Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Environment’ Category

This is really too good for me to pick excerpts out of. It really expresses so much of what I believe is wrong with the world and to cut it up would diminish it. While focusing mainly on India, Arundhati Roy, author of the God of Small Things (a book I think is overrated since I disapprove of the petered-out ending), and other books manages to strike the heart of the system: that the word democracy has been usurped to mean something entirely different than it should/did. Read it yourselves:

While we’re still arguing about whether there’s life after death, can we add another question to the cart? Is there life after democracy? What sort of life will it be? By “democracy” I don’t mean democracy as an ideal or an aspiration. I mean the working model: Western liberal democracy, and its variants, such as they are.

So, is there life after democracy?Attempts to answer this question often turn into a comparison of different systems of governance, and end with a somewhat prickly, combative defense of democracy. It’s flawed, we say. It isn’t perfect, but it’s better than everything else that’s on offer. Inevitably, someone in the room will say: “Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia… is that what you would prefer?”

Whether democracy should be the utopia that all “developing” societies aspire to is a separate question altogether. (I think it should. The early, idealistic phase can be quite heady.) The question about life after democracy is addressed to those of us who already live in democracies, or in countries that pretend to be democracies. It isn’t meant to suggest that we lapse into older, discredited models of totalitarian or authoritarian governance. It’s meant to suggest that the system of representative democracy–too much representation, too little democracy–needs some structural adjustment.

The question here, really, is what have we done to democracy? What have we turned it into? What happens once democracy has been used up? When it has been hollowed out and emptied of meaning? What happens when each of its institutions has metastasized into something dangerous? What happens now that democracy and the free market have fused into a single predatory organism with a thin, constricted imagination that revolves almost entirely around the idea of maximizing profit?

Is it possible to reverse this process? Can something that has mutated go back to being what it used to be? What we need today, for the sake of the survival of this planet, is long-term vision. Can governments whose very survival depends on immediate, extractive, short-term gain provide this? Could it be that democracy, the sacred answer to our short-term hopes and prayers, the protector of our individual freedoms and nurturer of our avaricious dreams, will turn out to be the endgame for the human race? Could it be that democracy is such a hit with modern humans precisely because it mirrors our greatest folly–our nearsightedness?

Our inability to live entirely in the present (like most animals do), combined with our inability to see very far into the future, makes us strange in-between creatures, neither beast nor prophet. Our amazing intelligence seems to have outstripped our instinct for survival. We plunder the earth hoping that accumulating material surplus will make up for the profound, unfathomable thing that we have lost. It would be conceit to pretend I have the answers to any of these questions. But it does look as if the beacon could be failing and democracy can perhaps no longer be relied upon to deliver the justice and stability we once dreamed it would.

A Clerk of Resistance

As a writer, a fiction writer, I have often wondered whether the attempt to always be precise, to try and get it all factually right somehow reduces the epic scale of what is really going on. Does it eventually mask a larger truth? I worry that I am allowing myself to be railroaded into offering prosaic, factual precision when maybe what we need is a feral howl, or the transformative power and real precision of poetry.

Something about the cunning, Brahmanical, intricate, bureaucratic, file-bound, “apply-through-proper-channels” nature of governance and subjugation in India seems to have made a clerk out of me. My only excuse is to say that it takes odd tools to uncover the maze of subterfuge and hypocrisy that cloaks the callousness and the cold, calculated violence of the world’s favorite new superpower. Repression “through proper channels” sometimes engenders resistance “through proper channels.” As resistance goes, this isn’t enough, I know. But for now, it’s all I have. Perhaps someday it will become the underpinning for poetry and for the feral howl.

Today, words like “progress” and “development” have become interchangeable with economic “reforms,” “deregulation” and “privatization.” “Freedom” has come to mean “choice.” It has less to do with the human spirit than with different brands of deodorant. “Market” no longer means a place where you buy provisions. The market is a deterritorialized space where faceless corporations do business, including buying and selling “futures.” “Justice” has come to mean “human rights” (and of those, as they say, “a few will do”).

This theft of language, this technique of usurping words and deploying them like weapons, of using them to mask intent and to mean exactly the opposite of what they have traditionally meant, has been one of the most brilliant strategic victories of the tsars of the new dispensation. It has allowed them to marginalize their detractors, deprive them of a language to voice their critique and dismiss them as being “anti-progress,” “anti-development,” “anti-reform” and of course “anti-national”–negativists of the worst sort.

Talk about saving a river or protecting a forest and they say, “Don’t you believe in progress?” To people whose land is being submerged by dam reservoirs, and whose homes are being bulldozed, they say, “Do you have an alternative development model?” To those who believe that a government is duty bound to provide people with basic education, healthcare and social security, they say, “You’re against the market.” And who except a cretin could be against markets?

To reclaim these stolen words requires explanations that are too tedious for a world with a short attention span, and too expensive in an era when “free speech” has become unaffordable for the poor. This language heist may prove to be the keystone of our undoing.

Two decades of “progress” in India has created a vast middle class punch-drunk on sudden wealth and the sudden respect that comes with it–and a much, much vaster, desperate underclass. Tens of millions of people have been dispossessed and displaced from their land by floods, droughts and desertification caused by indiscriminate environmental engineering and massive infrastructural projects, dams, mines and Special Economic Zones. All developed in the name of the poor, but really meant to service the rising demands of the new aristocracy.

The hoary institutions of Indian democracy–the judiciary, the police, the “free” press and, of course, elections–far from working as a system of checks and balances, quite often do the opposite. They provide each other cover to promote the larger interests of Union and Progress. In the process, they generate such confusion, such a cacophony, that voices raised in warning just become part of the noise. And that only helps to enhance the image of the tolerant, lumbering, colorful, somewhat chaotic democracy. The chaos is real. But so is the consensus.

A New Cold War in Kashmir

Speaking of consensus, there’s the small and ever-present matter of Kashmir. When it comes to Kashmir, the consensus in India is hard core. It cuts across every section of the establishment–including the media, the bureaucracy, the intelligentsia and even Bollywood.

The war in the Kashmir valley is almost twenty years old now, and has claimed about 70,000 lives. Tens of thousands have been tortured, several thousand have “disappeared,” women have been raped, tens of thousands widowed. Half a million Indian troops patrol the Kashmir valley, making it the most militarized zone in the world. (The United States had about 165,000 active-duty troops in Iraq at the height of its occupation.) The Indian Army now claims that it has, for the most part, crushed militancy in Kashmir. Perhaps that’s true. But does military domination mean victory?

How does a government that claims to be a democracy justify a military occupation? By holding regular elections, of course. Elections in Kashmir have had a long and fascinating past. The blatantly rigged state election of 1987 was the immediate provocation for the armed uprising that began in 1990. Since then elections have become a finely honed instrument of the military occupation, a sinister playground for India’s deep state. Intelligence agencies have created political parties and decoy politicians; they have constructed and destroyed political careers at will. It is they more than anyone else who decide what the outcome of each election will be. After every election, the Indian establishment declares that India has won a popular mandate from the people of Kashmir.

In the summer of 2008, a dispute over land being allotted to the Amarnath Shrine Board coalesced into a massive, nonviolent uprising. Day after day, hundreds of thousands of people defied soldiers and policemen–who fired straight into the crowds, killing scores of people–and thronged the streets. From early morning to late in the night, the city reverberated to chants of “Azadi! Azadi!” (Freedom! Freedom!). Fruit sellers weighed fruit chanting “Azadi! Azadi!” Shopkeepers, doctors, houseboat owners, guides, weavers, carpet-sellers–everybody was out with placards, everybody shouted “Azadi! Azadi!” The protests went on for several days.

The protests were massive. They were democratic, and they were nonviolent. For the first time in decades, fissures appeared in mainstream public opinion in India. The Indian state panicked. Unsure of how to deal with this mass civil disobedience, it ordered a crackdown. It enforced the harshest curfew in recent memory, with shoot-on-sight orders. In effect, for days on end, it virtually caged millions of people. The major pro-freedom leaders were placed under house arrest, several others were jailed. House-to-house searches culminated in the arrests of hundreds of people.

Once the rebellion was brought under control, the government did something extraordinary–it announced elections in the state. Pro-independence leaders called for a boycott. They were rearrested. Almost everybody believed the elections would become a huge embarrassment for the Indian government. The security establishment was convulsed with paranoia. Its elaborate network of spies, renegades and embedded journalists began to buzz with renewed energy. No chances were taken. (Even I, who had nothing to do with any of what was going on, was put under house arrest in Srinagar for two days.)

Calling for elections was a huge risk. But the gamble paid off. People turned out to vote in droves. It was the biggest voter turnout since the armed struggle began. It helped that the polls were scheduled so that the first districts to vote were the most militarized districts even within the Kashmir valley.

None of India’s analysts, journalists and psephologists cared to ask why people who had only weeks ago risked everything, including bullets and shoot-on-sight orders, should have suddenly changed their minds. None of the high-profile scholars of the great festival of democracy–who practically live in TV studios when there are elections in mainland India, picking apart every forecast and exit poll and every minor percentile swing in the vote count–talked about what elections mean in the presence of such a massive, year-round troop deployment (an armed soldier for every twenty civilians).

No one speculated about the mystery of hundreds of unknown candidates who materialized out of nowhere to represent political parties that had no previous presence in the Kashmir valley. Where had they come from? Who was financing them? No one was curious. No one spoke about the curfew, the mass arrests, the lockdown of constituencies that were going to the polls.

Not many talked about the fact that campaigning politicians went out of their way to de-link Azadi and the Kashmir dispute from elections, which they insisted were only about municipal issues–roads, water, electricity. No one talked about why people who have lived under a military occupation for decades–where soldiers could barge into homes and whisk away people at any time of the day or night–might need someone to listen to them, to take up their cases, to represent them.

The minute elections were over, the establishment and the mainstream press declared victory (for India) once again. The most worrying fallout was that in Kashmir, people began to parrot their colonizers’ view of themselves as a somewhat pathetic people who deserved what they got. “Never trust a Kashmiri,” several Kashmiris said to me. “We’re fickle and unreliable.” Psychological warfare, technically known as psy-ops, has been an instrument of official policy in Kashmir. Its depredations over decades–its attempt to destroy people’s self-esteem–are arguably the worst aspect of the occupation. It’s enough to make you wonder whether there is any connection at all between elections and democracy.

The trouble is that Kashmir sits on the fault lines of a region that is awash in weapons and sliding into chaos. The Kashmiri freedom struggle, with its crystal-clear sentiment but fuzzy outlines, is caught in the vortex of several dangerous and conflicting ideologies–Indian nationalism (corporate as well as “Hindu,” shading into imperialism), Pakistani nationalism (breaking down under the burden of its own contradictions), US imperialism (made impatient by a tanking economy) and a resurgent medieval-Islamist Taliban (fast gaining legitimacy, despite its insane brutality, because it is seen to be resisting an occupation). Each of these ideologies is capable of a ruthlessness that can range from genocide to nuclear war. Add Chinese imperial ambitions, an aggressive, reincarnated Russia, and the huge reserves of natural gas in the Caspian region and persistent whispers about natural gas, oil and uranium reserves in Kashmir and Ladakh, and you have the recipe for a new cold war (which, like the last one, is cold for some and hot for others).

In the midst of all this, Kashmir is set to become the conduit through which the mayhem unfolding in Afghanistan and Pakistan spills into India, where it will find purchase in the anger of the young among India’s 150 million Muslims who have been brutalized, humiliated and marginalized. Notice has been given by the series of terrorist strikes that culminated in the Mumbai attacks of 2008.

There is no doubt that the Kashmir dispute ranks right up there, along with Palestine, as one of the oldest, most intractable disputes in the world. That does not mean that it cannot be resolved. Only that the solution will not be completely to the satisfaction of any one party, one country, or one ideology. Negotiators will have to be prepared to deviate from the “party line.”

Of course, we haven’t yet reached the stage where the government of India is even prepared to admit that there’s a problem, let alone negotiate a solution. Right now it has no reason to. Internationally, its stocks are soaring. And while its neighbors deal with bloodshed, civil war, concentration camps, refugees and army mutinies, India has just concluded a beautiful election. However, “demon-crazy” can’t fool all the people all the time. India’s temporary, shotgun solutions to the unrest in Kashmir (pardon the pun), have magnified the problem and driven it deep into a place where it is poisoning the aquifers.

Is Democracy Melting?

Perhaps the story of the Siachen Glacier, the highest battlefield in the world, is the most appropriate metaphor for the insanity of our times. Thousands of Indian and Pakistani soldiers have been deployed there, enduring chill winds and temperatures that dip to minus 40 degrees Celsius. Of the hundreds who have died there, many have died just from the elements.

The glacier has become a garbage dump now, littered with the detritus of war–thousands of empty artillery shells, empty fuel drums, ice axes, old boots, tents and every other kind of waste that thousands of warring human beings generate. The garbage remains intact, perfectly preserved at those icy temperatures, a pristine monument to human folly.

While the Indian and Pakistani governments spend billions of dollars on weapons and the logistics of high-altitude warfare, the battlefield has begun to melt. Right now, it has shrunk to about half its size. The melting has less to do with the military standoff than with people far away, on the other side of the world, living the good life. They’re good people who believe in peace, free speech and human rights. They live in thriving democracies whose governments sit on the UN Security Council and whose economies depend heavily on the export of war and the sale of weapons to countries like India and Pakistan. (And Rwanda, Sudan, Somalia, the Republic of Congo, Iraq, Afghanistan… it’s a long list.)

The glacial melt will cause severe floods on the subcontinent, and eventually severe drought that will affect the lives of millions of people. That will give us even more reasons to fight. We’ll need more weapons. Who knows? That sort of consumer confidence may be just what the world needs to get over the current recession. Then everyone in the thriving democracies will have an even better life–and the glaciers will melt even faster.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Strong Objection to the Nuweiba Power Plant Project in South Sinai planned by the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company and to be financed by the European Investment Bank and the African Development Bank.

We kindly ask for to join us in combating a serious situation that is arising in Nuweiba!

We, and other investors, residents and workers in Nuweiba, have, over the past couple of days, just learned of the plans of the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company to build a very large power plant, (750Mw gas powered turbines on a site of 105000 square metres – towering over 82 metres in height), in the middle of Nuweiba City, South Sinai, Egypt.

Financing is reportedly to be forthcoming from the European Investment Bank and the African Development Bank, (even though procedures of the banks and of the European Union for the granting of such financing have not been properly adhered to).

Furthermore, we were dismayed and shocked to hear that, allegedly, this project has been approved by the Egyptian Environment Affairs Agency. However, we now learn that apparently this is not the case.

If such a plant proceeds, it will have a disastrous effect on the local tourism industry, on the local Bedouin population and, above all, on the local environment.

Nuweiba is one of the most picturesque parts of the whole southern Sinai Peninsula, has an excellent and unique tourism potential, is home to two major Sinai Bedouin tribes, and has an almost unique, relatively undisturbed underwater marine life.

Apart from the obvious enormous detrimental effects such a project will have on the local environment and population during the construction period, once operational, the plant will have a negative impact on the quality of air, will reduce the level of sunlight, increase noise pollution and, above all, will damage seriously and irreparably the marine life and coral reefs that lie all along the east coast of Nuweiba adjacent to where the plant is planned to be built. The increase in water temperature will damage the aquatic life in Nuweiba in a number of ways, most prominently by causing a rapid reduction in the number of different fish species found here, causing the death of some and by forcing others to move to distant stretches of reef, but also by inducing coral bleaching and rapidly increasing the amount of algae in the water. This effect will initially be localised to the reefs in the immediate vicinity of the plant, but will, over time, extend to destroy more and more of the reefs in Nuweiba and further afield.

Such a large power plant will also cause the eventual demise of the local tourist industry and subsequently force the closure of the hotels, dive centres and other tourist service providers in the area, resulting in the loss of jobs for the many workers within the tourism industry and the loss of livelihood for the various local businesses that supply products and services to the tourism industry in Nuweiba. Tourism is a major source of income for the local Bedouin tribes so the effects on the loss of this industry are simply unimaginable.

We kindly and respectfully ask your assistance in putting pressure on the Ministry of Electricity and Energy, the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company, the South Sinai Governorate, the European Investment Bank, the African Development Bank and the Egyptian Environment Affairs Agency immediately to withhold approvals for this project pending full investigations, in co-ordination with internationally recognised environmental protection agencies, as well as to hold full disclosure meetings and consultation with local residents, businesses and NGOs as this has apparently not be done. The proposers of this project did place an advertisement in Al Ahram Newspaper, (a single, 1/8th page, insertion on the 8th April 2009 with very brief details on the project and with the instructions that any interested parties should visit certain offices either in Cairo, 470 km away, or Ismaileya, 400 km distant, or attend a meeting on the 15th April 2009 in Sharm el Sheikh, 160 km), but made no other serious attempts to advise, consult or inform the local community.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/stop-the-destruction-of-nuweiba-and-its-coral-reefs



Read Full Post »

I figured this warranted its own post since it’s about the shift to the desert suburbs leaving the slums behind in old Cairo:

I like the sound and images, but i find the commentary to be mediocre. I think there’s much more to be said about this issue.

Read Full Post »

Nonsense climate change denier

I dont have much time, but couldnt hold this back.

Climate change skeptics are a dime a dozen. Although they are indeed very wrong, it is their opinion and they’re entitled to it.

But talking nonsense is something completely different. Robert Skidelsky, apparently House of Lords member, tries to equate Al Gore with the likes of y2k alarmists (i’m sorry if you got swept up in that, but i didnt – it’s a computer, you can reprogram it) and evangelical crazies.

Let’s look at what he says. He opens with:

It was only to be expected that former US Vice President Al Gore would give this month’s Burmese cyclone an apocalyptic twist. “Last year,” he said, “a catastrophic storm hit Bangladesh. The year before, the strongest cyclone in more than 50 years hit China. …We’re seeing the consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continual global warming.”

Surprisingly, Gore did not include the Asian tsunami of 2004, which claimed 225,000 lives. His not-so-subliminal message was that these natural catastrophes foreshadow the end of the world.

Hmm, Sherlock, maybe the exclusion has something to do with the fact that, while cyclones, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts are climatic phenomena, a tsunami is the result of the earth’s plates shifting – like an earthquake! So, Al Gore, who’s been giving his presentation for decades and muct have developed some understanding of the science, probably realizes this.

It’s sad when your first smart-ass point is a blatantly ignorant one. Moving on:

Classical apocalyptic thinking is certainly alive and well, especially in America, where it feeds on Protestant fundamentalism, and is mass marketed with all the resources of modern media. Circles close to the Bush administration, it is rumored, take current distempers like terrorism as confirmation of biblical prophecies.

Nothing groundbreaking here.

In secularized, pseudo-scientific form, apocalyptic thinking has also been at the core of revolutionary politics. In his latest book, “Black Mass,” the philosopher John Gray discusses how political doctrines like Marxism colonized the apocalyptic vision in prophesying the destruction of capitalism as the prelude to the socialist utopia. But political messianism was an offshoot of 19th-century optimism. With the collapse of optimism, contemporary apocalyptic belief lays more stress on catastrophe and less on utopia.

Interesting point. Hadnt thought of Marx that way. But i am inclined to think this a bit of a grasping-at-straws-to-make-my-point stretch. Maybe not so much the y2k anaolgy:

For example, in his book “Flat Earth News,” the investigative journalist Nick Davies reminds us of the millennium bug panic. Newspapers everywhere carried stories predicting that computer systems would crash on January 1, 2000, causing much of the world to shut down. The subtext was familiar: those who live by technology will die by it.

This, however, is rid-dicule-ous:

Misreporting of science is now so routine that we hardly notice it. Much more serious is when science itself becomes infected by the apocalyptic spirit. Faith-based science seems a contradiction in terms, because the scientific worldview emerged as a challenge to religious superstition. But important scientific beliefs can now be said to be held religiously, rather than scientifically.

Thank you for enlightening us, Mr Science. Wait, what is your degree in again? History? Oh.

Does snorting work in English? or is that an Egyptian thing? But back to the issue at hand:

This brings us back to Al Gore and climate change. There is no doubt that the earth became warmer over the 20th century (by about 0.7 degrees Celsius), which most climate scientists attribute largely to human carbon dioxide emissions. If nothing is done to restrict such emissions, global temperature will rise 1.8-4 degrees over the next century. At some “tipping point,” the world will be subject to floods and pestilence in classic apocalyptic fashion.

This is the second doomsday scenario of recent decades, the first being the Club of Rome’s prediction in 1972 that the world would soon run out of natural resources. Both are “scientific,” but their structure is the same as that of the Biblical story of the Flood: human wickedness (in today’s case, unbridled materialism) triggers the disastrous sequence, which it may already be too late to avert. Like Biblical prophecy, scientific doomsday stories seem impervious to refutation, and are constantly repackaged to feed the hunger for catastrophe.

I’m running out of time, so i’ll stop with this: What friggin planet are you living on? Does this person not know about $120+ oil? about food shortages? about rice export curbs? about rioting in numerous countries, including Egypt? How have the Club of Rome’s assertions been proven to be untrue?

I suppose if you’re a member of the House of Lords you probably dont drive your own car, let alone fill the tank, nor buy your own groceries for that matter. But as a politician and a professor political economy, shouldnt you be following the news?

Read Full Post »

The UN’s Human Development Report for this year is out and it focuses on, surprise surprise, climate change. Havent read it yet. But here’s the press release.

Read Full Post »

Cairo Desert Sprawl

Here‘s more (see previous posts) in FT on Cairo’s mushrooming into the desert. It looks at how both rich and poor have had to accommodate themselves in recent times.

I, however, disagree with this:

The development of exclusive estates represents a new phenomenon for the ancient city, as the rich and powerful seek seclusion in communities laid out and run by the private sector. It is also a reflection of the increased wealth enjoyed by the elite as the economy continues on the path of robust growth. [emphasis added]

There is, actually, absolutely nothing new about this. It was the case thousands of years ago and has been ever since. In more modern times think Heliopolis and Maadi.

In Cairo, it has meant that both rich and poor often have to rely on their own resources to build not just their homes but their own districts. Top earners opt frequently for the private gated enclaves, while the poor live in illegally built suburbs reclaimed from the surrounding countryside.

The city is now ringed by vast areas of informal housing. These are overcrowded forests of unrendered blocks crammed so close together that their balconies almost touch above streets that are too narrow for cars to pass. [emphasis added]

My uncle, the albeit well-educated and traveled se3eedy (upper egyptian), on a recent visit to my father in Saudia and dazzled by the order and opulence exclaimed, “El Masreyeen dol fikrohom fikr 7awary” (Egyptians have an alley(i prefer, wynd) mentality).

Experts estimate that well over half of Cairo’s 16m people live in unplanned districts that have sprouted in breach of laws banning construction on farm land.

Hmm. And the conclusion:

But as the government struggles to bring order into the chaos, crises that are the direct result of poor planning continue to grow. In Cairo, those who paid heavily for their luxurious homes have been finding, in common with poorer residents, that the city’s infrastructure is unable to cope with expansion. Rich and poor alike were subject to water cuts last summer in soaring temperatures that left some communities with little or no water for days at a time.

Read Full Post »

According to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler, biofuels are a crime against humanity. In a recently submitted report to the UN, he cites the use of food crops for conversion into biofuels as directly responsible for the world price increases. This comes in a year of unusually notable rises in food prices across the globe (mexican tortilla’s double in a year and maize up 70% in 6 months by Feb 2007). Accurate statistics notwithstanding, it’s quite evident in Egypt.

Experts have been for some time now warning of the negative effect of converting food agricultural products into biofuels on world food prices. Because the processes by definition require high-energy inputs to produce another substance to be used for energy, it’s staple products (starches and oils) that are most useful. In the US, federal subsidies (driven by greenhouse and energy dependence concerns) for biofuel production help drive farmers to sell over a fifth (in Jul 2006) and rising of US maize crops to refiners. Unilever, over a year ago, was warning Europe that food prices would soar as a result of shortages in palm and rapeseed oil, that did (20 to 30%) and could continue to result from setting road transport fuel targets.

Ziegler, similar to Unilver’s earlier position, urged for a 5-year moratorium on using such fuels until technology makes it possible to use agricultural waste (husks, cobs, wood shavings) or plants that grow in terrain unsuitable for food products.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »