Information and news about foreign policy

beijing
With the advent of modern technology and personal web profiles such as Facebook, twitter, Instagram and ask.fm, just to name a few, connecting with a global audience has become much easier and far faster than ever before. Although the plethora of personal webpages has been at the center of national conflict regarding adolescent bullying and overexposure, these websites can also be used more efficiently to promote important humanitarian causes and advance principles of social justice.

One renowned group in particular, the World Health Organization, has taken effective use of the benefits of online media. It is not sufficient enough to merely provide the general public with information regarding a current issue if no adequate steps are taken to ensure that a secure means of two-way communication has been established. According to the WHO, materials should not only enrich prior knowledge but also provide new insight on critical topics. An innovative method which establishes a proper two-way connection and provides adequate material is the employment of social advocacy.

Advocacy, communication, and social mobilization (ACSM) is the WHO’s strategy in terms of raising awareness while rallying individuals together. The advocacy portion of the technique involves working to influence legislative changes, while the communication and social mobilization segments involve improving public knowledge and engaging the general public in advocacy programs, respectively.

One manner in which the WHO utilizes this technique is by raising awareness of tuberculosis within the global and local environment by strengthening doctor-patient interactions. The ultimate goal of this pioneered social intimacy is to establish informed communities in which residents not only work individually to rally against tuberculosis or other social issues, but also to work together in joint activities.  On the surface, the central goal of ACSM is to reduce incidences of tuberculosis, while the greater goal is to encourage global health and community development.

Although social media websites like Facebook and Twitter are not necessary to engender such events, it is arguable that these websites are critical in gathering support for these programs. As interactions among individuals, societies, and global communities shift towards online methods of communication, it is essential for organizations to also incorporate social media in their reservoir of campaign techniques. Not only does social media enable foundations to reach out and influence a wider audience, it also enables more effective and immediate communication – a vital ability in the chronically fast-paced tempo of the modern world.

Phoebe Pradhan

Sources: World Health Organization, National Association of Social Workers
Photo: Vintage 3D

swiss
Technology has, over the years, come to run our lives.  We rely upon it for anything ranging from healthcare innovation to entertainment.  Even now, you are reading this article that was composed on a computer for you to read on the Internet.  No paper newsletter for you.

It is precisely because technology is so all-encompassing for us that the following statistic is so shocking: 1 billion adults worldwide are illiterate.  Equaling 26% of the world’s total adult population, there are 1 billion people who cannot partake in the reading of this article, which you may be taking for granted.

Technology may have made reading and writing even more accessible in our sphere but in lesser-developed areas, such advancements are not seen.  According to UNESCO, the entire continent of Africa has a literacy rate of less than 60%.  Compare that to the 99% literacy rate in the United States.

However, there is hope.

Numerous organizations are dedicated to eradicating illiteracy. Here are five of the top literacy initiatives worldwide.

1. ProLiteracy

The mission statement of ProLiteracy is a perfect articulation of why literacy should be on the forefront of global advocacy: “…when individuals the world over learn to read, write, do basic math and use computers, the more likely they are to lift themselves out of poverty.”  The organization makes literacy for women in developing nations as a top action addressed by their donations and programs.

2. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning

UNESCO hosts a “LitBase” website, which chronicles programs worldwide that have been successful in combating illiteracy.  In doing so, UNESCO hopes to have a go-to source for advocates interested in starting or joining the cause.

3. World Literacy Foundation

The World Literacy Foundation was founded in 2003 to promote awareness of illiteracy by bringing together various government organizations and NGOs.  Some of the programs championed by the Foundation include the Write On English writing competition in Azerbaijan, founding the Centre of Hope computer center in Uganda and the USAID-supported Fantastic Phonics computer program.

4. Global Literacy Project

A key program of the Global Literacy Project is the shipment of books and basic educational supplies throughout Africa, Asia and the Caribbean.  The Walk-for-Literacy fundraiser housed at Rutgers University is run through the Global Literacy Project as well.

5. Literacy.org

Founded at the University of Pennsylvania through a partnership with UNESCO, literacy.org (formerly the Literacy Research Center) has been training teachers and advocates of literacy since 1983.  Literacy.org also hosted a summer intensive workshop in Philadelphia for mid-career professionals interested in promoting literacy in developing countries.

Taylor Diamond

Sources: ProLiteracy, UNESCO LitBase, World Literacy Project, Global Literacy Project, Literacy.org
Photo: Vintage 3D

Israel
Rather than considering himself an advocate for Israel, Neil Lazarus considers himself to be “fighting the de-legitimization of Israel.” Since Israel became a state in 1948, groups of people have made it their lives work to not acknowledge its existence, but according to the Times of Israel, Lazarus will not stand for it.

There are a myriad of questions that are extremely difficult to answer in regards to what it means to be pro-Israel, especially for Americans. Is it good or bad for it that more American Jews are questioning its policies? Should a person’s support for this country be limited by the needs of non-Israelis affected by the conflict? Both questions as well as many others are hardly even approached by scholars or professionals, thus making it rather difficult to determine advocacy for Israel.

The editor-in-chief of the Jewish Daily Forward, Jane Eisner, explained that, “It is hard not to view this lopsided scene as an incredibly sad commentary on the difficulty of engaging Jews with vastly different views on Israel in civil dialogue.” How does an American Jew balance the occasionally competing interests of Israel, the United States and Palestine?

Neil Lazarus has put it simply by saying, “If we could do for Israel what McDonald’s did for the hamburger, we’d be in a good place. They don’t do hasbara, but they do sell in the language of the people: In China the burger comes with rice; in Italy, pasta; in Germany, beer. But they’re all buying the burger.” Even there the McDonald’s is kosher.

The ability to advocate for this country lies in the ability to understand that when asking questions about it, issues of identity, politics and personal responsibility all come into play. Different perspectives and sets of facts are hurdles that need to be address to determine the impacts of advocacy on Israel.

Lindsey Lerner

Sources: The Times of Israel, The Washington Post
Photo: Vintage 3D

merchant marines food aid
For some, the U.S. Merchant Marine represents an organization that shuttles American imports and exports around the world during peacetime while becoming a naval auxiliary during wartime. For others, they represent the largest obstacle to food aid reform.

Current food aid regulations stipulate that at least 80% of aid must be shipped by U.S. citizens on U.S. flagged vessels. Critics argue that needless money and time is spent hauling items around the world when food could be purchased locally in a much more timely fashion.

President Obama proposed a food aid overhaul in 2014’s fiscal budget that would reach an estimated 2 to 4 million more people within the year. Specifically, he wished to expand local and regional procurement procedures and food vouchers.

U.S. mariners were not amused by this proposal, however. When the food aid amendment attached to the farm bill reached the Congress floor, maritime lobbyists worked strenuously to ensure it wouldn’t pass, and succeeded.

The U.S. merchant marines provide a unique service for the United States. As they are not employed by United States military, they are able to service both the government and private sector.

The duality of their role in regard to the United States is significant for a number of reasons. The Navy League, a special interest group representing the U.S. maritime community, reports that they provide over 33,000 jobs for Americans, account for $1.9 million in economic output and $24 million in household earnings. Although food aid reformists argue that the shift in these numbers would be slight, by only a few hundred, Merchant Marine advocates contend that change would usher in the end of the merchant marines all together.

The Merchant Marine’s ability to transport troops and supplies during wartime, known as sealift, may be severely impacted if reform results in job loss. The U.S. Maritime Service was established by President Roosevelt in 1938 in anticipation of needed shipping vessels to both the European war front and Pacific Theater. The Merchant Marine provided invaluable service during the war, and current mariners argue that their services are still necessary.

Despite the mariners concerns, the Obama Administration has plans to counteract any negative effects the reform may usher in by providing aid directly to the U.S. Merchant Marine.

The administration proposes shifting $25 million of the efficiency savings that will be obtained through the food aid reform to the Department of Transportation’s Maritime administration. According to the White House International Food Aid Fact Sheet, this additional funding will provide a vehicle to support sustainment of militarily-useful vessels and a qualified pool of citizen merchant mariners.

Although this may not be the solution the merchant mariners were hoping for, the strong advocates for food aid reform may ensure that this is the best they can expect.

Emily Bajet

Sources: The Center for Public Integrity, U.S. Merchant Marine FAQ, The Maritime Executive, The White House: International Food Aid Fact Sheet
Photo: Giphy.com

bike
The inaugural World Innovation Summit for Health (WISH) – a conglomeration of entrepreneurs, business leaders, academics and technicians in the health space – convened last week in Qatar. As its title suggests, WISH serves as an arena for international delegates to create and implement innovative, nontraditional solutions to pressing issues in global health.

One participant, Londoner Lord Darzi of Denham (chairman of the Institute of Global Innovation at Imperial College), succinctly stated after the announcement of the Summit that “WISH is about action.”

Qatar’s newfound consideration as a hub for frontline innovation- principally through the Qatar Foundation- landed the nation the opportunity to host the prestigious two-day summit event. The Foundation has been on the forefront of the nation’s “visionary national health strategy” and initiated a first-of-its-kind investigation into the healthcare systems of eight major world players, the United Kingdom, the United States, Spain, Australia, South Africa, Brazil, India and Qatar. The Global Innovation Diffusion Report, unveiled on the second day of the summit, presented a well-researched report card of how each nation fosters and incorporates innovation to maximize health outcomes for their citizens.

The report noted both victories and areas in need of improvement for the eight nations of study. Each succeeded on a general level in identifying and addressing doctors and involving patients in treatment. Unfortunately, however, every nation but Qatar fell short in matching research-based suggestions with real changes in the health care space. Expert assessments of appropriate technological or practical innovations were ignored for different reasons in each nation.

In Spain and the United Kingdom, the least innovative countries, funds for research and development are scarce. New ideas simply cannot get off the ground because there is no money to put wind in their sails to begin with. Australia, Brazil and South Africa were slightly more successful than their European counterparts, but need to improve incentives for academics and policymakers who spread innovation. The United States and India showed a consistent, but small, gap between the ideal and reality.

The thorough case study concluded that innovation is most successfully spurred in the United States when incorporated into (or alongside) insurance and the accompanying payment system. Incidentally, the report identified the rollout of Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) programs as a major success for the U.S. in terms of innovation implementation. PCMH programs encourage primary care providers to tailor payments around patient outcomes and foster cooperation between medical and social services.

Moving forward, hot areas of progress for medical innovation will likely include: the application of mobile technology to share and store medical information; policymaking that encourages clinicians to adopt new ways of working; mobilization of resources to allow coordination between researchers and clinicians; and the development of an “innovation culture” and leadership among front line health care professionals.

Delegates representing our nation will undoubtedly confer about these recent findings and carve out a designated space for innovation in discussions touching on future policies, programs and technologies.

Casey Ernstes

Sources: Gulf News, NCQA, PR News Wire, World Innovation Summit for Health: Home, World Innovation Summit for Health: Global Diffusion
Photo: Vintage 3D

American sentiment global poverty
Though the United States is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the country ranks poorly when it comes to aid and contributions to global poverty. In a ranked global list of 27 developed countries, the United States tied for 19. This gap in aid can be explained by the belief that Americans care more about helping people geographically near them than helping people who live further away.

A study conducted by the Center for Global Development established a “Commitment to Development” Index which measures the contributions of developed countries to less-developed nations around the world. The study also splits aid into 6 different sectors in order to account for every kind of assistance given by countries.

The security sector of the study, for example, deducts points from countries that give weapons to unstable or tyrannical governments. The study concluded that the United States does less than the average developed country to help underdeveloped nations, resulting from the lack of attention given to people residing in further countries.

Furthermore, a study conducted by a PhD student at Stanford found a clear correlation between citizens’ support for foreign aid and the amount of aid given by their country. In the United States, many people are very generous and give public and private donations at high levels; however, these donations are directed to fellow Americans. As it stands, a majority of Americans support donating to their fellow citizens and cutting aid in the form of food and money to foreigners.

Both studies go far in explaining the low levels of aid given by the United States of America to foreign nations. In order to increase the amount of aid given to foreign nations, the United States will have to change its attitude, thus allowing for a positive affect on the amount of aid donated overseas.

– Lienna Feleke-Eshete

Sources: Think Progress, Center for Global Development

Overfull and varying widely in accommodation, Syrian refugee camps have become an international crisis. The United Nations has made the largest humanitarian appeal for aid ever at $5 billion to relieve the situation but has received less than $2 billion to date. Some 2.2 million refugees are currently scattered across Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt while more Syrians are fleeing war at an alarming pace. Estimates say more than 3 million refugees will be in those areas by January.

Such numbers are startling given the Syrian population before the onset of war was only  22.5 million. Lebanon, for example, has no official camps despite having more than a million refugees in its borders and does not allow the building of permanent refugee structures. Those who can afford it rent apartments or rooms in the cities at an exorbitant rate while others share the homes of sympathetic civilians or even inhabit abandoned buildings in depressed areas. In the northeast region, an average of 17 people per household are packed together according to a study conducted by Doctors Without Borders last year.

Water, food and healthcare are rationed out slowly and insufficiently, with less to go around as numbers rise. Employment for refugees was around 20% last year in Lebanon, and the economies of Iraq, Turkey and Jordan are in little better position to provide opportunities for such a rapid influx of labor.

Dependency on humanitarian aid is heightened and the desperation of the situation has many refugees working for extremely low wages in poor conditions and engaging in child labor. Economic and physical insecurity in Jordan’s Zataari camp has led parents to arrange hurried marriages for their teenage daughters as young as 14. Matchmakers recruit young girls for Saudi husbands but often end up as prostitutes or victims of “pleasure marriages” where the suitor divorces them after consummation.

Though some of Syria’s displaced persons find bourgeois  housing in Cairo or end up in one of Turkey’s refugee camps that consist of metal trailers with access to satellite T.V. and air conditioning, most see basic necessities and sanitation as luxuries. The Domiz camp in Iraq is made up primarily of tents and has 45,000 residents despite being designed for just 30,000. In just two weeks between August and September, more than 1,500 people were treated for upper respiratory infections there by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Security is also an issue in these camps with reports of rape, theft, kidnapping and murder being common. In the Zataari camp, Jordan security forces restrict entry but lack the manpower to adequately police the camp’s 120,000 residents. Other camps in Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkey reportedly funnel arms and recruits back into Syria. In Lebanon, crime has increased by 30% and increased tensions between Hezbollah and Sunni refugees may be behind the recent bombing of the Iranian embassy in Beirut.

Syria’s bordering nations are gradually increasing restrictions for entering refugees. Lebanon and Turkey are both planning to relocate some people to camps they wish to build within Syria’s insecure borders. Only about 25% of Syria’s refugees are actually in camps now, the rest are trying to survive by their own means. There are also an additional 3.8 million who are internally displaced.

Despite their faults, the refugee camps provide essential support and the need for more camps is evident, but where they can be built and how they will be funded is not so clear.

– Tyson Watkins

Sources: Medecins Sans Frontieres, World Health Organization, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Syrian Arab Republic,
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Moving Refugees, The Guardian, Integrated Regional Information Networks, BBC, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Syrian Regional Response Plan, Aljazeera, The Daily Star United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Stories from Syrian Refugees, The New York Review of Books
Photo: NPR

cars white background
In the midst of international mourning for Nelson Mandela and in an attempt to drive home the message of International Human Rights Day, a Brazilian NGO posed a provocative question on Tuesday, December 10.

A billboard designed by Conectas Human Rights, featured an image of Nelson Mandela and the question, “Do you feel moved by his legacy?” The text then urged the Brazilian population to act upon their emotions and “Do more than be moved.”

This campaign is driven by recent public opinion polls that reveal a negative feeling toward human rights issues in Brazil and support for more stringent laws and regulations.

Respondents to surveys administered across 134 municipalities in June 2013, support the reduction of maximum crime penalties from 18 years of age to 16, based on a belief held by 60% of the sample population that criminality is the result of ‘bad character.’

Moreover, the Datafolha Research Institute released data that reveal 26% of self-identified conservative-leaning respondents believe that homosexuality must be discouraged by society as a whole, whilst 33% believe that poverty is the result of laziness.

These emerging public opinions are linked to a reduction in funding for human rights groups, namely through foreign aid.

Brazil is widely considered to be an emerging market, the country’s role as 2014 World Cup host is evidence of this image but it disguises the fact that a growing economy does not automatically address human rights issues as seen through the need of foreign aid in assisting structural development.

It is estimated that 60% of the country’s NGOs relied on foreign aid for 80% of their budgets in 2003. Between 2008 and 2009 this aid decreased by 30% and again by another 49% in 2010 alone.

Executive Director of the Brazil Human Rights Fund, Ana Araújo, reminds us that Brazil was marked by dictatorship as recently as 30 years ago, a type of legacy that differs greatly from the one being celebrated across the globe on International Human Rights Day 2013.

Araújo argues that domestic support for human rights groups is the next, though not imminent, step, suggesting that emerging powers require more support, not less, to ensure that their emergence is ‘just.’

– Zoë Dean

Sources: Global Voices Online, Universo Online: CNT, Universo Online: Rightist Leanings, Open Democracy

usaid_pakistan
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was created in 1961 by The Foreign Assistance Act, which established a separate administration for non-military foreign aid. This consolidated the many separate foreign aid organizations within the US government at the time into one effective agency.

USAID advocates for making international aid the focus of foreign policy.  Under President Truman, foreign policy had two goals:  creating new markets for U.S. exports by relieving global poverty and helping countries prosper through capitalism. Later, in the 1970s, USAID shifted its focus to basic human needs: food security, health, education, jobs and resource management.

Today, USAID focuses on creating sustainable markets, transitioning countries into democracies and rebuilding former areas of conflict. USAID works mainly through non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and diversified aid packages.  Food security, economic growth, education, environmental protection, gender equality, health, innovation, sanitation and conflict management are at the forefront of US foreign policy.  All these factors go into creating sustainable trade partners and positive political relations.

USAID’s $20.4 billion funding comes directly from the U.S. government.  Of this, only about $1.35 billion is spent on operating costs.  The rest of the funding goes to “bilateral assistance” provided to countries and regions in need.  Afghanistan is the largest recipient of US economic assistance at $2.24 billion, followed by Pakistan with $970 million.

Past successes include family planning, immunization programs, improved farming techniques and booming energy sectors in developing countries.  Life expectancy in the developing world has increased by 33 percent, immunizations have eliminated smallpox, and infant and child death rates have decreased by 50 percent in the developing world.  HIV/AIDS education and prevention has been a major focus of USAID, with programs set up in 32 countries.  Meanwhile, 1.3 billion people have access to safe drinking water thanks to USAID-led UN Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade.

Stephanie Lamm

Sources: USAID History, USAID Sites
Photo: Business Week

quotes about diplomacy churchill
Tool of war or a path to peace? Art of compromise or art of deceit? Over the years, diplomacy has been viewed in many different ways. Below are quotes about diplomacy from five famous individuals, who each had their an opinion on diplomacy and its role in international relations.

 

5 Inspirational Quotes about Diplomacy

 

  1. “Diplomacy: the art of restraining power.” – Henry Kissinger, 56th U.S. Secretary of State, U.S. National Security Advisor and winner of the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize
  1. “Part of diplomacy is to open different definitions of self-interest.”- Hillary Clinton, 67th U.S. Secretary of State, former New York senator and former First Lady
  1. “Diplomacy is the art of telling people to go to hell in such a way that they ask for directions.”- Winston Churchill, U.K. Prime Minister during World War II and recipient of the 1953 Nobel Prize for Literature
  1. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”- Sun Tzu, Chinese general and author of “The Art of War”
  1. “To say nothing, especially when speaking, is half the art of diplomacy.”- Will Durant, author, philosopher and historian

–  Jordanna Packtor

 

Read global poverty quotes

Sources: Brainy Quote, Good Reads, HISTORY.com, Encyclopedia Britannica, Nobelprize.org
Photo: History Today