STAND UP

My name is Emily Burchfield, and I am a sophomore at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina. Clemson is a public university with around 17,000 students. There are many different student organizations on campus, but none dealing specifically with the global poverty issue. Last year, however, this all changed!

There is an incredible divide between “the West and the rest.” People of developing nations lack access to the many opportunities of western society. For example, when I went to Ghana, I met a girl who was my age named Regina. We became very close during my stay in her country. After my return to the US, I received a letter from her in the mail stating that her father had passed away. Her family no longer had any legitimate means of income and she was forced to drop out of school to work on her family’s farm. The fact that someone as bright as Regina can’t attain an education because of bad luck and poverty pushed me to act. I started to research the poverty issue and discovered the MDG’s. The goals clearly define the problems in the developing nations of the world and lay out the steps necessary to fix these problems. They outline the UN’s approach towards the many crises in developing nations. As I read over the goals for the first time, I became very excited. Not only do the goals address global education, but seven other broad topic areas including poverty and hunger, gender empowerment, child mortality, maternal healthcare, HIV/AIDS and malaria, environmental sustainability, and global trade. I found the ONE Campaign, which fights specifically for the MDGs and decided to try and make Clemson a “University of ONE.”

What else are we doing at Clemson? During the spring 2006 semester at Clemson, we attained over a thousand signatures for the ONE Pledge and informed countless students about the importance of the “fight to make poverty history.” We also started a branch of Americans for Informed Democracy (http://www.aidemocracy.org) at Clemson to help generate awareness about the ONE Campaign, the MDG’s, and the world in general. This year, we hope to form a “ONE Committee” with representatives from across campus to continue our campaigning for ONE and the MDG’s.

Extreme poverty is one of the most pressing issues of our time, and I truly believe that our generation will make an enormous difference in this area. So many people today are not aware of the issues surrounding the UN Millennium Development Goals, the “fight to make poverty history,” and the crises taking place in developing nations. When people are informed, they are driven to action. This is why I think it is so important to inform as many students as possible.

This is also why I am participating in the “Stand Up” (http://www.millenniumcampaign.org) event on the 15th and 16th of October. This is a great way to put pressure on the US Government to stick with the Millennium Development Goals. The “Stand Up” action is a global effort which we felt Clemson should be a part of. At Clemson, during the week leading up to October 15th and 16th, the “Stand Up” dates, we are going to organize international film screenings to raise global awareness on our campus. We hope to make these screenings as fun as possible to get many students involved. At each event we will fill our on-campus movie theater with flyers, food, and fun decorations. We will hand out flyers about AIDemocracy, the ONE Campaign, and especially the “fight to make poverty history.” On the 15th, our final event will be the screening of “Silent Killer,” a movie highlighting the global hunger crisis worldwide. Before the movie starts, we will explain the “Stand Up” Campaign and the MDGs. We’ll ask those attending to stand up for one minute before the show. In addition to these events, members of Americans for Informed Democracy will sit at tables around campus handing out flyers and getting students to sign the “ONE Pledge” during the week leading up to the 15th. We will also contact student organizations having meetings throughout the day Sunday to see if they will “Stand Up” for one minute during their meetings.

We hope all of these events are successful and become Clemson traditions!

Downfalls of Diplomacy

An article in The New York Times today reflects the one of the greatest struggles in international relations and the UN: how do we foster international cooperation, and especially enforce commitments, without violating national sovereignty? This is indeed a touchy subject- everyone wants to involve the UN to convict their opponents, to use force to get our side's point acrosss, but when it comes to convicting ourselves, we are much less likely to do so. I repeatedly accuse the US of this tactic, of employing the term "national sovereignty" at times of our convinience, but then willing to violate other's soveriegnty or even international rights simply because it conflicts with what we want. (See another intersting article in The New York Times) You can't have it both ways, there must be a middle ground.

The crisis in the middle east embodies all these issues. Lebanon agreed to a UN resolution to end fighting on the condition that their national sovereignty was respected. This seems like a just cause, especially as the US has used this reasoning to withhold signatures of many treaties. Yet respecting national sovereignty means the UN has little force. Currently, UN forces deployed in Lebanon are feeling a torn, as they are told to only assist in situations when the Lebanese government asks them to. Yet as of now, the Lebanese government hasn't ask them to do anything. This poses an interesting question that has plauged UN activists/advocates in many an issue: when should one step aside and mind their own business, and when is intervening absolutely necessary? Unfortunately, there is no clear cut answer.

History Repeats Itself

by Nicholas Tilipman

I would like to begin this blog by mentioning that Megan Levanduski’s post (the entry before this one) was particularly timely and well written. I would like to devote this entry, however, to saying a few more things about 9/11 and the United States administration.

First of all, as everyone knows, Americans gathered two days ago in remembrance of the tragedies that occurred on September 11, 2001. While most still feel a sense of urgency—that the United States should do whatever in its power to protect against the imminent terrorist threat—most have actually fallen back into the catacombs of apathy. According to The Economist, a poll published by the Wall Street Journal/NBC in July concluded that roughly 14% of Americans still think that terrorism should be the government’s top priority. About twice that number thinks that occupation in the Iraq should be America’s top focus.

Although it wasn’t reported, one can infer that a growing number of people are now disillusioned, not only by the way the US has handled the war on terror in the past five years, but also how it has handled international affairs in general. Middle East conflicts are waxing and waning, violence in Iraq is still a major cause of concern, and it appears as though people are just growing tired of hearing about it.

Can anyone really blame them, however? I get the distinct impression that this has happened before. Let’s look to history for the answer. President Woodrow Wilson, founder of the modern school of liberal thought and employer of the “rhetorical presidency,” had a similar dilemma in the early twentieth century, with regards to World War I and the idea of global interdependence. Wilson believed that America, as it has undergone a tremendous and organic evolution to its stage in world affairs, should remain at the vanguard of international relations. America, according to Wilson, should serve as a role model for the rest of the world in its quest for global interdependence, self-determination, and collective security.

How did Wilson gain support of the American public prior to World War I? Part of it was, of course, the German sinking of British boats, which he used to justify America’s involvement. Mostly, however, it was his skills as a rhetorical president. Much of Wilson’s rhetoric gave hope to the American people, but was clearly contradictory. How can one engage in a war under the premise of “peace without victory,” and then force Germany into an unconditional surrender? How can one claim to support “self-determination” and then intervene in Latin America and Russia? This of course contributed to the isolationist backlash against American interventionism in the 1920s and 30s.

The point I am making is that President Bush possesses Wilson’s skills as a rhetorical president, and has used a major tragedy to arouse support from the American public. We can clearly see the violent backlashes against his failure to recognize the world’s pluralism. Now that more and more Americans are growing disillusioned or apathetic, we see that Bush is risking making the same mistakes Wilson did. If he does, I fear America might drift back to isolationism; and we know what happens next.

Moving On....

by Megan Levanduski

I would first like to point out that today is a day of rememberance of perhaps the biggest tragedy of our lifetime. Five years ago, the World Trade Center was attacked by terrorists. I would like to thank the heroes of that day, and give my condolences to all those involved. I must say, however, that is all I am going to say on the subject. As my friend Nicholas pointed out a few days ago, not much has changed over the summer, and I must say while the world has changed drastically since 9/11, we are still dealing with the same topics. There is still conflict in the middle east, trouble especially in Afghanistan and Iraq. And are aiports and subways are just as hectic. People don't feel much safer, despite all the promises of cooperation and international peace that came with 9/11.

Yet while the effects of 9/11 still loom, most everything is business as usual. Perhaps that is what is most remarkable about the world, and Americans. We have the ability to move on, to deal with a tragic situation, fix the problem, and then get on with our lives. Unfortunately, that often leads us back where we started. It doesn't do any good to continually fix an engine if every few months you have to call a mechanic again. Instead, you should just buy a new car. Of course, that is costly and time consuming, and most of us are attached to our cars no matter how awful they may be. I am no longer talking about 9/11, but about international relations in general. The world seems to get fixiated on one hot topic, one tragedy we want to read about everyday, and when all is said and done, a few weeks later we don't pay it any mind. Whether that is hurricanes or tsunamis, or civil wars, the truth is we all have too much going on in our own lives to stay committed to other people's problems.

This needs to change. Sudan has been a buzz word in the press for quite some time. Every one seemed very concerned that the country may turn out to be another tragedy like Rwanda. Unfortunately, years of civil war have left the country torn and little progress has been made in settling conflicts. The UN has approved peace keeping forces to enter the Sudan and provide assitance. The African Union is currently aiding Sudan in their efforts to achieve peace, but they have such limited resources and power that the UN feels intervention is necessary. Unfortunatley, Sudan begs to differ. They want the African Union, and only the African Union to help. The Sudanes government has refused offers of assistance from the UN and has said that the African Union must leave the end of this month when their mandate ends, unless the AU can find a way to continue resolving the conflic on their own. This leaves many refugees in a painful situation. If peacekeeping forces leave, the refugees will be forced ot flee again, as they fear they will come to harm in their current homes.

With all that is going on in the world, it is difficult to devote a lot of time and resources to one area. But we should all try to not move on so quickly. While it may benefit us to not dwell on the past, as we move on from one conflict to antoher we leave many others left behind. Let's not move on from Sudan.

A Peaceful Iraq?

by Nicholas Tilipman

The U.S. military announced today that the arrest of Hamed Jumaa Farid al-Saeedi, al-Qaida in Iraq’s second in command, actually occurred on June 19 and not a few days ago. Regardless, the New York Times referred to it as the “most significant blow to the terror network since the death of al-Qaida in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.”

According to The Economist, the Iraqi government is using this capture, on top of the death of Zarqawi as evidence that the situation in Iraq may gradually be easing and that the authorities possess the capability to suppress the insurgency without the help of external (American) forces.

This may ring true in some areas, perhaps in Southern Iraq, but in the Sunni populated areas around Baghdad and north-western Iraq, there is fairly little evidence to suggest that the situation is stabilizing. According to the New York Times, two bombs exploded in northern Baghdad today, killing at least nine people and wounding 39 others. In northeastern Baghdad, several gunmen opened fire on pilgrims heading to Karbala, the Shiite holy city. The point is that the bombings have not ceased, nor will they any time soon.

What’s worse is that insurgent violence has shifted from being exclusively directed against American-led coalitions to being a sectarian conflict between Shia and Sunni Arabs. And it isn’t even the Shiites that are being persecuted by the Sunnis. Sunni Arabs have plenty to fear in the area as well. In today’s New York Times, an article was printed discussing how Sunnis in Baghdad are frequently being persecuted for having names that allude to unfavorable Iraqi leaders (Saddam Hussein). This is causing many Iraqis to go as far as to change their names (their identities) to save themselves from being persecuted.

This is only a sign of increasing, not decreasing, insurgent violence in Iraq. “To have to hide one’s name is considered deeply shameful. But with sectarian violence surging, Iraqis fear the name on an identification card, passport or other document could become an instant death sentence if seen by the wrong people.” Iraqi civilians have been stopped at checkpoints and have been executed on the spot if their name sounded suspicious. Shiite death squads often operate these checkpoints.

The capture and killing of terrorist leaders may or may not decrease the number of large-scale suicide bombings in Iraq. However, less than 5% of the insurgents in Iraq belong to al-Qaida. Rather, the insurgency was born and bred in Iraq and has evolved into an intense sectarian conflict that, despite recent optimism, will continue and be as bloody as ever.

De Ja Vu (Again)

by Nicholas Tilipman

I’ll be honest here. Since the culmination of my internship with UNA-USA, I have spent the remainder of the summer securing my schedule and preparing overall for the upcoming school year. As such, I had little or no time at all to keep in touch with the news or post on this blog.

Well, there is good news to those of you who may have enjoyed my previous posts: You didn’t miss much. That’s right, since I moved back to school this past Saturday, I have come back to the habit of reading the news and staying in touch with world events, only to realize the lack of any sort of change in the current global conflict. All the headlines are precisely the same as I have left them a little less than a month ago.

Sure, the Israeli-Lebanese conflict has settled and fresh, new conflicts have begun to escalate, but nothing in particular caught my attention as being any different. Two Fox News journalists were kidnapped in Gaza (for reasons that remain uncertain, if not absurd), there is still a tremendous amount of violence erupting in Iraq, and best of all, Iran faces yet another deadline to suspend its uranium enrichment program.

I recall that the last blog I wrote was devoted to praising the UN for taking what I thought to be some serious action against the numerous conflicts in the Middle East. The Security Council had finally set a deadline for Iran, threatening some form of punishment (though still undisclosed) if they did not cooperate. Now, it seems there are still deliberations instead of action being taken.

Furthermore, Kofi Annan has embarked on a rapid tour of the Middle East with his entourage. I am beginning to wonder whether this will be the catalyst for any type of change in the region.

Don’t get me wrong, working for UNA has exposed me to a wide array of successful UN programs. It is just getting hard to see the light at the end of the tunnel when I read the news only to find the same conflicts manifesting in different areas and to find that the only headline that remotely widens my eyes is the one entitled “Heath Ledger set to play Joker.” Let’s hope Annan’s visit to the Middle East puts me to rest.

It doesn't matter if you win or lose, it's how you play the game.

by Megan Levanduski

Sports can be a great way to bring people together. Despite the competitive spirit and national pride, a sense of international cooperation and mutual respect is found in events like the Olympics or the World Cup. Every once in a while, however, a few select people ruin it for the rest of the world by bringing these events to the tabloids with rumors of scandals. At an international cricket competition in August, an umpire made a controversial call against Pakistan that sparked rumors of racism and bias from the judge and the system. The umpire accused members of the Pakistan team of tampering with the ball.

More recently, a motor sports competition in Turkish Cypriot showed reflections of much more deep seeded political conflicts. Turkish Cypriot is a Turkish controlled section of Cyprus that is only officially recognized as a state by Turkey. At the competition, the political leader of Turkish Cypriot was introduced as the President of the region as he gave the winning prize. This upset Cyprus denounced the event as exploitation of the event by the Turkish Cypriot leaders.

With preparations for the 2008 Beijing Olympics in full swing, it is up to the international community to show the dignity and respect that is normally shown in sports. I can only hope that these few incidents of conflict are isolated, and that international competitions will take their cue from the World Cup, which Secretary General of the UN Kofi Anan states as a “phenomena as universal as the United Nations” due to its promotion of diversity. While sports are a chance for pride, they are more importantly a place for sportsmanship, and a chance to unite people who would not be willing to any other way.