Opinion: It’s a WikiLeaks World, Get Used to It.

by Jim Harper, Director of information policy studies at the Cato Institute.
Special to AOL News
 http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/o…

(Aug. 5) – No matter where right or wrong lie in the posting of classified military reports on WikiLeaks.org, one lesson should be clear: This is how it’s going to be. Technology will continue to undercut secrecy — not just in the military, but in all large organizations.

Government and corporate leaders who aren’t ahead of this problem may already have trouble on their hands they don’t know about.

When 90,000 pages of documents chronicling the Afghan war went online last week, their potential effects on military planning and security caused the White House to strongly condemn their posting as “irresponsible.” Differing more than slightly, Salon commentator Glenn Greenwald praised WikiLeaks.org as “one of the most valuable and important organizations in the world.”

Culture: Cultural trends are coming into play as well. Military service-members today live in a culture of information sharing that might baffle their senior officers. They expect to be in touch with the outside world during their tours. Their service is long and difficult enough without quarantining them in a communications bubble for protracted periods. Indeed, doing so would undermine military effectiveness by cutting deeply into the morale of young men and women whose stateside lives are “always connected.” This is the generation that knows the value and power of sharing information.

Doubling down on information security is an option, but there are better approaches than to hunker in the secrecy corner.

Information technology is a strong and growing adversary, and it is better to turn its strengths to one’s advantage than to waste resources trying to fight against it.
————————————————–

Pentagon Wants WikiLeaks to Return Classified War Documents.

by Christopher Weber, aol Correspondent
 http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/05/…

A week after WikiLeaks dumped 92,000 classified military documents online, the Pentagon is ordering the whistle-blower Web site to give them back.

“The Defense Department demands that WikiLeaks return immediately to the U.S. government all versions of documents obtained directly or indirectly from the Department of Defense databases or records,” Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters Thursday.

The Pentagon also ordered WikiLeaks to delete all the documents, most of which relate to military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, from its Web site and records, The Associated Press reported.

Morrell didn’t say what efforts, besides asking firmly, the Defense Department might be able to take to ensure WikiLeaks complies. Right now, Morrell said, the Defense Department hopes WikiLeaks will “do the right thing.”

WikiLeaks has not responded to the Pentagon request.

The Web site posted the reports, mostly raw intelligence reports, July 25, 2010.

Wikileaks is a 3-year-old nonprofit founded by Julian Assange that allows anonymous sources to upload private documents so anyone can read them online.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Extraordinary times in Cuba

Laura Pollan, leader of Las Damas de Blanco, marches along Quinta Avenida in Havana on Sunday.

There has been a flurry of news in Cuba. First came the Cuban government’s decision to release 52 political prisoners over the next three months. Then came the extradition of Francisco Chavez Abarca, a Salvadoran accused of carrying out violent attacks against Cuba.

More news came today when Fidel Castro’s photographer son Alex posted photos showing the former Cuban president visiting a research center in Havana. Alex Castro shot the pictures last week at the National Center for Scientific Investigation in Havana. One news report said Castro used a cell phone camera to take the pictures; I haven’t confirmed that.

Photos by Alex Castro. Source: CubaDebate

News of Fidel Castro’s rare public appearance comes days after the Cuban government said it would free 52 prisoners held since a government crackdown on dissidents in March 2003.
Guillermo Fariñas announced he’d end his 134-day hunger strike after Cuban authorities announced the release. Fariñas is a dissident and independent journalist in the central town of Santa Clara. He began his protest after dissident Orlando Zapata Tamayo died in February after an 86-day hunger strike.

About Along The Malecón

The Malecón is the famed avenue stretching for more than four miles along Havana’s seawall. People go there every day: Blacks, whites and mulattoes – people of every hue. Young and old, they all go, die-hard revolutionaries and those who are fed up with the revolution. They take in the ocean air, dance and look for romance. They sip rum and stare at the water.

More than a dozen reporters and photographers showed up to cover the Damas’ march on Sunday. The women marched without any interference. A passing motorist yelled something like, “Those people aren’t news.” Another shouted, “Mariconas,” which means lesbians.

The Damas kneeled in front of Santa Rita Church and prayed after finishing their march, then they chanted “Freedom! Freedom!” A few minutes later as they gathered at a nearby park and some of them repeated the chant. A man who was shooting video missed that shot and asked the Damas to repeat it. One prominent member of the group refused, saying that these chants “come from the soul” and aren’t meant to be repeated just because someone asks.

The cameraman asked if, well, the Damas could please be inspired again to feel it “from the soul.” More than a half dozen of the women complied, chanting “Freedom! Freedom!” once again, then told the cameraman that they hoped he was satisfied.

Social Media and Information Technology in Cuba: Recommendations for the Public and Private Sectors.

Empowering the Cuban People through Technology.

In collaboration with the Cuba Study Group & The Latin America Initiative at the Brookings Institution.
Welcoming Remarks:

• Christopher Sabatini, Senior Director of Policy, Americas Society/Council of the Americas

Presenters:

• Carlos Saladrigas, Co-Chairman of the Board, Cuba Study Group
  
• Theodore Piccone, Senior Fellow and Deputy Director, Foreign Policy, the Brookings Institution
• Christopher Sabatini, Senior Director of Policy, Americas Society/Council of the Americas

Discussant:

• Brett Solomon, Executive Director, AccessNow

This event is free of charge and open to the press.

Further event information: Please contact Matthew Aho at maho@as-coa.org or 212-277-8389.
Press inquiry: Please contact Alex Andrews at aandrews@as-coa.org or 212-277-8384.

New report makes policy recommendations for expanding online and IT access in Cuba.

New York, NY, July 15, 2010—The U.S. can help improve access to information in Cuba and lay the groundwork for future long-term economic growth if it relaxes contradictory regulations governing telecommunications investment in Cuba, says a report published today by the Americas Society and Council of the Americas in collaboration with the Brookings Institution and the Cuba Study Group.

Empowering the Cuban People Through Technology: Recommendations for Private and Public Sector Leaders shows how Washington can ease restrictions on the telecom industry, improving the private sector’s ability to invest while helping Cuba close its technology gap.

“Expanding the opportunity for U.S. telecom investors and companies to provide cell phone and Internet service to the island will help ensure that Cuban citizens possess the tools to become productive economic citizens once the shackles of political and economic state control are removed,” concludes the paper, drawing on recommendations from over 50 information technology and telecommunications executives and other experts.”

Access the report online.

Press Inquiries: Contact Alex Andrews at (212) 277-8384 or aandrews@as-coa.org.

——————————————

Some of the main points from the presentations:

Before technology was a by-product of economic development, but today it is that technology is a pre-requirement for economic development.

Cuba, because years of embargo,  has one of the most embryonic technologies; we, the US, have technologies and they need it for economic development and the closing of the gap. If the Cuban regime embarks on this we see what we can do. For technology to grow there must be a basic human security.

The US economy could work with Cuba. There are products that can be produced right in the neighboring Cuba. It could become like Hong Kong is to China.

All of the above based on the case of the cellular phone in Cuba. In one year they grew last year from 43,000 to over one million. All this because there was a liberalization by the government. This followed the November 13, 2009 liberalization by the Obama Administration. US law says that what is important to the PEOPLE has been liberalized – this includes cell-phone services. Now they need more efficient energy use and phone cards. It calls for more activity from the private sector.

Most interesting was the comment from the co-chairman of the Cuba Study Group – Mr. Carlos Saladrigas who among other positions is also member of the Hispanic Advisory Board of Pepsi Co., told us that he was on the trip with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when in Krakow she spoke of Freedom and Democracy and said that this has three elements: the Government, Business & Enterprise, Civil Society. He then said that it is the Civil Society that can do it with Cuba – to bring them to deal with their own future and the catch here is technology.

——————————————

SEE ALSO FOREIGN POLICY ARTICLE BY CHRISTOPHER SABATINI:
 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/20…

That is a longer article to the point.

Fidel is back. In a one hour television appearance this week, his first since intestinal surgery four years ago, the 83-year old head of the Cuban Communist party appeared neither hale nor hearty. But neither did he look like El Cid, the Spanish warrior who was so inspiring that even after death his body, strapped to a horse’s saddle, cowed the Saracen hordes.

Mr Castro’s pre-recorded show coincided with Havana’s pledge to release 52 political prisoners, a decision unlinked to reciprocal US action, although it may encourage change. Legislation in Congress, for example, seeks to end the US travel ban, while leaving the broader embargo intact.

Cuba, in fact, has two embargoes. The first Cubans call the “internal embargo”; the thicket of bureaucracy and socialist antipathy to individual enterprise that has ruined the economy. The second is the US embargo. Contrary to common perception, this is not a monolith. It is more like an onion, with multiple layers, although the last one, normalisation of relations, effectively requires regime change.

Some of those layers have already been peeled off. The US is now Cuba’s fifth-largest trade partner, due to cash sales of food and medicine. Despite the travel ban, up to 200,000 US citizens also visit Cuba every year, illegally via Mexico or on direct Miami flights on educational or cultural exchanges. The US president has scope to expand ties further, for example by allowing business travel, as happened in Vietnam prior to ending that embargo in 1994. Travel would put more money into Cuba’s economy – and most likely the regime’s pockets, too. But it would also help ease ordinary Cubans’ plight and remove a scapegoat Havana has used to excuse its many ills.

Cuba has long ceased being a dagger in the heart; it can hardly even be called a thorn in the side. Its ties with Venezuela may worry some. But this relationship is qualitatively different from Cuba’s African or Central American campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s. It remains a repressive regime, and yet, while the judgment is fine, the time is right for the US to open up more to Cuba.

Doing so is risky as it may not speed the regime’s end. But any measure that reduces the possibility of Cubans streaming across the Florida Straits in the event of a chaotic transition from the Castro regime is sensible.
Barack Obama has called the current US policy “failed”. Most dissidents agree; and, when their blood is not up, perhaps even most exiles, too.

—————————————-

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being “one of the nation’s most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers.” For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha@coha.org.

COHA is formulating a series of analyses of the breaking news from Havana that Cuba is in the process of releasing 52 political prisoners.

In immediate response to the latest news from Cuba – COHA released the following report by Staff Member Sara Nawaz.

COHA Staff Memorandum: Cuba Pledges to Release Political Prisoners.

State Department Must Seize Golden Opportunity to Utilize Momentum to Change its Cuban Strategy, and not Duck Behind Shallow Platitudes.

On Wednesday, July 7, Cuba vowed to release fifty-two political prisoners, five immediately and forty-seven in upcoming months. If successfully carried out, this would mean that about one-third of current political detainees on the island will have been released, leaving approximately one hundred still in custody. This is the first large-scale prisoner release by Havana since 1998, when upwards of 100 political prisoners were released following Pope John Paul II’s visit to Cuba. Spurred on by E.U. pressure, the current release was negotiated by the energized Archbishop of Havana Jaime Ortega, Spanish foreign minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos, and Cuban president Raúl Castro. The Obama administration, which so far has failed to live up to its campaign rhetoric of broadening ties with Cuba, would be wise to seize this opportunity to warm up its outdated and unproductive Cuban strategy.

Despite promises to shift U.S. policy toward Cuba in the direction of greater flexibility, the Obama administration has so far only managed to reverse some of the more extremist policies implemented by President George W. Bush. While the current administration removed the limit on remittances to Cuba, as well as the cap on travel that prevented Cuban Americans from traveling to the island more than once every three years, its Cuban policies otherwise have been lame, listless, and bereft of imagination. While necessary, these have ultimately been only token steps that have failed to ignite much enthusiasm in Latin America because of their limited nature. Furthermore, despite Obama’s orders for the CIA to close Guantanamo Bay last year, the prison will now remain open for the next two years.

For full article click here

—————————————–

COHA Previous Releases on Cuba:

• Disparities in U.S. Immigration Policy toward Haiti and Cuba: A Legacy to be Continued?
by COHA Research Associates Alice Barrett & Kelsey Cary

• Travel to Cuba Legislation Mired by Scandal, Fierce Opposition
by COHA Research Fellow Katya Rodriguez and Research Associate Carl Patchen

• Cuba-U.S. Rhetoric Timeline: Hope for a Basic Shift in Policy Disintegrates into Continued Polarization
by COHA Research Associate Katya Rodriguez

• Cuba’s Health Politics: At Home and Abroad
by COHA Senior Research Fellow Julie Feinsilver

• Cuba – Russia Now and Then
by COHA Research Associate Evgenij Haperskij

• No “Common Policy,” as Europe Grapples over its Future ties with Cuba
by COHA Research Associate Evgenij Hapers

• ¿Cambio?The Obama Administration in Latin America: A Dissapointing Year in Retrospective
by COHA Research Fellows Guy Hursthouse and Tomás Ayuso

—————————————-

Clinton “Encouraged” by Cuba’s Prisoner Accord.

WASHINGTON, Jul 8 (IPS) – In the most positive U.S. statement on developments in Cuba in recent memory, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Thursday said the reported agreement between President Raul Castro and the Cuban Catholic Church regarding the release of 52 political prisoners was “very welcome”. At the same time, independent analysts here said the accord, in which Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos also played a role, should bolster chances that Congress will approve pending legislation that would end the ban on U.S. citizens travelling to Cuba.

“All of this will strengthen the chances of passage (of the bill) by the House of Representatives,” said Geoff Thale, a Cuba specialist at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA). “To the extent the (Congressional) debate will be about the human rights situation in Cuba,” he told IPS, “this will provide evidence that the situation is improving and that engagement is more likely to produce results than isolation.”

Indeed, anti-Castro Cuban Americans expressed concern about the possible political implications here of a major prisoner release. “Those who perish in Castro’s dungeons deserve better than to be used as ploys by the Castro apparatus to extract concessions and financial rewards that will enable the regime to extend its stranglehold on the Cuban people,” said Cuban-born Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as the Archdiocese of Havana announced the accord in Havana.

“We must not be fooled. Until all political prisoners are liberated; all political parties, labour unions, independent media are legalised and allowed to operate freely; until the Cuban people are able to exercise their universal rights free of coercion and intimidation, maximum pressure must be exerted on the Cuban tyranny,” she added. Under the accord, which was the lead story in Thursday’s Washington Post, the Castro government will release 52 political prisoners over the next several months. Five of the prisoners are to be released immediately and sent to Spain, while six others are to go to prisons closer to their homes.

The 52 prisoners were among 75 dissidents – 23 of whom have already been released – who were rounded up during a major crackdown in March 2003 and sentenced to as much as 20 years for anti-state or counter-revolutionary activities. It is not yet clear whether any or all of them will be required to leave the country as a condition of their release, although published reports have quoted Spanish government sources as indicating that Madrid will take them in. The State Department said Thursday they would also be “welcome” in the U.S. but that “those released should be free to decide whether to remain in Cuba and those who do leave should be able to return to their country.”

The Havana-based Cuban Commission for Human Rights said the number of political prisoners held in the country’s prisons currently stands at 167, the lowest number since former President Fidel Castro took power in 1959. Release of the 52 would reduce their population by about one-third, according to Elizardo Sanchez, the Commission’s long-time president.

Amnesty International, which uses narrower criteria in determining who qualifies as a “prisoner of conscience”, said the release of the 52 would leave only one such prisoner, Rolando Jimenez Posada, in confinement. Posada, a lawyer who publicly protested the 2003 crackdown, was himself arrested in April of that year and is serving a 12- year sentence for “disrespecting authority and revealing secrets about state security police”.

“We welcome the commitment to release these prisoners, but there is no reason why all 53 prisoners of conscience held in Cuba should not be released immediately, said Susan Lee, director of Amnesty’s Americas Programme. “Forcing them to leave the country would be yet another attempt to suppress freedom of expression and movement in Cuba,” she added.

Key Congressional Committee Votes to Lift Travel Ban.
Jim Lobe*
 http://ipsterraviva.net/UN/currentNew.as…

WASHINGTON, Jun 30 (IPS) – In a major victory for anti-embargo forces, a key Congressional committee voted here Wednesday to lift restrictions on travel by U.S. citizens to Cuba. If passed by both houses of Congress, the Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act will also ease restrictions on U.S. agricultural exports to the Caribbean island that were imposed by former President George W. Bush.

“I am proud to say that today, the House Agriculture Committee took a courageous vote to end the short-sighted and failed policy that limits American agriculture’s access to the Cuban market,” said Democratic Rep. Collin Peterson, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee of the House of Representatives who, along with a Republican colleague, Rep. Jerry Moran, was the bill’s chief sponsor.

“An unprecedented coalition of agriculture, business, religious and social organisations have endorsed (the bill), and today’s vote demonstrates that Congress is ready to change our nation’s approach on this issue,” he added. “We have tried to isolate Cuba for more than 50 years, and it has not worked. As it has in other countries, perhaps increasing trade with Cuba will encourage democratic progress.”

The bill, which was approved on a 25-20 vote that broke mainly along party lines, will now go to the House Democratic leadership which will decide whether to send it to the House floor.

Sources on Capitol Hill told IPS they believe the decision is likely to be affirmative and that a floor vote could take place by the end of July.

If it passes, the bill, entitled “The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act”, would go the Senate where pro-embargo forces – mainly Republicans, but also a handful of anti-Castro Democrats – are in the minority but can resort to a number of procedural moves that could delay or even prevent a vote from taking place.

Still, supporters of lifting the travel ban and facilitating more trade with Cuba were jubilant about Wednesday’s Committee vote, depicting it as a major breakthrough in the decades-long battle to end the 49-year-old embargo.

“A committee that comes from a pro-trade, pro-business, and politically very centrist perspective has now called on Congress to lift the ban on travel,” said Geoffrey Thale, a Cuba specialist at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA).

“That’s an important political message in itself to the Senate, certainly to President (Barack) Obama, and also to the Cuban government, which last month opened a promising dialogue with the Cuban Catholic Church,” according to Thale, who noted that two political prisoners have recently been released and a number of others have been moved to detention facilities closer to their homes. “This should encourage that dialogue,” he added.

“We commend the House Agriculture Committee for favourably reporting (the bill),” said Jake Colvin, vice president for Global Trade Issues of the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), a lobby group representing more than 300 major U.S.- based companies engaged in international business.

“Today’s vote is the first step towards a more rational foreign policy towards Cuba, and one that the business community strongly supports,” he added.

He noted that the NFTC, as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Farmers Union, has included the bill on their scorecards for rating lawmakers on their legislative records before the November elections due its importance as the only major trade-related bill on which the House will have voted this year.

That will add to pressure on pro-business incumbents – mostly Republicans – to vote in favour of the bill if and when it reaches the floors of either house.

U.S. farmers have been eager to increase their exports to Cuba since then president Bill Clinton relaxed the embargo in 1999, and Congress followed with its own reform bill the following year. Despite severe conditions imposed on their sale and shipment to Cuba by the Bush administration, however, exports continued to climb during his administration. Since 2000, more than four billion dollars in agricultural goods have been sent to Cuba.

Under the Peterson-Moran bill, the Bush conditions would be substantially eased. Cuban importers, for example, would no longer have to pay for the goods in advance of their actual shipment. In addition, U.S. banks, which were barred by Bush from handling such transactions, may now participate in their financing.

“Prior to the embargo, the United States accounted for nearly 70 percent of Cuba’s international trade. Cuba was the seventh-largest market for U.S. exporters, particularly U.S. farmers and ranchers,” noted Bruce Josten, executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in a letter to lawmakers before Wednesday’s vote.

He cited a March study by Texas A&M University that found that “easing restrictions on agricultural exports and lifting the travel ban, as proposed by (the bill), could result in up to 365 million dollars in additional sales of U.S. goods with a total economic impact of 1.1 billion dollars and create 6,000 new jobs in the United States.”

Like the business sector, the U.S. tourism industry has tried for years to ease the ban on travel. First imposed in 1961, the ban was lifted under President Jimmy Carter, only to be re-imposed by his successor, Ronald Reagan.

Clinton, who sought to encourage “people-to-people” exchanges, eased the ban, only to be reversed by Bush, who also severely limited the frequency of visits that Cuban Americans could make to the island to visit their families.

At various times under Bush, majorities in both houses of Congress approved provisions in larger bills that would have denied funds to the Treasury Department to enforce the travel ban. But each time the administration and anti-Castro lawmakers succeeded in having those provisions deleted before final passage of the underlying bills.

In that respect, the Peterson-Moran bill marks the first- ever “free-standing bill” to end the travel ban, and most political observers believe that majorities in both houses will vote for it if given a chance to do so.

In the upper chamber, however, several influential senators, including Majority Leader Harry Reid and Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, have opposed lifting the ban and may resort to procedural methods to prevent it from reaching the floor.

Still, anti-embargo forces, who have been disappointed by Obama’s failure so far to take more aggressive steps to ease the embargo, said the Committee’s action gave them hope that Washington’s approach toward Havana was indeed changing.

“The U.S. needs a new Cuba policy, and the Peterson-Moran bill is a decisive change in the right direction,” said Sarah Stephens, executive director of the Center for Democracy in the Americas.

“By increasing food exports and repealing the travel ban, this legislation will provide more jobs for Americans and Cubans, and move our country from ‘helpless bystander’ to supporting Cubans as they debate and decide the future for themselves.”

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

Energy Use in the US & Global Agri-Food Systems: Implications for Sustainable Agriculture.

by Shirin Wertime

June 05, 2010

http://www.culturechange.org/cms/content/view/652/1/

Was received from Jan Lundberg of Culture Change <info@culturechange.org>

During the 20th century, access to cheap and abundant sources of energy helped transform the world in countless ways. Extraction of fossil fuels led to a massive expansion in economic growth and agricultural production, and was one of the bases of a six-fold increase in human population. Petroleum, the most sought after fossil fuel, had the largest role in this transformation. Because of its versatility and liquid form, oil is today the world’s primary transportation fuel (Heinberg 1) and leading source of energy (Brown 27).

Less than 200 years ago, however, all of the planet’s food energy was derived from the sun through photosynthesis (Pimentel, Pimentel & Karpenstein-Machan 3) and almost all work was done by human or animal muscle power (Heinberg 2). Practically all of our energy presently comes from non-renewable resources whose stocks are being depleted at an ever-faster rate.

The benefits we derive from oil are so numerous and of such great convenience that we have built our entire way of life around its use.

Now we are entering a period of declining oil supplies and rising prices that threaten not only food security for increasing numbers of people globally, but also many aspects of political and economic stability as well — a new phenomenon for a world that became accustomed to growing supplies of oil and relatively stable prices. Unless we begin quickly to a move away from fossil fuel dependence to a different energy regime and a radical lifestyle and societal change, the transition to a post-petroleum world could be devastating for Americans and people throughout the world. Food, the basis of all life, will be at the forefront of this upheaval.

Agriculture is one of many features of modern life that have been drastically altered by the availability of cheap and abundant oil. The American and most other agri-food systems are almost entirely dependent on fossil fuel energy for everything from food production to transportation to food preparation and storage. The structure of industrialized agriculture under a capitalist system, aided and abetted by government policies, including that of the United States, has spurred the expansion of farm specialization and consolidation, monocultures, the delocalization of agricultural production, and the adoption of industrial farming practices (Altieri 78-9). The technological innovations of the Green Revolution drastically reduced a farmer’s labor input time and greatly increased agricultural yields. Thanks to modern mechanization, the time input necessary to raise a hectare of corn is 110 times less than that required by hand-produced crops (Pimentel 464). Since 1950, the world grain harvest has more than tripled. This growth in productivity resulted from a ten-fold increase in fertilizer use, a near tripling of land irrigation, and the development of high yielding crop varieties (Brown 36-7). Countering the benefits of modern industrialized agriculture is the massive amount of fossil energy needed to power the petroleum-fueled farm machinery and to produce indispensable fertilizers and pesticides. Increases in production notwithstanding, the shift to industrialized agriculture has brought about a host of ecological and social problems in its wake.

The increase in globalized food production, which has come at the expense of local production, is possible only for as long as cheap energy supplies can subsidize the transportation of goods across long distances. The price of food will inevitably climb as oil becomes more and more expensive and drives up the cost of production and transportation. This will disproportionately impact the world’s poor, especially those who depend on food assistance and cheap North American grain. Only by taking steps toward creating a sustainable food system of a radically new kind can we hope to attenuate the looming crisis in agri-food systems in this country and abroad. As Patricia Allen argues, any effort to create a truly sustainable food system must take into account the relationships humans have with each other as well as with their environment, which they have molded and influenced in many significant ways (1). Agricultural dependence on fossil fuels is a man-made problem. It will take not just scientific and ecological solutions but also deep-rooted structural and institutional changes as well as lifestyle changes on the part of individuals, their governments, and societies to transition to a more sustainable, non-petroleum based food system which oil depletion and rising costs will inexorably force on us. Before dealing with the implications of oil depletion and rising costs for the agri-food system and human survival, a closer look at the dominant role oil plays in the agri-food system is in order.

Oil is a finite natural resource whose global rate of production will eventually peak and begin an inevitable decline. According to petroleum geologist Colin Campbell, the peak of oil production is passed when about half of the total resources have been extracted. Richard Heinberg notes that the basic concept of Peak Oil is derived from observations over the past 150 years of all older oil fields which have peaked and then declined in output (12). Indeed, the United States, once the world’s biggest producer of oil, reached its peak of oil extraction in 1970 and has since experienced declining output (Heinberg 12). Today, 90 percent of the United States’ oil deposits have been extracted and the country, once a net exporter of oil, now imports over 65 percent of its oil (Pimentel 459).

Worldwide, the discovery of new oil deposits peaked in the 1960s and since 1981 the amount of oil extracted has surpassed the amount discovered by an increasing margin (Campbell). According to the oil giant ChevronTexaco, 33 of the world’s 48 major oil-producing nations are already experiencing declining production (Heinberg 13). There is uncertainty, however, as to when exactly global oil production will reach its peak. Some experts believe we have already reached Peak Oil while almost all agree that it will occur sometime during the first half of this century.

Although other sources of energy exist, such as nuclear, coal and wind power, none of these can produce liquid fuels. Some have hailed crop-based ethanol as a replacement for petroleum, but the negatives of ethanol production seriously outweigh any potential benefits. In 2007, one-fifth of the United States’ entire grain harvest was transformed into ethanol, but the 8.3 billion gallons of ethanol produced that year could only supply less than 4 percent of the country’s automotive fuel (Brown 39). Moreover, it takes 65 percent more energy to produce 1000 liters of ethanol than the energy that is derived from those 1000 liters. Thus, ethanol production has a negative energy balance (Pimentel et al. 15-6). Diverting a large portion of the U.S. grain harvest to ethanol production has serious ramifications for the world’s poor. Worldwide, grain prices have increased dramatically, with the price of wheat more than doubling in 2007, setting off food riots in countries across the globe that same year (Brown 40). Ethanol production in its current form has no place in sustainable agriculture because it actually presents a net energy loss and because it is pricing food out of reach for the world’s poorest people.

{Pincas Jawetz comment – We have a 30 year old feud with David Pimentel on this particular subject – the energy balances and the place of ethanol in an energy policy – so let us say I disagree with the author and her source of information on above point.}

In 2002, the U.S. food system consumed 17 percent of the country’s total fossil fuel use (Eshel & Martin 2). The availability of seemingly unending fossil fuel resources has led to the highly unsustainable situation whereby “the U.S. food system consumes ten times more energy than it produces in food energy” (Pfeiffer 4). Much of the food system’s heavy dependence on fossil fuels stems from the capitalist structure under which it operates. United States government policies have also encouraged the expansion of large corporate farms and farm specialization by subsidizing over production and the export of goods to international markets. Although large specialized farm owners benefit from economies of scale, they must in turn increase their use of synthetic chemical inputs and petroleum fueled farm machinery, creating a serious dependence on fossil fuels. The use of synthetic fertilizers accounts for 20 percent of energy use on American farms (Brown 34), and annually one billion pounds of pesticides are applied to farms across the nation (Pimentel 463). The dramatic increase in urbanization over the past century, coupled with a move away from mixed farming systems in favor of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has deprived farms of natural sources of fertilizer and resulted in the massive expansion of commercial fertilizer use (Pimentel 464). The capitalist system encourages the food system’s unhealthy reliance on fossil fuels because as long as oil is cheap and plentiful, large profits can be made by ensuring the system remains unsustainable.

Farming itself is the least profitable and least energy intensive segment of the entire economy of agriculture. Of the roughly 2,000 liters of oil required per year to feed each American (Pimentel 459), only one-fifth of that energy is actually used for agriculture, with the rest going toward transport, processing, packaging, marketing, and food preparation and storage (Brown 35). The transformation of farm products into consumer commodities, along with the provision of farm inputs, are the biggest moneymakers in the American food system, and not surprisingly, the sectors dominated by large agrifood corporations. Farmers operating under the capitalist system must sell their products on the open market, which usually means selling to the large transnational corporations that dominate the market. Similarly, there are a handful of large companies that produce the fossil fuel-dependent farm inputs purchased by American farmers. Today, farming only accounts for 10 percent of the total food dollar, while 25 percent pays for farm inputs and 65 percent for transportation, processing and marketing (Lewontin 95). A century ago, the value added by farming was closer to 40 percent of the food dollar and most farm inputs were produced by the farmers themselves by using draft animal power, storing seeds, and using animal manure for fertilizer (Lewontin 95).

The dramatic rise in monocultures and the increasingly globalized scale of agricultural production have essentially destroyed the localized food infrastructure in the United States. For example, in 1870 almost all the apples consumed in Iowa were produced locally, but a little over a century later that number had dropped to 15 percent (Pfeiffer 25). In the United States today, less than five percent of food is locally produced (Pfeiffer 68), and so our food travels an average of 1,500 miles before being consumed (Pimentel 467). The transportation of food from farm gate to dinner plate constitutes 14 percent of the energy used in the entire food system (Brown 35). Transporting a head of lettuce from California to New York City by refrigerated truck requires 4,140 kcal of fuel per head of lettuce, while actually growing the head of lettuce consumes only 750 kcal of fossil energy (Pimentel 467-8).

Given that 90 percent of global transportation is fueled by oil or oil by-products (Heinberg 4), declining oil supplies will most likely impede the transportation of produce internationally, and even across the United States. Fresh produce imports from the Southern Hemisphere will likely be one of the first casualties of rising fuel prices. Ultimately, higher transportation costs will be reflected in the price of goods, placing many of the items we enjoy today out of the reach of a majority of people. On the surface, the United States might appear to be food secure, but a cutoff in transportation would lead to serious local shortages of food and other goods.

Oil production will inevitably decline and eventually come to a halt once all accessible oil deposits have been exploited. As this trend intensifies, industrial agriculture in its current form will become impossible. Already, since 1985, fertilizer production worldwide has declined by 23 percent because of fuel shortages and high prices (Pimentel et al. 12). This downward trend will likely continue as petroleum becomes increasingly expensive. Sadly, much of the world’s soil has been so degraded by the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides that without the continued use of these synthetic inputs, the land cannot produce yields large enough to feed the world’s population (Heinberg 5). One study has shown that in the United States, soil is being lost at a rate 10 times faster than it can naturally be replaced (Hough). Fossil fuel fed irrigation is leading to water scarcity as countries overpump their underground aquifers to the point of depletion. Irrigation currently accounts for 70 percent of all water use and 19 percent of farm energy use in the United States (Brown 69). Once groundwater sources are largely depleted, the amount of land available for cultivation will diminish substantially.

Another limiting factor of post-peak agricultural production is population growth. Over the past decade the per capita availability of cropland has declined by 20 percent worldwide (Pimentel 461), and still, 78 million people are added to the planet each year. It will prove increasingly difficult to feed the world with diminishing fertile land and water resources.

Ironically, while 862 million people in the world suffer from hunger and malnutrition, another approximately 1.6 billion people suffer from excessive caloric intake (Brown 107). In the United States, it is usually the most marginalized among us, the poor and minority groups, who experience obesity and a lack of nutritious food in their diets. The sale of processed food, which makes up 82 to 92 percent of food sales, is entirely subsidized by fossil fuels. By exploiting the availability of cheap energy, the agri-food industry has created a situation in which the most processed, energy intensive food is also the cheapest. The average American consumes a diet of 3,747 kcal a day, which is greatly in excess of the FDA recommended intake of 2,000 to 2,5000 kcal per day (Pimentel 459). By simply reducing their caloric intake and consuming less processed food, Americans could greatly reduce the fossil fuel energy used in food production. Of course, in order to be able to start eating healthier, everyone must have access to nutritious foods, which is not the case in the current agri-food system. Another potential energy savings could come from a transition to diets that are lower in meat and dairy consumption and more seasonally based. Currently, one third of the calories in a typical American diet come from animal sources (Pfeiffer 22). A strictly vegetarian diet of equivalent caloric intake, however, consumes 33 percent less fossil fuel energy (Pimentel 459). These are only a few of the simple lifestyle changes that Americans could adopt to reduce their consumption of fossil fuels.

On small farms across the country, agricultural techniques are being implemented to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Harking back to the days of pre-industrialized agriculture, some people have advocated a return to the use of draft animals as a replacement for fuel powered farm machinery. In a post-petroleum world, animal and human muscle power could very well be the most accessible forms of agricultural labor power. Although one horse can help manage 25 acres of farmland a year, that one horse in turn requires one acre of pastureland and 1.5 acres of hayland for its maintenance (Pimentel 464). Furthermore, the additional land that would be required to grow food for draft animals is currently being cultivated to produce food for humans. This needed cropland for draft animals will come from that presently reserved for humans.

Nevertheless, an increasing number of farmers across the country are choosing to adopt organic farming techniques. In the organic farming system, the need for synthetic fertilizers and pesticides is replaced by the use of crop rotation and leguminous cover crops, which naturally replenishes nutrients back into the soil. The application of compost and manure produced on the farm can replace the need for synthetic fertilizers to a large degree. Moreover, a shift to minimum and no-till agricultural practices on about two fifths of U.S. cropland has helped reduce direct use of petroleum based fuel on American farms by 3.5 billion gallons from 1973 to 2005 (Brown 34).

Although the knowledge needed to transition to localized, sustainable agriculture exists, the current structure of power relations and resource control in the United States prevents the widespread move away from fossil fuel based agriculture. Those in positions of power within the United States government and in agribusiness have no interest in altering a system from which they greatly benefit. Without a change in the status quo, however, small local and sustainable producers will have a difficult time competing against the fossil fuel subsidized overproduction of agribusiness which finds its way into our grocery stores. The adoption of sustainable agriculture can only be truly transformational if we broaden its scope to focus on the relationship between social, economic and ecological factors within the agri-food system. In order to move away from conventional agriculture, it is necessary to understand why it functions the way it does and who are the winners and losers in the equation. Sustainable agriculture is not just about practicing organic farming techniques, but rather it is a way to address the structural inequalities in the current agri-food system and to guarantee that all people have access to nutritious and affordable food. Although this vision of sustainable agriculture might seem Utopian and unrealistic given the current nature of things, it is the only acceptable way to ensure the wellbeing of the planet and its inhabitants.

The fact of the matter is that the present agricultural system cannot be maintained for much longer. Decreasing oil production and rising oil prices will effectively bankrupt the American agri-food system. Without petroleum and all of its benefits, there will be little choice but to revert to a system of local, organic production and consumption. The experience of Cuba with peak oil could possibly serve as a model for a transition to post-peak agricultural production. Cuba, which lost the majority of its oil imports and half of its food imports with the collapse of the USSR, now produces almost all of its food organically (Pfeiffer 56). Urban gardens are an important source of produce, providing over 60 percent of the vegetables consumed by Cubans (Pfeiffer 61). The example of Cuba shows that it is possible to feed an entire nation with organic agriculture, but it also demonstrates the hardships involved in moving away from fossil fuels. In the first few years after the Soviet Union’s collapse, the average Cuban’s daily caloric intake decreased by 36 percent and protein consumption by 40 percent, while undernourishment increased by 15 percent (Pfeiffer 57). It must be noted that Cuban government policies played a critical role in helping to ensure that the collapse of industrialized agriculture did not turn catastrophic. There has also been a change in attitude towards farming amongst the Cuban people. Cubans now see farming as an important and profitable endeavor and many families have migrated to rural areas to become farmers or have started urban gardens (Pfeiffer 60).

Peak oil is a real phenomenon with the potential to turn our entire world upside down. Modern industrialized agriculture is headed for disaster and unless we begin immediately to change our patterns of agricultural production and consumption, many people will suffer. At the individual level, a lifestyle change is needed whereby we start to consume local products, rely less on oil-powered modes of transportation, eat lower on the food chain, have fewer children and reconnect with the land by participating in the growing of our own food. Structurally there ought to be a return to localized, small-scale photosynthesis-based, appropriate-tech agricultural production and an end to the domination of economic and power structures that place profit above all else. Broad based culture change will be a necessary component of any successful transition to a post-petroleum world. We can no longer afford to live isolated from one another and from nature. Of course, the rate of oil depletion is an unknown variable, and as Richard Heinberg observes the time interval before peak oil occurs will likely be too short to painlessly adapt to a new energy regime and way of life (3). However, if the United States, which is the world’s top oil consumer, can drastically reduce its use of oil, we might be able to buy time for the world to transition to a post-petroleum era (Brown 45). Clearly, weaning ourselves off of our addiction to oil will not be easy, but the alternative will be much worse.
Shirin Fatemeh Wertime, a 2010 Boren Scholarship winner, wrote this report for a sociology class at College of William and Mary, course # SOCL 440, on 5/11/10. She is the daughter of John Wertime, whose review of Robert Engelman’s book More: Population, Nature, and What Women Want appears on Culture Change.

* * * * *

Bibliography

Allen, Patricia. 1993. Connecting the Social and Ecological in Sustainable Agriculture. In (ed.) P. Allen Food for the Future. New York: John Wiley, 1-16.

Altieri, Miguel A. 2000. Ecological Impacts of Industrial Agriculture and the Possibilities for Truly Sustainable Farming. In (eds.) F.Magdoff, J.B. Foster and F. H. Buttel, Hungry for Profit: The Agribusiness Threat to Farmers, Food and the Environment. New York: Monthly Review, 77-92.

Brown, Lester Russell. Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to save Civilization. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008.

Campbell, Colin J. “About Peak Oil.” ASPO International | The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas. Web. .

Eshel, Gidon, and Pamel Martin. “Diet, Energy and Global Warming.” Earth Interactions (2005): 1-36.

Heinberg, Richard. The Oil Depletion Protocol. New Society, 2006.

Hough, Andrew. “Britain Facing Food Crisis as World’s Soil ‘vanishes in 60 Years’ – Telegraph.” Telegraph.co.uk: News, Business, Sport, the Daily Telegraph Newspaper, Sunday Telegraph – Telegraph. 3 Feb. 2010. Web.

Lewontin, R.C. 2000. The Maturing of Capitalist Agriculture: Farmer as Proletarian. In (eds.) F.Magdoff, J.B. Foster and F. H. Buttel, Hungry for Profit: The Agribusiness Threat to Farmers, Food and the Environment. New York: Monthly Review, 93-106.

Pfeiffer, Dale Allen. Eating Fossil Fuels: Oil, Food and the Coming Crisis in Agriculture. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society, 2006.

Pimentel, David, Marcia Pimentel, and Marianne Karpenstein-Machan. “Energy Use in Agriculture: An Overview.” (1998): 1-32.

Pimentel, David, Sean Williamson, Courtney Alexander, Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Caitlin Kontak, and Steven Mulkey. “Reducing Energy Inputs in the US Food System.” Human Ecology 36 (2008): 459-71.

UNEP leads 27 countries of the Wider Caribbean on  “land-based pollution” at an International Maritime Organization (IMO) meeting in Panama City based on the ISTAC of Kingston, Jamaica (Interim Scientific, Technical and Advisory Committee to the Cartagena Convention. Will they touch nevertheless the menacing Deep-Water Oil-Well Blow-Out?

from: James Sniffen <sniffenj@un.org>

UNEP/CEP PRESS RELEASE: REGIONAL GOVERNMENT POLLUTION EXPERTS MEET IN PANAMA.

Panama City, 24th May, 2010:

Over 50 pollution control experts from 27 countries of the Wider Caribbean
gather today (Monday 24th May) in Panama City at the invitation of the
United Nations Environment Programme’s Caribbean Environment Programme
(UNEP CEP) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

The gathering of experts for the 5th Meeting of the Interim Scientific, Technical and Advisory Committee (ISTAC) to the Protocol concerning pollution from land-based sources, commonly known as the LBS Protocol, will last for five days.  The CEP is the Secretariat for this Protocol and is based in Kingston, Jamaica.

The LBS Protocol is one of three agreements under the Convention for the
Protection and Development of the Marine Environment in the Wider Caribbean
Region (the Cartagena Convention).  It establishes regional guidelines and
standards for reducing the impact of pollution on the coastal and marine
environment, and on human health.   Over 80% of the pollution of the marine
environment of the Wider Caribbean is estimated to originate from land
based sources and activities.

Panama, the host country, is one of only six countries to have ratified the LBS Protocol.  The others are Trinidad and Tobago, Belize, Saint Lucia, France and the United States.  Discussions during the meeting will focus on measures to increase the region’s commitment to ratify the Protocol, and have it enter into force and become international law as soon as possible.

In support of regional cooperation, UNEP CEP is partnering with the IMO and their joint Regional Activity Centre for Oil Spills (RAC REMPEITC) to bring together experts from environmental agencies, maritime authorities and port administrations for this 5th LBS ISTAC.

Delegates are expected to identify practical measures to improve the implementation of marine environmental agreements including the IMO London Convention on the control of pollution from dumping of wastes at sea and the MARPOL Convention on the prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships.

According to Nelson Andrade, Coordinator of UNEP CEP”   “It is vital that
Governments adopt a more integrated approach to reducing pollution from
land and marine based sources”.  He noted that the continued partnership
between UNEP and IMO will help to effectively implement the Cartagena
Convention and its three Protocols and to reduce marine contamination.

Meeting Participants are also expected to review recent achievements of the
UNEP CEP to reduce and control marine pollution and to endorse a new work
plan and budget for 2010-2011.

For additional information, please contact:

Christopher Corbin,Programme Officer,
Assessment and Management of Environment Pollution (AMEP),
Regional Co-ordinating Unit, UNEP CEP
Kingston, Jamaica
Telephone: (876) 922-9267 — Fax: (876) 922-9292
http://www.cep.unep.org; cjc@cep.unep.org;

About UNEP’s Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) -  The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) in 1976 under the framework of its Regional Seas Programme.   It was based on the importance and value of the Wider Caribbean Region’s fragile and vulnerable coastal and marine ecosystems including an abundant and mainly endemic flora and fauna,

A Caribbean Action Plan was adopted by the Caribbean countries and led to the adoption, in 1983, of the only current regional, legally-binding agreement for the protection of the marine environment, the Cartagena Convention.  The Convention and its first Protocol (Oil Spill) entered into force in 1986.

Two other protocols were developed by the region – the Protocols on Special Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) and the Control of Pollution from Land Based Sources (LBS) in 1990 and 1999 respectively.

The SPAW Protocol entered into force in 2000, whereas three ratifying countries are still needed for the LBS Protocol.

The Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit (UNEP-CAR/RCU) serves as the Secretariat to the Cartagena Convention and is based in Kingston, Jamaica.

Each Protocol is served by a Regional Activity Centre.  These Centres are
based in the Netherlands Antilles (Regional Marine Pollution Emergency
Information and Training Center for the Wider Caribbean, RAC/REMPEITC) for
the Oil Spills Protocol, Guadeloupe (RAC/SPAW) for the SPAW Protocol, Cuba
(Centre of Engineering and Environmental Management of Coasts and Bays) and
Trinidad & Tobago (Institute of Marine Affairs) for the LBS Protocol.

 http://www.periodico26.cu/english/news_w…

Fighting to Save the Planet COCHABAMBA, Bolivia.— The First World People´s Conference on Climatic Change, brought to a close yesterday in Bolivia, declared the Mother Earth as the life source and proposed raising awareness about the protection of the planet, reported ANSA. Nearly 35,000 people from 142 countries convened by Bolivian president Evo Morales met in Cochabamba city in an attempt to raise the voice of the International civil society in front of the upcoming Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climatic Change (COP 16). In this conference, to be held in Cancun, Mexico in November, 2010, the final declaration of the “Acuerdo de Cochabamba” (Cochabamba Agreement) will be presented, which was unanimously adopted at the high-level event. We hope that the upcoming meeting in Mexico is not in vain and that participants take good decisions for everyone,” said Morales on Thursday at the Summit which closed with a popular activity. Attending the act were Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, Cuban vicepresident Esteban Lazo and Nicaraguan commander Tomás Borge. During the ceremony, Ecuadorian Lina Kawuanski and U.S. Vico Enosti read the main conclusions of the forum in Cochabamba, a document entitled Agreement of the People. The declaration states that “The Mother Earth is injured and the future of humanity is at stake.” It warns that if the global temperature rises by over 2 degrees, there is a 50 percent chance that the damage will be irreversible.” The document also points out that the capitalist system “has imposed a logic of competition, unlimited progress and growth,” in efforts to get profits without limit by separating man from nature, establishing a logic of domination and turning every resource into goods.” “The capitalist system model is going through a crisis and peoples have the alternatives in their hands,” said the Bolivian president. “Developed countries—–considered the most responsible for environmental pollution—–have been asked to pay their debt for overuse of the atmosphere and implement legal actions toward those who don´t fullfill their obligations,” the text states. A multilateral agency to manage environmental issues was created. This agency will also care for the international recognition of the Mother Earth’s rights, the non-privatization of knowledge, immigrant’s protection and full respect toward the freedom and guarantees of the indigenous groups. As a response to the harmful capitalist policies on the environment, this document proposes a new model based on solidarity, equity, collective well being and a just balance of economic, social and environmental needs in harmony with Mother Earth. It also calls for recognition of people for what they are and not for what they have. In this order, IPS reports that a World Referendum on Climate Change was approved at the closing meeting on Thurday, to be held in April, 2011 for the people of the world to have a say on the situation of the environment on a global scale. VOICES FOR CHANGE At the closing act held at the Félix Carriles stadium, Bolivian president Evo Morales highlighted that the main difference between the Copenhaguen and Cochabamba gatherings on climate change is that unlike Denmark where empires gathered to impose their opinions, in Bolivia all peoples gathered to find solutions, reported DPA. He also said that the Cuban Revolution leader Fidel Castro pioneered this struggle, as in 1992, Fidel said that the developed countries must pay the climatic debt, which was more important than the foreign debt. He also expressed his rejection toward US military bases in the region, as they not only damage the environment but also cause death, as happened in Bolivia. Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez called on social movements and indigenous organizations to participate in the UN World Summit on Climate slated for December in Cancún Mexico in order to avoid the death of the planet. He also urged putting an end to blackmail and double standards. “Cochabamba is the continuation of the struggle started in Copenhaguen in order to save the human race. Remember that unfortunately, due to the US plans, the UN Summit in Copenhaguen was a great failure,” he added, ANSA reports. —————— Evo Condemns Capitalism for Destroying the Planet Cochabamba, Bolivia.- Bolivian President Evo Morales, condemned the capitalist system, which he described as primarily responsible for the destruction of the planet, reports PL. THE PRESIDENT MORALES SHOWS ATTENDEES A PLASTIC PLATE, A PRODUCT HE CONSIDERS A POLLUTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT. At the opening of the First World Peoples Conference on Climate Change, he noted that the consumer system is the main enemy of Mother Earth, for it seeks only profit at the expense of nature. “Capitalism is the bridge of asymmetries and inequalities in this world,” he said. Addressing more than 15,000 representatives from the five continents, gathered in the Esteban Ramirez Ecological Stadium, in the town of Tuquipaya, Morales read a letter to future generations to warn that the planet is sick because of capitalism, which tries to convert everything into merchandise. In the letter, the president noted that an injured Mother Earth gives us warnings; earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones and droughts, hence the need to protect it. The text also called attention to climate migrants, some 50 million people by 2050, which could rise to 200 million victims of the negative impacts on the environment. He also criticized the earlier 15th United Nations Summit Conference of the Parties on Climate Change in Copenhagen (Denmark) and the so-called understanding of member nations, for there the demands of social organizations and indigenous peoples were not heeded. At the Bolivian event, speakers on behalf of the five continents and 130 countries participating in the Climate Summit, also supported the initiative of Bolivia to conduct the upcoming world referendum on the environment on October 12 and set up an International Court of Climate Justice, which would judge governments and businesses that act against life on the planet. COLORFUL CEREMONY A colorful religious ceremony and Bolivian music opened the Peoples’ Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. The Committee on Amautas of Bolivia was in charge of the celebration of an ancient wajata, attended by Andean priests and representatives of indigenous peoples of the five continents. The sages asked permission from “Father Cosmos” and “Mother Earth” to advocate for consensus positions in defense of nature and humanity to the sound of pututus, flutes and panpipes, Andean traditional instruments.

“Here is an opportunity for a better future to emerge from Haiti’s suffering,” said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the opening session, noting the over one million Haitians who are still homeless after the January earthquake. “But it will take a commitment from all of us to offer our support in a better way – a smarter way.” For Clinton and the other conference participants, which included co-chairs Spain, Canada, Brazil, France the United States and the European Union, that “smarter way” means investing heavily in Haiti’s hobbled government and “putting Haitians in the driver’s seat.”

To that end, the U.S. pledged 1.15 billion dollars towards “supporting the government of Haiti’s plan to strengthen agriculture, energy, health, and security and governance.” Other major donors include Venezuela and the Inter-American Development Bank, which each pledged around two billion dollars over the next decade.

Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive said the government devised its own redevelopment framework after producing a post-earthquake needs assessment report. According to Bellerive, that plan entails major investment in basic infrastructure along with the short-term reconstitution of the Haitian government, which lost all of its ministry buildings and a quarter of its civil service in the January quake.

Bellerive also stressed that poor central planning and underdevelopment in the country’s peripheral regions led to the overcrowding of the capital, Port-au-Prince – a social and economic phenomenon that was directly responsible for the severity of the earthquake. {that must be the number of casualties and not the geophysics!}

“We need to redeploy people throughout the country,” said Bellerive. “We need strong regions with capable infrastructure of economic development, with a planning process.”

Former U.S. president Bill Clinton, who will co-chair the interim redevelopment committee with Bellerive, was candid in discussing the shortfalls of previous approaches to international development in Haiti, and struck a self-critical note in discussing his pre-quake work as a U.N. Special Envoy, a position he has held since May 2009.

“I was asked…to harass all the donors to see that they honour their commitments. I was a failure at that,” he said, noting that only 30 percent of the funds requested for development in Haiti before the earthquake had actually been dispersed.

The rebuilding process is still fraught with uncertainty, largely because of the possibility that the international community will not follow through on its commitments.

Marc Levin, a professor of sustainable development at Columbia University’s Earth Institute who was in Haiti in the period immediately after the earthquake, told IPS that the rebuilding process will have to play out before the conference can be considered a success.

“A major part of story is going to be about the international community being ready to get really involved with the Haitian people and government and helping to pay for it,” he said. “The donors’ conference doesn’t really give you any clues if that’s going to happen. These are the baby steps of a process that could lead to a great recovery.”

He cited the Marshall Plan, the U.S. government’s programme for restructuring European economies and governments after World War II, as a model for the kind of comprehensive, far-reaching redevelopment that will be needed in Haiti.

He wondered if today’s donors are actually serious about taking up that challenge. “The donor countries have a history of forgetting about [development goals in Haiti] rather rapidly,” he said. “The pledges are nonbinding.”

In a press release, Oxfam spokesperson Philippe Mathieu expressed similar concerns about the donor nations’ commitment. “The last time the region was hit by a natural disaster of this scale, Hurricane Mitch of 1998, only less than a third of the nine billion dollars promised materialised,” he wrote. “This cannot be allowed to happen this time.”

While the future of the redevelopment efforts remains murky, Wednesday’s conference offered more occasions for optimism than pessimism.

Marie St. Fleur, Massachusetts’s first Haitian-American state legislator, received one of the day’s largest ovations for a speech about how the rebuilding process could give Haitians the opportunity to take responsibility for their nation’s future.

“It is up to us to help make real the hard won freedom that the fathers of the Haitian Revolution fought so valiantly for,” she said, referring to the 1804 slave uprising that made Haiti the Western Hemisphere’s second independent state.

Jack Kleinsinger talking and presenting exquisite Highlights of Jazz, shows us also things beyond the music in the hall. In this case it was international harmony.

The event was: Highlights In Jazz Salute To Lew Tabackin Thurs., Mar. 11th 8PM At TRIBECA Performing Arts Center, Manhattan.

It was one of those 2010 winter days. I worked at home on a UN text and the expected success of the evening did not disappoint.

This time Jack Kleinsinger himself did only the verbal introductions and the public relations. He did not perform himself, that is unless you do not count his broad brush with which he depicts his performers as performance also.

Lew Tabachkin, lanky, bearded, Trotsky-alike, Brooklynite, flutist and tenor saxophonist, has very wide vision of music. His flute sounds like the music of that primordial Hebrew Shepard amusing his flock of sheep and his tenor sax like the quintessential Jazz musician who has no intention whatsoever to sound like any other jazz musician – so he creates his own style and if needed dances to it while playing whatever instrument it happens to be – call it studied impromptu. This comes after many years of improvisation.

In 1968 he met pianist Toshiko Akiyoshi when the two played together in a quartet. They eventually married and moved to LOs Angeles where they formed the famous Toshiko Akiyoshi Jazz Orchestra.  www.jewtabachkin.com

The other performers were Russian best Jazz bass player Boris Kozlov, additional skilled wing musicians Joe Magniately who stepped in for Randy Becker who joined a foreign tour, and Gary Sloan. Lewis Nash on the drums. In the second half the star was guitarist Jack Wilkins. This second half was in part dominated by guitar-drumer and bass trio. Slowly the others joined the party as the audience got more and more enthused. Tabachkin was the last to step in – after all it was his party. The Grand Finale had all seven musicians on stage.

Kleinsinger said that at first he worried that with this group of individualists the show might be too modern for his years-long audience, but he was happy to see how well they were received.

Kleinsinger also mentioned the last two concerts of the series – Thursday, April 15, 2019  that will hold The Ben Webster & Lester Young Centenial, and Thursday May 13, 2010 – the Final Concert of the Highlights Final Season = nearly completely sold out – at the time there were only 40 seats left.

Further, as these concerts are not just performance but rather heritage, Jack Kleinsinger has cleared with the US Department of States a listening tour to Havana – May 27 – June 3rd 2010. You can bet on him that he will dig up the best Jazz emporia and joints of Cuba – and, don’t wonder if you sense after that an inflow to New York of great Cuban new music, and good old music as well. To who does not know – Cuba is linked to the evolution of Jazz in the US.

If only the UN could learn something from Jack Kleinsinger – at least why not make it an obligatory evening for the UN Security Council?

Recalling Obama’s words on May 23, 2008 concerning U.S. arrogance towards Latin America, it would appear that the U.S. is in need of a pressing review of a hemispheric policy that brings with it vital new ideas writes  COHA  ( The Council on Hemispheric Affairs ) Research Associate Katya Rodriguez. Her complaint is that nothing has changed yet compard to the Bush White House.

See article at:
 http://www.coha.org/cuba-u-s-rhetoric-ti…

Last night, March 8, 2010, three month since Copenhagen, I learned from someone that was among the creators of the US Carbon Market that this market is practically dead. Anything new on climate? No – nothing! Is there hope? Only if you are a continuous optimist!

That exchange brought me to post the following as a reminder of the post-Copenhagen spirit. Further, we are still that optimist that believes with a US health-care bill pushed through there may be a renewed US-China joint effort on climate. Further, we also follow with interest Brazil reasserting itself by putting its foot down on conditions of trade with the US. This push by Brazil may remind the US that it is hard to handle wars in Asia without house cleaning in its attitude in the Western Hemisphere. Brazil and the Latins must become US partners also on Climate and they are right to claim a more open door to US markets.

—————————

Letter to Grist from Europe

Copenhagen blame game is obstacle to 2010 climate deal.

Yesterday, WHO reported that there has been no rise in infectious diseases one month on from the disaster, with the finding based on epidemiological surveillance carried out by 52 sites across the Caribbean island nation.

On top of the more than 50 WHO/Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) staff on the ground in Haiti, dozens more experts in fields ranging from disaster management to water and sanitation were deployed to the Caribbean nation. “Haiti’s entire health system, from its infrastructure to the very staff and system that operated it, has been deeply affected by the earthquake,” WHO said in its latest update.

Over 200 Haitian medical staff died when the health ministry building collapsed, while many doctors and nurses were also killed or injured.

In total, the  January 12, 2010 quake claimed more than 200,000 lives, leaving over 300,000 others injured and 1 million Haitians homeless.

Henriette Chamouillet, WHO’s Representative in Haiti, paid tribute to the hundreds of Cuban health professionals in the country at the time of the tremors, with some 1,300 additional doctors and other staff being dispatched after the quake.

“They are absolutely important for the country,” she stressed at a press conference today in Geneva.

Dr. Chamouillet said that Cuba has long been training roughly 80 Haitian doctors per year, most of whom return to their home country following their schooling.

For its part, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported today that the humanitarian situation in Haiti is on the upswing, with the port, airport and other essential infrastructure gradually coming back online.

The Office warned, however, that shelter and sanitation needs, as well as rubble removal, are among those that remain unmet.

Tomorrow afternoon, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will be launching a revised flash appeal for Haiti, along with his Special Envoy for Haiti, Bill Clinton, and Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes.

Just three days after the quake, the UN called for $575 million, with a bulk of the funds intended to be directed to urgent needs, including food, water and shelter.

At The Foreign Policy Association, New York, Wednesday, January 13, 2010, in the Grupo Santander building Auditorium, there was a meeting with Dr. Julia E. Sweig who wrote the book: “CUBA: WHAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO KNOW.”

Julia Sweig is Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin American Studies & Director for Latin American Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

She has authored several reports on Latin America and American Foreign Policy. Her book “Inside the Cuban Revolution: Fidel Castro and the Urban Underground” of 2002 received an award for the best book of the year by an independent scholar from the American Historical Association.

The meeting was chaired by Ambassador Viktor Polgar, Consul General of Hungary in New York City.

Dr. Sweig started out by saying that she was part of the US culture relating to Latin America – that educated in Spanish language also lots of Cuban students  and studies about Cuba but nothing in Portuguese or Brazil, implying that in the US Cuba got much too thigh attention then it deserved – and Brazil much less attention then it deserved. But even so, in effect Cuba was in a dormant state so far as US direct involvement, until the switch from Fidel to Raoul.

The discussion with Cuba was always difficult. Cuba was focusing on history while the US was looking to the future.

2006 – 2007 changes start in Havana and the Miami Cubans find this important – then 2007-2008 Raoul begins to look at domestic issues in Cuba and starts to talk of dirty laundry of the regime. On February 2008 he takes office in a 34 minutes speech – a novelty to who was used to the unending Fidel rhetoric. He skips the gov’t talk to improve the life and says that inefficiency will be removed. He eliminates control of Cubans travel abroad. There seems to be a new government, new people, new ways of doing things – and expectations started to be high. With the changes in the US – President Obama suggested in april 2009 to open a new chapter.

——-

In Miami, the last decade the Cuban Americans shift from the call for embargo to a people-to-people family oriented approach. This in South Florida more then in New Jersey. Miami is now for the first time ahead of Washington asking for change.

Since 2001 there were exchanges with Cuba, but then they were stopped by the Bush Administration – including the remittances. Then came the war on Iraq and the notion of regime change that ruffled Cuba. All what started before Bush years was now suspicious

President Lula and Spanish PM Zapatero are pushing Washington for change in regard to Cuba. Indeed, in Trinidad the US allowed the return of Cuba to the OAS, and in Congress there is now a bill to remove travel restrictions and to take Cuba of the terrorism lists.

Clearly, the US is not the final decider in Cuba – but it has a role to play in Cuba changing.

Former Congressman John Brandemas said that President Bush restricted Microsoft and Google in regards to Cuba, as Cuba also reacted with restrictions. In effect the same day as this meeting at the FPA, the New York Times had an article about a communications contractor who was arested in Cuba, Alan P. Gross, who was working with local groups to make sure they are capable of using internet communication.

Questions abunded about how long will it take to get to “YES WE CAN.” It was pointed out that $9,000 gets a Congressman’s vote and this is a reason for the bottleneck. The Cuban Americans still hold the game, even though they would like to see change.

The facts are that after the US and Canada, Cuba is third on medical issues in the hemisphere. Cuba helped Chavez consolidate his power and they like him to take out oxygen of Latin America.

—————

Further, let us recommens CUBA – La Isla Grande, Edited by Martino Fagiuoli, a 2007, Fall River Press, New York, printed in China, an album about Cuba with photos taken in the 1990s. The country seems to be ready to stick it out until the US changes its attitude towards the island.

Time for the U.S. and Cuba to Talk and More
by COHA Staff, January 29, 2010

The modest collaboration between the State Department and the Cuban government concerning the use of Cuban airspace and cooperation in providing medical relief to the Haitian people represents an opportunity for transition toward a more positive relationship between Washington and Havana. This cooperation demonstrates common humanitarian values that both nations share. The two governments should use these values and this opportunity to open a space for dialogue.
Privately, many U.S. and Cuban officials acknowledge that they are inclined to support steps toward reconciliation, though each side appears to harbor doubts of the other’s sincerity in attempts to move beyond historical rancor.
Although President Obama’s repeal of travel restrictions for Cuban-Americans constitutes a step in the right direction, it was hardly enough to signal to Havana its readiness for détente.
The two ancient foes need not strive for a home run; a bunt single will do.

Diane Sawyer on ABC News,1/15/10, is visibly and verbally upset that
so much food, water, etc. was still at the airport and not distributed
to the very many in desperate need and could be dead very shortly
without it.

Then one U.S. Commander interviewed, said they needed the Haitian
government to designate distribution centers, then to be approved by
the U.N., while 10,000 U.S. troops are on the way by Sunday to help in
distribution.

Have the U.S. government/military..politicians  lost their minds? If
the Haitian government, which barely exists after this tragedy, wasn’t
there for the people before the earthquake, why is anyone waiting for
this government to act now?

If the U.N., which has done little to stop genocide in Darfur with
500,000 Blacks murdered by Muslims, why in the world is the U.N. in
charge of this operation? To avoid this dilemma, our web has picked up
the COHA idea – let the Brazilians, much less suspected then the
Americans, take over for an agreed time period the keys of Haiti!

On CNN, with Anderson Cooper showing that only Dr. Gupta of CNN, is
left in a hospital with 25 wounded patients, while the UN has asked
the rest of the doctors to leave, and then to see the aerial views of
hundreds, perhaps thousands, of bodies lying on just one of the
streets, does anyone get what is going on here?

By following the supposed ‘plan’, the food and water sits at the
airport, and men, women and childen are dying .

A ‘distribution’ sight?  How about every spot where hundreds and
thousands are outside of hospitals, in parks, and in the streets,
afraid to go back into their homes, and get the food and water to
these people before they dehydrate and die. JUst don’t worry about the
fact that they did not have clean water even before this last
catastrophe hit.

Oh first we have to deal with all the ‘politics’?

Let’s see, now if the U.S. controls the airport, and not the U.N.,
then will the US be seen as ‘occupying’ Haiti? Will some see this as a
pretext to naming Haiti the US 51st State?

Then there is the big hoopla from listening to Obama that he’ll do
everything possible, including the comitment of  troops and
$100millions – some saying that this is for the reviews, while Rush
Limbaugh is obsessed on whether Obama will look good in all of this
and his ratings rise. Will he advise not to give to the Haitian people
in crisis?

If Limbaugh had a heart, he’d be pushing to feed the starving and put
the politics aside until we got through this level of the crisis.

Now with some saying 200,000 being reported dead, up from the Red Cross’s
assessment  of 45,000, we are witnessing Obama’s ‘Katrina’ of
going by ‘the book’, whatever that is, instead of stepping outside of
the box and actually making a difference.

How about just handing the water and food to everyone in need? Is this so hard to do?  How about taking care of everyone that needs the help? At what point do you need permission to be a human being and help another human being, especially when you can? Then, if this is really the case, take the Brazilians that are already in Haiti – and ask them for God’s and humanitarian sake – take the supplies and hand them out without waiting for the UN. We know, the Brazilians have lost 14 people and miss three more, but they are tough and will accept this if they see it is for a clear purpose. They also lost people in that infamous UN Baghdad disaster when the Brazilian Mission leader was killed.

This is how governments operate or don’t and they don’t… beyond the
stunts and media ploys and everyone covering their own butts, so as
not to do anything that they will have to be accountable for, while
the rest of us are expendible.

Thank G-d for independent thinking and action from volunteers.

With all the ‘chatter’ now from Yemen and another potential Muslim
Jihadist attack on the U.S. at this very time period, you can see in
Haiti the insipid approach that would happen here as well. On this, I
just observed that Saturday January 16, 2010, the Empire State
building was dressed in Green-White-Green colors – and these are the
colors of Nigeria. Is this the initiative of some private group to
thank the boy-bomber from Nigeria for awareness raising that we are
unsafe?

Can’t anyone make a decision that matters, when government bureaucrats
are in charge?

If 3 millions are affected by the Earthquake in Haiti, do we not
understand that without food or water for 5 days what is pending?

Then we watched Sean Hannity on FOX tonight talking about the
‘political earthquake’, should the Republican beat the Democrat next
Tues. for former Sen. Kennedy’s seat?

“Earthquake” Hannity? With hundreds of thousands dead in our back
yard? This is your level of consciousness to exploit using this word,
on going after Obama?

This is revolting – our stomachs turn.

How do you play ‘safe’ with masses of people dying?

How do you exploit for politics, the horrors people are facing?

Appeasing those who want to kill us and then neglecting those in need
after the damage has been done, is one more example of what we are
witnessing daily in our approach in Haiti. It doesn’t matter if the
catatrophe is man-made through terrorism or by an act of G-d.

Today, after 8 yrs. illegal Haitians in Miami and in the rest of the
U.S., by the tens of thousands, they will now be allowed to stay for
18 months, eventually get green cards,  and we hope do something for
the folks back home.

But this still isn’t feeding today even one Haitian baby starving to
death or dehydrated by lack of water.

We got an e-mail saying:
“Having gone through Hurricane Andrew in 1992, I know what it is like
with 80,000 buildings destroyed and they, only admitting to 50 dead,
but there were many more.

We on Miami Beach were 17 miles from ‘Ground Zero’ and every house on
our block had no electricity for 11 days, all foods were spoiled,
every roof had to be replaced if you could find quality repair people,
not out to steal from you or legitimate insurance agencies not trying
to screw you, and in every level of survival running into obstacles
for getting food, water, gas,repairs, cleanup and a host of basics,
let alone damage to property and the emotional damage in all of it.

It took 10 years for us to recover.  Every Hurricane season we’re
glued to the weather channel in hopes of not going through it again,
and Haiti went through 3 hurricanes recently before this earthquake.
Haiti with so many of its trees destroyed. Then Papa Doc, Baby Doc,
Aristedes and even today, where are the Haitian leaders in Miami
speaking out, for they are in two political camps like the Dems. and
GOP, and neither are for the people, when it is all about them and not
us.

No matter. We MUST help those who need this emergency help.
The American people have always come to the rescue of those in need
all over the world and we’ll do it again and again for that is who we
really are and we don’t need to apologize for it either.

As a Jew, that is who I am too. That is my conscience. That is my
faith. That is my reason for being. That is my history of being a Jew
for 5000 years. Nothing to apologize for here either. My Covenant with
G-d, My Torah and My Constitution and my heart are my guides in all of
this as well as knowing so many on this level as well.” Even a secular
Jew like myself has no problem in seconding above last lines.

Ecuador Will Build UNASUR Headquarters.
Construction of the agency’s headquarters will begin next year

Foreign Minister Fander Falconí reported today that in 2010, Ecuador, which holds the pro tempore chairmanship of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), intends to build the organization’s headquarters in the community of Mitad del Mundo, a village near the country’s capital. “Our challenge is to consolidate UNASUR’s internal structure,” which includes the appointment of its secretary general, the ratification of the treaty establishing the Union for the twelve member states, and “consolidating the organization’s infrastructure,” the official said.

“We are ready to begin construction of the UNASUR headquarters in Mitad del Mundo, we have an agreement with the Provincial Council (of Pichincha, where the community is located), and we already have the resources to begin the project,” Falconí said. This entity is composed of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Suriname and Venezuela.

Interesting, the list of members, that includes only the 12 South American independent States, excludes besides the states of the Central American istmus, also the island of Cuba.
28-Dec-2009

From the latest news coming from Washington – “Under the new airport
rules, all citizens of Afghanistan, Algeria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq,
Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen must receive a pat
down and an extra check of their carry-on bags before boarding a plane
bound for the United States, officials said. Citizens of Cuba, Iran,
Sudan and Syria — nations considered ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ —
face the same requirement.”

That means Cuba and thirteen Muslim states: Afghanistan, Algeria,
Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia,
Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

These news caused a lot of comments, but we think the wrong comments.

We assume obviously that Washington is ready finally to address the
terrorism issue. Airplane terrorism, as we learned on 9/11, is not
about transport of weapons but about terrorists – to be specific since
9/11 – we speak here about Islamic terrorists. If you want to catch
terrorists you must look for terrorists. Looking for baby formula is
not the answer – but looking for those passengers whose profiles are
suspicious might be a better bet. Sure, obviously, not all Muslims are
terrorists, and profiling is terrible – even illegal, but if you want
to catch terrorists you start with the profile that most fits Islamic
terrorists, and you bet – they are Muslims of any color. Even though
they may be traveling with documents issued by non-Islamic States,
i.e. the UK, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, France, Switzerland, or even the
US.

So, it is not easy to define exactly what papers are carried by the
terrorists, but you can have some guidelines to increase your chance
of catching them. looking for a profile of an Asian or African Muslim.
Then, learn from the Israelis how to talk to them – you may even find
out that they are so convinced that their cause is the right one, that
they will lower their guard and just plainly disclose that what you
see is all they got.

There may be a Jamaican convert to Islam who preached terrorism in the UK
and resides now in Kenya – a case in point. Kenya does want him either and
he will be sent back to Jamaica a second time. yes, this is a problem if you
are American and Jamaica does not cooperate – but he is a Muslim and no
Anti-Defamation league is enrtitled to tell you Mr. President that he should
not be stripped and searched if he wants to travel via the US to Jamaica.
This is simple.

But what about Cuba? Fidel Castro is more atheist then Catholic, surely
no Muslim. Whatever went on in the past is history to me and I do not believe
prologue to Mr. Castro. So why mix him and his country up with 13 Islamic
States involved in Islamic Terrorism? That is unless someone in the US longs
to see him give cover to such terrorists in the future so they get new reasons
to be after him? If the Jamaica case has anything to teach us – it is that the
US is better off reinsuring its rear parts from anger caused by mistreatment
and friendship is not achieved by mulling over past grief. Specially, as several
hundred former sugar baron families living in Florida should not be allowed to
hold hostage the US when it comes to real US interests.

Mr. President, I watched Bolivia and Venezuela leaders speak in Copenhagen,
they fumed and brimmed with words – no stones or missiles. Their ALBA is,
I think, the natural ally of a US that manages to disengage from the Islamic
world of oil. So, it is the US self interest that calls for you, Mr. President, to
invite Fidel Castro to Washington for a tete-a-tete and start on a way that
eventually will give the US the wall of safety it needs when addressing the 21st
Century centers of terror – the Islamists’ terror cancer that will continue to ooze
as long as we use oil.

Please start by taking him of that list!

The thirteen on that list include the obvious Iran – Syria – Lebanon
trio of the Shii’a Islam, it includes the Afghanistan/Pakistan US
theater of operations and Iraq, as well as the other US theater Saudi
Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan that misses Egypt and the Gaza strip. A
fourth historic region includes Libya and Algeria, then with Nigeria,
these are newer sources of oil for the US, and as such clear potential
sources of unhappy Islamists who complain about the changes in their
countries as fueled by oil money. In very few countries terrorism
against the US was actually started by rulers decree. Libya, Iran,
Syria, Sudan, Somalia may be the exceptions, but Saudi Arabia and
Yemen may have seen rulers who deflected anger against themselves into
anger against foreigners. In the majority of cases the terrorist is a
person of convictions and the situation could have been avoided had
the US and the rest of the Western World, tried to be less squanderous
with the oil we got addicted to.

Having said the above – let us get now to the point – MR PRESIDENT -
PLEASE – TAKE CUBA OFF THAT LIST BECAUSE THEY DO NOT BELONG ON THAT
LIST IN 2010.

* * * *

Please look – I am posting here four reference – links to news
articles of today’s New York Times.
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/us/05t…

New Air Security Checks From 14 Nations to U.S. Draw Criticism
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/world/…

In Yemen, U.S. Faces Leader Who Puts Family First
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/world/…

Behind Afghan Bombing, an Agent With Many Loyalties
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/world/…

Kenya Seeks to Deport Muslim Cleric to Jamaica

————————

THE UPDATE:

We have received a comment on this post and it presents a very valid point supposedly made at the UN General Assembly by the Foreign Minister of Cuba: “I mean if they were going to include us, then they should have at least thrown in North Korea.”

Even if the e-mail we received from ajay -   akazif at gmail.com  as presented by www. eggplantpost.com in http://eggplantpost.com/2010/01/05/cuba-… were a made up story, the argument holds water nevertheless. DID THE US INCLUDE CUBA ON THAT LIST BECAUSE IT WANTED TO AVOID BEING SEEN AS GOING AFTER A RAG-TAG OF ISLANIC COUNTRIES? Now, we believe that US security should be spoken here – not again US appeasement-for-oil please!