No 375
7 March
2008
Helpless in Gaza
The
Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem reports that in the days leading up
to March 3rd 106 Palestinians were killed in the Gaza Strip. It
refutes the government’s assertion that these were nearly all armed combatants.
It states that around a half were taking no part in the hostilities, and that
in addition 46 children died. Just one Israeli civilian and two soldiers were
killed during this period. The organisation publicises the number of civilians
on both sides who fall victim to the fighting, pointing out that “attacks on
legitimate military targets are prohibited if they are likely to cause
disproportionate harm to civilians”.
Both
sides can therefore be said to be guilty of war crimes, though other
commentators point out that it is important to take into consideration the
context and the differences in scale of the damage caused. ‘Terrorism’ is a
blanket term applied to indiscriminate attacks on civilians, though there are
big differences between, for instance, the al-Qaeda attacks of September 2001
and the firing of rockets out of Gaza, for both of which the word ‘terrorism’
is used.
A
report written for the United Nations suggests that Palestinian ‘terrorism’ is
the “inevitable consequence” of Israeli occupation. John Dugard, the author of
the report, says that it is important to see Palestinian ‘terrorism’ in its
historical context, as “acts committed in the course of a war of national
liberation against colonialism, apartheid or military occupation”. Palestinians
in the Gaza Strip are experiencing what has been called a ‘humanitarian
crisis’.
British
human rights organisations are reporting that there is no freedom of movement,
there are no regular supplies of food, water and electricity, sewage treatment
is very limited and healthcare and hospital treatment cannot be taken for
granted. The economy has collapsed, unemployment is rising rapidly and access
to schools and education is dwindling.
The
recent worsening of the situation is due to the blockade by the Israeli government
as a reprisal for rocket fire out of Gaza. Like B’Tselem, Amnesty, condemns
Palestinian rocket fire into Israel, but states that “unlawful attacks by one
side cannot justify violations by the other. Israel’s attacks this week display
a degree of disproportion and recklessness which has so often characterised
Israeli military attacks... in recent years”. How many different definitions of ‘terrorism’ can you find, and do they
sometimes contradict each other?
[Sources: B’Tselem - International Herald Tribune
– Amnesty International]
The end of cheap food
The
price of grain has risen sharply and global cereal reserves are at their lowest
for 25 years. It is being reported that the age of cheap food is over. This
will hit the poorest regions of the world hardest. There many families who
spend practically their whole available income on food, and any increase in
price is felt keenly.
Population
growth is part of the reason: more people need more food. But economic progress
is also a factor. It means that many people in rapidly developing countries
such as China are improving their diets and eating more nutritious food, such
as meat, which needs more water and grain to produce than a diet largely of
cereals.
But
probably the main challenge comes from the fact that cereal crops are being
diverted into the production of biofuel, which means that relatively less land
and fewer crops are available for food. In the US around one-fifth of their
grain production is now being used for ethanol, and farmers are being paid
subsidies to grow fuel crops. So the rich are being hit by higher prices, which
they will probably pay, but the problem is far more serious for the poor.
Historically,
hunger has often been the spark which kindles civil discontent, and in many of
the world’s countries, in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia this has
already begun to happen. There have been riots in Mexico over the rising price
of tortilla, and even in Italy over the cost of pasta, their staple food. The
UN World Food Programme has stated that it can no longer afford the food aid
programmes to which it is committed.
Meanwhile
the British public continues to throw away 20 million tonnes of food each year.
Most of this is waste which happens in homes, hotels, restaurants, supermarkets
and so on. Statistically, this amount has been quoted as half the food import
needs of the whole of Africa. How and what we eat is a personal and private
matter, dictated by taste, culture and of course money. Do you think that there will have to be rules or rations in the future
to regulate the world food supply?
[Sources: New York Times – The Observer – The Independent]
The year of the spud
The
potato is the world’s fourth most important staple crop after maize, wheat and
rice, and 2008 has been designated UN International Year of the Potato (IYP),
so as to draw attention to the importance of the potato and to address issues
of global concern, including hunger, poverty and threats to the environment.
Potatoes
take less space to grow than many other crops in relation to their yield, and
provide a good balance of nutrients, and, though their consumption is
decreasing in Europe, it is increasing hugely in poorer parts of the globe.
Most of the world’s potatoes are now grown in China.
They
were first introduced to Europe in the 16th century, and by the
start of the Industrial Revolution they had become an important part of the
British economy. Some have said that, without the potato as a cheap and
available source of energy food, the Industrial Revolution could not have
happened as it did. In Ireland, it became almost the only food consumed by many
poor people, as became evident when the failure of the potato harvest led to
the tragic famine which struck the country in 1845.
Staple
foods are not only what keeps millions of people alive: they are also of
obvious importance economically, since countries need healthy adults to work
the industries which create the wealth of the country, and healthy children to
provide the workforce of the future. One famous social philosopher even said that the potato was the equal of iron for its “historically revolutionary
role”.
In the rich countries, potatoes are no longer seen as
essential to survival. Indeed, the way in which they are often consumed is in
the form of chips or French fries, which are now considered to be contributing
to obesity, a condition which is the direct opposite of famine, in a social
situation where food is no longer seen as just fuel, or a necessary means to
keeping alive. What do you think are your ‘staple’ foods, or does the word
not apply where there is food plenty?
[Sources: The Economist – International
Year of the Potato]
Towards a healthy world
A
meeting of international health experts is stating that global action is needed
to avoid “preventable chronic diseases”. By this they mean heart disease,
stroke, diabetes, cancer and chronic lung disease which together, they say,
cause up to 60% of deaths in the world. The Oxford Health Alliance (OxHA) says,
“Across the developed and developing world chronic diseases
are running wild. The way we live now is making us sick: it's making our planet
sick and it's not sustainable.” These life-style issues do not just require medical
solutions. They are questions which have to be resolved by governments,
businesses, town planners, lawyers and educators.
The
point they make is that the problems are of our own making and are more easily
avoidable than for instance AIDS, climate change or terrorism. At the meeting,
OxHA published a document called the ‘Sydney Resolution’ which calls on the
international community to work together to eradicate these diseases. But
meeting the challenge will take time and determination. Much of the problem of
chronic disease is due to tobacco use, physical inactivity and poor diet.
Patterns of disease, says OxHA, are affected by how people live, the design of
cities, the nature of work and workplaces and especially housing. Health
services should be focused on prevention rather than cure, and “we need a world
free of tobacco”.
The frustration felt behind the ‘Sydney Resolution’ is
the conviction that these killer conditions are self-inflicted and unnecessary.
They call on the UN to encourage “healthy places... healthy food... healthy
business... healthy public policy... [and] healthy societies”. Do you think that people – and governments –
are so deeply rooted in their way of doing things that they will not be able to
change their lifestyle?
Kivalina is a tiny indigenous Inupiat city in Alaska
with a population of just under 400 people. It lies on the edge of the Chukchi
Sea on the edge of the Arctic Ocean. The melting of Arctic ice due to climate
change has meant that the city is no longer protected from the sea by the ice
shelf, it is prone to flooding, and the whole community is having to relocate
inland.
Kivalina has filed a lawsuit in the US Federal Court,
arguing that the big petroleum, electricity and mining companies active in
Alaska are responsible for the climate change and are therefore the cause of
their problems. These companies emit millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide, and
the city is suing them under ‘public nuisance’ law. It is also accusing the
companies of conspiracy, in that they have allegedly worked together to mislead
the public about the science of global warming. The companies have responded,
saying that the accusation diverts attention and energy away from the real
challenge, which is how to improve people’s lifestyles and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. Do you think that small
initiatives like this can affect the activities of the big energy corporations?