blogs

Book Review: Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women by Susan Moller Okin

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:28:26 +0100

The book opens with a more subtle account of the larger debate within feminist theory relating to ideas of difference and traditional notions of equality and equity by questioning the legitimacy of liberal society’s dedication to gender equality while it   grant legal and political recognition to other cultures that discriminate against or abuse their female members. The first part of the book by author, Susan Moller Okin presents the main essay; entitled Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? Marta Sutton Weeks Professor of Ethics in Society and Professor of Political Science at Stanford University, demonstrates the inherent tensions between multiculturalism and feminist theory by assessing what the cultural practices of minority groups in Western societies imply for women and girls. Within the context of a growing influx of immigrants for various parts of the developing world, Okin isolates several cases that highlight the notion of multiculturalism and the concessions in the name of ‘group rights’ that involve the marginalisation of women. One such incident that Okin draws from is the late 1980’s contentious case in France about whether Magrbin girls could attend school wearing the traditional Muslim headscarves (purdah) regarded as proper attire for young women when they reach puberty. Okin writes:

Staunch defenders of secular education lined up with some feminists and far-right nationalists against the practice while the left supported the multiculturalist demands for flexibility and respect for diversity, accusing opponents of racism or cultural imperialism. However, the public was virtually silent about a problem of vastly greater importance to many French Arab and African immigrant women: polygamy.

During the 1980s, the French government quietly permitted immigrant men to bring multiple wives into the country, to the point where an estimated 200,000 families in Paris are now polygamous.

By offering a conceptualization of her use of feminist and understanding of multiculturalism, Okin brings the principles of liberal theory under a harsh and compromising light in her reproach of all cultures being intrinsically patriarchal. In order to show the clashes between multiculturalism and gender equality, Okin point out how advocates of special group rights tend to focus on public parts of cultural life and neglected private life. The problem here is that because most cultural practices, customs and ‘rules’ are predominantly concerned with the private life such as laws of marriage, divorce family property and the like. Thus the advances made in the interest of special group rights are more likely to have a more significant impact for women and girls than for men and boys, whose time and energies are vastly vested in the public life of the society they form part of. Okin writes:

Occasionally, cultural defenses are cited in explanation of expectable violence among men or the ritual sacrifice of animals. Much more common, however, is the argument that, in the defendant’s cultural group, women are not human beings of equal worth but rather subordinates whose primary function (if not only) function is to serve men sexually and domestically.

As a feminist and liberal political theorist Okin accepts that minority groups should be given special rights and that even outside the context of liberal states, culture should be preserved. However in her attempt of a solution to the issue of overt sex discrimination against women under the flagship of culture she maintains that there is still no clarity in the feminist view that ‘minority group right’ as they have presented thus far are the solution. Therefore a compromise between feminist demands for the equality of women despite culture appears unlikely.

Blurring the Lines: The Ethical Issues Surrounding the Invasion of Iraq

Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:47:32 +0100

As part of its ongoing ‘global war against terror’ the United States, under the leadership of former President Bush declared war against Iraq on 23 March 2003 with the launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom (Lindner: 2009,21). White (2011, Internet source) reported that in 2010 the death toll of Iraqi civilians was estimated at 109 794 and more 55 000 insurgents have been killed. In 2007, the estimated number of misplaced persons was approximated at 2, 225,000 making it the largest forced misplacement in the Middle East since 1948 (Berta: 2008, 262). The number of Iraqi soldiers and police that have been killed in the war was reported in January 2011, at 9,889 (White: 2011, Internet source). What is more, the impact of the war is vast and it runs deep, in the face of such tragedy, the Iraqi nation is confronted with challenges of unemployment levels of about 60 per cent, an infrastructure in ruins and chronic malnutrition among others.

However despite reports on the number of deaths, injuries and displaced persons that continue to be recorded well over five years after the war has ended, as the country fights to rebuild itself and regain an announce of normalcy the considerations surrounding the US led invasion in Iraq are not clear-cut as it may appear. According to Nye (2003:22) there are four overarching limitations on ethical considerations that guide international politics. Firstly, there are massive cultural and religious differences that divide people when deciding the morality and justice of certain acts. Islam societies present a dissimilar culture to that of the West. Secondly states do not act as individuals and heads of states are judged on different set of ideals as their expected to serve as trustees of the country’s resources and the population’s safety over which it has been given the power to rule over. Thirdly limits on the ethics international politics is the complex nature of causation. At the international level, making accurate predictions of consequences is intricate as there many more key actors and more variables at play. Lastly, there are arguments that perhaps stem from the realist tradition, that assert that institutions of international society such as the United Nations are particularly weak in their very nature.

While strict pacifists deem any kind of killing as always wrong, for Perry (2004: Internet source), killing can be justified in defence of the innocent against unjust attack. Therefore although all people have a basic right not to be killed, the right is not absolute and one can forfeit that right if they wilfully threaten or take the lives of others. The United States has received a lot of criticism since 2002, regarding the conditions justifying its decision to wage war against Iraq under the flagship of ‘how does a government’s abuse of its citizens’ human rights have to be before military intervention can be enforced in that country, without its governments consent. According to international law, if there is no threat to any other state, then the UN Security Council must be formally consulted before any form of action can be taken.

Although the Iraqi government’s cooperation with UNMOVIC (the UN agency responsible for monitoring Iraq compliance with the resolution) in early 2003, a report was released indicating that Saddam Hussein’s government had not yet it full access to its programs and weapons sites. On the basis of this report, the United States asserted that the report was reason enough for undertaking military action on Iraq. China, Russia, France and other non-permanent members of the Security Council expressed strong opposition to the argument the US and all its allies had posed. While this was met with widespread criticism, several scholars in international politics have posited that indeed nothing short of invasion would have prevented Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons and sing WMD to achieve his foreign policy goals or giving them to terrorist groups. Nonetheless the human cost of the war has been extensive. The latest death reports of American soldiers and Iraqi insurgents that are directly linked to the events of the war and the ongoing occupation of Iraq by Americans troops were reported in January 2011.

This article does not purport to offer means by which specific moral dilemmas should be approached. Rather it highlights the interlinked relationship between the domestic and international moral aspirations of states as well as the irony of globalisation. Although we live in an age where the margins between states are so faint maps best serve as territory markers we as moral creatures remain divided in our selfish ambitions of state interest.

Bibliography
Lang, A.F., 2007. “The violence of rules? Rethinking the 2003 war against Iraq”. Contemporary Politics. Vol 13 (3)
Maitre, B. R., “What sustains ‘Internal Wars’? The dynamics of conflict in the state of Sudan”. Thirds Wold Quarterly. Vol (30) 1
Meashmier, J.J. and Walt, S.M., 2003. “An unnecessary war” . No Iraq War.org. Internet source, accessed 2 May, 2011
Nye, J.S., 2003. Understanding International Conflict. Pearson,New York
Perry, D.L., 2002. “Can an Invasion of Iraq be justified ethically?”. Santa Barbara News Press. Internet source, accessed 2 May, 2011
http://www.hoeearthlink.net/davidperry/recent.html
White, D., 2011. “Iraq war facts”. About.com. Internet source, accessed 29 April, 2011
http://usliberlas.about.com/od/headsecurit1/a/iraq/nimber.html

Can Democracy Prevent War? The Case of Darfur

Tue, 23 Aug 2011 06:19:04 +0100

The events of September 11 came as a great shock that was meshed with feelings of fear and uneasiness for the American population and the greater international community as well. Since then Washington has rhetorically pledged to make the promotion of democracy a primary goal in America’s foreign policy objectives. Through this, the United States has expressed its desire to revive the ideals of the liberal systems that were made popular in the 20th century and advance them in the developing world so the global South community can engage fully in the global agenda.

At the core of liberal theory is the commitment to the individual and the progression toward a society in which the individual can thrive. Beyond its preoccupation with the individual, liberals contend that freedom is the chief individualist value. However Liberal theory upholds that security and progressive leadership can only be ensured by the state, which is in turn regulated through the constitution (Heywood: 2007: 23).

While international politics is inherently anarchic, the distribution of power among states provides a great deal of insight into how states are likely to respond to certain influences (Nye:2003; 42). The whole world over, people are embracing democracy. The populations of countries with small and deteriorating economies also desire democracy. For a long time the conflict situation in Darfur was seen as just another model of the war predicament in Africa. It is interesting to observe how this attitude changed when the ‘Darfur crisis’ started making the headlines of international news networks and newspapers, and moreover how this transformed the situation into a ‘humanitarian crisis’.

Darfur lies in the most western part of the country in North Sudan. The conflict in Darfur is commonly classified as an opposition of ethnic African and Arab groups on the basis of a patriarchal lineage and tribal hardships. However in reality the human rights abuses, ineffective local law enforcement, tribal disputes and conflict over land and other resources contribute to instability of Darfur (Bogema and Beard: 2009: 8). Maitre (2009:54) reported that the number of people killed in the civil unrest in Darfur between 2003 and 2009 has been estimated to be 450 000.

The first step at a negotiated resolution was the Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement, which was fostered by the government of Chad on April 8th 2004. When the rebellious faction in the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) camp declined to sign the ceasefire further violence ensued and escalated the humanitarian crisis. The next attempt at a ceasefire was the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA), which was launched by the USA on behalf of the AU, and signed on May 2006.

Following the independence of South Sudan as sovereign state and the newest member of the United Nations General Assembly on the 9th of July 2011, both North and South Sudan have been faced with significant challenges. For the North, the major challenge has been the conflict situation in Darfur. While the international community has been consistent in its peace-keeping efforts, in particular with the efforts of the AU-UN combined peace-keeping forces that were deployed in the region in 2008, the resistance of rebel groups has been strong. The most significant hindrance in the peace-keeping efforts occurred when the 2010 peace talks delayed and the ceasefire agreements that had brokered began to breakdown. However rebel groups in Darfur have since shown greater willingness to cooperate, both politically and in terms of military action. Although progress continues sporadically, the threat of conflict has not been done yet been done away with.

The pronouncement of Sudan as a failed state by various international organisations, including Amnesty International comes as no surprise if one considers the reports on the death toll in country and vast human rights abuses. The order of the international system today observes the condition of war as a deviation from the expected course of governance and statehood. Yet Maitre (2009:53) has emphasised that when assessing the functionality of states it is important to consider that what starts a war is not necessarily what sustains it. However it is also evident that the framework of democracy is postulated on Western postulations.
On this basis the international community awards sovereignty exclusively on the terms of territorial borders without taking into consideration the institutions in place as well as the historical identity of the communities that inhabit those territories. Therefore although democracy has proven to be a viable reliant model for good state governance and the maintenance of international peace, its framework needs to be broadened in order to cater to historical traditions and grievances that play a significant role in informing strategies for good governance.

Bibliography
Bogema, S. and Beard, V., 2009. “Women’s movement, state building, growth and civil society”. Midwestern Political Science Association, P1-29
Heywood, A., 2007.Political Ideologies. Palgrave Macmillan. New York
Insight on Conflict, 2011. “Sudan: Conflict profile”. Insightconflict.org, Internet source, accessed 17 August, 2011.
http://www.insightconflict.org/conflict/sudan/conflictprofile/?gclid=cTKTe7LmN3KoCFsQOfdOT7u7w
Maitre, B. R., “What sustains ‘Internal Wars’? The dynamics of conflict in the state of Sudan”. Thirds Wold Quarterly. Vol (30) 1
Mcfaul, M., 2004. “Democracy promotion as a value”. The Washington Quarterly. Vol 28(1)
Nye, J.S., 2003. Understanding International Conflict. Pearson,New York

The viability of nuclear power in South Africa

Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:38:00 +0100

One of the most significant developments in South Africa’s economic rise under the National Party (NP)’s apartheid regime, both politically and economically was the establishment of the Atomic Energy Board (AEB). The international socio-political climate that was emerging shortly after the NP’s electoral victory led to the AEB being designated as solely responsible for the production, processing and disposing of uranium (Cho, 2006:6). In the culmination of the Cold War in the mid 1980’s, South Africa had secretly built six nuclear weapons.

While South Africa officially denuclearised in the early nineties, the World Nuclear Association (2010: Internet source) has pointed that like in most parts of the worlds, electricity consumption in South Africa has been increasingly growing since the 1980s. To this end, in October of 2010, the Department of Energy in South Africa released its draft integrated Electricity Resource Plan (IRP) for 2010-2030. In early 2007, South Africa’s biggest electricity producer, Eskom approved a plan to double generating capacity by 2025, which will include construction of new nuclear capacity in order to increase the nuclear contribution to the overall electricity output from five per cent to about twenty-five per cent. More recently, in March this year, the Minister of Energy declared for six new reactors as part of the Integrated Resource Plan for electricity production. This was however met with some criticism. The Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) made took a strong stance against this announcement that received wide support through submissions that were made by members of Civil Society Energy Caucus, including affected communities, the labour movement, faith-based organisations and other NGOs.

Sokolov (2008: Internet source) pointed out in his 2008 address of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), that nature of the challenges facing the world today, ranging from the increased energy demand, climate change and energy security have emphasised the enormous opportunities for the nuclear industry. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) energy consumption will continue to increase by about 50 per cent in the next fifty years. This projection has amplified the concern of energy security the whole world over, but more specifically in countries that are already experiencing energy shortages. It is clear that the uses of nuclear technology have indeed since the end of the Cold War diversified. The IAEA projected that nuclear electricity will grow by between fifteen and forty-five percent by 2020. Therefore it had been widely asserted that increased exploration of uranium mines and nuclear plants is needed.

Yet the catastrophic explosion at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant early this year has created major concern around the issue of expanding nuclear stations in the country and progress made by the nuclear industry in terms energy security has not entirely done away with the concerns at national and international level. In addition it has not done away with the general anxiety that seems to escalate in societies when it comes to matters regarding the development of nuclear power (Nye, 2003: 144).

Although the financial constraints that governments is facing are severe, governments commitment to nuclear is strong. In the 2011 budget speech, the Minister of the Department of Energy affirmed that 22 per cent of new electricity production capacity would be nuclear and 14 per cent would be coal-based. The Minister also highlighted that R586 million would be provided for the Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa (NECSA) “to continue its role as the centre for nuclear energy research and development and innovation” (Chalmers, 2011: Internet source). According to the World Nuclear Association (2011: Internet source) the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) that was launched in 2006 confirmed the selection of three potential sites for the next nuclear power units: Thyspunt, Bentamsklip and Duyensfontein, all of which are located in the Cape region.

The exploration of renewable energy sources and more pertinently, nuclear power has been an ongoing debate here in Africa. With South Africa at the forefront of this debate as the only country in the Continent that has a nuclear power plant, the question that has emerged is; without experience can Africa really benefit from this? The argument opposing the expansion of nuclear power plants in South Africa and the rest of Africa has been that these states may not have the capacity to respond to the terrorist threat that it may be inviting, and although the potential of earthquakes and tsunamis is low in this part of the world, the emergency preparedness of African countries becomes questionable in the event of nuclear security uncertainty. While the debate presents various compelling arguments in terms of the power supply and the environmental long-term effects of nuclear energy, South Africa’s energy future boils down to the fact that although nuclear power is cleaner than coal power, it is not renewable since uranium fuel is not by any measure unlimited.

Article by Refiloe Joala

References
Cho, S., 2004. “A diversionary compliance hypothesis of nuclear renunciation, the case of South Africa”. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Chicago

Chalmers, V. 2011. “South African National Budget 2011: Download budget speech and people’s guide to the budget”. Vernon Chalmers SEO. Internet source, accessed 14 July, 2011. http//www.national-budget-2011-download-budget-speech-and-people guide-to-the budget

Nye, J.S., 2003. Understanding International Conflict. Pearson,New York

Solokov, Y., 2008. “Opportunities and challenges for world nuclear industry in 21st century”, International Atomic Energy Agency, Internet source, accessed 11 April, 2011. http://www.iaea.org/newcwntre/statemnet/ddgs/2008//sokolov090608.html

World Nuclear Association, 2010. “South Africa’sNuclear Program”, World Nuclear Agency, Internet sources, accessed 11 April, 2011. http://www.world-nuclera.org/info/inf88.html

Nationalization: Economic Freedom or the Beginning of the End

Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:31:49 +0100

Yet despite remarkable changes in the new government’s economic policies and positive economic growth path, the South African economy still faces severe challenges that are mostly typical of an emerging economy. Louw (2003: 6) highlights some of these challenges. The level of job creation in South Africa demonstrates a disappointing ratio against its economic growth rates across the various industries and sectors. This can be further observed in the weakening mining industry as more people get retrenched due to dropping exports.

This failure to meet the needs of the majority of its population, the Zuma administration has received a lot of criticism both nationally and internationally for its inability to address the widening gap between rich and poor and moreover that of the distribution of resources has been the source of a great deal of the labour strikes that have been occurring all around the country since mid 2009. In this highly unionised economy, South Africa’s private and public sectors alike are feeling the heat as workers down tools and bring production in these various industries to a complete halt. However in the aftermath of the global economic down-turn the issue of economic inequality and unemployment is not unique to South Africa. The recent waves of political revolts by the nations of the Arab world against their leaders are only a tip the iceberg.

Most recently, prominent public figure Julius Malema, President of African National Congress’ Youth League (ANCYL) has with the support of the league made an official call for the nationalisation of 60 per cent of South Africa’s new mining companies in February of 2010. While the senior ANC faction has been cautioned against this, the issue of nationalising the mining sector was again brought up by the controversial leader. In the early 2010, the ANCYL committee had compiled a detailed paper advocating the nationalisation of mines, requesting the government to amend the mineral act to ass a clause that would obligate new mining companies to enter a partnership with state before it can be issued with a mining licence in South Africa. Since the development of this national debate, contentious arguments expressing the detriment of this is prospect on the economy let alone the effect it will have should it be successful have surfaced from various actors within the South African corporate landscape and more so from oversees investors and potential investors as well.
Striking while the iron is hot, the ANCYL established the slogan of ‘economic freedom in our lifetime’ at the 24th Congress in January of this year. The emergence of this widely supported sentiment by presents a continuation of the policy changes the time the league has proposed. Although the reality of youth marginalisation and economic equality comes second to none in South Africa’s current political discourse, it appears the understanding of ‘economic freedom’ remains to be settled.

According to Nietshezhe (2011: 4) South Africa needs a comprehensive plan that details how it intends to attain the goals it has set out and the time framework for addressing the root causes of the problem including the issue of structural unemployment, quality education and the overall structure of the economy. The question that remains nonetheless is what would it mean for South Africa’s economy if Malema’s call for the nationalisation of mines were to succeed? While experts have expressed nuanced perspectives on the matter, the outcome is all very much the same and presents a disconcerting picture of the future of this country. Hlongwane (2011: Internet source) cites Azar Jammine, director and chief economist at Econometrix, who made a daunting projection stating that “the very first thing that would happen is that there would be a big outflow of capital out of the country, which would lead to a rapid depreciation of the rand” and although this may result in positive returns for manufactures in the short to medium term interest rates will rise and the inflation rate”. Perhaps the question to ask is whether the nationalisation of any sector in the South Africa’s economy will translate into the equal distribution of the gains made.

References:
1. Hlongwane, S. 2011. “Analysis: what would happen to SA if mines were nationalised”. The Daily Maverick, Internet source.
Htpp://www.thedailymaverick.co.za/article/2011-06-23-analysis-what-would-happen-if-mines-were-nationalised.htm
2. Kirsten, M. 2003 “Financing Africa’s Development: Enhancing the role of finance”. Development Report 2003.
3. Louw, L, 2006. Habits of highly effective countries: Lessons for South Africa”.
4. Nietshezhe, J., 2011 “Economic freedom in our lifetime: we have a proper debate this time”. Mapungubwe Institute

SA-Polsci and Nelson Mandela Day

Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:26:22 +0100

In November of 2009 the United Nations declared that 18 July will be known as Nelson Mandela International Day to coincide with Madiba’s birthday. In the spirit of Madiba, who said in 2009: “We can change the world and make of it a better place. It is in your hands to make a difference”, the day’s theme is: Change.

Just like Madiba spent 67 years fighting injustice, serving his community, country and the world, so too we ask you to serve 67 minutes helping your community, and tell us about it!

We'd like to know how you, or your organisation or company spent 67 minutes contributing to the community or the environment, whether it be on Monday 18 July or the weekend. Comment on this blog, or join the Sa-Polsci Facebook group and tell us about your experience, upload some photo’s from your camera or even your phone!

You can write a short summary of your service or a piece of poetry and send it to info@sa-polsci.com to publish on our website! Please keep it shorter than 500 words, we want to give everyone a chance to read, reply and post something!

For more information on ideas to improve the lives of so many on just one day visit http://www.nelsonmandela.org/mandeladay/67_ways.html. today!

“Take action. Inspire change. Make every day a Mandela Day!!”

The Intellectual: Responsibility through Self-Reflexivity

Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:02:49 +0100

Today’s piece of writing will be a reflection. Although we will not directly reflect on the politics of nations or discuss the intricacies of exploitation, it will touch on such matters all the same. It will be a brief reflection on the self, a reflection on the position of a professional intellectual in contemporary society.

According to Gayatri Spivak (in McIntosh, 2007: 2) reflexivity is an important site for thinking responsibly. For this intellectual, to think responsibly involves interrogating the norms, ideas and texts that motivate one and form one’s perception of reality as well as one’s role in society. It is therefore imperative to understand that one’s beliefs stem from the knowledge/information that one has acquired, be it at home, school, and university, through the media or the government. Furthermore one’s knowledge/information has motivated or influenced one’s current viewpoint/standpoint on what is “true” and what is proper practice, therefore laying the foundation for the way in which one approaches a subject.

One perspective on knowledge and the role of the intellectual within contemporary society that can be helpful is that of Michel Foucault.

Here a good starting point would be for us to consider the position of theory within the intellectual domain. For International Relations (IR) scholars such as Walt (1998: 29) and Guzzini (2001: 103) theories are used by all people, whether they are conscious of it or not. Therefore disagreements about practice or action generally arise due to more fundamental disagreements about the basic forces that shape social, political and economic outcomes. According to Guzzini (2001: 103) theory has a dual nature in that it is both explanatory and constitutive. Theories are explanatory in the sense that no empirical analysis is without theoretical assumptions or without a framework of analysis, and constitutive in that a theory is the very condition for the possibility of knowledge. This leads Guzzini (2001: 103) to observe that “it is fundamental that observers of International Relations, whether practical or academic, be trained to become aware of their own and others’ assumptions”.

The constitutive dimension of theory now leads us to Michel Foucault. Foucault claims that knowledge in every society (“information” is also a good substitute word) is controlled through mechanisms of power. Moreover, knowledge and power go hand in hand. In this sense they are conditions for the possibility of one another, leading Foucault to the assumption that “knowledge is a regime of power” (Roderick, 1993: n.p). Following on Guzzini’s constitutive dimension of theory and Foucault’s idea of power/knowledge, one can then deduce that theory is a mechanism of power as it serves as a tool box or a lens in approaching the subject of a study and therefore in the creation of knowledge.

This begs the question then, “how and where is knowledge/power produced in contemporary society?”. For Foucault power/knowledge is connected to three important spheres, namely institutions, discourse and discipline. Institutions represent those spaces in which knowledge is produced and which have been given the status/power within society to make truth claims. Discourse in this sense refers to communications that function through rules that determine who may speak, about what and for how long (Roderick, 1993: n..p). Finally, discipline describes a mode of social organisation that operates without coercion, imbuing the individual with particular ways of thinking, knowing and behaving (Evans, 2005: 10554-1055). If one has to keep with the example of the discipline of IR theory, one may consider two images: the university and the academic journal. The university constitutes the institution in which knowledge is produced within the discipline, while journals represent a crucial institution of modern sciences in which discourse occurs (Waever, 1998: 697).

The discipline of IR itself is embedded in the broader “regime of truth”, the Western model of science. This model has been exported and standardised across the globe in the form of the Western style university which acts on the one hand as the conveyer of knowledge, therefore disciplining individuals towards this particular understanding of what good knowledge is and therefore how “truth” can be measured, and secondly as the producer of new knowledge or “truth claims”. Due to a close relationship with the modern bureaucratic apparatus of the state, therefore a necessary component of modernity, the university also holds the status/power within society to discern what is good knowledge and what “truth claims” are valid (Sutherland, 2007: 500). At the same time the discipline of IR exists within the international sphere through a community/network of professional intellectuals who have identical standards of practice and form an “epistemic community” (Sutherland, 2007: 500). The discipline is therefore shaped through discourse between these professional IR theorists in which the academic journal constitutes the most crucial space in which “truth claims” are validated or falsified.

The above example was an attempt to illustrate the problematic nature of knowledge: that knowledge itself is not free from social influences and that it has a history/present that one must be critical of. The problematic nature of power/knowledge is that, first of all it is built on principles of exclusion and inclusion, therefore lending itself to the possibility of excluding voices from the discourse that might not fit into the dominant view of who is allowed to speak (Shiner, 1982: 384). Secondly, it lends itself to manipulation by the dominant forces within society so as to perpetuate political goals that may themselves lead to exclusion, exploitation and domination (Sutherland, 2007: 500).

So now one may ask, what does this mean to me? Foucault envisions the role of the intellectual within contemporary society to, on the one hand, provide an analysis of the “specificity of the mechanisms of power” and, on the other hand, to develop an analysis or critique of the “regimes of truth” (Shiner, 1982: 384). One can connect this to Spivak’s notion of responsibility. When an intellectual becomes aware of the deeper implications of his/her socialisation as well as his/her practice, it becomes evident that to act responsibly would mean to reflect on their own knowledge/history as well as be critical of the information, theories and methods they have acquired and deem to be “true”.

An act of self-reflexivity is an act of responsibility. This act can be considered to reflect a concerted effort that one’s claim to “truth”, that which one divulges to the public sphere as trusted knowledge, is built on critical self-awareness. This does not mean one should become completely paranoid and suspect, but rather study one’s own practices as one would do a subject, in an attempt to bridge the gap between theory and practice and step out of the Ivory Tower from whence academics tend to observe the world.

Article by:
Nick Dietrich
(nick@sa-polsci.com)

Bibliography

Evans, T. 2005. “International Human Rights Law as Power/Knowledge”, in Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3 (August). Pp 1046-1068.

Guzzini, S. 2001. “The significance and roles of teaching theory in International Relations”, in Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 4, No. 20 (June): pp 98-177.

McIntosh, C. 2007. “Intellectual Responsibility and IR theory: security studies, scholarship and negotiating the theory/practice gap”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, 48^th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, February 28, 2007: pp 1-28. (www.allacademic.com/meta/p179897_index.html).

Roderick, R. 1993. “Lecture 6: Foucault and the disappearance of the Human”, in Lecture series: The Self under Siege, Rick Roderick – a psychological exposition for up-building and awakening. http://rickroderick.org/306-foucault-and-the-disappearance-of-the-human-1993/.

Shiner, L. 1982. “Reading Foucault: Anti-method and the Genealogy of Power-Knowledge”, in History and Theory, Vol. 21, No. 3 (October): pp382-398.

Sutherland, H. 2007. “The Problematic Authority of (World) History”, in Journal of World History, Vol. 18, No. 4. pp 491-522.

Walt, S.M. 1998. “International Relations: one world many theories”, in Foreign Policy, 110 (Spring): pp 29-36.

Waever, O. 1998. “The Sociology of a not so international discipline: American and European developments in International Relations”, in International Organisation, Vol. 52, No. 42: pp 686-727.

SA's Restricted Freedom?

Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:58:04 +0100

"The ANC never freed us, they only took the chain from around our neck and put it on our ankles"- Rassool Snyman, Anti-Apartheid activist.

In light of the aforementioned, after the African National Congress (ANC) seized a peaceful transition from the clutches of Apartheid, South Africans had been promised that both political and economic freedoms would be given to previously disadvantaged. The latter have been left with the right to vote but simultaneously left with several issues pertaining to freedom that had been idealised and promised post 1994, politically and economically, more than anything else.

Promises for adequate housing, equal access to health care and education, sanitation were all promised to the South African electorate post 1994. This saw the rounding up of all previously disadvantaged persons casting their vote, by faith on a ballot for a better future, a better life based on promises made by the African National Congress. Casting their votes marked the ANC being placed into power by hopeful masses of South Africans. Ideals had been placed on the table nationally, and the entire nation awaited this in service delivery. The issue arose when, many of the electorates were still affected by all the economic injustices of the past up until this very day, despite efforts made by the ANC (Klein, 2011).

Pre 1994 negotiations were solely to blame for the inadequate service delivery from current governance. The main reason for this was that these negotiations had not been fully developed with regards to the economic freedom and reform. Mandela made the most by ANC radicalists as "selling out to the NP for political autonomy". Sparks (2011) states that before the transference of power, the Nationalist Party wanted to negotiate a deal whereby the ANC would not be in full capacity to be able to running it their own way (Sparks, 2011).

In 1990, Mandela put forward the ANC's policies to nationalise the mines, banks and monopoly industries and modify our views on black economic empowerment. He did however, unabashedly admitted that in certain sectors of the economy would not been able to be penetrated by the state.

Redistribution ideals that laid the foundation for the ANC Freedom Charter 1955, reiterated on several points that "the people shall govern". It constituted as the base of the liberation struggle that sought to combat over 3 decades of abject economic and political oppression (Klein, 2011). Yet, decades later, the aforementioned still has a strong hold on the progression of previously disadvantaged South Africans despite efforts made by government.

It was clear that the Freedom Charter would not necessarily grant black people access to wealth and redistribution ideas that had been put forward (Klein, 2011). The 1975 negotiations made with the National Party did everything to avoid potential blood spillage in South Africa. Mandela sought negotiations that concealed political and economic autonomy for previously disadvantaged backgrounds. De Klerk made a concerted effort to preserve as much economic power as possible. Klein (2011) states that South African whites had failed to stop black South African's from taking over government, but when it came to safeguarding wealth amassed during apartheid, they did not succumb as easily.

De Klerk used the Washington Consensus as a guideline for economic policies in post Apartheid South Africa. First, drawing on the ascendant Washington Consensus that there was now only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making, such as trade policy and the central bank as "technical" (Klein, 2011). Moreover, by the use of a wide range of new policy tools such as international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs were made to hand control of those power centres to supposedly impartial experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the National Party. This was implemented to anyone except the liberation fighters of the ANC. It was a strategy of balkanization, not of the country’s geography (as de Klerk had originally attempted) but of its economy (Klein, 2011).

The ANC were too busy deciding on the rankings or positions held within the organisation than the economic independence fully being granted from the Nationalist government. The Reserve Bank's power and IMF power was instinctively tried to be secured via the NP (Klein, 2011). After being granted the state, full power had not being given to the ANC which restricted the ANC from taking necessary steps in advancing economic freedom. The redistribution of land had been unsuccessful due to privatisation of property (Klein, 2011). Job creation had been impaired by the ANC signing GATT deals forced in compliance with the WTO and opening up SA's market globally (Klein, 2011). This lead to factories closing down and people losing work. South Africa's budget had been used to repay debt accumulated by the Apartheid government which lead to a lack of funds available for anti retro virals in South Africa. Printing more money had also been hindered by the reserve bank still being led by the Apartheid era leaders. Even the nationalisation of the mines had been something the ANC watered down by entering partnership with De Beers mining owner, Harry Oppenheimer (Klein, 2011).

Perhaps we can direct the lack of service delivery on nepotism in government today as well as greed and a lack of political transparency. This, in conjunction with an economic system that favoured the wealth and expansion of white South Africans, still lays at the foundation of the private sector in South Africa (Sparks, 2011).

It is thus clear that while political autonomy had been granted to the ANC, economic sovereignty had been neglected in the epic struggle against Apartheid. Albeit that several efforts have been made by the ANC in contemporary SA, the economic infrastructure has a long way to be fully reformed which will allow a more economically free South African society.

Bibliography
Klein, N (2011). Democracy in Chains [online]. Available from HYPERLINK "http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/02/democracy-born-chains"http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/02/democracy-born-chains[Accessed on 3 June 2011]

Malawi's outdated laws on Gay marriage: Change is needed

Fri, 01 Jul 2011 08:54:06 +0100

It is the 21st centrury. People have witnessed the increase in the amount of women and men being openly gay, lesbian or bisexual. Humanity has progressively seen a shift in awareness with regards to sexual orientation. This has birthed a liberated way of thinking that has allowed individuals to be open and express their sexuality in the most comfortable way possible.

Global legislation has been passed by the United Nations to safeguard interests of minority groups in a majority ruled world. This has allowed individuals the right to be comfortable with their sexual preference and feel supported, irrespective of the sex they choose to be with. Same sex couples are completely comfortable to display public affection. The term or idea of a civil partnership, synonymous for a gay union, has been legally recognized on a global scale. This forms the basis of respecting human rights that global governance seeks to harness and protect.

Sex relations in Africa have been a quite controversial issue as many African states deem homosexuality as illegal. Thirty-eight out of 53 African countries criminalise consensual gay sex, which is punishable by death in some nations, according to Human Rights Watch. South Africa is the only country in the continent to legally recognise same-sex marriages (RTE news online, 2010). The outright discrimination against homosexual couples wanting to get married and be respected serves as an extremely disturbing and volatile issue in Malawi. The Blantyre court sentenced Steven Monjeza, 26, and his 20-year-old partner Tiwonge Chimbalanga to 14 years hard labour for sodomy, after they were arrested late December following a symbolic wedding. The couple's lawyer, Mauya Msuku, said that this was a 'step forward towards recognising the rights of minorities and still maintain that the two were charged and jailed based on the penal code which is archaic and unconstitutional (BNL times online, 2011).The bases of these judgments have been made on account of the Malawi Council of Churches (MMC), an umbrella organisation for 27 Protestant Christian churches and 20 para-church organizations. These organisations seek to assert and reaffirm their position against homosexuality.

The MCC promotes, propagates and defends the Kingdom of God through collective action and witnessing for Christ by evangelisation, proclamation, meditation and advocacy for holistic human transformation in Malawi (BNL times online, 2011). In this way, the council demonstrates its role of being a prophetic voice and conscience of Malawian society. It is behind this that the MCC categorically disagrees with those that are pushing for homosexuality to become an acceptable norm. They believe that sex was biblically sanctioned for man and woman who come together as one body, and not between people of the same sex or gender (BNL times online, 2011).

Due to the fact that homosexuals are basically considered as sinners, the MMC seeks to reform any gay person’s life whether in or out of relationships. They view it as a threat to human rights and not being in accordance with the scripture as Malawi is a God-fearing nation, which has a rich traditional understanding of the nature of family and marriage. Thus, homosexuality can never become an acceptable norm in society and is viewed as sinful (BNL times online, 2011).

UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, addressed Malawi's National Assembly and said: 'I appeal to you to reform outdated laws that discriminate against homosexuality. They should be repealed and reformed. I urge all countries to show moral and political courage in combating discrimination in all its forms. Malawi should be known throughout the world for its successes in combating poverty and hunger, not for outdated laws on homosexuality.' (RTE news online, 2010)

Irrespective of one’s religious affinities or state sovereignty, the basis of human rights clearly states that one cannot be denied the right to be with whomever they wish. Global legislation has been put into place to protect human rights and specifically to safeguard the rights of minority groups. Research has proven that being gay is a result of genetic makeup (BNL times online, 2011). Malawi’s stance on homosexuality, specifically within the broadened African continent, quite backward, unprogressive and can be seen as an indirect crime against humanity. There are several questions one needs to ask. Whom are these individuals harming by being gay? Certainly not their neighbours, and certainly not the state. How does this pose a threat to the Church that allegedly advocates ideals of non judgment and acceptance but in the same breathe, advocate separatism and discrimination? Is it not the right to marry is the choice of an individual rather than a state? Is it an outdated and dusty law book decides who we have a right to love? It’s hard enough to find love in a world filled with hate and really no one should ever stand in love's way. Love does not understand gender, race or cultural divides. Being asked to have relationships kept in secret furthers shame and stigma.

To conclude, it is important that Malawi, over and above its sovereignty as a state, be put up to speed with what has legally been put into place in terms of human rights in the global arena. The church, with its religious dogma cannot be the legal body to discriminate, incriminate and imprison gay people on the basis of the bible. This is taken from the same bible that advocates love, compassion and acceptance for your neighbour.

Article by Seth Williams
(seth@sa-polsci.com)

Bibliography

Joda-Mbewe, O.L and Thindwa, G. 2011. OPED : Homosexuality: What is Malawi’s last stand?[online]. Available from http://www.bnltimes.com/features/86-all/317-oped--homosexuality-what-is-malawis-last-stand.html[Accessed 25 June 2011]

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has called on Malawi to amend what he called its 'outdated' laws on homosexuality in RTE News online http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0530/malawi.html (accessed 25 June 2011)

The Bottom Billion

Fri, 01 Jul 2011 08:37:04 +0100

Perhaps it is a sign of how far “behind” certain parts of the world are with regards to “development,” that the most dynamic, and probably the best publicized, debate about the economic future of poor regions in recent years, has been between three economists. On one side of the argument is Jeffrey Sachs, the author of “The End of Poverty,” and on the other is William Easterly, whose “White Man’s Burden” ridicules Sachs as a modern version of a 19th-century utopian. Sachs’s conviction is that Africa can be saved with $75 billion a year in Western aid (and up to $135 billion by 2015) (Sachs, 2005: 318). However, in Easterly’s opinion, the current generation of white philanthropists is no more likely than earlier ones to succeed in a self-appointed mission of enlightening the “Dark Continent” (Easterly, 2006). In the midst of the aid debate, enters another acclaimed economist, Paul Collier.

The popular view of global poverty rests on the assumption that we live in a world of one billion people in the rich countries and five billion people in the developing world. In this view of the world, globalisation and economic development have had little effect and outside of the West and Japan, people are poor, sick and their situation either shows no signs of improvement or is getting worse. However, the facts tell a different story, and a key point in Paul Collier's passionately argued “The Bottom Billion” is that this simplistic and outdated picture does not accord with the facts. According to Collier along with the billion in the rich world, there are now four billion people living in economies that are growing rapidly and the progress of this growth is having a direct impact on the lives of the people in these countries. However, that leaves a billion people living in societies that are failing, “falling behind and falling apart” (Collier, 2007: 3), these are the bottom billion and for them the future remains bleak.

If globalisation and development has been able to turn things around for five billion people, why can't it do the same for those in the bottom billion? In addition, why is that the aid agenda persists on presenting the more simplistic 'us' and 'them' picture of the world? Collier first addresses what he regards as the “root causes” of the continued failure of the states at the bottom – most (70 percent) but not all in Africa (Collier, 2007: 7). He describes a series of “traps” that ensure that escape from the bottom is extremely difficult. Collier lists each of these “traps” in turn: conflict, geography, governance and mineral riches (2007: 17-75). The existence of these traps means that many of these countries are going backwards rather than forwards, described as, “a cesspool of misery next to a world of growing prosperity that is both terrible for those in the cesspool and dangerous for those who live next to it” (2007: 99), let alone the people who live there.

In the poor but developing countries, life is less dangerous, results are more encouraging and it is easier for development agencies and foreign governments to have some influence. Moreover, Collier points out, in these countries increased trade, liberalisation and the other benefits of globalisation are making huge in-roads to problems that were deemed intractable. However, what solutions are there for the impoverished countries of the bottom billion where civil conflict, endemic corruption and/or incompetent governments make progress next to impossible? Why can't globalisation work here as well? Collier suggests that globalisation will not work for these countries because they've already been left behind by the other developing countries, who not only have cheap labour to offer (for example China and India), but also stability, existing infrastructure and governments that are attempting to tackle corruption and gangsterism (2007: 79 – 123).

Collier’s analysis of African civil wars is notably interesting. The alleged “grievances” of rebels are usually absurd and meaningless. Rebel soldiers are recruited from desperate young men without education, who perceive no other means of supporting existence. Poverty and greed prompt recourse to arms: “On both sides interests develop that only know how to do well in war.” (2007: 23). Angola offered the most spectacular example, where the MPLA government, aided by the Cubans, battled for its oil, while Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA supported by the CIA and white South Africans, fought for diamonds (2007: 25).

Although difficult, Collier is optimistic about helping the “bottom billion.” His suggestions range from supporting those reformists who do, miraculously, manage to make it into power, to preferential trade agreements, to proposals for international norms (such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative) and, most contentiously, support for military intervention (2007: 124 – 171). Although many of Collier’s proposals are well argued, it is his support for military intervention that is most likely to be controversial. Despite the disaster of Iraq, Collier believes that foreign military intervention may be necessary to break the cycles of civil war and conflict that afflict many of these poor countries. He cites Sierra Leone as the best example where this has worked (2007: 127). However, the conditions for making a success of such a venture are so difficult to achieve that it is questionable whether in practice it’s feasible. That's not to mention the objections to the “ethical imperialism” that would enable governments in the West to police the rest of the world.

If Sachs appears too saintly and unrealistic and Easterly too cynical, Collier’s proposals are much more plausible. His descriptions of the problems, and his characterisation of the traps that have ensnared the poorest countries on the planet, move beyond the naïve and emotional responses that are common in the discourse of many of the NGOs who campaign for debt relief. In any case, this is an interesting and thought-provoking read no matter what your opinion when it comes to global poverty and economic development.

Article by Michelle Zietsman
(michelle@sa-polsci.com)

Bibliography

Collier, Paul (2007) The Bottom Billion, Oxford, Oxford University Press

Easterly, William (2006) The White Man’s Burden, Oxford, Oxford University Press

Sachs, Jeffrey. D. (2005) The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time, New York, Penguin Press