Humanitarian

by David Baake

2005/5/14

The Sorrows of Globalization: Capitalism and Slavery

@ 01:16 PM (54 months, 17 days ago)

A major investigation by the International Labor Organization has found that 12.3 million people live in a condition of ‘modern slavery’ worldwide, on all continents and in nearly every country.  Three out of four forced laborers are enslaved by private agents, with 11% forced into prostitution or another form of commercial sexual activity and 64% working as bonded laborers in traditional sectors of the economy, including the industrial and agricultural sectors.  Twenty percent of the cases studied in the examination involved direct exploitation by state or military, including forced prison labor.  Slavery is an extremely lucrative industry, generating 31.6 billion dollars in profit every year, comparable to El Salvador’s Gross Domestic Product and an approximately $13,000 per forced laborer annually.

The distinction between traditional slavery and wage slavery proves to be difficult to articulate.  The ILO officially defines slavery as “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.”  According to this definition, sweat-shop labor should qualify as a form of slavery, as it constitutes the extraction of labor under the threat of a penalty, starvation; which no person endures by his or her own choice.  It seems clear that a person working for Wal-Mart in a Chinese sweatshop making between 13 and 23 cents an hour and forced to work 60 to 70 hours a week or be fired and face starvation should be classified as a slave; however, the ILO does not consider sweatshop labor to be a form of slavery, on the precarious grounds that forced labor encompasses only coercion that is a “severe violation of human rights and restriction of human freedom,” violations which apparently do not occur in “situations of pure economic necessity” that would force one to work in a sweatshop. 

Whether or not direct capitalist exploitation meets the definition of slavery, however, the ILO report shows clearly that forced labor exists primarily because of conditions imposed by a system of capitalist globalization. The report explains that “many victims enter forced labor situations initially of their own accord,” undoubtedly consenting to horrific conditions out of sheer desperation for any sort of income, which cannot be earned in other sectors of the economy due to the crippling of any attempt at economic development in third world countries by multinational corporations and their financial institutions.  Because social welfare apparatuses have been dismantled as a prerequisite for economic loans from the World Bank, for instance, people in abject poverty have no choice but to enter into forced labor situations to pay for life necessities such as health care and education or simply to receive food.

Neoliberal policies which allow first world corporations to flood third world economies with cheap, subsidized products such as food that drive local producers out of work are another reason for the desperate poverty in the third world.  Because of the ‘race to the bottom’ brought about by the transition to neoliberalism in the world economy which allows corporations to move effortlessly from one country to another in search of lower and lower wages, forcing third world countries to lift laws offering any protection to labor or the environment in an attempt to entice employers, wages in many countries do not meet subsistence levels for the laborer.

This extreme poverty also leads destitute parents who are unable to feed their own children to sell them to rich masters force them to work as servants and often sexually exploit them.  The sale of children is most prevalent in Haiti, where 200,000 children work as restavecs, or domestic laborers. Destitution is often even greater in countries such as Haiti that have, in addition to being plundered by corporations, have also been ravaged by American military operations. 

Internal wars also wreck devastation, and there are many cases of people who become mercenaries in such wars in order to earn subsistence, particularly in African countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea and Ivory Coast, and later find they are unable to leave the army for fear of retribution.  These internal conflicts led to a vicious cycle in which thousands of young men are forced to become mercenaries because of poverty.  These mercenaries perpetuate the war, which inflicts even more destruction upon the community and increases poverty. 

Even in the increasingly rare cases in which forced laborers are forced into their position not by economic necessity but social custom, capitalist globalization is responsible for its perpetuation.  This slavery is often allowed to exist because of lax labor laws that are instituted because of the need to compete in the ‘race to the bottom’ which prevent governments from taking action to end the slavery. 

It is clear that the struggle against capitalist globalization and the struggle to eradicate slavery are one in the same.  To combat slavery, stronger laws to protect laborers must be implemented both by national governments, international financial institutions, and international diplomatic institutions.  As long as there is abject poverty in the world and as long as capitalism continues to promote it, there will be people who have to live with the miserable reality of slavery.  

 

For more on modern slavery, visit http://www.ilo.org/   

 

 

2005/5/11

The CIA's New Client in Sudan

@ 05:11 PM (54 months, 20 days ago)

ZNet Africa

 

It was Woodrow Wilson who called the Armenian Holocaust ‘sad, but necessary to quell an internal security threat.’  Today it appears that the Bush administration, only eight months after former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced that Sudan’s pro-government militias were committing genocide, has changed its mind and now is once again ignoring victims of genocide and allowing a government to quell a ‘security threat.’ 

 

The Las Angeles Times recently reported that the US government and the Sudanese government responsible for over 180,000 deaths are forming a close intelligence partnership, and that government in Khartoum is becoming a ‘surprisingly valuable ally of the CIA’ in the war on terrorism, as surprising as that would seem to anyone aware of the fact that Sudan harbored Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda a decade ago and that Sudan’s dictator retained ties with other groups classified as terrorists by the US government after Al Qaeda left Sudan. 

 

The Times’ report on the US’ new ally shows very clearly the opportunistic nature of the ‘war on terrorism’ paradigm, which in reality has nothing to do with stopping violence or promoting peace but is merely a new justification for continuing with the imperialist program that the US has pursued since the Second World War.  The article is full of completely contradictory messages from US government officials, and it is difficult to imagine how an establishment reader could make sense of them without resorting to the use of doublespeak.  The first few paragraphs explain that Sudan has been charged with committing genocide by the US government, once welcomed bin Laden, and has been described as "an extraordinary threat to the national security" by the Bush Administration. 

 

Paragraphs later, the readership is told that ‘"American intelligence considers [Sudan] to be a friend" by a senior official in the Sudanese government, and that Sudan could become a ‘top tier’ ally of the CIA by a State Department official. In addition, the Bush Administration has recently normalized relations with Sudan in light of this recent cooperation.

 

According to these interviews with US and Sudanese intelligence officials, in recent collaborative efforts partaken by the two governments Sudan has expelled Islamic ‘extremists.’  This leads one to wonder, have they banished themselves from the country?  Among their other services, they detained Al Qaeda suspects, members of the Iraqi insurgency, and other terrorist operatives and gave them to the US for interrogation.  Unfortunately, no members of the Janjaweed, the pro-government militia committing genocide against the civilians of Darfur have been detained or disarmed.

 

Why has the relationship between Sudan and the US shifted so suddenly, and why is the Sudanese government so interested in helping the US government hunt down extremists that it used to fund and give sanctuary to?  Why is the US so ready to normalize its relationship with a country involved in a massive campaign of ethnic cleansing, as the UN calls it, or genocide, as the Colin Powell called it?       

 

Washington’s radical reversal of relations with Sudan undoubtedly has quite a bit to do with Sudan’s oil, the majority of which it had been selling to China.  Washington has been looking for a way to gain control over Sudan’s oil fields for a long period of time.  It is likely that the US helped train the two largest rebel groups whose attacks elicited the government’s counter-insurgency campaign, the Justice and Equality Movement and the Sudanese Liberation Army, in an attempt to weaken Sudan’s government at a time when it was developing closer ties with China.  When the atrocities began to escalate in Darfur and the US Sate Department officially labeled the killings in Darfur ‘genocide’, it seemed the US was considering invading Sudan on a platform of ending the genocide, disposing of the dictator who made the mistake of giving China access to its oil fields, and replacing him with a leader who would allow US corporations to funnel oil from Sudan.

 

However, now that Sudan has proved willing to cooperate with the US, new questions arise.  Why would Sudan be dealing so comfortably with Washington unless it knew that it would not be held accountable for its own atrocities in any real sense? 

 

It doesn’t seem altogether unfeasible for the governments of Sudan and the US have made a pact stating that the US would use its power to prevent action against the genocide in Darfur, in exchange for aid in countering ‘terrorism’ and, at some point, access to untapped oil?  It is hard to think of another explanation for the sudden friendship of the two regimes.  The US has been considering an attempt to repeal the sanctions placed on Sudan, a move favored both by Khartoum and by US oil companies. 

 

Once again, it seems the US is being complicit with genocide and making deals with the war criminals responsible, just as previous US administrations were complicit with the rise of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia which was engaged in a battle with the North Vietnamese by allowing Thailand (then a US client state) to sell arms to Pol Pot while he exterminated 1.7 million of his own people. Just as the US was silent during the Rwandan genocide and instead focused on the bombing of Yugoslavia, the US is again ignoring a massive tragedy in Sudan in favor of perusing its immediate imperial interests and destroying the resistance in Iraq. 

 

Of course, just because ties have increased between Khartoum and Washington doesn’t mean that the US wouldn’t abandon the Sudanese government if the US feels the alliance is no longer politically expedient or if Sudan is insubordinate, but right now it seems like the alliance is a win-win situation for both governments; the only losers of course being the citizens of Darfur experiencing living hell.   

 

The situation in Darfur is still one the of the worst humanitarian catastrophes in the world with nearly 200,000 dead, either due to violence or famine, and 2 million displaced.  The pro-government militias continue to raid the towns of Darfur, killing men, raping women, and plundering entire villages, often abducting young women and using them as sex-slaves.  It is clear that rapid action is necessary to save innocent lives and end the mass slaughter.

 

The solution to the tragedies in Darfur is most certainly not an American or NATO military intervention; such an imperial intervention would only augment the suffering felt in Sudan.  To protect the human rights of Sudanese civilians, it would be necessary for the UN to launch a major peacekeeping mission or for the world to come together to fund the African Union’s peacekeeping campaign.  The AU has already launched a peace keeping mission, and AU peace keepers have been effective in stopping violence in areas where they are dispatched. However, the AU does not have the resources to sustain the kind of mission necessary to bring any degree of peace to Sudan, and has only been able to deploy 3,000 troops to Darfur, a region the size of France.  In addition to enduring vicious campaigns of violence, the people of Sudan are also in dire need of humanitarian aid and are experiencing a great shortage in food, medicine, clean water, and other life essentials.

 

If the international community does not work together to build a peacekeeping campaign and the humanitarian aid campaign, the Oxfam aid agency predicts that the humanitarian crisis in Sudan will continue until October 2006, most likely bringing hundreds of thousands of additional deaths.  However, it seems the US may present an obstacle to such campaigns, as it does not want to offend its terrorist ally in Khartoum.

Tell your representatives in Congress: Reparations for Vietnam

@ 04:03 PM (54 months, 20 days ago)

 

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41088000/jpg/_41088327_xuanminh203.jpg

 Agent Orange’s continued effects on Vietnam

 

One of the most devastating military conflicts since the Second World War was the US invasion of Vietnam.  It is estimated that 3.5 million Vietnamese were slaughtered during a war in which 72 million liters of toxic chemical weapons were dumped on Vietnam, destroying 40% of South Vietnam’s forests and causing birth defects, cancer, and other health problems.  Approximately 1/3 of South Vietnam’s population became internal refugees.  The amount of munitions exploded in Vietnam was twice the number exploded by all sides during the Second World War.  The US prevented a democratic election from taking place in South Vietnam, for fear that the communists would take over nonviolently, and instead installed a puppet with a poor human rights record. 

 

The US’ war in South East Asia was also extended into Laos and Cambodia, where intense bombing campaigns attempted to destroy communist strongholds in these countries.  The US bombing campaign of Cambodia set the stage for the rise of the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot, who killed an estimated 1.7 million people in a campaign of auto-genocide.  The US government, who saw the Khmer Rouge as a useful Cold War ally, as he was anti-Soviet and was waging a war against the Vietnamese communists, was complicit with the genocide carried out by the Khmer Rouge.  The Khmer Rouge was driven out of power not by the US, but by the North Vietnamese.

The US’ imperialist war in Indochina is one of the most heinous military campaigns in US history.  The US has never paid any sort of reparations to the people of Vietnam, and in fact, actually demanded that the North Vietnamese pay the debt owed to the US by the South Vietnamese, in effect forcing the victims of an atrocious war to pay for their own extermination.   The people of Vietnam still live with the after effects of the war, dealing with land mines and chemicals as well as a devastated economy with a Gross National Income per capita of $480, thanks in large part to the destruction of Vietnam’s infrastructure and the poverty caused by the invasion.  As a way to mark the 30th anniversary of the fall of the American puppet in Saigon and the end of the Vietnam War, I believe the American government has a moral obligation to the people of Indochina, whose lives were destroyed by a vicious war for domination.  While the crimes committed during the Vietnam War have already had devastating and irreversible effects on millions of lives, it is still possible to help the people of Indochina who still suffer as a consequence of the invasion.  Please, consider drawing up a bill in Congress to help the victims of the ugliest war in US history by giving reparations directly to the people of Indochina.  Quality of life can be raised in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos through aid for health, food, and education.

 

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN THE HOUSE

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN THE SENATE