Living in an orphaned world
Look what is going around! Inside the country, some of which, of course, we are lamenting our hearts out on. But that can wait for the moment, because morally we have a higher call of duty to respond to. So, what's more to the point this instant is what is and is not happening in the wider world we are living in real time.
As world citizens, we cannot irresponsibly be vicarious about others' misery; that is not in our grain either. We can only be conscionable and sympathetic. And really angry with those with power who are not using it to any better purpose than letting the things be.
Some chilling realisations are creeping in -- thanks to current media narratives about situations in many countries that do not truly reflect the brisling ground realities and the tragedies of deeper human agony playing out mostly unrecognised, being not seen through the lens of Western media. Of course, their access is somewhat circumscribed by the backlash to an intervention, yet they still see what they want to see through a somewhat preconceived prism. This is not to say though that Al Jazeera, BBC and CNN miss out on what might be a shade unpalatable to their audiences. Yet, what sneaks through eyewitness accounts read much more horrifying.
Take the example of Libya. The other day, a young Libyan woman in hysterical outbursts before the media as officials tried to grapple with her to silence her, vented out: "They (pro-Gaddafi forces) have taken my humanity, they stripped away my being, what am I left with, who need I be afraid of?" This is an eloquent statement on failed multilateralism mirrored on the passing of the no-fly-zone resolution by the UNSC over Libya and the manner in which it has been operated thus far. This resolution was carried through with "significant" number of abstentions. What was so "significant" about the abstentions, even in terms of pulling a moral weight against the resolution? Nothing at all; for while China and Russian Federation, as permanent members of the Security Council, have the veto power, neither of the two applied it. Therefore, they are to blame for disserving the UN cause in Libya. The continuing civil war and the enforcement of no-fly-zone ironically through bombardment are exacting an incalculable humanitarian cost that would be difficult to recompense. The scale of internal displacement and external exodus not just in and from Libya but from some other neighbouring countries as well is beyond the capacity of IMO, UNHCRC and Red Crescent Society to cope. Even though they are doing their best but given the complexities, ramifications and escalatory nature of the crisis these bodies are faced with an uphill task.
In Egypt, Mubarak exiled by the Shatel Arab must be savouring a recall of his prophesy that if he were to quit power at a particular juncture, the country would plunge into chaos, even though his desperate counsel was a ploy to bide time to consign his ill-gotten riches to safety. Egypt has got itself an interim constitution under which political parties, barring the Mubarak vintage, are free to participate in parliamentary and presidential elections. But the old guards in the military still breathe down the neck of the radicals. Furthermore, the secular character of popular aspirations is under threat of a fundamentalist surge which has found a well-accepted sale point in religious messages as far as the broadcasting media in some parts of the country goes.
In Ivory Coast, Laurent Ghagbo has vowed to fight to the bitter end despite being holed up in the basement of a presidential palace and his earlier intent to negotiate surrender before Alassane Outtara, the winner in the election. The latter has the support of the UN which has a peacekeeping presence there. The country is fraught with a civil war as both sides fight with breakaway ragtag armies, each with its sectarian agenda. The tragedy is the UN has no mandate to disarm the feuding troops. Look what has happened in Congo in the last three decades; the country is plunged in a civil war, again because the UN Peacekeeping Force has no mandate to disarm the fighting forces and enforce ceasefire!
The power hungry and long-serving elected and unelected leaders are an endangered species. Thanks to the tectonic slippage of grounds under their feet triggered by popular uprisings to break loose of stifling authoritarianism.
The trend is not confined to the Green Crescent alone. It is getting global. The two-term serving Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero, sensing disenchantment with his people, has made clear that he would not stand for the third term. Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega's express intent to seek reelection even in far-away November is resented by his people who have taken the issue to the street.
These are all wholesome trends but the multipolar world is too indecisive to steer the wind of change to fruition, an outcome that would make the world a better place to live in. World leaders need to think big, and think fast to evolve an effective mechanism for change.
But what the world misses out on are the likes of Bertrand Russell and Andre Marlaux who were the conscientious objectors we could latch on to in times of human crisis to draw strength from their voice of reason. This breed is no more. What is even worse, this inadequacy is compounded by another feeing of void: Whereas there is no dearth of green movements for protestations to save environment, or want of public outcries before G-8, World Economic Summit, Conference of Parties on climate change voicing concerns over state of economic, social and developmental justice, yet what is glaringly absent from the scene is any civil society-led movement in the world capitals demanding political justice for all. It is time somebody took the lead there.
Comments