The faith of Taliban women

Recently the world was staggered by the image of Bibi Aisha, a 19 year-old Afghan woman, who was brutally mutilated by her Taliban husband. Her photograph placed on the latest cover of the Time magazine shocked everybody. Her story takes us to a world of everyday brutality and women abuse, to a world where the is no escape and no one to protect you.

Aisha like many Afghan women got married in a very young age. Her husband was a member of a Taliban family, placed somewhere in the middle on the ladder of the local society. Aisha was frequently abused and tortured by her father-in-law and her 10 brothers-in-law, with the full approval of her husband and the whole family. Being almost beaten to death, treated worse than the households animals. she decided to escape. A lonely woman, terrified and unable to live on her own in an Islamic state, could not run for long. Aisha was captured and handed over to her husbands family custody. A local Taliban commander in charge of the tribal judicial system was supposed to decide her faith. Neither marks of previous brutality nor the woman’s story could convince him to withdraw the charges of bringing shame upon her husbands family. In this way Aisha was sentenced to mutilation on the basis of a crime against honour.

The sentence was carried out by her husband. He and two other members of the family, imprisoned Aisha in a dark room, than he took out a knife and sliced off her ears. After that he butchered her nose. Aisha had massive blood lost she passed out. When she woke up she couldn’t even see due to all the blood. She was walking alone along the countryside until a group of American construction workers found her and delivered to a hospital.

Aisha was placed in a secret woman shelter in Kabul, where she received psychological and medical treatment. A foundation from the States promised to help Aisha and provide money for her re-constructive surgery.

That was not the first and unfortunately not the last case of violence against women in Afghanistan. Actually the problem concerns most Islamic states and even Muslim societies in the Western World. Yet Afghanistan is still the main front in the fight for women rights. As long as the war against the Taliban goes on there is progress, as Western values start to leak into the Afghan society, however there is still the question what will happen after the war is won.

It is more often said that to achieve long-lasting peace it is necessary to negotiate with the Taliban leaders. Only together with them the new Afghan government could fully control the whole country. Is that not a step backwards? The whole war started to beat the Taliban terrorists and partisans. And those are the same people who officially approve of violence against women. Will it be possible to improve the situation of women, if you reach a settlement with people who brutally mutilate and kill women?

That is a question the Afghan government has to ask itself.

MP

The Land of Last Pirates

With worlds eyes turned towards South Africa and its World Cup, discussions about the future of Africa and the changes it already has been through, started to heat up the atmosphere around the Dark Continent once again. Leaving the aftershock of the football festival in SA aside, as it is already the topic of many media researches, I will move miles up north to the Republic of Somalia.

When you look carefully on the map of the continent you realize that the peninsula on which Somalia is located looks just like a rhinoceroses horn, and as a matter of fact it is actually called the Horn of Africa. The Horn proudly encroaches into the Arabic Sea, reminding the forgotten history. History when due to all the important luxurious resources it was still called by the Romans the “Aroma Land” and in medieval times known to the Europeans as “Land of the Berbers” a mysterious land of fearsome warriors.

Nowadays the Horn is frequently torn by conflicts and unrest. Somalia became recently the grim leader of regional mayhem and disorder. Being considered as a haven for terrorists and Islamic radicals, as a state that is both internally unstable and dangerous to its neighbours, Somalia draw the attention of the international community. Concerning the common knowledge on how “quick” and “efficient” the heretofore world interventions in Africa were, it was reasonable to expect no serious international actions in the region. That would have been true, if not for the one thing that Somalia became later world-famous  for. Pirates.

That is right, pirates. Most people have this romantic vision of pirates from the past -  looking for treasure, sailing the seven seas, fighting with sabres and wearing eye-patches. Unfortunately the image of Somalian pirates is so much different than that of the cunning Jack Sparrow, from the popular pirate films. No parrots, no wooden legs but a lot of old guns, machetes and frustration. Instead of a majestic lofty, they use dirty motorboats that had their best days long ago. Somalia pirates where on the news radar of worlds media after a few spectacular kidnappings of huge cargo ships and tankers.  The Somalian government having a handful of own problems and fighting a never-ending civil-war, had no means to intervene.  After a couple of hostage crises and more aggressive kidnapping attacks, countries that had to protect their trading routes, decided to act. The US and EU sates agreed on sending their military fleets to patrol the waters and secure the cargo-ships that crossed the pirate territory.  That has improved the situation on the surrounding waters, though the bloodshed on dry-land persisted if it has not developed.

The civil-war originated around old tribal and clan conflicts, going back to times where the main cause of war, were the resource conflicts between Christians and Muslims in the region. The actual modern conflict began in 1991, when the repressive regime of Siad Barre was overthrown. In spite of the success the anti-Barre insurgents achieved, Somalia fall deeper into havoc, what resulted in a counter-revolution group backing Barr.

In the same year the northern part of the country, generally the area known as Puntland declared independence as Somaliland. Even though the new state provided considerable stability in the region it wasn’t recognized by any foreign country. The United Nations tried to provide peace in the region by establishing three peacekeeping missions UNOSOM I, UNITAF and UNOSOM II. To put the story short, once again the “blue helmets” weren’t enough to establish peace in an African state. In fact the infamous raid on Mogadishu and the battle for the city in 1993 resulted in serious UN casualties, where local gunmen managed to trap a Pakistan patrol. The UN decided to pull-back all the troops.

After the UN troops left, a new axis of conflict broke out, between secular warlords and the ICU (Islamic Courts Union). The ICU radical Islam policies were the main obstacle in reaching a settlement, what resulted in more cooperation within the opposition of the ICU, which established in 2006 the ARPCT (Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism). The ARPCT was backed by the United States.

After some major military success of the ICU, most of the country was in the hands of the Islamic militants. Finally an intervention of the Ethiopian army supported by the US, led to the downfall of the ICU. Though basically the militants lost the war with the government and most of their structures fell apart, they kept fighting as partisans and insurgents in southern provinces. When the Ethiopian forces withdrew from the country in 2009, the Islamic rebels raised once again against the government. With the rebels gaining power in the south, war broke out again at its fullest. While tribal conflicts where paralysing government efforts to restore peace, radicals managed to take Mogadishu.

Behind every war there is the tragic story of civilians, as they suffer the most. As the war goes on, once again the cries of people echo terribly in the air. The recent fights in the capital have already resulted in dozens killed and even more injured. Refugees try to leave the country or at least to find a safe place. In the first case refugee camps along the borders are already full and the conditions are terrible. Huge groups of refugees are being send back from Saudi Arabia, where they tried to find asylum, and they are sent right back into the middle of the conflict. In the whole country there is no safe place, however the northern regions of the country are still believed to be safer than central and south Somalia, where most of the fighting goes on.

International aid is crucial, basic supplies – water, food and medicine – are need. Another attempt of the UN to at least help the civilians should be considered. As the intervention against pirates was amazingly quick, it wonders me why aren’t there any actions taken against the radicals. Somalia is still considered to be an Al-Qaeda haven and an important point in the War on Terror policy. I would like to remind Barack Obama, that he was awarded the Nobel price, some believe that now he is in depth to world peace. What we need to remember is that in this particular depth, there is no interest rate, but human lives…

MP

If there is money, there are controversions

With the recent events in Greece, where people once again stormed the streets to show they frustration and lack of trust to the government, the world could once again observe the struggle of the European Union to work out a common crisis policy. One my say that the problems of the Greek economy are an issue only to the Euro-currency group, but the problem goes further. As it turns out not only the involvement of the IMP and the Euro Monetary Union was need, but also a full agreement of the rest of EU states was necessary. All this once again drove controversy to the very idea of the Euro currency. Will the Euro survive with all the national states undermining its transparency?

Two of the biggest contributors to the EMU France and Germany are starting to doubt the involvement of financial unstable countries within the Euro project. Especially in Germany’s cold approach to the economical disaster in Greece we could observe a disappointment and disagreement. Finally a rescue plan for Greece was forged by the member states Finance Ministers and a success in the prevention of a another deep economical crisis in Europe was announced. What I want to ask, is the problem really solved?

Once again have the European string-pullers proved that they are not capable of developing a long term stabilization plan. Helping Greece is just softening the symptoms and not curing the illness. The Euro Monetary Union is becoming a overblown bubble that could burst unexpectedly, as by now it is kept alive by strong support from sovereign, national states and their financial bail outs during the time Europe was first struck by the world economical crisis. The questions is, whether the Euro is strong enough to survive the financial tsunami in Europe, or is it just a artificial product of a noble idea. Expert voices are leaning more and more towards the dusk of the universal European currency, yet state leaders of the EU remain optimistic. The rise or fall of the Euro is still a hazard of judgement and apparently one of the reasons economists can’t sleep at night. One thing is certain, something is wrong with the European economy and it mustn’t be particularly connect with the recent world crisis. Something might just spread the disease from the very core of the ECU.

As I mentioned this isn’t the first time Greece has problems with it’s public debt, so why do all the other states once again have to put effort in reviving Greece’s economy. “A test of solidarity” – you can hear from euro-enthusiasts, “By helping them, we help ourselves” would the pragmatics say, and finally the euro-sceptics “Bureaucracy and Super-state forming”. Where is the balance? This is more a question for a fortune-teller, as analytics’s were proved wrong to many times. Anyhow is it right to carry on your back a state that for the last decades has done nothing more than pushed itself towards bankruptcy. The fact that Greece is in the ECU puts it in favour of other countries, like i.e. Hungary who recently has undergone a severe economical crisis. The reluctance to help was here more noticeable.

Maybe the Euro is a currency for a Superstate, and this is still not the time to talk about such a geopolitical structure in Europe.

MP

A win is not enough

After the results of the British elections were announced (649 on 650 seats already declared) the Conservatives camp could celebrate. The win over they rival Labour party, which has been ruling Britain so far, was not a complete victory. With the third political power Liberal-Democrats far behind(57 seats), Tories received 306 seats and Labour 258. This most probably will lead Cameron to a hung government with the Lib-Dem. Talks about a perspective coalition have already started. With the Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg also being in an uncomfortable situation, while receiving around 6 mln votes, still staying behind the two major parties, a coalition is slowly taking shape behind the scenes.

The defeat of  Gordon Brown’s Labour Party was predicted before the election, as the shape of the British economy and a few political scandals shifted the support strongly in favour of the opposition to the labour government under Brown. Within the election campaign both Liberal-Democrats and Conservatives pointed the ruling Labour as the cause of the deep economical crisis of the United Kingdom, strongly reminding that all those years of Labour supremacy have brought Britain into a dead end. Brown had nothing much in the defence of his government as many times figures where speaking against him (unemployment, salaries drop outs and general wealth). Additionally a few faux pas of the last prime minister with the ‘bigot woman’ incident as a landmark overhauled common tendencies among voters. Still the loss could be worse and Labour is second after Tories in the number of seats and overwhelmed Lib-Dems.

Though the differences in number of votes isn’t that drastic between the three main players (Cosv, Lab, Lib-Dem) Britain’s electoral law once again puts a rather ambiguous placement of seats. While the Liberals had around 6 mln votes and 57 seats, Labour had around 8 mln and 258 seats. This raises once again a discussion about the British electoral system with the supporters of a proportional voting system criticizing the British model. Tu put it simple in the UK the winner takes-it-all. It means that in each Constituency the highest count wins, leaving the second with nothing. This sometimes leads to situation in which even a high count of votes on one of the main parties would not grant it victory. On the other hand the fact of a greater political unification of small groups and the most possible outcome of a two-parties system is considered as a positive side is often considered. Is this system a good solution, I leave to your judgment.

Coming back to the outcomes of the election, we should be soon expecting a decision whether there will be a hung government or coalition. No matter what will be decided the new government will have a difficult time to bring back Great Britain on the right track. The victory of the Conservatives may also have a bigger impact on Europe than most people think, as the UK politics in the EU main change drastically and drift away from the pro integration policy represented by Labour. Will it bring the first cranny on the idea of the EU? Will Britain rise from the crisis? All the answers has David Cameron.

MP

A dark day…

10.04.2010 A Polish plane with the President of Poland Lech Kaczynski any many Polish officials crashed in a terrible accident in Smolensk. This tragedy brought death of many important and honourable members of the Polish political elite, including former President of Poland in Exile Ryszard Kaczorowski, members of parliament, representatives of the church, highest military commanders, social workers, combatants and Katyn Families representatives.

Today I pass my condolences to the families of all the people who died at the catastrophe in Smolensk. I mourn with them and the Polish nation about the loss of the great figures of Poland.

MP

Who opress, will be opressed?

One of the main excuses made up by terrorists to justify their actions is the struggle of freedom. Revenge and retaliation supposed to be the answer to violence. This is true. Partially. If we look at the areas of higher terrorist activity or the countries from which they are recruited, we can see that there is always war, oppression and political instability in the background. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq or Caucasian and African countries, each has a story behind it. In Europe there was IRA in Northern Ireland and ETA in Spain, the struggle for sovereignty is many times painted with blood. This is of course not applicable to all situations, sure there can be terrorism without any particular higher reason, maybe just madness, cruelty or greed.

Nonetheless even killing a guilty man, makes us guilty as well. That is why there is no justification for acts of terror. And even if there would be a just reason, like freedom or the right to live, is the violence pointed in the right direction. Lets say here for a moment that there are people, hypothetically, that deserve to die. I guess most of you would put here Hitler and other mass murderers. Taking out someone like Hitler, a ringleader, would need some other deaths too. So we kill his bodyguards and accomplices, more bodies on the pile. Well they worked with him/for him, so they either supported what he did or did some terrible stuff themselves, right? Going further, the only chance to take him out is on a picnic. So you are sitting there in the bushes. A sunny and warm day, a clear sky and the smell of sausages in the air. You sit in the bush, you have a perfect view of the scene and you hold the detonator. All the families of his accomplices are there. Women. Children. Elderly people. Maybe some of the women are pregnant. You can say that they are the family of murderers. You can say the children bear a genetic god that will make them evil. And what if there are prisoner there. Innocent people. Some of them hurt even more then you. Some of them want to kill Hitler even more than you. Maybe they are you colleagues, friends or family? The detonator getting kind of itchy in your hand? No? Necessary victims for a greater good you might say? I got a even better word, martyrs! Kill a few, save thousands? Maybe, maybe not. But this is not a question whether I would go back in time and kill Hitler or not, this a material for another discussion.

The point I am trying to make here is that killing people has this incredible tendency to focus somehow on innocent bystanders. The average Joe. So please if you support any activists that support violence in the name of their cause, cut the crap. Either go and kill you neighbour because he disagrees with you or just shut up and keep in value human lives. I would not advice the first one, sure you maybe be busted, but that is not the worse thing that could happen. The person you killed may have somebody who cared about him/her, even if not, someone might just feel supportive of him, of the idea he died for, and he comes and kills you. Simple. Do the maths if all of us would think that way.

People that died in the last terrorist attack in Moscow where ordinary people. They died in the subway, going to work, coming back home, visiting some shops, friends or just taking a ride. They had the right to. Some of them had no idea of what where the attacker fighting for. Some of them maybe even supported their cause and did not agree with what the government was doing. Nevertheless they died in the blast. More where wounded. The terrorists were recognized as the women. Women from Dagestan, described by their relatives as pious but not radical. The first one was a 17 year old girl, widowed recently, as her husband was killed in an counter-terrorist action. The second one was 20 year old teacher, also a widow after a Dagestanian rebel. There are thousand of women similar to them in Russia. Yet they killed 39 people and wounded 95.

Is this attack going to improve the situation of Caucasian rebels in Russia? No. Will it soften the brutal policy of the Russian military? No. Will it improve the peace talks and negotiations between the two sides? No. So what will it do? Actually it will strengthen the authoritarian grip of Kremlin in the rebellious provinces. It will start a long term retaliation campaign and it will cause more deaths on both sides. It also lowers the support of the international community, that could back up the independence process of the rebellious regions.  Goal achieved? Death. Maybe revenge. Maybe the approval of my god, who will meet me in grace. But hell believe me I do not want to meet this god, that is pleased by blowing all those people in to pieces. They did it for their dead husbands? Common they are dead they do not care! For themselves? Well suicide is a much different word than genocide, so why put them together. One of the beauties of free will is the fact you can kill you self and nobody should have anything to say about it, just let it stay personal. I do realize this is an important, serious topic but my irony shows the absolutely lack of logic in this behaviour.

Here we come to the next step I would like to talk about. There is no logic in acts performed in the heat of the moment, passion, madness and desperation. So why am I expecting it just a few lines earlier? I am because the message I want to pull through is actually directed to YOU dear readers (I sincerely hope there are no terrorists among you), so you could realize some important things. What are they? Well, first of all terrorism can be born (and mostly is) from oppression and  bilateral hatred. If the international community can support the independence of Kosovo, why is it tolerating so many other areas of conflicts. If Russia accept the independence of South Ossetia why can’t they accept the sovereignty of Chechnya.  If China pursues it’s foreign policy by cooperation with tribal rebels in African states, why can’t they grant Tibet independence. Please understand me right, I am not a dreamer and I do not believe in a world Utopia (just yet). I know all the strategical, political and economical interests behind those situations. I just want you to care more about those pending issues. Sure we all have our own more important and down to earth problems. But remember one day you might be the person taking that subway and then suddenly. Boom!

MP

Reason or Islamophobia?

Once again Europe trembles under the discussion where is the borderline in matters of tolerance, this time the topic is even more edgy, as it concerns the presence of Islam in the Old Continent. The chain of events launched after the loud referendum in Switzerland, concerning the ban of minarets build near to new mosques. With the ban passed, the Muslim World declared the beginning of a new islamophobic era and the media dwell whether it is an exaggeration or a serious problem.

The rising population of Muslims in Europe causes frequent cultural clashes and divides Europeans in their opinion on tolerance. The question at issue is if multiculturalism should be put above the basic values of the Western World. This values aren’t strictly defined and the borders are often blurry, although it is possible to agree on a common pattern.  Modern Europe is based upon freedom of speech, thought and believes as well as right to live, work and decide. One can say that one’s freedom ends where it endangers someone else’s rights. Based on this  Europe welcomed people form all cultures and religions.

Islam was never an European religion so it is unreasonable to consider it as a cultural pillar of modern Europe and therefore implement Islamic law as tradition above state law. European states are lay countries and although all of them have a common ancestral background with roots in the romano-christian cultural circle, state legislation has long been above religious dogmas. On the contrary Sharia law in Islamic countries is most commonly the state law and it is strictly abided. In a case of a foreigner breaking the rules of Islamic law, the regulations are often providing one solution, death penalty. Cases vary, but time to time a shocking news appears in the media as people are going to be persecuted for showing off affection in public, wearing immodest cloths or performing social activities for better treatment of women. All this is even more shocking when we compare it with the fact that every little incident involving the Muslim community in Europe fires a huge response from all the Islamic states. In particular every action performed by legal authorities, based on violation of state law, is considered as an attempt to isolate and discriminate Muslims.

The question that has to be asked is simple. Is it logical, necessary and right to give up our values in the name of tolerance? Tolerance that in fact is misunderstood by most of the people, as letting others to be intolerant towards your own values and culture is everything but tolerance. Europe is proud about the fact that it hosts the most multicultural society. But this is the same Europe where the two World Wars started and where most of the xenophobic and racists philosophies were found. One should hope that Europeans have learned they lesson and that peace and prosperity still will be among their main priorities. The idea of the European Union, putting aside it’s economical spectrum, is supposed to be the means to achieve a stable and splendid global society. This is the project of our own, common future.

Something that is based on equality and integrity, can not create double standards for different groups, law needs to be respected.  This rule applies no matter what the subjects nationality, religion or political allegiance is. Yet the problem seems to be  evolving somehow only around the Muslim society. Any sign of criticism is automatically assumed to be of islamophobic origin and a constructive discussion is often covered by outbursts full of anger and lamentation. Picturing themselves as victims of intolerance, Muslims gain the upper hand and are able to scar the very idea of a multicultural world. One may think in their vision of global society there is only place for the followers of Mohammed. It were divisions, started over ethnic, national, religious or political reasons, that led the mankind towards its darkest days. ‘Divine’ laws have all the same problem, for one person they are divine for the other they aren’t.

The issue is not only about the conflict between Sharia law and state law, its more of a cultural intrusion and respecting of basic human rights. Muslims who choose not to abide to the rules of fundamentalists, face retaliation and oppression. It is not even the people who abandon Islam, it touches also the less radical, moderate followers of Allah. If a women living in Europe decides to live up to western cultural standards, she may be even killed just for the sake of honour. It is really hard to help victims of honourable retaliation, as members of the society won’t help, because it is against the law and tradition.

While in France removing all religious symbols from schools included Christian crosses and icons and was an act to overcome the cultural differences in public places and government institutions, the ban of the Muslims women veil the ‘Bruqa’ once again caused a fierce reaction. I might add that wearing a big cross in a Muslim country on the streets is not such an good idea. Another things is that while making fun of, doubting and insulting Jesus, Buddha, Krishna etc. is considered to be an outrage to their believers, no one will threaten your life for it. And in the case of Kurt Westergaard the Danish cartoonist who pictured Mohammed in his works, life threats turned out to be very real. Westergaard was constantly followed and finally a 28 year old Muslim actually tried to kill him. The case of the Dane started the awakening of reason in Europe, which was followed by the mentioned above referendum in Switzerland and the ‘Burqa’ ban in France. Where is the border between free speech and blasphemy? How tolerante do we need to be to let people kill each other for their believes? Can a religion, that is absolutely aggresive orientated be a part of modern Europe?

Of course there will be people that are islamophobic and full of hatred towards Muslims, but do reasonable people have to suffer because of that. Islam isn’t any more aggressive than other bigger religions, its just a matter of interpretation that leads to all the hostility. Though we can not stay passive, a dialogue is needed and if someone thinks there are truths that can not be discussed, then well nobody forced anybody to move to Europe. To put it into simple words, if you visit someone you’re a guest and he is the host. Of course as a guest you have certain privileges, but you act in favour of the the hosts policies. If you decide to stay and you’re becoming from a guest a host your self, well then still, you have to respect the traditions of the house. Otherwise it is just rude and you are an unwanted occupant.

Terrorism in not an Muslim invention either. Fundamentalism? Same. Oppression of infidels? As well. Lower status of women? Was also in Europe. So the problem are not just the Muslim people, we are the problem as well. We need the dialogue to move ahead but we also need to put our foot down sometimes. That is why the Swiss people had their right to decide whether they want minarets or not.

MP

Washington drowning

As Barack Obama was running for President, and he managed to win, all eyes in the world were turn to Washington with high expectations of a new economic, military and political policy. All this was mentioned in Obama’s campaign and there is no doubt the new President at least tried to full-fill those expectations. US economy has already showed symptoms of getting better, with the dollar growing strong again and the local US markets witnessing moderate rise. A positive wave from the US flooded related markets in Asia and Europe, giving the world a little bit more faith in the end of the global economic crisis. Though a general turn-down in the negative effects of the crisis is noticeable, economists agree it is still far to early to talk about the absolute end of the crisis. With most economies still experiencing downturn it seems reasonable to still stay focused on financial reforms.

Obama’s recovery plan costs the US citizens falling further in debt as a country and society. The boosts the new administration gave to the stalling economy being already considered in billions of dollars, and is estimated to grow to a overall budget expense of 3.8 trillion!! Are this steps actually helpful? Is the state subvention to bankrupt companies a good things? All this is still under discussion, but more and more economists say this is at least not enough.

Obama faces a lot of filibuster in the Congress both in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, even though the democrats have a majority in both. Are at least that is what the administration wants the public to believe. On the contrary the is no doubt that D.C. has been flooded with lobbyists and interests groups. The huge impact put on each politician in Washington basically evolves around stoppage of any economical reforms that could disturb the current set of market power, particularly hit the income of many well established groups of influence.

The main question is, if president Obama will keep the promises he gave to the citizens, the middle class in particular, and instead of the wealth of bankers and huge companies owners, he will fight for the change of the average Joe.

MP

Revolution led by Mother Nature

The tragic events of the recent earthquake on Haiti have left a terrifying aftermath, with 75 000 death (it is estimated that the tragedy might actually reach above 200 000) and countless injured, out of homes and any supplies, the survivors still worry about their safety. The quakes dismantled the delicate balance of the state forces structures, it is clearly visible that without international, wide scale help the chaos can not be tamed. Random fires, various illnesses and rising crime still endanger both the locals and the aid services.

Gangs that engage in massive looting, shoot outs and robbery might be the cause of the retreat of most of the international health care personnel, as the authorities are unable to prevent further violence. The presence of foreign forces is a delicate matter, especially for the not distant neighbour the United States. The memory of US govern-ship and the average negative approach to the US, makes America a rather dubious candidate.

Though something must be done, and it must be done quick, as more quakes of rising magnitude are striking the island repeatedly, and the death toll may rise. At Port-au-Prince the situation seems to be critical, the latest quakes damaged the very little remains of structures in the city. Over one third of the populations is without basic supplies, food and water. Desperation is growing as people try to leave the endangered area in self made boats.

Chaos is the ultimate ruler of Haiti, and we can witness a revolution let by mother nature.

P.S. Please support your countries national charities, that help Haiti.

MP

Bosnia, a heart breaking

Bosnia and Herzegovina a relatively new country in Europe’s geopolitical landscape, was so far proudly presented by the international community (EU and NATO in particular) as an example of a model reconstruction of a postwar state. With high US and EU, both military and financial, involvement into peacekeeping and reconstruction of Bosnia, it was believed that at least in this region of the Balkans it was possible to achieve a consensual peace. Huge amounts of money invested in the economy, and more significantly the presence of international troops (first NATO based forces SFOR, then EU based EUFOR) empowered the creation of a Muslim state within the unstable Balkan region. A state that despite the pre-war ethnic differences and the cruelty of the  war itself, managed to include within it’s borders not only Bosnian Muslims, but also Serbs and Bosnian Croats. Soon Sarajevo became the central point of interest for over 200 non-governmental organisations and serious investors (both state and private owned) from all over the world. With time, as skyscrapers started to tower above Bosnia’s capitol and as international forces begun their withdrawal, something seemed to be wrong with the fresh Bosnian state.

The economy went through a serious break down, and foreign investors started to be more careful towards Bosnia and Herzegovina, as the political influence of the central government became dubious. In fact the once so glorified new stated, fall into ethnic division once again. This time the fault for this outcome bear the Western powers that helped rebuild the country.

B&H often referred to by locals and tourists agencies as the ‘Heart Shaped Country’ started to bleed economically, and what’s even worse the ‘heart’ started to break. Basically due to international actions performed under the leadership of the US, Bosnia became a divided country with a decentralized government in the first place. Under the umbrella of the US and EU, Bosnia consists legally of two semi-independent entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina with Bosnian Croats and Muslim Bosnians and the Republika Srpska (Serb Republic) with a Serbian majority. And if this division wasn’t enough, the Federation part is also strongly divided between the Croatian alleged citizens and Muslims. This results in a very strange government multi-polarity, as each ethnic group has it’s own representation, manifested in actual three independent governments, that are not willing to cooperate with each other. The antagonism of interests between the fairly richer Republika Srpska and the central government in Sarajevo, successfully results in the restrain of central government authority. This leads further to alienation of foreign capital into different regions of Bosnia, and makes it harder to establish any type of efficient administration.

Corruption, nepotism and legal obstruction is on the rise in Bosnia in Herzegovina, as most politics depend on ethnic elites that run the country in their own interest and are highly against centralization. The international community suggested, or it’s better to say implemented rather a decentralized state model in Bosnia, as especially the EU belived this would the best solution for the postwar country. This reasoning isn’t without any solid ground, to be fair decentralization worked just fine for most post Cold War Era countries, undertaking transformation from the beginning of ’89. Though in most cases those were ethnically solid countries and is important that Bosnia suffered terrible war repercussions. Suspiciousness towards other nations is still pretty common in the former Yugoslavian Republics.

With secession moods within the Republika Serpska, which led by Milorad Dodik is unwilling to cooperate with the Sarajevo government, the situation in B&H becomes more dramatic each year. Any attempt of EU or US to influence the Serb leader or even force him to further cooperation is effectively countered by the Serbian and Russian support for the Republika Serpska. It became even more difficult after the emancipation of Kosovo, as Dodik has successfully used the international doubts about Kosovo’s independence to secure his position within the Serb part of Bosnia. Additionally with the US engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq, and with the shadow of the economical crisis hanging over the Western world, for the main players (US, EU) it became tempting to declare a success in Bosnia and leave it as soon as possible. This was pretty clear for the ethnic elites in B&H, and with a shady vision of EU membership for Bosnia, they decided that it would be best to maintain the status quo instead of giving away their power and influence to a central government.

Not only Dodik and the Serb part seem to be an obstacle in Bosnia’s unity, the second problem is the activity of Bosnian Croats. Besides the Bosnian citizenship most of them also hold a Croatian one, that allows them to vote in Croatia. That is why there are a desirable political force, and Zagreb does much to improve the autonomy of Bosnian Croats. Those actions result also in massive emigration to Croatia.

Now it seems pretty clear that any money pumped into B&H economy from outside, fades away somewhere in the corrupt and overgrown administration, therefore Bosnia become less attractive for investments, and any international aid/reconstruction plans can not succeed. Without new legal bodies and mutual agreements in place of the out of date Dayton agreement, all the hard work the Bosnian people put in rebuilding their country after the war terror will be lost. And both the US and EU prestige in the region would be cut to ribbon, not to mention the impact it would afflict on peacekeeping missions all around the world. Especially in Islamic states where the huge challenges in reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan would be at stake, as most of the Muslim world observes the situation in the Islamic Balkan part.

Without any strong actions from outside the ‘breaking of the heart’ seems to be inevitable, and we all have to ask our self if a weak Bosnia is in Europe’s best interest.

MP