Saturday, April 22, 2017

Earth Day 2017 and the March for Science

  
C-span’s Washington Journal call-in program this morning asked its listeners “What do you believe the greatest environmental problem is today?”  The callers mentioned indoor air pollution, asteroids, water pollution, animal slaughter, over-population, fracking, and even the hype of global warming.  A much longer list exists (volcanoes, nuclear war, ocean acidification, deforestation, loss of top soil…) but the root problem is rarely mentioned.  That being what we think, value, and actually do or don’t do. 
Each of these human factors are largely driven by our examined acceptance of a single word - ‘independence’.  There should be no doubt that this single mental construct is the greatest threat to an environment that has sustained our species since our origin, but also the greatest threat to our freedom and security.  Historically, the very government we depend on to protect our freedom and security is based on this fantasy ideal.
In reality, everything, I repeat, EVERYTHING (organic, inorganic, or imaginary) is dependent upon a variety of other things. Yet we go about our lives as if what we do, or what we do it with, is our business and no one else’s.  We call this ‘freedom’.  Ultimately, we are all free.  Free to do anything humanly possible.  But we (and others) will never be free of the consequences.
We don’t need to worry about the Earth.  Fact is, in the long run (the next 4 billion years) the earth and the natural environment will be fine. There has been at least five mass extinctions, where 50 to 95% of all multi-cellular species were wiped out over the last 600 million years.  And, after each mass extinction, life returned to cover the planet with increasing abundance and diversity.  Humans arrived in the later part of last recovery.  And now, most scientists believe humans are creating the next mass extinction at a pace approaching 1000 times faster than any previous extinction.  Humans will likely survive, but not all of us.  And, unless we direct our sciences to mimic the powers of nature, and find a new means of surviving the end stages of our primary source of energy, the sun, all humanity will eventually go extinct.
There is a growing possibility that humans could go extinct long before our Sun goes red enveloping the Earth and its orbit.   And our extinction is most likely to be the result of our own advances in science and technology which currently serve national and economic interests not that of all people and the environment. Those at the Science March who were advocating  for more funding for science and technology seldom mention that science is only a tool. How it is used depends on the value system of the user, not the inventor.  Unless our collective value system puts the protection of human rights and the environment ahead of nationalism, patriotism and/or profit, our prospects for the future are grim.
Nationalism as it is now in the absence of ‘justice for all’.   It drives weapons development and the evolution of weaponry to unprecedented killing capacity and accountability.  We are creating artificial intelligence to give us a military advantage.  Its possible that AI will evolve beyond our control, and after attaining the insight that the human mind is fundamentally flawed in its capacity to believe anything and destroy everything, humans will be eliminated.  In our species arrogance we forget how fragile our life form is.   Thirteen organic systems and structures entirely dependent on each other and a far greater number of interdependent living and nonliving systems and structures makes for health and survival.   As individuals, families, cities, states, and nations we are infinitely vulnerable to a variety of microscopic and global macroscopic factors.  Factors no independent government can stop, no matter how tall the wall, or how powerful the military.
Because of our unchallenged worship of ‘independence’ “We the People” of the world still have no global democratic system or structures to assist us in protecting our valued lives, liberty and pursuit of happiness…each of which is entirely dependent on our God given life support system we call ‘the environment’.  These values used to be ‘self-evident truths’. 
We humans have always altered our environment for better or worse, mostly worse, but we in our technological power/arrogance continue to ignore reality.  The health of the earth’s environment has the last vote.  And, human freedom, security, prosperity, and perhaps our species survival rely on that vote.
If we cannot redirect our intelligence, creativity, science, technology, resources, and laws toward mimicking the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” (as our nation’s founding fathers stated in the first paragraph of our Declaration of Independence) we should prepare for the worse.  
So on this Earth Day remember that Earth and life on it will be fine for the next 4 billion years.  We may not.   Science will only prove valuable if it is applied in the long run to the value that ‘all people’ are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights.   Rights not limited to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’  But also the fundamental right to a sustainable environment and justice for tall.  
The more one reads, questions and thinks outside our dysfunctional culture/society one will increasingly conclude, beyond any doubt, that unless we apply science to the Golden Rule (promoted by every religion) human progress will be thwarted.   Ultimately we are free to do, and believe, anything we want. But without understanding and responsible actions in relation to our global interdependence, our security is not possible.

The most effective means of demonstrating our responsibility today would be our collective action in achieving each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals for the year 2030.  Read, question, think, and act responsibly.    The greatest power you have is educating your elected officials regarding the nature of reality.  

Friday, April 21, 2017

Science and Religion unification in The Gold Rule

Brahmanism: "This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you" : Mahabharata 5:1517
Christianity: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Matthew 7:12
Islam: "No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself." Sunnah
Buddhism: "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana Varga 5:18
Judaism: "What is hateful to you, do not to your fellowmen. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary." Talmud, Shabbat 31:a
Confucianism: "Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness: Do not unto others that you would not have them do unto you." Analects 15:23
Taoism: "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." T'ai Shag Kan Ying P'ien

Zoroastrianism: "That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good: for itself. " Dadistan-i-dinik
Justice for all, or security for none. 

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Measuring progress on SDGs. Atlas of information.

If you would like to monitor progress on the SDGs…which are essential indicators of global justice and security, this is the website to keep handy.


If you are interested in making the SDG’s important to your elected officials,  consider participating in the 435 Campaign for Global Justice.

Three things are vital to a peaceful, free, prosperous and secure future for humanity.

1.        A comprehensive approach to ‘justice for all’
2.        A means to fund it and/or enforce it.

3.       Motivating action in the context of enlightened self-interest…national security.


Wednesday, April 5, 2017

100 Years ago Today. We chose a path we must now leave..

Today is the 100th Anniversary of the US entry into the first World War.  No one really knows why that war was fought but most agree that the way it ended set the stage for the World War II and nearly twice as many casualties.  There should be no dispute that the horrors of World War II set the stage for the Cold War and dozens of genocides, revolutions, and famines that followed that killed more people than both World Wars combined.
There should be no doubt that current global war against terrorism, now called violent extremism, is a direct result of the consequences of the global injustices perpetrated during the Cold War.
The most important question now, is how do we end war before it ends us?   Given the evolution of weaponry and the dozens of new factors that make a continuation of war by any means (bio, cyber, nano, space, robotics or AI) a form of insanity what are we to do?   Our freedom, security and prosperity will increasingly be lost.
The urgency of our era can be seen from multiple perspectives.  The evolution of weaponry. The evolution of pathogens.  And the failure of our political systems to evolve in response to these threats.
There is only one viable pathway to an alternative future where freedom, security and prosperity can be maximized for all the world’s people.   We the people must demand that our governments put the protection of human rights (see the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) above the rights of nation states to do as they please, without being held accountable.
After the horrors of WW II most people agreed we needed to prevent future war. From that view emerged the UN system and the most important document in human history -the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Then world leaders failed to make human rights a priority.
We now have what may be our last chance to end the trajectory of world war.  Replace it with world law.  We all know that’s not going to happen anytime soon, so the next best option is meeting the Sustainable Development Goals which is a close equivalent of enforcing the UDHR.
There is no shortage of money to achieve these goals.  It can be found in off shore accounts and even many US states where banks are now holding approximately $14 trillion in money that should have been put into the service of human survival instead of enriching less than one tenth of one percent of humanity.
Time is not on our side.  Our survival will depend on our capacity for adaptation to these changing times.  More military spending is not going to help.  More treaties and weapons bans will not help.   More hopefulness will not help.   

Only a movement of movements generating sufficient political will for our leaders to move away from war and toward world law will work.  Demand that our elected officials take this path.   There really is no other way.  

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Myanmar Human Rights and the UN

UN pressure grows on Myanmar human rights conditions

on: March 25, 2017In: ASIAOPINIONPOLITICSNo Comments
 Print Email
By Rene Wadlow
On Friday 24 March 2017, the 47-member UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution without a vote ( a consensus-type procedure) to create an international independent commission to study the human rights situation in Myanmar (Burma). The representatives of the Russian Federation and China, who do not like independent investigations anywhere, indicated that had there been a vote they would have voted against but that they would not block a consensus motion. The Ambassador of Myanmar, Hlin Lynn, indicated before the adoption that such a commission was not necessary and that his government would not cooperate. The resolution had been proposed by the members of the Council from the European Union who often have difficulty in reaching agreement among themselves. The fact of their joint action indicates that awareness of the dangerous situation in Myanmar has been growing in the past months.
The creation of an independent commission is the strongest form of pressure that the Human Rights Council has and is rarely used. The most noteworthy commission created concerned the armed conflict and resulting human rights violations in Darfur, Sudan. The government of Sudan did not let the members of the commission into Sudan, but interviews with refugees in Ethiopia and Geneva confirmed the information which representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had been providing the Commission on Human Rights, the ancestor of the Human Rights Council. As I had been the first NGO representative to raise the Darfur situation in 2004 in the Commission on the basis of information from sources that I trusted but without myself having been on the ground, it was a satisfaction to have the Darfur Commission confirm what I had been saying.
Since I have been addressing the Commission on Human Rights on human rights in Myanmar since 1989, I am not sure that there is much new evidence to be presented, but events can always be updated. In 1992, a Special Rapporteur (then the sharpest tool available to the Commission) on Myanmar was named, Prof. Yazo Yokota of Japan. The government of Myanmar did not cooperate with him but did not attack him either because the government of Myanmar needed trade and investment from Japan. Later Special Rapporteurs on Myanmar who came from less powerful States were attacked by name in the Commission ( a break in diplomatic practice as people are referred to by their title and not their personal name.) I had helped Prof. Yokota meet Burmese exiles in Bangkok. His reports were a model of fact-finding and calls for the appropriate measures of international law, in particular the Geneva Conventions.
In response to Yokota’s report the Commission expressed its “deep concern at the violations of human right in Myanmar which remain extremely serious in particular concerning the practice of torture, summary and arbitrary executions, forced labour, including forced portering for the military, abuse of women, politically motivated arrests and detention, the existence of important restrictions on the exercise of fundamental freedoms and the imposition of oppressive measures directed in particular at minority groups.”
The then Foreign Minister of Myanmar, Ohn Gyaw, had replied to the Yokota report that the government’s aims were “our systematic endeavour towards establishing the democratic system in an atmosphere of peace, tranquility, prosperity and orderly processes rather than under anarchy, disintegration of the nation and tragic and senseless destructive acts. This democratic system we aim to establish will be on foundations that are within the parameters of our history, traditions and culture.”
In early 1992, there was increased pressure against the Rohingys resulting in their massive flight into Bangladesh. Due to pressure from Arab and Islamic States such as Indonesia and Malaysia, which had never been concerned with refugee flows of largely Buddhist “national minorities” to Thailand , a Special Representative of the Secretary-General was named. Thus the fate of the Rohingyas started to be discussed in the Commission on Human Rights.
It is not clear to me why there is the current flair up of violence in Rakhine State on the Bangladesh-Myanmar frontier. In a future article, I will try to set out the causes as I see them. The destructive situation was well set out to the Human Rights Council by the current Special Rapporteur Ms Yanglee Kee earlier in March and by the Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the Human Rights Council but there was little discussion of causes or possibilities for mutual understanding.
My aim in this article is to welcome the creation of an independent commission on the model of that for Darfur-Sudan but also to warn that data collection is not an answer in itself as the continuing armed conflict in Darfur shows. There are long-standing obstacles to peace and development in Myanmar which require planning within a basic needs framework and then real international cooperation for socio-economic development.
Rene Wadlow is the President of the Association of World Citizens, an international peace organization with consultative status with ECOSOC, the United Nations organ facilitating international cooperation on and problem-solving in economic and social issues.

Thursday, March 2, 2017

One more injustice in US foreign policy - military aid to Honduras.

One year ago today (March 2, 2016) environmental activist Berta Caceres was assassinated in Honduras. [1]

Leaked court documents suggest Berta's murder was planned by military intelligence specialists linked to the country’s U.S.–trained special forces. [2] 

Global Witness calls Honduras the deadliest country in the world for environmental activism. [3]

Today, Rep. Hank Johnson (GA) re-introduced the Berta Caceres Human Rights In Honduras Act, HR1299
calling for the suspension of U.S. military and police aid to Honduras until human rights violations committed by Honduran security forces cease and their perpetrators are brought to justice. [4]

Given the cuts President Trump has targeted in foreign aid perhaps this should be one of his first cuts he should make if he were sincere in the words he used before Congress on Tuesday night. 


“Each American generation passes the torch of truth, liberty and justice — in an unbroken chain all the way down to the present. That torch is now in our hands. And we will use it to light up the world.”

Urge your U.S. Representative to co-sponsor the Berta Caceres Human Rights In Honduras Act.  
HR1299  by calling 202-225-3121, give them your zip code and ask to be connected to your Congress persons office.  

You can also sign a petition generated by Robert Naiman, Avram Reisman, and Sarah Burns
from Just Foreign Policy that is at MoveOn

We can make U.S. foreign policy more just, or continue to suffer the inevitable consequences here in the US.  Consequences a wall at the border will not stop.


References:
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/opinion/an-idealists-martyrdom-fails-to-move-honduras.html
2. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/berta-caceres-honduras-military-intelligence-us-trained-special-forces
3. https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/environmental-activists/honduras-deadliest-country-world-environmental-activism/

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Pandemics/bioterrorism/infectious diseases NOT equal to threat of War or Climate Change


The threat of infectious diseases, pandemics and bioterrorism (“When nature is the terrorist” WPost editorial, 2-24-17)   [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-nature-is-a-terrorist/2017/02/23/57bed82e-f942-11e6-bf01-d47f8cf9b643_story.html]    should not be held on the same “level as preventing nuclear war or climate change”.  Why?  Because they represent a greater threat to individual, national, and global security than wars or climate change combined.  Even if one considers the inevitable escalation of global interactions between war and climate change. 
Few people remember that shortly after the attacks on 9-11 former …Collin Powel told the UN that HIV/AIDS was a greater threat to national and global security than al Qaeda.  It was because that RNA based virus (with a 3% mutation rate) contributes directly to the failure of nation states which sustains the spawning ground for every strain of violent extremists.
Consider the inevitable emergence of a single pandemic that could be equal to -  or potentially greater than -- the impact of the so called “Spanish Flu” of 1918.  According to historians that pandemic played a major role in stopping World War I while killing more US soldiers than the war itself and killing nearly 500,000 Americans back home in about 16 months.  Imagine how such a pandemic today would freeze any ongoing war including the war against climate change.
Just the inevitable loss of our antibiotic arsenal alone (not mentioned in the Post editorial) could lead to an existential threat of civilization as we know it -- if it happens before breakthroughs in bioengineering new solutions to combat all infectious diseases.   But remember,  it is just such breakthroughs added to existing advancements in biotechnology that make bioterrorism a greater threat than a nuclear terrorist attack or a limited nuclear exchange.   Imagine a genetically engineered virus that would kill anyone who had not received the vaccine that was bioengineered by the same scientists intending to protect only their nation (N. Korea?), their terrorist group (ISIS?), or their environmental cult who feel threatened by the current dominance and trajectory of world powers.
There are at least three mental problems most policy makers and their electorate must overcome to rationally and effectively respond to all individual, national and global security threats.   First, we must stop thinking that these threats are independent of one another and urgently invest in global prevention and preparation efforts.   This could best be accomplished by enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or fully funding and implementing the Sustainable Development Goals as rapidly as humanly possible.  These threats (pandemics, war, terrorism and climate change) that all nations face cannot be effectively addressed by independent national policies.   Independent government and institutional policies will fail in multiple aspects of offering a comprehensive global approach. 
Second, we must do what we know we must do.  Abide by that fundamental “Self-evident” “Truths” in our Declaration of Independence,  that all people are created equal (ie. With a body temperature of 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit.)
Last, we must learn and persistently remember the greatest human achievement in history.  The eradication of Smallpox in 1977 (official in 1980).  Up until then nature’s smallpox had killed more people globally in the 20th century than both World Wars, all murders, revolutions, and genocides combined.   The US invested $32 million in this global eradication campaign which (according to a 1997 GAO report) had saved $17 billion dollars in US tax payer money by then.   No longer needing to pay to protect the lives of US children yielded these unbelievable health and economic returns to all Americans that continues today.  And here’s the astounding fact that needs to be remembered.  If just one nation, religious group, or remote family had rejected this global vaccination effort, this natural terrorist would still be circulating among us today.  It still exists in some laboratories.   And, given the natural evolution of all pathogens and human’s increasing technological prowess in changing them (google ‘Weaponized Smallpox’) means that Smallpox, or variations of any pandemic like virus, will remain a threat -- unless we are as indiscriminate in taking care of one another globally as viruses are to infecting us if our body temperature is 98.6 degrees.

In conclusion I offer the profound words of Nell Temple Brown, former head of the WHO office in Washington DC.  She said “Pathogens change.  Can we?”