Expanding Technologies Fail to Bridge Broadband Divide

JOSÉ DOMINGO GUARIGLIA

UNITED NATIONS , Sep 29, 2011 (IPS) - Despite an overall increase in global internet usage and in the prevalence of information and communication technologies (ICTs), the gap between developing and developed countries remains vast when it comes to accessing broadband connections.

Known as the broadband divide, this gap underscores the many obstacles in the process to provide developing countries with access to information, even while on a global scale ICT development continues to improve.

"Measuring the Information Society 2011", this year's version of an annual report released by the U.N. agency International Telecommunication Union (ITU), compared accessibility, capabilities and cost of ICTs in developed and developing countries between 2008 and 2010.

Broadband access is indispensable to implementing e-government projects and meeting the U.N.'s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), Gary Fowlie, head of the ITU liaison office, told IPS.

The MDGs are a set of eight goals to be accomplished by 2015 and include universal access to education, gender equality and female empowerment, improved child and maternal health, and reducing poverty and HIV/AIDS.

"Broadband will permit a greater use of the spectrum that allows e-health services, e-education, e- governance services. It makes it possible to deliver health care by distance," Fowlie said. However, in many low-income countries, broadband remains unaffordable.

Increasing access to broadband will help countries meet the MDGs by making technology more affordable and widespread, Hamadoun Touré, ITU secretary-general, explained.

Greater global connectivity

The report's conclusions relied on the ICT Development Index (IDI), which gauges developments in uses and capabilities of ICTs in 152 countries, and the ICT Price Basket (IPB), which measures changes in prices of ICTs in 165 countries.

South Korea led countries in ICT development, with European countries taking eight out of the top 10 spots. For Fowlie, the explanation was simple. "South Korea has been a leader in broadband technology and many European countries have national broadband plans and mature regulatory systems. They have homogenous population in small lands," he told IPS.

He emphasized the importance of government regulation to ensuring that connectivity reached even remote areas, noting that allowing the private sector to control connectivity might create divisions between urban and rural areas or different genders and ages.

"The government can put some criteria in the delivery of the services… It is about good governance and regulatory oversight by the government," he added.

Developing countries were the ones that grew more in terms of access to and implementation of technologies. In fact, Africa had the highest mobile growth rate, but it was also the region with the lowest scores in the development index. The cost of technologies and the lack of interest on the part of authorities were the main causes of these disparities.

"The cost remains an issue and that's why it is important to have national broadband plans," said Fowlie, who recommended a strategy combining public access to technologies, an effective system of operating licenses and promoting investment by the private sector.

The report stated that income levels and ICT development are related, but experiences on the ground have shown that governmental action and promoting technologies can accelerate ICT development.

Such a phenomenon occurred in Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea, countries whose ICT development levels were higher than expected given their income levels.

The ICT price basket, which combines the average cost of fixed telephone lines, the cost of having a mobile phone and the price of broadband internet services, showed that the average price of ICT services has decreased by 18 percent globally between 2008 and 2010, and by even more in broadband internet services (52 percent).

The prevalence of mobile phones has increased in many developing countries where poor infrastructure limits the expansion of fixed telephone lines. In developed countries, mobile prevalence is higher than 100 percent.

The "mobile miracle" has provided the most disadvantaged people in the world with access to ICTs, Touré has said, noting that efforts to expand broadband internet accessibility should seek to emulate this success.

ICT in politics

Two previous world summits on the information society have taken place – one in Geneva in 2003 and another in Tunis in 2005.

After the last summit, which focused on internet governance, participating countries noted with satisfaction the "increasing use of ICT by governments to serve citizens and encourage countries that have not yet done so to develop national programmes and strategies for e-government".

The very principles to which these countries pledged their commitment at the summit are the same ones that have been tested with the latest revolutions and uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East.

Countries reaffirmed their "commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge" and committed to "protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression".

Yet governments like Tunisia and Egypt tried to block internet access during the protests in their respective countries, violating Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states everyone has the right "to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".

These events have proved that despite disparities, trying to control or reduce the impact of ICTs in the world is no longer easy, Fowlie believed.

"The ICTs gave a way to share frustrations, and citizens could use that information to improve. Trying to control access to ICT is not so easy anymore. People are going to find a way."

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=105297

Groups Demand Ouster of Rights Violators from U.N. Bodies

JOSE DOMINGO GUARIGLIA

Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution

Photo Credit: Adam Nadler

United Nations, Sep 26, 2011 (IPS) - An international coalition of NGOs is pushing for countries that regularly violate human rights to be barred from U.N. agencies including the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHCR) and U.N. Women.

"We call on the United Nations to continue on the path of reform by suspending China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia from the UN Human Rights Council," stated an international coalition of NGOs in its "Declaration of Dissidents for Universal Human Rights."

The declaration served as the outcome document of the Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution, held in New York Sep. 21 and 22, as a side event of the U.N. General Assembly.

In addition to the suspension of the four countries from UNHCR, NGOs also called for Iran to be eliminated from the Commission on the Status of Women and Saudi Arabia to be expelled from the executive board of U.N. Women.

In the past, human rights defenders have succeeded in excluding Libya, Iran and Syria from UNHCR, even as some believe that the international community has failed to act unanimously against human rights violators.

"Tragically, the governments who are the members of the Council… failed in their mandate to protect human rights worldwide. There has never been a resolution (against China). China is a member of the Security Council. It is upside down," Hillel Neuer, executive director of U.N. Watch, told IPS.

In other instances, Libya was elected chair of the Human Rights Commission in 2003 and Gaddafi's regime was a member of the Human Rights Council before its suspension in February 2011.

David Keyes, executive director of Advancing Human Rights, another NGO that sponsored the summit, said that the United Nations "has lost much of its effectiveness and its impact has been diminished by allowing some of the worst human rights violators in the world to set the agenda".

Meanwhile, doubts remain about the motivations of many NGOs that participated in the event.

U.N. Watch, the primary organiser of the summit, is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and has been very active in combating perceived anti-Israel positions in the U.N.

It has also been a strong critic of UNHCR. According to James Paul, executive director of Global Policy Forum, the view they promote is strong in Washington and is aligned with Israel policy.

"This is a highly politicized view of how human rights have to be pursued in the world. We should be suspicious of what the motivations of this conference were, who was organizing it and for what purpose," Paul told IPS.

"It is a completely unbalanced way of understanding how human rights have to be defended in the world and what the U.N. is all about and why is it important for the U.N. to be a universal institution," he added.

Paul believed that the effectiveness of the Human Rights Council would not improve with the elimination of certain members. At the same time, he pointed out the absence of some important human rights organizations at the event.

"Where is Amnesty? Where is Human Rights Watch? Where is the International Federation? The absence of those organizations at this event tells us something. I think this was a movement to discredit the Human Rights Council and the U.N. more generally in a time when the Palestinians are coming up with their proposals," he said.

Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been very critical of Israeli actions, particularly in the West Bank.

Also part of the debate was the issue of U.N. reform, especially in the Security Council, whose five permanent members have veto power: China, Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and France.

For Hillel Neuer, reforming the Security Council would not guarantee change in human rights policy, and eliminating veto power would be unrealistic and useless.

"In the real world, you want to have the major powers at the table and that is what the Security Council wanted to reflect. I don't think it will be easy to remove the veto power," Neuer said.

Paul, who is in favour of reforming the Security Council and eliminating both the veto and permanent seats, says the best way to organise a reformed Council is on a regional basis.

Chinese dissident and founder of Initiatives for China, Yang Jianli, believed that the voting power of a member state and the possibility of vetoing resolutions "should be linked to and based on the degree of democracy in the country".

"China has led the world for over 60 years in jailing dissidents, independent scholars and journalists, fringing on freedoms of press, religion and association, but the world leaders seem unable or unwilling to do anything about it," Yang told IPS.

Yang was arrested in 2002, sentenced to five years of prison for allegedly spying and subjected to torture multiple times.

The U.N. has the mechanisms, through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights treaties, "to apply pressures on various governments, especially the members of the UN Human Rights Council", Yang said.

According to Neuer, NGOs like U.N. Watch play an important role in addressing the demands of the victims of human rights violations and must push for the enforcement of rules and policies against them.

"They [NGOs] have to be the voice of the principles, of truth. We have to plant the seed of what is just and what is right and let the world events take their course. China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Russia should be removed. It is the right thing to do," he said.

But for Paul, this polarization between good and bad countries is not the right answer to the problem of the protection of human rights, especially in times when there are international interventions in Libya and possibly in Syria, that according to him, respond to "western economic aspirations".

"We regret human rights abuses, but the idea that we have to expel certain countries and decide between good guys and bad guys brings us back to a kind of cold war conception of what is going on," he concluded.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=105249

"Things Are Bound to Change in China"

José Domingo Guariglia interviews advocate for the Uyghur people, REBIYA KADEER

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Uyghur American Association

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 19, 2011 (IPS) - Before 1999, she was best known as the richest woman in China. Her business empire included a trading firm, real estate investments and a department store, putting her among the top 10 wealthiest individuals in the Asian nation.

Today, Rebiya Kadeer is a political exile in Washington who works full-time defending the cause of the Uyghur people, one of the 55 national minorities in China.

The dramatic change in her life came in 1999 when she was imprisoned by the government and sentenced to eight years in jail for allegedly revealing "state secrets" to the United States. She was released in 2005 after a campaign organised by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and following the intervention of the George W. Bush administration in the U.S.

Since then, she has been working with the Uyghur American Association.

"I realised that I had to challenge the Chinese government's treatment of Uyghur people after the massacre of Uyghurs in February 1997. At that time, I realised that Chinese leaders were not interested in improving the lives and in respecting the human rights of the Uyghur people," she told IPS.

Nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, Kadeer has been accused several times by the Chinese government of instigating riots organised by opposition groups, and in particular the Uyghurs, Muslims located in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region, one of the most important because of its rich natural resources.

Uyghurs have expressed concern about the immigration of Han Chinese people in their territory and efforts to destroy their language and their whole culture.

To publicise the situation of the Uyghur people, Kadeer will participate at the Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution Sep. 21-22 next to U.N. headquarters in New York.

The conference will produce draft resolutions on genocide, torture, discrimination, and the systematic violation of civil, religious and political freedoms.

IPS correspondent José Domingo Guariglia interviewed Kadeer to talk about her expectations for the summit, the situation in China, and how the United Nations can intervene to guarantee the respect of human rights.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: Why did you decide to participate in the Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution?

A: The reason is because the Uyghur people, including me, suffered persecution and discrimination under the six-decade rule of the Chinese Communist Party. I am highly sympathetic to all oppressed peoples around the world who have been persecuted and discriminated by authoritarian countries like China. I want to stand with them and support their peaceful struggles for freedom and human rights.

Not only the governments but also the long-suffering peoples will pay attention to this very important summit. I am sure the authoritarian countries will pay even more attention.

Q: The event is being organised by a coalition of NGOs and you were released from prison in 2005 because of the active campaign for your liberation put up by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. What's the role of non-governmental organisations in the defence of human rights?

A: NGOs play an extremely important role in shaping human rights debates and policies of many Western governments and in pressuring authoritarian states to respect the fundamental human rights of oppressed peoples. My release is an example of the excellent work of human rights organisations. I cannot but thank all the human rights organisations for pressuring China to release me and other political prisoners.

Q: Do you think reform of the U.N. Security Council and the elimination of the veto power could boost the protection of human rights in countries like China, Pakistan, Syria or Libya?

A: Yes. A reform at the U.N. Security Council is needed because it has become a weak international body in the protection of human rights in countries like China.

Q: One of the petitions of the organisers of the summit is to ban nations like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia from U.N. bodies that regulate basic freedoms. Do you think it will be possible?

A: I believe all dictatorial and repressive states should be banned from all bodies which regulate basic freedoms at the U.N. Their presence at such bodies is incompatible to the way they rule their own countries. The U.N. will only lose its credibility by allowing such authoritarian regimes to be on the boards of such bodies.

Q: The panel sessions will also include the topic of the "Arab Spring" and the events that took place in Tunisia and Egypt. Are the conditions favourable in China for something similar to occur?

A: I believe the conditions are soon going to be favourable in China in light of the heavy-handed repression of the Chinese authorities against Chinese democrats, Uyghurs and Tibetans and all those who are not happy with China's communist rule. Things are bound to change in China whether the Chinese Communist Party is willing to do it or not. It is just a matter of time.

The Chinese Communist Party cannot stop the legitimate demands of the Uyghur, Tibetan and the Chinese people for freedom, human rights and democracy.

Q: Why does the Chinese government refer to Uyghur people as terrorists?

 

A: Because Uyghurs believe in Islam. It is a convenient cover for the Chinese authorities to deceive the international community on the nature of Uyghur's struggle and justify its brutal repression against the peaceful Uyghur people.

The Chinese government has to stop its brutal treatment of Uyghurs, Tibetans and Chinese and allow them to live with human dignity and without fear.

I'd like to ask the Chinese government to initiate a genuine dialogue to peacefully resolve the political status of East Turkestan (Xinjiang). But I am not sure if the current Chinese leadership has the political will to initiate such dialogue. Their heavy-handed approach to resolve the Uyghur problem has failed.

Labelling Uyghur dissent as terrorism and launching attacks on peaceful Uyghurs will never create the conditions for peace and stability or the harmonious society championed by Chinese President Hu Jintao.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=105159

"We Have to Find a Way to Communicate"

José Domingo Guariglia interviews journalist and women's rights advocate MARIANE PEARL

Photo Credit: Courtesy of Mariane Pearl

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10, 2011 (IPS) - "The anger that rushes through me goes well beyond the hellish night I've just lived through. In a flash, I feel a terrible bond not only with the victims of September 11th but also with the kids brainwashed to become instruments of death in the name of an invented Islam," Mariane Pearl wrote in her 2003 book "A Mighty Heart".

The previous year, Pearl was five months pregnant when her husband, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, was kidnapped and brutally killed in Karachi, Pakistan, for allegedly being a CIA spy.

Later, the French journalist would write that the Islamic fundamentalist group that committed the murder chose her husband just for being Jewish and a U.S. national, in an emblematic case of terrorism and discrimination based on race and religion.

In an interview with IPS nine years after the incident, Pearl discussed her participation at the upcoming Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution, a civil society initiative to take the lead in defending human rights, rather than waiting for action from governments and international bodies.

"Many of us are wary of politicians and organised bodies. It is much more difficult to be cynical about individuals who, with their own lives, have elevated our humanism," Pearl told IPS.

The Sep. 21-22 Global Summit is taking place in New York at the same time as the 66th Session of the U.N. General Assembly and the tenth anniversary of the Durban Conference on Racism, Discrimination and Xenophobia.

The summit is expected to produce draft resolutions for governments to adopt on genocide, torture, discrimination and basic freedoms.

Pearl plans to focus on women's rights and empowerment. In her second book, released in 2007, "In Search of Hope", she presented the stories of extraordinary women from all over the world.

IPS Correspondent José Domingo Guariglia interviewed Pearl about her expectations for the summit, how civil society can fight human rights violations, the legacy of Daniel Pearl, and the Sep. 11 terrorist attacks.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: Why did you decide to participate in the Global Summit Against Discrimination and Persecution?

A: Global efforts and commitments to address issues undermining us all as human beings are worth the effort. I think that we are heading to a world where international cooperation, dialogue and understanding are vital for our very survival.

Q: The summit will be held parallel to the 66th session of the U.N. General Assembly. Do you think the governments will pay enough attention to it?

A: No, the appropriate attention would mean that the summit is held within the U.N. addressing the General Assembly. It is difficult for politicians to pay enough attention to those issues as they struggle to appropriately value other vital problems such as education. On the other hand, a world leader that does not truly understand the importance of defending human rights might not deserve people's trust.

Q: At the panel, you will be joined by Yang Jianli, John Dau and Rebiya Kadeer, among others. What do you think all of you have in common?

A: I wouldn't be able to tell you what we have in common as when I read about what all of them have done, I felt incredibly humbled. To me these individuals are like lighthouses.

Our societies often feel like lost ships swayed by countless currents and lured by many illusions, such as greed. These people all have been through a lot of sufferings and through those sufferings they have learned.

We should capitalise on their knowledge and aspire to understand what they know, so we can defeat the root causes of discrimination and wars.

Q: The event is being organised by a coalition of NGOs. What's the role of non-governmental organisations, civil society and the U.N. in the defence of human rights?

A: In general, I believe that civil society will become more and more important in defending human rights. Many of us are wary of politicians and organised bodies. It is much more difficult to be cynical about individuals who, with their own lives, have elevated our humanism.

Personally, I find the NGO landscape quite confusing. Some do remarkable work, some don't, but it is important that they retain people's trust.

To me the U.N. is an utterly imperfect body but it is the world's answer to war and genocide. It is our instrument for global dialogue and that dialogue needs to exist. Part of that dialogue, probably the most important part, is about listening. We have to find a way to communicate.

Q: You focused on the stories of courageous women in your last book "In Search of Hope". Why did you choose to explore gender issues?

A: I approached women stories as a journalist and I was blown away by what I saw everywhere in the world regardless of context, race or religion. Most of the valuable transformations requiring a tremendous amount of resilience, courage and compassion are undertaken and carried through by women.

I just think that women are an incredible asset for peace and development if they are given a chance.

Q: How do you think the international community can address the hate that has spread in countries like Pakistan and has taken the lives of many, including your husband?

A: I think that if we care to look closely, we can find many individuals whose lives and messages defy even the most ruthless or hateful propaganda. It takes so much more strength and courage to resist violence than to give in to those instincts.

There are many people who are ready to sacrifice their lives to the hatred they feel so we can only hope that there will be many more who are willing to give it all to spread hope like others spread fear.

I think Danny (Daniel Pearl) has accomplished a lot for someone who had a rather short life. He has inspired countless individuals worldwide. His example shows that you are as good as the values that guide your life.

Q: Ten years have passed since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. What has changed?

A: So much has changed. The Arab world is undergoing its own revolution which, as painful as it is, can also be the best we can hope for. The dialogue between civilisations will always be a struggle.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=105055

"Former Genocidaires Still Wandering Free"

José Domingo Guariglia interviews ODETTE KAYIRERE , Executive Secretary of AVEGA Agahozo

Photo credit: Courtesy of Slice Communications/AVEGA Agahozo

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 1, 2011 (IPS) - The year 1994 was marked by blood. Between April and June, more than 800,000 Rwandans were killed in 100 days, in a terrible genocide that followed the assassination of Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana and the explosion of racial tensions between the country's two major ethnic groups, the Hutus and the Tutsis.

Odette Kayirere was one of the thousands of women who lost their husbands during the genocide. She helped to create AVEGA Agahozo, a non-profit organisation launched in 1995 with 50 members to help Rwandan genocide survivors to rebuild their lives. "AVEGA" is an acronym for the French name "Association des Veuves du Genocide" (Genocide Widows Association) while "Agahozo" means "consolation".

Today, AVEGA Agahozo has reached more than 20,000 people and 71,000 dependents and orphans with five different centres across Rwanda. But even as they have tried to help survivors by promoting welfare, education and medical services, for Kayirere, now executive secretary of the organisation, there is still a long road ahead in the quest for justice and reparations.

"African countries should come together and conjugate more efforts to see how they can address this issue. Many criminals are still wandering (free) in many countries and some countries seem to be unconcerned. They ignore that these people constitute a threat for Africans and the entire world in general," Kayirere told IPS from Kigali, Rwanda.

In June, 16 years after its creation, AVEGA Agahozo won the prestigious 500,000-dollar Gruber Prize for Women's Rights 2011. According to the foundation's president, Patricia Gruber, they have "improved life for all of Rwanda and set an example for the rest of the world". The award ceremony will take place in New York on Sep. 26.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: What does it mean for AVEGA Agahozo to have won the Gruber Prize for Women's Rights?

A: Words failed to express what we felt after winning this prize. We are very proud and it was unexpected. We did not compete or do any application to win. According to external eyes, AVEGA's work has been effective and constructive. In addition, it is very interesting to see genocide victims taking the initiative to help their fellow genocide survivors.

There is no shadow of doubt: our service in favour of widows and their orphans in Rwanda is not in vain. This money will be invested in income-generating activities for our members to fight poverty.

We are still struggling to help widows regain hope for life and ameliorate their living conditions and knowledge through education, sensitisation and provision of social, economic and health support. Moreover, trauma remains a persistent problem.

Q: How has the organisation changed Rwandan widows' and children's lives?

A: AVEGA has put in place different departments. Those are advocacy, justice and information, which is in charge of providing legal assistance to beneficiaries who are in need.

The psycho-medical department provides help to beneficiaries who have physical and psychological disabilities. Three health centres were built and are open to our beneficiaries and the public. Many of them have trauma-related problems.

Others are the capacity-building department and the social-economic department, which help our beneficiaries to do income-generating activities. We have made many changes in the lives of widows and orphans.

Q: In Rwanda, women were systematically raped by HIV- infected men and this led to a whole generation of HIV-positive widows. How are you treating these cases?

A: It is the widows and orphans who witnessed the atrocities and, in many cases, suffered extreme violence themselves. Sexual violence was often used to humiliate and degrade women during the 100 days of the violent scourge, with estimates of the number of women raped ranging between 250,000 and 500,000. Traumatised and shamed, many of these women are seeking help now only because they are ill.

For these women, AVEGA is a refuge, providing medical services, psychological counselling, education and training, housing and legal services.

AVEGA offers medical help to those suffering from AIDS and has coordinated voluntary testing for HIV for more than 10,000 of its members. It also delivers antiretroviral treatment and wrap-around care and treatment, including nutrition support, to more than 1,500 HIV positive women.

Q: Are you satisfied with the African actions to arrest and extradite Rwandan genocide fugitives?

A: Taking into account that genocide is an international crime, African countries should come together and conjugate more efforts to see how they can address this issue. Many criminals are still wandering in many countries and some countries seem to be unconcerned. They ignore that these people constitute a threat for Africans and the entire world in general. Therefore they should take initiative together to actively participate in arresting genocide fugitives and judge them.

Q: Do you think the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has been effective?

A: In the beginning, the ICTR was very slow. Few trials were judged but in the last few years, there was an improvement. They also participated in identifying those who committed genocide.

We appreciated the decision of judging genocide crimes within the country because the money spent on the expenditures pertaining to trial procedures is too much; instead it would be spent to assist genocide survivors who are still undergoing genocide consequences.

Q: Do you think the new special body set up by the U.N. Security Council for the Rwandan genocide that will start on Jul. 1, 2012 could help to speed up the investigation?

A: This is a good idea as this new organ will have a specific task to achieve within a specific period of time. This organ will be composed by judges assigned to accomplish their responsibilities. Our wish is that those who committed genocide crimes would be preferably judged in Rwanda than elsewhere.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=104959