October
27
2009
(For the next week or so, I will be running a guest blog by Gerri Haynes, a former president of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility. Gerri, a nurse from Kirkland, Wash., is in Gaza with 11 other people in an effort to help the people there and also to better understand the situation.)
Our humanitarian/human rights group met with human rights experts in Gaza this morning, then visited an elegant activity center for children. The director of this center is an inspiring young woman who was educated in and beyond Gaza. She has chosen to serve the children of her homeland in the most loving way she can imagine – with creativity and safety.
The physicians in our group continue to serve patients in Al Awda Hospital, in clinics and in our hotel. A radio announcement telling of our presence in Gaza resulted in many more patients seeking care.
The sister of the wonderful man who is organizing our itinerary runs a neighborhood school – teaching children who are able (because of extreme crowding in classes) to attend regular school for only half of the day. I visited her and witnessed the overwhelming courage of a young woman whose husband is no longer able to work; the wounds he received in an Israeli attack have permanently disabled him. With teachers specializing in such areas as English and mathematics, this bright and cheerful woman is making extended education available to children in her neighborhood for a minimum fee (less than $20/month) – and working in an environment of many needs and great resourcefulness.
In the classes I am teaching, I heard today from a treating psychologist the story of a six-year-old boy who witnessed his neighbor being “cut to pieces” by shrapnel from an Israeli bomb. The child, horrified by what he witnessed, picked up the pieces of his neighbor and placed them in a nearby car. Solemn and purposeful as he retrieved each part, he said little to his parents about what he had done – but the fears that have since directed some of his behaviors signify a persistent trauma. He is one among many, many thousands of the citizens of Gaza who suffer from the psychological injuries of being attacked in the prison that is their homeland.
Again and again, I am humbled by the courage of mental health professionals in this land – each one knows personal trauma and still they continue to offer care to their fellow citizens.
Soha, a Palestinian friend who knows we are in Gaza sent this poem by Rainer Maria Rilke to me today…
Only in our doing can we grasp you.
Only with our hands can we illumine you.
The mind is but a visitor:
It thinks us out of our world.
Each mind fabricates itself.
We sense its limits for we have made them.
And just when we would flee them, you come
and make of yourself an offering.
I don’t want to think a place for you.
Speak to me from everywhere.
Your Gospel can be comprehended
without looking for its source.
When I go toward you
it is with my whole life.
One of many demolished homes in Gaza.
October
26
2009
(For the next week or so, I will be running a guest blog by Gerri Haynes, a former president of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility. Gerri, a nurse from Kirkland, Wash., is in Gaza with 11 other people in an effort to help the people there and also to better understand the situation.)
The sun shines brightly – destruction from the attacks this past winter become more apparent. Bombed shells of buildings await repair – importing concrete is forbidden. Some single story buildings are being constructed of mud bricks readily available from the earth of this country. Injured bodies appear in clinics. Injured hearts and minds are universal – everyone has a close experience to the latest war on the people of Gaza.
The physicians in our group, Bill Dienst, Dave Hall, Laura Hart, Bob Haynes, Don Mellman and Bryan Saario are meeting with colleagues and seeing patients. Some surgeries have been completed and many cardiology patients have been served. Consultations by Dave Hall, psychiatrist, reveal the ongoing trauma of living in this pain-filled environment.
A group of mental health professionals participated in the first day of a two-day conference on grief and mourning – facilitated by me. Elliott Adams, Will Covert, Cherie Eichholz, Anne Hall and Jack Smith, members of our delegation designated as the human rights group, traveled the length of Gaza. Their observations of the effects of the four years of siege and repetitive attacks will be documented here in the next days.
Jack Smith wrote today: “I’ve seen the bombed-out buildings, the tunnels that are used to bring basic supplies – food, clothing, fuel, medicine – into Gaza from Egypt, saw where Rachel Corrie was murdered, talked with a farmer who could not ship his strawberries outside the border of Gaza, talked with people who, like the strawberries, could not leave Gaza, learned that structures cannot be rebuilt or replaced because building supplies are not allowed by Israel to enter Gaza. I saw the destroyed juice-processing plant, the industrial facility destroyed by white phosphorus, talked with workers who did not speak English (I don’t speak Arabic), but somehow connected. I am learning to love the Palestinian people – people who state they do not know why they are imprisoned and attacked. My goal for the coming days is to keep caring and to show it – to learn more and commit to sharing in the US what I learn here.”
Between 400 and 600 tunnels exist at the southern border between Gaza and Egypt. These tunnels are routinely targeted by Israel, but new tunnels are continuously dug – they are a lifeline for the people of Gaza. And they are dangerous. Tunnel collapses have taken an estimated 200 lives. Goods coming through the tunnel are taxed. A tunnel-digging industry now exists. Egyptians reportedly await those who enter Egypt, stamping entry visas on passports (for a fee). The tunnels are a physical statement about human need and desperation.
Human relationships are essential to survival. The Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the Islamic University of Gaza visits his mother every day. He finishes his work and, before continuing with his evening, stops to visit his octogenarian mother. She kisses his hands and feeds him whenever there is time or need – he is her child and they know love and security in these daily visits.
One of the tunnels linking Gaza and Egypt.
October
25
2009
(For the next week or so, I will be running a guest blog by Gerri Haynes, a former president of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility. Gerri, a nurse from Kirkland, Wash., is in Gaza with 11 other people in an effort to help the people there and also to better understand the situation.)
This journey has been months in the planning and today we were able to cross into Gaza through the Erez checkpoint from Israel. We are a thankful group! The Gaza Community Mental Health Programme and associated health care providers are giving us this week in service.
There are 12 of us. Six physicians will see patients in cardiology, maxillo-facial surgery, family practice/emergency medicine, neurosurgery, urology, and psychiatry. Our nurse/grief consultant will teach classes in grief and bereavement. Five of our delegation – a pastor, an attorney and three human rights professionals will talk with families and listen to people throughout the area – all in service to this land that is trying to recover from the war of last winter.
WPSR made a first journey to Gaza in 1993. Here, we met Dr. Eyad El Sarraj, Director of the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme. Dr. Sarraj has published important articles and papers on the health situation in Gaza, the mental health of the population, the effects of war and living as a refugee on children and critiques of the political situation in his country.
In 1993, entry to Gaza was accomplished through a small checkpoint. At that time, Israel physically occupied Gaza. There were Israeli guard towers visible at frequent intervals and Israeli soldiers appeared on every street. Now, there is an imposing warehouse-like checkpoint building on the Israel side of the crossing. Security is tight.
We applied for permission to enter Gaza several months in advance of today’s crossing and were assisted by an Israeli lieutenant in gaining that permission. Israel no longer physically occupies Gaza – the settlements were vacated and destroyed by Israel in 2005 – but remote occupation continues. By various means, Israel controls all movement at the borders of Gaza. There is no free movement of goods or services and complete closure of the Gaza Strip is a constant threat.
The cardiologist in our delegation worked with a fellow cardiologist from Gaza today. They examined a woman whose congenital heart defect was expertly repaired several months ago by a Palestinian surgeon. The woman was despondent. Healed vertical scars were present on her back. The Palestinian cardiologist explained that the wounds had been caused by shrapnel fragments during the attack in the winter war that killed the woman’s husband. “Some wounds heal,” the physician explained, “some never do.”
One hospital in Gaza has a lovely new wing. On the upper floors of this wing, there are operating rooms and intensive care beds. These areas are furnished but stand empty, ready to receive patients, but unable to accommodate the admission of those needing care here. The elevator that is essential for safe transport to this area has not been installed. For months, permission from external authorities has barred installation of the needed elevator. In the entire area of Gaza, there are 60 intensive care beds for a population of more than 1.5 million people. During the December/January attacks there was a daily need for 120 intensive care beds. At that time, heroic hospital staff moved wounded patients up to the intensive care facility on stretchers through steep stairways. Patient safety requires access to an elevator though, and so the wait – no one knows for how long – for permission to install the elevator.
On this first day in Gaza, we have seen the spirit and courage of the Palestinian people. The threat of more attacks, the lack of access to potable water and adequate food, the continuing grief over the death and destruction of life and environment, and the sense of living in an open-air prison are evident in every encounter. We are grateful to be here and look forward to learning from our hosts in the days ahead.
October
22
2009
On Monday, Nov. 2, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani woman who studied at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brandeis University, is scheduled to go on trial in New York for allegedly trying to kill FBI agents in Afghanistan.
Siddiqui, according to the official U.S. version of events, was arrested in Afghanistan on July 17, 2008, for “suspicious behavior.” On July 18, while still in custody, so that version goes, the 90-pound neuroscientist grabbed an unattended rifle and attempted to shoot the agents before she was wounded by gunfire.
Before news of her arrest in Afghanistan, no one, at least publicly, had heard of Siddiqui since she was disappeared by Pakistani intelligence forces in 2003 (She likely was picked up because U.S. intelligence agencies were saying she had terrorist links). A report in the Pakistani press said that Siddiqui and her kids, then 7, 5, and 6 months old, had been seen being detained by Pakistani authorities. Days later, a spokesman for Pakistan’s interior ministry and two unnamed U.S. officials confirmed that she was in custody and being interrogated. Several days later, however, Pakistani and American officials apparently changed their minds, saying it was unlikely she was being held.
Siddiqui’s mother, Ismet, has said that a few days after Siddiqui’s disappearance, a man on a motorcycle arrived at her house and told her Aafia was being held and that she should keep quiet if she ever wanted to see her daughter and grandchildren again.
The treatment and fate of Siddiqui’s children, who are all U.S. citizens, is one of many troubling aspects of this case. The oldest, 11-year-old Ahmed, who had been detained with his mother in Afghanistan, was recently released from Afghan custody into his aunt’s care. Siddiqui has said that her younger son died in custody; her 5-year-old daughter remains unaccounted for.
Interestingly enough, on July 7, 2008, only a few weeks before Siddiqui’s arrest, Yvonne Ridley, a British journalist and patron of Cage Prisoners, a human rights organization, had sparked an uproar by calling a press conference in Islamabad to demand that the United States hand over an unidentified female prisoner being held at the U.S.-run Bagram prison in Afghanistan.
Ridley said the woman, whom she called the “Gray Lady of Bagram,” had been held in solitary confinement for years. And while no one knew for sure the identity of that prisoner, Ridley said she thought it was Siddiqui. Several former U.S. captives have also reported that a female prisoner, known only as prisoner 650, was being held in Bagram. And according to news reports, the former captives said she had lost her sanity, and cried all the time.
Ridley had written previously about “Prisoner 650″ and her four-year ordeal of torture and repeated rapes, saying that her cries had prompted the male prisoners to go on a hunger strike. And, at the Islamabad press conference, Ridley said she called her a “Gray Lady” because she was almost a “ghost, a specter whose cries and screams continue to haunt those who heard her.”
Ridley is an award-winning journalist who was detained for 11 days by the Taliban in 2001 while on an assignment in Afghanistan. Months after her release she converted to Islam.
Siddiqui supporters plan a rally for the opening day of her trial in front of the U.S. District Court in New York City.
October
20
2009
The Philippines is frequently in the news these days, primarily because of two recent typhoons – Ketsana and Parma – which killed more than 850 people and displaced hundreds of thousands.
Today reports say Typhoon Lupit is expected to make landfall around the far northern tip of the main island of Luzon by Thursday and it may be even stronger than the earlier storms.
Natural calamities always seem to get a lot of coverage. Those created by people often don’t.
The Philippines has been dealing with two armed conflicts that have been a major drain on its economic and political life, not to mention the deaths and destruction these conflicts have brought to the people.
The first is a rebellion throughout the islands led by the New People’s Army, the military wing of the Philippines’ Communist Party. The NPA, formed in 1969, has undergone a lot of changes, politically and materially since then – reportedly shrinking from a maximum of 25,000 guerrillas to about 4,000 now – but it continues to fight for what it calls a more democratic form of government. The Philippine government has been intermittently (and sometimes half-heartedly) attempting to negotiate a peace treaty with the NPA for years.
The second conflict is with Muslim guerrillas, primarily in the southern islands of the Philippines. Muslims have been struggling for their independence for several centuries, dating back to the first colonization of the islands by Spain, which called them “Moros” after the Moors of Northern Africa. The name stuck.
The United States battled Filipino rebels, including Moros, during our colonization of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War of 1898. We didn’t give up control until July 4, 1946. And then it was in name only. The U.S. continues to play a major role there politically, militarily and economically.
Today, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front is continuing the struggle, although a small region in the south has attained autonomy – the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. For the moment a truce between the guerrillas and government troops is holding, but only a few months ago the two sides clashed in battles that killed hundreds.
Recently the MILF asked the United States for help in ending the conflict. Ghazali Jaafar, MILF vice-chairman for political affairs, said in a statement they are asking the U.S. government to help resolve the root cause of the Moro conflict, which, he claimed, began after the U.S. government – during the colonial years – failed to recognize the Moro people’s aspirations for self-rule.
I met Ghazali Jaafar in the jungles of Mindanao in 1979, describing him as an “affable and eloquent politician” for a story I wrote on the Moros and the NPA for Mother Jones. It never occurred to me that he would still be at it 30 years later or that both conflicts would still be unresolved.
Maybe the Philippines would be a great place for President Obama to start living up to his Nobel Peace Prize.
October
19
2009
Responses to President Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize are still coming in from friends and colleagues in other countries. Just a little more food for thought:
From Shahid Shah, a journalist in Pakistan, “I think it is too early to give him the Nobel Prize. We will see the results of his policies in coming years…”
From Ghanashyam Ojha, a journalist in Nepal, “I think the prize for peace contradicts the situation the U.S. is facing in Afghanistan. However, it could help Obama bring peace in the Mideast as the situation, seemingly, has improved since he entered the White House…”
From Maha Al-Azar, a former journalist and now media relations officer at the American University of Beirut, “It’s definitely premature to give Obama a peace prize even though his intentions may be good. Just as we should not penalize people for violent intentions but actions, the same should apply for peaceful intentions. Plus, I read somewhere that he was nominated two weeks after assuming office, since that was the deadline this year. In that case, it’s quite ludicrous, and it undermines the Nobel Prize committee. By extension, all those deserving people who have won the NP are also being harmed by such a seemingly political nomination, as people will likely start questioning the credibility of all Nobel prizes and will start wondering if the whole institution is politicized – allegations that some/many already maintain.”
October
16
2009
These are hard times for journalists in the United States. Newspapers are losing money and trimming staff. Some papers have gone out of business – the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, for example, where I worked as the National/Foreign editor. Across the country, roughly 20,000 journalists have lost their jobs since the beginning of 2008. Few of my 160 or so colleagues at the P-I have found work at all, not to mention work as journalists.
Sometimes, just to keep things in perspective, I look at what’s happening with journalists in other countries, where losing their jobs isn’t the biggest worry.
Here’s part of just one week’s report, from the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, of what journalists face overseas:
In Vietnam, nine Vietnamese bloggers and writers were charged with anti-government propaganda and sentenced to severe prison terms. The bloggers were convicted of demanding greater “political pluralism, democracy and respect for human rights.”
In Yemen, a demonstration in the capital Sana’a – organized by the NGO Women Journalists without Chains – which called for freedom of expression, was broken up by police who injured several of the demonstrators and destroyed several video cameras.
In Nepal, the government intends to use journalists as informants as part of a security plan, a decision that would undermine the role of independent media and increase attacks on journalists.
In Kuwait, a journalist known for his reporting and activism on corruption was attacked and beaten by an unknown assailant while the journalist was at a conference on transparency.
In Israel, Israeli security forces disguised themselves as photojournalists in the midst of a Palestinian demonstration and later arrested protesters.
OK, I know this is little consolation to any journalist in this country who is out of work, with little prospect of a job on the horizon. Still, it helps me to know, as I fill out my unemployment claims for the seventh month in a row, that I can blog about any damned thing I want, and no one is going to come after me for it.
October
14
2009
I had just settled down to breakfast in front of the computer this morning when I got an emailed press release from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) with the latest global hunger index. Like any normal person I skipped right past it.
But it’s been a while since I’ve seen anything on global hunger, so, after washing down my bagel with cold, black coffee, I read the email.
As expected, it had good and bad news. The good news is that hunger rates worldwide have shrunk since1990; the bad news is that they have shrunk less than 25 percent despite the greater focus on world hunger by various international organizations as well as the affected nations.
The 2009 Global Hunger Index, for the first time, also shows that high rates of hunger are strongly linked to gender inequalities, especially in terms of literacy and access to education.
The situation is especially serious in Chad, which ranks fifth worst on the Global Hunger Index, second worst in terms of gender inequality, and has a female literacy rate of only 13 percent, compared to 41 percent for men. The report said that IFPRI research shows that equalizing men’s and women’s status would reduce the number of malnourished children by 13.4 million in South Asia and by 1.7 million in Sub-Saharan Africa.
The press statement quoted Agnes Quisumbing, report co-author and IFPRI senior research fellow: “Women’s educational level and status or power relative to men’s in households and communities significantly affect children’s nutrition. In South Asia (especially), women’s low social status and limited access to schooling have dire consequences for the nutrition, health, and wellbeing of both mothers and their children.”
IFPRI Director General Joachim von Braun said, “Knowing that hunger and gender inequality go hand-in-hand, an important step to ending world hunger is empowering women and eradicating gender disparities in education, health, economic participation, and political opportunities.
“After decades of slow progress in the fight against hunger, child malnourishment is now on the rise due to recent economic developments. It is imperative that commitments made at the G20 and other global policy meetings are swiftly transformed into real action in cooperation with developing countries.”
Overall, the report found that 29 countries around the world have “alarming or extremely alarming” levels of hunger, and thirteen countries have actually seen increases in their hunger levels since 1990. The Democratic Republic of Congo scored the worst, followed by Burundi, Eritrea, Sierra Leone, Chad, and Ethiopia.
The situation is also bad in South Asia largely because of widespread child malnutrition. In Bangladesh and India, more than 40 percent of children are underweight. An important exception in the region is Sri Lanka, which has been committed to universal education and reproductive health care, and has been successful at reducing hunger.
Even though there is severe hunger in Afghanistan and Iraq, there wasn’t enough data available to be included in this report.
Most of the progress in the battle against hunger has been made in Southeast Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean.
The Global Hunger Index is being released in advance of World Food Day (October 16) for the fourth year by IFPRI, Welthungerhilfe, and Concern Worldwide. The Index ranks countries on three leading indicators—prevalence of child malnutrition, rates of child mortality, and the proportion of people who are calorie deficient—and combines them into one score.
The IFPRI is one of 15 centers supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, an alliance of 64 governments, private foundations, and international and regional organizations.
October
13
2009
Congress is debating a slew of health care measures that might or might not provide relief to some 75 million people in the United States that are believed to lack adequate health insurance or are uninsured altogether.
Might be a good time to see how we stand compared to the rest of the world.
We have the most expensive health care system in the world based on expenditures per capita (per person) and in total expenditures as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). Yet we rank No. 37 among the nations of the world in the quality of health care.
In addition, we are the only country among developed nations, except for South Africa, that doesn’t provide health care for all its citizens. And, the U.S. ranks last among developed countries in limiting preventable deaths, just below the superpower nations of Ireland and Portugal.
While we’re making comparisons, we should note that the United States, while ranking eighth in gross domestic product per capita, also has the highest inequality and poverty rate in the world, outside of two other dynamos of progress, Mexico and Turkey.
So any bill on health care that would be worth passing has to be affordable. It has to provide health care coverage for everyone. And to do that it will probably require a public option, a government insurance that would force other insurers to be competitive.
That would move the United States up in world rankings and it would be a healthy move for us all.
October
9
2009
So have you heard the joke about the president of the United States winning the Nobel Prize for peace while simultaneously fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and conducting counter-terror operations in the Philippines, Africa and Colombia?
Oh, wait. That’s no joke. That happened today. And many observers around the world, not to mention leading lights of the Republican Party and some liberals, were not amused or very happy about it.
I emailed Mairead Maguire, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in l976 with fellow Northern Ireland peace-campaigner Betty Williams, to get her reaction.
Maguire said this: “I am very disappointed to hear that the Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama. They say this is for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples, and yet he continues the policy of militarism and occupation of Afghanistan, instead of dialogue and negotiations with all parties to the conflict. …
“Furthermore, I believe the Nobel Committee has not met the conditions of Alfred Nobel’s will where he stipulates it is to be awarded to those who work for an end to militarism and war, and for disarmament. This is not the first time the Nobel Peace Committee in Oslo has ignored the will of Alfred Nobel and acted against the spirit of what the Nobel Peace Prize is all about.
“Giving this award to the leader of the most militarized country in the world, which has taken the human family against its will to war, will be rightly seen by many people around the world as a reward for his country’s aggression and domination.”
The Associated Press reported that U.S. Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele contended that Obama won the prize as a result of his “star power” rather than meaningful accomplishments.
“The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?’” Steele said.
And today on the Daily Beast, liberal Peter Beinart, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, writes this:
“I like Barack Obama as much as the next liberal, but this is a farce. He’s done nothing to deserve the prize. Sure, he’s given some lovely speeches and launched some initiatives – on Iran, Israeli-Palestinian peace, climate change and nuclear disarmament – that might, if he’s really lucky and really good, make the world a more safe, more just, more peaceful world. But there’s absolutely no way to know if he’ll succeed, and by giving him the Nobel Prize as a kind of “atta boy,” the Nobel Committee is actually just highlighting the gap that conservatives have long highlighted: between Obamamania as global hype and Obama’s actual accomplishments.”
But, while I was as surprised as the next person that Obama got the peace prize without actually bringing peace anywhere, the Nobel committee, in awarding the prize, made clear that this is an effort to encourage peace in the many places where Obama has said he will strive for peace.
And already, just by agreeing to talk with enemies of the United States and by such gestures as his June 4 speech in Cairo pledging “to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims,” Obama has entirely changed the view of this country. We are, once again, according to a recent poll, regarded as the most popular nation in the world, with high marks from Muslim countries as well.
A statement issued today from Michael Ignatieff , the leader of Canada’s opposition Liberal Party probably says it best:
“The awarding of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama recognizes the tremendous promise of his efforts to bring peace and hope to troubled areas in the world.
“President Obama has set an ambitious agenda to achieve a more peaceful Middle East, end terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and curb nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea. He has sought to reduce the destabilizing effects of climate change and extreme poverty in Africa, and has reached out to the Muslim world.
“By seeking to strengthen international diplomacy and advance co-operation between people early in his mandate, President Obama has given momentum to the efforts of people and countries throughout the world who seek to achieve peace, reconciliation and nuclear disarmament. I hope that the vote of support given to President Obama by the Nobel committee through the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize adds to this momentum.
“On behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and our Parliamentary caucus, I offer my sincere congratulations to President Obama for this momentous achievement.”
Here, here! Hail to the Chief! Now go out there and get us some peace, Mr. President.