements made by Iraqi Kurds to gain proportional governmental representation. The Syrian government’s recent relinquishment of Kurdish communities to local control granted Kurds a taste of the autonomy they have long endeavored to attain. Their seizing of such liberty is apparent in Kurdish flags flying high over Syrian government buildings and Kurdish language buzzing within local schools. Kurds in Iran, Iraq and especially Turkey observe their progress and are gaining even more determination. In reaction to this shifting sentiment, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has declared Turkey’s obligation to intervene within Syria’s Kurdish regions if activity there threatens Turkey’s security. This building tension suggests that the end of the Syrian civil war will not lead to peace, but

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

5

rather to another war engrossing even more of the legally qualifies as an act of terrorism punishable by region. imprisonment. The Turkish government remains

The Kurdish population represents a true convinced the PKK lacks any peaceful intentions; anomaly in the Middle East. Spanning the region therefore, it sees any relinquishment or reconciliathat lies at the intersection of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and tion on its part as a display of weakness.

Syria, the Kurds inhabit these countries with vary- Under these conditions, the past few deing degrees of representation from their respective cades produced little progress for either side of national governments. In each country, most Kurds the conflict. Recent regional events, especially the resist integration into the general populations, some Syrian conflict, however, have fed sparks to this evof them still endeavoring to establish a separate er-burning fire by presenting the Kurds with new Kurdistan that is completely their own. In particu- seeds of hope. Kurds, unlike many other distinct lar, Turkish Kurds represent about half of all Kurds ethnic groups in the Middle East, have yet to sucworldwide, numbering between 10 and 12 million ceed in isolating themselves from the governments people, or about one-fifth of the Turkish popula- to which they, for varying reasons, do not relate. The tion. In spite of the Kurds’ position as the largest past success of the Armenians, Azerbaijanis and Isnon-Turkish ethnic group in the country, the Turkish raelis in their ethnic assertions reminds the Kurds government, for the majority of its history, includ- of the potential for triumph, but also exacerbates ing the present, has not acknowledged that a Kurd- their frustration that such success has yet to include ish ethnicity exists. The governthem. Arab autocrats, countless ment considers assimilation to the “... any expression post-Ottoman Turkish officials, dominant Turkish culture the only and Western leaders (particularly of Kurdish rights, the Allied powers after World War viable way for Kurds to partake in government and politics. Since all contributed to relentincluding writing I)lesshave language is a fundamental differKurdish oppression by denyence between Kurds and Turks, in Kurdish, legally ing Kurdish rights despite any of government authorities’ banning qualifies as an act their initial intentions or promises. of the Kurdish language sustains If there is any time for Kurds to of terrorism ...” the division and bitter opposition seize control of the future and dibetween Turkish and Kurdish culrect it in accordance to their own ture. Despite fleeting successes in some efforts to aspirations, that time is now, within the cataclysm of reverse these trends, like those of former Turkish the Arab Spring and Syrian unrest.

Prime Minister Turgut Ozal, denial of Kurdish iden- Turkey’s Kurds will be of particular signiftity prevails. As of 1995, Turkish law prohibits use icance in this initiative. Generations of resistance, of Kurdish in any government institution, including especially in the last three decades, have left Turkish courts and schools.

Kurds in search of a larger cause into which they can

The establishment of the PKK in 1984 al- channel their resources and resilience. As the Turktered the perception of Kurds in Turkey by chang- ish government’s policy agenda grows increasingly ing their self-identification, their status in relation to complicated, their attention to Kurdish resistance the Turkish government, and their repute around will inevitably compete with other priorities. Kurds the world. The “Kurdish problem” in Turkey trans- in countries neighboring Turkey must therefore capformed into a perceived “terrorist problem,” com- italize on the present regional condition. Changing manded and charged by the PKK. Turks’ fear of the power dynamics are lining up with the invigoration PKK’s violent quest for Kurdish secession serves as of Kurds in Turkey and their willingness to contribjustification for government laws and actions that ute to a greater Kurdish cause. Organized behind restrict civil rights and free expression. Governmen- the PKK, Turkish Kurds have spent decades devottal resistance blurs the distinction between legiti- ing their lives to the Kurdish autonomy cause. What mate protest and terrorism, such that any expres- better occasion than now to finally make that hope sion of Kurdish rights, including writing in Kurdish, reality?

6

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

IN SEARCH OF MONSTERS

America has abandoned its founding fathers’ isolationist principles. Where should it take its international role now?

Sean Hoffmann “Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”

On Independence Day, 1821, John Quincy Adams, the 6th President of the United States, addressed these words to the American people. He was reiterating what had become a core tenet of American foreign policy: the United States should serve as an emblem and example of democratic freedom to the world, but no more.

It was an idea exemplified by George Washington’s farewell address, in which he advised the nascent union to “observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all.” It was more than a proclamation of isolationist policy, although his words have often been interpreted as such. It was a plainly realist analysis of the American position in the world: a young nation, naturally wealthy but dependant upon international trade, could not survive while pursuing aggressive foreign policy or choosing sides in European conflicts. For as long as the United States existed as a minor player in the global order, its interests were best served by remaining neutral.

This philosophy largely governed American foreign policy until the First World War. Even then, much of the American public resisted the idea of U.S. intervention in Europe. This faction reasserted itself following the signing of the Treaty of Versailles and stonewalled President Woodrow Wilson’s movement to establish a League of Nations and bring the United States to the forefront of global relations. It was not until the conclusion of World War II that the American people accepted the mantle of great power, and not until the onset of the Cold War they accepted the role of global leader.

The Cold War changed how America, and Americans, viewed the world. The United States was no longer simply a well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all; it became the guarantor of liberty and the first line of defense against the insidious and spreading threat of

Wikimedia Commons

President John Quincy Adams, monster apologist

communism. The policy of the United States had become, in the words of President Harry Truman, “to support free people who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures.” Communism, an amorphous ideology, was seen as an existential threat to the idea of America. The Soviet Union, as its physical embodiment, thus became a palpable threat that required constant vigilance to defend against. For the first time, the line of defense was not limited to the country’s territorial borders; it extended around the world, wherever freedom was thought to be at risk. America became, at least in the minds of its people and its policymakers, the world’s savior.

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

7

Bush cited a concern for the promotion of democracy and human rights within the country as grounds for the invasion. It was codenamed Operation Just Cause.

A year later the United States, along with 33 other nations, launched Operation Desert Storm, following Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The motivations for the military action were largely geopolitical: defending Kuwaiti sovereignty, protecting the flow of strategic resources, and keeping peace in an already volatile region.

It is worth noting, however, that Saddam Hussein’s record of human rights abuses contributed to the international support for American-led intervention. Then, shortly after the successful conclusion of Operation Desert Storm, the United States initiated Operation Provide Comfort, a military and humanitarian intervention in Northern Iraq to defend Kurds fleeing their homes in cia.gov the wake of the Gulf War. Range of Soviet missiles, if launched from Cuba; President Clinton continued the interventionist during the Cold War, the monsters came to us policies started in the Bush administration and expandAnd then, as in all things, the Cold War came to ed the rationale for involving the United States in such an end. The iron curtain lifted, the wall was torn down, actions. In 1999, President Bill Clinton gave a speech exand the threat of communism dissipated. The beast had plaining the interventionist actions of his administration been tamed, but winning the Cold War did very little and the responsibility the United States bore towards to change the American view of the world and, more the world. The Clinton Doctrine was embodied in these importantly, its role within the international order. The words: “Where our values and our interests are at stake, United States was not to turn back the pages of histo- and when we can make a difference, we must be prepared ry and live again as a city on a hill; the American role to do so.” as champion of liberty and defender of democracy had Between 1992 and 2000, the United States was been too well internalized. The United States had defeat- openly involved in four armed conflicts – Operations ed its first great monster, but it continued to see itself as Restore Hope and Gothic Serpent (Somalia), Operathe world’s hero. That left one possible course of action: tion Deliberate Force (Bosnia), Operation Uphold Deto seek out new monsters to slay. mocracy (Haiti), and Operation Noble Anvil (Kosovo) The 1990s are known for many things: the fall – all of which were executed to protect human rights of Communism and the end of apartor promote democracy. Each of these heid, the birth of the Information “Where our values and engagements was, to a varying degree, Age and the dot-com boom, the TV our interests are at stake, deemed successful, possibly excepting show Friends. Spanning the years be- and when we can make the Battle of Mogadishu. Genocides tween the Cold War and the War on were ended or prevented, democracy Terror, the final decade of the twenti- a difference, we must be was upheld, and the fires of war were eth century was one of prosperity and extinguished, however momentariprepared to do so.” harmony for many around the globe. ly. The United States protected the President Bill Clinton With the threat of imminent nucleworld, at the cost of American lives. ar annihilation lifted, the world seemed infinitely more The significance of these interventions lies not secure. There were no dragons on the horizon, no true only in the use of American forces for humanitarian offenders to the new, unipolar global order. purposes around the globe, but also in the rhetoric with And so the United States found itself searching which these actions were justified. The 1990s saw widefor smaller monsters to destroy. American foreign policy spread military action undertaken with moral cause, not became one of political and humanitarian intervention. national interest, as the primary motive. While President As the leader of the free world, the United States carried Clinton occasionally attempted to define national interest a unique burden, a relic of the Cold War: a moral imper- to include such interventions, it is difficult to make the ative to protect and expand American values everywhere. argument that there was any true strategic value to these On December 21, 1989, President George H.W. conflicts. These interventions stand as proof of AmeriBush authorized the use of force in Panama in response can dedication to the protection of its values around the to Panamanian assaults on American military person- world, and the destruction of those forces that would nel within the country. Importantly, however, President threaten them.

8

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

Of course, the interventions of the 1990s distinguished themselves from those that would come in the following decade in an important respect. They relied on multilateral cooperation.

On September 11, 2001, a new dragon reared its head. Al Qaeda was not a monster that the United States had sought out, but as the Twin Towers fell in New York City, a new American war, the War on Terror, began.

While there had been intermittent entanglements with terrorist organizations throughout the 1990s, no concerted, long-standing effort had been made to combat the threat. 9/11 changed that.

The fight quickly grew. It was not a war against Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, or any other specific terrorist organization. It was a war on terror. The enemy was an idea, not a country or an organization. That it was framed as such is perhaps not surprising given the language that the United States had developed over the past half century to promote its role in the world. But the problem with a war on an idea is that there is no tangible enemy, no strategic goal, and no end. This quickly became all too apparent as the War on Terror ballooned into ground wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, shadow wars in Pakistan and Eastern Africa, and a disregard of civil rights in the name of national security.

Perhaps most worryingly, the United States became a lone crusader. While there was broad international support for the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the neoconservative administration of President George W. Bush squandered that goodwill on the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its subsequent mishandling of the two wars.

Under President Bush, the United States purported to wield the sword of international justice, but did so with decreasing international support. The United States continued to fight monsters wherever it found them, but the process became more difficult and the world less hospitable.

President Barack Obama’s first term in office was a stark contrast to the policies of his predecessor.

Seeking to repair America’s reputation, President Obama chose to walk the road of a realist. He spoke not of spreading democracy at all costs but of protecting American lives and American interests. He discussed a foreign policy pivot towards Asia and proposed engagement with hostile leaders. When the decision was made to intervene in Libya, the action was coordinated, multilateral and brief, reminiscent of the interventions of the 1990s.

In his first term, President Obama narrowed the American foreign policy focus. His strategy for fighting the War on Terror was to turn it into a war on terrorism – still a problematic idea, but one somewhat more tightly defined. He sought to end the nation-building efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. This effort was met, however, with an expansion of America’s shadow wars – clandestine Special Forces operations and drone strikes in places

Walsh/AP

President Barack Obama announces the end of the Iraq War in August 2010

like Pakistan and Somalia. While these methods are perhaps more effective, and certainly more efficient, than the counterinsurgency methods pursued in Iraq and Afghanistan, they too must be used judiciously. A nation that lives too much in the shadows can hardly claim to represent the light.

The question now turns to President Obama’s second term, and the administrations that will follow.

America remains the world’s sole superpower, and will hold that honor for some time to come. The United States, then, has the ability to define its role in the world order. What it can no longer do is endeavor to freely shape the world order to its liking. If his first term is any guide, this is a lesson that President Obama seems to have learned.

Nevertheless, troubling signs remain. Foreign policy played second fiddle to economic issues in the 2012 presidential election, but when it was discussed, as in the final debate, the arguments from both candidates tended towards the belligerent and the dangerous. Granted, a presidential election will force candidates towards the extreme as they seek to prove themselves worthy of the title Commander-in-Chief. Even so, there was more discussion about threats and dangers than about opportunities or allies.

The dangers of a constant search for monsters can have no clearer example than the past decade. This particular quest has cost two wars, billions of dollars, and thousands of American lives. There will always be monsters in the world, but if we seek to avoid such wars in the future we must as a nation recognize that we do not need to slay them all. We can, however, serve as an international leader on global issues like poverty, nonproliferation, climate change, and, yes, the peaceful promotion of democracy and human rights. Where force is necessary, force must be employed, but those instances should be limited to direct threats to American interests, not the shadows of an idea.

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

9

THE DEVIL WE KNOW

Despite his mixed results for Venezuela, the country’s prospects remain aligned with those of President Hugo Chavez Christopher Huffaker A Venezuelan acquaintance of mine recently related to me a horrifying anecdote. Home in Venezuela for the summer, she had been spending time with some old friends she had only seen occasionally over several years. She was horrified when one of these friends, welloff and educated, pointed to a pair of teenage girls who looked poor and said with disgust that they were “probably Chavista,” meaning a supporter of President Hugo Chavez. It is depressing enough that this young woman would comment on the class of some strangers on the street in the first place, but that she connected it to their political affiliation is even more shocking.

Prensa Miraflores/Flickr There is little difficulty in finding more stories like this one. One Venezuelan friend of mine, who lives Chavistas like these are praying for Chavez’s recovery in Montreal, spoke of a group of his friends screaming at undeniable degree of political savvy. His main asset was, their television as they watched the results come in from and is, a rapport with Venezuela’s poor, an unfortunately October’s presidential election. When a ranking member large portion of the population (over a quarter of Veneof Chavez’s United Socialist Party of Venezuela (Parti- zuelans are below the poverty line, according to the CIA do Socialista Unido de Venezuela, PSUV) was shown giving World Factbook). a press conference, these Venezuelan-Canadian college Chavez has maintained this connection to the students yelled, “I hope you die, you communist piece poor, but he first established it in the midst of an exof shit!” Finally, and most surprisingly, I myself watched ceptionally weak economy and a political system known a pre-election discussion between an elderly Venezuelan primarily for its corruption. “What you’d had in Venezuscholar and a fellow student grow ela was growth without a reduction heated, merely because the student, in poverty,” former US Ambassador herself not even Chavista, was willto Venezuela Charles Shapiro told ing to acknowledge the validity of me. This meant that the purchasthe ruling party’s position and the ing power of the average Venezuescholar was not. lan’s salary in 1998 was down a third How did this cultural, social from its peak in the 1970s, and the and political schism happen? In the high level of inflation, over 20 perUnited States, no one identifies othcent, cautioned against hope. Furer people with an individual, unless thermore, “the two parties in power that individual is a Jesus or a teen before Chavez were both extraordiCharles Shapiro idol. Relative to Venezuela, it would narily corrupt,” said Shapiro, and the Former US Ambassador to people knew it. The former duopoly seem that our political polarization Venezuela endures at a personal level only to an of the AD and COPEI parties comextremely limited extent. But Venezuela was not always bined received less than 20% of the vote the year Chavez like the divided country we see today, and it is worth ex- won the presidency. Chavez campaigned primarily on amining how it got there and what hope the country has the increased nationalization of Venezuela’s massive oil of moving forward. reserves in the interest of redistribution of revenues to President Hugo Chavez was elected in 1998 with the lower classes, as well as on the elimination of cor56 percent of the popular vote, 16 percentage points ruption and a general anti-imperialist sentiment. In that more than his closest competition. The former military first election, Chavez made clear his disconnect from the officer was born to a working-class family and has an established ruling parties, which depended heavily on the

“What you’d had in Venezuela [before Chavez] was growth without a reduction in poverty.”

10

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

wealthier segments of Venezuelan society. This set the groundwork for the class-based division the country sees today.

To his great fortune, Chavez’s years in power have also seen a continued, dramatic increase in the price of oil. Venezuela has the largest proven reserves of conventional oil and the second-largest reserves of natural gas in the Western Hemisphere, as well as vast reserves of unconventional petroleum, such as bitumen and extra-heavy crude oil. Altogether, petroleum accounts for over 50 percent of the government’s income, making much of the otherwise implausible social policies of Chavismo possible. With $250 million dollars of oil revenues daily at hand, Chavez has pursued what he and his supporters call “the Bolivarian revolution,” after the historical South American hero Simon Bolivar, focusing on social justice and economic redistribution.

Emblematic of those policies are the Bolivarian Missions, a series of social justice, social welfare, anti-poverty, education, and military recruitment programs.

The missions are, in Shapiro’s words, the “government replacing itself on an ad hoc basis” because the normal institutions do not work. To Chavez’s credit, many of the missions have been effective. The construction of thousands of free medical clinics helped reduce infant mortality by 18.2% from 1998 to 2006, and poverty fell from 59.4% in 1999 to 30.2% in 2006. Educational campaigns are reported to have made more than one million adult Venezuelans literate.

With these successes, Chavez’s political power Capriles points excitedly to his adoring fans

Walter Prado/Flickr

Ismael Batista/juventudrebelde.co.cu

Chavez, an ardent Bolivarian, gives public television addresses in front of Simon Bolivar’s portrait

grew, winning successive elections with growing margins of over twenty percent. He consolidated his electoral coalition into the PSUV. While he was briefly removed from power by a coup in 2002, he returned stronger than before only two days later, and he survived a recall referendum by 18 percentage points in 2004. Both of these occassions helped to ingraine the us-versus-them political philosophy that is causing division today. The first major political setback of his presidency did not come until 2007, when student protests drove a rejection of a constitutional referendum that would have increased presidential authority.

By 2012, opposition figures would have been blind to believe they could defeat Chavez’s political genius easily, but amidst increasingly visible economic and social problems, they had reasons to be cautiously optimistic. The Bolivarian Revolution has been far from entirely successful. Venezuela still has millions of people in poverty. Its inflation rate, over 20 percent, is the highest in South America, as is its homicide rate, with 53 homicides a day. Furthermore, violent crime has increased threefold during Chavez’s presidency. Nor do these problems go unnoticed by the population; Gallup reports that only 44 percent of Venezuelans see their standard of living getting better, the lowest percentage in South America, tied with Guyana.

In 2008, opposition parties were able to coalesce, forming the Coalition for Democratic Unity (Mesa de la Unidad Democratica, MUD). After electoral successes in 2010’s parliamentary elections, the coalition backed the popular, young Henrique Capriles Radonski. Capriles was governor of Miranda, one of Venezuela’s largest states and the home of part of the country’s capital. He defined himself as a “center-left progressive,” both business-friendly and socially conscious, joining Chavez on the left, where most Venezuelan voters stand. Then, in June 2011, Chavez underwent surgery in Cuba to remove a cancerous tumor, putting into question the dynamism

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

11

Prensa Miraflores/Flickr

Vice President Maduro comforts a worried Chavista

and energy that had defined his political figure. Despite Chavez’s claims of remission, in September 2012, the majority of polls showed a much narrower race than Chavez had yet faced, and a few even projected a victory for Capriles. Ignoring the overwhelming advantages the incumbent had, media the world over predicted a wakeup call for the president.

The polls were wrong. While it was his smallest margin yet, at 11 percent, Chavez won handily. The election was far from fair (Chavez forced hours of proPSUV programming onto anti-Chavista TV stations using emergency broadcast laws, among other mischief), but election watchers reported that at the ballot box, voting proceeded without interference. Twenty-first Century Socialism had received its mandate for another six years. One question immediately asked was, “Why?” How were the polls so wrong?

Firstly, it is worth noting that polling in Venezuela, like in most developing countries, is historically unreliable, but this does little to account for the difference of ten or more percent between polling and reality. Williams College Political Science Professor Jim Mahon offered one possibility. “The worst-case scenarios were the ones where the opposition wins,” he told me, so undecided voters, who may have favored Capriles ideologically, concluded that the “safer option was to vote for Chavez.” If Capriles had won narrowly, many feared it would result in a civil war. Chavez, with the backing of the military, may have challenged, or altered, the results, with unforeseeable but probably unpleasant consequences. Venezuelans may have been left reminiscing about the halcyon days of mere economic troubles and crime.

Voting for Chavez was also perceived as safer at the personal level. Many Venezuelans feared that the ballot would not be entirely secret, in which case voting

against Chavez could risk their livelihoods. In 2003, the list of signers of the petition to recall Chavez was released. Many signers lost their government jobs or were denied services supposedly available to all Venezuelans, so fear of partisan discrimination increased.

Whatever the reason for the disparity, Chavez’s victory was clear. Oil revenues have ensured his massive, unwavering support base in Venezuela’s poor, while corruption and inefficiency have equally ensured that he is unlikely to maintain the supermajority support he experienced in the past. To counter this, Chavez has made certain to demonize the opposition as much as possible, calling Capriles a “pig” and a “fascist” during the latest campaign. Certainly, there was class animosity before Chavez, but Venezuelans now live in a polarized political matchbox, where political affiliation and apparent wealth are critical elements of how individuals are identified and treated.

This became even more dangerous in December, when Chavez returned to Cuba for another round of cancer surgery. Prospects were apparently grim enough that he named a successor, Vice President Maduro, in case “something were to occur to him.” The inauguration, scheduled for January 10, has yet to occur. Unfortunately for Chavistas, it is difficult to imagine Chavismo without Chavez, and Maduro will “not come anywhere near Chavez’s power,” said Shapiro. Additionally, Maduro does not hail from the military side of Chavez’s power base, so his support within the party may be less sturdy.

Unfortunately for the opposition, Chavez is really what holds them together, as well. They had limited success in December’s state elections, although Capriles at least won the gubernatorial race in Miranda again. They remain “as different internally as the far left and the far right in the U.S.,” said Shapiro.

If Chavez were to die soon, it seems that neither party would be terribly stable. The PSUV would find itself a highly corrupt, well-armed headless chicken, while the MUD would be even more starkly challenged by its motley political makeup. Ideally the transfer of power to Maduro will be smooth and when, as the constitution requires, an election is held, Capriles will win. Unfortunately, we could also see a coup, a breakdown of the opposition, or worse. There is no way to know the future, but there is a good reason to believe it will not be pleasant.

Venezuela’s immediate future appears to be a case of the devil we know. For the world and for Venezuela’s people, hopefully Cuba’s doctors are good.

“Venezuelans now live in a polarized political mathbox, where political affiliation and apparent wealth are critical elements of how individuals are identified and treated.”

12

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

OPEN LETTERS TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Below you will find two letters written by members of the Globalist board to President Obama. Each writes on a salient foreign policy issue, the first our relationship with allies, and the second the so-called pivot to Asia. The views expressed in these letters represent only those of their writers, not of the magazine

Relationship with Allies Laurel Jarombek

Dear President Obama, Your second term provides an opportunity to strengthen relationships with existing allies and to build new relationships with countries whose domestic changes over the past several years have opened the possibility of closer ties with the United States.

With the exceptions of Israel and Pakistan, the world is generally pleased with the outcome of the election, but you must translate that support for you, personally, into increasingly healthy and productive alliances. Regarding our traditional European and NATO allies, it is essential that we maintain strong ties and continue cooperation in global affairs into the future. Taking concrete action to address some of the sticking points in our relationships with these critical allies, such as the closing of Guantanamo and addressing the seemingly unrestricted nature of drone warfare at present, could serve to improve our standing in the eyes of countries like Britain and France.

Additionally, given the dire economic situation that Europe currently faces, working together to solve these issues is imperative. We must promote the strength of the European Union, both for the sake of its people and to ensure that Europe will continue to be a significant ally to us on the international stage. With a world where more and more countries are becoming involved in global affairs,

it is necessary for the United States to work with our friends to solve problems. We must come to an agreement on economic sanctions against Iran, and deal with the crisis in Syria, preferably without having to resort to violence.

Recognition of the Arab Spring as an opportunity to ally ourselves with the people of the region, rather than autocratic governments, is also a necessary step. Through our support for democratic movements, in whatever form they take, we can find allies in Middle Eastern governments that are representative of their peoples.

Sincerely, Laurel Jarombek President Obama demonstrates the “special relationship� with the U.K. by rooting for Chelsea in the 2012 UEFA Champions League final. Chancellor Merkel is unpleased, as Bayern Munich loses in penalties

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

Wikimedia Commons

13

Pivot to Asia Aldis Inde

Dear President Obama, Although so far as a magazine we have focused heavily on the problems of the Middle East, I beg you, as President, not to. The long-term interests of the United States lie in a Middle East independent of continuous U.S. intervention. Even more so, they lie in a renewed focus on the future power centers of the world, especially Asia.

The popular idea of a “Pivot to Asia� is, theoretically, a good place to start, but I am worried about the direction it is currently taking U.S.-Chinese relations. It is time to be honest about China.

While the country, with its population and its infrastructure, is certainly gaining status as a global power, we need to acknowledge the serious structural problems it faces and adjust our policy accordingly.

The U.S. government, and you particularly,

Mr. President, need to wake up to the fact that China is not a credible threat to American global dominance. Our policy towards China needs to reflect the fact that their military is not poised to overtake ours, their economy is not about to swallow ours whole, and their biggest fear is the unrest amongst their own people.

Our pivot must be diplomatic, not military.

U.S. dominance of naval power should be enough to calm any fears about Chinese military growth. Any further allocation of military power or intervention in regional disputes will serve only to magnify tension in the region. Yes, it is time to get our men out of the Middle East, but it is not, nor likely will it ever be, time to move them into Asia.

Sincerely, Aldis Inde

Pivot in progress: President Obama stands with President Hu Jintao of China on the White House lawn

Pete Souza/Official White House Photo

14

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

INDIA’S ASCENT

Previously derided for its “Hindu rate of growth,” India’s recent progress has been attributed to its belated acceptance of capitalism, but there is more to its story than that Phonkrit Tanavisarut After more than a century of stagnation, Everything, including all investment and production India has been growing at an extraordinary rate decisions, required central approval. At the center for the past twenty-five years. India, like many of the economy were large government monopolies. countries in Asia, flourishes because it has embraced The government nationalized banks, controlled the capitalism, opened to the free market, and curtailed rupee, and enforced import substitution policy, regulation. Its success demonstrates the power of replacing imports with domestically made goods. the free market, but it does not legitimize market The results were predictably poor. High failure and its potential damage to economic growth costs, high corruption, and a lack of international in the long run. The establishment of property competition led to a stagnated economy with a very rights and deregulation alone do not guarantee low per capita income. Gross domestic product growth acceleration, because many determinants (GDP) grew at an annual average of less than of growth are public goods – goods which are one percent, most of which was due to a growing both non-rival and non-excludable, meaning population, not increases in the average labor usage by one person does not reduce availability productivity. to others, and availability cannot be restricted.

The currency crisis of 1991, however, Externalities exist, and government must be active triggered Rao’s and Singh’s government to implement in implementing the policies needed to alleviate the market reforms. India opened its borders to foreign damaging consequences of market failure. On the trade, lessened regulation, and partially privatized other hand, because government intervention can many industries. Its reform program focused on lead to devastating economic encouraging capital imports consequences, government “In the 1990s, India became and commodity exports, a failure must be minimized. one of the fastest-growing modest degree of industrial Civil society can keep the and a modest economies in the world.” deregulation, government in balance and degree of tax system ensure that its intervention is fair and transparent. rationalization. The government began to end price India is a prime example of a country that is starting controls and subsidies. It transitioned to a free to find a balance between these two approaches. market economy, and thus reduced government For some forty years after attaining inefficiency. The result was extraordinary. GDP independence in 1947 the Republic of India followed grew at an average of five to six percent per year. In a misguided combination of Soviet-style socialism the 1990s, India became one of the fastest-growing and Gandhi-inspired self-sufficient autarky. economies in the world.

Although there was consensus on the need to grow Does India’s success support an argument rapidly, the Indian National Congress and Jawaharlal for free market reform and limited government Nehru, its first prime minister, believed that intervention? Yes, but only partially. The collective action rather than capitalist acquisitiveness acceleration of growth in India during the 1990s drives economic growth, and therefore opted for was made possible by a standard set of free market central planning and protectionism. Over time, it reform agendas. India, like many countries in enforced an increasingly tangled web of regulation. Asia, succeeded because “it embraced capitalism – WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

15

durajik@yahoo.com/Flickr

In 1991, Tata Motors, one of India’s biggest companies, launched its first commercial car, the Sierra, the same year a currency crisis spurred Rao and Singh to open the Indian economy

including a largely open economy, financial stability, and reasonably secured property rights,” according to economist Andrei Shleifer. In general, welldefined property rights incentivize an individual or a firm to act efficiently because exclusivity ensures that all costs and benefits accrue to that particular agent. The privatization of state-owned enterprises and a modest degree of deregulation reduced cost and improved performance. For instance, in the mid 1980s, the Indian government allowed people who owned trucks to bid in order to take loads from one part of the country to another at the price they chose. This deregulation expanded the trucking industry and reduced overall transportation costs.

Nevertheless, the argument for an absolute laissez-faire approach is imperfect because it disregards the very nature of many goods and overlooks better alternatives. Establishing property rights, creating a free market, and removing the burden of regulation do not guarantee growth acceleration. In the long run, human capital, physical capital and technology are the permanent sources of growth. Since many of these determinants are public goods by nature, however, positive externalities exist and a so-called invisible hand would not provide the efficient quantity, because everybody wants a free ride. For example, a firm is usually reluctant to provide the efficient amount of labor training out of fear that it will not recoup the incurred costs if the workers switch jobs. Likewise, no firm wants to single-handedly pay to build a highway system or provide for better road conditions, from which other 16

firms can benefit. In addition, firms have incentives to overuse and pollute natural resources beyond an efficient level. Environmental problems such as air and water pollution cause perceptible problems for human health. The free market’s failure to recognize these externalities leads to inefficiency.

In India, an active government effort to correct market failure has stimulated economic growth. The government has been investing heavily in infrastructure and education. Much red-tape has been removed to improve efficiency and stimulate growth. Furthermore, India’s government has introduced many laws which aim to correct market failure in allocating natural resources. It has set up reserved forest areas, regulated the cutting of timber, and increased the penalty for poaching Although the success of the free market justifies more government deregulation, it does not legitimize market failure and its potential damage to growth. So, what should be done? The answer is to allow the government to correct market failure but at the same time to minimize government failure.

Many economists, such as Dani Rodrik, propose a strategic collaboration and coordination between the private sector and the government, “designing the most effective intervention, periodically evaluating the outcomes, and learning from the mistakes made in the process.” Likewise, democracy and civil society must keep the government in balance and ensure that government intervention is fair and transparent.

This is truly the case in India; democracy and public deliberation have become a part of the Indian national identity. Thanks to decentralization, many ethnic groups have voices to influence national policies, which promotes accountability and focuses politicians’ attention on people’s welfare.

India’s success demonstrates that market liberalization leads to economic growth because it incentivizes economic agents to act efficiently.

Because the determinants of growth are often public goods, however, active government intervention is necessary in order to correct market failure and hinder the potential damage to long-run growth. This article does not support full government intervention similar to central planning policy practiced in prereformed India. It does, however, recognize both the need to eliminate market imperfections and the potential to minimize government failure.

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

MOURNING IN MARIKANA

Mining revolts in South Africa reveal the inequality that persists despite the ANC’s promises to right the wrongs of apartheid Refiloe Damane History will remember August 16, 2012 as the day 36 South African miners died at the hands of South African police. Added to that casualty list were two police officers and the injury of about 80 other miners and policemen. That morning, violence flared up in Marikana, an area in the Platinum Belt of South Africa, and labour unrest has spread across the mining industry. In a country where violence is ubiquitous and strikes are rampant, one cannot say on what side history will judge that day.

Mineworkers in the platinum belt will surely remember that day for what it symbolised: a desperate cry for help in a country with glaring income inequalities. The preceding mining strikes and subsequent violence illuminated massive distortions and imbalances in the local economy, which have accentuated deep-rooted structural problems and metastasised into a prickly political issue.

The morning of August 16 saw a police unit, armed with weaponry, fail to contain a mob of miners brandishing machetes. The miners, fuelled by their enchanting struggle songs, refused to disarm, opting instead to continue with their protest. The police attempted to diffuse the tension using teargas and rubber bullets, but when a small group of miners retaliated with ammunition, the police resorted to real bullets.

Perhaps the biggest challenge in interpreting those deaths, and the subsequent violence, is finding a root cause for the strike. While the violence of that tragic Protesting miners armed with spears throw rocks at police in Marikana

Str/AP

Abayomi Azikiwe/Flickr

Under pressure from the ANC, South African President Jacob Zuma visits the site of the bloodbath

morning is utterly deplorable, the central story of this incident has far more to do with poverty and inequality that persist in South Africa. In 1994, when the African National Congress (ANC) came to power, it promised to right the wrongs committed by the apartheid government. The chief component of that correction was to be the distribution of wealth to all South Africans. It has been eighteen years, and appalling inequalities remain.

Ebrahim Patel, Minister of Economic Development, stated earlier this year, “The top 10 percent of earners in South Africa take away 101 times the earnings of the bottom 10 percent of the population.” During the apartheid era, non-white South Africans were disadvantaged by numerous factors that confined them to unskilled, low-paying jobs. When the ANC party came to power, it promised to rectify that inequality gap, but it has struggled to realise even a fraction of that promise.

When you think of the value of mining to the South African economy, you might expect mineworkers to have relatively better pay, but as the mining labour strikes show, this is far frome the case. While miners, mostly black, toil under the earth for a meagre R4000 (US$460) a month, board members, mostly white, walk away with handsome seven-figure salaries. Given the nature of the job miners undertake, R4000 is surely not adequate compensation. Unfortunately, mining jobs remain the only viable prospects for a better future, creating a

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

17

vicious cycle. Miners, like most people in South Africa, live in areas crippled by poor infrastructure, poor service delivery and constant social and geographical dislocation, all of which combine to make for an uncomfortable existence. The living conditions of the miners are horrifying and their wages have not improved to match the increasing costs of living.

A few days before the tragedy of August 16th, miners decided to take matters to their own hands, exercising the hard won right to strike when conditions are unsatisfactory. Tired of being exploited, they demanded that their wages be increased from R4000 to R12,500.

Reuters While the desire for increased wages was significant in Police opened fire on protestors reportedly wielding the decision to strike, miners were also pleading for a life that affords them dignity. By striking, they were sending sticks and machetes a strong message to their employers and trade unions for called “wildcat strikes,” a series of labour unrest incifailing to meet their grievances. More importantly, the dents that have spread across the mining industry. These strike said the ANC has failed the miners. The econom- placed heightened pressure on President Jacob Zuma, ic equality that they fought for during the apartheid era trade unions and industry bosses. Thus far, wage agreehas stalled. Regrettably, on that ments have been signed in most “We can chastise the ANC for fateful morning, while out on the of the mines, but only after the streets fighting for a vision they complacency and inaction, president jumped from one place have always cherished, they were another, trade unions pointed without believing that it has to met with police bullets. Black men fingers at each other, and mining given up on the vision and bosses deferred blame to trade pulled the triggers, this time.

If the failure of the Black mantra that steered its heroic unions. Worse it appears that the Economic Empowerment (BEE), sun is setting on the wildcat minstruggle in the past.” a government initiative intended ing strikes. to address the inequality left by apartheid, was ever in The wage agreement is a reflection of, rathdoubt, the Marikana incident proved the extent of the er than a solution to, the challenges that South Africa failure. Only a small fraction of the black population, faces. The authorities have missed that a quick fix is no the intended beneficiaries of the initiative, has reaped substitute for a long-term strategy of restructuring the any benefit. The exceptions, like Patrice Motsepe, Tokyo economy that enables it to create more value and hence Sexwale, and Cyril Ramaphosa, have become remarkably increase the standard of living. South Africa has a strucwealthy and hold large shares in big mining companies. tural poverty issue, where the institutions perpetually The control of the country’s top companies, however, deny the poor access to things that could improve their remains firmly in the grip of white hands. lives.

The Marikana Incident set in motion the soEducation is generally prescribed as the solution, but to this point, South African education has failed to ANC Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa is a large address the country’s problems. Education is a force that shareholder in Lonmin, whose low wages were being unites the practical, social, political and moral realms of protested in Marikana life, regenerating the spirit and offering hope and opportunities to the poor. A concerted effort to improve the country’s education system will go a long way towards eradicating some of the structural poverty.

While the vestiges of apartheid struggle remain vibrant in South African society, it is not useful to linger on that memory when reflecting on the changes needed in contemporary South Africa. South Africa today needs to be defined for what it has achieved outside of the temporal “pre-1994” and “post-1994” categories. We can chastise the ANC for complacency and inaction, without believing that that it has given up on the vision and mantra that steered its heroic struggle in the past. The Marikana Incident is a wake-up call. Leaders take heed.

Forbes

18

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

CHINA’S FARMING DILEMMA China needs to cut production soon, or risk a crash in future agricultural yields Laurel Jarombek There is no doubt that China is on the rise. The nation’s growth rate in terms of GDP has averaged roughly 10 percent over the past two decades, and while estimates vary, its GDP is projected to surpass that of the United States around 2030. With this rapid economic expansion has come a vastly increased population; although the one child policy has limited growth in that regard, China still contains the world’s largest population.

The more than 1.3 billion people that currently live in the country need to be fed, and an increase in agricultural production has accompanied the rise in population. The amount of irrigated land has been increasing steadily over the past few decades. Larger quantities of crops are being produced, and larger areas of land are being used to produce them. While China has been able to stay relatively self-sufficient in terms of food production in recent years, the continuation of this trend is contingent upon the sustainability of its land and water use.

Many of the worst agriculture-related environmental problems that China faces arise simply from overcultivation. Urbanization also prevents the use of certain parts of the country for agriculture, and pollution negatively affects the quality of both land and water resources. High concentrations of greenhouse gases and sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere produce acid rain, which is damaging to crops.

One of the most pressing concerns regarding the future of Chinese agriculture is the depletion of sources of irrigation. Of the total volume drawn from China’s freshwater supplies, mainly aquifers, 68 percent is used for agricultural purposes. Farmers have drawn so much water from these groundwater resources, particularly in the Hai, Yellow and Huai

River basins, that the water table has been falling at a rate of approximately one meter per year in some areas. The depletion of aquifers has already resulted in declining grain production since 2000, and this trend is expected to continue and even accelerate in the future. Zheng Chunmiao, the director of the Water Research Center at Peking University, said that the aquifers in the northern plains would reach a “dire” level in 30 years unless food production is significantly reduced.

While the overuse of groundwater is a widespread problem, one area where it is becoming particularly severe is the Quaternary Aquifer of the North China Plain. The Hai River Basin has been consistently experiencing a 0.5 meter yearly decline in the water table for quite a while due to the increase in agricultural production. The average wheat harvest, for instance, increased to 4000 kilograms per hectare in the 1990s, from 1000 kilograms per hectare in the 1950s. The amount of water used to grow these crops is unsustainable; if a sustainable Director Zheng Chunmiao of the Water Research Center at Peking University says aquifers are being depleted at dangerous rates

The University of Alabama Department of Geological Sciences

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

19

level of irrigation were to be imposed on the region, Rising food prices poses an economic the average yield would be slashed by as much as challenge to China’s poor in particular. Currently, 50 percent, a dramatic change. While saving water there are over 100 million Chinese citizens below is necessary to maintain the resource for future the poverty line, accounting for over 13 percent of generations, this also means that lower crop yields the population. Last year, the country experienced in the near future are inevitable. an extended 10 percent increase in the food Another problem is increasingly rapid component of the consumer price index. Such a desertification. This trend is particularly persistent in price hike disproportionately hurts people who the northern part of the country, and is due largely already struggle to put food on the table, and to a combination of overuse of water and rising undermines the Chinese government’s efforts temperatures. Overcultivation and overgrazing also to bring its people out of poverty. This will place contribute to the pattern of land degradation. The additional strain on social programs dedicated to average expansion of desertified areas is 2460 square providing food for those who are unable to afford kilometers per year, a rate that has increased in the it. In the grand scheme of the national economy, past few decades. Economic loss as a direct result of these differences may not seem significant, but small this is estimated to be between 0.2 and 0.25 billion drains on the productivity of the nation can and U.S. dollars, and this is not including any indirect will add up to pose a problem for the country that impacts to the economy. As with aquifer depletion, cannot be ignored. the only way to halt or reverse this trend is to decrease The environmental issues that China crop growth and livestock grazing to a sustainable is beginning to be faced with will have huge level, and this of course means that implications for its future economic China will have to further lower “Increasing food development. Increasing food its food production in the coming production to keep production to keep up with its years. In addition, the contribution increasing population is no longer up with its increasing of global warming, wherein an option, as doing so will only rising atmospheric temperatures population is no lon- accelerate the processes that are in exacerbate desertification, suggests ger an option ...” motion. Facts will necessitate that that even further steps will need to China enforce a scaling back of be taken to prevent the loss of even more land. agriculture. Agriculture accounts for only 10 percent According to the United Nations, as of of China’s GDP, but an economic pinch will still 2010, China had lost 8.2 million hectares, or 20.2 be felt in paying for increased imports of food. million acres, of arable land since 1997. The CIA Sustainable agriculture will be costly, but necessary. estimates a loss of 20 percent of total agricultural Much has been said on both sides on the land since 1949. These conditions are the result of a question of whether China is on a track to replace combination of urbanization, industrialization, the the United States as the world’s most powerful replanting of forests, the effects of natural disasters, nation. Agricultural production may contribute a and the overuse of the land and its resources. U.N. relatively small amount to the health of the Chinese Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier De economy, but as part of a group of ceilings that Schutter warned, “The shrinking of arable land and China is projected to hit in the next half-century, the massive land degradation threatens the ability of the most prominent of which is the cost that the the country to maintain current levels of agricultural government will have to bear when the demographic production.” The Chinese Academy of Agricultural imbalances created by the one-child policy result in a Sciences made a prediction that agricultural yields retired population that overwhelms the labor force, would fall 14-23 percent by 2050. These harsh it will begin to be felt. This is not to say that the realities pose a threat to China’s self-sufficiency nation will not be able to overcome the challenges in agricultural production, and have led to price it faces, be they in the agricultural sector or not, but increases for food products. These trends show no the serious economic issues that China faces will be signs of slowing down, much less reversing. sure to impede its rise.

20

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

COUNTRY FEATURE: MAURITANIA

Each issue, one writer is assigned a country, which usually does not receive news coverage, to investigate Stanislas Monfront Nestled against the Atlantic coast of Africa, at the western-most extremity of the Sahara Desert, lies Mauritania. Within the spectrum of developing countries, its symptoms are woefully predictable: spread over a nation roughly twice the size of California, most of 3 million Mauritanians live in abject poverty, depending on subsistence agriculture and livestock to survive. Mediatized human rights issues, such as widespread female circumcision, are rife, and the recent political landscape is a sad succession of coups and elections of questionable legitimacy. Nonetheless, Mauritania is, in at least one way, unique. It is the last bastion of institutional human Wikimedia Commons slavery.

This might constitute an insult to most West- Mauritania sits on the Atlantic coast of Africa and inern sensibilities, but the facts are hard to avoid. With cludes the western-most section of the Sahara Desert a governmental ban put in place in 1981, Mauritania was the last country in this world to officially outlaw slavery. In a peculiar turn of events, however, the Mauritanian soldiers march in colonial-style uniforms act of owning another was only made punishable by law in 2007, and since then only one man has faced conviction, receiving a meager six-month prison sentence. And, despite these legistlative changes, the practice remains endemic: as of 2012, an estimated 10-20 percent of Mauritanians live in slavery. That’s up to 680,000 people, mostly women and children, who are currently owned by others.

Western nations such as the United States, Great Britain and France have repeatedly and vehemently pronounced themselves to be against this practice, but the government of Mauritania, led by President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, insists that all of its citizens are free and equal. The only force that really seems to push back against the status quo is an internal one: several organizations, such as the Initiative for the Resurgence of the Abolitionist Movement in Mauritania (IRA-Mauritanie) and Ar.Abdull88/Flickr WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

21

SOS-Esclaves, campaign for both increased awareness and eventual abolition.

Part of what makes this human right crisis so hard to grasp is that it escapes the usual historical narrative. To begin with, slavery in Mauritania was not brought about by the pressure of imperialistic powers, as one might expect. France began to colonize the area in the late 19th century, and conquered in its entirety by 1912. The nation’s practice of slavery, however, is many centuries old. In 1076, the Islamic Berbers known as the Almoravids, originally from Morocco, invaded the Ghana Empire and remained in a region that now makes up part of Mauritania. Over the years, this group, known to this day as the White Moors, gained supremacy over the region, subjugating the indigenous Black Moors.

This racial distinction between ruler and subject is the ancestral source of contemporary slavery in Mauritania.

The ancestral nature of this plight serves to make the transition away from servitude even more difficult. Abolitionists admit that slaves are often unwilling to leave the familial structures they belong to, and accept their plight as part of the natural order of things. In addition, the rampant misery that dominates Mauritania sometimes makes the alternative even less desirable: many emancipated slaves return to their former masters, seeking food and shelter they are unable to find on their own. Lastly, the geography of the region itself constitutes a challenge.

Outside of the capital of Nouakchott, most Mauritanians live in extremely distant, rural communities, and the potential for outreach by both the government and abolitionist NGOs is severely hindered.

A number of factors need to be addressed Enslaved women and children are not uncommon in Mauritania’s towns and villages

Joao Leitao/Flickr

22

Ferdinand Reus/Wikimedia Commons

Three-quarters of Mauritania is desert including the village of Bareina in the Southwest

before Mauritania can remove this appalling badge: The role of Islam in the tissue of the society is one of them. Again, the leitmotif of extreme Islamic regimes the media portrays does not apply in its traditional sense. In fact, disruptive influences such as Al Qaeda have not gained much ground among Mauritanians, and as recently as 2011 one of their alleged operatives was put to death by the government. Rather, Islam serves as a barrier; the White Moors use their Islamic cultural ancestry, which they can trace back to the Almoravid invaders, as a civilizing distinction that justifies the enslavement of the Black Moors.

In addition, economic stability needs to become a reality for individual freedom to become a viable and desirable option. The country is home to a number of valuable resources, which could be exploited to its great advantage: rich iron deposits have constituted up to 50 percent of its exports in recent years, and recently discovered offshore oil fields have raised the promise of prosperity. Unfortunately, mismanagement of resources has been an endemic problem for Mauritania. The fishing sites found in its territorial waters, for example, are some of the richest in the world, but overexploitation by foreign companies has depleted and compromised this source of income. With its other resources threatened in a similar manner, the struggling nation is faced with a difficult road ahead. If the international community can help protect Mauritania’s interests, it could eventually capitalize on its natural wealth and achieve some economic stability. Only then will the abolition of this remnant of slavery be a feasible goal.

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

UNEQUAL RITES

Norway’s nationwide high school graduation party, the “russefeiring,” exposes social and economic inequality Lani Willmar If you took the blockbuster hit Project X, placed it in downtown New Orleans during Mardi Gras, then gave it to Ke$ha, you would not even come close to the craziest party on Earth, Norway’s russefeiring. Kristian Branæs, a native Norwegian from Oslo, states, “Every year, Norwegian high school seniors partake in what can only be described as a world record attempt in debauchery.” If you are a fellow russ and you managed to survive the party of a lifetime, you probably found yourself in trouble for the final exams scheduled the following week.

Some of russefeiring’s fluorescent adolescent festivities are sex, drug usage, spending huge amounts of money, peer pressure, and studying for final exams, all in a span of three weeks. No other ritual in the world symbolizes a rite of passage to adulthood quite like Norway’s russefeiring. While the memories that are made will surely be some of the best, they come at a cost to the Norwegian youth and the nation as a whole.

The festivities of the russefeiring begin on the 1st of May and end May 17th. 408 hours seems like just enough time to fill the days with a hearty dose of obscene, and sometimes illegal, shenanigans. While the actual celebration is at the end of the last year of high school, groups of russ start forming early on, long before the celebration. In the second or even first year of high school, girls and boys split into separate groups. Groups are created among friends, with the average number running approximately 20 to 30 members. After groups have been decided, team names are established and themes are chosen within the second or third year.

Between choosing a theme and the actual celebration on the last year, members of each group fundraise, either from wages for after-school-jobs or, more commonly and controversially, their parents checkbooks. The money goes towards the Norwegian equivalent of Pimp My Ride, where the groups purchase party buses and deck them out with their

Yngve Nordskag/Flickr

Norwegian graduates pile onto a custom party bus

chosen themes. The buses are entered into a competition that starts at the school level, then regional, and eventually the best ones move onto nationals.

Between the bus, song, and attire costs, average contributions run around $6500 per a person. In addition, this does not include alcohol and ticket costs for events, which run a total of $2000 per person on average. Buses alone for the more affluent members can run as high as $150,000 to $250,000.

If buying, owning, and customizing a party bus is not extreme enough, another competition that runs simultaneously is the Russ Song of the Year, where groups pay to create a group song, entering it into the national contest. The russ also have their own traditional attire, which includes red overalls and a cap (colors can vary within the student’s track of study, but red is the most common color) worn by all russ for the entire duration of russefeiring.

In addition, “knots,” small trinkets worn on the caps, can be earned if students accomplish certain russeknuter tasks. Such challenges and knots rewarded include earning a pinecone by having sex in the forest, winning a porno picture by answering every question in class with quotes from a pornographic magazine, and a classic, streaking in public places.

Perhaps the most infamous component of the russefeiring is the three straight weeks of

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

23

hardcore partying and binge drinking, similar to ingitis crisis occurred among the Norwegian youth Munich’s 16 days of Oktoberfest. From a business during the russefeiring. As a result, the government perspective, the celebration is a major attractor of now offers free health check ups, and condoms are prominent members of the entertainment industry. distributed in bulk to promote safe sex during the Stars such as Skrillex, David Guetta, and DJ Antoine russefeiring.

‘Tryvann’ have taken the stage in recent years at maLast, but certainly not least, when the Norjor Russ raves and concerts, as the Norwegian youth wegian government noticed the increase in extreme party on. partying and reckless behavior during the russefeiThe celebration of Russ dates back to the ring, they initiated a policy that was aimed at reduc18th century, but extreme binge drinking and party- ing the partying and taking things a notch too far. ing only gained major momentum during contem- Their legislative solution was to move final exams porary times. When Norway was a poorer nation rel- from before the party to one week after, so students ative to the world than it is today, its national identity would not party as hard in lieu of studying for exwas much more conservative. Currently, Norway ams. Sadly, this backfired, as many students opted enjoys the second highest GDP in the world while to ignore studying all together. Norwegian and Wilits ideas of governance have become more liberal. liams student Jesper Bodd attests that “it’s comThe significant increase in wealth has had a broad mon for students to choose celebrating Russ over impact. For one, excessive studying for exams that will wealth combined with bore- “... the gap between the determine university choices dom among the youth is re- rich and poor is nowhere and prospects, and will take flected in the increase in the the entire year over again more apparent than extreme level of recklessness for those three weeks. That’s and lust for adventure in the during the russefeiring.” how important it is in the sorussefeiring. Similarly to how cial scene.” The failed govBritish youth reacted in the late 1960s, the kids of ernment policy of scheduling exams after the russeNorway are simply too rich and too bored to not feiring also worsens the impact of excessive wealth want to have some fun. inequality. Students from some well off families Unfortunately, the fun and games come at have less incentive to study, because unlike the less critical social and individual costs that are highly re- affluent students, they have the fallback of taking flective of the demographics and current hot topic over successful family businesses without the need issues in Norway. For one, the gap between the rich to earn prestigious university degrees. Academic and poor is nowhere more apparent than during the education then becomes an optional institution for russefeiring. Most of the national competitions are members of this social class. won by students whose parents are well off enough So, what does this extreme celebration say to donate significant sums of money for their enter- about Norway? It is evident that the russefeiring tainment purposes. brings many Norwegian issues relevant to the curIn addition, the russefeiring can be an at- rent youth population into light. It is important that tractive opportunity to meet members of the oppo- Norway addresses drug abuse and sexual assault site sex and have a good time. The hook up culture among youth. Furthermore, the russefeiring acts in the extreme party setting itself is combined with as a microcosm of the widening gap between the the push to collect as many knots as possible. As a rich and the poor in the country, which has come consequence, unsafe hookups result in huge spikes with changes in the national identity throughout the of sexually transmitted diseases and reported cases years. How do changes in a nation affect future genof sexual assault, both of which are serious mat- erations, and in turn, how do the values of the youth ters that can turn what is supposed to be a celebra- contribute to those changes? When all is said and tion into an devastating nightmare. The shock of done, these are the questions that are left lingering these issues is so critical that direct policy initiatives in the aftermath of the world’s ultimate rite of pashave resulted in response. In 2011, a national Men- sage: Norway’s russefeiring.

24

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT

Pentecostalism’s rise in developing countries puts in question the idea that secularization is the product of economic growth Philip von Hahn Despite its frequent use as a self-evident rise of what has been called the new global middle description of the current, the recent past, or the class, often with reference to China, India, or Brazil. future, ‘modernity’ manages to escape definition. There is an often overlooked, additional effect to this One common interpretation rise, especially in Asia. Mike treats modernity as a global Davis, in his much-lauded “Slum-dwellers on the progression of secularization book Planet of the Slums, periphery of the third walking hand in hand with has referred to the new global economic growth and poor, the new, informal world’s megacities are development. In this view, working class, as the ‘surplus turning to alternative population,’ a parallel effect largely atheist-agnostic, social democratic nations in of this widespread economic means of support, Northern Europe appear to deregulation. The rise of new be the most developed and finding God again in the middle classes, rather than modern. It is assumed that absence of government broadening the wealth of a global retreat from religion all of society, has led instead institutions.” will accompany the opening to a transfer of wealth away of global markets through from the poorest of the free, unregulated trade between increasingly globally poor. Increasingly, slum-dwellers on the periphery aware and advanced nations. of the third world’s megacities are turning to But is the developing world really becoming alternative means of support, finding God in the more secular? In fact, it would seem that the absence of government institutions. Pentecostalism opposite is often the case, as seen in the global rise offers adherents strong imperatives to find work as a of Pentecostalism. The advents of freer global trade new informal labor force, as untaxed, unmonitored and advanced networking technology support the workers for hire, to eke out an existence in slums, this ‘modern’ world’s gritty residue.

Parishioners speak in tounges at a Pentecostal church Rooted in early Methodism and Africanin Lagos, Nigeria American spirituality, Pentecostalism originated in a poor neighborhood of Los Angeles in 1906, when participants in a prayer marathon found themselves gifted with the holy spirit, and began speaking in tongues. Unified around a transformation-based notion of belief, miracle healing, and a prosperity gospel which promises financial blessing for good believers, early American Pentecostalism was well suited from the beginning for the disenfranchised of the world.

Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

25

As Pentecostalism grew among the rural and urban poor in the US, it also began taking root in other parts of the world, establishing itself in shantytowns in South Africa where, according to Jean Comaroff, “it seemed to accord with indigenous notions of pragmatic spirit forces and to redress the depersonalization and powerlessness of the urban labor experience.” Pentecostalism, still growing in slums today, is analogous to early twentieth-century socialism and anarchism in its role as a balm and a belief system for the disenfranchised masses.

Since 1970, and largely because of its Nate Cull/Flickr extraordinary malleability, Pentecostalism has Pentecostalism is noted for its inclusiveness; this grown into the largest self-organized movement church in Brazil shares space with a gay nightclub of urban poor people on the planet. Finding in it both a refuge from harsh realities and a motivating Efficiently correlating itself to the survival needs of force in working life, the working world’s informal the informal working class, by organizing self-help periphery flocks to Pentecostal churches in the networks for families and women and providing help storefronts of the slums, seeking both comfort with addiction and domestic life, Pentecostalism, in and spiritual drive. Jefrey Gamarra asserts that the a very modern way, tailors its services to its market.

In some ways, this makes it, in David growths of Pentecostalism and the informal economy in slums are “a “Pentecostalism ... is Martin’s words, the “enchanted consequence of and a response to analogous to early market itself.” Pentecostalism, he argues, has transcended the confines each other.” Pentecostalism is a kind twentieth-century of the religious sphere, and is a of organic safety net, grown out of socialsim and force at once economic, religious, this informal labor market, where anarchism in its and social, flouting the tenets of those without job security can find motivation and respite. role as a balm and contemporary secularization theory.

Indeed, Pentecostalism a belief system for This ever more popular “fusion of stimulates capitalism in many ways, the disenfranchised instrumentalism and consumerism” operates by the same laws as the creating an imperative to consume, masses.” capitalist system and is accordingly through its prosperity gospel, and engendering ascetic, hardworking tendencies in not only an essential buttress to, but a harbinger of, its fundamentally exilic, world rejecting nature. a new, enchanted modernity.

Relying on ordinary people to ‘take up The Apostolic Faith Mission on Azusa Street in Los Anthe book,’ as it were, Pentecostal churches are geles was a founding center of Pentecostalism particularly good at teaching the key tenets of management. They teach the disenfranchised quasi-urban classes to speak in public, to organize meetings and, as they become more successful, to manage large congregations. As a controversial concept inherently tied up in different ideas of social, national, and human values, any definition of modernity, per se, will be problematic, but an emergent, vibrant religious force like Pentecostalism seems to directly refute the secularization that many expect to come hand in hand with freer trade and globalized technology.

Wikimedia Commons

26

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

OBITUARY: THE COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS

Once a bastion of commitment to world peace and human rights, the group of countries formerly belonging to the British Empire faded away this year at the age of 63 Sauman Cheng In the White Drawing Room of Buckingham Palace, on April 27, 1949, King George VI received all together for the first time, the Prime Ministers of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, India and the UK. Clement Attlee stepped forward and read out the carefully crafted words of the London Declaration that he and his fellow ministers had laboured over for days. At that moment, he spoke alone, but with the voice of all six nations who chose to stand collectively, symbolically, before the King. “It is doubtful whether any agreement of such consequence had ever been evolved in so short a time,” lauded The Times. The London Declaration pronounced that the Commonwealth of Nations would no longer be a British commonwealth,

but one of “free and equal members”, be they realm, monarchy, or republic, recognizing the King, Head of the Commonwealth, as a symbol of free association.

Over the following six decades, she grew to encompass fifty-four former British dominions and territories. Excepting the United Nations, she was unrivalled in geographic breadth. Containing almost a third of the world’s population, she possesses considerable ethnic, religious, cultural, linguistic and economic diversity within her common historical background.

The Commonwealth marked the beginning of her six decades with the honourable defence of her core principles: world peace, human rights, and economic and

THE COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS Members

Former Members

Suspended Members

British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies

Wikimedia Commons

WINTER 2013 • ISSUE 1

27

Commonwealth Secretariat

The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago in 2009

racial equality. Lead by her African and Asian members who found Apartheid intolerable, the Commonwealth refused the ascension in 1960 of the Republic of South Africa to her membership. Her nations, taking advantage of their domination in the sports of cricket and rugby, imposed a sporting ban on South Africa in the Gleneagles Agreement.

In the face of a Zimbabwe-Rhodesia stubbornly, albeit tenuously, held by a white minority government, she refused to acknowledge any form of independence except under majority rule. Nor was her declaration just vapid gesturing; the Lusaka Communiqué was the offer of active assistance in establishing a credible democracy, in the form of Commonwealth observers, elimination of racial discrimination through contribution to land reform, and the mediation that brought about the freely elected Republic of Zimbabwe in 1980.

As all collectives are wont to be, though, her unity was not without moments of fracture. Margaret Thatcher’s refusal to impose economic sanctions on South Africa emptied the playing fields of Edinburgh in the 1986 Commonwealth Games. Constructive competition dissolved into disaster with the refusal of thirty-two member nations, led by Nigeria, to participate.

But such wounds were the wounds of faith in each other; the kind of angry disappointment one feels towards a friend rather than the cold indifference of strangers.

In more ways than one, her legacy is that

of family. Over ninety professional and civil societal associations crisscross every continent and ocean, like the Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association, the Association of Commonwealth Universities and the Commonwealth Broadcasting Association.

She came from grassroots, not government, forming a commonwealth of people, not states. It was a vision to be praised, and her modus operandi supported this interpretation.

Over the years, the Commonwealth increasingly concentrated her efforts on subtle diplomacy, cooperation and consultation. The continuation of these sentiments after a decade rife with warfare and military intervention was almost refreshing.

The illusion of solidarity and quiet success shattered with a memo from Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma leaked and splashed across the headlines. “The secretariat,” he pronounced tersely, “… has no explicitly defined mandate to speak publicly on human rights.”

In a flood, images of silence flashed before the Commonwealth’s eyes. 2007: Reports of wartime atrocities by both the government of Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers. 2008: The jailing of a gay couple by a court in Malawi. 2009: The threats by Yahja Jammeh, the Gambian president, to behead homosexuals and ravage the country with ‘witch-hunts’. 2011: The refusal – fueled by Namibia, South Africa, and India – to publish an internal report on Commonwealth response to such human rights violations.

Where has the Commonwealth gone, she who espoused racial equality against the tenacity of Margaret Thatcher? She who suspended Nigeria from her association mere hours after their political prisoners were militarily tried and executed? She who stood as a body in that White Drawing Room sixty-three years ago, weary, but triumphant and hopeful?

Where has she gone? She has been forgotten.

Lingering on are mere fragments of her memory: little shards of hope that may one day be ignited again.

“She came from grassroots, not government, forming a commonwealth of people, not states.”

The flag of the Commonwealth of Nations

Wikimedia Commons

28

THE WILLIAMS GLOBALIST

THE WILLIAMS

GLOBALIST

Want to write for the Globalist, or otherwise get involved? Have a correction or a comment on one of our articles?

Email williamsglobalist@gmail.com The Williams Globalist is online.

Visit williamsglobalist.org for more news and commentary.

The Williams Globalist is a member of Global21, an international network of student-run international relations magazines, based at Yale.

Visit global21online.org for other great Globalist magazines.