Because Tibetans in Nepal Also have Rights!

Yet another prayer gathering by Tibetans in Kathmandu was busted. This now seems like a regular affair. And that is sad.

Given the geopolitics of the region Nepal's decision to adhere to the "One China Policy" cannot be criticized. But these over zealous attempt to please our Chinese friends (read overlords) by equating any Tibetan gathering as anti-China and cracking down on it brutally must stop. There needs to be an internal dialogue in Nepal about how important we think freedom of speech is in this country, and how far we are ready to go for the sake of friendship. As far as I am concerned: while in Nepal if someone wants to question the nature of Chinese governance in Tibet, Sri Lankan governance in Northern Sri Lanka, American bases around the world, or Indian governance in Kashmir, we should allow them the privilege. That's what free societies do.

I have nothing against a friendly relations with China. I think its much needed. The Chinese have been good friends to Nepal. But the last time I checked Nepal was not a part of China. So lets stop acting as if we are! It also surprises me that not many Nepali "pro-freedom", and "human rights" advocates cry out about this.

No one here promotes anti-china activities in Nepal. But we need to support human rights in China, and freedom of speech in Nepal.

Monsanto: Our Savior?

Stop Monsanto in Nepal screams a Facebook page. But why? Why should I stop something that promises higher yield for farmers, and food security in country where millions go hungry every day.

Well, this uproar is about USAID and the Ministry of Agriculture's decision to promote Monsanto hybrid maize seeds in key maize producing districts of Chitwan, Nawal Parasi, and Kavre. This controversial pilot project targets 20,000 farmers and includes training on hybrid maize production practices. The purpose of this initiate according to the USAID- Nepal website is to “improve the business environment, work with the Government of Nepal (GON) to strengthen fiscal and trade policies, encourage competitiveness and exports, enhance food security and increase access to financial services.”

Sounds good right! So why the noise? Apparently, all is not as bright and cozy about Monsanto and its hybrid seeds. Critics of this initiative have two major problems: first, the problem with hybrid seeds; second, the problem with Monsanto.

To start off- let be fair - there is a widespread confusion about what hybrid seeds really are. Most people seem to confuse them with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s). They are not the same thing. Hybrid seeds are the offspring of a cross of two different varieties or species, GMO’s are plants whose genes have been altered in the lab to insert foreign genetic material. It’s important to know that not all hybrids are GMO’s. A hybrid is a GMO only if one or both of the parent plants had been genetically modified. Most hybrids do not have artificially manipulated DNA and are therefore not GMOs.

Pro-hybrid seed folks argue that hybrid seeds are attractive because of their “hybrid vigor” which ensures higher yield, more uniform looking product, longer shelf life and relatively cheap price in the short term. Hybrid critics on the other hand argue that while the product looks better it taste like salted cardboard, requires more fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides and water to achieve their high yields than “traditional” or heirloom seeds, and are more expensive in the long term especially taking into account soil and water degradation.

Another big disadvantage of the hybrid seed is that farmers cannot save the seed. Saved seeds are either sterile or produce plants that are different from the original. This means that the farmer will have to buy a new batch of hybrid seeds every year.

For example, an average farmer from Kavre, let’s call him Ram dai, decides to buy the Monsanto hybrid maize seeds that USAID promises will give him higher yields and plants them. And like a good Nepali farmer, Ram dai does what the “foreigners and educated city folks” tells him and uses the prescribed fertilizers and pesticides the seeds need to fulfill their potential. Lo and behold! The seeds produce higher yields than usual. Ram dai is smiling from ear to ear! Everyone is happy until Ram dai realizes that the seeds from the hybrid crop cannot be saved for another year, and he has to buy the seeds again the next year and again the year following that. He's also angry about his soil is slowly turning into dust. Further, excuse his impertinence if he’s not too thrilled about the fact that the seeds also need a special kind of fertilizers, and pesticide for the wonder seed top work.He’s pissed to find out that the ones producing the wonder seed and the wonder fertilizers to sustain those seeds is the same company. Yes, you guessed it- The big M.

Which brings us to the second major problem: Monsanto- voted the world’s most evil corporation. Ask most environmentalists and they will probably say Monsanto makes Hitler look like a pink unicorn. So evil is Monsanto that when it offered to help a desperate Haiti after the 2010 earthquake, the smart Haitian farmer decided to the burn the seeds. Monsanto is accused of almost single handedly strangling small farmers, producing GMO’s that have harmful side effects, producing the infamous Agent Orange, and many other horrors that can be read about on any environmental blog online.

Also, surprising is the confusion USAID is under. USAID has somehow decided that the words " food security" and "promoting specific Corporate interests in the third world countries" mean the same thing. And while English is not my native language I am certain they are wrong. While USAID is "From the American People"I am sure the American people aren't too thrilled about improving Monsanto's bottom line.

So here we are: Is Nepal hungry from maize? Yes, we are. Will hybrid seeds increase our production? It will (at least in the short term). Is Monsanto’s hybrid seeds our best option? History and smarter people than me seem to think not.

So what are you going to do about it? My advise is to join the protest! Mail the US Ambassador and tell him he's wrong. Get in touch with the Ministry of Agriculture and tell them they are wrong. Spread the word!!

-----

P.S- Remember to spread the word in way that people understand and in a way that is respectful enough to be taken seriously.

What’s a game of Football after all?

I stood in a hot and sweaty classroom talking to a large group of older students about the “issues” they face.As I looked outside the room, I couldn’t believe what I saw. I was too distracted to continue that I took an unplanned break. In the
middle of the afternoon under the scorching heat of the relentless sun, a group of shalwar clad girls, were playing football with a group of boys. Yes, football. Even from my limited knowledge of the sport I could see that they have done this before, and had done it for a while.I looked around to see if anyone else was amused by this seemingly baffling scenario, but no one seemed to notice anything different. As I saw what I saw, I qucikly snapped a picture and sent it to my brother ( the self appointed guardian of my rightfull place as a women) with a caption that read, in bold, “ a man’s game! my foot”.In a futile attempt to unconfuse myself I tried telling myself “ So wh

at’s the big deal, it’s just football afterall? right?”...... wrong!.

I was so completely distracted at the time that it did not even occur to me that these students were playing in an area only recently cleared of landmines. Earlier that day, I met these students, trying to help them figure out these so called “issues”. However, their issues were somewhat different from what one might ex

pect.In this particular group, every single student had lost a family member due to death, detention or succumbed to the infamous lable “missing”. Most of them were forcefully conscripted to fight a grusome, bloody war they had not asked for, but nonetheless paid for it dearly.On average each student had been displaced and resettled 8 to 12 times within the past 10 years. They had suffered immensly at the hands of those who fought for, and aganist their rights, just two sides of the same coin depending on how one chooses to see it. Raped, orphaned, abused, maimed, detained, totured , the so called “issues” are endless.

A year ago when I took up an assignment to work in post war are

as, I was told of how backward this war ravaged community was. In order to be accepted I supposed to wear a saree ,pull my hair back , not look at men straight in the eye,speak the correct dialect etc. I had to play the part of a conservative women as this almost primitive society expected nothing less. I had no choice, as my oragnization explained it, but to be culturally sensitive. “I had to be accepted” according to their definition of how a women ought to be and therefore had to play the part accordingly.


This was the first time I travled so far into the interior of this isolated area, where firece fighting had ta

ken place toward the end of the war. The students and their families were resettled recently and were still trying to adjust to their new post war lives, away from detention, rehabilitation and refugee camps.Them playing football did not shock me beacuse I expected them to be traumatized or depressed as many would expect they would be. I was only confused beacuse this was the last place on earth that I thought I would see girls play football, (let alone play football with boys). In my defence, I was asked to be culturally sensitive.

As I travelled back to the city that night, I couldn’t wrap my brain around the fact that these girls were playing a “man’s game” fearlessly in a place where women and men

had a clear understanding of “how women should be”. How could this so called backward community allow girls to play a “man’s game” ? and that too with MEN? (while I in a progressive city am asked to just watch the game).

Fortunatly that day, I was travelling with a senior counterpart who had worked in these areas through the thick of war. In a futile attempt to downplay my ignorance, I casually inquired of her about this incident that had now become an obsession. She, casually, told me how the traditional role of a women, and what she should and shouldn’t do are none exsistant in this part of the country. At the end of the conversation, she said with a h

alf smile “ They’ve seen women in every possible role, you city folk can’t even imagine”. The rest of the 12 hour journey back home my thoughts were flooded with unstoppable memories of stories I had heard during this assignment and during the past year. Why didn’t I realise this truth before?

I was made to believe that the definition of “how women should be” was well defined in this community. They were right, it was well defined, however the problem was that the definition I was given was wrong. The reality is that this community has seen their women fight in the frontlines of battle, detonate themselves as suicide bombers, manufature small ammunition, launch guerrilla attacks from within dangerous jungles,dress bloody wounds, lose limbs, carry the wounded and bury the dead ( at times the almost dead). Some of them followed the lead

of the women who taught them to assemble a bomb and defuse others, read mine maps and kill themselves when captured by the enemy. They have seen themselves, their mothers, sisters,aunts and girl friends agree to have sex with higher officers, in exchange for front line fighting. Women drove armed cars and tankers, bombed cities, trained fighters,lead battalions,smuggled tractor loads of weapons,dug bunker holes for protection, drank alcohol and roled joints, farmed, foraged and fished to feed their troups. They did all this and more, all in par with men; and in this the land of “how women should be” sometimes....just sometimes..... they also played football together.

This is not another quasie hero sob story of how this community has made it through tough times. While a handfull of resilient ones have re adjusted to their new lives, most of them have not yet made it through the tough times, (and might not anytime soon). The war has left more scars than what are seen outside. Greif, loss, poverty, coruption still continue to plauge them as they struggle to survive just one day at a time. Although the worst is over, and there are small but sure signs of positive change, to most of them them the absence of war is just the absence of war. Nothing more, nothing less.

In this community,one generation has lived to see how a war changed the so called traditional roles of a women upside down. While they were forced to re define the roles of women, they passed on the re-defined version to the next generation who live that reality today. So what’s a game of football afterall? for surely it’s not a man’s game anymore.

-----

Article written by Annamika.

The identity of the author has not been disclosed for security reasons.

Interesting Fact of the Day or "The Nepali PM That Helped Win a War"

While Nepal’s contribution of 160,000 soldiers to the allied cause during WW2 is widely known in Nepal and not unheard of in the rest of the world, its Nepals non-personnel contributions that I wish to highlight today.

Not many know, but in addition to the men Nepal, under PM Juddha Sumsher Rana, also contributed 3,000 walnut trees for the purpose of making rifle butts, 8000 sal trees for railways sleepers, 192 service revolvers, 145 binoculars, and 95 machine guns. The PM also donated Rs. 115,500 to various Imperial Relief Funds from his personal family reserves. Further (and this is where it gets interesting), the magnanimous and clearly very rich prime minister sent 50 cigarettes, a pound of tea, a pound of sugar, a pound of biscuit, and a photograph of himself to each leaving solider. Tell me that is not awesome!

The reason for Juddha Sumsher’s generosity was clearly political; and alas lady luck is no man’s mistress. Things didn’t turn out the way JSR had hoped. Winston Chruchill’s Conservatives lost and the new British Labor Government wanted out of the subcontinent. The Rana regime was left on its own, and didn’t make it much longer.

Regardless of how history turned out, Nepal’s unheard, albeit invaluable, contributions to the cause is worth remembering. Also worth remembering is the man who gave away photographs of himself to soldiers going to war.


Information provided by: Nepal Under the Ranas, Adrian Sever, pp. 350.
Photograph taken from ancestry.com

50 Biggest Football Egos

While I am not thrilled about seeing 3 Milan players on the list, I really can't complain. Also missing from the list are: Pique, Rafa Benitez, and the entire Inter Milan team ( well maybe not Zanetii and Forlan), and Sanchez.

For the list PLEASE CLICK HERE

Getting the timing right in Palestine.

US wants peace, Israel wants peace, Palestine wants peace, the world wants peace. That much we all agree on. But neither wanting peace, nor agreement on a 2- state solution is the problem. The problem, sadly for the millions Palestinians, is timing.

Of all the years to pressurize the US administration, forcing a yes/no stance on the issue of UN membership for Palestine a year before an uncertain US reelection campaign hardly seems like a wise choice. So why do it? Surly, the Palestine leadership must have known that US will veto such a reckless move. Its done so time and again on issues half as magnanimous as this.

Mr. Abbas must have surly known his low odds of getting this resolution passed. But by charging head on with his demands he has forced the burden of action (or inaction) on Israel and the US. Internally, there is a growing support for the end of settlement, and mutual peace and recognition in Israel. Polls conducted by PSR in March, 2011 shows that 52% of those polled in Israel want a mutual recognition of identity as part of a permanent status agreement. Further, among Israelis, 74% oppose settlers’ actions which damage Palestinian property and block roads (labeled “price tag”) in response to removal of illegal outposts by the Israeli government. Nethanyahu has to answers to this growing section of his constituency.

Externally, the growing isolation of the Israel is old news. Weakening relations with historically supportive Arab states, and questionable legitimacy amongst US and European public is documented. Most members of the community of nations support Palestinians claim for statehood; and at least 11 members of the Security Council are in favor for such.

US too is in a bind. Obama must tip-toe the line between losing the Jewish vote (79% of the Jewish vote went to Obama- Biden in 2008), and hurting larger American interests in the Middle East. Also, the moral question of supporting an occupying state over the occupied is increasingly weighing on American conscience. And while avoiding the veto in the Security Council might the help save face, all doubts of Americans flip flopping on the Palestine question will be put to rest. Critics will argue that USA and Israel are thick as thieves and it will take more than a liberal president and couple of democratic revolutions to change their thinking.

As I said earlier, it all about the timing. “Last week, the Quartet of mediators - the US, the UN, the European Union and Russia - called on Israel and the Palestinians to resume peace talks within one month and aim for a deal by the end of 2012.”, reports BBC. The end of 2012 will show us the results of the US Presidential elections. The diplomatic gamble for UN membership for Palestine depends highly on an Obama reelection. Once reelected, Obama does not have to worry of a third term in office. He will be relatively freer to pursue the goals laid out by him in the famous 2009 Cairo speech.

So the best option for Palestine is to come back in 2 years, September 2013, having negotiated the details of statehood with Israel. This way Israel and USA will have exhausted all excuses, everybody can save face, and legitimate concerns of statehood can be addressed. We will then see Palestine as a nation among the community of nations.

Palestine must continue to use the wave of international legitimacy to force Israel to the table under the conditions of "no new settlements". Israel must get serious about settlements and an inevitable Palestine state, and US must realize that the new political reality in the Middle East demands it ensure a fair solution.

The Palestine leadership can take these two years to resolve some of the questions that are bound to be raised after a state is created : better their case for a state, remove all doubts. They should address detailed peace based upon 1967 border, and security agreement with Israel; address concerns about Jerusalem, and settlements, trade agreements, economic restructuring, political restructuring, securing of loans. Securing its boundaries from non-state extremists and pacifying legitimate concerns about Israel’s security. It can and must also raise concerns about Israel refusal to give a police or a military force.

For the next two years, an increase in violence between Israel and Palestine would be unwise for Palestine. Another problem will be the election of a hardliners in Israel and US.

Timing is the key. It always has been. Mr. Abbas played his hand wisely, lets hope he continues to do the same.

Another reason to save the planet!!

Don Cheadle is Captain Planet from Don Cheadle

Plant trees or I'll turn you into a fucking tree!