Hopes high, solutions complicated

Everyone knows Don Quixote confused Romances for reality, and vice versa. I sometimes think a similar thing has happened to people using the internet; that somehow by using the net, by writing on comment boards – or indeed news sites, by generating twitter interest or getting something to trend, you’re changing reality – you’re changing the world. Or to put it another way, people confuse the web for reality, and vice versa.

Putting it simply, the web is not reality. It has a bearing on reality, and it might change the way we think about the world – it may even change the way we think – but it’s not the world. To keep it simple, reality is the stuff that happens in the world – the raw data of life – and the web, well, that’s exactly what it is – the web. A bunch of ideas about the raw data. I told you I’d keep it simple.

So when this online storm about the Oscars emerged last month, I assumed it would go away rather quickly – despite the valuable goals it pursued, I thought it was just another bunch of hashtags that would die away slowly. In one sense, #Oscarssowhite, is basically that – just another twitter trend (despite having a year-long pedigree). Where it becomes interesting is the way in which people believe it’s making a difference. There seems to be something stirring in the civil rights movement in America, which continues today, under the commonly understood moniker ‘black lives matter’. But there does seem to be some confusion between the movement and the way it is playing out in the mass media. In real life, black lives are being extinguished because of systemic racism; On twitter, it looks like black lives just aren’t being celebrated.

This isn’t a trivial point. Pointing out that there is a massive disjuncture between reality and our representation of it, does not mean I am dismissing the latter; Awards reform is important, so that all people are given a fair chance of winning. But just because awards reform is part of the broader cultural debate about the value and representation of people of colour, does not actually mean that it is as important as what is happening in reality. This seems to be the point that people have forgotten – that black celebrities stand in relation to ordinary black people, as white celebrities do to white people; The same problems simply do not affect them.

So here’s the key message – it’s easy to get hyped up on twitter, and claim that the battle for awards reform is identical to the struggle against police and political brutality in America, but it’s not. The two are part of a broad agenda to recognize the equality of people, but one is more serious than another – and not being able to tell which is more important will be fatal to the struggle altogether. To put it in a slightly brutal way, Will Smith winning an award will not stop a policeman from killing a black kid.

Criticising internet usage and presumed beliefs is not the same as criticising a movement – but I believe the energies and aims of a movement can be better channelled into helping those at the bottom of the pile – not at the top.

The reason why this is important to talk about is because of the Quixotic sense that what happens online is the same as what’s happening in reality. Taking symbols from black identity struggles and incorporating them into a mass-media spectacle, might be subversive – but it is still a mass-media spectacle, and is therefore part of widely accepted practise of entertainment. In other words, it’s both subversive and totally conformist. The idea that by penetrating popular culture and popular discourse, we will change the world, is a popular one right now. But I fear that people will realise a little too late that it will take more action and less talk, or more action and a similar amount of talk, to get real change, and not just the kind that happens on your screen.

I feel like I haven’t really recovered from last week. News from across the world, and across the universe, felt all a bit too monumental to understand. First, there was the mind-boggling confirmation that gravitational waves, as predicted by Einstein, were real, existing phenomena. The tiny machines which can register changes across the universe, flickered to reveal a century-old prediction was right. Insane.

But then much larger, much less delicate machines also moved, or rather, stopped moving: Across the Middle-East, planes, tanks and weapons fell quiet, at least for a few hours, as a ‘cessation of hostilities’ was declared, in a joint US-Russian effort (that mainly excludes the Americans) with Syria. Most commentators agree that this decision is basically in favor of Russia, Assad and the status-quo. Who knows where this will leave the whole Daesh vs the world conflict, not to mention Syria (only today, a MSF hospital was bombed).

And then just the other day, Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia died, leaving nobody mourning and everyone bickering about whether President Obama will be able to push through a nomination through the senate.

So we dwindle from the universal, to the global, and end up at the local. It’s been hard to understand, shifting from levels of complexity that go far beyond my knowledge and comprehension, so I’m tempted to just make a few comments about something I can understand – the political strategies employed now by different American actors in the appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice.

But I’m not going to – the world is in an unbelievably strange place at the moment, whose political crises and impending ecological disasters can be overwhelming. So instead of talking about the political strategies and political devastation, the wars and ecological damage, I’d like to remind everyone, myself included, that a machine, on our planet, detected two black holes crashing into one another, 1.3 billion years ago, last week.

NATO yesterday announced that it was sending three naval ships to the Aegean to help “stem the flow” of refugees and migrants arriving in Europe, and will carry out surveillance of human traffickers, criminal networks and irregular crossings to Greece.

AThat happened due to a call by the alliance members Germany, Greece and Turkey earlier this week.

A direct intervention of NATO ships is not planeed, so the reports. "It is not about to stop refugee boats and push them back", NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said. Only in emergencies,
NATO ships should save refugees, but then return them immediately to Turkey. That it's what was "agreed fixed" with Ankara, said German Defence minister von der Leyen. This also applies if the people would be saved in Greek waters.

To make this possible, Greece probably wants to declare Turkey to a safe third country, so the landed refugees could be returned directly back to the neighboring country on the Greek Aegean Islands.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan gave himself however unfazed by the pressure of Germany and other NATO and European Union partners - also facing demands to include tens of thousands more refugees from Syria. "There is not the word 'idiot' written on our foreheads," he said in Ankara. "We will do what we have to do. Do not think that the planes and buses are there for nothing."

Erdogan also confirmed media reports that he had threatened in November the EU to fully open the 2.5 million refugees in his country the borders towards the EU.

Human rights organizationa like Amnesty International are warning Europe should immediately implement and scale up plans to resettle refugees from Turkey. Offering legal and safe alternatives would be the only measure likely to deter people from dangerous and irregular sea crossings.

“Hundreds of refugees, including many children, have already died this year attempting the treacherous journey across the Aegean. Any NATO ships that witness a boat in distress must provide immediate life-saving assistance,” said Iverna McGowan, Head of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.

“In no way must NATO forces become yet one more barrier between refugees and the international protection they are legally entitled to. Intercepting refugees attempting to reach Europe and pushing them back to Turkey - where 2.5 million are already hosted - would be a serious violation of their right to claim asylum, and would fly in the face of international law.”

We still have a long way to go when it comes to securing equal rights for members of the LGBTIQ community.

But as a new report from the Guardian shows, there is also plenty to be hopeful about.

The report focuses on six developing nations where LGBTIQ activists are seeing success, from staunchly Catholic Colombia to Mozambique, a single African state ruffling the feathers of its neighbours.

"If you want evidence that the tide of history may be turning irrevocably in the direction of LGBT rights across the world, you need only look to the staunchly Catholic Latin American country of Colombia.

“Equality is unstoppable and equality will also come to Colombia,” said the interior minister, Juan Fernando Cristo, as he announced that his government was in favour of marriage equality."

In Jamaica, the greatest opposition to the LGBTIQ movement in the church. But with the justice minister, the capital city's mayor and even newspaper editorials calling for equal rights, change is in the air.

Lawyer and gay rights activist Maurice Tomlinson will mount a challenge to the anti-sodomy law later this month, and says all these milestones would have been unimaginable merely years ago.

Meanwhile in Asia, Nepal, Vietnam and Taiwan are all seing huge changes in the levels of acceptance of the LGBTIQ community.

Last year Nepal became one of only a very small number of countries to recognise a third gender on its citizens' passports.

"Human Rights Watch researcher Kyle Knight points out, Nepal is in many ways a long way from realising many of its human rights obligations, but in the case of its LGBT citizens it appears to be on a path to progress."

Taiwan currently has a marriage equality bill in progress, supported by its president, and on a local level, same-sex couples are able to register their partnerships in Taipei.

Last year an NBC News headline claimed that “on gay rights, Vietnam is now more progressive than America”. And while that may have been a little premature, change is certainly afoot there, as well.

"Gay marriage is tolerated by the state, though same-sex couples don’t enjoy the same rights as straight people."

This week the Guardian Global Development Professionals Network is highlighting the work of the LGBT rights activists throughout the world. Join the conversation at #LGBTChange.

There are so many cliches surrounding the Republican party that it even subsumes commentary of it. You want to call them the gifts that keep on giving, or you feel an urge to say 'you couldn't have made it up'. I've opted for a more ambivalent platitude - one that captures the triteness of the shabby display in the recent Republican debate, but also the peculiar entrance-based humour (in a way I can't believe I just wrote that) that the debate offered; finally, it's a old phrase that reveals, the sadness at the bottom of the American right-wing.

Watching the debate the other day, I couldn't but help think of Emile Heskey - the hapless English footballer who, astoundingly, received almost as many plaudits and national team 'call-ups' as his more illustrious peers, Michael Owen and Steven Gerrard. Heskey was renowned for fumbling the ball; spectacular displays of ineptitude; massive gaffes; world-beating failures. Yet, every week, there he was in a Liverpool, and sometimes, England shirt. His selection required explanation: Managers admired his brute strength and ability to give more skilled players time to exercise control of the game. Heskey therefore was a kind-of go-to player for fearful managers; Despite his monumental flops in front of goal, he was a safer option than say, Robbie Fowler, who was niftier on the ball, but probably more likely to lose it.

The Republican line-up looks like a similar, shambolic, fearful selection by America's right than is available to them. There is a entire band of committed, intelligent, articulate conservatives that could surely hold respectable and honourable (as much honour there could be in running for candidacy for an American party) - but they're no where to be found. Instead, the right has chosen to deploy the political equivalent of Emile Heskey in several different manifestations: Shambling, Blundering, Fearful - yet somehow, fascinating. Somehow compelling. Somehow - they keep getting in the national press.

Part of me wants to speculate about the nature of the American psyche at the moment. That part of me thinks Americans have tired of soaring rhetoric and Obama's highly-polished, highly-intelligent display; This part of America wants ugly, brute-force, unaccommodating solutions. Quit picking at that knot folks, just cut it!

But don't let me get carried away - I really don't know too much about America, despite spending a lot of mental time in its climate, through its culture and sport, politics and news etc. I don't know what Americans actually want from their politicians - but something tells me it's not really going to come from any of the candidates in the Republican line-up. Everyone knows Donald Trump is a windbag; but that doesn't mean his lead over Marco Rubio and Chris Christie et al in the polls isn't justified - they too hedge and dodge and come off as clumsy. Ted Cruz, the only real, refined speaker on the card does a good impression of a thoughtful person but the illusion fades as soon as he opens his mouth about waterboarding and torture.

There's been a current in Republican politics for a few decades of the loudmouth outsider to shout everyone down - perhaps its most famous instantiation is in Newt Gingrich - the Clinton-carping-adulterer who is now held responsible for a government shut-down in the late 90s. But Gingrinch used to be considered the outsider, the maverick, a bit of a gung-ho clown. Now the whole line up is full of such types.

A few years ago, my housemate and I were watching England play in the World Cup. We were in our living room, lamenting the poor quality of the football on display - England were being England. Then, all of a sudden, Emile Heskey seized the initiative and injected life into the game - he took the ball, dribbled it past one or two defenders, and lining up a beautifully poised shot, missed the ball, kicked his own leg and fell flat on his face. His massive two-metre, 90+ KG bulk was on the ground in front of goal - he looked rather like a deflated rubber dinghy. We laughed - and then to his credit - my housemate, stopped, and offered a heartfelt sigh instead - I got the point soon too - Emily was trying his best and, poor guy, he was on the floor. You can't help but feel the same when you watch a group of Republicans try to enter a room.

Nearly five years ago, the UN decided to renew for a period of one year the mandate of an independent expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan.

The approach, among others: reaffirming the obligation of States to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as emphasizing that States have the primary responsibility for the promotion and protection of all human rights, including the prevention of human rights violations.

The new UN expert in charge is Aristide Nononsi from Benin, with extensive experience in international and African organizations, who’s mandate was extended by the UN Human Rights Council for an additional year in September 2015.

Now Nononsi reports back and urges protection of unarmed civilians after new escalation of violence in Darfur. “Violence is certainly not the way to resolve the current difficulties Sudan is facing, and must stop, now,” Mr. Nononsi stressed urging all parties to the conflict to respect international human rights and international humanitarian law and to ensure humanitarian access to people in need at all times, and protect unarmed civilians.

“The Government of Sudan has a duty to facilitate free, full and unhindered access to all conflict-affected areas to UNAMID (UN-African Union Mission in Darfur), UN agencies and other humanitarian organizations,” he noted.

The on-going hostilities between Government forces and the Sudan Liberation Army/Abdul Wahid have reportedly resulted in human rights violations and abuses as well as violations of international humanitarian law, including destruction of civilian property and objects as well as considerable displacement of civilians, in addition to unspecified number of civilian casualties.

According to UNAMID, up to 21,338 civilians, mainly women and children, have fled into North Darfur State and have sought refuge around their camp by 1st February. About 15,000 others have fled into Central Darfur State, according to the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Sudan.

The number of internally displaced persons following the attacks on Mouli and surrounding villages in west Darfur is estimated at 5,000 civilians, according to the Humanitarian Aid Commission of the Sudanese Government. These civilians have mostly fled to El Geneina, while the number of civilians who sought refuge in Chad remains unknown.

“I call on the Government of Sudan to create the conditions for an inclusive dialogue and ensure the participation of all armed opposition groups to advance peace and reconciliation in the country,” the UN Independent Expert stated.

A group of indigenous Sami in Sweden have won a landmark battle for their land rights in case which saw the Swedish state accused of racism.

A decision in Gällivare district court on Wednesday granted the tiny Sami village of Girjas, inside the Arctic Circle, exclusive rights to control hunting and fishing in the area, restoring powers stripped from the Sami people, or Laplanders, by Sweden’s parliament in 1993.

“It is a symbolic step towards getting Sami rights acknowledged, and we hope that this verdict can shape policies towards Sami issues in Sweden, that was the main goal,” said Åsa Larsson Blind, vice-president of the Sami Council, which represents Sami people in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Russia.

The Swedish Sami Association had petitioned the European commission and court of human rights to have the case brought in Sweden.

In an open letter, 59 academic researchers, including ethnographers and anthropologists at the Sami Research Centre at Umeå University, condemned the lawyers for using the “rhetoric of race biology” and revealing “a surprising ignorance of historical conditions”.

Larsson Blind said she was relieved that the court had seen through the “colonial speech” of state representatives. “By getting this verdict, many Sami individuals will feel strengthened after hearing the harsh wording used in the court,” she said.

Although the case concerned only a small geographical area, it came out of a far more general frustration that Sami issues were getting nowhere in the political arena, where they were debated endlessly but no decisions were taken, Larsson Blind said.

So while Sweden enjoys a reputation for open-mindedness towards diversity abroad, its only indigenous people say they face discrimination.

Prominent Chiense artist Ai Weiwei will withdraw from two exhibitions in Denmark in protest of the country's harsh new asylum law which was passed yesterday.

The new law makes it possible for refugees' valuables to be seized on arrival and will delay family reunifications for up to three years, a move which critics - including Kofi Annan and Ban Ki Moon - say will destroy families.

Ai Weiwei announced on social media that he will remove his works from ARoS Aarhus Art Museum and the Copenhagen gallery Faurschou Foundation, copying in a letter he sent to ARoS:

“I am very shocked about yesterday's news that the Danish government has decided to seize refugees' private property. As a result of this regrettable decision, I must withdraw from your exhibition ‘A New Dynasty.Created In China’ to express my protest of the Danish governments' decision. Please accept my regrets and thank you for your long-term support. I apologize for the inconvenience caused,” the artist wrote.

He also released a joint statement with the Faurschou Foundation in which the founder showed support for the boycott:

"This decision follows the Danish parliament’s approval of the law proposal that allows seizing valuables and delaying family reunions for asylum seekers. Jens Faurschou backs the artist’s decision and regrets that the Danish parliament choses to be in the forefront of symbolic and inhuman politics of todays biggest humanitarian crisis in Europe and the Middle East, instead of being in the forefront of a respectful European solution to solve the acute humanitarian crisis."

This is not Ai's first Danish controversy. In October Danish toy giant Lego refused his bulk order on the grounds that they do not sell to users with "political" intentions.

Ai criticized the company for gagging free speech and, after international debate, Lego changed its policy.

A well-known critic of the Chinese regime, Ai has been using his influence in the art and cultural worlds to draw attention to the refugee crisis in Europe, having moved to Berlin last year after his travel ban from China was lifted.

While much of his famous work critiques Chinese authority, he has lately turned his attention to his new home, clearly unafraid of questioning the systems which have allowed him to successfully make work outside his country of birth where he was stifled.

Ai regularly posts photos of refugee rescues in Lesbos, Greece to his Instagram account, where he is making a documentary about refugees arriving from the Middle East.

Gallery owner Faurschou says: “From Ai Weiwei’s side the important thing is to get a debate and to use his voice.

"He is becoming a European; he is taking part in what goes on here. He did that in China. People would say he has no influence, but when he focused on the scandal of the earthquake in 2008, today China is doing something about corruption. He has a voice and he uses it. I really admire him for that.”

The news that some German states, as well as Switzerland and historically the Netherlands have all legalised the seizing of refugees' valuables begs the question: will there soon be anywhere left for Ai Weiwei to display his art?

Resisting cynicism is a difficult, if not impossible task. In news commentary, as in life, you try to tell yourself that human beings have a basic, elemental goodness to them that if nurtured properly, can outgrow urges to evil, pettiness, hatred; but then Donald Rumsfeld releases a solitaire app.

Donald Rumsfeld, a man directly involved in two of the world’s most destructive conflicts in recent times, a man behind the Abu-Gharaib prison complex and its advanced interrogation techniques, that man, that guy, you know, the one who said the thing about known unknowns – he has released a solitaire app.

Now what’s there to be cynical about, exactly? Does the idea of Donald Rumsfeld playing solitaire, help designing an app and publishing it to market rank alongside Tony Blair’s Middle East Peace Envoy appointment? Not exactly. In fact, the idea of an alleged war criminal making an app based on a game where the user plays alone is pretty fitting – Donald Rumsfeld, like his brand of American Neo-Conservatism, alone, playing a game in a dark room, while the rest of the world has a kickabout. Does such a thing really seem so strange?

No – the cynical urge comes in, the guffaw, the sigh, the tendency to go, ‘oh sure – of course he did!’ after the point. It goes beyond the idea that Donald Rumsfeld prospers while at least two countries languish as a direct result of his actions as Secretary of Defence – the cynical urge comes in at the intersection of American military brutality, the unofficial ‘pardon’ a man like Donald Rumsfeld is given, and the banal, laughable consumerism that he’s now involved in. From Halliburton to Solitaire – that feeling - the idea that a man like Donald Rumsfeld is given a second chance, when so many others aren’t. Oh sure – yeah – of course he did that!

But there’s an alternate trajectory here too: A feeling of lost hope. Maybe, in another world, given a different kind of ambition, Donald Rumsfeld could have been a name familiar to tech-junkies only; He could have been an early-tech pioneer: an inoffensive advocate for the pleasant delights of private games played on machines. It’s not a Hitler-as-artist melancholy you’re feeling, but there is something there.

Another feeling of cynicism: What do we actually want? Do we want Donald Rumsfeld to suffer? No. I would like him to be put on trial, a fair trial – something his policies denied so many. But it probably won’t happen. Will he benefit as a result of his app? Probably not hugely – but there will be a certain kind of appeal for a certain set of consumers.

What we can do is try to not be cynical, try to join in when the world offers us a kickabout in the park, and not sit in dark rooms, alone, thinking we know all the answers.