Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-10-2007, 08:50 AM   #301
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
David Chalk wrote: View Post
With regard to Keynsianism - How Dare FDR follow a policy which pulled the USA out of depression. Although I have no problem on a social provision based economy rather than a consumer based one.
Ermm... the idea that FDR's policies pulled the US out of the Great Depression are fairly old-fashioned. It's pretty well-established that World War II finally pulled the US out of the Depression. In fact, there's some recent, trendy book by some economists showing (once again) the same thing, but I haven't been motivated to find and read it.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 12:08 PM   #302
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 632
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
Ermm... the idea that FDR's policies pulled the US out of the Great Depression are fairly old-fashioned. It's pretty well-established that World War II finally pulled the US out of the Depression. In fact, there's some recent, trendy book by some economists showing (once again) the same thing, but I haven't been motivated to find and read it.

Mike
Basically correct and there's a wide consensus among economists and political scientists on that point.

There's also a pretty compelling line of scholarship arguing that the benefit of FDR's economic policies was less the ending of the Depression and more the prevention of the both the Communist revolutions and Fascist takeovers that occurred almost every place else in the industrialized West during the Thirties.

I'm willing to credit him with knowing where the stepping stones were and see no need to claim he walked on water....

Best,

FL
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 12:15 PM   #303
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
Fred Little wrote: View Post
Basically correct and there's a wide consensus among economists and political scientists on that point.

There's also a pretty compelling line of scholarship arguing that the benefit of FDR's economic policies was less the ending of the Depression and more the prevention of the both the Communist revolutions and Fascist takeovers that occurred almost every place else in the industrialized West during the Thirties.

I'm willing to credit him with knowing where the stepping stones were and see no need to claim he walked on water....
I'd agree with that. However, during those times there were a lot of people who were admiring of Hitler or of "Uncle Joe" Stalin and it's easy to back-read and misunderstand what those two represented at different times in their history. Historical accident is a slippery eel in the arms of history.

Best.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 03:38 PM   #304
Gernot Hassenpflug
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 319
Japan
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Every time I chance upon a decent discussion of history, I grow more disappointed with my history education at school :-(
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 07:17 PM   #305
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
With regard to Keynsianism - How Dare FDR follow a policy which pulled the USA out of depression. Although I have no problem on a social provision based economy rather than a consumer based one.

And for monopolies I'd say Governments prevent monopolies - I'd ask you to look at the 'Anti-Trust Laws of the USA, the Anti-Monopoly legislation in the UK, and the EU - 'abuse of a dominant position' rules.
I'm sorry, David, but you are terribly mistaken on both of these points. What you have stated is the court historian version, the official story if you will. Please, dig a little deeper. Any earnest research will reveal that those ideas are false.

Governmental interference with the money supply caused the great depression and FDR's (and Hoover's) policies prolonged it. Not to mention they left us with problems that we haven't been able to address to this day.

I'd ask you to look more closely at the USA's anti-trust laws and research their history. Laws are often given misleading names that hopefully appeal to the public, ex. the Patriot Act. Anti-trust laws were the attempts of politically influential businesses to cripple their competition.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
"Do you have a clear understanding of what rights are, and where they arise from?".

Do you have any idea how complicated a question that is.
I just provided an answer to this question on another thread. It was fairly concise, so here it is again:

A right is something that you don't have to ask permission to do, and has no conditions or limitations. On the other hand, a privilege is something that requires permission, and can be revoked at any time. Rights pre-exist any governments or other groups. They are expressions of the nature of man. All rights can only be understood through property, the most basic of which is the individual's own body.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
Still if you want to argue for 'free-trade' the way you understand it you need to explain how you believe it is possible to establish it
Although you will have to consider the difference between the world today and the one Adam Smith (who I presume is your hero) lived in.
These aren't new ideas that I just came up with. One way would be the classical-liberal method, which is the basis of the American political structure. A constitutionally limited republic; laws only protecting life, liberty, and property; sound money; minimal taxation -- formerly known as laissez faire.

Adam Smith isn't my hero, but I'd love to know how today's world is so different that freedom is no longer important.

Quote:
Fred Little wrote:
There's also a pretty compelling line of scholarship arguing that the benefit of FDR's economic policies was less the ending of the Depression and more the prevention of the both the Communist revolutions and Fascist takeovers that occurred almost every place else in the industrialized West during the Thirties.
Well, I guess if you just become a Communist/Fascist country, there is no need for a "takeover." So in some sick, twisted way this maybe true.

-Michael
"Through aiki we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately." - M. Mochizuki
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2007, 06:55 AM   #306
Taliesin
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 82
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Michael

You have to come up with something better than - I don't agree therefore you are wrong. We already have one poster who believe that is gospel.

As far a I am aware Anti-Trust Laws inthe USA established to break the various cartels or 'rings' as they were known at the time. However the fact that a bigger, company can buy out a smaller more efficient one and thus eradicate competition does not strike me as a good idea. The idea of preventing that is at the heart of fair competition. - and BTW I also pointed out UK Monopoly Law and EU 'Abuse of a Dominant Position' - You also failed to answer why countries that rightly or wrongly put business at the heart of their economies - all take steps to prevent monopolies and maintain competition.

I will also say that, unlike you, I am not a fan of 'Natural Law' arguments, - God/Nature gave us abilities - rights are a societial (primarily legal) concept - after all simply because nature gave me the ability to break your grandmother's neck (to use an unlikley example) does not mean I am entitled to do so. - You definition sounds like it's pulled out of a law undergrad's textbook on natural law. Still if you wish to equate abilities with rights - that's up to you. (I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point).

As far as Adam Smith is concerned - you have promoted an idea of free trade as a matter of individuals. As far as I am concrened you cannot have freedom without equality. - Although my question was how to establish that equality.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2007, 03:37 AM   #307
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
You have to come up with something better than - I don't agree therefore you are wrong. We already have one poster who believe that is gospel.
I didn't say that. I said, you don't have your facts correct, therefore you are wrong. I also encouraged you to research these matters further.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
As far a I am aware Anti-Trust Laws inthe USA established to break the various cartels or 'rings' as they were known at the time. However the fact that a bigger, company can buy out a smaller more efficient one and thus eradicate competition does not strike me as a good idea. The idea of preventing that is at the heart of fair competition. - and BTW I also pointed out UK Monopoly Law and EU 'Abuse of a Dominant Position' - You also failed to answer why countries that rightly or wrongly put business at the heart of their economies - all take steps to prevent monopolies and maintain competition.
The anti-trust laws penalize efficiency and encourage companies to please politicians not consumers. I could give you a long list of sources to back any points I make, but it still falls on you to take the time to read them. Here are two excellent reads: Antitrust and Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure by Dominick Armentano; Man, Economy, and State by Murray Rothbard.

As I said monopolies don't last in a free-market unless they are benefiting the consumer, and in that case, there is no problem. Anti-trust laws are a form of protectionism, that may protect some businesses, but at the cost of everyone else. To stay in business you either have to be good at delivering goods and services, or pay off the right politicians. One is a free-market, which leads to progress; the other is what the countries you mention have in various degrees -- socialism, which destroys progress. It is foolish to believe that all wealthy, big-businessmen are advocates of the free-market; most are not.

I think the utter absurdity of anti-trust laws can be summed up by the 1944 ruling against Alcoa, where the judge found them guilty of possessing "superior skill and foresight."

"[Alcoa] insists that it never excluded competitors; but we can think of no more effective exclusion than progressively to embrace each opportunity as it opened, and to face every newcomer with new capacity already geared into a great organization, having the advantage of experience, trade connections and the elite of personnel."

They were punished for excellence.

Did you know that the entire Japanese electronics industry was the result of antitrust regulations on RCA, which resulted in the company licensing their products to Japanese companies? The rest is history.

The list goes on and on.

Talk to any small businessman. Ask him how gov't regulations affect his business.

Terms like "fair competition" are amusing. When Mike Tyson was in his prime should he have been forced to go into the ring with his shoe-laces tied together and one hand behind his back? I mean it wasn't fair how he just beat all those guys up. Life isn't fair, and that's a good thing.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
I will also say that, unlike you, I am not a fan of 'Natural Law' arguments, - God/Nature gave us abilities -
I can tell you're not a fan of Natural Law, but it is the only system they holds up to reason and inquiry.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
rights are a societial (primarily legal) concept - after all simply because nature gave me the ability to break your grandmother's neck (to use an unlikley example) does not mean I am entitled to do so. -
You're still struggling with this notion of rights. You may have the ability to break my grandmother's neck, but you do not have a right to break her neck. However, in this situation, my grandmother does have a right to shoot you in the face.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
You definition sounds like it's pulled out of a law undergrad's textbook on natural law.
Thanks for the compliment. It came right off the top of my head. I was just showing that this isn't as complicated of a matter as you are trying to make it.

This is simple, fairly short, and offers a better explanation than I can give:

http://isil.org/resources/philosophy...ty-english.swf

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
As far as I am concrened you cannot have freedom without equality. - Although my question was how to establish that equality.
This is an either/or and equality cannot actually be achieved. Establishing equality is ugly and will cost freedom. Freedom doesn't need to be established, just get out of everyone's way. Which is more important to you freedom or equality?

-Michael
"Through aiki we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately." - M. Mochizuki
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2007, 05:51 AM   #308
Taliesin
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 82
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Michael you are back to assuming all products and services are equal.

You still have come up with an argument that competition in provisions of necessities is necessarily beneficial. All you've got is arguments based on what happens when the product's/services are luxuries (And i agreed that competition as far as those matters are concerned - remember)

By the way Natural Law argumetns of rights do not in the slightest stand up to examination
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2007, 03:02 AM   #309
Taliesin
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 82
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Michael

I thought what would happen if you did have a country with no Government, no pesky laws or regulations (at least none that are recognised and enforced), no restrictons on possession of a gun (no laws means no ownership) wouldn't that be a perfect capitalist, utopian paradise.

Then I though of a country that for several years had no Government, no effective laws, no regulations, no restrictions on ownership of a gun, no restrictions or limitations, a true free market

The name of this undoubted paradise? - Somalia.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2007, 05:11 AM   #310
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
Michael you are back to assuming all products and services are equal.

You still have come up with an argument that competition in provisions of necessities is necessarily beneficial. All you've got is arguments based on what happens when the product's/services are luxuries (And i agreed that competition as far as those matters are concerned - remember)
Is raw aluminum ingot a luxury or a necessity?

Please define necessity.

The "necessities" That I imagine you are referring to are mostly delivered by gov't (monopoly), private companies with gov't granted monopolies, or heavily regulated industries (water, waste disposal, electricity, postal?, education, defense, police, courts, health care).

So are you in favor of monopoly or against it? Or does it depend?

Economic laws are always the same, whether you like it or not.

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
By the way Natural Law argumetns of rights do not in the slightest stand up to examination
Please elaborate.

If there were no States, no Nations, no Gov'ts would man still have rights? Would there still be such a thing as justice? Would ethics exist?

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
Then I though of a country that for several years had no Government, no effective laws, no regulations, no restrictions on ownership of a gun, no restrictions or limitations, a true free market

The name of this undoubted paradise? - Somalia.
Good job! I doubt most people realize that Somalia has no central gov't. The interesting thing is, Somalians are doing better now then when they had a gov't -- especially in the north. Somalia is developing faster than neighboring countries, and most of the problems they are having is from outsider interference (UN, US, AU, Ethiopia) trying to re-establish a democratic central government.

Paradise? Probably not, but I was never talking about paradise.

Besides, you can't compare Somalia to the US or UK. Only to their own situtation. Why don't we hear that they are doing fine without gov't for the last 15 years?

Wait a minute. 15 years without gov't does sound like paradise!

-Michael
"Through aiki we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately." - M. Mochizuki
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2007, 08:42 AM   #311
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 632
United_States
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

In re: Rights vs. Privileges

Human rights naturally belong to humans.

Corporations are not humans.

Therefore, any discussion of corporate rights must begin with the acknowledgment that so-called "corporate rights" granted to fictive entities operating under the doctrine of "corporate personhood" are, in fact, privileges of a lesser order than "human rights" held by humans.

Humboldt County, California has revoked those corporate rights by the successful passage of Proposition T in June 2006. It is the largest, but not the only, municipality which has revoked those rights as regards campaign contributions.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2007, 11:46 AM   #312
Taliesin
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 82
Offline
Re: A President's Thought

Michael

Since you have moved the debates on monopolies - I am against private monopolies as far a necessities are concerned. I am less concerned with publically owned monopolies. As far a luxuries - I don't care.

With regard to your questions

"If there were no States, no Nations, no Gov'ts would man still have rights? Would there still be such a thing as justice? Would ethics exist?"

No - Rights are a societal concept - without that framework to provide legitmacy all you have is abilities. (To Fred - since rights are a societal concept society can grant lesser rights to corporate persons than Human Beings - but there still needs to be a society)

Yes - Although it would be even more poorly understood than it is now, and there would be no external objective framework - it would be a purely subjective concept of whether an individual considered an outcome 'fair' (consider the term 'poetic justice').

Yes - ethics are a personal and contextual value system of right and wrong. You do not need a society to have your own subjective idea of what is right and what is wrong.

Moving onto Somalia

Michael I very disappointed you have things backward. The Ethiopian Troops invaded after the Islamic Courts Union had taken over and effective established a Goverment (albeit unrecognised internationally, like Somaliland), they didn't invade when there was no Government. There is a Government there now - although still almost entirely dependant on Ethiopian troops and fighting continues. - so you have a point about outside intervention possibly making things worse - After a form of government was taking hold.

The Background - Somalia had no effective Government 1995 - 2006 just competing/warring majority 'Clans'.

Then last year the Islamic Courts Union took over and established some form of Government and Sharia law. This was considered a significant improvement for both business and human rights (except by the USA and Ethiopia)

Ethiopia then invaded in 'support' of the 'Trasnsitional Government' (Powerless Government in Exile). Bringing Somalia back to civil war. - which is pretty much where we are now.

When you talk about northern Somalia where exactly do you mean Somaliland?, Puntoland? (Both that effectively have governments of their own).

In answer to your question

Why don't we hear that they are doing fine without gov't for the last 15 years?

Somalis were not by any stretch of the imagination doing 'fine'. Just think how bad things have to be for Sharia law to be considered an improvement. (Or you could dig up the Amnesty International, Human Rigths Watch, US State Dept reports for that time).

I also point out that I have represented far too many Somali Refugees over the years (minority clan mainly) to have any illusions that Somali's were doing 'fine'.

It wasn't reported because the news agencies and 'audience' were not interested. Pretty much as they weren't interested in the 'brotherwar' that broke out between the PUK and KDP when the Kurdish Autonoumous Area was established.

I've also ask you to note that the evidence does not support Somali's "doing better now".

UNICEF warns of critical levels of malnutrition amongst Somali children

NAIROBI, 12 September 2007 - Following a recent nutrition survey, UNICEF and its partners estimate that 83,000 children in central and southern Somalia suffer from malnutrition - 13,500 of whom are severely malnourished and at risk of dying.

"These children urgently require attention to ensure that they survive," said UNICEF Representative to Somalia Christian Balslev-Olesen. "UNICEF is very concerned that their numbers might increase with continued civil strife, limited humanitarian access to these areas, food insecurity and a depressed economy," he added.

Malnutrition is not new to Somalia, however such critical levels in a region known as the country's breadbasket are alarming and point to a deteriorating humanitarian situation. In fact, an earlier comprehensive nutrition survey conducted in May in Middle and Lower Shabelle (bordering Mogadishu) had already indicated that 17 per cent of children under five years of age suffer from global acute malnutrition – a figure that is above WHO emergency threshold levels (>15 per cent).

"Children and families in this region have recently gone from one shock to another" said Balslev-Olesen, "and with the next flood season around the corner, it is important that peace building efforts are intensified to ensure that UNICEF and its partners can address the underlying causes of these problems as well as the immediate needs."

UNICEF currently supports 60 selective feeding programmes in Central and Southern Somalia. These centres treat about 15,000 malnourished children each month. But in order to scale up its activities and reach the thousands of additional children at risk, issues of security must be tackled.

"We appeal to all parties involved," stressed Balslev-Olesen "to establish peace so that we can work with communities to meet the needs of these children."

The number of people in need of humanitarian assistance in Somalia has increased from one million to 1.5 million since January 2007. Most of those in need are children and women.

About UNICEF
UNICEF is on the ground in over 150 countries and territories to help children survive and thrive, from early childhood through adolescence. The world's largest provider of vaccines for developing countries, UNICEF supports child health and nutrition, good water and sanitation, quality basic education for all boys and girls, and the protection of children from violence, exploitation, and AIDS. UNICEF is funded entirely by the voluntary contributions of individuals, businesses, foundations and governments.

Pictures available upon request.

For interviews, please call:
Christian Balslev-Olesen, UNICEF Representative, +254 722 514 569 or +254 733 629 933
Nuradin Derie (for interviews in Somali), +254 722 582 646

For further information, please contact:
Misbah Sheikh, OIC Communication, UNICEF Somalia Support Center, Tel: +254 20 762-3958
Mob: +254 736 397 771, Email: msheikh@unicef.org

(End)

Somalia Faces Bleak Future But Hope Endures

By Darren Taylor
Washington
10 September 2007

Conflict continues in Somalia, the Horn of Africa country that's been ravaged by violence for almost two decades. Innocent civilians are caught in fighting between members of Islamic militias, and troops from Ethiopia and Somalia's Transitional Federal Government (TFG). Human rights monitors say thousands of people have been killed or displaced. A recent national conference called to set the agenda for more inclusive politics in Somalia has instead resulted in further division. In the final part of a series focusing on Somalia, VOA's Darren Taylor looks at the future of the country.

"Somalis in general want peace. The problem of course is that many Somali elites have armed themselves and are only pursuing a peace that they are willing to live with, that they would benefit from. So the average Somali – man, woman and child – ends up suffering because of the nefarious interests of a few," says Dr. Andre Le Sage, an analyst at the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, a US government think tank in Washington, and a former political advisor in the process that resulted in the formation of the TFG.

"The folks who are stoking problems in Somalia are a minority in that country. And you have that minority in almost every country in the world if there is lawlessness. But when democratic governments are in place, most people want to go on with their lives, take care of their families, put their children through school, and Somalis are no different," says Prof. Abdi Ismail, a Somali academic who teaches at the University of Minnesota.

But, at the moment, there can be no "getting on with their lives" for Somalis, whether they're still living in the country or in foreign lands, for their homeland continues to be torn apart by violence.

Many Somali analysts, including Dr. Mohamed Diriye Abdullahi, a linguist and historian based in Hargeisa in Somaliland, say the only way to ensure peace and prosperity in Somalia in the future is for the international community, and especially Ethiopia, to allow Somalis to "sort out their own problems."

"The main problem in Somalia is the outside intervention, outside actors. The problem is Somalis are so weak that any country, by using a few million dollars, can influence the situation in Somalia. And that is what has been happening for the last 16 years," says Abdullahi.

"We had interference from Kenya, Ethiopia and even tiny Djibouti. And then from the bigger powers, like the United States and the European Union, and they are always interested in getting their own outcomes from Somalia."

Some observers accuse the US of selfishness, of only being interested in Somalia because of its potential to become a haven for terrorists and therefore a direct threat to America, and they accuse Ethiopia of having helped to rig the outcome of the process of negotiations that resulted in former military leader Abdullahi Yusuf being elected president of Somalia's TFG and appointing many members of his Darod clan to senior positions in his administration. Such a scenario, they say, allows Ethiopia to maintain its hegemony in the Horn of Africa by having unfettered influence over a friendly, but essentially weak, Somali administration.

Afyare Abdi Elmi, a Somali international relations specialist at the University of Alberta, says Liberia and Sierra Leone only experienced harmony when their respective warlord leaders, Foday Sankoh and Charles Taylor, were removed from the peace process.

"Somalia is no different. Rewarding warlords will not bring peace to the Somali people. These individuals committed heinous crimes and they are not interested in peace or democracy. The United States should help in establishing a commission of international inquiry that investigates Somalia war crimes," Elmi states.

Instead of encouraging flawed reconciliation conferences, events he says omit key players in the conflict and simply serve to set the stage for more violence, Elmi is convinced that the US should encourage efforts by countries such as Saudi Arabia to mediate in Somalia.

"The Saudi government has helped mediate similar conflicts in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. Moreover, most Somalis consider it a neutral country and it has a close relationship with Washington. It can also influence the Islamist groups as they are indispensable for ending the conflict," Elmi reasons.

Some Somali analysts also mention Yemen as the possible host of an all-inclusive peace summit for Somalia in the near future.

Le Sage agrees that the international community should make more efforts to involve "allies that have common interests in Somalia and might have better contacts with some segments of Somalia's political leadership, as divided as they are. So working with and through and in conjunction with Saudi Arabia, Yemen and other countries makes perfect sense."

But even if this were to happen, says Abdullahi, Somalis should still be "left alone" to negotiate their own future. He says there's an encouraging precedent for this.

"Here in Somaliland, people left the leaders alone and look at the result we have: a stable democracy. We had negotiations and conferences, we established a bicameral parliament and now we have peace. And we have no terrorists here. If you leave people alone to sort out their own problems, they will come up with solutions."

But Omar Faruk, the chairman of the National Union of Somali Journalists, says abandoning Somalis in the "high hope" that they'll solve decades of strife on their own would be "wrong…. The international community withdrew from Somalia in the 1990's, and that prolonged the crisis and the conflict. The US-led UN troops left from Somalia in the 1990's, while the conflict in Somalia was only starting. And at that time we had only two main warlords. Now, we have more than 30 equal-power warlords – either in the government or not in the government."

The only way forward for a lasting peace in Somalia, he says, is for the international community to continue to pressure the factional leaders.

"We need the international community to be present on the ground, as peacekeepers, and at the same time to push the different political groups to reach a solution. We do not need less international presence in Somalia; we need much more. But it must be in the form of a legitimate peacekeeping force, with no sinister motives," Faruk says.

Ismail says unless there's major reconstruction and development in Somalia, there'll be no peace, and what's needed is for international donors to make substantial financial commitments to the country.

"Very significant amounts of money, carefully monitored, that will be invested in the infrastructure of Somali society, the rebuilding of the country – ports and airports and schools and roads, water systems, electricity, security, education, health – those kinds of things. If that is done, then it will create jobs in the country. Many of the young people who have nowhere to go will see that as a new hope for them, and the revival of the Somali society will take place. There will be little need for young people to join warlords, or to join Islamist militants, or whatever group," he says.

Prof. Ahmed Samatar, the dean of international relations at Macalester College in Minnesota, says he and other Somali academics have often discussed the future of their impoverished, violent homeland.

"We have made some calculations, and we think that an investment of about a billion dollars a year for about five to six years in those kinds of social infrastructure and economic infrastructure will put new energy into the revival of Somali society and its own institutions."

But Samatar also believes that a "moderate Islam" has a major role to play in Somalia's future.

"This is a society that has to rise from the ashes. And the only way in which you can rise from the ashes is to retrieve some of the fundamental cultural foundations of that society. Islam is a Somali phenomenon. The Somalis cannot be non-Muslims. There are many in the Somali society who understand that an Islam that is cosmopolitan, that's connected to the world, is the key to rehabilitated, democratic politics."

Prof. Hagi Mukthar, another prominent Somali academic in the US, says no "proper" development will happen in Somalia unless there is a "large scale disarmament process, supported by the world, to get rid of all the weapons in the country. Otherwise it will remain in disarray. You can't have people running around a country carrying weapons of mass destruction and expect there to be peace and political negotiation."

But Mukthar isn't optimistic. He foresees the circle of ethnic violence continuing in Somalia.

"No clan until today (has) really won over another clan. There was no loser, and there's no winner. It's always like this," he says.

"One area where we are failing hopelessly is that you never hear Somalis speaking about the rule of law. I've never heard of any place that has undergone a crisis of such magnitude, and nobody talks about what has gone wrong, about who is who in the whole scenario."

He warns against a "growing apathy" among Somalis.

"Other nations, in the aftermath of a civil crisis, there's always a great shout amongst the people for the rule of law to take precedence in establishing order. If you look at South Africa, Rwanda, Liberia and Sierra Leone – there were processes there that allowed the people a bit of justice. Why is this not happening in Somalia? It worries me a great deal. There are no calls for any tribunals, or for any justice, in Somalia."

Tom Porteous, the director of Human Rights Watch in London, warns that the Somali state cannot be rebuilt in a "human rights vacuum. All the parties to the conflict at the moment have committed very serious violations of international humanitarian law. Those violations continue, and as long as they continue, it's going to be extremely difficult even to start rebuilding the Somali state."

(End)
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Train of thought Ketsan General 35 12-04-2006 06:13 AM
ki in scientific thought shadow Spiritual 193 06-22-2003 03:49 AM
Reason for Thought DaveO General 20 08-12-2002 03:03 AM
the Path Beyond thought CraigJamieson Techniques 3 08-27-2001 04:00 PM
food for thought ( maybe not... hey that rhymes!) Chocolateuke General 4 08-10-2001 05:49 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:00 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2017 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate