Articles by Janet Jagan
Will the World’s Children be Better off in 2007?
by Janet JaganDec 30, 2006
This planet on which we all live was in pretty bad shape during 2006. Wars (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, Ethiopia, etc), pestilence (HIV/AIDS and malaria) poverty (everywhere, even in the very rich countries), homelessness (as a result, mainly of wars and poverty) crime (increasing in every country) and all kinds of violence have all reaped heavy tolls on humanity.
Hit the hardest, as always, are the world’s children who suffer and die in increasingly large numbers because of all the ills of society. When it comes to war, the toll on children is devastating. In all the countries where wars exist, it is the children who are hit the hardest.
The numbers killed grow daily in the bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan and the suffering, especially in Darfur in Sudan is unbelievable, as children starve and die because of displacement, no food and shelter and the violence against their mothers.
Now before military courts in the USA are US Marines charged with the murder of 24 unarmed Iraqi citizens who died in Haditha, Iraq. Several were children who were allegedly gunned down by US soldiers. One young girl was raped and then murdered.
But this is only one of many such occurrences arising out of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan where one hears constantly of deaths by gunfire at weddings, for example, mistakenly thought to be ambushes or by false information. Always children die!
In Lebanon, Israeli soldiers flooded the country with cluster bombs that covered vast areas of the countryside, where children play and where these bombs explode and kill or maim thousands of children.
The BBC recently showed a feature its correspondents filmed in Vietnam, showing large numbers of children who were born horribly deformed – as a result of the poison Agent Orange which was used during the US invasion of that country. Thousands of acres of land were sprayed with this poison which remains in the soil and still has the power to destroy and deform babies. It’s always the children who pay!
Violence against children is widespread. Children are raped, frequently by soldiers, by relatives, even by their fathers. Children are beaten, some to death, by angry fathers, mothers, teachers and others.
In Guyana we debate whether teachers should be allowed to beat school children! We seem to be in the dark ages, when slaves were whipped and children beaten to serious injuries for minor offences.
Children go hungry in a world where food is plentiful and much of it thrown away. A recent news report said: “Hunger in American households has risen by 43% in the last five years and it requires urgent attention.” The report stated that the US Department of Agriculture released information that 38.2 million Americans live in households that suffer directly from hunger and food insecurity, including nearly 14 million children.
According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, some 220 million or 44% of the population of the area do not have enough money to cover their needs.
And what do these statistics tell us? It’s the children who always suffer the greatest.
Further statistics help us understand the “Why” for such pervasive poverty. In the USA, for example, the richest 1 percent of the US population hold 40% of the nation’s wealth. In the UK it is there, but lower. 1% of Britons hold 18% of the nation’s wealth.
Although each year malnutrition in developing countries contributes to the death of more than 5 million preschool children, enough food is available to provide every human being on earth with more than the 2,350 calories needed daily for a healthy and active life. (From Crop Circles by Marc J. Chin reviewed in “Natural History,” October 2003).
We should go back to a slogan popular some years ago – “Save our Children.” Irresponsible, foolish and harmful wars must end. Voters in every country have to speak out – as they did recently in the USA against the war – and demand a better use of each nation’s resources, so that children can live, enjoy life and make their contributions to the welfare of all
© 2007 Janet Jagan
by Janet Jagan
(Thunder, 11 November 1961)
It seems that the only time Mr. Richard Ishmael of the MPCA comes out of his cocoon of complacency is when his members start kicking up their heels, as they have been doing with greater and greater frequency of late. One is by now getting a bit bored with the hopelessly puerile demonstrations of solidarity with him and his union, by him and his crew.
I can recall the genuinely spontaneous demonstrations of opposition to his poorly bargained Pension Scheme of a few months ago. Mr. Ishmael, who plays the ferocious tiger in the newspapers and over the radio, always sags and flops when the real challenge is put to him.
I put the challenge during our discussions on the Sugar Pension Scheme and dared him to go to the estates and hold public meetings with his members and determine their views on his scheme. This challenge scrupulously avoided. I notice now that Ajodha Singh has also put the same challenge to him, which he is brushing aside with haughty laughter.
Challenge
Of course, one should never have to challenge a trade a union leader about testing his support with the members of his union, to whom, under normal circumstances, he owes his position of authority and responsibility. But one must never forget that the MPCA is rather unique in its own little way.
To begin with, it has the largest number of members on paper, but it also has the least support from its members.
Its President, Mr. Ishmael lost his deposit when he fought a Legislative seat in a sugar constituency in the 1953 elections. Its President again contested a seat in the August 1961 elections, again in a sugar constituency, but when he saw the handwriting on the wall – a second loss of deposit – he hastily withdrew.
Company support
One also cannot forget that the check-off system, which under normal trade union conditions is a good thing, in the hands of a company union, is a means of company support to build membership and collect dues.
Ask any ten workers on a sugar estate if they agree to being members of the MPCA or if they allow deductions because of fear of victimisation by the management. The answer would not be bard to find, and I can safely predict that fear of victimisation as the reason why the MPCA shows such a high enrolment and collects so much in union dues.
MPCA undemocratic
Another vital point to keep in mind is the fact that democracy just does not exist in the MPCA. Some people quarrel about a new union in the sugar industry, a “rival union, and say that that is wrong. But the simple question is — can the MPCA leadership be changed democratically? The answer is clearly — no.
When Ishmael’s leadership was challenged in 1957, it was quickly arranged that he be sealed into office for four years, shamelessly violating the constitution which called for annual elections — which is common practice in the trade union world.
As soon as his four years were up this year, it was again arranged for him to be, in a rigged set-up, cemented into office for a period of three years, again carefully avoiding annual elections and normal trade union practice.
Tip-off
We can no longer be fooled by such antics of Ishmael as now calling for increased benefits to workers because of the higher price being paid for sugar in the USA. We know that he knows that the majority Party was making official inquiries into the increased prices being paid by the US. He got the tip-off and immediately, anticipating something militant from those genuinely interested in the sugar workers, started to jump on that band-wagon.
Is it any wonder that the trade union movement in BG comes in for scathing criticism, both locally and internationally? It is time that there is a clean-up, and the workers are properly led and militancy developed.
The reports coming out of Iraq are so alarming that they are causing consternation all over the world, and particularly in the USA. With mid-term elections for the Senate and House of Representatives of the US Congress, due on November 7, President Bush and his close officials, like the Vice President, the Defence Secretary, the Secretary of State and the UN Ambassador are in a tight squeeze. The pressure comes from everywhere, including the Democrats, leaders of the ruling Republican Party, and ordinary US citizens. The polls show that the Iraq war is of the greatest concern, even though President Bush is trying hard to shift emphasis in the November 7 elections to the state of the economy, but no one is buying that.
One of the severest blows came from the USA’s loyal partner, Great Britain. Chief of the General Staff Richard Dannett said recently that British troops should leave Iraq soon because their presence is worsening security. He said that post war planning for the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq was poor and the presence of troops there was hurting British security globally. The Head of the British armed forces further said: “Britain should get ourselves out sometime soon because our presence exacerbates the security problems.”
And that is really the essence of what has happened in Iraq. Over and over again, it has been explicitly pointed out that the invasion and occupation of Iraq have emboldened the terrorists, increased their deadly activities and has also encouraged the spread of terrorism, rather than stopping it. President Bush’s campaign all along has been a “War on Terrorism,” but the reverse has happened.
Right now, there are approximately 100 deaths a day in Iraq. The number of US soldiers killed is the highest – some 90 so far for the month of October. New and reliable research puts the figure of dead Iraqis since the invasion to 655,000, far, far above the benign figure given by Bush of some 30,000 Iraqis. In an article in the Sunday Chronicle, October 22, 2006 entitled “The Human Cost of the Iraq War,” Gwynne Dyer reports on the studies done by reputable US researchers from John Hopkins University and the renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology, plus the British Medical Journal Lancet which confirm the high death rate of Iraqis.
The costs of the terrible and vastly unpopular war run in the billions – estimated at US$811 billion! Enough to give the poor, the sick, the displaced, the hungry and the homeless a chance to survive!
Last Sunday’s TV programme “60 Minutes” exposed the shocking corruption in Iraq, where US-picked officials stole almost one billion dollars. Besides all the dreadful deaths and what these mean to the remaining families, tens of thousands of Iraqis are fleeing the killing fields. The number of displaced persons are now placed at 130,000, some putting up tents far from the dangerous areas, and thousands fleeing to neighbouring countries, Syria in particular.
While the figures on Iraqi deaths and the huge exodus are alarming, what about the number of injured, and, especially the number who have been maimed for life? These must be very high, both for Iraqis and Allied troops. US figures are unavailable.
What about the new land of democracy and the better life the Americans have brought to Iraq? Everyone knows that is rubbish. Education, housing, health care, electricity, water, sewage – all these are even worse than in the time of Saddam. Iraq, right now, is a destroyed country – destroyed by the invasion (for which the reasons given by Bush turned out to be all lies) and the occupation, which absolutely no Iraqi accepts.
The USA’s record in connection with prisoners and their incarceration is a blemish on the USA and increases the hatred of Americans worldwide. In the United Nations, it was observed that torture now is worse than it was under Saddam Hussein.
The US has protected itself by demanding and pressuring governments to pass laws to exempt Americans from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and from local courts when they commit misdemeanours.
That is one reason why Iraq cannot try and punish US soldiers for rape and murder. Such cases are now heard in the USA, but in the instances arising, it was Iraqi young women who were raped and other Iraqis who were murdered. One of the smallest countries in the world – Barbados – had the guts to defy the USA and refused to sign the pact. Congrats to them!
President Bush is now facing his greatest challenge. It appears, that despite US public opinion and the lowest popularity polls, he has no intention of accepting proposals to move troops out of Iraq. The results of the November 7, 2006 polls will be a significant test and may, possibly, influence the future of that devastated land called Iraq.
© 2004 Janet Jagan
© 1999 Cheddi Jagan Research Centre. All rights reserved.
