Regular Comments Based on Issues Raised by BBC World Haveyoursay

Can Russia and the USA trust each other?

2009-07-06T02:33:00.000+01:00

President Obama’s in Moscow with nuclear weapons top of the agenda. He says he’s confident that the discussions could offer “extraordinary progress” on several fronts

Currently, there are many differences between Russia and the USA over different issues, especially NATO expansion.

Russia will remain suspicious of the USA as now it is the single superpower on Earth while Russia is still struggling to be a feared state as it was under Communism and during and the cold War.

While the USA is the most powerful economic and military power, Russia has only pride to keep distant from the USA, not to be swallowed by its culture and corporations.

The US and Russia can get on as long as they keep direct military confrontations aside. However, there relations will remain conflictual as their competition extends to different parts of the world and neither will cede ground to the other. Each will continue to compete to have as many satellite states as possible. That in itself the seeds of growing and lasting tensions between what was once a giant and a current giant struggling not to be minimized in size.

Obma's trip to Africa

2009-06-07T02:21:00.002+01:00

President Obama makes his sub-Saharan Africa debut with a visit to Ghana this week and WHYS is doing a TV special to discuss it.

Ros asks what Obama and America should do for Africa. Actually, the question should be what African leaders and ordinary Africans should do for their continent. Obama’s visit to Ghana is going to be less than one day long but Africa’s development still needs years if not decades for a normal lift-off.

Billions of dollars in aid for Africa have been squandered without bringing the desirable positive changes due to corruption and mismanagement on the part of the African leaders nationally and locally. It seems a change in mentality can’t occur over night as Africa needs a new generation equipped with the skill to govern itself without needing to be watched over by the international community like a child being watched over by a parent.

African leaders must ask themselves why the USA managed to produce a black president of African origin who is both popular and powerful while many African leaders hold to power just for their own glory instead of the glory of their countries.

Should Obama address the African leaders and teach them how to translate words into action instead of simply having their organisation the African Union in which they meet just to shake hands and make speeches they forget about once they get back home?

Obama, whether we like it or not, is the incarnation of the American dream. When can Africa have its own dream to get out of its multiple nightmares?

Questions to Irene Khan of Amnesty International reports

2009-05-31T00:31:00.002Z

Human rights issue is used as weapon with double edge. The West views human records in other countries according to their allegiance to them. There are double standards concerning this. The West is still boycotting the regime in Zimbabwe because of the human situation there affecting dispossessed white farmers and the black majority still repressed by Robert Mugabe’s security and armed force.

Concerning G20, it will always prioritise maintaining its economic lead worldwide. Poor countries are the least object of concern, except for offering them economic aid, which evaporates quickly because of corruption. Africa alone got aid amounting to $700 billion in the past years without showing any economic recovery. It’s always the least developed continent, with the exception of few countries like Botswana.

It’s unlikely that the West will put pressure on Saudi Arabia to respect fundamental human rights, especially those concerning women who are seen far behind, compared with other women even in Muslim countries like Morocco and Lebanon. The economic stability of Saudi Arabia as a big oil supplier to the West far outweighs its shortcoming concerning human records. in other words, the West favour the balance to tilt on the economic side which secures jobs at home rather than on human rights and democracy which can bring fundamentalists and anti-west to power

Here are two questions I put to Irene Khan Amnesty International :

1- What’s the significance of Amnesty International if its authority is limited to publishing human rights abuses without having the power to redress them?

2- There are governments who use the positive things about them in your reports to claim they’re doing well as far as human rights are concerned.

These are her answers to my questions:

on governments use of its reports&thePlayerURL=http://www.esnips.com//escentral/images/widgets/flash/mp3WidgetPlayer.swf">

Get this widget

Track details

eSnips Social DNA

Are some countries deaf to world opinion?

2009-05-15T17:36:00.002Z

While there are countries that are deaf to world opinion, there are others that turn a blind eye to these countries.

There are many countries that don’t care about world opinion as they consider their policies a matter of sovereignty and the defence of their interests and security. In Africa, there is Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe who , despite international sanctions and condemnation, continues to go ahead with his policies. His apparent sharing of power with Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai is just a strategy to continue his grip on power.

In the Middle East, Israel’s latest attacks on Gaza showed that the international community has only words but lacks firm actions to prevent human catastrophes.

There are regimes as in North Korea and Burma which are callously ready to defy international sanctions and condemnations and to enslave their people for the sake of their ideology.

History has shown that in face of international determination, regimes can be toppled as it was the case with Saddam in Iraq and Slobodan Milosevic in ex-Yugoslavia who were toppled despite their strong armies because they were real danger for the West, respectively to the USA and Europe.

Dictatorial and unruly regimes can survive as long as they have the means to control their people with iron fist and foreign policies to divide world opinion. If one of these pillars crumble, this is the signal of their downfall. Leading countries like the USA have the policies of wait-and-see for apparently benign regimes and swift actions for those which look beyond repair.

Do some countries need dictators?

2009-05-15T14:04:00.002Z

For some countries benign dictatorship is better than a democratic rule. It’s the mentality of the people in a country that decides the kind of rulers they deserve. As long as there are people who themselves can’t abide by the rules affecting their daily lives, like not throwing rubbish in the street and respecting road code either in the presence or the absence of a policeman, such people still to be under the tutorship of a leader who should keep them under his grip. If they are given more freedom, they’re likely to turn more chaotic.

Democracy means plurality and the right to have different opinions. It means accepting defeat by recognizing and respecting the winning side. In some countries, especially in Africa, elections are marked with fatal violence. To put it mildly such countries are still on the first step of the mile of the democracy they should reach. When things settle, their situation hardly improve in terms of governance and progress. For them a good dictator is better than a fake democracy which is just a means for the self-serving and the powerful to legitimize their grip on the power at the expense of the legitimate rights of the people they’re supposed to serve.
In short, democracy can be successful if both the leaders and the people are all qualified to play by the rules.

In the Arab world there are monarchies and republics. It is acceptable for a monarch to be the head of state for life. What is peculiar for the Arab republics is that leaders never change through the ballot. They can be a new leader just through a coup, or as a result of the death or the assassination of the president. They seem to have presidents for life. There is even tendencies for presidents to be succeeded by their sons as it was the case in Syria. There are rumours that the presidents of Egypt, Yemen and Libya are likely to be succeeded by their respective sons.

Is dictatorship good for Arab countries? Well, for some where killing a women who has had sex outside marriage for the honour of her family is still widely supported, they still deserve a dictator as long as dictatorship is still practiced in homes and where the father still has great authority over everyone in the family.

Is Race the cause of the current economic crisis?

2009-05-12T01:23:00.000Z

Racism of whatever kind is unacceptable. It doesn’t mean that racism which was historically practised by the whites; mainly in the USA and South Africa, should be practised against them. White people shouldn’t be made a scapegoat to deal with a crisis. There should be reforms based on tangible policies without fuelling racism by targeting a particular race.

The statement by Brazil’s President attributing Brazil’s crisis to the irrational behaviour of white people with blue eyes shows that Latin America as a whole is still dominated by white people while the indigenous and black people are still seen as second class citizens. He should have been more diplomatic by attacking a set of ideas rather than a race. After all, isn’t he a white person probably lacking just blue eyes?

As far as I know many outstanding personalities, particularly in UK, had to resign because of their racist remarks. Shouldn’t Lula resign over his apparently racist remark or make a public apology?

Race isn’t the real problem when it comes to a crisis. The current economic crisis is affecting almost every country in the world, mainly the Asians and the Europeans. Should the Japanese blame Europeans for their current economic downturn? What about countries that are mono-racial and yet they are facing many problems?

It’s better to say that there are types of people that are behind a particular crisis than to pinpoint a race. Singling out a race is more likely to cause more crises than solve them.

Does the sex life of politicians matter?

2009-05-04T19:15:00.003Z

The Berlusconi’s very public falling out is grabbing headlines — and has grabbed our attention. The Italian Prime Minister has now demanded an apology from his wife. This after she said she wanted a divorce accusing him of “consorting with minors”

Sex is still a deadly weapon when it comes to politics. In the USA many politicians, including presidential candidates had to fall because of their sex scandals. In Israel, ex-President Katsav had to resign because of sex harassment towards a number of women and the list of sex and politics can never be exhausted.

However the sex of life of politicians does matter, especially when it comes to extramarital relationship or bawdy behaviour. It doesn’t make sense to elect a sex maniac as this can change the attitudes towards the moral authority a politician should have. Politicians are still expected to be conservative when it comes to sex. In France, which is still considered as one of the most liberal countries, President Sarkozy caused a storm in French society after his divorce and relationship with his current wife before they got married.

The image of a politician as a family person still plays a part in being or not being elected. As such politicians have to be above flesh temptations. Even for gay politicians, it’s one thing to be a committed gay and it is another to be a promiscuous gay. As the private life of politicians still matters in its smallest details, it goes without saying that their sex life matters the most when it comes to marital or casual relationships.

Swine flu and economic effects

2009-05-01T01:07:00.001Z

In case of the apparent danger of swine flu, it seems prevention is better than cure. If it spreads alarmingly, the entire economic revenues can’t eradicate it easily.
However, it is the responsibility of the individuals to be sensible. Anyone feeling the symptoms should avoid mixing with the others and seek medical advice instead of spreading it by disregarding the precautions.

The economy needs to keep going, but not at the expense of general health. In other words, there is no need to have factories busy producing just vaccines for the entire workforce lying in beds because of an entrenched virus that can claim more material and health disasters if the economic activities keep going for a periodical gain that can turn into a permanent loss.

Is language a source of power?

2009-04-21T01:53:00.000Z

Language is a part of one’s identity. Language is still a source of power. Acquiring a language can open different opportunities. But it is the practicality of a language that makes it dominant. There are very powerful economic countries whose languages aren’t as widespread as English. In China, due to its economic boom and openness on the outside world, there are more than 300 million English learners. The Chinese can export their products, but they can’t export their language at a scale as large as that of English. The same applies to Japan and Germany. French is retreating. This is embarrassing for France which is spending more and more money to keep French “afloat” at least in its former colonies through its cultural centres.

However there are many languages that are marginalised even by their own speakers in favour of a dominant language. Many countries have tens if not hundreds languages like Nigeria and India. Deciding a national language is always linked to political considerations and influence.

In the case of Morocco, although classical Arabic is the national language, there is Moroccan Arabic (which is in most cases understood just by the Moroccans and to some extents by the Algerians.) as there is Amazigh which is made of three main different dialects.

However, in Morocco, foreign languages mainly French, English and Spanish are also important, especially in the world of business. Many jobs, especially in business and tourism require at least one foreign language. Administrative papers are in most cases both in Arabic and French.

At the personal level, speaking more than one language is an opportunity to be open on different cultures. Personally I can speak three languages, Arabic French and English. Still I have the wish to learn Spanish. I more than once made myself the promise to learn it but I failed. Still I enjoy its rhythm without understanding a single word.

In general, a language is a source of power if it is linked to an economic and cultural activity. Just speaking multiple languages doesn’t make one multimillionaire.

Should Politicians do God?

2009-04-20T01:25:00.000Z

Leaders in countries where religion is still the rule of conduct are considered as representatives of God and should act according to his teachings.

Conceding that politicians should do God, it remains which God teachings they should follow, especially in multi-faith societies.

Politicians aren’t perfect people. They are prone to mistakes and weaknesses and thus they can’t do God. This conflicts with democratic values as politicians should do what people , not what God, ask them to do.

Turning politicians into God-figures means they can be above reproach and anyone opposing them will be punished.

There are enough God-figures around the world in dictatorial regimes as in North Korea. Currently the world needs much less of them, not more.

The excess of incorporating religion in politics will turn Christian countries to the Puritan era as it can turn Muslim countries to Taliban rule.

Religion should remain an individual matter; especially, in multi-faith societies. Imposing a unique brand of religion is likely to cause a clash among sections of society with different religious views and beliefs.

Any country should have a constitution that guarantees democratic values. Empowering religious institutions over the democratically elected ones will turn societies into theocratic where religious dissent can lead to persecution. As such, multi-faith societies should be governed by secular laws and religion should remain a personal matter.

Why are there are so few openly gay sport stars?

2009-04-19T22:15:00.000Z

John Amaechi played for the Cleveland Cavaliers, Orlando Magic, LA Lakers and Utah Jazz , but it was only after he stopped playing that he revealed that he is gay. The question is why there are so few openly gay sports stars?

As long as the majority of fans are heterosexual, they ‘re unlikely to consider a gay player as their role model. It’s one thing to accept gays within society, but it is another to take them as models. Gay player had better hide their sexual orientation.
As a compromise, as there are gay clubs, there should be gay teams watched by gay spectators. At least there will be no embarrassment on either side.

In the world of art, people like Elton John didn’t reveal they were gays at the start of their careers. It took them time to do so as it took time for their fans to accept them. Maybe for gay sport stars, they have to wait for their fans to accept them for what they are and to make a distinction between a player on the field and in private life.

And let’s not forget the commercial side. There are sponsors, advertisers as well clubs who refuse gay sportsmen because they may just deter fans from whom they can generate revenues.

The attitude towards gay sportsmen still has to do with ethics, popularity and business.

Rambling thoughts on the world economy following G20 summit in London

2009-04-02T01:20:00.002Z

The way out of the current recession is to regulate the banks and the markets without fettering free trade movement. Printing more money without regulating the markets will simply result in two digit inflation which will cause further economic problems and deficits. Consumption can be enhanced when people feel financially secure. Without financial security, consumers will continue to tighten their belts.

G20 must find tangible mechanisms to put the world economy on the right track for both producers and consumers to feel confident and to keep the economic wheel rolling at reasonable speed. The current crisis has primarily been caused by unrefrained investment and consumption based on speculation which has made the economic wheel come to a relative halt after the unexpected crush.

Rich countries still have the means to redress the current economic downturn, not without sacrificing millions of jobs as it is unlikely that all can be fixed with the strike of a magic wand.
In this dire economic crisis, despite the outward concern for the global economy, each country will have the motto of “charity begins at home.”Poor countries are likely to suffer most as their economies are mainly based on exporting raw materials and international aid.

It’s hopeful that the world leaders at G20 can come up with a new Marshal Plan that can save all the countries, poor and rich.

G20 will have no meaning if it is going to be remembered just as a moment of outspoken rallies by those disenchanted with the failures of capitalism and reassurances by politicians without tangible results that can put the world economy on the right track.

Third world countries as a whole have failed to create economic functional blocs, with few exceptions like ASEAN. Third world countries are just dreaming of becoming economic blocs as they have just names. One example is the Arab Maghreb Union whose purpose since its creation in 1989 was to create economic integration between North African countries ( Morocco, Mauritania, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya). So far there is little economic exchange between these countries compared to their potentials and complementaries and geographic proximity.Not to mention the dream of the United States of Africa.

In short poor countries should work out the means to integrate their economies and to consider their economic exchanges with rich countries as one of their priorities and THE priority.

The current economic mess was fundamentally created by Western financial institutions and the apparent total disengagement of Western governments until it was too late. It seems the rest of the world has to pay with them, especially oil producing countries, like Iran and Venezuela, which now have to reshuffle their domestic economic plans.

But the fundamental question is, ” What can G20 do to help when corrupt leaders in third world countries simply squander the wealth assets of their countries to enrich themselves by impoverishing their already impoverished peoples?”

Maybe rich countries can make things better in the long run. But countries suffering from corrupt leadership still need to clean their houses for general prosperity.

Morning after pills for 11 year olds sound like a good idea?

2009-03-26T01:01:00.000Z

These schools in the UK will allow girls of 11 and upwards to request the morning after pill by sending a text to a nurse.

Why shouldn’t be an inquiry to know who girls as old as 11 have sex with? Encouraging very young girls to have sex by allowing them to have the morning pills is a straight encouragement to paedophilia.

It can be acceptable for girls as old as 11 to use cosmetics and wear fashionable clothes- although this can be seen by some as preparing them for sex predators- but turning a blind eye to their use of morning pills without bothering to offer them advice about the risks of fully engaging in sex at such an early age shows the irresponsibility of parents and society as a whole.
It’s funny that girls can’t legally buy cigarettes and alcohol, but they can get hold of morning pills. If this continues, this means one day we may hear of an eleven-year old girl legally married to an adult!

2009-03-26T00:53:00.000Z

March 26, 2009 at 14 :30
Children should be encouraged to be independent but not too independent as they still lack adult experience. Their parents can be for them a model. But parents needn’t force their children to be according to their wishes as personalities differ. Children still need parental protection financially and emotionally. But they aren’t robots that can be programmed and are expected to function according to their programming. A child isn’t just a part of his/her family but of society as a whole.

Children should be brought up to enjoy their childhood and to be prepared for the future. As such, they shouldn’t be bullied by their parents into adopting a way of thinking but they should be encouraged to have healthy style of thinking that can prepare them to face their reality and the reality of the world around them.After all, in view of the complex world in which they live and the multifaceted exposures they have, children can be seen as small adults. They need just time to reach full adulthood. They should be entitled to pursue their dreams as long as they don’t bear in them the risk of becoming nightmares that can disrupt the whole of their lives.

Children can be affected by the current economic downturn because of growing materialism in society. Children are exposed to consumerism at a very low age either from their parents or advertisements directed at them. In the past, it was enough for children to have a playground and a ball to have fun. Now with the spread of electronic gadgets and the Internet, many children can’t live without pocket money. I think it’s time for them to learn to live in the warmth of family life and friendship without the unnecessary and sometimes frivolous luxuries. When grownup, they can make and have their own money.

Sport and Terrorism

2009-03-24T01:05:00.000Z

The decision to shift the IPL away from India for security reasons should be seen as a victory for the terrorists, which will give them as much publicity as when they would succeed in mounting a terrorist attack. Their aim is to instil fear on all levels.

On the other side, it shows that India is still a target of terrorist attacks from within and outside, especially from Pakistan. The terrorists there have two principal aims: to destabilize the Pakistani government and to cause it to have sour relationships with India. It’s not in their interest that Pakistan should be a stable country with excellent relations with India, as this means they can be easily defeated.

On the whole, it’s better to have India concentrate on its elections, which concern the whole country, than to couple them with a sporting event that can make the majority of Indians have their hands on their hearts in fear for a possible terrorist nightmare.

Religion and politics

2009-03-20T01:17:00.000Z

Religion if incorporated into politics can be used as a tool to repress different views. There are theocratic regimes which stifle all sorts of freedoms in the name of religion whose teachings they interpret according to their scheme to hold to power.

The excess of incorporating religion in politics will turn Christian countries to the Puritan era as it can turn Muslim countries to Taliban rule.

Religion should remain an individual matter; especially, in multi-faith societies. Imposing a unique brand of religion is likely to cause a clash among sections of society with different religious views and beliefs.

Any country should have a constitution that guarantees democratic values. Empowering religious institutions over the democratically elected ones will turn societies into theocratic where religious dissent can lead to persecution. As such, multi-faith societies should be governed by secular laws and religion should remain a personal matter.

Israeli elections and Middle East peace

2009-02-11T12:25:00.003Z

The Israelis have gone to the polls to elect their new government. The main issue appears to be security. But there are other issues like the economy and education. For the outside world, what matters is how Israel can be a genuine peace partner in the volatile region of the Middle East that has been regularly going from one crisis to another.

Israel can pride itself on being the most democratic country in the Middle East, but so far it has failed to grant the Palestinians an independent state and to reach a settlement with Syria over the Golan Heights. These are some of the reasons why it has many enemies in the Muslim and the Arab worlds.
There are many questions that should be answered:

1- Can Israel survive without its close alliance with the United States from which it gets the most militarily and financial support?
2- How serious is Israel about an independent Palestinian State?
3- Does it envisage sharing Jerusalem with an independent Palestinian State?
4- Concerning water, how can it be a source of tension between Israel and Jordan?
5- How deeply is Israel affected by the current financial crisis?
6- How Judaism is still important in Israeli society. Is it drifting to more secularism?

There are some who argue that Israel is the 51st state of the USA in view of the huge military, diplomatic and economic support it gets from it. The Israelis may be complacent about the living and democratic standards they’re living. They may view their political leaders as the same despite the political parties they stand for.

Perhaps, the Israeli leaders are good at making wars against their enemies inside and outside Israel as their war machine is the most powerful in the region. But they are also shrewd politicians when it comes to negotiations with the Palestinians. As long as the Israeli politicians become united when it comes to wars, the daily running of the country is left to take care of itself regardless of which party is in power.

Despite the apparent apathy on the part of the Israeli voters, Israel can survive only through democracy. Without it, the differences between politicians can generate into violent political and social instability, a situation Israel can’t afford if it wants to survive in a volatile regions where the “paws” of many countries and political movements are directed against it.

However, Israel should be democratic towards the Palestinians living within Israel or in the Palestinian territories, many of whom pay dearly because of its differences with their political leaders. The recent events in Gaza - military assaults and blockades by Israel- are a case in point.

The Palestinian issue is a strong card in the hands of Israeli politicians with which they can sway the voters and appeal to their nationalism. No Israeli politician seems ready to risk his/her political future by going beyond asserting the need for peace with the Palestinians and the Arab countries. As for territorial matters, there can be signing of agreements, like the 1994 Oslo accord, which fall short of being implemented because of lack of mutual trust.

Perhaps for the Israelis, delaying any compromise is an opportunity to give nothing and to maintain negotiations at the staring point despite the apparent rounds of talks that have been going for years.

It’s no wonder that the public inside and outside Israel have grown sceptical of any settlement between the Israelis and their opponents in the Arab world as each side portrays the other as uncompromising and offering very little to get too much. Maintaining one’s ground is the best mean for attack and offence. For how long will this continue? Only the politicians- from all sides - who hide their cards can decide.

Not reaching a compromise about standing issues concerning the Golan Heights, Jerusalem and an independent Palestinian state will maintain Israel in a perpetual state of war. Its very existence will depend not just on having a strong economy but also the strongest army in the region.

In the Arab world, Israel has so far direct diplomatic relations just with Egypt and Jordan which are subjects to ups and downs because of the fluctuations in the Palestinian territories. It will be better for all parties to reach a lasting compromise by establishing bridges of trust and by each getting one’s due rights without infringing the rights of the others.

Here is an audio extract of Israelis discussing the issue of Iran and Judaism in Israeli society

Get this widget

Track details

eSnips Social DNA

Ros Atkins announcing the presentation of BBC WHYS show from Tel Aviv

Ros Atkins from of BBC WHYS introducing the show

War and peace for Iran and the USA

2009-02-01T18:10:00.002Z

In his first interview with a foreign media outlet – Al-Arabiya television – President Barack Obama promised to extend the hand of American diplomacy to Tehran if the regime froze its nuclear programme.

Despite welcoming the change of tone in US foreign policy towards his country, Iran’s president demanded an apology for past US “crimes” committed against Iran.

Iran should equally apologize to the United States for the 52 American hostages it took after the Islamic Revolution in 1979, before it asks the US to apologize for the economic sanctions it has successively imposed on it.

If Iran seeks good relations with the US both should work to build trust between them. Continuing diplomatic conflict will delay the resolutions of many problems affecting the region, especially the conflicts between Israel and Hamas on one hand and Israel and Hezbollah on the other.

The differences between Iran and the US are so deep extending from Iran nuclear program to the attitudes towards the conflicts in the Middle East, involving Israel with Hamas, Hezbullah and Syria. Iran has strong relations with these. It can exert strong influence on Hamas and Hezbullah either way as long as it gets or doesn’t get what it wants. It’s using them as a tool to indirectly wage wars against Israel.

In view of this complex differences regulating Iran’s relations with the US and Israel , there is so much hard work to do on all sides to heal the rifts that has been taking place since 1979.

For the US and Iran, they can be friends if they leave the past behind them and turn a new page. However the harsh tone of Iranian president in his last speech in which he demanded an apology from the US for its “crimes” against his country and the extended hand of friendship from Obama to the Iranian leaders shows that there is “love” just from one side. The rift whose causes are much more complex can’t be healed easily.

Are octuplets a blessing or a burden?

2009-02-01T18:07:00.000Z

A US woman has given birth to eight babies , becoming just the second person recorded in the US to have delivered a set of living octuplets.

There was the case of a Russian mother who gave birth to 69 children in the span of 40 years from 1725 to 1765.

Having so many babies at the same time can be a blessing if the parents have the means and the time to support them. It can be fantastic to have a big family all of a sudden. But the effort and the cost of raising a child in today’s world isn’t so easy.

For many parents, the beauty of having many children is that they come one by one. At least parents enjoy having babies over a period of time.

For woman who is past 40 and has never had children before, it must be a good thing for her to have a triplet or a quadruplet as she will have secured having more than one child before the menopause. For a young mother, it must be difficult as she will have to care for more than one baby at a time, which can be burden on her physical health, mainly when it comes to sleep deprivation during the first years of the new born babies.

Local jobs and foreign investments

2009-02-01T18:05:00.000Z

Hundreds of employees staged walkouts across the UK over the use of foreign staff at a Lincolnshire refinery.

Should jobs go to local workers?

It’s laudable that local people should have local jobs. But there are jobs that the locals disdain to do like construction and farming. The Gulf States have to rely on foreign workers mainly from the Indian Subcontinent because they have relatively a small population compared to the needed development activities and the locals can accept only activities related to office work or trade, which has resulted in high unemployment among the young.

A protectionist approach isn’t the best solution as this means the world economy will shrink even further because of reduced economic exchanges. This will mainly have negative effect on poor countries whose economy depends on exports to rich countries and remittance from their immigrant populations. Countries should instead protect local jobs as long as there are those who can do them efficiently. Depriving the locals from them will lead just to social unrest.

However, there are jobs that only foreigners are renowned to be good at. In the UK, Polish worker , for example, are still highly needed for repair services. This leads to ask which category of foreign workers should be disposed of for the benefit of the locals.

Protectionism will mean the end of many economic agreements between different countries as it will mean the end of many economic blocs like the EU,G8 and ASIAN.
What is needed is economic restructuring that can allow national economies to grow and to expand beyond the borders. The biggest losers of protectionism will be the emerging economies, like those of India and China, whose success largely depend on exports.

It’s no good news for anyone that the world economy should shrink as it will put backward many poor and developing countries as it will lead a fall in the living standard of the citizens of developed country. There should be mechanism to revive the national economy without jeopardizing the existing international trade agreements.

In Morocco, there are many sectors that are managed by foreign companies although the workers are all Moroccans, except at the administrative level where there are some foreigners.

In Casablanca, the largest city in Morocco, water , electricity , sewage and litter collection are managed by French companies. In Marrakesh, all the buses are managed by a Spanish company because the municipality company went bankrupt because of mismanagement.

In the case of Morocco, there are locals who do most of the jobs. There are very few foreign workers. This means, it’s possible to create jobs for the locals, but there are still sectors that should be managed by foreign companies because of the lack of transparency and good managements when they are in the hands of the nationals.

Compensating human rights victims

2009-01-30T18:08:00.001Z

Many countries around the worlds have tried to turn a new page concerning human right abuses in the past as a means to foster national reconciliation and to compensate the victims or their relatives.

Morocco is the first Arab country to compensate for the victims of human rights abuses between independence in 1956 and the end of King Hassan’s reign in 1999, during which 592 people were killed, the Equity and Reconciliation Committee. Some received more than USD 300,000 in compensation.

Money is just a means to compensate the victims, but there is no money to compensate for the lost years in imprisonment under torture. Many leave the prison in critical health conditions and die just after receiving their compensation.

For Morocco, the compensation of former victims of human rights abuses has been a success. Outstanding political prisoners have become involved in politics, by joining existing or newly formed political parties. Many exiled politicians returned. At least the compensations have secured political stability in Morocco – although the Islamists, hundreds of whom are now in prison, still constitute a dangerous factor for the regime in Morocco.

Is the BBC right not to air DEC Gaza appeal?

2009-01-26T00:03:00.003Z

The BBC is under pressure to air a charity appeal for aid to Gaza after other channels agreed to broadcast it.

This has led to different responses from different personalities as well as from the public .

The BBC controversial position on whether it should show the DEC appeal is giving it more publicity than it needs as this has become one of top news reports on the BBC and other major news channels.

Those who support the BBC decision can argue that the BBC should keep its impartiality by reporting the situation in Gaza objectively. It will set a precedent if it shows the DEC appeal as there are other disastrous areas in the world needing major help because of politics like Zimbabwe -a completely run-down country on all levels.

The BBC has to keep its impartiality when it comes to political conflicts. The tragic events in Gaza were the results the political enmity between Hamas. The BBC doesn't have to show the DEC appeal as it may amount to the incrimination of either Hamas or Israel or both.

It's enough for the BBC to make objective reporting about the ongoing events in Gaza for the public to make their own judgement. The DEC can use other media outlets and emails to get the donations it needs.

However there must be exceptions when human lives are in danger. It’s not a question of being or not being impartial but being indifferent. As there are viewers who shrug at the sight of suffering and dying people, there are others who feel compassion. These people should be given a chance to help through the DEC appeal. That could have gone unnoticed if the BBC wasn’t adamant that it’s out of question to show the appeal on air.

Tony Benn of DEC said "If you wont broadcast the Gaza appeal then I will myself"

Gaza and the international community

2009-01-11T16:29:00.000Z

As long as Israel is ready to kill the civilian Palestinians which it sees as collateral damage and as long as Hamas sees the death of the Palestinians as martyrs for its cause, there will be no lull between the two sides.

Hatred between Hamas and Israel is so deep that no UN resolution can stop them fighting. Each side will find an excuse to kill and attack in the name of survival.

Hamas can keep its morale high through protests worldwide, which are likely to change nothing. Israel will continue its attacks knowing in advance that its fight will be limited within Gaza as no Arab country will step in to fight with it and the international forces can’t get in to establish peace without its agreement.

As such the UN resolutions whether soft or harsh will have no effect on Israel policies as countless events similar to those in Gaza have shown.

On the whole, the Israeli actions in Gaza are likely to deepen the hatred towards Israel and to make Jews around the world feel unsafe. They can be the source of growing of anti-Semitism.

However it’s not too late to close this Gaza bloody chapter if all the parties come to their senses and agree to a ceasefire which should be sustained by allowing people in Gaza the freedom of movement and to be guaranteed their basic needs. Mutual and sustained attacks are likely to prolong the damages on both sides and to make any peace agreement unachievable.

Israel on the defence against defenceless Palestinians

2009-01-06T01:33:00.005Z

The Israeli politicians say that their war on Hamas will go on whatever it takes. This means they have given themselves the right to have a free hand. But as long as there are the laws of wars, going beyond them must be a crime against humanity.

However as long as it’s unlikely that Israel can face international sanctions from its allies, mainly the EU and the USA - its major economic and political partners, it will continue to bombard Gaza at will. The irony is that NATO was able to intervene militarily in ex-Yugoslavia to stop ethnic cleansing there and the international forces led by the USA invaded in Iraq. Now the international community is watching Israel pound its bombs in civilian areas and “calmly” asking for a ceasefire. As such Israel isn’t just defending itself but it’s being defended by its allies on behalf of which it is waging a war against Hamas.

In short, Israel in its history of bloody attacks is used to the pattern of diplomatic condemnations and angry wide public protests. It has a deaf ear to them because the drones of the engines of its weapons and the sounds of the explosion are louder than them. Israel doesn’t need justifications as it has no one to account for its actions. It’s the law of the strong against the weak, not the modern laws of war.

Israel has the right to defend itself, but not at the expense of the innocent civilians caught in the fire attacks. The Israelis exposed to Hamas rockets have only fear to deal with, considering the casualties when contrasting 14 Israeli killed by Hamas rockets versus 5,000 Palestinians killed by Israel sophisticated weapons in the past seven years.

Israel can reserve the right to respond to those who attack it, but not through indiscriminate killing which it euphemistically can call collateral damage.

The best way for Israel to defend itself is not to allow extremism grow around its borders and beyond, by being realistic about its approaches to its conflict with the Palestinians. One of the approaches can be for it to speed up the establishment of a Palestinian state and not to use Hamas and Iran as an excuse for further delays.

World Have your Say on TV

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four

Gaza situation, who's to blame?

2008-12-30T18:29:00.000Z

The events in Gaza are a trying time for everyone. It’s not politics. It’s unrestrained actions with full military might versus unarmed civilians caught in the feud between two opposite ideologies.

When civilized negotiations fail, there is room for bloody actions which resolve nothing but just increase the enmity between the two sides.

It’s sad to see that only atrocities can unite the Israelis and the Palestinians against each other when it is hard for them to achieve lasting peace.

From what it is seen, Israel is facing criticism from the international community over its attacks in Gaza, not because of siding with Hamas but because of the casualties that were caught in its fires intended for Hamas locations and fighters.

When there are attacks, the Palestinians are sure to stand against Israel. What can decide the popularity of Hamas are free and fair elections within the Palestinian territories to see if people in Gaza want to be ruled by Hamas or to have a new leadership.

Hamas can be a news star during the Israeli attacks. But the question that remains if Hamas policies are the only possible ones to settle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If not the Palestinians should have had the chance to have their say about Hamas’s stay in power before things developed into bloody actions.

What can solve the Palestinian problem is democracy among the Palestinians and fruitful negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
There are many questions that should be answered vis-à-vis these attacks:
1- In such a situation who should be accused of crime against humanity: is it Israel who is making much more casualties among the civilians than the armed groups or is it Hamas who has its weapons and weapon factories in densely populate areas?

2- Should Egypt be accountable for turning a blind eye to the tunnels from which weapons are smuggled or for closing its borders with Gaza, making it easy for Israel to impose its total blockade on Gaza?

3- Wouldn’t it have been better for Israel to mount a ground invasion of Gaza and arrest Hamas leaders and armed factions instead of mounting air strikes that randomly killed innocent civilians?

4- How will such attacks in Gaza affect Israel relations with moderate Arab countries and will this mean its contact with them will be low-key?

Hamas can be strengthened only by the desperate Palestinians, especially those living in Gaza. These have nothing to lose as they feel they’re living in a collective prison under blockade. Their life can have meaning by fighting and dying for the Hamas cause.

But Hamas getting strength from despair can’t solve the Palestinian problem which is politically very complex. There must be political solutions through negotiations and not by Hamas Qassam rockets and Israeli destructive and deadly air attacks.