Category Archives: Government Oppression

Regulation of online content has received little attention amid a global health crisis. But violent extremist activity has not stopped, and we need to get our response right, writes Anjum Rahman.

Today marks the first anniversary of the Christchurch Call, a response to the mass murder at two Christchurch mosques last year, a massacre livestreamed by the killer.

For the first time, in Paris on May 15 2019, technology companies and governments made a commitment to work together. Hurriedly, civil society organisations were invited to meet and be part of the Call. This was formalised in the creation of the Christchurch Call Advisory Network, of which, for full disclosure, I am one of three co-chairs.

The wording of the Call provided a narrow focus on areas that were less likely to be disputed. There has been general agreement that livestreaming of a mass murder is not desirable. Tech companies signed up to the Call have been successful in preventing sharing of livestream video footage of other mass murders.

The Call aims to eliminate terrorist and violent extremis content online. Defining who is a terrorist and how that is different from a violent extremist very much depends on ones viewpoint. The cynic in me thinks terrorism has become solely associated with attacks perpetrated by Muslims and the term violent extremist seems to be designed to keep it that way. Do white supremacist or incel killers not have a political agenda? They do seek to change behaviour and perceived power structures, along with terrorising the target population.

Resistance to state oppression has often involved violence. All countries recognise war heroes who fight for the state. Sometimes we recognise those who have fought against oppressive or enemy states the French resistance, anyone? We havent come to any global consensus of when violence is or isnt justified and calling armies peacekeepers cant hide that they commit violent acts.

Some of the governments that have signed up to the Call have engaged in problematic activities in the online space. Whether its the misuse of Facebook users data, posting of inflammatory material, or other breaches of human rights.

Violence can be perpetrated by words and by moving and still images. In the domestic violence sphere, we recognise the impact of emotional abuse and harm. Depictions of violent acts can be traumatising, though they can also be evidence of crimes. Hate-filled language excludes and silences those who are subject to it, whether they are individuals or communities. Even moderators suffer the consequences.

Violent acts offline are preceded by violent speech, much of which is spread online. Mass murderers described as lone wolf attackers have significant histories of belonging to online chat groups, with like-minded members egging each other on. Dealing with expressions of online hate must be part of any successful counterterrorism effort and needs to be factored into the work of the Call. To be meaningful, the work has to move beyond livestream videos.

Along with the blocking of violent content, the achievements of the Call have included the development of a shared online crisis response protocol, and growth in the number of countries who have signed on. A major announcement in New York last September was the restructuring of the Global Internet Forum for Countering Terrorism (GIFCT).

While the move to independence is a positive one for GIFCT, in that it will now be an organisation with its own staff and director, it is still an organisation funded and governed by tech companies. The additional of an Independent Advisory Committee will give the forum access to the views of government and civil society representatives, those representatives have no voting powers or any effective way to exercise accountability other than through public and media channels.

Decisions made by the GIFCT have major impacts globally, both online and offline. There is a huge need for transparency and accountability in the way content moderation decisions are made. There have been concerns about the lack of transparency in the selection process for the Independent Advisory Committee. Individual platforms continue to have issues with their approach to fake news, bots, and the unwillingness to take down accounts of politicians and public figures who post content clearly in breach of the platforms stated community standards.

The pressure for moderation of online violent extremist content can and will be used by governments to suppress opposition voices in their own countries. While the supporting governments of the Call are required to sign up to certain human rights commitments (notably, the United States is missing), there are limited policing mechanisms for those who breach those commitments.

All of this is why it is important to have a power sharing structure, where civil society organisations are effective in holding government and tech companies to account. Currently, the Christchurch Call framework has the greatest potential for civil society to have a meaningful input in the way technology is regulated, and to keep a watchful eye on the activities of the GIFCT. However, there remain challenges.

The Christchurch Call Advisory Network has no funding and is reliant on member organisations donating time and resources. Civil society organisations cannot match the profits of tech companies nor do they have the power to raise funding through taxation. There is still work to be done to ensure that there is adequate consultation, and mechanisms are put in place to ensure that the voice of the network is not simply ignored.

Regulation of online content moderation has not received much attention while the world is gripped by the global pandemic of Covid-19. Terrorist and violent extremist activity, however, has not stopped and marginalised communities continue to be at risk in almost every country. Technological developments have advanced at a much greater rate than governments and communities ability to respond to the dangers posed. This is why the work of the Call is urgent, and why it is so important to get the structures right.

The Spinoff Daily gets you all the days' best reading in one handy package, fresh to your inbox Monday-Friday at 5pm.

Read more:

A year on, the Christchurch Call must go beyond dont livestream mass murder - The Spinoff

Shortly after the Iraqi parliament voted to endorse Mustafa Al-Kadhimi as the countrys new prime minister after midnight on 6 May, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo picked up the phone to congratulate the former chief spy on taking the new post.

Pompeo also joyfully broke the news to Al-Kadhimi of Washingtons decision to grant Iraq a 120-day sanctions waiver enabling the country to import gas and electricity from Iran to meet its dire power needs.

That was welcome news for the many who thought that Iraq would need the worlds support to leave its government deadlock behind and for others who feared that Iran was exploiting the political turmoil to consolidate its power in Iraq.

To many Iraq watchers in the US media and think-tanks, Pompeos gesture was an indication of support for the new Iraqi premier after hiccups in US-Iraqi relations caused by Al-Kadhimis predecessor Adil Abdul-Mahdi and his pro-Iran policies.

Some observers may even have assumed that Al-Kadhimis success in forming a new government could amount to a foreign policy victory for the US Trump administration over Iran amid a continued US-Iran standoff.

But these rosy assessments are without foundation. Contrary to such beliefs, Irans influence in Iraq may be increasingly challenged, but the Islamic Republic is still a dominant power in Iraq and the American ability to cause Irans influence in Iraq to wane is still in question.

What is obvious is that Iraqs new government will be entangled in the US-Iran conflict and that there will be a lot of questions as to whether it will be able to chart its way to avoid being caught in the crossfire.

In order to put things in perspective, one needs to assess the balance of power and influence between the US and Iran in Iraq and how that could impact Al-Kadhimis government and its ability to insulate the country from regional turmoil.

Nearly ten years after it pulled most of its combat troops out from Iraq following the 2003 invasion, the United States still maintains a powerful military and a leading political role in Iraqs institutions.

Iraq hosts a massive US force, with the official number of US troops in the country estimated at up to 5,000. They are deployed in military bases around the country with contingents of tanks, warplanes and military equipment.

After fighting the Islamic State (IS) group along with the Iraqi armed forces in the 2014-2017 war to expel the militants from Iraqi territory, the Americans have continued their mission which they have seen as ostensibly to prevent the groups resurgence.

Their counterterrorism mission has also included training the Iraqi armed forces and providing them with badly needed intelligence in deterring future attacks.

Yet, US military power in Iraq is about much more than the number of troops and equipment it has in the country and corresponds to the influence it can exercise in the fields of command, control and communication over Iraqs military.

Today, the United States maintains a remarkable political and diplomatic influence in Iraq with an unequaled network of domestic, regional and international partners.

With its numerous assets permanently or temporarily deployed to various spheres and sectors in the country, its advantages surpass Iraqs ability to disengage without paying a heavy political price.

A closer look at the work of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) and other UN agencies and organisations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) whose help for Iraq is indispensable shows that US support for Iraq is unmatched by other international players.

In addition, the United States has the edge in influencing Iraqs economy through the power its oil companies can exercise in both production and marketing, thus impacting sales of the commodity.

Washington can also play a role in shaping Iraqs financial and monitory systems through its control of US-run petro-dollar mechanisms as well as its ability to engage the international finance institutions that are engaged with Iraq in providing loans and guarantees.

Moreover, the United States enjoys tremendous political influence among different Iraqi communities, political elites and social strata. It has maintained a strategic friendship with the Kurds in the north, and more recently it has consolidated ties with Sunni political leaders either directly or via its Arab Sunni allies.

Washington has also been able to reach out to large segments of the Shia community by making friends and influencing people in political, social, tribal and business elites, exploiting their needs to balance Irans influence.

It has dedicated enormous resources to build on its strengths of soft power in order to promote its interests in Iraq. Much of this soft power rests on thousands of people working in the bureaucracy, security forces, business community and civil society in Iraq.

Another source of American soft power can be found in members of the Iraqi community in the United States who are connected to US interest groups, think-tanks, the media and the academy and who network with political leaders and institutions in Iraq.

Reports and rumours have long suggested that activists among these expatriates have been involved in efforts to form previous Iraqi governments and probably this new one too.

However, this power should not be misunderstood. The United States does not have the upper hand in Iraq, or at least not yet. Iran also has significant political, security, economic and cultural assets in Iraq that it can mobilise to sabotage US efforts to win back Iraq.

In a sense, Iraq has become a pilot project for Irans attempts at regional hegemony. For 17 years, the Islamic Republic has had a free hand to experiment in Iraq on how to spread its influence in the region.

Since the fall of the regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003, Iran has been deeply immersed in its western neighbours affairs such that it is now being seen as the dominant force in Iraq.

Tehran has employed a variety of outrageous stratagems and canny tactics to consolidate its political, economic, religious, security and cultural interests in Iraq.

Over all these years, Iran has expanded its influence in Iraq, and it has effectively had free rein across the key institutions of the state, security forces, political leadership and civil society.

Soon after Saddams ouster, Iran began asserting itself in Iraq, using aggressive tactics and proxy groups to pave the way to trying to turn Iraq into its sphere of influence.

Through allied Iraqi Shia politicians and paramilitary groups and a range of anti-Saddam opposition groups it had hosted, Iran emerged as the dominant force after the US-led invasion.

Beyond its political and security efforts, perhaps the most visible consequences of Irans influence have been its commercial, business and investment ties to Iraq.

Iraq is now a major consumer of Iranian goods, as trade between the two countries reached $16 billion in 2019 and there are plans to boost bilateral trade to $20 billion. Tehran is also a major energy and power supplier to Iraq, with plans for the construction of a railroad network linking Iran and Iraq with Syria.

Irans influence peaked after the rapid advance across Iraq by the IS terrorist group, which threw the country into chaos and led Baghdad to seek Tehrans help to kick the group out of Iraqi cities.

In its attempts to play a non-zero-sum game with Washington, Tehran turned its support to Iraq in fighting IS in order to gain greater influence in the war-torn nation and advance the rise of its proxy Shia militias and turn them into a political force.

In addition to its hard-power geopolitical, military, security and economic instruments, the Islamic Republic has also utilised religious, social and cultural ties as important soft-power tools to intervene in Iraq.

If the election of Al-Kadhimi now somehow shifts the balance of power and reshapes the strategic environment in the country, with the new prime minister starting to clip Irans wings in his country, Iran will likely start to lose some of its influence and probably its supremacy in Iraq.

Hit by the raging coronavirus pandemic, US sanctions and cheap oil, Iran may now be much weaker than it was and less able to play the same game with the United States. There are increasing signs that its proxies in Iraq are losing ground, and many of them are facing an uncertain future.

Irans supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has signaled that the Islamic Republic may be ready for a compromise with the United States, which he has always dismissed as the Great Satan.

Imam Hassan acted in such a way that genuine Islam, which couldnt continue to be a government, moved on to be a great revolutionary movement, Khamenei tweeted on 9 May.

He was referring to the Shias second revered imam, who ceded the caliphate to a contender without a fight in a 7th-century peace treaty that many historians saw as a surrender but that the Shias have defended as a necessary protection of their faith and their lives.

Due to his actions, Islam remained a religion that is against oppression and is uncompromising, undistorted and genuine, Khamenei wrote.

*A version of this article appears in print in the 14 May, 2020 edition ofAl-Ahram Weekly

Short link:

Read this article:

Iraq's new government in the Iran-US crossfire - World - Al-Ahram Weekly - Ahram Online

I wake in disbelief. I cannot leave my house except for essential items because I could spread or catch coronavirus. I have limited ability to conduct business or recreational activities. Anti-lockdown rally organizers may face criminal charges.

To me, these are freedom of speech and gathering issues. Prisoners are being set free even though prisoners are always susceptible to diseases while in prison. I must be dreaming or am I living in the Middle Ages? How can this be happening in the 21st century? It is hard to believe this is my country, the United States of America, where freedom was so freely given to each citizen, until now.

The novel coronavirus pandemic has made many American citizens worried and anxious beyond what any of us have ever known, and some were already concerned. Constant coverage in nearly every media outlet coupled with the political response has led many to near hysteria in this country. Stay at home, wash your hands and practice social distancing are key phrases.

Please do not let me hear another politician or doctor tell me to wash my hands. I learned this basic life survival skill from my parents and during my grade school education when I was a child. I have adhered to this basic principle long before this pandemic crisis to keep myself healthy through my first 65 years of life.

Why is government imposing stringent restrictions upon the citizens of this country? Let us step back and look at the facts in their entirety to gain a different perspective, and you may see another path to freedom.

As of this week, more than 80,000 Americans have died of COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. Looking at the total population in the United States, this equates to a death rate of less than 0.025% and the death rate in San Diego County where I live is about 0.005%. Early 2020 has not brought a significant increase in the number of deaths in San Diego County compared to recent years.

Read more about coronavirus restrictions and protests in San Diego County:

Many coronavirus victims have had no or mild symptoms, although data on this is limited so far. Over 75% of the deaths are from Americans aged 65 or older. Why not let those at risk for death (elderly, immunocompromised people, etc.) decide to isolate themselves? Why continue to quarantine everyone when the few are at greatest risk?

The national debt is $25 trillion and climbing, with nearly 40% of the federal budget spent on Medicare and Social Security. While older Americans have paid into the system, they have not paid enough to cover the bill. Federal spending on Americans 65 and older is estimated to be seven times what is spent on those 18 and younger. Will older people pay their fair share to help?

Unfortunately, we all know the answer to this question, and sadly it is no. We leave our young people burdened with a great financial deficit to resolve. The biggest con job in the history of the world is taking place right before our eyes.

Now, look at the coronavirus crisis, we ask the young to stay home, impinging on their basic freedom. These are the young, the strong, the future, and we are taking their freedom away. Notwithstanding the seriousness of the coronavirus crisis, the young and healthy should be allowed to get out and earn, to go to school and to help our country begin to recover.

There is no question we need to protect those groups most vulnerable who may succumb to the virus; however, a lack of common sense and a high level of reactivity has been applied to this situation. Besides a loss of freedom, we are experiencing new highs in unemployment, economic turmoil and general instability in society.

Coping with coronavirus

The pandemic sweeping the globe has changed everyones lives, and we want to hear how its changed yours. If youd like to write an op-ed for us on a subject related to the virus, make it 700-750 words and send it to us with your name and a phone number so we can reach you.

Is America spending the large U.S. government relief money about $3 trillion in a reasonable manner? No. Heres an example: My 101-year-old mother died in January. Guess who received a $1,200 stimulus check deposit from Uncle Sam? My mom. However, I predict my small business will have a 75% income loss in 2020. Will I receive any compensation for my losses? No. Any loan does not erase the losses.

Its time for President Donald Trump, Gov. Gavin Newsom, the county supervisors and Mayor Kevin Faulconer to wake up. Please release us from the coronavirus oppression. The numbers supporting the lockdowns of freedom in America, California and San Diego County do not match the risk. Lift the restrictions. If you want to stay home or be in isolation during the coronavirus crisis, go for it.

Let people choose their own path. Let freedom ring again in America.

Stiglich owns an engineering consulting company and lives in Fallbrook.

Link:

Commentary: Message to Trump, Newsom and Faulconer: 'Please release us from the coronavirus oppression' - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Graffiti that reads "Capitalism is the virus" is seen on an information station at Ballard Commons Park in Seattle, May 4, 2020, where a homeless encampment was being cleared. | Ted S. Warren / AP

Historians have long discussed the concept of turning points in historythat is a moment when things change in a significant way from what they had been. Over the centuries, scholars have described periods of human development and assigned dates for their beginning and end.Therefore, dates such as 1492, 1776, 1865, 1877, 1929, and 1945 have long been considered turning points in U.S. history.Of course, these dates are not set in stone; historians often differ in their interpretations and categorization of the past. In other words, there is often wide disagreement as to what constitutes a turning point.

Let us make the assumption that at various points in the passage of human civilization observers conclude that many things in a society changed radically from what they used to be. It could be changes in how people produce things, in belief systems, or in the relationships between different countries. Wars and revolutions often bring about these changes. But they can happen in more peaceful ways, too.

Might we be at such a turning point in 2020? Not so much because there have been major changes in society, but because of what may take place in the years ahead.

The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has exposed in the starkest terms a society with numerous serious problems. They did not suddenly appear along with the virus, but stem from developments that grew over the last several decades. Foremost among these is the close connection between the power of economic elites and their influence on all levels of government, best described as the rise of the neoliberal system that came to the fore with the election of Ronald Reagan.

This has led to inequities in government policies, a marked increase in social inequality, a decline in democracy, and an imbalance in who in our society wields power.At the same time, the United States has not accepted the fact that this is no longer the post-World War II era where it exercised a dominant role in world affairs.

The efforts of those opposed to these policiesworkers, people of color, women, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, and Indigenous peoplehave led to many victories, but the beast has yet to be tamed.

As a result, unchecked social and economic tensions continued to fester and now have come to a boiling point. The list of problems that have been laid bare by the pandemic is too long to enumerate here. But one must mention the lack of a national single-payer health system (Medicare for All), which has impacted the lives of millions and contributed over the last two months to the deaths of more than 85,000.

The impact of COVID-19 has been worsened because of a serious shortage in essential medical supplies, such as ventilators and personal protective equipment (PPE). This is the direct result of the priorities and malfeasance of the federal government.

The whole nature of work in this country has changed over the last several decades. As the most extreme sectors of capitalism have consolidated their dominance, the power of labor unions has been weakened and severely undermined. The percentage of workers organized in unions has dropped to levels not seen in a century. As a result, the number of workers employed in dead-end jobs with no benefits and no job security has skyrocketed. The growth of the gig economy, contracting, and contingent work has become commonplace.

The effects of endemic and systemic racism, which people of color have been fighting for centuries, are now manifested in the highly disproportionate number of African Americans and Latinx people contracting and dying from the coronavirus. This is the direct result of living in substandard housing and holding jobs that, in addition to all the problems they have faced for many years, now endanger their lives.

The obscene spending on the military budget and the huge tax breaks given to the mega-rich over the last 75 years did a great deal to drain valuable resources that rightfully belong to the working class and the poor, no more so than now.

There are many other serious weaknesses in our social order that are too numerous to mention. It is not hard, however, to see them no matter where we lookfrom child care, to education, to the digital divide, and care for the elderly.

When the day comes that we beat the pandemic, many are questioning whether we will ever return to normal, that is, to the way things were before. A growing number of observers, however, are talking about a new normal, with the understanding that the way life was will never return. Change is not only inevitable; now it is imperative. The question is, what will the new normal look like?

It could be a society where there is greater individual security, especially in the areas of health, jobs, housing, and food. The great extremes in wealth can be reduced. Protections against racism and all the other forms of oppression and violence can be strengthened. We can live in a world of peace and greater mutual understanding and respect. In other words, the excesses that emerged in U.S. society can be addressed, reduced, or eliminated.

To a large degree, it will be up to the people of the United States to shape that future. Many things need to be done to assure a more just and equitable society (particularly in case another pandemic ever appears). It will be a major struggle; the forces of reactionbe they big capital or white supremacywill not give up with a fight.

Among the things that need to be done immediately are:

Where could it end? No one knows, but it is safe to say that if we begin the reform of so many areas in our society and economy, strengthen democracy, and advance a peoples agenda, we will turn our society into a more decent and humane one. That would truly be a turning point in history.

See the rest here:

Turning point: What will be the post-pandemic 'new normal'? - People's World

Amy GoodmanLive and Let Die

Wednesday, May 13, 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic has hit the Dine/Navajo people hard, inflicting the highest per capita infection rate in the country after New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. The Navajo Nation is the largest reservation in the country, larger than West Virginia, straddling Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah. Half of the over 300,000 enrolled members reside on the reservation. Navajo President Jonathan Nez has issued some of the strongest stay-at-home measures in the country, including a weekday evening curfew and a complete, stay-at-home curfew for the entire weekend. Nearby Gallup, New Mexico, with a large Dine population, has enacted a complete lockdown, with the National Guard prohibiting entry.

As of May 5, despite these efforts, there were 2,559 confirmed COVID-19 cases on the Navajo Nation and 79 deaths. Among the victims, 28-year-old Valentina Blackhorse, a beloved champion of Navajo culture and a community leader. She left behind her partner, Robby Jones, and their 1-year-old daughter, Poet.

She really loved her familyher parents, her sisters, her nieces and nephews. She loved her elderly. She loved children, Jones said Tuesday on the Democracy Now! news hour. She was a kind and hardworking lady, and she was warmhearted. She would do anything for her family.

Jones is a detention officer with the Navajo Department of Corrections, and contracted COVID-19 at work. When she was taking care of me, I guess she contracted it, he said. She started showing symptomsshortness of breath, body aches, loss of taste and smell. By the time I started feeling better thats when she started feeling sick.

Blackhorse tested positive for COVID-19 on April 22. She died the next day. She had won numerous pageants, being named Miss Western Navajo and Miss Dine College, among others, and hoped to run for office in the Navajo Nation government one day.

Dr. Michelle Tom, a member of the Navajo Nation, is a family physician in Winslow, Arizona, just across the Navajo reservation line.

Its a reflection of what were going through as a people, and it correlates with what this virus can do to our young and someone who was very motivated, loved our culture, spread our rich and strong culture, and our language. Thats what were trying to fight for, she said, adding, She was going to lead our next generation. It was a hard loss for our community.

The Navajo Nation, along with the nearby Hopi, Pueblo, Zuni, and Gila River indigenous communities, have endured despite centuries of genocide, oppression and systemic racism and poverty. The novel coronavirus pandemic is afflicting them disproportionately, as it has African American and Latinx populations across the U.S. Access to water is challenging on the Navajo reservation.

Thats from a long state of histories with treaties and our relationship with the [federal] government, Dr. Tom explained. Our infrastructure for water has never been at the capacity where we can provide water for everyone on the reservation. So, youre telling people to wash your hands for 20 seconds, and yet people are trying just to get water just to drink and to cook with.

President Donald Trump made a rare trip Tuesday, visiting an Arizona N95 mask factory, where he ignored factory rules by not wearing a mask. Guns N Roses blared from a factory sound system, playing the song Live and Let Die. Its not clear if it was a coincidental music choice or not.

Trump also met with elected officials, including Navajo Nation Vice President Myron Lizer. The Navajo Nation joined a lawsuit filed by numerous native tribes against Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, for his abject failure in disbursing $8 billion promised to Native American tribes in the CARES Act.

The amount of money thats being sent to Indian country, as we call it, is the largest amount in the history of the U.S. And you deserve it. And youve been through a lot, Trump said to VP Lizer. The Navajo Nation will soon receive over $600 million. Thats a lot. Should I renegotiate that? Can we renegotiate that? (Laughter.)

There was no laughter back on the Navajo reservation. Today, the federal government announced that they intend to release a portion of funds appropriated by Congress over one month ago to tribes to help fight COVID-19, but Ill believe it when I see it, President Jonathan Nez, who himself tested positive for the virus, replied. We couldnt sit around and wait for those dollars, so weve had boots on the ground in nearly 20 communities giving out food, water, firewood, protective masks and other supplies We lost many of our beloved relatives and family members to this virus, but our teachings also tell us to move forward. We will and we are.

Amy Goodman is the host of Democracy Now! Denis Moynihan contributed to this column.

See the original post here:

Live and Let Die - Cascadia Weekly

With thousands of migrants who had left Uttarakhand for greener pastures returning amid the Covid-19 lockdown, the state government is trying to convince them to stay on and rebuild their lives there, offering interest-free loans, subsidies and free electricity to set up eco-tourism and micro-enterprises. The state government has added an additional budget for employment-generating schemes such as the Veer Chandra Garhwali Yojana, which offers micro credit aimed at creating sustainable employment opportunities in tourism and establish facilities to run taxis, buses, restaurants and tourism info centres.

However, migrants say it is too soon to decide, and point to a bevy of problems that made them leave in the first place, including inadequate public healthcare and education; low productivity in agriculture and damage by wild animals; and poor infrastructure.

Let the government first set up a successful model of a venture and run it successfully to evoke confidence, said Bhupender Singh Rawat, 37, who worked in Zambia in an agrochemical firm for nine years, and is now back with his wife, children and parents in Pauri Garhwal districts Buakhal village.

Over the years, Uttarakhand has seen a large exodus of people to the plains, other parts of the country and abroad as poor development in the hills created few opportunities. Now, the widespread closure of manufacturing units, hotels and other businesses elsewhere has forced them to return.

As of April 23, a total of 59,360 people had returned to the 10 hill districts in the state, according to government records and officials. Of these, 12,039 are from Pauri Garhwal and 9,303 from Almora the two districts most affected by migration, according to an interim report released by the states Rural Development and Migration Commission, or RDMC, on April 23.

Around 350,000 residents were estimated to have migrated from the state between the 2001 and 2011 censuses, leaving 1,048 villages totally uninhabited. Of nearly 16,800 villages in Uttarakhand, as many as 734, mostly in the hilly areas, have become uninhabited after 2011. Such ghost villages with their houses lying in ruins and fields overgrown with vegetation abound in Pauri district, where 186 districts turned uninhabited since 2011.

The return of migrants, and their staying on, could help the hill state rectify its socio-economic imbalance and repopulate deserted villages that are perched along a strategic international border, experts say.

Pauri Garhwal district magistrate Dhiraj Singh Garbyal told IndiaSpend that villages are looking lively again as many have begun ploughing their fields to utilise the free time. Of the sizeable number who have returned, 60%-65% have come back from states like Haryana, Punjab, Chhattisgarh, Goa and Tamil Nadu; 25%-30% from urban pockets in Uttarakhand such as Dehradun, Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar; and the remaining from countries like Dubai, Australia and Oman, the RDMC report said.

Most of the returnees are 30-45 years old and work largely for the hospitality sector at low pay. Life is hard. It is very difficult to live in cramped one-room rented accomodation with three others, said Puran Bisht of Badait village, who works as a helper in a spice store in Dehradun. I want to return to my parents, wife and children in the open and healthy environment of my village, for good, provided the state government helps me in earning a decent livelihood.

The out-migration had improved the sex ratio, with 1,037 women for every 1,000 men in the hills as against 900 in the plains and 963 across the state, according to an April 2018 RDMC report. However, researchers say that the men leaving exchanges one form of oppression for another.

If the son migrates to the city, then his wife has to bear a higher workload to take care of his parents, children, land and cattle in the village, Shankar Gopalakrishnan, Uttarakhand-based researcher who conducted a comparative study on migration in 2016, told IndiaSpend. If she accompanies her husband to the destination, she becomes much more dependent on him, lacking in the local support structure and partial independence that she was able to rely on in the hills.

The elderly, women and children left behind in the villages live without basic amenities such as healthcare, education, piped water, electricity and, most importantly, livelihood opportunities, said Aranya Ranjan, a social worker based in Khadi in Uttarakhands Tehri district. They feel disinterested in taking up agriculture due to the problem of wildlife damaging their crops, Ranjan added.

Earlier, people would allow animals to eat away a part of their crops, said Mahendra Kunwar Singh, founder of Dehradun-based Himalayan Action Research Centre, which works with several self-help groups to grow 89 types of organic produce for sale in smart packages in markets across the country.

Monkeys were declared vermin in 2019, and wild boar in 2016 and 2018, allowing local authorities to cull these animals, which were ruining crops, reports show.

Trepan Singh Chauhan and Gopalakrishnan are credited for launching Ghasiari contest, a competition in Tehri Garhwal in 2016, in which the woman who proved fastest at cutting grass was awarded Rs 1 lakh prize money. The contest was aimed to impart dignity to the work of women who go out into the jungle to bring back fodder for the cattle and firewood for the kitchen.

Besides the workload, women also face attacks by wild animals such as leopards and bears when they go out in the fields to graze cattle, Geeta Gairola, an activist from Bhatti village under Aswalsyun Patti of Pauri Garhwal, said.

Women must battle on every front without the menfolk around to help, said Malti Devi, a resident of Badait village, I urge the state government to facilitate employment for our men so that our families can reunite and we can work together to develop our hills.

A report that recommends steps for the states economic revival, such as rural job creation in the hills to stem out-migration and lure migrants to return, is due to be submitted this month, Indu Kumar Pandey, head of the states post-Covid-19 economic revival committee and chairperson of the Uttarakhand Finance Commission, told IndiaSpend.

It is a great opportunity for the state government to reach out to thousands of its skilled and experienced migrants who have come home these days, said Sharad Singh Negi, Vice-Chairperson of RDMC and Finance Secretary. However, he said, As of now, 70% of them have declined to stay back. Some have shown interest in starting their own small ventures.

Meanwhile, every district administration has prepared a profile of each migrant. The RDMC has submitted an interim report after conducting an online sample survey on April 23. After talking to migrants, I have made some recommendations to the state government in my interim report which include laying down provisions for interest-free loans, heavy subsidies and free electricity for people to set up new ventures in sectors like eco-tourism or for micro enterprises, Negi said. Additional budget for employment generating schemes like Vir Chader Gadhwali Yojana too have been suggested.

Other recommendations of RDMC include setting up a new cell for migrants by the Rural Development Department, a helpline to resolve their problems and a database on their aspirations. The commission is trying to fix the issues responsible for out-migration, as described in the RDMCs interim report cited above.

A new report with an action plan for 15 blocks under three districts, Pauri Garhwal, Almora and Pithoragarh, has been submitted to the state government, Negi said. The action plan includes establishing new schools, primary health centres and road networks wherever required. The government has allocated an additional Rs 50 crore in the state budget to implement this action report, Negi said, adding that the lockdown had temporarily halted the release of funds but it would be resumed soon.

Meanwhile, Chief Minister Trivender Singh Rawat too has called upon the migrants of Pauri Garhwal through an open letter on April 24, in an emotional message, he implored the migrants that the land their ancestors had cultivated through hard work to feed their families now lies barren and neglected.

I have recommended [a] one village-one cooperative culture, where all the small landholdings of one village are pooled to grow one kind of produce and sold through a smooth supply chain, said Pandey of the finance commission. We will encourage value addition for all our enterprises like agriculture, cultivation of herbs, dairy and poultry farming for the rural sector which will give a boost to the income of villagers. Decentralisation and micro-economy through self-help groups will be supported.

Experts also agree that migration has damaged the rural economy and aspirations of the simple hill-dwelling family. Out-migration from villages along the international border poses serious national security concerns, according to the RDMCs 2018 report, corroborated by reports of territory marking in Baharoti village in Joshimath.

Anil Joshi, proponent of the Gaon Bachao campaign, has recommended the development model of neighbouring Himachal Pradesh, which has a similar topography. Himachal Pradesh has generated a booming economy with intense agriculture and horticulture, Joshi said. The same model, if replicated in Uttarakhand, will not only generate employment but will also enrich the ecology.

Farmers could do wonders with the fertile land and natural resources in the hills and the problem of wild animals would also disappear if people worked in the fields, said Kunwar Singh of the Himalayan Action Research Centre.

The biggest chunk of people, 43.6%, work in the agriculture sector, followed by 32.2% in labour in Uttarakhand, according to the RDMCs 2018 report. In Pauri and Garhwal, this figure is 38.8% and 38.7%, respectively, according to the RDMC report.

Life for most of the migrants working in low-paying jobs is no better than in the village, said Binod Khadria, director of Migration and Diaspora Studies Project in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Across the Himalayan belt in the world, the hill communities suffer the worst working and living conditions in the urban areas while working for low-paying jobs. So migration has its own side effects.

Khadria recommends that the state government form an advisory board of consultants and stakeholders to devise innovative solutions for reverse migration through sustainable development in the hills, where families live united and take care of their jungles and other natural resources.

Paramvir Rawat, 24, who returned to Raidul village from Dubai on March 20, days before the nationwide lockdown was enforced, said he would wait for infrastructure to improve. Livelihood and opportunities have to get better on the ground for us to return, he said.

Over the past decade, Uttarakhand has also seen an influx of people from outside many have left successful careers to settle in the serene and pollution-free life of the hills. Many have also fostered local communities. Roopesh Rai, 40, a top executive with a five-star hotel in Delhi, quit his job and turned abandoned houses into home-stays in many villages such as Raithal and Kanatal. He also set up the non-profit Green People. The common tendency of red tape and intrusive approach to create hurdles in order to extract money from entrepreneurs needs to stop, he said. Secondly, the government should focus on large dynamics like creating mega infrastructure for adventure tourism rather than targeting individuals through schemes.

Anand Sankar, 38, Bengaluru-based photojournalist, brought the nondescript Kalap village of Mori tehsil in Uttarkashi, situated at 7,800 feet, into prominence, after settling down there in 2003. With his Kalap Trust, he set up a school and hospital in the village, which had none.

For short-term pragmatic measures to tide over the impending recession, he suggested, the government can help in setting up food processing units in the hills for people to make pickles, spices, juices, and growing vegetables and also stuff such as chillies and ginger which are not eaten by wild animals. In the winter, they can make warm apparel and woollen to sell, for which the government needs to take the marketing initiative. Hopefully, after that the religious tourism season pertaining to the Char Dham will pick up.

Some migrants are tempted to stay on. Pankaj Bisht, 26, a resident of Paidul in Pauri Garhwal, who works as a chef in a Delhi-based eatery, says his euphoria of being with family has been diluted with the concern of losing his income as he came home with just Rs 3,000. Given an opportunity and financial assistance, he would start a computer lab in his village as now he is wary that such a pandemic might recur, and he feels safer in his village than in the city.

This article first appeared on IndiaSpend, a data-driven and public-interest journalism non-profit.

Original post:

Free power, easy loans: How Uttarakhand is trying to hold back locals who have returned from cities - Scroll.in

The number of countries in which state structures have collapsed seems to be growing. But is it really? Are these so-called failed states a threat to global security? And is there an antidote? Five hypotheses, put to the test.

Not necessarily. Very few states have completely failed. In international law, a state has failed when its authority has largely disintegrated and it can no longer carry out essential duties. Recent examples include Syria and Yemen but even in these countries, both of which are embroiled in ongoing wars, the state is still able to perform basic functions in parts of its territory.

In any case, the blanket diagnosis of state failure has been out of fashion for more than a decade. In 2001, it still served as a justification for the US-led intervention in Afghanistan, which was supposed to result in a liberal and democratic Afghan state. Almost 20 years later, this endeavor has proven a complete disaster thanks to the immense hubris of the interveners and their inability to comprehend the diverse challenges arising from political order in contexts where scarcity and violence are more widespread than prosperity.

Instead of being labeling as failed, such places are now commonly considered fragile. And even the most fragile among them which are rarely entire states, but more often sub-state areas or regions with limited statehood have neither failed irretrievably nor are they waiting to be rescued by the West.

Fragility is considered to be the opposite of state stability on a continuum between a well-functioning and completely absent state. As World Bank expert Michael Woolcock once put it in reference to Tolstoy, every fragile state is fragile in its own way. While one state may lack authority, another may suffer from a lack of legitimacy and acceptance in the eyes of its population. Elsewhere, a governments capacity to supply basic public services may be limited. And the situation often varies considerably between different parts of the same country.

Global indices such as the Fragile State Index (FSI) categorize states according to a cross-section of several symptoms of fragility. Their rankings often produce unexpected neighbors in the global rankings. Take, for example, Turkey and Tanzania: while the two countries both received similar FSI scores between 2017 and 2020, that instability is rooted in very different causes and comes with varying consequences. While the main problem in Tanzania is low state capacity, the index attests Turkey limited legitimacy as a result of widespread repression in the country.

To account for such nuances, governments and international organizations have refined their analytical tools. The German government, for example, distinguishes between multiple fragility profiles based on a states levels of authority, legitimacy and capacity. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development measures fragility in terms of a states economy, environment, politics, and security. Since 2011, the World Bank refers to fragile situations rather than fragile or failed states; and in 2020, it chose to sharpen its focus on contexts marked by violent conflict or high social and institutional fragility.

From the vantage point of development policy, this makes perfect sense. According to World Bank estimates, at least half of all people affected by extreme poverty will live in fragile situations by 2030, and those areas do not always neatly map onto national borders. The Global Fragility Act, which was recently passed by the US Congress, also refers to existing rankings for fragility and conflict risks, but stresses the need for more nuanced analyses of the causes of state failure and violence.

Detailed fragility assessments rightly point to the fact that elements of fragility exist almost anywhere. These range from a rule of criminal gangs or rebel groups in certain sub-state areas to widespread poverty and a lack of basic public services in countries where governments are not going anywhere any time soon. They can also take the form of a temporary loss of state control in crisis situations (think Hurricane Katrina in the United States or the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic). But this does not mean that the world as a whole has become more unstable.

Accurately evaluating the risk of state collapse and conflict and proposing remedies requires a combination of expert assessments, scenarios and predictive analyses on the basis of geo-located event data. Such analytical capacities are being developed in the European Union and some member states like Germany, but there is still plenty of room for improvement to prevent and mitigate crises.

Thats a misconception. It is true that populations are particularly vulnerable without the protection of a capable state authority. But often it is these very state authorities who pose the greatest threat to their citizens. Well-organized state apparatuses are especially effective in carrying out repression and serious human rights violations against political opponents and minorities, including genocides.

That is why the contemporary understanding of security not only includes the security of states, but the safety of people and the protection of their rights. Domestic conflicts come with the potential to escalate and even destabilize the international order. The war in Syria is a prime example for how security threats to populations on the ground can directly impact neighboring countries or entire regions in this case the Middle East and Europe. Such a holistic understanding of security also reflects the fact that wars are not the principal danger to peoples safety. Violent crime accounts for global casualty numbers that are several times higher than those caused by armed conflicts.

Public order and essential services are often lacking in fragile states. But it is nave to sweepingly blame such problems on the absence of a strong state as the sole cause. In many contexts, non-governmental actors successfully provide basic public services like infrastructure and public security in coordination with the central government. Bangladesh became a development success story after the central government gave non-governmental organizations a free hand in running the countrys educational infrastructure. Since a lack of schooling for young girls is a proven risk factor for armed conflict, this move decreased the risk of conflict.

If, where and when public services, including security, are provided in a fair manner is not solely a matter of state capacity or stability. Hubs for illicit trade in arms and narcotics, human trafficking and cybercrime can also be found in states that are considered respected members of the international community. And it is often the governments of wealthy nations that cannot or do not want to be the providers of all public goods to all parts of the population. This becomes obvious during exceptional situations such as natural disasters or pandemics: police functions are outsourced to for-profit security companies, the private possession of weapons is poorly regulated, critical infrastructure like railway networks, power plants and hospitals remain underfunded, and access to those services is unequal.

In some cases. After the September 11 terrorist attacks, the United States and its allies were convinced that failed states are ideal hiding places for terrorists and thus constituted security threats. This narrative spread rapidly and proved very persistent. But the reality is that ideological, financial and logistical support for terrorists mostly comes from rich, functioning states.

A collapse of state structures is often followed by periods of lawlessness in which different groups compete for power often using armed violence. To spread and enforce their own model of public order, regional branches of the Islamic State have carried out terrorist attacks in countries like Iraq and Syria and throughout the Sahel. This illustrates that unstable states first and foremost pose a threat to the people living within their borders, who directly face the resulting violence, crime and disorder.

It is true that extremists also spread their ideology worldwide via YouTube and messenger services to recruit new followers for attacks in Europe and beyond. But only a small fraction of victims of violence are harmed in terrorist attacks. And the majority of terrorist attacks committed in Europe were carried out by European citizens with various ideological motivations.

Still, foreign and security policymakers view the collapse of state structures as one of the biggest global threats. Armed violence bears the risk of spilling over to neighboring countries or entire regions, and of escalating to the point of war between great powers. But whether or not this happens depends to a large extent on the behavior of other, mostly stable states. Major interstate conflicts arise when outside actors interfere in internal conflicts and the international community fails to reach a peace agreement such as in Syria and Yemen.

When large territories are no longer governed effectively, it becomes more difficult to tackle global security challenges like the spread of the novel coronavirus or to enforce international arms control agreements. The international system is based on states as the primary units of order. In diplomacy states are natural counterparts. In the absence of recognized governments, there are no legitimate partners for diplomatic relations. Negotiations and peace agreements become much harder when the relationship between parties at the negotiating table are a constant bone of contention.

However, limited capacity of the central state does not necessarily result in chaos. Somalia, where the central government has failed to effectively rule its national territory and population for decades, is considered one of the most fragile states in the world. But the autonomous region of Somaliland, a self-declared but not internationally recognized state, holds democratic elections and maintains control over its territory. While basic service provision is supported by international and local aid organizations, governance in Somaliland functions more effectively than in the rest of Somalia.

A closer look at differences within a country is essential for assessing security threats, but far too often this falls to the wayside. By focusing on recognized state structures, the international community at times undermines its own efforts toward effective problem solving.

*It shares a large part of the responsibility. *Especially when looking at the African continent, it is hard to deny that centuries of colonial rule and exploitation are causes for the instability that plagues many African states. Haphazardly drawn borders, which randomly divided established settlements, along with the division of people into ethnic groups based on pseudo-scientific criteria and their corresponding political instrumentalization still hamper peaceful coexistence to this day.

Colonial states in much of Africa were designed for exploitation by European rulers. Administrative structures served as tools of oppression, not legitimate forms of representation or even participation. Functioning and legitimate local institutions were destroyed. Today, differences in the stability of African states can be traced back to their respective experiences under different forms of colonial rule.

Even after these countries have been formally independent for decades, dependencies on the West and Global North persist. West African states, for example, still struggle to gain complete control over their monetary and fiscal policies, which are influenced by France. What is more, by choosing to support autocratic regimes in the quest for stability, Western governments continue to undermine the development of free and democratic societies.

The weapons used in wars and state-sponsored repression often come from Western countries like Germany or the United States. And it is the West that facilitates slavery and war economies and hampers economic development through the EUs trade and agricultural policies, the exploitation of natural resources like diamonds or rare earths by Western trade networks and corporations, and generally through Western mass consumerism.

Of course, many problems of contemporary weak states are homemade. While international financial institutions and donor countries often limit these states ability to independently manage their economies, the pressure for liberalization plays into the hands of kleptocratic elites who prevent the investment of state revenue into infrastructure projects and public goods for the population. Instead of fighting their money laundering schemes, Europe grants corrupt elites and their billions access to European financial centers much to the detriment of the local populations. While European politicians sharply criticize such corruption in public statements, they ultimately dismiss it as an unfixable defect of non-Western societies.

And not only former Western colonial powers take advantage of weaker states. Actors like China, Russia or the United Arab Emirates also benefit from the money laundering, lack of natural resources regulation and flourishing arms business that characterize many weak states and thus prevent effective global solutions.

While Europe continues to be perplexed by violence and state failure as drivers of migration, its coarse attempts at controlling migration and terrorism create new rifts within historically developed cross-border economies. Instead of contributing to prosperity and thus reducing migration, European governments restrict cross-border movements and inadvertently further the cycle of poverty and repression. So the West is far from acting in a conflict-sensitive and historically conscious manner and from promoting peace and development in unstable regions to its best ability.

*There is, but there is also a serious risk of doing more harm than good. *Afghanistan is representative for all the countries where Western intervenors catastrophically overestimated their influence, their understanding of the situation on the ground, and their own legitimacy. Those who act like a bull in a china shop should not be surprised by the mess.

But given the risks associated with escalating violence and a rising number of displaced people, doing nothing is hardly a viable option. The German government and many of its partners understandably want to see the wars in their neighborhood end and make sure that cornerstones of international law, such as those regulating weapons of mass destruction or prohibiting the killing of civilians, are respected.

Once a state has collapsed, the road back to functioning institutions is a long one. Still, examples like Germany after 1945, Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Liberia, or Sierra Leone all show that (re)construction under varying conditions is possible. The group of states we see today has not always been around and will likely not remain in place forever. When governments founded the United Nations almost 75 years ago, they designed its Charter to prevent violent disputes on state sovereignty. But the post-World War II period is full of examples of states being destroyed and reconstructed.

In times of acute crisis, humanitarian support and diplomacy can help. The aftermath of natural disasters and conflicts require financial assistance from international funds. Economic cooperation facilitates reintegration into the global economy. In the fight against diseases such as Malaria, countries benefit from targeted external support. But if outside actors assistance permanently substitutes public services, they can weaken existing structures.

To support other countries in times of crisis, some governments try to counteract immediate state collapse through stabilization measures. The German government, for example, uses civilian, police and military means to achieve a rapid and clearly visible improvement in living conditions for civilians and thus increase public trust in local authorities. In Iraq and Mali, Germany supports the respective security sector with training and equipment to further sustainable development, create the conditions for a reconciliation of the conflict parties, and even lay the foundations for democracy. While these are noble goals, reaching them will require a long-term effort and a lack of detailed studies means that the jury is still out on whether this approach actually works.

Securing basic services for vulnerable populations can buy time and political capital to help resolve underlying differences, but nothing more. Stabilization alone cannot cure structural problems like corruption, an inequitable distribution of resources, or the exclusion of minorities much less end the external support for conflict parties by major powers that has prolonged and exacerbated conflicts like the one in Syria.

As a result, international organizations, the EU and European governments are increasingly focusing on conflict prevention. Beyond diplomatic mediation, their goal is to foster long-term societal resilience through democratic participation and flexible institutions. This is a difficult balancing act with a number of conflicting goals: stabilization, respect for locally developed structures, and promoting democracy and human rights as the basis for sustainable peace.

Any success of European conflict prevention efforts will be difficult if not impossible to prove definitively. Experience shows that when a conflict breaks out, oversimplified explanations spread even quicker than the violence itself. But when violence is avoided, nothing happens. Prevention measures usually go unseen and investments in conflict prevention do not result in tangible political wins. Instead, they call for close observation, tolerance for complexity and, above all, patience. Understanding what would have happened under different circumstances requires tracing complicated processes with the help of counterfactuals, scenarios and simulations a tedious exercise that is often complicated by a lack of a sound empirical basis.

Despite the arguably limited influence that external actors have, the possible return on investments in conflict prevention is high: prevention is significantly cheaper than the sum of humanitarian, stabilization and reconstruction efforts not to mention that it is a moral responsibility.

A German version of this commentary was originally published in the May/June 2020 edition of Internationale Politik.

Follow this link:

What's Left of the Failed States Debate?: Putting Five Hypotheses to the Test - World - ReliefWeb

Rather than focusing solely on a questionable constitutional interpretation process, complementary democratic pathways through the COVID-19 emergency and election delay should also be considered

On 11 May, the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI) made a public announcement seeking written submissions from experts on a request for constitutional interpretation from the House of Peoples Representatives (HoPR), submitted on 5 May. The request indicates that the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia is unable to conduct elections on 29 August as planned, as a result of disruptions to its preparations due to the national and international responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The constitution fixes the term of the HoPR, and therefore government, to a maximum of five years (Article 54(1), and requires elections at least a month prior to the end of the term of the HoPR (Article 58(3)). Because the term of the current parliament will end on 5 October, the inability to hold elections before 5 September would be contrary to the constitution, unless the suspension of the relevant provisions is justified as necessary under the current emergency circumstances (Article 93(4)(b)).

Accordingly, the request for constitutional interpretation seeks answers to two questions:

Plausible solutions within the current constitutional framework have been suggested for these key constitutional and legal issues. But the outcomes of the interpretation exercise would not address underlying concerns regarding the emergency and elections. Instead, approaches such as a National Dialogue and a consultative government, which fall beyond the ambit of the constitutional framework, should also be considered.

Before the CCI/House of Federation (HoF) delve into determining the substantive solutions to the constitutional conundrum, they must first settle preliminary procedural issues.

Mandate to issue advisory opinion

It is important to state from the outset that the request for interpretation does not relate to whether elections can be postponed at all. The postponement is presented as a given. Beyond this, there is no specific government decision, law, or even proposal, and the request does not relate to the compatibility of a chosen course of action with the constitution. Therefore, the HoPR is seeking an opinion on what the constitution requires or allows in relation to the two issues.

In the absence of a chosen or proposed course of action, there will not be a review by the CCI, whether concrete or abstract. Accordingly, the request is for an advisory or consultative opinion. Advisory opinion is distinct from abstract review in that it involves the review of a decision or law without a need to show that the decision affects a specific persons rights (i.e. without a victim). In procedures for an advisory opinion, there may not be a decision at allas is the case in the request at hand.

As in all legal proceedings, the CCI must first determine whether it has the constitutional and legal mandate to provide an advisory opinion. This is critical because some commentators have argued that the constitution does not allow the issuance of advisory opinions, or even abstract review.

Under Article 62 of the constitution, the HoF has a plenary power to interpret the constitution. There is no reference to disputes or even review, which would assume the presence of a decision or law. In contrast, Article 83(1) refers to the power of the HoF to resolve constitutional disputes, in the Amharic version . Specifically, in relation to the CCI, the English version of Article 84(1) also speaks of constitutional disputes, but the Amharic version uses (issues), rather than .

Theres only one winner when legislation clashes with the constitution

BY MULUGETA AREGAWI Before interpreting the constitution, the relevant institutions must first assess whether the request itself is constitutional.

A cumulative reading of these provisions appears to suggest that the HoF has a broader mandate to interpret the constitution than the CCI, which could arguably be understood to include providing advisory or consultative opinions.

This distinctive mandate seems to have found expression in the relevant laws regulating the role of the two institutions. Article 4(2) of HoF Proclamation No 251 provides that the HoF shall not be obliged to provide consultancy service on constitutional interpretation. The a contrario reading of this provision could be interpreted to mean that the HoF has the discretion to offer an advisory opinion. Indeed, the HoF has on occasions provided advisory opinion (e.g., on the issue of whether a federal family code could be enacted as part of the need to create a single economic community), but has also declined to offer such service (e.g., on the meaning of the special interest of Oromia over Addis Ababa).

Admittedly, the current request is much more amorphous than the instances where the HoF gave an advisory opinion, as the HoPR is not seeking advice on whether a specific plan or proposal (e.g. a federal family code) would pass constitutional muster. The current request is unique in that it is completely open and exploratory, potentially opening the possibility for a range of constitutionally plausible answers, rather than a single answer. There is therefore no guarantee from precedent that the request would be accepted, despite the momentous occasion.

In contrast, the proclamation regulating the CCI, no 798/2013, has no provision authorising the CCI to issue an advisory opinion. Some commentators have indicated that Article 3(2)(c), which allows one-third of members of a federal or state legislature, or the federal or state executive to submit a request for constitutional interpretation on any unjusticiable [sic] matter provides the basis for the request for interpretation. Nevertheless, this provision cross references and gives effect to Article 3(1) which clearly refers to challenges to any law, customary practice or decision of government organ or decision of government official. As such, under this law, the CCI can only review a law, decision, or customary practice.

As indicated, in relation to the request for interpretation on the consequences of the postponement of elections, there is no law or decision. Accordingly, if at all this request could be considered, it may have to be directly submitted to the HoF, not the CCI.

It may be argued that Article 6 of Proclamation No. 251 enjoins the HoF to forward direct requests for constitutional interpretation to the CCI. As such, a procedural technicality should not be used to delay the settlement of the critical matter. This would be inaccurate. A discretion to accept a request for an advisory opinion is fundamental and is a filtering mechanism that allows the HoF to consider a range of factors, including non-legal factors.

House of Federation should consider rejecting request for constitutional interpretation

BY WONDWOSSEN DEMISSIE KASSA Misuse of constitutional interpretation mechanism would set a problematic precedent

A decision to seek an advisory opinion is inherently political, so is a decision to accept it or not. As a principally legal entity, the CCI may be unsuitable to exercise this discretionary power. Leaving the initial decision to the HoF would also insulate the CCI from accusations of selectivity in the exercise of the discretion. Therefore, Article 6 of Proclamation No. 251 may not necessarily be understood as justifying the delegation of the discretionary decision to accept or reject a request for an advisory opinion.

If this line of argument is accepted, the CCI must either directly rely on the apparently broader Amharic version of Article 84(1) of the constitution empowering it to resolve constitutional issues; or it may have to decline the request and advise the HoPR to submit the request to the HoF instead. The HoPR and the government may then either choose a course of action, which could then be challenged as unconstitutional, or submitted to the CCI/HoF for abstract review; or redirect the request for advisory opinion to the HoF.

While the matter may ultimately return to the CCI, and this outcome would simply delay the resolution of the matter at a moment when time is of the essence, respect for legality and a need to insulate the CCI from undue politicization may justify it.

Need for constitutional interpretation

Suggesting that the constitution is clear and does not need interpretation does not exclude the CCI from entertaining the request, if only to confirm this stance. A finding that there is no need for constitutional interpretation is itself an exercise in interpretation. In any case, while the relevant constitutional provisions may appear clear in isolation, a constitutionally defensible outcome requires reconciling the logic, interaction, and implications of the various provisions. Once the CCI/HoF claim the mandate to issue an advisory opinion on the current request, the need for constitutional interpretation is evident.

Where the procedural hurdles end, the substantive engagement begins. Even if the CCI/HoF affirm that there is need for constitutional interpretation and that they have the general mandate to issue an advisory opinion, they still enjoy the discretion to decline the request in this case.

If the CCI/HoF rule that they have the mandate to issue the advisory opinion and accept to provide an opinion in the current matter, there are a range of different outcomes.

Possibility I: Elections cannot be postponed

First, although the possibility of postponement of elections is presented as a fait accompli, it is not a given that the CCI/HoF would rule that the current constitution allows such postponement. If they rule that postponement is not allowed under the constitution, there would be no option but to amend the constitution to determine the circumstances under which the term of parliament and/or government may be extended, by whom, through what procedures, and for how long on each occasion and/or in total.

Possibility II: Elections can be postponed

If the HoF/CCI rule that the proper interpretation of the relevant constitutional provisions allows the postponement of elections beyond the five-year term in exceptional emergency circumstances that disrupt the organization of elections, they have to determine the consequence of such postponement. One outcome is absolutely necessary, and that is that the government has to continue; the question is only on the form it could take.

1. Parliament dissolves and government continues as caretaker

One possible consequence of the postponement of elections is for the parliament to be dissolved, while the government continues in a caretaker role. This would be analogous to the outcome of dissolution of parliament prior to the end of its term under Article 60.

This solution could be constitutionally plausible, but only if there is certainty that there would not be a need to renew the emergency, as such renewal or issuance of a new emergency would require approval of the HoPR. Considering the inability of excluding the possible extension of the emergency, as health professionals have warned of a possible surge in cases of COVID-19 even after countries have supposedly reached the peak, the need for renewal or issuance of new emergency cannot be precluded. As such, parliament must also continue.

A caretaker function for the government amid and in the aftermath of an emergency may also be inappropriate. The logic of a caretaker government, which seeks to cabin the role of government, is incompatible with the logic of an emergency, which requires a proactive government not only with a full mandate, but also exceptional powers. In addition to this logic, the unique circumstances that the country finds itself in amid geopolitical contestations over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and in the politics of the Horn of Africa may militate against a caretaker government.

This incompatibility of the two logics is probably why in parliamentary democracies whose constitutions specifically regulate the impact of emergencies on terms of parliament and government, such as India (Article 83(2)), Mauritius (Article 57(4))and Poland (Article 228(7)), the institutions continue with full powers.

2. Parliament dissolves, government continues with full powers

This possibility would solve the problem of having a weak government at a time of need for a proactive and strong response. Nevertheless, it would not solve the problem that may arise in case the state of emergency needs to be renewed or a new one to be issued before the elections.

In addition, it is unusual for a government to exercise full, even exceptional, powers without a corresponding accountability mechanism that parliament is designed to provide. In the absence of parliament, the public deliberation that should inform decisions and policies would be undercut.

3. Both parliament and government continue with full powers

This third possibility would allow the parliament and the government to continue with full powers, including powers to suspend constitutional guarantees in an emergency. This option would address the challenges in the above two possibilities.

In addition, the continuity of parliament would at least provide a semblance of political accountability of the government.

This is the option that has in practice been pursued in relation to Addis Ababa City Administration and local elections, which have been repeatedly and controversially postponed. In all these cases, the existing legislative and executive organs simply continued. While the terms and status of these entities are not specifically defined in the constitution, as is the case with the federal legislative organs, and even if the postponements occurred in an authoritarian context, the experiences may be seen as establishing a precedent.

Theoretically, these three possibilities could be constitutionally defensible to varying degrees; admittedly the third option more than others. The presence of different plausible possibilities, rather than the clarity of the constitutional provisions in prohibiting extension of governments term, may tempt the CCI/HoF to decline the request for an advisory opinion. This would force the government and HoPR to choose one of these options, potentially opening possibilities for negotiation between government and opposition on the way forward, while remaining within the ambit of the constitutional framework. In case anyone challenges the chosen measure, the HoF and CCI would be called upon to exercise a more natural adjudicative function.

The second substantive issue in the request for constitutional interpretation relates to the time within which elections must be conducted after the circumstances that have necessitated the state of emergency end. It is important to clarify from the outset that this is not an issue about how long the emergency may last. The duration of the emergency may only be determined by the Council of Ministers, with the approval of the HoPR.

Considering the lack of information, capacity and resources of the CCI and HoF, it is practically unimaginable that they would readily provide a specific answer on the length of time between the end of the emergency and elections. Instead, they can be expected to determine the entity which can determine the length of time and may offer some guidance on how the decision should be taken.

Who decides?

In terms of the entity, under Article 93(4)(b and c) of the constitution, the power to determine the restrictions on constitutional guarantees during an emergency is conferred on the Council of Ministers. Indeed, the current state of emergency approved by the HoPR opts for a flexible approach and largely leaves the necessary restrictions and measures to the Council of Ministers.

Nevertheless, considering the fundamental nature of the right to vote as the epitome of the sovereignty of the people, and that the HoPR is the highest authority at the national level, the CCI/HoF may rule that the decision on the postponement of the elections as well as the exact length of the preparatory period for elections should be made by the HoPR itself, rather than the Council of Ministers.

Based on what?

The right to vote and periodic renewal of the mandate of political institutions lies at the heart of a democratic dispensation. The period of postponement of elections must therefore be only to the extent absolutely necessary to allow proper preparations for elections to ensure competitive, free, fair and informed choicesfor the electoral board and the public, as well as political parties, particularly opposition entities.

The CCI/HoF could therefore be expected to find that the determination of the period between the end of emergency and election date should reasonably consider the needs of the various stakeholders. In recognition of ensuring the legitimacy of the elections, the CCI/HoF could specifically require that the decision should be based on the proposal of NEBE, after consultation with the ruling as well as opposition parties, with a duty to provide public explanation for any changes to the electoral boards proposal.

Fundamentally, the contestation within the constitutional framework revolves around two issues, and the controversy over interpretation may therefore simply be beating around the bush. The first relates to opposition concern that the decision to end or renew the state of emergency could be based on calculations to advance the interests of the ruling party, including potentially a much longer period than may be justified. This opposition concern is not unwarranted, considering the absolute dominance of the ruling party.

Nevertheless, this elephant in the room is not among the issues that will be resolved in the constitutional interpretation exercise. While there is a possibility of challenging decisions in relation to the emergency in the CCI/HoF, they are likely to defer to the assessments of the government in this regard, considering their lack of sufficient information, resources, and institutional capacity.

A public government assurance that decisions on ending, renewing, or reissuing a state of emergency would only be taken after genuine prior consultation with opposition groups, or even agreement from parts of the opposition, would go a long way in appeasing concerns in this regard.

From his pulpit, amid a crisis, Abiy regally dismisses all opponents

BY RENE LEFORT The ruling system the Nobel laureate yearns for becomes clearer and clearer.

The second underlying issue relates to the period of preparations for elections from the end of the circumstances that necessitated the emergency. There is concern among some opposition groups that the government may unduly prolong this period, to allow it time to (ab)use state resources to weaken the opposition; or unduly shorten it to catch the opposition off-guard and unprepared (note that even some of the prominent opposition parties are yet to fully re-register under the new electoral regime). A short period of time could mean that opposition parties have to spend most of their time attempting to finalize their legal establishment, rather than strengthening their structures, promoting their platforms, and building their constituencies.

As noted above, this second issue has been presented for constitutional interpretation. Nevertheless, the CCI/HoF are unlikely to offer a specific period. A CCI/HoF requirement and/or public government assurance that a decision on the period of electoral preparation would be based on the proposals of NEBE and prior genuine consultation with the opposition groups could dampen the level of mistrust.

Government concessions on these two fronts could secure broad opposition support for the continuity of parliament and government with full powers during the interim, an idea that already has support from key opposition groups.

As the saying goes, tough cases make great judges. The CCI and HoF have the chance to reset their records. If the procedural innovations, including in procuring expert submissions and hearings, are complemented with a robust decision, the moment of crisis may signal a hopeful future for constitutional democracy.

It is important to note that the terms of regional parliaments (and their governments) are not determined by the constitution. As such, the constitutional interpretation exercise would not directly and conclusively determine their fate. Nevertheless, the solutions in relation to the federal parliament and government are very likely to be replicated for the regions, as part of the measures under a state of emergency.

The above discussion relates to the possibilities within the current constitutional framework. Nevertheless, while not clearly stated, alternative or complementary proposals that fall outside the ambit of the constitutional framework have also been presented. The postponement of the elections has been seized by some political parties and commentators as a renewed opportunity to propose what they have long argued for.

While it is important to clarify that these proposals are outside the constitutional framework, it does not follow that they are undesirable or should be rejected. If there is sufficient consensus, it is possible to craft a new political and social contract, but that would require a constitutional adjustment.

National Dialogue

Key among these calls relate to a National Dialogue, or a transitional government. Considering the fragmented and polarised political discourse, and the failure to build a fundamental political and social contract in the almost three-decade rule of the former ruling coalition, a National Dialogue may indeed be necessary. While the FDRE Constitution still provides a veneer of a political contract, it never really achieved the reverence and broad support as a legitimate point of reference. The challenge in Ethiopia is not that an old political settlement has died and a new one cannot be born, it is rather the fact that no settlement was ever fully born.

While necessary, a National Dialogue should perhaps not occur in the context of a postponed election. It is arguably better to ensure that a National Dialogue does not occur alongside or close to an election period. Otherwise, short-term electoral calculations are likely to undermine and interfere in the inherently long-term considerations that should permeate such a process.

In any case, a National Dialogue would require a much longer timeframe than any constitutionally acceptable period of postponement. Negotiations on who should be part of such process, what should be on the agenda, how decisions would be taken, and how they would be implemented are likely to require a much longer period, even before substantive deliberations formally commence. As such, imminent engagement in a National Dialogue would perhaps require a constitutional amendment postponing the elections indefinitely. This conduct of a dialogue outside the shadows and short-term calculations of election periods would allow the deliberations to occur behind a veil of ignorance (as no party could know their level of support with certainty in advance of the elections) that is a precondition for a minimal type of public-spirited, reasoned, considerate and empathetic socio-political compact in the form of a new or revised constitutional framework.

In the absence of a sufficient timeframe, such a dialogue is much better left for after the elections, as the ruling party has insisted. As a compromise, the various political groups could start a process to agree on the basic principles that should guide the National Dialogue once elections are finalised. This would be similar to the creative two-stage approach adopted in South Africa after the formal end of apartheid where the African National Congress and other opposition groups and the apartheid government agreed an interim constitution with 34 broad but enforceable principles that formed the basis for a new constitution, which was ultimately drafted by an elected constituent assembly.

Considering the limited time available before elections and the election fever, incorporating such principles in the FDRE Constitution may not be achievable, but this is no excuse for failure to start the process and push as far as practically possible an agreement that would at least enjoy a moral force. Such agreement could involve a commitment from all parties to start the dialogue process as soon as possible, for the winners of the election to provide enough funding and political support, and on who should convene it.

Transitional government

Some opposition groups and commentators have also called for a transitional government. The call is premised on a claim that the current government, as well as the governments before it, were illegitimate and sustained their power through a combination of violence, oppression, and co-option.

Nevertheless, however justifiable the grievance may be, a transitional government would not be acceptable within the current constitutional framework and pursuing it would require a constitutional amendment. Practically, just like a National Dialogue, forming a transitional government would require a much longer timeframe than the postponement of elections that the emergency would necessitate.

In any case, the current government has rejected the possibility of a transitional government. It is also arguably inappropriate in the current context where a unified, proactive government is needed to address the challenges of responding to an emergency and shifting geopolitical and international political sphere.

This does not mean that less formal but more inclusive governance structures cannot be organised. As I have proposed in another piece, the government could agree to a consultative government where it would formally provide opposition groups a chance to present and critique proposed policies and decisions prior to their formal endorsement. This formal opportunity for scrutiny is normally exercised by the parliamentary opposition. But because of Ethiopias past pseudo-elections and the authoritarian predispositions of the former ruling coalition that Prosperity Party has inherited, there is practically no opposition in the HoPR. The proposed consultative framework would make up for this original sin which provides the moral case for allowing opposition groups a formal opportunity to contribute to and influence policy making.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in a recent video message and during consultations indicated that this wont be practical considering the number of political groups. Nevertheless, this could be addressed through using, for example, the Joint Council of Political Parties as the channel of interaction. Opposition political groups would therefore be required to debate the issues amongst themselves and propose a common position to the government with a fixed period of time. In addition to enhancing the legitimacy of public decisions, the exercise could generate a sense of common purpose and cooperation among the political class. This is also in line with the assurances of opposition consultations described above in relation to the renewal of the emergency and determination of the preparatory electoral period.

If the period of postponement is short, the government is likely to be reluctant to agree to this arrangement. Nevertheless, if this period becomes extensive, the government going it alone may become politically untenable.

Ethiopia stands at a critical juncture. The controversy over the postponement of the elections and its consequences has triggered a lively, multi-dimensional conversation over the understanding of the constitutional ordinances as well as the direction the country should take.

This piece has sought to contribute to this debate, first by breaking the constitutional issues down into their parts and identifying possible pathways; by discussing the underlying causes of the constitutional controversy, which require political assurances regardless of the outcomes of the interpretation exercise; and by distilling proposed ideas that fall outside the constitutional framework, and must be considered in that light.

While the debates have predictably generated some heated, and at times inflammatory rhetoric, there has arguably never been a moment of collective reflection on the Ethiopian constitution. This is an experience we should be proud of as a nation and must seek to consistently emulate if we are to bury the ghost of constitutions without constitutionalism.

Follow us on Twitter @EthiopiaInsight and join our Telegram channel here

This is the authors viewpoint. However, Ethiopia Insight will correct clear factual errors.

Editor: William Davison

Main photo: Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed with opposition leaders Beyene Petros, shaking hands, and Merera Gudina.

Query or correction?Email us

Published under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationallicence. Cite Ethiopia Insight and link to this page if republished.

See the rest here:

Beating around the bush on the constitutional conundrum - Ethiopia Insight

DHIRENDRA NEWAR

It is once again proved that a hardship anywhere the world is an opportunity to exploit the labourers and poorer sections of the world everywhere. Whatever be the form of the government, whatever be the status of the Constitutional values of a country is, the labourers and the poor people of the world had been and are still been oppressed and subjected to inequalities. India is no exception to this, the plight of the migrant labourers and the poorer sections in the country, especially in the last couple of months is the visible example of such a scenario. Unfortunately, instead of redressing their plights, another major blow was thrown to them in the name of labour reforms being taken by various state governments to stimulate the economy.

In the last couple of days several state governments, including the state of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh as well as the state of Assam have decided to make an amendment in the existing labour laws. The decision includes several stringent provisions like increasing the working hours from 8 hours to 12 hours a day, tightening the norms to get registered for enjoying the benefits of industrial laws to its employees, extending the number of labour requirement in an organisation to be brought under the jurisdiction of the labour inspector etc. Sadly, though working hours has been increased by an extra four hours, there is no increase in the wages for overtime works. All these seem to benefit the employers and industrialists who can have the liberty to exploit their employees and these workers and labourers are left with no rights but to get exploited.

It is understandable that the world is going through a tough time due to the outbreak of the pandemic. No country in the world is safe and has to face the blot of the onslaught of this disease. Nevertheless, whenever we read the ethos and values of our Constitution, we understand that our country is a democratic one and this has been evident from the various fundamental rights and directive principles of state policies that opt for several welfare measures to all sections of the population, be the rich or the poor. Under such a scenario, a pandemic like situation causes greater harm to the poorer and the lower sections of the population. Moreover, a change in the labour laws in the name of reform is unprecedented and uncalled for.

Our Constitution under Article 39 (e) provides that the health and strength of workers, men and women, and the children are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter a vocation unsuited to their age or strength. Moreover, Article 42 of the Indian Constitution provides a direction to the state for securing just and humane conditions of works. Given these constitutional requirements, the present decision of the state governments to amend the labour and industrial laws in a bid to exploit the labourers and employees is an unfortunate one. In the pretext of economic hardships, no welfare and democratic country in the world exploits its workforce.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his address to the nation on 12th May had proposed for Atma-Nirbhar Bharat or self-reliant India. This was appended with an announcement of a package of 20 lakh crores, around 10% of Indias GDP for the revival of the Indian economy. This sounds a good move given the fact that the prime minister himself advocated for the welfare of the marginal as well as the migrant labours in his address. But the fact of the matter is that the exploitation of labours in one hand and the welfare packages for them in the other hand cant go together. This carrot and stick policy is not in tune of our Constitutional ethos.

Article 23 of the Constitution of India advocates prohibition of any form of forced labour. Though the term forced is not defined in the Constitution itself, it was interpreted by the Supreme Court for a wider use in a landmark case of Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs. Union of India (AIR 1982). In that case, Justice Bhagwati said, the word forced must, therefore, be construed to include not only physical or legal force but also force arising from the compulsion of economic circumstances which leaves no choice of alternatives to a person in want and compels him to provide labour or service. Given the fact that the changes in the labour laws call for an extended labour period that might cause a detrimental impact on the health and psychology of the labour class, it does amount to forced labour, and it is unconstitutional.

It is not unknown to the world that the industrial revolution in Europe had garnered several economic and industrial benefits. However that was followed by a consequence of widespread hardship to the labour class, their health and strength being compromised and the emergence of two-fold classes, the haves and the have nots. Today, if India opts for this imperial policy of labour oppression and exploitations, the outcome will not be a desired one. No democratic country in the 21st century can think of stepping to the ladders of economic surpluses on the hardships of its labours and workforces. Given the backdrop of the ongoing critical situations due to the outbreak of a pandemic, people might have no option other than to bow down to the government decisions and get exploited. But it is not a democratic and welfare decision on the part of India to allow this mischief being happened. A call for status quo in these developments and protect the labour class and employees from these hardships and exploitations is the least that the authorities in power can do.

Follow this link:

LABOUR REFORMS NOT IN SYNC WITH CONSTITUTION Northeast Today - NorthEast Today

Has the music we listen to, and why we listen, changed during the coronavirus pandemic?

Beyond the well-documented evidence of pandemic music-making at a distance and over social media, music critics have suggested there is an increased preference for music that is comforting, familiar and nostalgic.

Data from major streaming services and companies that analyze them may support this view.

On Spotify, the popularity of chart hits dropped 28 per cent between March 12 and April 16. Instead, Spotify listeners are searching for instrumental and chill music. In the first week of April on Spotify, there was a 54 per cent increase in listeners making nostalgia-themed playlists, as well as an uptick in the popularity of music from the 50s, '60s, '70s and '80s.

More than half of those participating in a survey conducted by Nielsen Music/MRC Data at the end of March 2020 said they were seeking comfort in familiar, nostalgic content in their TV viewing and music listening. The survey was based on responses by 945 consumers in the U.S. aged 13 and older, plus online responses.

As a researcher who has examined musics power in times of crisis most recently, exploring the music of people who were refugees from civil war El Salvador during the 1980s I believe such work can help us understand our apparent desire to use familiar music for psychological support during this challenging period.

In a time when many are confronting both increased solitude and increased anxiety, familiar music provides reassurance because it reminds us who we are as people. Whether it is a hit we danced to with our teenage friends, or a haunting orchestral piece our grandmother played, music lights up memories of our past selves.

Music allows us to create an emotional narrative between the past and present when we struggle to articulate such a narrative in words. Its familiarity comforts us when the future seems unclear.

Music helps to reconnect us to our identities. It also helps us, as all the arts do, to pursue an otherwise inexpressible search for meaning. In so doing, it helps bolster our resilience in the face of difficulty.

People have used music to such philosophical and psychological ends even in times and places where one would think music would be the last thing on peoples minds.

In one of the most extreme among many examples, survivors of Nazi concentration camps report having sung familiar songs to reinforce their sense of self and their religious identity, when both were gravely threatened.

My current research considers musics use for such purposes during the 1980s by refugees from the civil war in El Salvador. Subsistence farmers (campesinos/campesinas), who fled government oppression for refugee camps in Honduras, have told me they considered music essential to their psychological survival.

In a sometimes-dangerous new land, away from their war-stricken home, campesinos and campesinas performed, listened and danced to old and new folk songs to help sustain a connection to their pre-war identities in the nation they had left behind. Traditional folk songs were sometimes given new words to document the refugees persecution.

Songs thus provided both a means to maintain identity and an emotional narrative for traumatic events that were hard to describe in words. This helped the refugees manage the challenges of the present and face an uncertain future.

In 2019, I helped conduct research for a short documentary about one leading refugee singer-songwriter in El Salvador, Norberto Amaya. Amayas story shows how Salvadoran musicians harnessed music to help their refugee compatriots manage the psychological challenges of their situation. The film was a collaboration between Western University and Juan Bello of Triana Media, with support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

The songs of El Salvadors civil war refugees make clear that music, whether old or new, serves a vital function for humans facing hardship, both on personal and cultural levels.

The COVID-19 pandemic has hit some communities much harder than others, and demonstrated how existing inequalities are thrown into even greater relief in times of crisis. Yet in all affected communities, the pandemic has the capacity to trigger anxious feelings about earlier traumas and current separations.

Listening to music we know well reminds us of the friends and family that have made us who we are. In our current situation, different as it is from that faced by Salvadoran civil war refugees, familiar music is similarly permitting reconnection both to personal identity and to a much larger community of family, friends and strangers who also love these familiar songs. This helps us better manage our isolation and anxiety.

This apparent human instinct to seek out mechanisms that enable cultural reconnection is a smart one. Trauma scholars believe that, for some people, familiar cultural practices may actually be more effective than psychiatric treatment in helping people deal with potentially traumatic events.

American poet and activist Maya Angelou once movingly wrote:

Music was my refuge. I could crawl into the space between the notes and curl my back to loneliness.

Many can surely relate to such a sentiment. We may not yet have the words to articulate our response to the situation in which humanity currently finds itself. But engaging with music soothes us in these difficult times, providing a means to begin to process our emotions, to stay connected to our pre-pandemic identities and to participate in something larger than ourselves, even while we live apart.

Read this article:

Music helps us remember who we are and how we belong during difficult and traumatic times - The Conversation CA