Obama. Complexity. Doing. Etc.

Following this post the other day about my own muddle-headedness, I re-stumbled across this old David Brooks column about Obama when his candidacy was just getting going.

There are a thousand things to potentially disagree with this administration about. But Obama's ability to "get" or just better express that he "gets" that the U.S. can be both humble and bold about our place in the world—and that the world is complicated and ridiculous and not always a matter of good v. evil—is welcome relief (even if obvious), and why he gets people to listen (especially the enormous audiences abroad—he speaks to them as if they were adults). Brooks, a conservative-ish, certainly gives him the same respect:

Yesterday evening I was interviewing Barack Obama and we were talking about effective foreign aid programs in Africa. His voice was measured and fatigued, and he was taking those little pauses candidates take when they’re afraid of saying something that might hurt them later on.

Out of the blue I asked, “Have you ever read Reinhold Niebuhr?”

Obama’s tone changed. “I love him. He’s one of my favorite philosophers.”

So I asked, What do you take away from him?

“I take away,” Obama answered in a rush of words, “the compelling idea that there’s serious evil in the world, and hardship and pain. And we should be humble and modest in our belief we can eliminate those things. But we shouldn’t use that as an excuse for cynicism and inaction. I take away ... the sense we have to make these efforts knowing they are hard, and not swinging from naïve idealism to bitter realism.”

My first impression was that for a guy who’s spent the last few months fund-raising, and who was walking off the Senate floor as he spoke, that’s a pretty good off-the-cuff summary of Niebuhr’s “The Irony of American History.” My second impression is that his campaign is an attempt to thread the Niebuhrian needle, and it’s really interesting to watch.

On the one hand, Obama hates, as Niebuhr certainly would have, the grand Bushian rhetoric about ridding the world of evil and tyranny and transforming the Middle East. But he also dislikes liberal muddle-headedness on power politics. In “The Audacity of Hope,” he says liberal objectives like withdrawing from Iraq, stopping AIDS and working more closely with our allies may be laudable, “but they hardly constitute a coherent national security policy.”

At the time, in a failed experiment with my own human nature, I had decided to see if I could truly stay mentally uncommitted to a candidate until the last week of the election. But it was stuff like this that made Obama wildly compelling—and to me made his unconventional youth in places like Indonesia and Pakistan an enormous asset.

Thoughts?

Trafficking

It.
Happens.
In.
The.
Bible Belt.

Still.. nice to see functioning law enforcement and judicial systems (although.. only 13 years?). Here officials own brothels. I'm trying to figure out how to measure what faith/distrust in the system does for societies.

photos of the sky

Back in January, a few months into dry season here, every rice farmer/mushroom harvester/trash creator in the north was setting fires. Soon sunsets, mountains and the general existence of color (despite the red/yellow Bangkok protests) were all gone (as I've relentlessly documented/complained about). Then it started raining again earlier this month, jacking up humidity levels but returning the general visual vibrancy that makes this place so livable.

Good story huh.

Pictures!:

Liberia Day (updated)

Jon Stewart had Liberian president Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf on yesterday. I wish Stewart had let her talk more, but she's a remarkable woman doing an impossible job as Liberia rebuilds after decades of war, and worth listening to (as I got to do each morning on UN radio during my short trip there last year).

She's the first female president in Africa. More and more and more I'm seeing that it's women who are best equipped to lead desperate communities/countries to better futures.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Here's The Economist on the book she just wrote (plus an update on her performance so far).

Also—looks like a story I wrote about that Liberia trip got picked up by a literary journal. Neat huh? Details soon..

Update: Ha. Also... Former Thai PM/polarizer/"Great Satan" Thaksin Shinawatra is apparently exploring investment opportunities in Liberia this week.

Darfur. Giving. Complexity. Etc.

Good intentions don't always work with reality (and sometimes make things worse), and I find that fact simply, increasingly, terribly paralyzing.

William Easterly—whose excellent blog I mentioned in this post and who's made a career out of highlighting how aid is often misguided—writes this post about a book about some well-intended NGOs (possibly) making things worse in Sudan:

In brief, he accuses advocacy campaigns like Save Darfur of making the achievement of peace in Darfur more difficult by portraying the conflict simplistically between “bad Arabs” and “good Africans,” and by advocating foreign military intervention.

I’ll repeat just a few points from Mamdani that stuck in my mind, but I encourage you strongly to pick up the book.

• The Save Darfur campaign repeatedly ignored and distorted the facts on the ground.


• Darfur is an insurgency and an extremely vicious counter-insurgency, but there was never the intent to eliminate any specific group and so the word “genocide” is inappropriate. But the word “genocide” gave the West and the UN a free hand to intervene.


• The prospect of foreign military intervention encouraged the rebels to hold out rather than agreeing to a peace deal, while hardening and attracting additional support for the position of the government to “defend national sovereignty.”


• There were also terrible atrocities on the “good African” side.


• The “good African” side includes one key player, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), that is an opposition Islamist movement that was previously on the “bad Arab” side in the North-South civil war (note: disconcerting, especially if you've read this book) between “bad Arabs” and “good Africans.”


• There was a sharp decrease in violence after 2005 just as the Save Darfur campaign picked up steam.


• The ICC is not credible to much of the non-Western world as a judge of war crimes since the US itself does not subject itself to the ICC, and since the ICC seems to selectively prosecute US enemies and turn a blind eye to war crimes by US allies.


• The Western pressure based on distorted facts has set back attempts within Sudan and within Africa to reach a peace settlement in Darfur, which is the only way the tragedy will end.

None of this is to deny the enormous human tragedy in Darfur. But Mamdani’s analysis makes one wonder: is it possible that ill-informed outsiders with the threat of military power on their side can make things worse rather than better?

Anyone who knows care to comment?

This nothing new—on all levels of aid—even without getting into military complications. Kipling called the worst forms of it the "White Man's Burden." We've met more than one pastor who steals from his own orphanage, and there's a long sad history of governments creating dependent, depowered (it's a word) poor communities. Most of the beggar kids here have pimps watching nearby.

Seems like the world just exploits the human attraction to good v evil, the tendency to reduce things to that which we can understand and act upon, and really horrible realities on the ground that a still, in fact, dying for assistance.

So... how to help when so much aid is ineffective and some runs the risk of impeding progress?

Nick Kristof, on cue, offers encouragement in a recent column about giving. :

Many people doubt the effectiveness of foreign aid, and a new best-selling book called “Dead Aid” by an African finance expert, Dambisa Moyo, even argues that government-to-government assistance is often harmful to recipient countries. It’s true that aid of all kinds is harder to get right than people usually assume, but the kind that has the best record is grass-roots investment — with strong local buy-in — in health, education, agriculture and microfinance. I’ve repeatedly seen these kinds of programs transform families and communities, from Africa to Afghanistan.

Frankly, this kind of aid is also pretty beneficial to the donor. For my part, I gain far more than $24 a month in psychic value from sponsoring Yuneiris, and my family’s tiny foreign assistance projects also remind my own kids that there is a world out there in which children have needs greater than the latest iPod.

Will my dollars and letters utterly transform Yuneiris’s life? Probably not. Will they make a significant difference? Probably yes. Is it worthwhile? For me, absolutely!

So, I guess... give in faith and obedience and a belief in sovereignty, give with due diligence, give with the right motives, give with realistic expectations about effectiveness, and give in the realization that we're not called to save the world. But... regardless... give, especially where you can't serve (the worst problems in the world, I'm increasingly deciding, are all fueled by and fought with the bottom line).

Thoughts?

Read Con's sorta-similar post (featuring Bono!) here.

Be gentle... I bleed.

Just curious what everyone did to celebrate World Hemophilia Day on Friday.



*First person to explain the title reference gets a prize (your choice between 49 U.S. Military "Saddam Playing Cards" I bought in Burma... and a severed goat head).

In conclusion..

.. (for now):



Think I'm going to miss Tony Cheng.

Anyway.. BBC has an extraordinary summation, that also explains a lot of the background better than I ever did. If you're confused and curious, read the whole thing:

Three years of intractable political conflict are taking a debilitating toll on Thailand. Emotions are now very raw.

Some of the ugliest scenes in recent days did not involve the army; they occurred when local residents came out to confront the rampaging red-shirts. Shots were fired, two people died, and some were savagely beaten.

It is difficult to explain why Thailand, a country once seen as a paragon of stability and social harmony, has become so polarised.

The division between Red and Yellow cuts across many lines; it is not simply just rural-versus-urban, or poor-versus-rich. Spend long enough with either group and you meet people from very varied backgrounds.

....

[But...]

Go to a red-shirt rally and you will hear the same mantra; "We are grass-roots people, fighting for democracy, against the ruling class".

Go to a yellow-shirt rally and you will almost inevitably hear a different mantra; "We are educated people, fighting against corrupt politicians who abuse democracy".

There appear to be no towering, Obama-like figures in Thailand, who can win the respect of both camps. Certainly not [Prime Minister] Abhisit, who often looks uncomfortably out of place in the rural, red heartlands of the north and north-east.

How he deals with the leaders of the "red uprising" now - and how that compares with the treatment given to last year's "yellow uprising" - will be an important test of his promise to uphold the rule of law impartially.

So the conflict which erupted so spectacularly in Bangkok and Pattaya over the past week will probably rumble on, steadily eroding the confidence of investors, tourists and the Thai people, in a stable future for their country.

Redshirts jump the shark?

ny times: people fight back (click for slideshow).

(update: This blog, which I like, says pretty much the same thing, except with a twist — "But, as Abhisit knows better than anyone else, the royal yellow lesson from 2008 is that thuggery, violence and provocation can reap rich political rewards." — and has a bunch of thoughtful comments that disagree.)

I wonder about how much hearts and minds matter here.

Back in October, during the PAD protests, I was skeptical of what the yellow shirts were demanding, but supported their right to protest. Then they became increasingly radicalized, culminating in the airport sieges that crippled the Thai economy, shutting down the tourism industry during the high season and hurting regular people. I heard from several people who quit supporting the PAD (although I don't really know — they could still be wildly popular).

This seemed to put the red shirts in position to take the high road, and — except for a couple minor instances — they did, putting on massive, peaceful protests and then going home after a day or three. Massive changes are coming in Thailand, and eventually there will be elections again, and the red shirts seemed primed to benefit. I think most democracy-minded Americans would at least tepidly agree with the reds' demands.

But then they started crippling Bangkok by abandoning their taxis at traffic choke points, attacking politicians, (literally) crashing the ASEAN summit, hijacking and threatening to blow up gas trucks in residential areas, and then — last night — allegedly attacking a mosque and opening fire on a group of angry citizens at a market, killing two.

So today the headlines have switched from stuff like "Government fires on protesters" to things like "U.S. condemns red shirt mob violence." A shift in popular opinion? A couple of red shirt leaders turned themselves in this morning, after encouraging protesters to disperse. Prime Minister Abhisit seems to be staging a remarkable (didn't think he'd last until the end of the month two days ago) comeback, and the government might just emerge from all this in tact.

The red shirts don't have the backing of the military and other elite, entrenched power centers like the yellows. So it seems like the only way they'll ever regain power is through popular support — and, as such, should be doing everything they can to hold on to it. It's unfair (and the source of their anger/frustration), but reality. Ghandi and MLK knew what they were doing.

Anyway.. I ask the question because I'm very much on the outside of all this, and am curious how this kind of thing looks for regular, unaffiliated Thais. (I'm not Thai and I'll prolly be gone in two years, but—on some level—someone unaffiliated and limited in understanding, albeit curious like me can be a decent gauge for how well a group's PR efforts are working).

Regardless, it's clear that violence breeds violence, and absolutist mob behavior (whether red, yellow or American partisan) is simply a part of human nature.

Thoughts?

--------------

Here are videos from yesterday. Watch the molotov cocktails, and then the taxi crash through the army line in this one:



And two from Al Jazeera — my new favorite news station:

backstory

Backstory (way way oversimplified, leaving the reasons for each side's protests somewhat out of it):

The reds (more democratically numerous) were in power. The yellows (more powerful) launched a non-violent military coup in 2006 to remove them. The reds (with hints of corruption) democratically regained power at the end of the year-long coup. The yellows started mass protests shortly before we arrived here in September, taking over the government house — essentially the White House without the a residence for the PM. Protests escalated (including the big one where Con got hit), and eventually the (increasingly fanatical and cultish) yellows shut down both Bangkok airports, crippling the Thai economy but making their point. The courts responded by booting out the (almost visibly relieved) red PM (who visited us in the hospital) on corruption charges ushering in a new yellow PM (who seems competent, but obviously gained power under dubious circumstances).

The reds regrouped and started mass protests around New Years. Then, following events I don't really understand, the protests escalated this past week, demanding the removal of the current PM.

There's been like 23 coups since 1900, or something. So this is just the latest in a long complicated history of sorta-instability (would rather have this than what's happening in Burma).

If anyone who knows wants to fill in holes or tell me I'm wrong.. feel free.

Crackdown

(note: for updates as this all escalates, I'm following this site — support his analysis by visiting his sponsors. And a twitter feed here. And another blog here and here.).

It's sort of amazing. I'm in Chiang Mai, where the Songkran (see second video in previous post) festivities are in full swing. I've never seen so many people smiling at once outside of a sporting event (even if some are red shirts riding around with propoganda on loudspeakers). Everyone gets to be kids for a few days.

Yet...

The police and military finally started pushing back against the Red Shirts late last night in Bangkok, using tear gas and the threat of live rounds shot (only—according to the government) into the air (yeesh...) to disperse protesters from one traffic choke point in Bangkok. The protesters have done their share to incite the violence, driving a bus into a riot line, hurling molotov cocktails and (according to the government) shooting a few of soldiers. They've also started hijacking/parking/threatening to blow up gas trucks (wtf!). Protesters quickly regrouped nearby, proving that this is going to be a long, drawn out mess.



This round of protests is different than the ones in October — more widespread, strategic and unruly. Seems like they are already approaching the height of the PAD's (October yellow shirts) mob mentality. There are groups blocking intersections in several parts of the city, and — now, in response to the crackdown — major highways all over the country.

And the introduction of violence will only cement the zealotry on all sides. I hate group think/mob mentality. People have full rights to protest. And the government needs to be able to control things (see their ridiculous inability to secure the Asean summit). But it seems like there are tipping points...

Also.. Stewart, our BangkokPastor who lives in central-ish Bangkok somewhat close to the action, has a post up showing how a state of emergency in Thailand almost always means life as usual for most people (although they forced the closure of our favorite mall — shame!).

Songkran; States of Emergency

This was the scene in Bangkok today — Tanks rolling. Coup rumors. Military and police providing strikingly little resistance to the protests:



This was the scene in Chiang Mai today — Same thing really:



Happy Easter everyone.

Protesters Quash Asean Summit

I can just picture the prime ministers/crowd control gurus of China and Burma sitting there snickering, feeling validated.

About half of the leaders at the meeting were evacuated by helicopter, including those of Vietnam, Myanmar and the Philippines, Thai officials said. Some officials fled by boat.

Abhisit Vejjajiva, the embattled Thai prime minister who has faced a week of large-scale street demonstrations, declared a state of emergency to secure the departure of leaders from Southeast Asia, China, South Korea and Japan. The emergency decree was lifted once the leaders had safely left Pattaya, a resort town about 90 miles east of Bangkok, officials said.

The cancelation of the meeting, involving leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean, was deeply embarrassing for Thailand and a missed opportunity for Asian leaders to discuss the severe economic downturn that is causing some of the region’s export-dependent economies to contract.

The link.

Somaly Mam

I just finished Somaly Mam's book about the realities of trafficking and prostitution in Cambodia. It's enlightening and terrible. She writes beautifully, and I finished it in a daze.

Here's a Nick Kristof column and video about Somaly and her book back in September.

In the past when I’ve seen Somaly and her team in Cambodia, I frankly didn’t figure that she would survive this long. Gangsters who run the brothels have held a gun to her head, and seeing that they could not intimidate Somaly with their threats, they found another way to hurt her: They kidnapped and brutalized her 14-year-old daughter.

Three years ago, I wrote from Cambodia about a raid Somaly organized on the Chai Hour II brothel where more than 200 girls had been imprisoned. Girls rescued from the brothel were taken to Somaly’s shelter, but the next day gangsters raided the shelter, kidnapped the girls and took them right back to the brothel.

Yet Somaly continued her fight, and, with the help of many others, she has registered real progress. Today, she says, the Chai Hour II brothel is shuttered. In large part, so is the Svay Pak brothel area where 12-year-old girls were openly for sale on my first visit.

“If you want to buy a virgin, it’s not easy now,” notes Somaly, speaking in English — her fifth language.

....

In her book, Somaly recounts how she grew up as an orphan and was “adopted” by a man who sold her to a brothel. Once when Somaly ran away, the police gang-raped her. Then her owner, on recovering his “property,” not only beat and humiliated her but tied her down naked and poured live maggots over her skin and in her mouth.

Yet even after that, Somaly occasionally defied him. Once two new girls, about 14 years old, were brought in to the brothel and left tied up. Somaly untied them and let them run away. For that, she was tortured with electric shocks.

.....

The world’s worst trafficking is in Asia, but teenage runaways in the United States are also routinely brutalized by their pimps. If a white, middle-class blonde goes missing, the authorities issue an Amber Alert and cable TV goes berserk, but neither federal nor local authorities do nearly enough to go after pimps who savagely abuse troubled girls who don’t fit the “missing blonde” narrative. The system is broken.

You can visit Somaly's foundation here.

Fear tactics much?

Airing in five states:



If anyone has a good argument for how this could affect me, my marriage or my country in any way, I'm really open to listening.

Super Cooks

I had an idea for a website. It was going to be huge.

Our western (farang food) options are limited in Phayao, but I'm usually happy with some sort of peanut butter, lychee wine, chocolate chip and coffee power shake. Constance disagrees that this either "resourceful" or "tasty," and as such moans a lot about food.

So I was staring at our kitchen, wondering if there was something creative or interesting I could cook for my wife using the limited ingredients we had (plus the 15 or so things I knew we could get at Tesco). Lightbulb! Carl Jung! Recipes for foodies who love cooking but who don't want to go to Whole Foods before dinner, or who can't because they live in a tiny cheese-allergic village in Northern Thailand!

Enter the ingredents you have. Website tells you what you can make.

I'd use it—even if only for idle time wasting and searching for the world's most ridiculous recipes (what could I make with singha beer, ham, deep fried crickets, olive oil and green curry paste?). We'd just need to build a base of content, design and market it well, and eventually thrive off user-generated recipes.

Meet supercook.com. Bastards.

My google-averse father has a long and distinguished history of inventing things that have already been invented. He once received a patent rejection after he couldn't get the 40-45th candles lit on my mother's birthday cake without getting burned, and came up with self-lighting candles with wicks tied together by dental floss. Last year he started laying the groundwork for a global tree-planting initiative that already existed... under the same name.

So I inherited that gene, but at least we try.

But now I don't get the website, and I've lost my excuse for serving my wife mustard fish ball sandwiches.

Live free; Ride hard

I got this vespa for my birthday two weeks ago:


I was going to join the Black Rabbits, this local motorcycle gang:


The moto came with a pink seat and pink handlebars. But it didn't come with a license plate, and we didn't realize that meant we couldn't ever get a license plate for it — ensuring inevitable confusing, awkward, hand-flapping run-ins with the local bribe-happy cops who care about that sort of thing.

So after riding it just a handful of times (including one long, glorious dash through countryside backroads during which I ran out of gas in the middle of a rice farm), we sold it back yesterday to Dong — the guy with the motorcycle shop in our front yard.

I never even named it. The Black Rabbits approve of my municipal obedience.