In Pakistan the local elections that are scheduled to happen in October have been postponed indefinitely because of the security situation. This is the way that all dictatorships start. The previously elected local officials are being replaced with centrally appointed governors.
While I appreciate that it is all to easy for an outsider to say that elections should be held, when I would not be facing the risks. But only with the legitimacy of an election held freely and fairly can people know that the policies enacted in their name are being carried out via the will of the majority. I know that democracy is not and never will be perfect, but it is the only system that is truly fair and just.
The problem is that terrorism is blamed for needing to cancel the elections, yet as a major factor fuelling the terrorism is the corruption in the Pakistani political system, stopping the elections only feeds into the cause of the violence. Therefore adding to the problem.
If we really want to defeat terrorism, we need to support the democratic process and stop supporting corruption in governments.
Tuesday 25 August 2009
Monday 24 August 2009
Bulgaria Easy Money
About three or four years ago the property programmes on television were highlighting Bulgaria as the place to buy property. Not to live in, but as holiday homes and to make money from. Now my views on property speculation are well know here, but to me encouraging people to buy property in a country where there is widespread corruption and what the EU describes the legal system as a failed system was foolish to say the least.
While I am a Europhile and I do think that the expansion of the European project can benefit the whole of Europe and the world, countries should only be accepted if they can show that they have met the high standards expected of all. Therefore Bulgaria should not have been allowed to become part of the European Union until they had sorted out these problems.
Now I know that there are people who will quite rightly say look at the corruption in Italy, and I would agree that Italy too should not be allowed to receive EU funds unless and until it sorts out the corruption there.
It is these examples that gives the critics of the EU their ammunition. I don't think that the EU is perfect and like all big organisations they will do things that make you think what a stupid bunch they are. But only via cooperation can issues like Climate Change or an integrated green energy policy become a reality.
As for all these thousands of British people that have lost their life savings in buying property in Bulgaria, well had you taken the greed blinkers off, you would have seen that there is no such thing as easy money. All these naïve television presenters did was line the pockets of the criminal gangs and add to the corruption in Bulgaria.
While I am a Europhile and I do think that the expansion of the European project can benefit the whole of Europe and the world, countries should only be accepted if they can show that they have met the high standards expected of all. Therefore Bulgaria should not have been allowed to become part of the European Union until they had sorted out these problems.
Now I know that there are people who will quite rightly say look at the corruption in Italy, and I would agree that Italy too should not be allowed to receive EU funds unless and until it sorts out the corruption there.
It is these examples that gives the critics of the EU their ammunition. I don't think that the EU is perfect and like all big organisations they will do things that make you think what a stupid bunch they are. But only via cooperation can issues like Climate Change or an integrated green energy policy become a reality.
As for all these thousands of British people that have lost their life savings in buying property in Bulgaria, well had you taken the greed blinkers off, you would have seen that there is no such thing as easy money. All these naïve television presenters did was line the pockets of the criminal gangs and add to the corruption in Bulgaria.
Friday 21 August 2009
Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi
In the British press there has been quite a controversy about the last of The Great Train Robbers, Ronald Biggs. He is seriously ill and in the latter stages of his life. While he was a violent criminal and was guilty of the offences he was charged with. However it looked as though he was being detained as for years after he escaped from prison he cocked a snoot at the British authorities.
Having suffered several stokes and unable to communicate verbally, finally he was released on compassionate grounds. While there are some people that wanted to see him die in prison, it is a mark of a truly civilised society that we treat prisoners and wrong doers with dignity.
It does not always happen and the British Government has and does breach the United Nations deceleration on human rights far more often than we are prepared to admit. In Britain today there are people who are detained that have never been charged. This is the result of anti terrorist legislation, and breaches the European Convention of Human Rights that is supposed to integrate throughout or law and legal system.
Basically no one should ever be detained unless they are facing charges and due legal process. If there is enough evidence to detain someone then they should face a trial. I acknowledge that it is not a perfect system and every day there will be people who are found not guilty in courts up and down the country that have gotten away with something criminal. But they have faced due process and if the evidence was not strong enough to convict then it is right that they should go free.
To go off on a tangent, the flip side of that is there have been a shameful number of people who have been finally released after years of imprisonment having been discovered to have been not guilty. The real purporters of that offence though has been walking free and frequently able to commit more offences.
Then just yesterday, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was released from prison on compassionate grounds. While there are legitimate reasons to question the safety of the conviction, he was convicted of the bombing of the Pan Am flight 103 and as such is a convicted murderer. However, he is dyeing of cancer, and it is a true measure of a civilised society that the Scottish Government has been able to show compassion.
Now I know that in America many people feel his release is wrong and that he should have died in prison. However this is one of the major divides between our two nations, as the American Justice system is far more political then the British system and the penal system is much more about revenge than seeking real justice and more importantly rehabilitation of offenders. Therefore as an outside observer, the scandal of Guantanamo Bay was fully predictable because of the US judicial system.
While I could not see a British Guantanamo Bay happening as easily, I do not delude myself that this could not happen here in the United Kingdoms. In Northern Ireland there was detention without trial and many abuses of human rights. Yet when you strip away all the ideology and political rhetoric at the core of all terrorism is an abuse of human rights. Therefore any further injustice and abuse of human rights only perpetuates the terrorism.
Therefore showing compassion to Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi does more to reduce the threat of terrorist attacks than any war or military action ever could.
Having suffered several stokes and unable to communicate verbally, finally he was released on compassionate grounds. While there are some people that wanted to see him die in prison, it is a mark of a truly civilised society that we treat prisoners and wrong doers with dignity.
It does not always happen and the British Government has and does breach the United Nations deceleration on human rights far more often than we are prepared to admit. In Britain today there are people who are detained that have never been charged. This is the result of anti terrorist legislation, and breaches the European Convention of Human Rights that is supposed to integrate throughout or law and legal system.
Basically no one should ever be detained unless they are facing charges and due legal process. If there is enough evidence to detain someone then they should face a trial. I acknowledge that it is not a perfect system and every day there will be people who are found not guilty in courts up and down the country that have gotten away with something criminal. But they have faced due process and if the evidence was not strong enough to convict then it is right that they should go free.
To go off on a tangent, the flip side of that is there have been a shameful number of people who have been finally released after years of imprisonment having been discovered to have been not guilty. The real purporters of that offence though has been walking free and frequently able to commit more offences.
Then just yesterday, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was released from prison on compassionate grounds. While there are legitimate reasons to question the safety of the conviction, he was convicted of the bombing of the Pan Am flight 103 and as such is a convicted murderer. However, he is dyeing of cancer, and it is a true measure of a civilised society that the Scottish Government has been able to show compassion.
Now I know that in America many people feel his release is wrong and that he should have died in prison. However this is one of the major divides between our two nations, as the American Justice system is far more political then the British system and the penal system is much more about revenge than seeking real justice and more importantly rehabilitation of offenders. Therefore as an outside observer, the scandal of Guantanamo Bay was fully predictable because of the US judicial system.
While I could not see a British Guantanamo Bay happening as easily, I do not delude myself that this could not happen here in the United Kingdoms. In Northern Ireland there was detention without trial and many abuses of human rights. Yet when you strip away all the ideology and political rhetoric at the core of all terrorism is an abuse of human rights. Therefore any further injustice and abuse of human rights only perpetuates the terrorism.
Therefore showing compassion to Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi does more to reduce the threat of terrorist attacks than any war or military action ever could.
Sunday 16 August 2009
Aung san suu Kyi and Burma
When I first heard that a man had swam across the lake to the house of Aung san suu Kyi, I googled his name and found a picture of him with some of the generals in Burma. Therefore I was absolutely sure that the lady had been set up. The picture however was removed and the web page gone when I tried to return latter. While I had bookmarked the page, on my old computer, I really wish now that I had printed the page, something I just do not do normally.
Having stolen the government of the country when the democratic process failed to give the generals the result they wanted, the country has been under a dictatorship for many years. Yet sanctions are not working as countries like India and Nepal still trade with Burma, particularly rubies. Therefore, condemning the people to more and longer oppression.
In governments across the world there is a phrase that well known and understood, that a Government is only six meals away from a riot.
Now if countries enforced sanctions properly, régimes like Burma just would not survive. As if you stop the elite from profiting from selling the nations resources, it just would not be able to keep the infer-structure of repression, like the army, on their side. In Zimbabwe it was only because Mugabe stole food aid and used it to feed his supporters has he been able to survive as long.
In Burma the army would rapidly turn against the leadership if they knew that their families were going hungry too. When the army has been used in Burma to repress the people the generals have had to move troops from different regions as most of the troops will not fire upon their own people.
While in general I am in favour of talking over any form of violence, I also believe that where sanctions are agreed they must be total. There will be people that say rightly sanctions harm the people, but twenty years of oppression by the Burmese government has harmed the people more.
Only by isolating oppressive regimes like Burma can real change be instituted. By allowing tourism and trade to continue we aid the generals to repress the people of Burma.
The traditional way of dealing with problem countries or dictatorships is to arm people, ferment war and create divisions, but this only creates new problems down the line. Afghanistan and Iraq are two perfect examples. Where the very people we in the west have armed, we then have gone to war to deal with latter.
I realise that dealing with any irrational government will never be easy, but in the long term stopping the tacit support of repressive governments will make the world a much safer place.
Aung san suu Kyi is an important symbol for the people of Burma, and the generals fear this woman of peace and democracy. And to me she shows the power of peace.
Having stolen the government of the country when the democratic process failed to give the generals the result they wanted, the country has been under a dictatorship for many years. Yet sanctions are not working as countries like India and Nepal still trade with Burma, particularly rubies. Therefore, condemning the people to more and longer oppression.
In governments across the world there is a phrase that well known and understood, that a Government is only six meals away from a riot.
Now if countries enforced sanctions properly, régimes like Burma just would not survive. As if you stop the elite from profiting from selling the nations resources, it just would not be able to keep the infer-structure of repression, like the army, on their side. In Zimbabwe it was only because Mugabe stole food aid and used it to feed his supporters has he been able to survive as long.
In Burma the army would rapidly turn against the leadership if they knew that their families were going hungry too. When the army has been used in Burma to repress the people the generals have had to move troops from different regions as most of the troops will not fire upon their own people.
While in general I am in favour of talking over any form of violence, I also believe that where sanctions are agreed they must be total. There will be people that say rightly sanctions harm the people, but twenty years of oppression by the Burmese government has harmed the people more.
Only by isolating oppressive regimes like Burma can real change be instituted. By allowing tourism and trade to continue we aid the generals to repress the people of Burma.
The traditional way of dealing with problem countries or dictatorships is to arm people, ferment war and create divisions, but this only creates new problems down the line. Afghanistan and Iraq are two perfect examples. Where the very people we in the west have armed, we then have gone to war to deal with latter.
I realise that dealing with any irrational government will never be easy, but in the long term stopping the tacit support of repressive governments will make the world a much safer place.
Aung san suu Kyi is an important symbol for the people of Burma, and the generals fear this woman of peace and democracy. And to me she shows the power of peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)