Soybean harvest in the U.S. state of Michigan. Credit: Public domain

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Sep 20 2012 (IPS)

Researchers are warning that RoundUp, a popular herbicide produced by the U.S. agro-giant Monsanto and which is used heavily on U.S. corn and soybeans, cause tumours, liver and kidney failure in rodents.

The researchers, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen in France, found that levels of the herbicide believed to be safe can cause mammary tumours and multiple organ damage, and in some cases led to premature deaths, in laboratory animals.

The study, the first peer-reviewed, long-term animal study of a genetically modified food, spanned two years, a relatively long period for such research. The results have been approved by CRIGEN, a group against the practice of genetically modifying organisms.

Researchers tested female and male rats, both of which reportedly developed abundant tumours when exposed to the herbicide. Most rats had two to three tumours before they died.

The study, which has been published in the peer-reviewed Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal, also shows that female rats were more at risk than the male rats, with 93 percent of the females developing tumours.

The rats were fed a diet of commercially available seeds that have been genetically modified to be tolerant of Round Up. They also drank water that had U.S. government-approved levels of RoundUp in it.

Discussing the findings with journalists on Wednesday, Seralini pointed out that these rats died before the rats in the control group, which were fed a normal diet. There was again a gender difference between the rats’ death rates, with 70 percent of female rats dying prematurely compared to 50 percent of the male rats.

These numbers were significantly higher than those of the control group, in which 20 and 30 percent of males and females, respectively, died prematurely. The livers of the males were found to have been particularly affected.

On Wednesday, Seralini called on the U.S government to take note of the study – and take action. He said he found it preposterous that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had not already tested for these issues.

“It is abnormal that the FDA hasn’t requested for more tests on pesticides and the like affecting mammalian health,” Seralini said. “These results can parallel human health.”

Critics, however, are sceptical of the study, and some scientists have pointed to what they believe are statistical inaccuracies. A major criticism is a lack of data regarding the portions fed to the rats.

Some have also wondered publicly why there aren’t more human cases to back up the study’s rodent findings.

Reuters reported that Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company would review the study, but that, “Numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies performed on biotech crops to date, including more than a hundred feeding studies, have continuously confirmed their safety, as reflected in the respective safety assessments by regulatory authorities around the world.”

Still, the study has been grist for groups in favour of labelling genetically modified food, a longstanding debate in the United States.

California Right to Know, a group that has been pushing for the labelling of such foods, is pointing to the study as proof that action must be taken. A spokesperson for the group, Stacy Malkan, claims that “this is the first available long-term study on GMO” despite the fact that such foods have been in the supply “for the better part of 20 years”.

Indeed, other countries have been quicker to take a precautionary approach. The French government has ordered an investigation into crop-growing methods in direct response to the study’s release.

In the United States, whether the FDA will take heed of the study and launch its own investigation is unclear at the moment, but pressure groups have already started urging the concerned authorities concerning these findings.

For Seralini, the matter is simple. “GMOs are problematic for human, mammalian health,” he says – and he has no qualms in drawing parallels between the rodents that were tested and the humans of which he speaks.

Landless workers march in Rio de Janeiro Jun. 20, 2012. Credit: Mario Osava/IPS

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Sep 14 2012 (IPS)

Academics gathered in Washington on Wednesday suggested that the mixed experience at the U.N. Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro in June, has increased the importance of citizen engagement and consumer accountability in issues of environment, renewable energy and sustainability.

At a panel discussion, participants explored why there had been such a lack of progress after the June conference, known as Rio+20, one of the largest international summits on the issue in decades.

Particular emphasis was also paid to the fact that the private sector, particularly large-scale corporations, was being allowed to make sustainability-related promises and voluntary commitments without being held accountable for those pledges.

“The one commodity that politicians care about are people, and if people care the politicians will follow,” Michelle Lapinski, the director of corporate practices at the Nature Conservancy, an advocacy group, said Wednesday. “People should mobilise, demand a change and ask what’s happening about the future of sustainable development.”

Lapinski believes not only that consumers can alter the behaviour of companies, but that companies that cave in to consumer pressure will ultimately lead by example, setting trends for other companies to follow.

An example of corporations doing their part for the environment is PUMA, which published an environment-focused profit-and-loss report every quarter. The group as a whole agreed with Lapinski’s analysis, calling attention to Chevron, whose entire public relations campaign revolves around sustainable development and renewable energy.

Twenty years ago, the participants pointed out, this would have been unimaginable.

As with government, citizen pressure holds great potential over corporations.

“If people go on a particular website and saw that Coca-Cola promised A, B and C, and haven’t delivered, that’s a very good basis for campaigns, for boycotts,” Reid Detchon, the vice-president for energy and climate at the United Nations Foundation, said. “They have to believe someone is watching – you have to hold (corporations’) feet to the fire.”

This concept of monitoring progress is why Jacob Scherr, the director of strategy and advocacy at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a research and watchdog group, is optimistic about the future, even after realising the lukewarm success of the Rio summit.

Scherr’s project, cloudofcommitments.com, is specifically designed to use social media to get the youth involved, to get their voices heard, and to make sure that they hold big corporations, business leaders and politicians accountable.

“The politicians didn’t feel pressured to act at the Rio summit,” Scherr said. “The people didn’t make them feel the pressure, but there were lots of young people who wanted to be heard. There were young business leaders with sustainable development plans and economic plans that need to be put out there and shared.”

Social media may hold out promise in this regard, particularly as a way to promote activism among the youth. Pop bands such as Linkin Park have also pledged support for sustainable development initiatives, with the power to mobilise tens of millions of followers into action.

Participants at Wednesday’s discussion also pointed to the new collaboration between the World Bank and the United Nations, which are co-chairing a new joint committee on sustainable development.

Still, many suggest, the issue will come down to citizen participation and consumer responsibility, initiatives hold out the promise of force a change in corporate culture, at least over time.

“Let’s face it. Our reality is we’ve been buying and selling nature for years – corporations do it, and now individuals do it,” Lapinski said, suggesting that the only real change that can be introduced on how corporations view their profits – the nature of how the transaction takes place.

If Coca-Cola uses water, she says, it needs to take the dual responsibility of giving back to nature and making a profit.

All of the participants emphasised that there will be no miracle solutions to the issue of sustainability.

But Scherr warns that the world doesn’t have another two or three decades to wake up and realise that the depletion of natural resources, waste dumping, and deforestation have almost killed the planet.

Activists protest in front of the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia. Credit: Caravan4Peace

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Sep 12 2012 (IPS)

Mexican activists winding down a month-long U.S. tour warned Tuesday that guns licensed in the United States were playing a massive part in gang- and drug cartel-related violence in Mexico.

Those speaking in Washington on Tuesday were part of a movement of activists and families known as the Caravan for Peace with Justice and Dignity. The movement was started by Mexican poet Javier Sicilia in 2011 in direct response to the murder of his son, a victim of the drug war being waged both in Mexico and the United States.

According to the organisation, more than 60,000 people have died and at least 20,000 others have “disappeared” since Mexican President Felipe Calderon took office in 2006, bringing with him a newfound militarisation of the struggle against the drug trade. Over the first half of 2012 alone, an estimated 21,500 people were murdered due to drug-related violence.

The Caravan for Peace activists are calling on U.S and Mexican authorities to change these militarised policies and end the drug war. In particular, they are urging the United States to crack down on the trafficking of arms to Mexico, which has played a crucial part in the thousands of murders and disappearances and the ongoing violence that pervades the country.

“There is strong evidence that these weapons are coming from the USA,” Sergio Aguayo, a noted Mexican academic, said Tuesday, speaking of arms in drugs-related violence.

Aguayo has long had a reputation for being both critical of lax U.S gun control and contemptuous of a perceived lack of regard for Mexican lives.

The Mexican drug cartels tend to favour AK-47 and AR-15 assault weapons, the group says, which are easily available at almost all U.S. gun shops near the U.S.-Mexican border.

The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has confirmed that approximately 70 percent of the guns being used and recovered in the Mexican drug war are of U.S origin.

And while many activists and organisations have repeatedly called on U.S. legislators to enact stricter gun control laws and stem the flow of arms into Mexico, Caravan for Peace’s agenda has always been to urge both the Mexican and U.S governments to find alternatives to the drug war.

Over the course of the past month of touring the United States, the movement has showcased individuals who have lost family members to the drug war. Olga Reyes, for instance, spoke on Tuesday about losing six members of her family to the drug-related violence, noting that she has more than 20 additional members of her family now living in exile for the same reason.

Aguayo is also highly critical of the Mexican government. “Felipe Calderon’s government has not fulfilled its commitment” towards the victims of the drug war, he says. He also warns that, despite the fact that Calderon term in office ended with the July elections, his militarised anti-drugs policies have not been halted.

But Aguayo says that much of the responsibility for the drug violence in Mexico lies with the U.S. government. “Help put out the fire at your neighbour’s house before your house catches fire and ends in ashes,” he said Tuesday, paraphrasing the former U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

For his part, Sicilia, the poet and founder of the Caravan for Peace, is clear about what is really at stake for the movement.

“We have travelled across the United States to raise awareness of the unbearable pain and loss caused by the drug war, and of the enormous shared responsibility for protecting families and communities in both our countries,” he says. “Our purpose is to honour our victims, to make their names and faces visible.”

The U.S. State Department on Friday declared the Haqqani network, a militant group based in Pakistan, a “terrorist organisation”.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the order while in Brunei and also sent a formal report to Congress, two days before a congressional deadline.

Clinton’s statement minces no words in its characterisation of the Haqqani network, a group that has been responsible for deaths and kidnappings of U.S. soldiers, as well as an onslaught of suicide bombings. And while the statement touches on the subject of offering aid to the group – and its consequences – it barely mentions Pakistan.

Such a designation, formally known as a “foreign terrorist organisation”, brings with it a “prohibition against knowingly providing material support or resources to, or engaging in other transactions with, the Haqqani Network, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of the organization that are in the United States.”

Pakistan doesn’t fall into the category, but its exclusion from the statement may have been by design.

“The Pakistani government seems to have signalled that they can live with this decision,” Marvin Weinbaum, a former analyst on Pakistan and Afghanistan in the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, told IPS.

If Pakistan were to be called out for letting the Haqqani network operate on its territory, a string of events would automatically ensue, thus souring a relationship that, even now, is only barely recovering after a year of significant disagreements.

“The U.S. government is not going to directly involve Pakistan, because then it would imply that the Pakistani government is aiding and abetting the Haqqani network,” Weinbaum said. “That would have to lead to the U.S. putting sanctions on Pakistan.”

In a briefing on Friday, two senior officials from the State Department echoed such analysis, saying they didn’t see Pakistan creating any problems regarding the decision. As one official put it, reconciliation efforts between the two countries would neither be put on hold nor be affected by the new decision.

“Obviously, the last year, year and a half, have been a very difficult time for our bilateral relationship,” the official said. “(Secretary Clinton) has said frequently that it is a challenging and complex but critical relationship … over the coming weeks, we are expecting a series of other important bilateral senior meetings … and this is one issue which we’ve raised many, many times with the Pakistanis and are committed to working with them on.”

The Haqqani network is one of the strongest elements of a tangle of politics, espionage and terrorism, a group allegedly backed by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). Further confusing the equation is the fact that the network’s fighters are fighting with the Pakistani Taliban against the Pakistan Army, offering a complex web of loyalties.

Known for running automobile and construction businesses as fronts for its militant activities, the Haqqani network is thought to have two staunch allies, the ISI and Saudi funders. But Weinbaum doesn’t think that the new U.S. listing will make much of a difference to these ties – or any resulting militant activity.

“Now that the decision has been passed, it will make it difficult for the Haqqani network to get support and funding from open channels,” he says. “It will definitely make it harder, but it won’t stop.”

Weinbaum believes that Clinton’s move was being heavily pushed by the Congress, members of which have become increasingly frustrated at the ease of ability with which the Haqqani fighters and leadership have been operating. Such frustrations have undoubtedly been further stoked given how little the United States has been able to do to slow the group, with close ties to Al-Qaeda.

“The decision doesn’t change anything fundamentally,” Weinbaum says. “But Congress will definitely feel less frustrated now. It’s election year, and as such this is a good move by the State Department.”

A human rights crisis has engulfed the Indian Ocean nation of the Maldives since the ousting of the former president, Mohamed Nasheed, on Feb. 7, activists warned here Tuesday.

The tourist haven, known mostly for its beaches and resorts, has seen a significant rise in public beatings and brutality by police targeting Nasheed’s supporters, according to a new report released here Tuesday by Amnesty International, a watchdog group. The events that led to Nasheed’s resignation are characterised as unlawful by Nasheed and his supporters, who claim that he was forced out of office at gunpoint.

The report takes an in-depth look into the violence that has permeated Maldivian society following Nasheed’s resignation by combining eyewitness accounts and personal narratives.

It includes an interview with Ahmed Shah Rasheed, the deputy mayor of Male, who was beaten by police and threatened with death. Other incidents include protestors being locked up in filthy dog cages, and not being allowed out to use the bathroom.

The Maldives, one of the most prosperous countries in South Asia, saw 30 years of autocratic rule under Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. In 2008, however, the strongman was beaten in national polls by Nasheed, a former Amnesty International “prisoner of conscience”, and his vice-president, Mohammed Waheed.

Dissatisfaction with the way the economy was being run and pressure from the opposition led to the February ousting of Nasheed. The new government, led by Mohammed Waheed, has a cabinet full of Gayoom supporters, including a few of his family members.

Gayoom may not be in power, Amnesty’s analysts suggest, but his political clout is not to be underestimated.

On Aug. 30, the U.S. State Department released a press statement that was surprising and shocking to many human rights groups.

“The United States welcomes the release of the report of the independent Commission of National Inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the February 7 transfer of power in Maldives,” it said. “The United States commends the Commission co-chairs for their leadership and commitment to a thorough and inclusive investigation and review process.

“The United States has consistently called for all Maldivians to respect the findings of the Commission of National Inquiry. Now that the Commission has released its report we urge all parties to respect those findings, to exercise restraint, obey the rule of law, and continue to express themselves in a peaceful and nonviolent manner.”

Human rights groups have been quick to question the U.S. State Department’s position on the issue. Nasheed’s tenure as president was the first time the country had a democratically elected leader in over 30 years, and for many the statement invalidates much of the Maldivian democracy struggle.

T. Kumar, director of International advocacy for Amnesty International USA, told IPS that the State Department should have at least mentioned the human rights violations that are spreading across the country.

He cited numerous accounts of brutality and police beatings that shed a harsh light on the current government’s inability to curb assaults by the police and put perpetrators behind bars. Kumar says that police regularly spray pepper spray directly into protestors’ eyes, beating them on the head with batons, and even following tortured protestors to hospitals to beat them again.

“When the United States doesn’t mention any human rights violations in Maldives, and only talks about the political coup d’état, it sends out a negative message to the Maldivian people. It means that the government can do as it wishes, without regard to human rights,” Kumar told IPS.

Mariya Ahmed Didi, a member of Parliament and a supporter of Nasheed, told Amnesty that she was brutally beaten by batons, and pepper-sprayed by members of the police who forced her to keep her eyes open.

“As we were in the hospital, I heard and saw uniformed policemen charging in,” she told Amnesty’s researchers. “They were hitting people who had been injured, hitting them especially on their head. We left the hospital quietly, but I saw two police officers marching into the emergency room.”

There are several such accounts in the new report, and Kumar believes that a strong word from the U.S would go a long way in curbing such violence.

“As of now, it seems as if the actions of the Maldivian police and government are acceptable. A strong word from the United States could rectify that. When the United States talks, countries are at least forced to take notice,” says Kumar.

The attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin in early August on the heels of the shooting at a movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado signals the rise of right-wing domestic terrorism in the United States, experts say.

After the shooting at the Sikh temple, a statement repeated on nearly every U.S. media outlet was that the Sikh shooting was a case of mistaken identity and that because gunman Wade Michael Page was actually trying to gun down Muslims and desecrate a mosque, the act was somehow therefore justified.

A talk held by the New America Foundation on Aug. 23 entitled “What do we make of extremism after Wisconsin?” sought to address these issues and highlight hate crimes against Muslims that have not received the same media attention as recent events.

On Aug. 6, a mosque in Joplin, Missouri was burnt down. The day before, the Sikh temple shooting had taken place in Wisconsin. On Aug. 7, pigs’ feet were thrown into a mosque in southern California. On Aug. 10, pellet shots were fired into a mosque in Illinois. The list doesn’t end here.

Haris Tarin, director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council believes that a change in attitude towards Muslim Americans needs to come from the top. “Democrats and Republicans need to come together to fight Islamophobia. We don’t want it to become a partisan issue,” said Tarin, who pointed to Representative Michelle Bachman’s witch hunt as an extremely dangerous turn taken by politicians.

Participants at the talk argue that how politicians portray American Muslims has a significant impact on how they are treated. “When the president talks, it helps. When politicians talk in favor of a certain group, it definitely helps,” says Valarie Kaur, director of the Visual Law Project.

Perhaps most unsettling is the fact that Muslims in America are held accountable and answerable for terrorist crimes perpetrated by a select number of Islamic extremists – most often foreign elements – who, moderate Muslims have explained, do not represent true Islam.

Spencer Ackerman, a senior reporter at Wired.com, dismissed the idea that people weren’t educated about Islam. “I’m an American Jew, and I have never had to explain or defend actions of Jewish people around the world. I realize I am in a privileged position. So why do American Muslims have to explain themselves or defend other Muslims’ actions?” said Ackerman.

Kaur added that no white Christians would ever be held responsible for the actions of other white Christians across the world.

The double standard is mind-boggling, but a truth that slowly seems to be permeating American society.

After 9/11, hate crimes against Muslims and turban-wearing Sikhs more than doubled. The word “terrorist” has become synonymous with “Muslim extremists”. The Aurora shootings, the Sikh temple tragedy – neither of these incidents was treated as “terrorist” activity by the media.

The manner in which media covers such events, as well as how politicians talk about Muslims, plays a huge part in the way Muslims are perceived in the United States.

“Rhetoric does not fall on deaf ears. Rhetoric is how political extremism becomes mainstream,” says Tarin. “There is a correlation between violence, rhetoric, and political extremism; hate crimes do not occur in a vacuum,” he adds, explaining how the media and the government can mould the public’s view towards certain groups.

Two incidents that highlight this correlation are Bachman’s witch hunt against Muslim politicians, and Representative Joe Walsh’s (R-IL) claim made in a town hall that radical Muslims are “trying to kill Americans every week”. The town hall was 15 miles from the Morton Grove Mosque, where pellets were fired by David Conrad. Other attacks such as an acid bomb incident in Lombard, Illinois and graffiti in Evergreen Park, Illinois, also took place in Walsh’s district.

Although negative perceptions of Muslims have reached extreme levels and can and have take on dangerous forms, there is reason to believe that not all Americans maintain such negatively biased beliefs about Muslims.

An evangelical friend of Tarin, along with a group of other evangelicals, has bought ad space and plans to put up signs reading, “I stand with my Muslim brother. I stand with my Sikh brother.”

“This is the greatness of America, its democracy and its pluralism; that people stand up and support one another,” says Tarin. Yet a lack of exposure to other cultures and religions is perhaps one of the largest factors for fear and hatred towards certain religious groups.

“The most supportive pro-Islam groups in the U.S. are returning veterans. Most Americans don’t travel, (they) only assume,” says Ackerman of the need for people in the United States to broaden their horizons and understand other peoples and cultures.

Whether Islamophobia will decrease in coming years will depend greatly on the media, and the U.S. government’s willingness to tackle hate crimes and counter negative perceptions of this religious group.

By mid-September, the Royal Dutch Shell Oil (Shell) group hopes to begin exploratory oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of northern Alaska, provided it can secure federal permission from the U.S. government and overcome other logistical obstacles. But a prominent environmental group warns that drilling will do “irreparable damage” to the area.

The Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) published a reportMonday urging the U.S. government to oppose Shell’s drilling, citing concern, along with other green groups, about Shell’s inability to clean up and prevent oil spills.

The oil drilling ship Noble Discoverer on April 5, 2012 in the Port of Seattle before its trip to Alaska for the summer Arctic drilling season. Credit: James Brooks/CC by 2.0

Pro-Shell groups and the Republican party criticise these organisations, however. They argue that oil found in the Arctic Ocean will lead to cheaper energy resources for more than a decade for the United States.

Shell has admitted that it cannot effectively clean up oil spills, and that its response barge, Arctic Challenger, may not be able to endure an Arctic storm.

Greenpeace Lead Arctic Campaigner Jackie Dragon was harsh in her criticism of Shell’s proposed venture.

“Shell can’t keep its drill rig under control in a protected harbor, so what will happen when it faces 20-foot swells and sea ice while drilling in the Arctic?” asked Dragon. “The company has admitted its drill rig can’t meet the standards required to avoid polluting Arctic air” and has “broken promises about its oil spill response plan and Arctic storm preparedness”.

“Shell cannot be trusted, and President Obama should not let its Arctic drilling program move forward,” said Dragon.

Shell, on the other hand, is hoping to make the most of a fast-shrinking summer drilling timeline. If the company begins drilling now, it will have to stop by October at the latest, before the advent of the sea ice.

But the U.S. government and Shell are currently embroiled in negotiations, even as environmental groups hope that after the 2010 BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and a damning inspection that showed Arctic Challenger to be lacking in the electrical, piping and fire departments, Shell will not be granted permission for the summer drilling.

The NRDC report outlined  eight primary reasons why Shell should not be drilling for oil in the Arctic Ocean.

First and foremost is that the oil industry has a deplorable track record for oil spills that are never effectively cleaned up. One need not look far for examples. The British Petroleum, Gulf Coast oil disaster in 2010 is a vivid reminder of how wrong an oil spill can go, and how far-reaching its effects are.

Lawrence Neil, a spokesperson for the NRDC, pointed out that oil production is statistically almost guaranteed to lead to spills. Furthermore, “there is still no proven way to keep a drilling rig on location in the shifting pack ice of an Arctic winter,” so drilling in the Arctic presents even greater risks than those of a normal spill.

Marine noise created by production will have adverse impacts on marine mammals, added Neil. In addition, production will “create huge pressure for a pipeline to carry the oil (that could) lead to bisecting extraordinary wild lands and vital wildlife habitat.”

“The history of development shows that the camel’s nose is a real phenomenon:  the more you spoil pristine places, the less resistance there is to additional development,” he told IPS.

The lack of rapid response and infrastructure in the area is further cause for alarm for green groups, as well as the fact that an oil spill or even disturbance within the area could lead to the migration of wildlife. Among the species that would be threatened are endangered bowhead whales, female polar bears and birds, all of which depend on the icy ecosystem for survival.

But if Shell finds oil, a barrage of oil and energy companies will descend upon this pristine area. The NRDC report outlines many more drawbacks to the proposed drilling, including a rise in greenhouse gases.

Still, not everyone believes that the risks outweigh the gains.

If oil is found in this icy tundra, dependence on foreign oil could drastically decrease. Republicans say that an oil discovery in the region would create thousands of jobs and provide a much needed boost to the lagging U.S. economy.

Lobbyists and politicians are pushing for an extension the deadline for summer drilling, and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is at the forefront. She is also a senior official at the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

But Lawrence and other green group activists claim that the risks outweigh any political gain.

For Lawrence, it’s simple. “There are certainly more direct ways to reduce dependence on foreign oil than drilling our last pristine ocean,” he pointed out.

“Arctic drilling is a huge investment, including an investment of federal resources to regulate, police, and provide emergency services; every such investment detracts from – and undercuts – investment in sources of energy that don’t contribute to the risk of catastrophic climate change,” he concluded.

Deportation is a devastating experience for a family, breaking it apart and leading to emotional and mental stress for its members. But a new report from the Centre for American Progress shows that such duress extends beyond families and into the larger community as a whole.

The report, “How Today’s Immigration Enforcement Policies Impact Children, Families, and Communities: A View from the Ground”, was put together by Joanna Dreby, a sociology professor at Albany University, and points to the short- and long-term effects that the deportation of illegal immigrants has on both family units and wider society.

Many in the Latino community are disappointed by U.S. President Barack Obama’s failure to push through comprehensive immigration reform. Credit: Valeria Fernandez/IPS

The United States deports roughly 400,000 illegal immigrants each year. Of these, a significant portion are parents of U.S. citizens, with children who were born in the United States. In the first half of 2011 alone, more than 46,000 parents of U.S. citizens were deported.

Although U.S. President Barack Obama recently enacted legislation that would allow children who were raised in the United States to apply for legal immigration status, deporting their parents continues.

Meanwhile, more than 16.6 million people in the United States currently live in “mixed status” families, in which one or more members is an undocumented migrant. A third of immigrant’s children live in such mixed-status families.

Unseen costs

For all parties involved, the effects of deportations on these families are emotional, psychological and economic.

Seth Freed Wessler, investigative reporter for the Applied Research Centre, a racial justice think tank, believes that “kids do better when they’re with their families”. During a discussion of the report at the Centre for American Progress here on Monday, he recounted tales of the separation of families, stories he characterised as “horrific”.

“When I interviewed these women, what I found was that once you have been deported, the child service agencies act as if you have fallen off the face off this earth,” he said. “There are very slim chances of reunification of children with their families.”

When parents of U.S. citizens are deported, their children are generally put into foster care. It may take years before they are able to reunite with each other. According to the report, every child that goes through the foster care system costs taxpayers 26,000 dollars.

“Every single parent I interviewed wants to stay here. They came here for a better life; they want to contribute to society, and they came here for their kids,” said Wessler, who believes that taking one’s children back across the border creates difficult adjustment issues for the children, who may not even know the native language.

Miriam Yeung, of the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum, recounted stories of mothers separated from their children while still breastfeeding. “In most cases, the man gets deported, leaving a single mother with her kids,” she said at the presentation. “This mother may never have worked before, and she now has to find employment right away.”

This is a vicious cycle, Yeung believes. If the mother cannot find work immediately and is herself undocumented, it may lead to self-deportation (when the family moves back to their original country) of the entire family.

While this may be relatively easy for the parents, children who are U.S. citizens may struggle to adjust. They may not know the language or find it hard to fit in culturally, which can result in emotional distress as well as poor performance in school.

Ajay Chaudry of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services interviewed 200 children, as well as officials with children’s services agencies and police and immigration officials, across seven states. He found that immigrant children lived in perpetual fear of being separated from their parents.

Of those who had been separated, there were lags in development and well-being, and often great economic repercussions. One woman he interviewed had moved eight times with her children after the deportation of her husband.

In addition, 42 percent of families with a deported member moved more than once in the first few months after the deportation.

Social and cultural implications

Dreby’s report also touched upon a fundamental problem that seems pervasive in immigrant communities. Immigrant children are often afraid of the police and view them in an extremely negative light.

They believe police officials are the same as immigrant officials, and often think that being an immigrant automatically makes you an illegal alien. They have also started thinking of the word “immigrant” as something dirty, and Dreby believes this serves to disassociate oneself from one’s own heritage.

“I interviewed a nine-year-old girl, and I asked her, what it was like being an immigrant?” Dreby said. “Her reply shocked me. She said that it was sad to be an immigrant, because she had seen a show on TV in which the police came and took the girl’s parents away, and the girl was left alone in a car.”

For Dreby, the answer is simple. The United States needs legalisation programmes that prevent parents of U.S. citizens from being deported.

Yeung also believes that public perception as to what constitutes an “American” family needs to change.

“We are a country of immigrants,” she said. “What makes an American family, really?”

In Bahrain, witnesses say riot police have tried to disperse protesters with tear gas and rubber bullets. Credit: Sara Hassan/Al Jazeera/CC By 2.0

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Aug 17 2012 (IPS)

The U.S. State Department released a statement Friday urging the Bahraini government to reconsider a ruling that sentenced the director of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, Nabeel Rajab, to a three-year jail term for organising opposition rallies.

“We are deeply concerned that a Bahraini court sentenced Nabeel Rajab to three years in prison on charges of leading ‘illegal gatherings’. We expect that the verdict and sentence will be reconsidered in the appeals process without delay. We urge the government of Bahrain to consider all available options to resolve this case,” it said.

Mariwan Hama-Saeed of Human Rights Watch welcomed the statement but told IPS that it was “long overdue”.

“The U.S. should have spoken up much earlier, and still should be putting pressure on the Bahraini government to release all peaceful protestors,” he said.

He cited the first line as especially problematic: “The Government of Bahrain has committed to respect freedom of expression and assembly and we look to it to fulfill these commitments.”

“Bahrain has been imprisoning innocent protestors since last year,” noted Hama-Saeed.

Rajab, who had already been serving a three-month sentence for tweeting about the unpopularity of the Bahraini prime minister, was sentenced to three years in a verdict that defence lawyers Jalila Al-Sayed and Mohamed al-Jishi claim was handed out by the judge before they could make it to court. Rajab was taken to prison before he could meet with his lawyers, or his family.

Rajab, who has more than 150,000 followers on Twitter, has been at the heart of protests since February 2011 calling for a more representative government in Bahrain. He spoke vociferously against inequities based on ethnic lines. Bahrain is ruled by the Sunni Al-Khalifa royal family, but has a Shia majority. More than 75 percent of the population is Shia.

Freedom House has rated Bahrain as “Not Free” in its “Freedom in the World 2012”, “Freedom of the Press 2012” and “Freedom on the Net 2011″ reports.

Reporters without Borders also ranked Bahrain 173rd in its freedom of speech index. Since February 2011, bloggers, journalists and human rights activists have been arrested and thrown into jail on trumped up charges of “inciting hatred”, “promoting sectarianism”, “disseminating false news” and “calling for the regime’s overthrow in online forums”.

Last year, a military court sentenced 21 human rights activists to lengthy terms in prison. Amidst this chaos, Rajab is on the front lines.

“All Rajab did was exercise his right to assemble peacefully. The Bahraini courts have produced no evidence that proves that Rajab was inciting violence or hatred. This is a terrible ruling,” said Hama-Saeed.

Human rights group the world over urged the U.S. to speak out against the verdict. Human Rights Watch released a statement on Aug. 16 stating, “The Obama administration should raise Rajab’s case forcefully with the Bahraini government.”

Courtney Radsch, freedom of expression officer at Freedom House, has similar views.

“The inabilities of NGOs to register, the numerous arrests, and prison sentences in no way reflect the U.S. government’s statement which calls Bahrain a country that ‘respects freedom of expression and assembly’,” Radsch told IPS.

Radsch, however, recognises the constraints that the U.S. government has in the context of its ties with Bahrain.

“Strategic” is perhaps the best term to describe U.S.-Bahrain relations. The U.S. has a fleet of more than 20 ships based in Bahraini waters. The Fifth Navy Fleet houses more than 2,300 U.S. personnel, and in 2011 approximately 45 million dollars was requested by the Pentagon for an expansion at Shaykh Isa Air Base.

Bahrain buys U.S. weaponry and aircraft worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and the two countries have robust trade relations.

Still, Radsch believes the U.S. can do a lot more to pressure the Bahraini government to halt its brutal crackdown.

“There has been a paucity of attention from the U.S. media and the U.S. government. It’s strange, the Arab Spring is spoken about but people forget that Bahrain is still ongoing, and is still struggling,” she said.

Hama-Saeed is sceptical that the rather tepid statement will have much political impact.

“We appreciate that the U.S. government has spoken up, but we have to wait and see if anything comes of it. A strong condemnation will certainly help,” he said.

How many condoms is it legal to carry around in your pocket? That’s the question sex workers in the United States are asking after being routinely targeted by police for having prophylactics – not in itself a crime.

On Thursday, Human Rights Watch launched “Sex workers at risk: Condoms as evidence of prostitution” at a press conference in Washington. The report includes more than 300 interviews, with 200 current and former sex workers as well as outreach workers, advocates, prosecutors, public defenders, police, and health department officials.

The “criminalising” of condoms has left sex workers in New York City, Los Angeles, Washington DC and San Francisco wary of carrying condoms, and exposed them and their customers to the threat of HIV.

Tanya B, a Latina transgender sex worker from NYC, recounts her harrowing experience with the police.

“I was stopped and threatened. The cops said ‘empty your purse.’ I cleared out everything but left the condoms at the bottom – I got caught. They said ‘how come you didn’t pull out the condoms? I can arrest you because of this.’ I said ‘it’s not a problem, I have no weapons, no drugs’ and the police officer said ‘next time, I will arrest you because this is evidence you are a prostitute’.”

Andrea Ritchie, coordinator of AT Streetwise and Safe (SAS), and a lawyer specialising in police misconduct, gave insight into this unofficial but prevalent practice. The most common victims in New York are women of colour and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, she said.

Between 20 to 40 percent of homeless youth identify as LGBT, and many turn to “survival sex” to earn enough money to eat and get a place to sleep.

“The police believe it is doing their job. The order to confiscate condoms, though unofficial, comes from district attorneys,” Richie told IPS. “NYC is the epicentre for AIDS, and these practices put countless women, LGBTs and men at risk.”

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) launched a safe sex campaign in 2007, ultimately distributing more than 40 million free condoms across the city.

The actions of the police directly counteract the city’s initiative to protect people from disease, and can be seen as a huge waste of resources, rights advocates say.

In Washington DC, the AIDS epidemic is one of the most widespread in the United States. Of the 17,000 people with HIV, 75 percent were African American males. African American women in DC are 14 times more likely to be infected than their white counterparts.

Groups such as Rubber Revolution in DC and Get Some! in NYC are taking the fight for condom use to the media, using popular social media platforms. They worry that the “condom as evidence” practice is seriously undermining these efforts.

If bills such as one pending in the New York State Assembly are passed, condoms will not be allowed to be used as evidence of prostitution. The bill specifically states, “Provides that possession of a condom may not be received in evidence in any trial, hearing or proceeding as evidence of prostitution, patronizing a prostitute, promoting prostitution, permitting prostitution, maintaining a premises for prostitution, lewdness or assignation, or maintaining a bawdy house.”

For Megan McLemore, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch, the issue at hand is clear. If someone has to be arrested for prostitution, it should be because law enforcement officials saw them agreeing to a sexual act for money. Condoms should not figure into the debate.

At the launch of the report, all the speakers stressed that criminalising condoms is a public health issue. It endangers the general public, and exposes them to diseases which can be easily prevented.

The report provides insight into the ordeals faced by sex workers, which include police harassment of transgender people such as vulgar insults, mockery, and disrespect. In one case, a police officer grabbed a woman’s wig, threw it to the ground and stepped on it. Such behaviour points to a pattern of discrimination that goes beyond simple stop and search tactics.

“We have a saying in NYC. If on one side of the West Village a frat boy is standing with 10 condoms in his pocket, he is hopeful and practicing safe public health. If on the other side stands a gay man with condoms in his pocket, he is obviously engaging in prostitution,” says Ritchie.

Civilian deaths due to drone strikes in Pakistan are falling rapidly, and the death rate is now close to zero – or so asserts a New America Foundation (NAF) report.

The report was authored by Peter Bergen and Jennifer Rowland of NAF, a public policy think tank based in Washington DC. Bergen is the cable news channel CNN’s national security analyst and a director of NAF, and Rowland is a programme associate.

The report states that since 2004, there have been 310 drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, killing between 1,870 and 2,873 individuals, of whom 1,577 to 2,402 were described as militants in reliable press accounts. This would put the overall civilian fatality rate at 16 percent.

Bergen and Rowland say that they used data compiled by the NAF, and the most “reliable press sources” which include the New York Times, Reuters, Washington Post, Associated Press to name a few, and leading English media outlets in Pakistan: Dawn, Express Tribune and Geo TV.

However, some sceptics challenge the accuracy of the report, based on NAF’s statistical database.

Chris Woods of the Bureau for Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) believes that NAF has not only underestimated the number of strikes and civilian deaths, but adds that civilian death percentages need to be treated with extreme caution.

“It (NAF) relies only on a small number of media reports immediately following a strike. Sometimes we learn crucial facts days, weeks or even months after an initial attack,” he told IPS.

“In February of this year, for example, a major investigation by Associated Press, based on 80 eyewitness testimonies from civilians in Waziristan, found previously unknown evidence of civilian deaths in 20 percent of the sampled strikes. Unfortunately, NAF has not incorporated these important findings into its data,” said Woods.

TBIJ’s own data puts the total number of drone strikes at 355, with a minimum of 2,513 people killed, of whom between 482 and 835 were civilians.

CNN’s controversial graph released with the report puts civilian deaths at zero for 2012.

Muhammad Idrees Ahmad, a sociologist and journalist, is scathing in his criticism of the report.

“NAF plays fast and loose with its statistics, and in some cases it deliberately misreports,” he told IPS. “Two particularly egregious cases where civilian casualties were actually reported even in the U.S. press were either omitted or misreported in the database.”

For example, as reported by Ahmed for Al-Jazeera, 82 children were killed at a seminary in Bajaur on Oct. 30, 2006. The NAF database continues to list the number as “80 militants”.

In another incident on Aug. 14, 2010, the AP reported seven civilian deaths, which are still listed as seven “militant” deaths in the database.

Likening Bergen’s report to propaganda, Ahmed argues that there are no “reliable press accounts” when it comes to Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). He says that the redefinition of the term “militant” – which now encompasses any male citizen over the age of 18 in a combat zone – has not only skewed reporting figures, but given license to more indiscriminate targeting.

Not one to cut the Pakistani government any slack, Ahmed says that it is in the interest of the United States as well as Pakistani authorities to lowball the figures. Pakistani officials would want to minimise public anger and outrage, and reporting militant deaths plays well to this particular stance.

“The Pakistani government doesn’t even make an effort to confirm the identity or category of the victims. I’ve asked people in FATA. They confirm that no one from the Pakistani government/military ever visits after an attack to confirm who the actual victims were. It’s convenient to declare them all ‘militant’,” said Ahmed.

The world’s population now stands at about seven billion, and by 2050, this figure will hit a whopping nine billion.

In his new book, “State of the World 2012: Moving Toward Sustainable Prosperity” , Robert Engelman, president of the Worldwatch Institute, outlines nine population strategies that he argues will effectively halt population expansion just short of that figure.

Engelman’s policies call for a massive restructuring of political and social policies, especially towards women. Universal access to contraception, secondary education for all women, eradication of gender bias that limits women’s economic opportunity and growth, as well as higher taxes are some of Engelman’s strategies to nip the baby boom in the bud.

“There is a definite link between growing population, poverty levels, and women’s inequality. If all women could use their right of choice and only have children when they wanted to, the population rate would stabilise. The estimated population growth is 75 to 80 million every year,” said Engelman.

Engelman argues that by cutting off women from education and the public sphere, the world will not only have a burgeoning population on its hands, but one that doesn’t have the resources to feed, clothe and educate the coming generations.

The projected astronomical rise in numbers is unsettling for more than one reason. According to the World Bank, 1.29 billion people live on less than 1.25 dollars a day, one in seven people go hungry every day, and 60 percent of the world’s hungry are women. UNICEF estimates that 22,000 children die each day due to reasons connected to poverty. The statistics are dismal.

Though the World Bank has reported progress since the 1980s, it still may not be enough to counter the surge in population and the resulting problems that will stem from it.

Martin Ravallion, director of the World Bank’s research group, lays it out as is. “The developing world as a whole has made considerable progress in fighting extreme poverty, but the 663 million people who moved above the poverty lines typical of the poorest countries are still poor by the standards of middle- and high-income countries,” he said.

“This bunching up just above the extreme poverty line is indicative of the vulnerability facing a great many poor people in the world. And at the current rate of progress, around one billion people would still live in extreme poverty in 2015,” said Ravallion.

Engelman’s ideas of universal contraception and education may be seen as a tall order, but without them, he argues, change just isn’t possible. The United Nations and the World Bank have been stressing the importance of education, especially family planning and sex education for women, for decades.

However, cultural and religious mores have to be taken into account, he says. Sweeping restructuring will not and cannot be instantly achieved.

More than 75 percent of the world’s poor live on subsistence farming. The more hands one has to till the lands, the better. In countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, having sons in the family is a matter of pride and honour. In certain cases, contraception isn’t widely available in rural areas, making it difficult for women to use family planning methods.

Engelman is quick to point out that women’s inequality isn’t restricted to developing countries – economic and social inequality exists everywhere, including the United States, where women still earn 82.2 percent of what men earn.

According to the U.S Department of Labor, women’s median weekly earnings were 697 dollars compared to 848 dollars for men in the first quarter of 2012.

“Equal rights in the public and private sphere will afford women the right to make their own choices. Access to contraception, and education will surely result in slower population growth, and a reduction in poverty levels,” said Engelman.

On World Population Day, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement stressing the importance of reproductive rights for women.

“Too often, in too many places, these rights are denied. Millions of women and young people in developing countries don’t have access to information to plan their family. This is not only a violation of their right to decide the number, timing, and spacing of their children, it’s also a question of equity as women everywhere should have the same ability to determine this fundamental part of their lives.

“Voluntary family planning programmes represent more than just an investment in health and human rights. Family planning is one of the most successful development interventions and one of the strongest and most cost-effective investments available. It reduces poverty, and it allows governments to invest in infrastructure, schooling, and healthcare,” read the statement.

The United States has contributed over 640 million dollars through USAID towards bilateral family planning and 35 million dollars to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA). With abortion and contraception issues coming to the fore in the upcoming 2012 U.S elections, the future of access to choice is yet to be decided.

The world’s population now stands at about seven billion, and by 2050, this figure will hit a whopping nine billion.

Like these newly born twins, more children are born daily into families who can barely afford to raise a child. Credit: Zofeen Ebrahim/IPS

In his new book, “State of the World 2012: Moving Toward Sustainable Prosperity” , Robert Engelman, president of the Worldwatch Institute, outlines nine population strategies that he argues will effectively halt population expansion just short of that figure.

Engelman’s policies call for a massive restructuring of political and social policies, especially towards women. Universal access to contraception, secondary education for all women, eradication of gender bias that limits women’s economic opportunity and growth, as well as higher taxes are some of Engelman’s strategies to nip the baby boom in the bud.

“There is a definite link between growing population, poverty levels, and women’s inequality. If all women could use their right of choice and only have children when they wanted to, the population rate would stabilise. Right now 75 million to 80 million babies are born every year,” said Engelman.

Engelman argues that by cutting off women from education and the public sphere, the world will not only have a burgeoning population on its hands, but one that doesn’t have the resources to feed, clothe and educate the coming generations.

The projected astronomical rise in numbers is unsettling for more than one reason. According to the World Bank, 1.29 billion people live on less than 1.25 dollars a day, one in seven people go hungry every day, and 60 percent of the world’s hungry are women. UNICEF estimates that 22,000 children die each day due to reasons connected to poverty. The statistics are dismal.

Though the World Bank has reported progress since the 1980s, it still may not be enough to counter the surge in population and the resulting problems that will stem from it.

Martin Ravallion, director of the World Bank’s research group, lays it out as is. “The developing world as a whole has made considerable progress in fighting extreme poverty, but the 663 million people who moved above the poverty lines typical of the poorest countries are still poor by the standards of middle- and high-income countries,” he said.

“This bunching up just above the extreme poverty line is indicative of the vulnerability facing a great many poor people in the world. And at the current rate of progress, around one billion people would still live in extreme poverty in 2015,” said Ravallion.

Engelman’s ideas of universal contraception and education may be seen as a tall order, but without them, he argues, change just isn’t possible. The United Nations and the World Bank have been stressing the importance of education, especially family planning and sex education for women, for decades.

However, cultural and religious mores have to be taken into account, he says. Sweeping restructuring will not and cannot be instantly achieved.

More than 75 percent of the world’s poor live on subsistence farming. The more hands one has to till the lands, the better. In countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, having sons in the family is a matter of pride and honour. In certain cases, contraception isn’t widely available in rural areas, making it difficult for women to use family planning methods.

Engelman is quick to point out that women’s inequality isn’t restricted to developing countries – economic and social inequality exists everywhere, including the United States, where women still earn 82.2 percent of what men earn.

According to the U.S Department of Labor, women’s median weekly earnings were 697 dollars compared to 848 dollars for men in the first quarter of 2012.

“Equal rights in the public and private sphere will afford women the right to make their own choices. Access to contraception, and education will surely result in slower population growth, and a reduction in poverty levels,” said Engelman.

On World Population Day, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement stressing the importance of reproductive rights for women.

“Too often, in too many places, these rights are denied. Millions of women and young people in developing countries don’t have access to information to plan their family. This is not only a violation of their right to decide the number, timing, and spacing of their children, it’s also a question of equity as women everywhere should have the same ability to determine this fundamental part of their lives.

“Voluntary family planning programmes represent more than just an investment in health and human rights. Family planning is one of the most successful development interventions and one of the strongest and most cost-effective investments available. It reduces poverty, and it allows governments to invest in infrastructure, schooling, and healthcare,” read the statement.

The United States has contributed over 640 million dollars through USAID towards bilateral family planning and 35 million dollars to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA). With abortion and contraception issues coming to the fore in the upcoming 2012 U.S elections, the future of access to choice is yet to be decided.

As NATO supply convoys began crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan for the first time in more than seven months Thursday, analysts here warned that the reopening of the key route does not necessarily signal a new dawn in the fraught relations between Washington and Islamabad.

The agreement, which will save NATO countries, especially the U.S., hundreds of millions of dollars in logistical costs, was worked out over the past two weeks, primarily by Washington’s top Afghanistan commander, Gen. John Allen, and the powerful Pakistani Army chief, Gen. Parvez Kayani. The men met twice over a 10-day period, most recently last Sunday, two days before the long-awaited accord was made public.

On the one hand, Pakistan got a rather lacklustre apology from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the Nov. 24, 2011, aerial attack on its Salala border station that killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers. For its part, Washington’s most cost-effective route into Afghanistan was finally re-opened.

For more than six months, the U.S. and its NATO allies have had to rely increasingly on far more expensive air routes and the Northern Supply Network (NSN) that runs from Europe via Russia and Central Asia to get needed supplies to their troops in Afghanistan. The Pentagon estimates that it spends about 100 million dollars a month using those routes than it would if the Pakistani border was open.

While U.S. officials here have touted the accord as a major step toward normalising ties with Islamabad, more sceptical voices described it as both superficial and tenuous.

“Bilateral relations have always been bumpy,” according to Zia Mian, director of the Project on Peace and Security in South Asia at Princeton University. “Whether it was (CIA operative) Raymond Davis shooting people in Lahore, (Al-Qaeda chief) Osama bin Laden being caught in Abbottabad, or the attack at Salala, there’s no love lost between the two countries. But money talks, and the U.S. got tired of paying through its nose for routes which could be had for much less.”

Still, it appears that the Pakistanis may have overestimated how much Washington needs them vis-a-vis Afghanistan, according to former U.S. diplomat Wendy Chamberlin, who served as Washington’s ambassador in Islamabad from 2001 to 2002.

“The U.S. was pretty successful in finding other routes and other alliances in dealing with Afghanistan,” she said, “including much to Pakistan’s concern, India,” which, at Washington’s urging, last month moved to increase its already-sizable economic investment in Kabul and hinted at an increased role in training Afghan security forces.

“It certainly must have been disturbing to Islamabad to see us cross one of their red lines, and that is greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan,” she noted, adding that Pakistan was also facing pressure from other NATO countries with troops in Afghanistan.

Washington and its allies might indeed be saving hundreds of millions of dollars, but Pakistan stands to gain more than 1.1 billion dollars in military aid that had been frozen for most of the past year, as Congress became increasingly doubtful about Pakistan’s value as an ally, especially after the May 2011 raid by U.S. Special Forces that killed bin Laden at his Abbottabad compound within shouting distance of Pakistan’s premier military academy.

Pakistan is also expected to ask the International Monetary Fund (IMF), where Washington exercises major influence, for approximately 4.3 billion dollars in the coming year.

In addition to a formal apology, Pakistan had reportedly demanded a sharp increase in the transit fees it would be paid for each lorry passing through its border into Afghanistan – from 250 dollars to 5,000 dollars.

In the face of growing U.S. anger, however – with U.S. Pentagon chief Leon Panetta publicly warning in Kabul last month that Washington was “reaching the limits or our patience” with Islamabad – it backed down, apparently contenting itself with the resumption of the suspended aid, most of which goes to Pakistan’s military as re-imbursement for costs incurred fighting its own Taliban insurgency.

Pakistan also got the apology it had been seeking since the disastrous aid strike last November.

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military,” Clinton told her Pakistani counterpart, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, in a telephone call, according to a statement issued by the State Department Tuesday. “We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again.”

“Our countries should have a relationship that is enduring, strategic, and carefully defined,” she stressed.

But that will likely remain an elusive goal, according to experts here.

“I think (the new agreement) is a temporary fix, but there are still powerful fault lines in this relationship, not least of which is the Pakistanis’ approach to reconciliation in Afghanistan, as well as their desire to control the use of their territory as a sanctuary for the Afghan Taliban and the very powerful popular resentment of continuing U.S. drones strikes into Pakistan,” said Shuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council.

“Any number of things could upend the truce – attacks by (Pakistani-based) militant groups in India or Afghanistan, or if the U.S. thinks they can get (Al-Qaeda’s leader Ayman) Zawahiri in Pakistan, or even a drone strike gone bad that causes civilian casualties and provokes a lot of popular unrest in the country,” he added.

“One should be grateful that this contretemps is over and that they have proved they can talk with each other. They need to continue doing that on a regular basis,” according to Nawaz, who suggested that each government designate one agency or individual to supervise, co-ordinate, and continuously tend bilateral ties to ensure greater coherence in policy-making.

Vali Nasr, advisor to the late U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, agreed in a column published by Bloomberg News Thursday that “the apology is just a first step in repairing ties deeply bruised by the past year’s confrontations.

“Managing relations with Pakistan requires a deft policy – neither the blind coddling of the George W. Bush era nor the blunt pressure of the past year, but a careful balance between pressure and positive engagement.”

Some analysts here, however, argued that Washington gave its apology too readily and should have held out for more in light of its continued support for elements within the Taliban insurgency.

“(T)he agreement on the ground logistical routes should have gone forward only if Pakistan agreed to end support for insurgent elements,” wrote Christine Fair, a Pakistan expert at Georgetown University, in The Huffington Post Thursday.

“Critics of this position will say that Afghanistan’s future can only be solved with Pakistan at the table. Unfortunately, so far, Pakistan has only tried to chop up the table and use it for firewood.”

But most analysts here believe that, despite Washington’s immense frustration, that demand remains a bridge too far.

“President Obama has to deal with reality. The U.S. did what it had to do. Sure it’s a temporary truce, but between these two countries, long-lasting calm is never an option,” said Mian.

*Jim Lobe’s blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.lobelog.com.

Children with congenital disorders linked to the Bhopal gas leak at a candle-light vigil in December 2011. Credit: Chingari Trust/IPS

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Jul 5 2012 (IPS)

After a controversial ruling Friday in favour of Union Carbide, NGOs and activists associated with the 1984 Bhopal, India industrial disaster are appealing the decision in the U.S. second circuit court of appeals.

Judge John Keenan’s dismissal of a lawsuit against Dow Chemical Company’s Union Carbide angered Indian activists the world over. Dow bought Union Carbide in 2001.

Keenan ruled that neither Union Carbide nor its former chairman, Warren Anderson, were liable for environmental remediation in the Bhopal gas leak that killed more than 22,000 people, and polluted soil and water sources for years to come.

The plaintiffs in the New York case claimed negligence and demanded that compensatory damages be paid. In addition they asked for punitive measures in regards to Anderson, and medical monitoring for those affected by the disaster.

The plaintiffs claimed that they sustained injuries from exposure to polluted water and soil, a byproduct of the toxic materials produced by Union Carbide India Ltd.

Responsibility for the cleanup of waste and toxic materials was taken up by Union Carbide, until it sold its stake in the Indian unit in 1994. In 1998, the State of Madhya Pradesh took over the responsibility of disposing of the waste – which to date has not been cleaned up in its entirety. The issue of soil and water contamination still persists.

Union Carbide estimated that 3,800 people lost their lives due to the industrial disaster. Amnesty International figures are a lot higher.

On Dec. 3, 1984 more than half a million people were exposed to the gas, methyl isocyanate and other hazardous chemicals. Between 7,000 and 10,000 people died immediately, and a further 15,000 died over the next 20 years.

More than 100,000 people suffer from serious health problems due to the leak, a fact that Amnesty International is swift to point out in lieu of Dow Chemical Company’s landing of a lucrative contract for the 2012 London Olympics. Dow is to provide a plastic wrapping that will encircle the London Olympic Stadium, a contract that Amnesty believes is an insult to the people of Bhopal.

A 1989 Indian Supreme Court ruling approved a settlement of 470 million dollars by Indian Union Carbide to the victims of the Bhopal tragedy – an amount that residents of Bhopal believe to be paltry.

Abdul Jabbar, an activist with the Bhopal Gas-Affected Women’s Organization, claims that the amount did not take into account the degradation of the city’s soil, gas and water supply. Mismanagement of funds and poor distribution amongst the residents put some estimates as low as 500 dollars per victim.

The ruling by Keenan disheartened activists who believed that a U.S. court would provide a higher settlement for those affected. The case has been struck down multiple times in U.S. courts.

“Keenan’s ruling continues a longstanding pattern. He should have recused himself from this case long ago. By making rulings that are bound to be reversed over and over, he’s denying justice to the people of Bhopal by delaying it,” Aquene Freechild of Public Citizen, and former coordinator of the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal-US Campaign, told IPS.

Though the verdict has disappointed activists, the legal team is not disheartened by the previous dismissals.

“If you look at the history of the case, you will note that the case has been reinstated on appeal as many times as it has been dismissed by the lower court. So that fact tells you something about our prospects on appeal and about the attitude of the US courts,” Rajan Sharma, one of the lawyers on the case, told IPS.

Though activists have been rallying for justice for those affected by the Bhopal disaster, the case has had more than its fair share of obstacles. The current Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Shivraj Singh Chouhan , had promised his full commitment to the case being heard by Keenan and stated that he would get the Center to intervene on behalf of Bhopal. Activists claim that no such support has come through.

After the Jun. 26 ruling, Union Carbide released a statement saying, “The court decision not only dismisses plaintiffs’ claims against UCC, but also clarifies that UCC has no liability related to the plant site and further acknowledges the matter of site ownership and liability as being the responsibility of the state government of Madhya Pradesh.”

Given the difficulty the Bhopal plaintiffs are having in U.S. courts, an appeal doesn’t automatically signal a new verdict.

Judge Keenan certainly thinks so. “Plaintiffs embarked on a discovery expedition that was worthy of Vasco de Gama,” Keenan wrote in his order granting the motion to dismiss. “More than two years and 12,000 pages of discovery later, defendants renewed their motion for summary judgment as to all theories of liability.”