I am a self-proclaimed shop-a-holic...I am not proud of it.
I can walk into a mall and spend hours upon hours, ambling from store to store, gazing longingly at displays propped up in windows, trying on enough outfits to clothe a small army, and searching for accessories to match. This would be fine if all I spent at the mall was hours, but it never is. No matter how I try to justify it, my shopping habit is an expensive one. My sister and I have always been partners in crime when it comes to shopping, and occasionally she will call me out on buying something completely impractical. She'll look at my selections skeptically and say "Don't you already have something just like that? Maybe even two somethings just like that?" I will consider this for a moment, then I will inevitably whine, "...but I neeeeeed it."
My perception of my own needs is obviously flawed.
This bit of self-reflection on my shopping addiction, er, habit has led me to think about the concept of human needs in general. People survive at varying positions on a wide spectrum of conditions and possessions, and their perceptions of their needs are inextricably linked with their position on this spectrum. On one end is the person who has everything under the sun, and imagines that they cannot survive without any of it, and on the other end is the person with zero material possessions who would likely have no idea what to do with all of these so-called necessities required by the first person.
Westerners, in general, exist on the end weighed down by lots and lots of stuff. We pride ourselves on owning the latest technology, biggest house, most expensive furniture, and in my case, the fullest closet. It gives me pause, however, to think of the other end of the spectrum, much lighter than the end I currently reside on, and how different it must be. I recently discussed this with a friend of mine who summed it up quite nicely in a quote by Buddha: "(s)he who is not happy with nothing will not be happy with everything."
We are so up to our eyeballs in our possessions, that we might be missing the big picture of what it actually takes to survive, and survive happily. Perhaps we are not reveling in our stuff, but drowning in it. In this light, it makes sense that the Western world is characterized by obesity, high stress levels, and the diseases associated with them. If we cannot learn to manage and be happy with a simple life, how can we be expected to manage our plethora of possessions?
While the Western world is burdened with too much wealth and too many possessions, the developing world is burdened with poverty and scarcity. While I am busy worrying about how on earth I can be expected to keep my closet organized, billions of people are stuck, literally in the dark because of the lack of electricity, wearing the same two or three articles of clothing day in and day out, because it is all they have. Westerners worry about losing weight, while citizens of developing countries are starving to death. I constantly whine that "I neeeeed" a new pair of shoes, while people suffer because they cannot get something that they actually do need, something as simple as clean water.
Joyce Mbwilo's life in Tanzania exemplifies the struggle to meet daily needs across the African continent. She tells of the difficulties she faces to send her children to school, and the 10 hour walk she must make, overnight, to bring water to her village. She is far from alone in these conditions, one in five people worldwide is estimated to have no access to clean water. She beseeches leaders of the G-8 to put themselves "in her shoes" to create policies that could help alleviate her exhausting situation. I wonder if it is even possible for someone who has to only turn on a tap to understand what it is like to commute for 10 hours for something as essential as water.
What strikes me while looking at these pictures is also how upbeat and positive she appears to be. She has much to be bitter about, but yet she smiles through the pictures and emphasizes the importance of a future for her children. If someone from a developed country is denied even the smallest luxury, I doubt that their attitude would be as optimistic. Have you ever witnessed what happens if you accidentally bump ahead of someone in line at a Starbucks? If people can't stand to wait an extra two minutes for their coffee, I doubt they would be smiling while carrying a heavy load of water.
Reading stories like Joyce's makes me feel ashamed. I don't see how I can justify or excuse my extravagant lifestyle while simultaneously claiming to be concerned about the fate of African citizens.
I think it is extremely important for people to evaluate, or in my case, re-evaluate what they actually need. We can't continue to stand idly by, with all of our stuff in tow, while ignoring the needs of fellow humans. I am not suggesting becoming a vagrant with no possessions, but perhaps next time you are in my position, about to make a superfluous purchase, take a moment to appreciate all the little luxuries you have...and then take a moment to think about how you can help someone without them.
My sister once posed the question, "What is important to you and how are you living it?" Africa, and the needs of its citizens are important to me - more important than my next shopping fix. I hope that wherever I end up with the Peace Corps will help me to start to live it.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
A terrorist by any other name...
The name "Osama bin Laden" strikes an emotional chord. For many Americans, including myself, this name conjures horrific images of 9/11 and stirs up feelings of anger and disgust. His attacks on the Western world have made his name and that of his terrorist organization, al Qaeda, infamous worldwide. Osama bin Laden has become a household name, topping the FBI's list of Most Wanted Terrorists.
With Osama bin Laden as THE face of terrorism, it is easy to see how terrorists like Joseph Kony have slipped through the cracks of international attention. However, after learning of his actions, his name becomes impossible to forget.
Joseph Kony and his organization, the Lord's Resistance Army, began their rebellion against the Ugandan government under President Yoweri Museveni in 1986. In the 20 years that have followed, the LRA has slaughtered more than 10,000 Ugandan citizens (some estimates range in the hundreds of thousands), has abducted more than 25,000 children to serve in its army, and has forced more than 2 million people to flee their homes. He is currently wanted by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity, along with four of the other LRA leaders.
The LRA aims to implement a 10 Commandment style law to "cleanse" the people of Uganda. Kony considers himself to be a spiritual medium in this quest. In a recent interview with Sam Farmar, Kony states that "Yes, we are fighting for Ten Commandments...And that commandment was not given by Joseph. It was not given by LRA. No, that commandment was given by God."
Hypocrisy aside (last time I checked, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" was still one of the commandments), the means Kony and his army have used to achieve his stated goal have been appalling. The vast majority of his army - estimates say more than 90% - is composed of children that have been taken from Northern Uganda, right out of their homes. Once the children are in the company of the LRA, those who resist are mutilated, dismembered, or killed. The girls are raped and many are kept as sex slaves. If a child survives the initial days of torture, they are forced to torture their peers in the same manner - even family members are not exempted from this and many children are forced to kill their own parents or siblings. Kony's strategy of kidnapping children is cruelly effective...it is easier for him to mold a child into a killer than an adult. He has conditioned his very own army of child soldiers to perform monstrous, unthinkable acts.
In a recent interview with the BBC, a man named Ocholo John told of his 11-day gut-wrenching experience with the LRA. He was verbally assaulted, beaten multiple times, and soldiers cut off his ears, nose, lips, and hands. He was left for dead, along with two women that he was abducted with, and survived only because they were discovered by government soldiers. He was my age when he was abducted. No amount of paraphrasing could do his account justice. Go to the site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5129350.stm
Throughout the conflict, Joseph Kony has denied any wrongdoing and has refused to accept responsibility for abductions or deaths. He continues to blame the Ugandan government, still headed by President Museveni, for the ongoing violence. In 2002, he called in to a radio show in Gulu and claimed: "We are not abducting children. We are not doing anything bad in northern Uganda. All this dirty work is done by government, not LRA...I appeal to all of you who are tuned to this radio that I, Joseph Kony, am not involved in propaganda. I want everybody to live in peace and harmony. I want dialogue to end this war. But I also believe that the barrel of the gun can resolve the conflict..."
Where will it end?
President Museveni has made several attempts to negotiate with Kony, and yesterday, he made a controversial offer: "The Ugandan government will grant total amnesty despite the ICC indictments if he responds positively to the talks with the government in Juba, southern Sudan, and abandons terrorism." Despite everything he has done, to children, to adults, to fellow Ugandans, to people like Ocholo John, Kony will not face any punishment, and will walk free.
The Ugandan government has had an Amnesty Act in place since 1999 for the child soldiers who are lucky enough to escape from the LRA - it even offers them $150 in "starting over" funds. I fully support this act, as I do not think that children who are forcibly trained to kill should be prosecuted, but their abductor and trainer is a completely different story. When I heard the news of Museveni's offer, I was bewildered and outraged on behalf of everyone who has been impacted by Kony's heinous brand of terror.
While the thought of an amnesty for Kony leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, I have reluctantly reevaluated my thoughts after being persuaded by arguments from those who seek peace, like Betty Bigombe, the former minister for Uganda. She has requested to put a "premium on peace" and argues that no peace can exist in Uganda without the cooperation and disassembly of the LRA, and perhaps an amnesty for Kony might be a way to bring him to the negotiation table. As disgusting as it may be that he could get away with these countless atrocities, the complete failure of justice could be worth it if it will lead to peace for the people of Uganda.
Whether or not Kony accepts this offer, it is disturbing to me that the Ugandan government has been forced to resort to negotiating with terrorists in its attempt to guarantee safety for its people. Leaders of the Western world like George W. Bush and Tony Blair have staunchly maintained that negotiating with terrorists is not an option, and both the ICC and the US government have expressed disapproval for Museveni's amnesty offer.
Disapproval duly noted, but it is completely ineffective and useless in a practical sense. Museveni has repeatedly said that he would not consider offering amnesty if he had "reliable partners" in the region and worldwide who would help him to apprehend Kony and deal with the aftereffects of the LRA's terror. Still, the US has made little to no real effort to assist in Kony's capture. In 2004, Congress passed the Northern Uganda Crisis Response Act which consists of heavily shrouded language declaring support for peace in Uganda, but offers no real plan of action by the US. Efforts by the US end here, with this inutile act.
While al Qaeda has become a name frequently heard around the US, the name of the LRA, an equally horrific organization, draws blank stares. The LRA remains placed on tier two of the State Department's Terrorist Exclusion List, meaning that it is not considered to be a threat to US interests, and meaning that US policy for dealing with the LRA is practically non-existent. While the State Department offers a $25 million reward to anyone with information leading to the capture of Osama bin Laden, it offers no reward or incentive of any kind for information leading to the capture of Joseph Kony.
The US government has simultaneously declared a war on terror, and has ignored perpetrators of it. It simultaneously claims to be a moral leader, and deems the fate of Ugandan children as a non-issue. It simulteneously denounces Museveni's pledge of amnesty for Kony, and offers no assistance for an alternative plan. What kind of a message does this send?
Unfortunately, I hear the message, loud and clear, and it's one that is heard not just in Uganda, but across the African continent. Don't make me say it.
This is why I have found myself in support of Museveni's offer of an amnesty, as unjust as it may be for Kony's victims. Kony does deserve to be prosecuted, but without the hope of international help in his capture and prosecution, this idea is far-fetched. So is the idea of peace in Uganda with him on the loose. In the question of whether peace is worth an amnesty, I say absolutely.
However, there is another important question of whether or not an amnesty will necessarily lead to peace, and here I am completely unsure. I am hopeful that Museveni's tactic will work to stop the LRA's reign of terror and ensure safety for the horribly neglected children of Uganda, but there is no way of knowing what Joseph Kony will bring to the negotiation table, if he even decides to show up.
Negotiating with a terrorist like Joseph Kony is an act of desperation. It is also a blatant cry for help. With the loud cries of outrage at only terrorist organizations that directly affect Americans, will anyone be able to hear it?
With Osama bin Laden as THE face of terrorism, it is easy to see how terrorists like Joseph Kony have slipped through the cracks of international attention. However, after learning of his actions, his name becomes impossible to forget.
Joseph Kony and his organization, the Lord's Resistance Army, began their rebellion against the Ugandan government under President Yoweri Museveni in 1986. In the 20 years that have followed, the LRA has slaughtered more than 10,000 Ugandan citizens (some estimates range in the hundreds of thousands), has abducted more than 25,000 children to serve in its army, and has forced more than 2 million people to flee their homes. He is currently wanted by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity, along with four of the other LRA leaders.
The LRA aims to implement a 10 Commandment style law to "cleanse" the people of Uganda. Kony considers himself to be a spiritual medium in this quest. In a recent interview with Sam Farmar, Kony states that "Yes, we are fighting for Ten Commandments...And that commandment was not given by Joseph. It was not given by LRA. No, that commandment was given by God."
Hypocrisy aside (last time I checked, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" was still one of the commandments), the means Kony and his army have used to achieve his stated goal have been appalling. The vast majority of his army - estimates say more than 90% - is composed of children that have been taken from Northern Uganda, right out of their homes. Once the children are in the company of the LRA, those who resist are mutilated, dismembered, or killed. The girls are raped and many are kept as sex slaves. If a child survives the initial days of torture, they are forced to torture their peers in the same manner - even family members are not exempted from this and many children are forced to kill their own parents or siblings. Kony's strategy of kidnapping children is cruelly effective...it is easier for him to mold a child into a killer than an adult. He has conditioned his very own army of child soldiers to perform monstrous, unthinkable acts.
In a recent interview with the BBC, a man named Ocholo John told of his 11-day gut-wrenching experience with the LRA. He was verbally assaulted, beaten multiple times, and soldiers cut off his ears, nose, lips, and hands. He was left for dead, along with two women that he was abducted with, and survived only because they were discovered by government soldiers. He was my age when he was abducted. No amount of paraphrasing could do his account justice. Go to the site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5129350.stm
Throughout the conflict, Joseph Kony has denied any wrongdoing and has refused to accept responsibility for abductions or deaths. He continues to blame the Ugandan government, still headed by President Museveni, for the ongoing violence. In 2002, he called in to a radio show in Gulu and claimed: "We are not abducting children. We are not doing anything bad in northern Uganda. All this dirty work is done by government, not LRA...I appeal to all of you who are tuned to this radio that I, Joseph Kony, am not involved in propaganda. I want everybody to live in peace and harmony. I want dialogue to end this war. But I also believe that the barrel of the gun can resolve the conflict..."
Where will it end?
President Museveni has made several attempts to negotiate with Kony, and yesterday, he made a controversial offer: "The Ugandan government will grant total amnesty despite the ICC indictments if he responds positively to the talks with the government in Juba, southern Sudan, and abandons terrorism." Despite everything he has done, to children, to adults, to fellow Ugandans, to people like Ocholo John, Kony will not face any punishment, and will walk free.
The Ugandan government has had an Amnesty Act in place since 1999 for the child soldiers who are lucky enough to escape from the LRA - it even offers them $150 in "starting over" funds. I fully support this act, as I do not think that children who are forcibly trained to kill should be prosecuted, but their abductor and trainer is a completely different story. When I heard the news of Museveni's offer, I was bewildered and outraged on behalf of everyone who has been impacted by Kony's heinous brand of terror.
While the thought of an amnesty for Kony leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, I have reluctantly reevaluated my thoughts after being persuaded by arguments from those who seek peace, like Betty Bigombe, the former minister for Uganda. She has requested to put a "premium on peace" and argues that no peace can exist in Uganda without the cooperation and disassembly of the LRA, and perhaps an amnesty for Kony might be a way to bring him to the negotiation table. As disgusting as it may be that he could get away with these countless atrocities, the complete failure of justice could be worth it if it will lead to peace for the people of Uganda.
Whether or not Kony accepts this offer, it is disturbing to me that the Ugandan government has been forced to resort to negotiating with terrorists in its attempt to guarantee safety for its people. Leaders of the Western world like George W. Bush and Tony Blair have staunchly maintained that negotiating with terrorists is not an option, and both the ICC and the US government have expressed disapproval for Museveni's amnesty offer.
Disapproval duly noted, but it is completely ineffective and useless in a practical sense. Museveni has repeatedly said that he would not consider offering amnesty if he had "reliable partners" in the region and worldwide who would help him to apprehend Kony and deal with the aftereffects of the LRA's terror. Still, the US has made little to no real effort to assist in Kony's capture. In 2004, Congress passed the Northern Uganda Crisis Response Act which consists of heavily shrouded language declaring support for peace in Uganda, but offers no real plan of action by the US. Efforts by the US end here, with this inutile act.
While al Qaeda has become a name frequently heard around the US, the name of the LRA, an equally horrific organization, draws blank stares. The LRA remains placed on tier two of the State Department's Terrorist Exclusion List, meaning that it is not considered to be a threat to US interests, and meaning that US policy for dealing with the LRA is practically non-existent. While the State Department offers a $25 million reward to anyone with information leading to the capture of Osama bin Laden, it offers no reward or incentive of any kind for information leading to the capture of Joseph Kony.
The US government has simultaneously declared a war on terror, and has ignored perpetrators of it. It simultaneously claims to be a moral leader, and deems the fate of Ugandan children as a non-issue. It simulteneously denounces Museveni's pledge of amnesty for Kony, and offers no assistance for an alternative plan. What kind of a message does this send?
Unfortunately, I hear the message, loud and clear, and it's one that is heard not just in Uganda, but across the African continent. Don't make me say it.
This is why I have found myself in support of Museveni's offer of an amnesty, as unjust as it may be for Kony's victims. Kony does deserve to be prosecuted, but without the hope of international help in his capture and prosecution, this idea is far-fetched. So is the idea of peace in Uganda with him on the loose. In the question of whether peace is worth an amnesty, I say absolutely.
However, there is another important question of whether or not an amnesty will necessarily lead to peace, and here I am completely unsure. I am hopeful that Museveni's tactic will work to stop the LRA's reign of terror and ensure safety for the horribly neglected children of Uganda, but there is no way of knowing what Joseph Kony will bring to the negotiation table, if he even decides to show up.
Negotiating with a terrorist like Joseph Kony is an act of desperation. It is also a blatant cry for help. With the loud cries of outrage at only terrorist organizations that directly affect Americans, will anyone be able to hear it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
