WikiCommons altered, author: Bosonic dressing

Since the downfall of the Yugoslavia, Kosovo has been through a lot. In 1989, Serbia annexed the territory which led to conflicts and eventually war. In 1999, NATO intervened against the Milosevic Regime in Yugoslavia. After 11 weeks of bombardments, the despot agreed to a peace plan for Kosovo, ending the genocide against the mainly Albanian population. Ensuing negotiations with Serbia eventually failed. As a result, the small country declared its independence from Serbia in February of 2008. Until today, 58 nations have recognized Kosovo as a sovereign state.

Since the independence, things have changed significantly. Reconstruction and political transition have been going so smooth, that Kosovo was accepted as member of the IMF and the World Bank yesterday [1]. Today, the situation in Kosovo is more stable than it has been in a long time. Therefore, NATO announced this June that they plan to reduce the number of KFOR soldiers stationed in the country until the end of the year. Currently, 14.000 troops are securing approximately 2 million mainly Albanian inhabitants. In 2010, only 10.000 will remain [2]. As of tomorrow, Kosovo will officially be regarded as a “secure” country [3].

Congratulations, and keep going, Kosovo!

Sources:
Swissinfo, Spiegel, OE24, Auswärtiges Amt

WikiCommons altered, author: Vardion

As announced, I will have guest authors participating in my blog from time to time.
This is the first guest entry by one of my friends from Uganda. He has written about the history of his country and reflects on current developments. Any and all comments on the article and on the guest author concept are welcome! Find out more .

Uganda is a landlocked country in East Africa boarded by Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, DR Congo and Sudan. The name was adopted by British Official in 1894 when they established a Protectorate Status over the country. The nation attained her independence in 1962 from United Kingdom amidst a wave of Pan Africanism in that period as many countries were demanding for political sovereignty from colonial leadership.

Since then, the country has witnessed 7 Presidents and 3 military coups. In 1971, Idi Amin Dada declared himself President through a military coup and he exercised dictatorial leadership. He was overthrown by a military alliance from Tanzania and since then the country went into political tension and instabilities. His lifestyle has been portrayed in the media in the movie “The last King of Scotland”, from 2006. You can see a trailer here:

The current President is Y.K Museveni, he attained power in 1985 through a 5 years guerrilla war and since then he has been credited by many Ugandans as a liberator and freedom fighter however his popularity drastically declined when he changed the constitution in 2001 to allow him stay in power. The country will hold elections next year and if he contests, he will be among the longest serving African presidents alongside President Gaddafi of Libya.

Economy:

Agriculture employs 80% of Ugandans with coffee as the chief export. The country is blessed with natural resources, fertile soils and regular rainfall and sunshine throughout the year. Uganda has untapped reserves in crude oil (2 billion barrels wells) and natural gas. Tourism also contributes to the GDP of the country with Lake Victoria, River Nile source, wildlife, mountains and forestry as major tourist attractions. The GDP (PPP) current price is $ 1,152.

Culture and Demographics:
The total population is estimated at 30 Million people. There are around 21 native local language and English as the official language of communication.

Challenges facing the country:
1. High Poverty, unemployment and income inequality rates
2. HIV/AIDS
3. Corruption & Public Finance mismanagement
4. Political Transition (since independence from British rule in 1962, the country has never witnessed a peaceful political transition, change of leadership has been through coups and guerrilla wars. The elections in 2001 had irregularities ranging from voter intimidation, enfranchisement and results manipulation).

Sources and further reading:
Tourism and Culture of Uganda, Idi Amin Cult of Personalism, East African Living Encyclopedia

Legal notice: The owner of the blog will not be held liable for the content of guest entries.

WikiCommons, author: Bosonic dressing

For some years now, rumors about a future after NAFTA are running wild all over the web.
Conspiracy theorists seem to think that a North American union will follow the current free trade association, along with the implementation of a joint currency, the “Amero”. Some even claim, that the ultimate goal is to form a “one world government”.

With little official information available, this article intents to bring some light to the matter and investigate if there is any truth to the claims.

Historical background:

The idea of a single currency for NAFTA countries first gained support after the Mexican crisis in 1994. Mexico was carrying a large budget deficit, so when the assassination of a presidential candidate and a short conflict with the Zapatista Army of National Liberation, an armed revolutionary group damaged investor confidence the government did not have sufficient funds to stabilize the currency. As a result, the peso quickly lost value with the exchange rate rising from about 3 to 1 to over 7 to 1 within a year, eventually stabilizing around 8 to 1.

The Asian crisis in 1997 developed similarly. Due to a high burden of foreign debt, the Thai government was forced to let the Baht float, which caused devalued stock markets and plummeting asset prices not only in other Asian countries, but in secondary markets as well. When the crisis hit Mexico, the exchange rate to the dollar rose again from 8 to 1 to more than 10 to 1. Overall, that means it tripled within just four years.

Created based on rates by x-rates.com

The case for the Amero:

With that background in mind, Herbert G. Grubel wrote a thesis called “The Case for the Amero” for the Fraser institute, an independent Canadian research organization in 1999. [1] In his paper, Grubel advocates a potential monetary union of the US, Canada and Mexico.

Based on his research, Grubel concludes that a monetary union would result in greater price stability, lower long-term interest rates, enhanced trade due to the elimination of the costs of currency trading and risk, and greater productivity. All of these would effectively create more wealth in Canada for personal and social ends.

For the US, Grubel predicted benefits as well, saying a monetary union would reduce the threat to the power of the US dollar that he expected to result from greater use of the euro in place of the dollar in the rest of the world. Today, we know that he was fairly correct with that prediction, given that the dollar has lost significantly with regards to the euro.

As for the practical implementation of a monetary union, Grubel suggests that a trinational central bank be installed. This bank, he says, shall only be responsible for price stability like the European Central Bank, instead of bearing joint responsibility for employment issues like the current Federal Bank of the USA. In his opinion, a triparte central bank is desirable, as it would be less open to political meddling than national banks.

Michael Chriszt for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta:

After a visit of Mexican president elect Vicente Fox to the US in 2000 where he proposed, among others, an eventual single currency for NAFTA, Michael Chriszt seriously investigated the issue for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta [2], weighing between the concepts of dollarization and monetary union.

Dollarization would mean that Canada and Mexico adopt the US dollar as their currency, like Panama did in 1904 and Ecuador recently did in 2000 following the collapse of its sucre to re-establish trust in the official currency. In this case, the US would not have to be an active participant, because they would not have to relinquish their management of monetary policy. Adopting countries however would lose the lender-of-last resort facility of their central banks, since they could no longer issue currency. Also, the dollarizing countries would forego seignorage, the revenues governments gain by issuing currency. On top of that, they would give up any control over monetary policy.

Flags from WikiCommonsPanama and Ecuador have already adopted the US Dollar

A Monetary Union on the other hand would require substantial cooperation between the countries, as all national monetary policies would be abandoned in favour of a shared policy. The use of a single currency can generate multiple advantages such as the elimination of transaction costs and would likely lead to increased trade and investments within the area, thus increasing economic and financial efficiency.

Chriszt evaluated the USA, Canada and Mexico on the basis of the criteria for Optimal Currency Areas [3]. In an OCA, all members can expect positive net benefits from their participation. He concludes, that a monetary union holds several advantages over dollarization for both the US and its NAFTA partners. Canada seems to be more suited for joining the US in a single currency arrangement, but Mexico is moving closer to fulfilling the criteria. However, Chriszt forecasts that it is unlikely that the three countries will pursue a monetary union in the near future, because economic integration of NAFTA is still developing and financial integration has hardly begun.

Vicente Fox:

In 2001 then-president of Mexico Vicente Fox gave the following statement in an interview for “Commanding Heights” [4], a PBS program:

“Now we want to go further. I’m talking about a NAFTA plus, a NAFTA that takes us to a further integration. I’ve been talking with [U.S.] President Bush, and fortunately he’s seeing it the same way. In the long term what we’re looking for is convergence of our two economies, convergence on the basic and fundamental variables of the economy, convergence on rates of interest, convergence on income of people, convergence on salaries. Of course this is a 10-, 20-year program. But when we reach that level, then we can just erase that border, open up that border for [the] free flow of products, merchandises, [and] capital as well as people.“

His comments spiked rumors and discussions all over the internet, both about a coming North American Union, as well as the potential introduction of the “Amero”.

The SPP:

Then in March 2005, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (the SPP) was launched. Officially, the SPP is nothing more than a partnership between the United States, Canada and Mexico to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation. [5] Official goals include ensuring “that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business […and] to keep [the] borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade.” Also, the SPP aspires to make North American businesses more competitive on the global market.

Conspiracy theorists however became even more determined that a North American Union was in the works, as a result of the SPP. Some even claim that it has already been founded behind closed doors. Soon thereafter, first drafts of possible Amero coins and bills started popping up on various webpages. The whole issue became a real internet phenomenon and took on a life of it’s own. Today, you can even buy the first mock-Ameros on ebay.

Naturally, youtube offers multiple videos on the issue too, I suggest you have a look at this one:

Reaction of the US government:

The US government quickly reacted to the internet debate by including a myth and fact page on their official information about the SPP [6] where they claim among others that the SPP is not a treaty but an open dialogue, and that it does not work towards the creation of a European-Union-like structure.

Resistance in Canada:

Nonetheless, rumors and theories continue to float on the internet, and severe resistance to the SPP has formed in Canada [7].

The Council of Canadians, Canada’s largest citizen’s organisation, harshly criticises the SPP as anti-democratic, because the NACC, a committee composed of representatives from some of North America’s largest companies, have been mandated to set priorities. The public and elected officials however, are shut out of the decision process.
Prosperity is only enhanced for big corporations, they say, who will benefit from easier movement of cheap, non-unionized Mexican workers.

In Canada however, it will lead to a drop in salaries and deteriorating working conditions. Indeed, the SPP has lead to some results for Canada: In a 2006 SPP report, stricter pesticide residue limits in Canada were identified as a “barrier to trade”, causing Canada to raise limits on hundreds of fruits and vegetables. Also, the SPP calls for a five-fold increase in Canadian tar sands production, which would make it impossible for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emission while at the same time quintupling the toxic wastewater by-production.

Also they criticize the US’s “war on terror” policies, especially the “no fly lists” that they consider a violation of human rights.
The population seems to agree with them. A study shows that 83% of Canadians would rather have an independent foreign policy even if it hurts trade, than align with the US’s security” policies.

Outlook:

Canadian resistance notwithstanding, the political reality seems to be moving towards a monetary union.
After the trilateral agreement, an independent task force from the council on foreign relations [8] was asked to make recommendations for the future based on what was agreed on in Texas. Based on NAFTA’s success, which includes a doubling of trade within North America, the task force’s central recommendation is the establishment of a North American economic and security community with a common external tariff by 2010, with the goal of guaranteeing a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America. Additionally, they identify three common challenges that need to be addressed:
The shared security threat, the challenges of increased global competition, and the issue of uneven economic development.

The potential future outlined by the task force goes way beyond what has officially been agreed on. They not only call for a unified North American border action plan with harmonized visa and asylum regulations, entry and exit procedures, and full data-sharing, but even suggest a North American Border Pass with biometric information. Also, the task force encourages Law Enforcement and Military Cooperation and the establishment of a trinational threat intelligence center.
Furthermore, they make ecological and economical suggestions, calling for a commitment to a cleaner environment and advocating the implementation of a “tested once” policy for pharmaceuticals. They claim the latter could raise return rates on new pharmaceutical products by an average of 4.8%.
Also, the task force calls for a mutual recognition of professional standards and degrees and promotes student and teacher exchange programs to foster a greater sense of a North American identity.

A greater sense of North American identity… That almost sounds like some of the theories aren’t too far-fetched after all…
So is the Amero coming? We shall see!

Sources:
Federal Reserve Bank Atlanta [1], [2], Fraser Institute, Council on Foreign Relations, PBS, IMF, Official SPP info [1], [2], [3], Council of Canadians and Youtube

WikiCommons, altered, user: Vardion

Malta has been dealing with illegal immigration since the 1990’s, when refugees of war from Yugoslavia and Iraq started to flee to the Mediterranean island. Recently, the small nation has been confronted with large amounts of boat people from Africa. You can read more about the effects on the small country and possible solutions

Even without immigrants, Malta is the most densely populated country in Europe, concentrating over 400.000 inhabitants on just 316 square kilometres. In the last six years, immigration figures have more than doubled with a new peak number of 2800 illegal entries recorded in 2008. Converted to terms of immigrants per legal resident, the current rate in Malta would correspond to 2 million asylum seekers in Germany. [1] The most southern country of the European Union already suffers from the overpopulation, as energy resources are scarce and most consumer goods have to be imported. Now, they are running out of places to house newly arriving people.

WikiCommons, author: Myriam Thyes

First view that immigrants get of their new home

236 guards and nine boats are currently in charge of controlling the sea surrounding Malta. Their job is far from easy, because they are supposed to stop people from entering Malta’s territory illegally, but have to remain humane and must not use force. If the arriving boats are not in Malta’s territorial waters, the watchmen cannot do anything but remind the passengers not to enter the European Union illegally. Once the boats pass into Maltese waters, they have to stop them from landing and persuade the travellers to leave their boats, search them for weapons and then take them to detention centers. [2]

Once the illegals arrive in the detention centers, their asylum requests are processed. Those who get to stay on humanitarian grounds are still not entirely happy. Most of them say that they wanted to go to Italy but ended up in Malta by mistake. According to EU rules, they have to request asylum in the first EU country they set foot on. After asylum is granted, they are stuck on Malta, where they are not wanted, and didn’t want to go in the first place. [3]

Flags from WikiCommons

Tensions between Italy and Malta are increasing

On top of the problems of dealing with its actual immigrants, Malta is currently in dispute with Italy about their handling of arriving ships. Italy is accusing Malta of diverting would-be immigrants to Italian ports instead of taking them to their own. Malta claims that they take all boats found on their territory to the nearest secure port, whether that port is Italian or Maltese, just like EU rules suggest. For boats approached in international waters they furthermore state, they have to grant free passage. Italy however insists that all immigrants found in the Maltese search and rescue area have to be taken to Malta, even if that is not the nearest port. [4] [5]

As a result of the conflict, Italy has started to send boats with immigrants back to Libya, the country that most originate from, and received heavy criticism for these measures. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has urged Italy to comply with EU rules and accept anyone who is seeking asylum, at least until their requests are processed. Any other treatment would pose a great danger to refugees from conflict zones like Somalia or Eritrea, because Libya has been known to return asylum seekers to their countries of origin. Countries, where the deported might face prosecution or death. [6]

killick1 for sxc.hu

What will the future bring?

The European Union is well aware of the problems that small nations like Malta or Cyprus are faced with and will address the issue within the year. The so-called Hague programme that currently regulates EU asylum and immigration approaches will expire at the end of 2009, and the President of the European Commission, José Barroso, is aware that changes have to be made. “Europe needs immigration, but it needs to manage it better”, he said in an interview with Corriere della Sera. [7] The new programme may come just in time, because it is becoming more and more obvious that Malta cannot solve the problem of illegal immigration alone. All countries of the European Union need to work together and develop a strategy that somehow shares the burden equally between all nations.

As a replacement of the Hague programme, a common immigration policy has been suggested, but most countries reject the idea of giving free passage to illegals that arrived in Malta. A rule like that, they say, would make the island an even more attractive target for illegal immigrants. [2] Instead, some countries have offered to provide financial and logistical support. Another possible solution is reaching an agreement with Libya from where most boats embark upon their journeys. Talks with the Libyan government however have not yet materialized, as Libyan officials refuse to meet with EU delegates. [8]

Opinion:

Whatever strategy the EU decides on, unless the root of illegal immigration is addressed the problem will persist. People in dire conditions will not stop seeking their fortune elsewhere because of barbed wire or stricter policies; they will instead search for other, potentially more dangerous ways to reach the European Union. In my opinion, the officials need to look for a way to improve and enhance foreign aid, foster education and economical development and give people a chance to stay in their own country without fear of persecution, poverty or death. This would not only solve the problem of illegal migration, but at the same time make the world a better place.

Sources:

Die Welt, BBC [1], [2], Monsters and Critics, Malta Media Online [1], [2], Malta Today, Financial Times [1], [2], Taurillon

Six countries have been discussed so far, and I seem to have conquered a small regular audience. In my articles, I always try to present the complete picture, which requires a lot of research and effort, but still it is not the same as getting a report from someone who is actually living in the country or has been living there.

That’s why I have decided to take it to the next level and invited some guest authors to participate in this blog. Apart from my articles, you will be able to get first-hand information about other countries here, and ask questions and discuss with nationals directly. I hope that this will intensify the exchange and add to your knowledge even more.

If you would like to request a report on a certain country or would like to write one yourself, please don’t hesitate to write me a message or leave a comment, I will be sure to get back to you!

Together, we can make this blog even better, more accurate, more detailed and more up-to-date. So if something is going on in your country, please let all of us know!

WikiCommons, altered, author: Vardion

People interested in sports know Ethiopia mainly for its athletes, more precisely: its middle and long distance runners. A lesser known fact is that the African nation is one of the least developed countries in the world, ranking 169th out of 179 countries in UN’s 2008 Human Development Index. [1] With a per-capita income of just 220 USD, the majority of the population is living below the poverty line and structural problems along with periodic droughts and famines remain unsolved. Now, the power supply system is failing. Read more about it .

Unlike other African countries, Ethiopia has never been colonized and maintained its independence, aside from a short-lived Italian occupation between 1936 and 1941. In 1995 the ancient monarchy turned democratic and held its first multiparty elections.

After a disagreement about the border to neighbouring Eritrea was resolved in the 2000 and Ethiopian troops pulled out of Somalia in 2008, the African nation is no longer involved in any external conflicts.

The weather plays a big role in the Ethiopian economy, because almost 80% of the workforce is employed in the agricultural sector. Frequent droughts continue to hurt the system and endanger not only the food supply for the population, but also harm the general development, because the export of coffee and other agricultural goods accounts for about 60% of the total GDP. [2]

Ethiopian coffee farmer, public domain

Inflation was estimated at a shocking 41% in 2008 and literacy remains a problem, with only approximately 43% of people aged 15 and over being able to read and write. [2] Literacy among people under the age of 24 is improving though (50%), and the government continues to invest in the educational sector to enhance teaching quality. In the last years, 13 new universities have been built with the help of international donors and the support of the German GTZ, an international cooperation for sustainable development. [3]

In recent years, Ethiopia’s economy has been growing at a fast pace. According to the IMF, it is growing the fastest among all African countries whose economy is not driven by oil exports. [4] While that is great for the development, it has created one big problem internally: The current power supply has not been able to increase capacity enough to satisfy the growing demand.

Today, less than one percent of the 65 million Ethiopians living in rural areas have access to electricity, and the capital city Addis Ababa is currently experiencing a power shortage of more than 40%.

Wikicommons, author: Jahsensie

Capital Addis Abeba

As an immediate measure, the government has suspended the production of cement as of May 12th and the Ministry of Work and Urban Development has announced that cement will be imported from Pakistan and Yemen to fill the supply gap. [5] Meanwhile, the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation (EEPCo) is setting up diesel generators to overcome the power deficit, but the shortage is likely to last for another two months at least. [6]

Fortunately, the generators will only have to be a short term solution, as Ethiopia has been investing in hydro electricity for some time now. It all started as a development project for some of the rural areas in Ethiopia. Together with the GTZ, small hydropower plants have been introduced in remote towns that had been living off-grid before. [7]

At least 85% of the water that goes on to flow through the Nile originally comes from Ethiopia’s high mountainous areas. Therefore, the African nation is believed to have a hydroelectric potential of more than 40,000 MW. At present, there are eight hydro, twelve diesel fired and one geothermal plants in the ICS. In recent years, Ethiopia has been trying to use its water resources to keep up with increasing power demand. However, since most of the rainfall arrives during the Monsoon season in the months of July, August and September, this move leaves the supply system vulnerable to droughts and is at least partly to blame for the current power deficit.

For the Ethiopian government, the answer to this problem appears simple: For some time now, Ethiopia has been working on a series of large-scale dam projects, trying to increase its power capacity way beyond internal needs to guarantee a sufficient supply at all times, and export excess energy during the rain season. [8]

In February of 2009, the Tekeze Arch Dam was completed, becoming the highest dam on the African Continent. Apart from generating power, the project is supposed to supply water to large areas of agricultural land, in one of the country’s main areas of coffee cultivation. [9] Currently in construction are three more projects; the Beles dam, which is also designed to supply water for both residential and agricultural use in the region, and Gilgel Gibe II and III, that are supposed to extend the capacity of Gilgel Gibe I which is already in operation.

Together, the four new dams are estimated to provide 2535 MW of power, more than tripling the current 750MW supplied by EEPCo, [10] and another dam is already in the planning stage. In Kara Dobe, a dam with an installed capacity of at least one gigawatt is supposed to be created. [11]

Transmission lines to Sudan and Djibouti are already being set up, and negotiations with Kenya are in process. From the export to Sudan alone, the Ethiopian government expects revenues in the amount of $30M per year. [8]

While the extension in hydroelectric capacity may be good for Ethiopian corporations and governmental income, experts are worried about the potential effects on the ecosystem.

Wikicommons, author: Giustino

Are Ethiopian pelicans endangered?

Upon deciding to launch the Gilgel Gibe III project, the Ethiopian government apparently bypassed internationally accepted procedures. Instead of assessing the social and environmental impact first, the building contract was directly awarded to Salini, an Italian company that had also been involved in the construction of previous dams. As a result, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank refused to finance Gilgel Gibe III.

Two years after construction began, the assessment was published and claiming that the dam project did not propose any danger. Kenyan ecologist Richard Leakey, among others, accuses the study of being falsified to keep the project running.

The African Resources Working Group released a commentary on the environmental research, which asserts: “The document rests on a series of faulty premises and it is further compromised by pervasive omissions, distortions and obfuscation.” It goes on to claim that the dam will “produce a broad range of negative effects, some of which would be catastrophic” to both the environment and the indigenous communities living downstream. [12]

Indeed, given the current energy crisis Ethiopia appears to need the new dams urgently. At any cost? “We cannot afford not to have Gilgel Gibe III,” said Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. “We need that type of mega-project given the increased domestic demand and the requirements of export. […] That would provide us with valuable foreign currency that will help with our balance of payments”. [12] He rejects fears that some 500,000 people could see their livelihoods destroyed by the dam. If he is wrong, his people will pay the price.

Sources:
UN, CIA, Auswärtiges Amt, Jimma Times,
All Africa, Nazret, GTZ, this excellent article Waterpower Magazine [1], [2], Addis Fortune via Friends of Ethiopia, Spectrum and BBC

Map from WikiCommons, author: Vardion

In 1804, Haiti was the first black republic to declare independence after a slave revolution, but life has never been easy for Haitians. Hurricanes torment the island from June to October, inflation and illiteracy are high, jobs are rare and the political situation is unstable. International agencies have issued travel warnings and Dominican truck drivers are boycotting the nation, citing harassment by criminal groups. Meanwhile, Haitians left homeless by heavy rains are waiting for aid. Get the whole story .

In 2006, Haiti elected its president and parliament democratically, following a period of political instability, including an US intervention on a UN mandate. About 8000 peacekeepers from the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) remain in the country today, trying to maintain civil order in the poorest country of the Western hemisphere. [1]

From WikiCommons, author Ricardo Stuckert/PR

Brazilian MINUSTAH soldiers

Nonetheless, the US Department of Foreign Affairs is upholding its travel warning, citing among other reasons 25 abductions of US citizens in 2008 [2], and they are not the only ones. For example, the German Auswärtiges Amt is also warning people not to go to Haiti, stating that UN troops and police are not effectively preventing violent crimes and kidnappings. The whole infrastructure is in bad condition, and journeys on the roads are dangerous and time consuming, they add. [3]

Haiti is amongst the least developed countries in the world, according to a UN statistic. [4]. Currently, 80% are living under the poverty line, that’s four out of five people. Illiteracy remains a huge concern, with only 52.9% of Haitians aged 15 or older being able to read and write. Inflation was at an estimated 15.8% in 2008. [1]

From WikiCommons, author Nick Hobgood

Cacao is one of the main agricultural products of Haiti

Most Haitians live off subsistence farming or work in the agricultural sector, but hurricanes along with heavy rains, occasional flooding and periodic droughts are making it hard for families to provide for themselves. Last year, hurricanes alone killed an estimated 800 people and caused damages exceeding 1 billion USD. Only 324 million USD in rebuilding funds have been pledged by international donors, leaving many people home- and helpless. [5].

As a result, many citizens risk their lives to flee to other countries.

Every year, hundreds of Haitians try to cover the 1000 km distance to reach the USA, often in small, overloaded boats. Only two weeks ago, at least 10 refugees died in an accident just off the US coast. [6]

Despite efforts to control illegal migration, Haitians also cross the border into the Dominican Republic by the thousands. It is estimated that around 1 million Haitians currently live in their neighbouring country, working mostly in construction and the agricultural sector. They do the work that Dominicans refuse to, for example harvesting sugar cane. [7]

Flags from WikiCommons, Public Domain

Haiti and the Dominican Republic share an island and some disputes

Recently there have been additional disputes between the two countries, with Dominican truck drivers refusing to drive into Haiti. Since May 18th, all four border crossing are blocked, the camions are jammed up for kilometres. The strike manifested, because Dominican truck drivers claim to be stopped frequently by violent Haitian gangs who demand half of their freight and a 4000 RDS toll to let them pass. Drivers who refuse to pay are pelted with stones. Dominican Union president Blas Peralta: “We will not even let one drop of water cross the border”. [8]

The conflict could hardly have come at a worse time for Haiti. Three hurricanes along with heavy rains have killed at least eleven people and left hundreds of homes affected in recent days. The southern city Cayes is partly flooded and at least 2000 families are still enclosed by water. [9] The whole country remains on red alert, and many Haitians are depending on food and other goods that are stuck at the border. [10]

Opinion:
Right now, things are looking very dark in Haiti. It comes as no surprise that a Kansas University study found that Haitians are among the least optimistic people in the world. [4] The only light at the end of the tunnel may be foreign help. The UN has recently appointed former US-president Bill Clinton as a special envoy to Haiti, who is expected to lead fundraising efforts, that this country so desperately needs. [11] Also, Haiti is expected to be forgiven around $525 million of debt as part of the Highly-Indebted Poor Countries initiative this year. [1] Honestly, I do not think this will be sufficient, given that it does not even cover the pending hurricane damages from 2008. There seems to be a long way to go, I sincerely hope that they will be able to overcome the challenges and improve the living conditions of their population, but I doubt that they can do it on their own.

Sources:
CIA World Factbook, Department of Foreign Affairs, Auswärtiges Amt,
UN, The Star, AFP via Google [1], [2], Latin American Herald Tribune, Dominicano.ch [1], [2],
Focus

Further Reading:
I recommend this very detailed article about international aid in Haiti, and the Section on Haiti by the Latin American Network Center, which links to a number of interesting publications and research centers as well.

The third elections in as many years mark a defeat for Sunni Islamists who lost 10 seats, while Shi’ite representation climbed by 5 members.

Read more about political challenges and possible reforms here:

For the first time in the Gulf nation’s history, women won seats in the parliament, as Kuwaitis voted four US-edcuated female candidates into congress.

Meet some of the new parliament members and get some comments from voters:

This historic result is a big step for Kuwait, but it is slightly overshadowed by new controversy forming on the horizon. Almost all parlamentarians that the government blamed for the anterior crisis have been re-elected. On top of that, two candidates who were detained for criticising the ruling family have been sent to parliament. This appears to spell new turmoil for Kuwait. [1]

To no surprise, reigning Emir Sabah IV has reappointed his nephew Sheikh Nasser Mohammed al-Ahmed al-Sabah as prime Minister and asked him to form a new government. All five governments that have ruled under his lead resigned as a result of disagreements with the parliament. [2] Every time, parliamentarians had accused cabinet members of corruption or misconduct, citing them for questioning and eventually causing resignations. [3] For more info, check the previous report.

Picture from WikiCommons, author Darwish99

Prime Minister of Kuwait

Challenges for the new parliament include overcoming the financial crisis that is affecting the world’s fourth largest oil exporter. A 5 billion $ stimulus package is waiting to be passed and new banking regulations and financial laws are pending approval. Additionally, the new parliament will have to vote on privatizing the oil sector and discuss plans to increase oil extension with the help of foreign firms. Both plans have been in the works for over a decade. Currently, oil fields are off limits for alien investors and foreigners are not allowed to own property in Kuwait. [4]

Aside from economical issues, the health system will likely be high on the agenda. Past parliaments were in disagreement with the government’s plans to drive down welfare state costs. Also, the critical housing shortage will have to be addressed. Kuwait’s population has grown massively over the years, with expatriate workers currently outnumbering Kuwaitis by about 3 to 1, which has lead to a housing crisis. At present, citizens wait up to 15 years for their housing grant applications to go through. [5]

Opinion:
The election of women as members of parliament is a huge step in the right direction.
However, in order to correctly address the political issues, the political deadlock needs to be ended. Unless parliament and government start working together, no progress can be made and new elections seem inevitable.

If the political turmoil does not end, it may be time to change the electoral system.
The direct election of candidates carries a high reward for vote-buyers, because personal votes are the only way to ensure a seat in parliament.
Once elected, a candidate is forced to make a name for himself in parliament to have a chance at re-election. To a large part, this has caused the recent controversy, the accusations against the cabinet and the habit of citing ministers for questionings. On top of that, the absence of parties makes it more difficult to reach agreements, and results are often unforeseeable. Political reality is dominated by spontaneous coalitions.
Also, opponents of direct personal elections criticize that all votes for candidates who end up not winning a seat are lost.

Allowing political parties in Kuwait could make life easier for everyone. That way, every vote would count, vote-buying would not be as crucial nor as effective and the pressure on candidates to prove their impact would decrease.

Sources:
[1] AFP Kuwaitis punish Islamists, vote for women, In: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gVofGNUefAbenijmx75QdsA0i-hA, May 17th 2009

[2] AFP Kuwait PM to stay on despite row that triggered election, In: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jXggXZVThehzO2m2G8GpvNm1bC1Q, May 20th 2009

[3] Worth, Robert F. First Women Win Seats in Kuwait Parliament, In: New York Times May 18th 2009, available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/world/middleeast/18kuwait.html?ref=middleeast

[4] Reuters FACTBOX-Economic reforms at stake for Kuwait’s new assembly, In: http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idINLH62724020090517, May 17th 2009

[5] Arab Time Kuwait: ‘Comprehensive work program needed to tackle housing issue’ , In: http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidZAWYA20090512141554/Kuwait:%20%27Comprehensive%20work%20program%20needed%20to%20tackle%20housing%20issue%27%20/, May 11th 2009

Find out more about the four women who are going to parliament here:
Reuters FACTBOX: Who are Kuwait’s first women lawmakers?, In: http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE54G0I720090517, May 17th 2009

A question and answer session in relation to the elections:
BBC Q&A: Kuwaiti elections, In: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8048684.stm, 2009

Map from Wiki Commons, author Pahari Sahib

Kuwait is a country torn between hereditary emirate and democracy, fundamentalism and progress. It is the first Arabic Gulf country to have an elected parliament, but in recent years disputes between governments and congresses have intensified to an unbearable level. As a result, Kuwaitis will be asked to elect a new parliament this Saturday – for the third time in three years.

Kuwait is home to roughly 1.4 million predominantly Muslim Kuwaiti as well as approximately 1.3 million foreign workers. On top of that, the Gulf nation serves as a transit station for most US soldiers headed to Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

After gaining independence from Great Britain in 1961 Kuwait adopted a constitution that represents a balancing act between classical monarchy and modern democracy.

The country is currently headed by a Emir Sabah IV, who forms the executive together with the Prime Minister and a cabinet that he appoints.

From Wiki Commons, author MuLaN™

The National Assembly, a parliament that acts as the legislative power, is elected by popular vote. In Kuwait, there are no political parties, instead every member of parliament is elected ad personam. The political reality is therefore shaped by varying coalitions and there is no entrenched opposition.

The parliament has some influence on the executive power, because it has the right to question ministers or pass a motion of no-confidence. The emir on the other hand holds the power to disassemble the parliament. This clash of competences has lead to considerable controversy in recent times.

It all began in December of 2006, when the parliament accused then-Minister of Information Mohammad al-Sanousi of confining the rights of the media in the run-up to parliamentary elections. Instead of subjecting himself to excessive questioning, the minister decided to step down from his post. Shortly thereafter, in March of 2007, the rest of the government resigned in protest of a threatened no-confidence motion against the health minister, forcing snap elections.

Less than a year after the 2007 elections, the new government also resigned in March 2008, claiming a lack of cooperation from the parliament after repeated interrogations. As a result, the emir dissolved the parliament and elections were held May 17th of 2008. The new parliament lasted a total of 10 months before it was dismissed again by Sabah IV this March in the wake of filing requests to question three ministers on various allegations. The emir claims he took the decision to “safeguard the security of the nation and its stability”[1].

However, Kuwait currently does not appear politically stable. Members of parliament seem to have discovered questionings as a way to make a name for themselves while the governments continue to use resignation as a means of preventing interrogation or possible impeachments.

From sxc.hu, author code1name

Kuwait quo vadis?

As a result, Kuwaitis will go to the polls again this coming Saturday – for the third time in as many years. Some politicians have decided not to run this time, claiming that it is unconstitutional to have elections under the supervision of a resigned government [2].

The upcoming elections also present the third chance for women to become members of parliament. Women became enfranchised in 2005 and although two females have served as ministers in past governments, no women have been elected as members of parliament yet. This may be because some Muslims still consider it a sin to vote for female candidates, claiming that only men are supposed to head a nation[3].

Opinion:
Hopefully the Gulf nation can find its way back to a functioning system of checks and balances after the third try in as many years. Otherwise, political reformation may be in order. It will also be interesting to see if candidates will be accused of buying votes again. In 2008, the voting system was modified to discourage this habit by reducing the number of constituencies from 25 to just 5.

_______________
Sources:
NY Times, AFP via Google [1], [2], BBC [1], [2], [3], The Economist, CIA, Auswärtiges Amt and The Seoul Times.”

Further reading:
Interesting commentary on the situation by a lecturer at Damascus University, Syria: Click.

Map taken from Wiki Commons and modified. Original map by Vardion.

Suriname, once known as Dutch Guiana, is currently holding a trial against former dictator Desi Bouterse for his potential involvement in the so-called “December murders”. On December 8th of 1982, 15 members of counter-revolutionary forces were assassinated while held under arrest. The circumstances of the killings remain unclear to date.

Suriname became independent from the Netherlands in 1975 and a democratic government was installed, but overthrown in 1980 after two military coups led by Sergeant-Major Desi Bouterse. Thereupon, the country was effectively ruled by military, even though a new civilian administration was appointed. The take-over was initially welcomed by the population in hopes of declining corruption and higher living standards, but instead government spending increased considerably and the economy continued to deteriorate. Moreover, rather than promised elections and a quick return to democracy, effective power was more and more centralized among the military.

Picture from Wiki Commons cut. Picture by We El.

As a result, strikes and demonstrations erupted throughout the country and in March 1982, a counter coup attempt was defeated. In December of the same year, the situation heated up further when a demonstration of high school students was ended by force. Social unrest escalated severely and the military was confronted by a large civil opposition. Apart from internal pressure, the army’s suspicions of foreign financial support and potential CIA involvement increased their fear of looming defeat.

In the light of a likely threat to their superiority, the army forcefully removed 15 high ranking supporters of the countermovement from their homes in the night of December 7th/8th. Among the detainees were several journalists, the leader of Suriname’s largest trade union, the Dean of Economics of the University of Suriname, a former member of parliament, a businessman, as well as the leaders of the March coup and four lawyers that defended them.

During an investigation by the Special Rapporteur of the UN [1], then-Prime Minister Wim Udenhout explained that the arrests were considered “necessary” and “based on the principle of survival”. He went on to explain that it was a question of “them” or “us”. On December 8th of 1982, the 15 prisoners were killed in Fort Zeelandia under circumstances that remain unclear to date.

Fort Zeelandia in Paramaribo, Suriname.

Picture from Wiki Commons, author Mark Ahsmann, under GNU.

That same night, the military also destroyed what they regarded as the centers of counter-revolution, including the headquarters of Suriname’s largest labor federation the Moederbond, two independent radio stations and the offices of an opposition newspaper.

The military continues to claim that the killings were an accident. Allegedly, a bren gun guard panicked and opened fire when planes flew over the Fort because he assumed that a rescue plot was in action. According to official reports, the guard was never authorized or instructed to shoot.

However, eyewitness statements differ significantly from this version. Observants report that an order was given to open fire with blanks at a certain signal. The signal was given at 11pm and firing supposedly continued throughout the hours in which the killings took place. Medical personnel testified that the shots appear to have been fired from close range, and that most bodies showed signs of severe torture. No autopsy has taken place to date.

The attendants also claim that Bouterse and other military leaders were present during the event, something that has always been disputed by the military. The official version only recognizes that Major Horb and one other top-level officer were present at that time. Horb supposedly hanged himself in his cell after being accused of plotting an overthrow of the government just two months later.

The Special Rapporteur of the UN concludes in his report that the killings were indeed arbitrary. As a result of the so-called “December murders”, both the Netherlands and the United States of America immediately suspended all financial aid to Suriname.

In the aftermath of the killings, pressure continued to build for the military and reached a new climax when an insurgency led by Bush Negroes, the “Maroons”, began attacking economic targets in July 1986. The army again tried to control the situation by violence, which led to the eradication of nearly the entire population of Moiwana, a Maroon village.

As a result of the war in the interior, Bouterse was forced to grant free elections in 1987 which resulted in the defeat of the military’s political wing. However, things remained unstable and on Christmas Eve of 1990, Bouterse once again seized control of the government. Nonetheless, international pressure quickly resulted in new elections.

Flags from Wiki Commons, Dutch flag by Zscout370

In 1997, the Netherlands issued an arrest warrant for Bouterse on charges of drug smuggling, but Suriname refused to extradite him. Thus, he was convicted of cocaine-trafficking in absentia and sentenced to 16 years in prison and a $2.18 million fine. Since the arrest warrant from Interpol is still pending, it is nearly impossible for Bouterse to leave Suriname.

Despite all the controversy, Bouterse maintains an important role in Suriname’s politics. Until this day, he is the leader of the National Democratic Party and a member of the parliament.

It is difficult to ascertain what exactly happened that fatal night in Fort Zeelandia. What seems clear though is that 15 people were mutilated and killed, and for the longest time it appeared as though no one would be held responsible. By 2000, the period for filing suit against many crimes attributed to Bouterse’s military regime had passed, and the deadline for the December murders was about to. Relatives of the victims filed a complaint just in time.

As of November of 2007, almost 25 years after the events, a Surinamese court is trying to shed some light on the incident. The trial is moving slowly and several witnesses have failed to show for their hearings. Bourtese also has yet to appear in court, but claimed in an Al Jazeera interview [2] that the lawsuit is being used as political propaganda, in an attempt to keep him from running for president in 2010.

On April 7th of 2009, a soldier testified that he saw Bouterse at Fort Zeelanida shortly before the killings [3]. While Bourtese has accepted political responsibility for the events, he continues to decline any personal involvement and claims that he was not present during the incident.

It appears too early to predict the outcome of the legal proceedings as multiple witnesses have not been heard, but the article will be updated as the case develops.

_____________________
Sources:

Auswärtiges Amt (in German), BBC, The Guardian, The New York Times, The University of Minnesota, The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights which has very detailed reports on the victims, Al Jazeera, Radio Nederland Wereldomroep which has a whole dossier on the incident (in Dutch), Wiki, decembermoorden.com (in Dutch), Encyclopedia Britannica, Histotheek (in Dutch), Der Spiegel which has more info about the cocaine trafficking (in German), The Victoria Advocate as well as Vrij Nederland, a Dutch newspaper.