In earnest attempt to resolve conflict between impoverished and wealthy nations en route to forging better global collaboration, Kofi Annan: Ghanaian diplomat, Nobel Peace Prize recipient, and 7th Secretary-General to the United Nations, took stand behind General Assembly podium in 2005 before 200 of the world’s most powerful leaders and delivered In Larger Freedom: Toward Development, Security, and human rights for all.
During his communiqué, which revealed an ambitious 21st century vision for corralling the UN’s sometimes elusive post World War II principles, Annan said:
"Five years into the new millennium, we have it in our power to pass on to our children a brighter inheritance than that bequeathed to any previous generation. We can halve global poverty and halt the spread of major known diseases in the next 10 years. We can reduce prevalence of violent conflict and terrorism. We can increase respect for human dignity in every land. And we can forge a set of updated international institutions to help humanity achieve these noble goals (3)."
Two months later, in a more forceful and cautionary article, In Larger Freedom: Decision Time at the UN, Annan – in response to the irresponsible facilitation of increasingly negative rhetoric between nations –once again pleaded passionately to the international community to stitch painful historical wounds for the sake of progression (“Foreign Affairs” 4).
"Future generations will not forgive us if we continue down this path. We cannot just muddle along and make do with incremental responses in an era when organized crime syndicates seek to smuggle both sex slaves and nuclear materials across borders; when whole societies are being laid waste by AIDS; when rapid advances in biotechnology make it all too feasible to create "designer bugs" immune to current vaccines; and when terrorists, whose ambitions are very plain, find ready recruits among young men in societies with little hope, even less justice, and narrowly sectarian schools. It is urgent that our world unite to master today's threats and not allow them to divide and master us (2)."
In spirit of Annan’s pursuance of greater freedom, my mission in this article is to define stoicism in the context of international relations, not in the context of apathy or impassiveness, but in context of moderation, or minimization of overzealous emotion and extremism from decision-making, en route to solving conflict through rule of law. I will also provide historical evidence of stoicism, before arguing that using the same, in conjunction with properly applied power politics and a fresh orchestra of diplomats willing to move beyond non-progressive Cold War and anti-colonialist rhetoric, can have a positive impact upon global developments in the 21st century.
Per Mainstream of Civilization to 1715, Stoicism emerged from the ideas of Zeno of Citium in Cyprus, who drew his inspiration from renowned Cynic philosopher Crates of Thebes as well as from Socrates, the man responsible for laying the foundation of Western Philosophy (69).
In summary, Stoicism, which blossomed into a very influential force throughout Greece around 300 BC, prior to deploying to the Roman Empire, is a philosophy built on the principle that the Almighty bestows all human-beings with free will, conscious, and a soul which in turn, should be utilized to clearheadedly seek virtuous, logical, reasonable and equitable means to counter emotionally reckless behavior. By mastering passions and emotions, Stoics believe, it is possible to overcome the discord of the outside world and find peace within oneself. (Murray 25). An example of Stoical concepts may be found by reading the following Meditation penned by Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius:
"Say to yourself in the early morning: I shall meet today ungrateful, violent, treacherous, envious, uncharitable men. All of these things have come upon them through ignorance of real good and ill... I can neither be harmed by any of them, for no man will involve me in wrong, nor can I be angry with my kinsman or hate him; for we have come into the world to work together” (“Stoic Beliefs and Practices” 11)."
Nearly 1,500 years after the death of Aurelius, John Locke, English Philosopher and ardent Stoic turned American Revolutionary emerged onto the diplomatic scene. Locke, who like millions of other Americans living under the roof of zealous British foreign policy during the 1700s, was well-versed in age of enlightenment. He was also a staunch advocate of the natural rights doctrine, which spoke of rationalism, mutual respect and assistance, and moderation in implementation of foreign policy. Locke’s precepts were not only influential during the drafting of the American Declaration of Independence and during the American Revolution, but also during the framing of the U.S. Constitution.
While it is true it did not take long for America and its newly independent American citizenry – both of which were isolated from warring nations across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans – to cultivate recently planted stoic seeds of life, liberty and happiness pursuance, it is also true that the same, as whispered into the ears of the living through Native American Indians, African shipped slaves, and illegally interned Japanese Americans, that the same nation which has served and continues to serve as a beacon of light for countless people throughout the world, possesses the same damning characteristic as every other nation on this planet – imperfection.
Notwithstanding, this characteristic should not necessarily be seen as negative, for it is this shared imperfection and this sense of stoicism that should invigorate reconciliation between all nations whether large, medium or small; wealthy, middle-class, or penniless; diverse, semi-diverse, or homogenous; en route to forging an indestructible foundation for all to rebuild lives devastated by wretched and apathetic behavior.
It is also this imperfection that should drive the global powers that be to shed Cold War yolk by reaching out politically, socioeconomically to nations most horribly ravaged by historically destructive decisions – not simply to ensure flow of raw materials and manufactured goods to feed the needs of millions, but as a symbol of charity to ensure future progression.
It is also important developing nations shed unproductive dependency theory, anti-colonialist, overzealously nationalistic rhetoric, for this all too often fervent rhetoric has begun to run its course and, with enough global cooperation, will soon fall upon deaf ears.
While collaborating to patch old bridges it is essential current and future diplomats continue to focus attention on building indestructible bridges leading to sustainable development while ensuring environmental responsibility. In other words, the bridge to international deliverance lie not only in advanced nations working towards cleaning up their own respective environments but also working towards, as articulated by Howard Handelman, author of The Challenge of Third World Development, “reducing poverty, discrimination, income inequality, inadequate schools, and broken families” (26).
It is these issues, when combined with inept and/or self-gratifying governance both internal and external to developing nations that have led to desperation and subsequent ethnic battle for clean drinking water, nutritious food, and adequate shelter. It is also these issues that – when one looks at the world with unbiased eyes – have led to resentment towards wealthy states, narcotics cultivation and facilitation, and religious fervor. Thus, while it is normal for world powers to ensure continued advancement of their people’s economic and social interests, it is also critical to do so while promoting fair relations and trade and investment with states desiring progression.
With that said, while post Cold War reconciliation and Stoic ideal facilitation should prove paramount in alleviating global problems, the same should not mark termination of a unified code of power politics utilized by those within the global diplomatic community to overtly and covertly crush those who defiantly continue to march innocent men, women, and children through the rusty gates of earthly hell in the form of refugee camps; and in the case of thousands in distant lands like Rwanda, Darfur, the Balkans, and Zimbabwe amongst other places, march the same through the valley of the shadow of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Accomplishing this mission however, will require use of cultural and/or ideological soft power, which indirectly persuades states through various attractive means, to comply with the political will of other states (Pastor 17). American soft power for example, includes college lure of nearly 1 million foreign students each year, enticement of Bollywood actresses like Aishwarya Rai to deploy to Hollywood, and recruitment of English football stars like David Beckham to play for budding American soccer teams. Other examples of soft power include Japan’s continued ability to utilize its technological prowess, Dubai’s ability to draw global investment and tourism, and France’s ability to influence others through its rich history and culture.
Of course not all states will be swayed by might of soft power. This is why states and rogue regimes that continue to strive toward wretched behavior within their own realms, must prove fearful of international use of hard power, or the use of “military forces, population, economy, territory, and natural resources” (Pastor 16), to ensure compliance with directives.
In order to accomplish this, the UN requires robust - and voluntary - military forces bound by noble cause, competitive pay and benefits, uniform language, and similar weaponry that can be utilized throughout the world, not only to better protect UN personnel, as well as IGO and NGO personnel from assault, kidnap, and murder in the most hostile regions of the world; but also to protect those suffering from ill effects of political, socioeconomic, and ideological warfare.
These ideas, stemming from stoicism and political power marching side by side within global politics may very well sound far-fetched at this point in history – especially to those who are realists by nature and experience. But to victims of terrorism and other forms of violence, as well as those rotting shantytowns and struggling in Wild West like rural areas, the concept of moderate diplomacy seems utterly refreshing.
References
Annan, Kofi. In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights For All. 21 Mar. 2005. 5 Jun. 2008. < http://www.un.org/largerfreedom/>.
Annan, Kofi. In Larger Freedom: Decision Time at the UN. 25 Apr. 2005. 6 Jun. 2008. <http://www.un.org/News/ossg/sg/stories/articleFull.asp?TID=40&Type=Article.>
Chodorow, Stanley. Mainstream of Civilization to 1715. 6th ed. NY: Harcourt, 1994.
Dobson, Alan P., and Steve Marsh. US Foreign Policy Since 1945. NY: Routledge. 2006.
Handelman, Howard. The Challenges of Third World Development. 4th ed. NJ: Pearson, 2006.
Jordan, Amos, and William Taylor. American National Security. 5th ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1999.
Murray, Gilbert. The Stoic Philosophy. 16 Mar. 1915. 3 Jun. 2008. London: Watts. 1915.
Pastor, Robert. A Century’s Journey: How the Great Powers Shaped the World. NY: Perseus, 1999.
Pease, Kelly-Kate S. International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century. 3rd ed. NJ: Pearson, 2008.
“Stoicism.” 21 Dec. 2005. 10 Jun. 2008. <http://www.religionfacts.com/a-z-religion-index/stoicism.htm>.
Late last August, farmers living in Monroe Michigan: a small rural town about 40 miles from downtown Detroit, expressed grave concern before the mayor and other officials that their livestock had developed blood shot eyes, blisters upon their feet and mouths and were displaying abnormal signs of fatigue. Despite feverish attempts to provide antibiotics, livestock kept getting sicker and sicker and losing weight to the point of death. In response to this dilemma, the Mayor and his administration, fearful of the devastating health, socioeconomic, and political impact this contagious disease could have on his town, as well as the county, state, and if not resolved quickly: country; turned to the Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA) rapid response network for assistance. The FDA, alarmed by what they found 48 hours after dispatch, contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which raided a residential home in Toledo Ohio and arrested a 17 year old student named Joseph Jefferson, before taking his computer.
In a newspaper article released to the public nearly two weeks after the raid, the FBI reported it found, amongst other questionable items unbeknownst to Jefferson’s parents, bookmarked links to websites that prey on the ignorant and disillusioned, as well as several documents linked to terrorist planning on his hard drive.
According to the lead FBI investigator in this case, Jefferson had become an influential global organizer of terrorism, guiding thousands of other people to Jihadist websites and hacking into several government databases to gain classified information as well as over $25,000 they found in his recently established bank account. However, these crimes were mild in comparison to FBI discovery during interrogation that Jefferson had been plotting with a handful of others from around the globe via these websites, to execute a large-scale Agricultural terrorist (Agroterror) attack on countrysides encircling nearly 20 major international cities. Even more disturbing however, was FBI discovery of two boxes of 24 index finger long viles filled with proteinaceous and infectious (Prion), which is the main catalyst of Mad Cow Disease. Unfortunately, for those in Monroe and immediately surrounding areas, seven viles were missing. This was because Jefferson had already used the viles, sent to him via mail by an online comrade from Colombia he never personally met, to douse livestock throughout Monroe County.
What was Jefferson’s motive for mass animal murder? Was he a dedicated Islamic-Jihadist hiding in rural America awaiting orders from Al Qaida leadership to unleash hell on barns of livestock, en route to crippling America’s economy? Was Jefferson member of a virtual gang, dedicated to cheap thrills at the expense of the livelihoods of other hard working rural peoples?
Strangely, the answer to both of these questions was no, for not one of the plotters in this tide of criminality was of Islamic faith or Middle Eastern descent. Nor were any of these individuals rough riding gangsters throwing up clique signs and flashing assault weapons in the middle of the information superhighway.
On the contrary, Jefferson, like many others in the internet chat rooms he drowned himself in, was anything but tough. He was a columbine kid, a self-perceived societal outcast, with little hope for a progressive future. Unlike his divorced parents, who both claim religious devotion, Jefferson has no faith. He lost his faith years ago when his parents irresponsibly played tug-of-war with his mind during divorce proceedings to gain favoritism. And while Jefferson is angered by events occurring on the ground in the Middle East, he is driven less by his desire to become a Jihadist to seek redemption against infidels. What motivates Jefferson to partake in terrorism is plain and simple – he gains a sense of belonging from global strangers he receives nowhere else.
Introduction
While the above story is fictitious, it is also very possible. While physical terrorism will continue to exist as long as political differences and societal decay exists on our planet, the alarming rise in homegrown cyberterrorism, oftentimes committed by disillusioned souls who are inspired by, but unaffiliated with infamous global Jihadists, have – to paraphrase President George W. Bush in The National Security Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, caused America to alter the way it transacts business, operates government, and conducts national defense (p. 2).
My mission in this essay is to discuss the dangers of homegrown terrorism, before revealing American government reaction to this predicament. I will also express the necessity for creative thinking by American policy-makers and Intelligence Community leaders to counter cyberterror activities; and will highlight potentially formidable strategies and institutions that, if properly executed within the fragile confines of the U.S. constitution and subsequent legal framework, will have a profound effect upon both American and international security.
Dangers of Homegrown Terrorism
According to Marc Sageman, Senior Fellow at the Center on Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism, and Homeland Security:
“individuals we should fear most haven’t been trained in terrorist camps, and they don’t answer to Osama bin Laden or Aymen al-Zawahiri…The new generation of terrorists consists of home-grown wannabes – self-recruited, without leadership, and globally connected through the Internet. They are young people seeking thrills and a sense of significance and belonging in their lives” (“Next Generation of Terror,” p. 37).
Sageman used example of a Canadian plot, hatched via international chat rooms by youth from Bosnia, Britain, Denmark, Sweden, and Atlanta Georgia, to execute large-scale terrorist attacks in Toronto and Ottawa; as a vivid example of homegrown terrorism (pp. 40-1). What made this example and others like the 2004 Madrid Bombings so alarming involves “the ease with which marginalized youths are able to translate their frustrations into acts of terrorism, often on the back of professed solidarity with terrorists” (p. 40).
Counterterrorism expert Malcolm Nance agrees. Nance believes the Internet allows anyone who wants to be a Jihadist to join the campaign (“How (Not) to Spot a Terrorist,” p. 76). Most frightening to Nance is that “many will probably be Americans. They presently live like sleeper agents, operating and planning independently like serial killers. Finding inspiration online, they stay virtual until they find like-minded supporters to meet in the real world” (p. 76).
U.S. Government Reaction
Grave concerns about homegrown terrorism in the U.S. gave birth to House Resolution 1955 (H.R. 1955), formally recognized as the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill, which overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives by a 404 aye to 6 nay with 22 not voting margin:
“amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention
of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives)” (Govtrack, H.R. 1955 Overview).
Section 899B of H.R. 1955 specifically addresses homegrown terrorism and the internet. “The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.”
While controversial to those who believe in privacy at all costs, the overpowering passage of H.R. 1955 by elected American officials should send shockwaves throughout the globe, that the United States is wholly dedicated to thwarting ideologically based, internet planned terrorism – wherever it resides. It should also speak volumes to peaceful peoples around the world, that the same is not targeting Islamic-extremists, for nowhere in the bill were these two words found. Instead, this bill displays America coming to grips with unfortunate reality that declining social values, when combined with overemphasis on materialism, has given rise to a generation of self-perceived outcasts that utilize technology, to include violent video games and the information superhighway, to vent respective frustrations. And unfortunately, those serving as Internet Gods of terrorist plot on extremist websites and in chat rooms are actively listening – and recruiting.
Help Wanted: Creative Minds
This American epiphany is great, but an idea without sound architecture is doomed to failure. This is where the U.S. National Strategy and Intelligence Community, more specifically, where traditional intelligence gathering steps into the limelight. In his article, Mr. Sageman recognized the difficulty of tracking terrorists via traditional intelligence gathering; as did Defense Secretary Robert Gates who, during a recent speech at Maxwell Air Force Base Alabama, expressed the importance of bulldozing through entrenched Cold War psyche and traditional intelligence gathering stovepipes, en route to using creative thinking to counter enemy tactics both on the battlefield and on the internet (Associated Press, p. 1).
Gates’ analysis links directly to University of Alabama Political Science Professor Donald Snow's Future War: from Symmetrical to Asymmetrical Conflict, which discusses potential type of combat the U.S may be fighting in the future. During this article, Snow used Vietnam as a vivid example of adversaries using both symmetrical (conventional weapons) and asymmetrical means (ambushes, car bombings, suicide attacks) to defeat a conventionally superior American military power in combat.
According to Snow, America’s 21st century adversaries, as witnessed in Afghanistan and Iraq, seem to be walking Vietnam course but with different tactics and more advanced technologies. The same is taking lessons learned from the Vietcong and other insurgent groups to include the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), by trying to produce enough U.S. casualties and anti-American propaganda pieces in theater (and on the internet) to convince the American public that the cost of the Global War on Terror (GWOT) is not worth the projected benefits. In Snow’s opinion, it is critical to defeat and discredit enemy methods in Iraq and Afghanistan so it will not form the basis for operations in the future (Cases in International Relations, p. 182).
While Snow did not directly address the internet in his article he, like gates, recognized that legally creative thinking by U.S. policymakers and intelligence community leaders is critical to the assurance of countering homegrown terrorism, en route to protecting American citizens. The word legally is italicized because the same must achieve this while simultaneously working to protect the Constitutional rights of regular American citizens. As witnessed with Public Law 107-56, otherwise known as the USA Patriot Act of 2001, the battle between national security and civil liberties protectionists has proven nothing less than controversial.
American Strategy to Secure Cyberspace
Despite controversy over privacy rights and civil liberties, the U.S. government has made significant progression during the past five years regarding creative pursuance of global internet Jihadists. Serving as a centerpiece during this time is the American National Security to Secure Cyberspace, published in February 2003. En route to preventing cyberterrorism and cybercrime, this document calls for the creation of a (1) national cyberspace security response team, (2) national cyberspace security threat and vulnerability reduction program, (3) national cyberspace security awareness & training program, (4) comprehensive strategic plan to secure governments’ cyberspace, and (5) an outreach program to ensure national security and international cyberspace security cooperation (p. 11).
While each of these priorities are critical to securing cyberspace, and thus preventing home-grown terrorist activities, Priority 2, Section A-1: Reduce Threat and Deter Malicious Actors applies most significantly to the topic at hand. This priority, which calls for the enhancement of law enforcement capabilities to prevent and prosecute cyber-terrorists states: “because nation states and terrorists are developing capabilities for cyber-based attacks, it is important to understand the potential impact of such an attack and possible ways to mitigate the effects” (p. 44). To accomplish this mission, this section calls for a three pronged, joint government and private industry attack that includes: (1) reduction of threats and deterrence of malicious actors through effective programs to identify and punish them, (2) identification and remediation of those existing vulnerabilities that could create the most damage to critical systems, and (3) development of new systems with less vulnerabilities and assessment of emerging technologies for vulnerabilities (p. 43).
Potentially Formidable Cyberspace Organizations
Potentially complementing American plan to secure cyberspace is the Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. This Center, discussed in section 899D of H.R. 1955 will – if passed by the Senate – “study the social, criminal, political, psychological, and economic roots of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States and methods that can be utilized by Federal, State, local, and tribal homeland security officials to mitigate violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.”
Also linked to this strategy, and tied to the overwhelming desire of more than 3,400 active and retired military officers surveyed by Foreign Policy Magazine, to see improvements in space and cyber warfare capabilities (“What the Military Needs,” p. 77); involves the 01 October 2008 standup of the United States Air Force Cyber Command. According to Lt Col Paul Berg, Chief of the Air Force Doctrine Development and Education Center, and author of AFCYBER: What it will do and why we need it:
“criminals, pirates and terrorists, who have long prowled the land, sea, and air environments,
will certainly operate in space when they can. In fact, they are already menacing cyberspace. Peaceful world commerce depends on security in all these environments. Just as the police and U.S. Army, Air Force, and Navy/Coast Guard help protect land-transportation routes, freedom of the skies, and freedom of the seas, respectively, so will AF Cyber Command help ensure freedom of cyberspace” (“Commentary,” para. 9).
Once established, the mission of the AF Cyber Command, as revealed during an interview with Maj Gen William Lord, first Commander of the new institution, will involve organizing, training, and equipping combat forces for the conduction of cyber-operations in the cyber-domain, or entire electromagnetic spectrum (“Q &A, para. 1). More specifically, the Air Force will master use of electronics and the electromagnetic spectrum to store, modify and exchange data via networked systems and associated physical infrastructures (“Fact Sheet” para. 2). To the math, science, or technological whiz kids emerging from high school, college, or elsewhere, the creation of the AF Cyber Command provides several exciting opportunities to make a profound difference in the world.
Conclusion
Joseph Jefferson’s story about unfortunate outcome of homegrown terrorism should provide America sound example of why policymakers and intelligence community leaders, walking in concert with the U.S. Constitution and subordinate laws of the land, should continue proactive and creative pursuance in securing cyberspace, both on a national and global scale. America has all the necessary tools to include financing, brainpower, and determination to lead this important 21st century effort. Let’s just hope they achieve this before the cows one day don’t come home.
Works Cited
Berg, Paul. “AFCYBER: What it will do and why we need it.” AF.mil 26 Mar. 2008. 01 Jun 2008. <http://www.afcyber.af.mil/news/commentaries/story.asp?id=123091666>.
“Defense Secretary Scolds Air Force for War Effort.” CNN.com 21 Apr 2008. 12 May. 2008 < http://edition.cnn.com/Archive>.
Donnelly, Harrison. “Q & As with Gen. William T. Lord, AFCBYER commander.” AF.mil 01 Jun. 2008. < http://www.afcyber.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=11980>.
Nance, Malcolm. “How (Not) to Spot a Terrorist.” Foreign Policy Magazine May/Jun. 2008: 76. Sageman, Marc. “Next Generation of Terror.” Foreign Policy Magazine Mar/Apr. 2008: 37-40. Snow, Donald M. Cases in International Relations: Portraits of the Future 3rd ed. New York: Pearson-Longman, 2008.
“U.S. Air Force Cyber Command 101” AF.mil 01 Jun. 2008. <http://www.afcyber.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=10784>.
U.S. Congress. House Resolution 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act 24 Oct. 2007. 01 Jun. 2008 <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955>
“U.S. Military Index: What the Military Needs.” Foreign Policy Magazine Mar/Apr. 2008: 77.
U.S. White House. The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace. House Feb 2003: 01 Jun. 2008 < http://www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb/cyberspace_strategy.pdf>.
In a September 2007 Associated Press published article titled ‘Kite Runner’ rape scene stirs controversy, Journalist Alisa Tang revealed to the world, passionate plea stemming from the father of Ahmad Khan Mahmidzada, 12-year old Afghani boy actor, whose bully orchestrated rape during the movie The Kite Runner generated fatherly fears that his family could be ostracized or even attacked because of the sheer impropriety of rape in Afghanistan. “In Afghanistan, rape is not acceptable at all. This is against Afghan dignity. This is against Afghan culture,” the boy’s father, Ahmad Jaan Mahmidzada, told the Associated Press. “When we argued, they said ‘We will cut this part of the film. We will take it out of the script. This part will not be in the film” (Tang, para 1). Yet despite beg and plea, the rape scene remained in the movie, which was recently DVD released on 25 March 2008. This begs the question: why? Why, with all the controversy and potential for backfire, would the movie’s architects ensure the scene remain within the movie? The answer lies in one simple word – metaphor.
My mission in this essay is to link metaphors provided in The Kite Runner, which reflect the human condition in Afghanistan to human security in the Asia-Pacific region of the world. I will define what human security means in broad context, prior to discussing Asia-Pacific mentality toward human security as it relates to the historical importance of national security. Finally, I will discuss the future of human security in the Asia-Pacific through argument the international community has the capability to redeem itself for poor/nil decisions past made.
The Kite Runner spans a timeframe of thirty years, from 1978, just before Soviet invasion; through the years of Soviet occupation, and finally through the rise of the Taliban, just before American invasion after being attacked on 911. The movie centers on pre-Soviet Kabul, where bicycle traffic bustled, somewhat westernized women walked the streets, and lamb kabob filled the daytime air. The story’s plot revolves around the childhood friendship of two boys, Hassan and Amir: mortals who live at polar ends of Afghani society, separated by religion and ethnicity. Hassan is a Hazara who, along with his father, serves Amir’s father who is a wealthy Pashtu businessman. This subservience is a metaphor stemming from Afghani Emir Abdur Rahman Khan’s Pashtunization campaign during the turn of the 20th Century. During this time thousands of Hazara’s were enslaved or exterminated following uprising sparked by generations of mistreatment. Afghanistan’s 1919 gain of independence from British rule did little to alleviate the burdens of Hazara’s, for to this day, they constitute the bottom rung of the Afghan social latter, despised by Pashtun, Tajik and Uzbek’s alike (Warlords, para. 2). Hazara hatred was evident throughout the movie, especially when discussing Assef, who was the bully involved in Hassan’s rape. Pashtu nationalism was evident even prior to the rape, a scene unfolded where Assef, while bullying Hassan and Amir, told Amir “Afghanistan is the land of the Pashtuns. We’re the real Afghans. Not this flat-nosed Hazara. His people pollute our homeland. They dirty our blood.” Shortly afterwards, Assef turned his wrath on Amir by saying “if idiots like your father didn’t take these people in, we’d be rid of them.”
While this scene provided a clear window into conditions in Afghanistan, it was the rape scene that provided the ultimate metaphor for Afghanistan plight during the past thirty years. The scene in discussion began during a kite running competition in Kabul during more pleasant times. The use of kite running was very reflective of a society that desired freedom from fear. During this scene, children from all over Kabul, to include team Amir and Hassan, raised their kites, with hopes of being the lone kite flying over the city at the end of the competition. Hassan, for all his flaws, was the best kite runner in Kabul as reflected during the competition when he cut the last flying kite, which caused enemy kite to
fall to the ground. Hassan, being the loyal Hazara asked Amir for the honor of chasing down the competitions kite to prove Amir’s victory, to which Amir said yes. However, when Hassan did not shortly return, Amir went looking for Hassan, only to find himself in an alleyway, hiding behind wall in cowardice and watching Assef, with help from his two friends, bully and rape Hassan because he refused to give Assef the kite Amir had victoriously cut.
To the naked eye, this grotesque rape scene, which ended with blood spilling from the bottom of Hassan’s pant legs onto Afghan soil, did not need to be in the movie in order for the same to succeed. However, per movie director Mark Forster as well as Khaled Hosseini, who authored the book leading to this movie, the rape scene was much more symbolic than what Afghanis and worldwide moviegoers envisioned, which is why deletion from the movie would have sacrificed a critical lesson the international community should heed – the importance of human security.
As revealed during movie interviews with the most aforementioned men, Hassan represented the standard for Afghani opinion that, during the past 30 years, their nation has been raped over and over again by various regimes, beginning with the Soviet Union in 1979, and continuing with the Taliban regime during the late 20th century until invasion by American forces after September 11, 2001 removed the Taliban from power. Amir represented a disinterested international community that stood by and watched from afar as various post-Cold War regimes repeatedly raped and bloodied Afghanistan after departure of Soviet forces in 1988. Only when America was attacked on 11 September 2001, did the international community begin to refocus its attention on Afghanistan.
What do scenes revealed above have to do with human security?
Sadako Ogata, who is the Chair of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), provided the answer to this question during a November 2004 speech given before the Asia Society regarding Human Security in Asia. During Ogata’s speech, which seems to echo Kofi Annan’s sentiment from In Greater Freedom, he stated:
“Today, we live in a world where the nature of sources of insecurity seems to be rapidly evolving. Last week, I attended the final session of the UN Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, which, by sheer coincidence, was held in a hotel overlooking ground zero. Since the horrifying attacks on the World Trade Center three years ago, the world seems to be increasingly confronted with a more elusive form of threats such as terrorism. The attack was a stark reminder that even states with secured financial power, cannot shield people from the types of threats and violence that prevail in today’s world. It was also a painful lesson that ignoring a country left in desperate poverty and disorder, such as Afghanistan, can breed extremists to strike at the heart of the developed world” (Ogata, para 2).
While Ogata’s statements are certainly true regarding Afghanistan, what exactly does human security mean? While various international experts and academics seem to have differing opinions at times regarding the true definition of human security, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), in its 1994 Human Development Report, seems to provide the most comprehensive definition. Per Amitav Acharya, author of Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific, this report listed the following seven separate components of human security:
1. Economic Security (Assured Basic Income)
2. Food Security (Physical and Economic Access to Food)
3. Health Security (Relative Freedom from Disease and Infection)
4. Environmental Security (Access to Sanitary water supply, clean air, non-degraded land)
5. Personal Security (Security from Physical Violence and threats
6. Community Security (Security of Cultural Identity)
7. Political Security (Protection of Basic Rights and Freedoms) (Acharya, p. 237)
One may also argue that the definition of human security includes all actions taken to safeguard the vital core of all human lives from critical pervasive threats, in a way that is consistent with long-term human development (Alkire, p. 2). Western Advocates, with focus on human rights, may define human security as freedom from fear. Advocates in the Eastern Hemisphere that uphold principles of national security and state sovereignty, may embrace a conception of human security that emphasizes freedom from want (Acharya, p. 238). Regardless of definition and regardless of location on this planet one thing is for certain – human security is about protecting human lives from direct and indirect threats that oftentimes conspire to undermine societal progression.
In deciphering the importance of human security in the Asian-Pacific, it is essential to understand that within the region (1) protection of state sovereignty/territorial integrity has historically proven paramount, (2) national security concepts are strongly influenced by concerns for regime survival, (3) overwhelming proportion of conflicts fall into the intra-state category, meaning they reflect the structural weaknesses of the state, including a fundamental disjunction between its territorial and ethnic boundaries; and (4) many intra-state conflicts have been shown to have spillover potential (p. 241).
These four concepts come to life even more so upon looking at the 2007 Failed States Index. This index, which splits the top 60 most unstable states on the planet into one of three categories: critical, in danger, and borderline, uses the following indicators to conduct its analysis: (1) demographic pressures, (2) refugees and displaced persons, (3) group grievance, (4) human flight, (5) uneven development, (6) Economy, (7) delegitimization of the state, (8) public services, (9) human rights, (10) security apparatus, (11) factionalized elites, and (12) external intervention (p.55). For each indicator, the higher the score (based on 10.0 scale) the more instability exists within the state.
With that said, a quick glance at the provided map reveals an Asian region, minus Mongolia, Japan, South Korea and Australia; walking a dangerous tightrope from failed statehood toward state stability. “The threats of weak states,” states the index introduction, “ripple far beyond their borders and endanger the development and security of nations that are their political and economic opposites (Failed States, p. 55). It is this potential for spillover that makes it important to mention a few states listed on the index that, while not officially part of the Asia-Pacific, are critical to regions future capability to move more toward human security psyche.
However, before revealing outside Asia-Pacific states, it is essential to discuss those within the region first, beginning with North Korea. According to the Index, North Korea is the most unstable state within the Asia Pacific and the 13th most unstable state in the world, just behind Pakistan (12th) and just ahead of Burma (14th) and Bangladesh (16th) all of which lie within Asia. Timor-Leste, which lie uncomfortably to the northern edge of Australia, is the 2nd most unstable state in the Asia-Pacific and the 20th most unstable state in the world. The Solomon Islands, considered to be “in danger,” rank 3rd in the region and 30th in the world. Borderline Asia-Pacific states include Laos (44th in the world), Papua New Guinea (52nd), Indonesia (55th), and the Philippines (56th). And, as stated before, Mongolia, Japan, South Korea, and Australia are the only four states in the Asian region to be stable, as reflected in green on the index map.
By looking at this data and researching data such as military spending by nations such as India, China, Taiwan, and Japan to name a few, one can come to understand why the potential for simmering conflicts to boil over into all violent conflict, causes Asian-Pacific states to put human security aside for the sake of national security. Furthermore, one can also understand the same by studying Robert Johnson’s seven possible barriers to multilateral cooperation in stopping organized crime. These barriers, which have the capability to tear apart governmental fabric of many fragile states, and thus create further instability in an already smoldering region; include: (1) corruption within police and intelligence organizations, (2) irresponsible economic lobbying and market protectionism (3) overzealous nationalism, (4) inability of governments to keep pace with advancing technologies, (5) national inter-agency rivalries, (6) the issue of sovereignty, and (7) states that benefit from terrorism and/or lawlessness, while working to undermine growth of transnational cooperation to squash such behavior (Acharya, pp. 234-35)
Does information revealed above mean that potential for robust human security fails to exist within a region dominated by mentality revolving around traditional toolkits of state security: intelligence agencies, surveillance networks, and counterinsurgency forces? Absolutely not, for many global entities have been striving towards providing greater emphasis on human security while working to alleviate roots of instability. One such entity is the UN Commission on Human Security, which “regards people as active contributors who can determine their own fate and that of their community. By empowering people, through education, social mobilization and participation in public life, they will be able to cope better with the threats confronting them in daily life” (Ogata, para 11). Better yet, by achieving the same people will prove better able to, as witnessed with local populations in Iraq gaining more courage to report suspicious insurgents, undertake efforts to reduce the “root causes of terror” such as poverty, inequality, and injustice; combined with poor health, education, and employment mechanisms.
Those whom advocate improvement and promotion of human security mechanisms like Sadako Ogata may call current activities taken to protect human life, international community redemption for years of neglect as witnessed at ground zero prior to ground zero – Afghanistan, where – like in many Asian nations revealed in the failed states index – tyranny spawned and spread throughout the globe due to disinterest in the sheer and utter poverty, which existed within the nation.
If Amir is indeed a symbol of the international community as witnessed through the eyes of Khaled Hosseini, the fate of human security is certainly in trouble – unless you believe in redemption provided through movie metaphor. Near the end of The Kite Runner Amir, who had watched his friend Hassan be raped nearly 30 years ago, returned to Afghanistan after hearing that Hassan had been gunned down by Taliban militiamen; to find Hassan’s son, who was in fact Amir’s nephew (Amir’s father protected Hassan because he knew all along it was his son but did not want to tell the man who raised Hassan he was not the birth father).
After visiting an orphanage in now rotted Kabul, just before American invasion, and learning Amir’s nephew was taken as a child slave by Assef, who was the same bully who had raped Hassan and who was now a Taliban leader; Amir, who was determined to redeem himself for childhood cowardice, made every effort to rescue the boy. Ironically, in the end, it was Hassan’s son who saved Amir’s life by sling-shooting a marble into Assef’s eyeball before Assef dealt Amir a death blow during a very bloody fight scene, before escaping into the Afghanistan horizon, prior to reaching the United States.
At the very end of the movie, Amir and his distraught nephew stood atop a grassy knoll in San Francisco, amongst other Afghani immigrants participating a kite running competition as if it were independent Kabul prior to Soviet invasion. Amir and the boy worked together to cut the final adversary kite from the sky like he did with Hassan, before asking the boy if he could go get the fallen kite for him. The boy nodded his head yes and, as Amir sprinted up the hill to capture the kite, he turned to his nephew and repeated what Hassan had repeated more than three decades ago before that fateful day: “For you, a thousand times over.” It is this redemptive mentality the international community should continue to uphold with regards to helping the Asia-Pacific overcome intra-state conflict, en route to dedicating more time and energy to the globe’s most important resource – the human species.
In this essay, I have linked metaphors provided in The Kite Runner to human security in the Asia-Pacific region. I have also defined human security in general context and discussed Asian mentality toward human security as it relates to the historical importance of national security. Finally, I discussed the future of human security in the Asia-Pacific through argument the international community has the capability to redeem itself for decisions upheld in years past.
References
Acharya, Amitav and Evelyn Goh (2007). Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific: Competition, Congruence and Transformation. Cambridge, MA: Belfer.
Alkire, Sabina (2003). A Conceptual Framework for Human Security. Accessed online via Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity website: http://www.crise.ox.ac.uk/pubs/workingpaper2.pdf.
Fund for Peace (2007, Jul/Aug) The Failed States Index 2007. Foreign Policy Magazine, (pp 54-57). Ogata Sadako (2004). Human Security in Asia. Accessed online via the Asia Society website http://www.asiasociety.org/speeches/ogata04.html
Tang, Alissa (2007). ‘The Kite Runner’ rape scene stirs controversy. Accessed online via USA Today website http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2007-09-23-kite-runner_N.htm
Warlords of Afghanistan (2005). Hazara: The Bottom Rung. Accessed online via Warlords of Afghanistan website http://warlordsofafghanistan.com/hazara.php
“History proves just how much good can come from individuals who both bear the costs and reap the benefits of their own choices when they are free to make them. That includes local politicians, activists, and businesspeople who are groping their way towards greater freedom, contrary to Developmentalists who oxymoronically impose freedom of choice on other people…The ideology of development should be packed up in crates and sent off to the Museum of the Dead Ideologies, just down the hall from Communism, Socialism, and Fascism."
- William Easterly
En route to best predicting Cuba’s future as assigned, it is essential to complement Mr. Easterly’s aforementioned words by articulating that nearly fifty years of degenerative and uncompromising diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba should also be packed up and shipped towards the same destination. For it, like Communism, Socialism, and Fascism, is nothing more than a Dead Ideology called Coldwarism – a damning relic of an ideological struggle between two global superpowers and a vivid reminder of how degeneration can occur when entrenched resentment and angry rhetoric overwhelms moderate reason.
History has repeatedly proven American policy geared towards dethroning Fidel Castro’s regime through sanction, sabotage, and subversion by “three generations of presidents – Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives,” as articulated by Louis Perez in Fear and Loathing of Fidel Castro: Sources of U.S. Policy Toward Cuba (Kingstone, p. 465), has miserably failed. History has also proven Castro’s harsh rhetoric, which challenges the validity of the Monroe Doctrine and demonizes the United States as a exploitive and inflexible nation has – while falling upon def American ears as reflected in little bestowed attention upon the Cuban situation by 2008 Presidential candidates and mainstream media outlets – echoed loudly throughout the developing world to include countries in Africa, Russia, and Eastern Europe; as well as on Caribbean islands – Jamaica and Grenada to name a few – and in Latin American countries like Venezuela under Hugo Chavez, Nicaragua under Daniel Ortega, and Bolivia under Evo Morales.
In order for the United States and Cuba to take the first step towards recovery en route to reestablishing diplomatic and economic relations, both sides must come to the realization that they, while separated by 90 miles of waters, will forever be bound by shared history, culture, and traditions. In other words, both sides should embrace the fact that “Cuba and the United States cannot escape each other” (p. 485). Thus if the same cannot escape each other, it must find progressive ways to live with one another. And if both nations determine Fidel Castro’s passing through the valley of the shadow of death will prove an adequate time to work towards peace and prosperity, than so be it.
While some “experts” living within both nations argue Cuba will become entangled in a violent inferno upon Castro’s passing, which will directly lead to massive droves of Cuban’s setting sail for American shores, others believe historically antagonistic Cuban-American relations, which began shortly after the American Revolution before handing baton to the Cuban Revolution, must now be addressed through a new revolution – Progressive Engagement.
Leading this revolution, and thus serving as Coldwarism gravediggers, will be an enthusiastic new generation of progressive American and Cuban citizens – not just Cuban-American lobbyists living in Florida, New Jersey and New York – whom are dedicated to orchestrating soothing reversal of nearly 50 years of animosity and unprogressive rhetoric through reconciliatory generation of realistic policy alteration.
Future Cuban leadership will moderately begin to lift the repressive iron curtain impeding civil liberties en route to assuring smooth democratic transition. With American understanding that lifting this curtain must be accomplished with moderation, for rapid political and socioeconomic modernization will prove beneficial to neither party; Cuba with time will realize American President George W. Bush’s vision of an economically liberalized nation where “opposition parties have the freedom to organize, assemble, and speak with equal access to the airwaves [and where] a free and independent press has the power to operate without censors” (Huddleston, para. 1).
Cuban leadership will also work towards developing its civil society which, according to Haroldo Dilla and Philip Oxhorn, co-authors of The Virtues and Misfortunes of Civil Society in Cuba, includes a dynamic array of organizations such as Fraternal, Cultural and Sports associations; Mass Social Organizations; Religious Congregations to include Afro-Cuban cults as well as Protestant and Catholic Churches; nongovernmental development organizations concentrated on alternative energy generation, popular education, women’s rights, and community, environmental, and institutional development; as well as a wide variety of Academic Centers and publications, community Social movements, dissident groups, cooperatives and new economic actors (Kingstone, pp. 454-459).
While Cuban leadership works towards democracy American leadership will lift travel restrictions and will accomplish immigration reform en route to developing a progressive atmosphere that breeds communication, collaboration, and competition. The same will also transparently work to provide the Cuban Government with capabilities it needs to ensure peace and security while the nation develops civil society and strives to overcome hardship while traveling down democratic roads. Finally, American leadership will work with Cuban leadership to further integrate the former sugar kingpin of the West Indies into regional economic organizations such as MERCOSUR and CARICOM amongst others to further diversify their economic portfolios.
Of course, Cold War hawks currently serving in key governmental positions within both the United States and Cuba may scoff at the notion that both countries will be able to overcome differences en route to accomplishing goals outlined above. However, three things are for certain. First, everything the United States has done to overthrow the Castro regime has miserably failed. Second, with its seemingly immovable governmental philosophies, Castro and company has begun to lag behind in the global journey towards increasing interconnectivity. Third, Americans and Cubans alike have grown tired of facing negative consequences stemming from a bitter war between two superpowers that ended nearly two decades ago.
Thus, the Cold War hawks living in both the United States and Cuba can spew all the anti-each other venom they want. But the fact remain, the decade is fast approaching when middle ground discovery on behalf of the same will result in the death and subsequent burial of Coldwarism, which in turn will finally allow previously oppressed winds of democratic change to rise up and spread fruitful seeds throughout the Americas.
References:
Easterly, William (2007, Aug) The Ideology of Development. Foreign Policy Magazine, 35.
Huddleston, Vicki (2007, Oct 25) How Not to Promote Democracy in Cuba. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from the Washington Post website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/24/AR2007102402061.html?tid=informbox
Kingston, Peter R. (2006) Readings in Latin American Politics: Challenges to Democratization. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
The recent assassination of Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairman Benazir Bhutto, just weeks prior to national presidential elections, has generated a difficult test of national will to be taken by citizens within the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to uphold strong collective identity en route to forging democracy.
At this point in history it is imperative that – as difficult as it may be – cool, calm and collected Pakistani demeanor prevail, for the nation lie at a pivotal crossroads between bestowing wretches whom despise life, liberty, and rule of law with new anarchical life; and laying indestructible bedrock of democracy, which will again remind the human race that determined cooperative and collaborative voice echoes throughout planet earth louder than any suicide bomb or assassin’s bullet.
As Pakistanis mourn the loss of Bhutto alongside other freedom loving beings throughout the world, it is essential the same avoid the former by heeding historical lessons provided – not only by events which have unfolded within your nation since becoming an Indus Valley Civilization nearly 5,000 years ago – but also by events which have unfolded within now consolidated and budding democracies throughout the world like those in Germany, Japan, Mexico and Chile. For each of these nations provide evidence that degeneration of national will during times of adversity can and will breed the ascension of leaders whose inhumanly barbaric, overzealously opportunistic, overwhelming oppressive, and diplomatically corruptive actions were all too often cloaked in initial promises of liberty and better quality of life for those previously disenfranchised under previous regimes.
While the tragic events that occurred within each aforementioned nation are unfortunate, the gradually progressive outcome of each of the same should provide hope to Pakistanis because, whether by choice or force or a combination of both, democratic ideals – thrust full steam forward by the mighty collective will of people determined to uphold civilized system of rule of law and moderate diplomacy, can and will triumph over the equally determined will of those desiring to rule through use of violence, oppression, and ironclad fist.
In other words Pakistan, despite unfortunate setback generated by Bhutto’s death, must uphold Robert Frost’s eloquent words bestowed via The Road Not Taken:
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
As morning sunlight emerges over America’s western Los Angeles horizon, subsequently unleashing a flurry of hustling and bustling businessmen and congressmen, farmers and fishermen, actors and athletes amongst other professionals eager to deploy to respective battlefields of progression; 13 year old El Salvadoran native Hector Ruiz, son of a poverty stricken, nearly homeless mother and father – first due to a mudslide generated by widespread deforestation on behalf of illegal logging companies, second due to illegal land confiscation for drug cultivation by increasingly wealthy drug lords and those corrupt souls within government seat in San Salvador – finds himself slowly being drawn into the wretched manipulative web of one of the most violent street gangs on the American Continent – Mara Salvatrucha, otherwise known as MS-13.
Much to the disapproval of his devout Catholic parents, freshly brainwashed Hector, after passing MS-13 initiation by opening semi-automatic weapon fire on a bus filled with innocent civilians in protest of San Salvador’s governmental crackdown on gang activity within the nation; after receiving infamous, fear instilling MS-13 tattoo across his back; and after being recruited and free of charge flown to a rural militant, ant-imperialistic Islamic school outside Tehran by the government of Iran; used the services of an MS-13 Coyote, or human smuggler to immigrate to the United States through a rocky, snake-infested National Forest in San Diego along the Californian/Mexican border. Once in California, Hector’s Coyote handed Hector a few dollars shortly before disappearing from sight as well as a piece of paper with directions to the nearest bus stop which would take him to his new home – Los Angeles.
It was here in The City of Angels—the same city filled with millions of mortals hustling and bustling towards progression where Hector turned to a life of drug facilitation, money laundering, barbaric violence, – and in time –covert assemblage with members of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell. After fulfilling two years of highly comprehensive and excruciatingly careful planning, Hector Ruiz, born and raised into sheer and utter poverty in El Salvador only to find further hopelessness for success in Los Angeles, helped Al Qaeda, with backdrop financial assistance from both MS-13 and the Iranian Government, carry out one of the most abhorrent attacks on earthly soil in human history when he, along with 91 martyrs simultaneously walked into several American venues to include famous shopping malls, restaurants, orchestra halls, and museums and detonated themselves before thousands of unsuspecting turned sheer and utterly horrified spectators – despite diligent efforts by the U.S. Government and local law enforcement to prevent the attack.
Although the aforementioned appears similar to a Hollywood movie synopsis, the fact remain that environmental issues faced by Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are intimately linked with American national policy and security as well as with the same in a global context.
Yet in American National Security: Fifth Edition authors Amos A. Jordan, William J. Taylor and Michael J. Mazarr – despite arguing that environmental issues have become increasingly intertwined with both National American Security and Foreign Policy since the end of the Cold War – seem to pay very little direct attention to how environmental degradation in LDCs directly and indirectly impacts American National Security.
While there is indirect mention of American historical mentality towards environmental protection through the likes of John Locke who espoused the importance of individual life, liberty and pursuit of private property according to Natural Law (Jordan, p 54); through colonial Virginia planter Lewis Burwell who, in 1751 wrote to the London board of trade “That, notwithstanding the Grants of the kings of England, France or Spain, the property of these uninhabited parts of the world must be founded upon prior occupancy according to the Law of Nature; and it is the seating and cultivating the soil and not the bare travelling through a territory that constitutes right” (52); and more blatantly through Thomas Jefferson who, while writing to James Monroe in 1801 stated, “it is impossible to not look forward to distant times, when our rapid multiplication will expand it beyond these limits, and cover the whole northern if not southern continent, with people, speaking the same language, governed in similar forms, and by similar laws” (53); little is directly discussed regarding how America’s near 250 year internal and international expansion has subsequently impacted LDC environments.
Indirect discussion arises again in Chapter 14: Economic Challenges to National Security regarding growth challenges in developing nations. In this chapter, Jordan and Company argue that “although the industrial democracies, working within a climate of security and relatively open world trade and in that context of the helpful international economic institutions that were spawned in the aftermath of World War II, have been largely successful in fostering their own and worldwide economic growth, most of the developing countries continue to be plagued by low growth. The gap between the richest and poorest nations of the world continue to widen” (307). While arguments regarding why the gap continues to widen are as diverse as there are dialects in Africa, Howard Handelman, author of The Challenge of Third World Development: Fourth Edition, argues that the biggest national security issue facing America lie involves “reducing poverty, discrimination, income equality, inadequate schools and broken families” (Handelman, pg 182). Furthermore, Jordan, Taylor, and Mazarr argue that developing nation governmental inability to resolve externally and internally generated problems regarding low capita income, high debt-to-export ratio, low growth rates, as well as corruption and mismanagement have created frustration, “exacerbated by the information revolution’s exposure of wide disparities of income and wealth, and perhaps further fueled by ethnic tensions and other grievances” (308).
With that said, could other grievances, as articulated by the latter involve desperate people living in LDCs -- people whom have lost faith in an international diplomatic community whose progression continues to be thwarted by, when combined with the issues discussed in the last paragraph, the unproductive upholding of vehement idealist versus realist, Marxist versus Capitalist, Modernization versus Dependency Theory mentality; as well as people whom have also lost faith in their stumbling and bumbling and corruption laden government’s ability to assure protection from danger and assure decent quality of life – taking John Locke’s Laws of Nature into their own hands by devastating their respective environments to assure their own survival?
Kelly-Kate Pease, Webster University Associate Professor of History, Politics and Law; and author of International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century thinks so. Pease argued the 1992 United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development, otherwise known as the Rio Conference, was product of both science and politics that systematically addressed “five interrelated environmental problems [that] have been of contemporary international concern – deforestation, desertification, biodiversity, ozone depletion, and global warming” (Pease, p 228).
In summary, international organization delegates, leaning on both respective national security objectives as well as scientific evidence understood that:
Ø Slash and burn techniques used by desperate subsistence farmers and lumbering techniques utilized by companies to build homes and furniture were raising carbon dioxide levels, increasing soil erosion and soil malnutrition, and devastating habitat for plant/animal species (Deforestation)
Ø Deforestation has given birth to Desertification, which in turn, has created millions of environmental refugees, provoking unprecedented levels of starvation and subsequent food security issues [and warfare] in places like Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan.
Ø Deforestation and desertification has led to biodiversity problems because the destruction of ecosystems destroys the habitats of plant and animal species.
Ø Usage of propellants and aerosols and subsequent release of chlorofluorocarbons have led to the deterioration of the ozone layer and to the intensity increase of Ultraviolet light – light which can cause certain kinds of cancers and genetic mutations.
Ø Global warming, or the gradual increase of the earth’s overall temperature, was a result of burning fossil fuels and greenhouse gas buildup (Pease, pp 228-29).
In an effort to articulate how environmental devastation generated by survival desperation is linked to American National Security, it is important to take a look, not at developing and heavily industrializing nations like India and China which have been repeatedly dissected by professional diplomats and intellectuals throughout the globe, nor at colonialist or imperialist history, for this is obvious to even the most casual observer that these issues, along with issues regarding Capitalism versus Marxism and idealism versus realism are entrenched in internationally diplomatic mentality; but at situations in three LDCs: Mexico, Sudan and El Salvador.
Living uncomfortably in the isolated, Sierra hillside villages in Northern Mexico – just 300 hundred miles from the American Texas border – are the Sierra Tarahumara – a group of impoverished subsistence farmers whom, according to Robert Brewster, producer of the documentary Voices of the Sierra Tarahumara have, during the globalization and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), been “oppressed by criminal drug lords and trapped in a web of rampant deforestation, crippling drug wars, and governmental corruption” (Berkeley, par 1).
During this documentary, American author and actor Peter Coyote demonstrates how issues of racism, international development policies, judicial and police corruption, and the failed War on Drugs surround the public assassination of an important Tarahumara leader and human rights advocate have threatened the very way of life and existence of the Sierra Tarahumara (par 2).
The documentary also reveals a story regarding a local drug lord who, after being indicted for a dozen Tarahumara murders en route to stealing their lands to gain access to more land for drug cultivation, is given not only full pardon for his crimes from a Federal Judge, but is also given full prosecution immunity (par 5). This is just one example of how deeply rooted corruption is in Mexico.
But obviously it is not just Mexico for as articulated by Jordan and Co, “drug trafficking in Bolivia, Peru, Colombia and Venezuela (as well as in Mexico) is a multi-billion dollar export industry. The flow of cocaine and other substances has been directed primarily at the U.S. market but also represents a law-and-order threat in the Andean highlands, where drug cultivation and trafficking are seen by locals as the most viable means to combat poverty” (Jordan, 469).
Further infesting Andean ridge areas are anti-government insurgents and corrupt police/military forces, which all too often serve as motivational and if necessary forceful liaison between corrupt governmental leaders at all locals and impoverished peasant farmers whom have little if any land rights – especially when looking down the barrel of a shotgun or semi-automatic weapon pointed in their direction – or if unluckier – pointed in the direction of their wives and children. These families are thus oftentimes drawn into an abysmal lifestyle to which there is no return.
Meanwhile across planet earth the Continent of Africa, particularly Sub-Saharan Africa, continues its struggle to find its way. Regarding American Foreign policy prior to 9/11, Sub-Saharan Africa seems to the naked eye more of a moral issue than a national security issue, for it “is neither a cross-roads of world power or trade nor a natural place for confrontation between world powers (Jordan, p 431). Yet when one takes a closer look into the international relations microscope one my find confrontation between world powers may be more feasible in Africa than once thought – despite the UN’s recent decision to deploy 27,000 fresh African Union soldiers to the Darfur region.
During the course of the past two decades, hundreds of millions of people throughout the world have watched from afar as Sudanese Government Forces, along with its orchestra increasingly divided Janjaweed militiamen, utilized Russian, Chinese and Belarusian provisioned weaponry to wage indiscriminate warfare against rebel forces fighting to protecting coveted land and cattle. The same also watched in abhorrence as hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children who, unlike those whose fate involved marching through the valley of the shadow of death – had no choice but to march themselves from this Darfurian wasteland through the rusty gates of earthly hell in the form of refugee camps.
However, according to Associated Press writer Alfred de Montesquiou, there is certainly more than meets the eye to the conflict in Darfur. For example, in his 21 June 2007 article titled Darfur conflict worsening environmental damage, Montesquieu – while not discarding Khartoum’s wretched behavior – argues the underlying causes for warfare in Sudan lie in the nation’s increasing population as well as fierce competition for an already scarce water supply generated by ever decreasing rainfall amounts in lieu of global warming (par 2).
En route to strengthening his argument, Montesquiou cited UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. “Darfur is usually discussed in convenient military and political shorthand -- an ethnic conflict pitting Arab militias against black rebels and farmers," Ban wrote in an early June 2007 New York Post editorial. "Look to its roots, though, and you discover a more complex dynamic” (pars 7-8). The more complex dynamic Ban speaks of revolves around the following facts:
Ø Darfur’s population has increased six-fold over the past four decades, to 6.5 million, which has created a strain on resources beyond capability of tribes to manage (par 11)
Ø Annual rainfall in El Fashir, capital of Northern Darfur, has decreased by half since rainfall research began in 1917 (par 11)
Ø Arab Nomads have been forced, due to desert closing in, to drift further south bringing their herds of camels towards lands African farmers were nurturing (par 13)
Ø Herds destroyed fields and worsened soil erosion, making farming more difficult when combined with lessening rainfall and tree pillaging on behalf of Nomads (par 16).
Shortly after revealing these facts, Montesquieu makes a key point en route to tying everything together. “With land being made unfit for farming, the Africans rebelled when the central government in Khartoum seemed indifferent to their plight” (par 14).
The ensuing result of governmental apathy as well as stubbornness to refuse external assets to assist in tackling the nation’s systematic problems to include rampant drying up of once water filled bore holes, is an at least four-pronged polarized nation with scorched villages and ethnic peoples less concerned with political theory and journalistic opinion, and more concerned with finding enough food, water, shelter and clothing to sustain life for themselves and their children.
Yet while several nations throughout the world frustratingly toil to rid places like Darfur of the same despicable actions committed by apathetic and stubborn sovereign governments like the one in Khartoum, the Chinese, Russians and Belarusians continue to exploit the region for profit. And if things within the Darfur region do not change; if China, which extracts 500,000 million gallons of oil per day from the Region, fails to use its political and economic might to assure the government in Khartoum utilizes its oil wealth for the betterment of Darfur’s impoverished; and if Russia, which sells the very weaponry such as gunships, rifles and spy equipment used by the Sudanese Armed Forces to wage warfare against rebels whom want alleviation from nature and human generated torrent does not cease and desist with such non-sense; and if the United States and its coalition of the willing do not show more thorough resolve both overtly and behind closed doors regarding this issue, the situation will continue to deteriorate before the international community’s eyes. Ultimately, if things do not change soon, all three aforementioned entities may very well end up engaging in one of the bloodiest regional battles in human history - especially when, once again, ethnic tribes are forced to join superpowers.
Lastly, in the poverty and inequality stricken and socially decayed but democratically transitioning nation of El Salvador – a nation that epitomizes Latin American zeal for upholding concentration of land in relatively few wealthy, elitist and oppressive hands – “millions of land-owning peasants lack sufficient land to support their families adequately” (Handelman, pg 154). Consequently “these inequalities have contributed to rural poverty and created rigid class systems” (149). When combined with overpopulation, low literacy and employment ratings and incredibly irresponsible governmental, commercial, and desperate inhabitant deforestation; as well as natural disasters such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, massive flooding and landslides; El Salvador, despite making some progress through several Millennium Challenge Corporation (MNC) initiatives, has become a breeding ground for violence as seen during the 1980s when President Jimmy Carter decided “to supply military and economic aid to El Salvador to help its democratically elected government defend itself against Communist insurgents aided by Nicaragua, Cuba and the Soviet Union” (Nuechterlein, p 140); as well as a strong base for drug cultivation and trafficking and gang activity as reflected in the birth of Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13).
In short, MS-13 is an abhorrent El Salvadoran based gang that has spread like cancer, first to Mexico through Costa Rica, then to Los Angeles California where it developed a very strong base from which to expand its abhorrent empire throughout the rest of the United States.
MS-13’s clear and present danger to America’s national security was clearly articulated by FBI Criminal Investigative Division Assistant Director, Mr. Chris Swecker. While sitting before the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere House International Relations Committee on 20 April 2005, Swecker, prior to revealing the FBI’s plan to establish a National Gang Intelligence Center (NGIC) as well as a MS-13 National Gang Task Force (NGTF) stated the following:
“The migration of MS-13 members and other Hispanic street gang members, such as 18th Street, from Southern California to other regions of this country has led to a rapid proliferation of these gangs in many smaller, suburban, and rural areas not accustomed to gang activity and related crimes. Additionally, the deportation of MS-13 and 18th Street gang members from the United States to their countries of origin is partially responsible for the growth of those gangs in El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico, although the precise of this responsibility is unknown…MS-13 is a violent gang comprised primarily of Central American immigrants which originated in Los Angeles and has now spread across the country. MS-13 gang members are primarily from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, who initially established a presence in Los Angeles, California, in the 1980s. In 1993, three MS-13 gang members from Los Angeles, California, moved to the Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, metropolitan area to recruit additional MS-13 members. Current reporting now estimates there are as many as 1500 members of MS-13 in the Northern Virginia/DC area…MS-13 members and associates now have a presence in more than 31 states and the District of Columbia. MS-13 has a significant presence in Northern Virginia, New York, California, Texas, as well as in places as disparate and widespread as Oregon City, Oregon, and Omaha, Nebraska. Due to the lack of a national database and standard reporting criteria for the identification of gang members, the frequent use of aliases by gang members, and the transient nature of gang members, the actual number of MS-13 members in the United States is difficult to determine. However, the National Drug Intelligence Center estimates there to be between 8,000 and 10,000 hardcore members in MS-13…Law enforcement in 28 states have reported MS-13 members are engaged in retail drug trafficking, primarily trafficking in powdered cocaine, crack cocaine, and marijuana, and, to a lesser extent, in methamphetamine and heroin. The drug proceeds are then laundered through seemingly legitimate businesses in those communities. MS-13 members are also involved in a variety of other types of criminal activity, including rape, murder, extortion, auto theft, alien smuggling, and robbery” (FBI, pars 4,7,9,11).
Regarding MS-13’s suspected and spooky ties to Al Qa’ida, Swecker had the following to say:
“Although there have been recent media reports alleging that MS-13 gang members have met with an al-Qa'ida operative in Honduras and that al-Qa'ida financed a MS-13 gang summit, there is no credible, independent reporting to support or otherwise corroborate these reports. Current analysis also supports the assessment that it is unlikely that MS-13 and al-Qa'ida would form an overt partnership for both security and ideological reasons…Despite this initial assessment, the FBI continues to remain alert for any possible connections between MS-13, and any other gang or criminal enterprise, with Al Qa'ida” (par 22).
The FBI as well as other Federal, State and Local level government and law enforcement officials have no choice but to remain vigilant and diligent in its monitoring and disassembling of MS-13, for as seen on September 11, 2001, human beings, when least expected, can surprise even the most suspecting. While the NGIC and NGTF are two noble FBI endeavors, neither organizations get to the root of the problem that led to the birth of MS-13 in the first place:
Ø International political failure due to entrenched ideology and consistent undermining
Ø El Salvadoran governmental ineptitude and corruption
Ø Mother Nature’s ceaseless wrath upon the nation.
These problems in turn have given birth to poverty, inequality, inefficient land distribution that – when combined with environmental devastation by “poor peasants [who] burn vast areas of jungle each year to clear land for cultivation” (Handelman, p 278) – have been responsible for massive post-earthquake landslides, much like the one in November 2001 that left thousands of El Salvadorians dead when a mudslide destroyed Las Colinas, a small town at the foot of the Cordillera El Balsamo mountain range (Edie, par 2). Most importantly however, each of these problems combined have generated a sense of hopelessness that has in turn bred resentment, which in turn has borne violence in the form of gang membership that has spread like illegal immigration wildfire to the United States and now threatens – especially if it links up with Al Qa’ida – the nation’s already fragile security.
With all of this said, what will it take for the international diplomatic community – for the sake of the progression of humanity and assurance of international and national security – to swallow scornful ideology en route to cooperatively hammering out truly legislation to solve problems leading to unfavorable societal behavior? Some may say it will take an act of God. Other people may say it will take an even more abhorrent attack upon American soil or elsewhere in the world to arouse people’s short attention spans.
Perhaps, the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) heeded Pease’s words, for in 2002 these two organizations – using the catch phrase “sustainable development” – released a revealing thirty-six page white paper titled Reforming Energy Subsidies: An explanatory summary of the issues and challenges in removing or modifying subsidies on energy that undermine the pursuit of sustainable development.
During her forwarding remarks, Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel, Assistant Executive Director of the UNEP, argued that “subsidies on the supply and use of energy have emerged as a major theme in international discussions and negotiations aimed at promoting sustainable development” (Reforming Energy Subsidies, pg 2).
Sustainable development is defined as “economic development that consumes resources to meet [this generation’s] needs and aspirations in a way that does not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (Handelman, p 279). Sustainable development includes:
Ø Use of renewable resources such as wind and water power for generating electricity in place of resources that cannot be replaced such as coal and petroleum, or that are currently being consumed at a faster rate than they can be replaced such as tropical rain forests, ocean fish such as cod and salmon (279).
Ø Embracement of resource consumption that least pollutes the environment: limiting auto and industrial emissions, finding sustainable substitutes for pesticides and other agricultural chemicals that pollute the soil and water system, and reducing the use of products that destroy the world’s ozone layer (279).
UNEP/IAEA’s white paper regarding the importance of balancing sustainable development with environmental responsibility argues that, while sustainable development has become a guiding principle for public policy in international relations, “translating that principle into practical policies and measures can be difficult, not least because of the complex interrelationships that exist between the interests of present and future generations and between the three dimensions of sustainable development – the economy, social welfare, and the environment. Energy is implicated deeply in all three dimensions. It is essential for economic and social development, but the current energy systems harm the environment in many ways. The manner in which we produce, transport and consume energy is therefore crucial to the long-term sustainability of human development” (p 4).
While it is true energy services such as those requiring the use of fossil fuels as well as those assuring deforestation, water pollution, and soil malnutrition “help meet basic human needs such as the production of food, the provision of shelter and access to health services [and contribute] to social development by enabling education” (UNEP, pg 6), it is also alarmingly true that “an estimated two billion people in the world have no access to commercial forms of energy including electricity. This withholds improvements in productivity, quality of life, health, & education” (p 6).
But how do governments at all levels in all nations, both developed and developing, assure these improvements without threatening environmental stability? In other words, how does the international community collaborate better to provide better quality of life for those “peasants hungry for firewood in Rwanda…giant cattle ranchers and poor peasants in Brazil [whom] burn vast areas of the Amazonian jungle each year to clear the land for cultivation…and Japanese-owned logging firms [that] cut down large tracts of rain forest to manufacture furniture” (Handelman, p 278), while simultaneously preventing the sheer and utter destruction of the global environment?
This seems to have proven to be a difficult mission, for “in many towns and cities, local pollution caused by burning oil, gas and coal in houses, factories, cars and power stations [has become] a major human health problem” (p 8). Furthermore, “concentrations of the main local air pollutants – particulates, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides – in the big cities of many developing countries are well above World Health Organization maximum guideline levels. UNEP/IAEA’s pamphlet also discussed negative consequences of nuclear power production and certain types of renewable energy such as hydroelectric dams.
During discussion regarding deforestation consequence, Handelman articulates “in regions such as Central America, Indonesia, and Sub-Saharan Africa, rains and waterways wash off topsoil, rainfall patterns shift, and both droughts and floods occur more frequently…the arable land area is declining and deserts are growing” (278). Handelman also paints abhorrent picture depicting quickly growing third world countries, with their “mines, oil fields, chemical plants, and factories, operating with few environmental safeguards, pollute their surroundings…producing enormous quantities of raw sewage, auto emissions, and industrial waste” (278). Consequences of this growth and simultaneous environmental degradation upon local populations has ranged from “infection, to respiratory illness, birth defects, and loss of farmland” (278).
Energy subsidies, defined by UNEP as “any measure that keeps prices for consumers below market levels, or for producers above market levels or that reduces costs for consumers and producers” (UNEP, pg 10), and “as any government action that concerns primarily the energy sector that lowers the cost of energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers” (10).
The five main energy subsidy types are as follows:
Ø Direct Financial Transfer (grants to producers, grants to consumers, low interest or preferential loans to producers)
Ø Preferential Tax Treatment (rebates or exemptions on royalties, duties, producer levels and tariffs; tax credits)
Ø Trade Restrictions (Quotas, technical restrictions, and trade embargoes)
Ø Energy-Related Service Provided Directly by Government at Less Than Full Cost (Direct investment in energy infrastructure, public research and development
Ø Regulation of the Energy Sector (Demand guarantees and mandated deployment rates, price controls, market access restriction (12).
Some of the UNEP economically held arguments against subsidies are as follows:
Ø Lowering end-use prices lead to higher energy use/reduced incentives to conserve or use energy more efficiently
Ø Reducing price received by producers undermines energy providers’ return on investment, consequently reducing their ability and incentive to invest in new infrastructure
Ø Cushioning subsidies to producers tends to reduce incentives to minimize costs, resulting in less efficient plant operation and investments that may otherwise not be economic
Ø Direct subsidies in form of grants or tax exemptions act as a drain on government finances
Ø Indirect subsidies, in long run, reduce economic growth and also leads to lower tax revenues
Ø Price caps or ceilings below market-clearing levels may lead to physical shortages and a need for administratively costly rationing arrangements
Ø By increasing energy use, consumption subsidies boost demand for imports or reduce amount of energy available for export. This harms balance of payments and energy supply security by increasing nation’s import dependence.
Ø Subsidies to specific energy technologies may undermine development of other technologies that might become ore economically and environmentally attractive (UNEP, 15-16)
Ø With the following information revealed, the fact remains that while it is not feasible at this point in history to eliminate subsidies, it is certainly important to reform them for the betterment of mankind and the planet it inhabits.
The international community can begin by working to assure:
Ø Subsidies go only to those who are meant and deserve to receive them
Ø Subsidies do not undermine incentives for suppliers/consumers to provide/use service efficiently
Ø Subsidy programs should be justified by a thorough analysis of associated costs and benefits
Ø Overall amount of subsidy be affordable & administration of subsidy program be reasonable cost
Ø Info on amount of govt money spent on subsidy and on subsidy recipients be transparent (21).
While certainly a noble endeavor, accomplishment of these goals will be a challenge due to third world developer perception of AIC hypocrisy, for as summed up by an unnamed Jamaican economist mentioned in Handeleman’s book who said “you Americans raped your environment in order to develop your country and raise your standard of living. Now we Jamaicans reserve the right to do the same” (280).
While this is certainly a valid point as reflected in the words of John Locke, Lewis Burwell and Thomas Jefferson, times are certainly different.
With its vast wealth and powerful influence, the United States, despite accomplishing several internally generated initiatives to improve the environment within LDCs, has been repeatedly demonized by millions of agenda seeking human beings worldwide for not taking more of an internationally leading role regarding environmental protection as indicated in the Kyoto protocol. What does not gain equal demonization on an international scale however, are those individuals and nations within the international community to include Americans that - whether advanced, newly industrializing, or least developed – continue to uphold the same vehemently unproductive idealist versus realist, Marxist versus Capitalist, Modernization versus Dependency Theory mentality that has plagued United Nation (UN) initiatives to find common ground in discovering and implementing solutions to address poverty and its derogatory effects upon both morale and the environment within developing nations. Should the international community continue down the same status quo path which helps breed abhorrent wastelands with no hope for progression, American as well as global security may very well be trouble.
However, should the international diplomatic community find common ground in discovering and implementing solution to help poorly-equipped and reprisal fearing third world governments weed out corruption within its law enforcement and judicial systems; should the same help impoverished and desperate people within developing nations seek, not further devastation of their respective environments, but protection from government backed drug lords whom steal their lands and opportunities for education, employment and healthy socialization; and should the same use its robust change purse and immense brainpower to develop environmentally protective technologies that will benefit both developed and developing nations, both humankind and the globe it inhabits may very well be in for times of peace and prosperity unknown to any preceding generation.
Selected Bibliography:
Brewster, Robert. 2006. Voices of the Sierra Tarahumara.[Online].<http://www.berkeleymedia.com/catalog/berkeleymedia/films/environmental_issues/voices_of_the_sierra_tarahumara>, accessed 14 August 2007.
De Montesquiou, Alfred. Darfur conflict worsening environmental damage. [Online]. <http://abcnews.go.com/International/WireStory?id=3303226&page=3>, accessed 10 Aug 2007.
Environmental Data Interactive Exchange (EDIE). 2001. Environmentalists blame El Salvador devastation on deforestation and bad city planning. [Online]. <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=3713>, accessed 18 August 2007.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2005. Statement of Chris Swecker Assistant Director, Criminal Investigative Division before the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere House International Relations Committee. [Online]. < http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress05/swecker042005.htm>, accessed 19 August 2007.
Handelman, Howard. 2006. The Challenge of Third World Development: Fourth Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Education, Inc.
Jordan Amos, William Taylor & Michael Mazarr. 1999. American National Security: Fifth Edition. Baltimore, MD. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Nuechterlein, Donald. 2001. America Recommitted: A Superpower Assesses Its Role in a Turbulent World. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.
Pease, Kelly-Kate. 2008. International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century: Third Edition: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
United Nations Environmental Programme. 2002. Reforming Energy Subsidies. [Online] <http://iaspub.epa.gov/trs/trs_proc_qry.navigate_term?p_term_id=28257&p_term_cd=TERMDIS>, accessed 14 Aug 07.