World War Z

I haven't seen the film of the same name, but I understand from the interviews with author, Max Brooks, that the film has had the Hollywood treatment and is very different from the structure of the original narrative, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie Wars. That said, provide it is less gory horror, I do like an adventure/thriller flick and a reinterpretation of a story is no bad thing. In fact, Max Brook's book itself is inspired by Stud Terkel's The Good War: An Oral History of World War Two and the zombie films by George A. Romero. Alongside reading the book in ePub format on my iPad and on my Android phone (also available here), I've tried listening to the much celebrated audio (abridged) version of the book (it is there on Youtube). The latter, voiced by actors for the various different parts means that I need to be able to have the time to plug in my headphones whilst being pretty close to an Internet connection, which is something that isn't always a possibility, these days.

Apocalypse

The book, published in 2006, is a written as a series of first hand accounts in a world with a radically reduced population following an outbreak of a virus with Patient Zero in China over runs the Earth turning humans into the living dead. It goes beyond a traditional horror genre and deals with post-apocalyptic chaos brought on by world-wide panic. Fear of the zombie virus spreading uncontrollably and denial of the extent of the spread of the disease is followed quickly by sudden movements of entire populations and societal breakdown. Most governments can offer little in the way of strategy and are unprepared against zombie attacks and the spread of mass infection. The collapse of social order is explored through a series of individual accounts.

In the book, Max Brooks travels the world, and we learn about the individual personal wars and survival stories of the characters that he interviews. Underlying them is the subtext of how we live today - our political and social identities and how humanity can unite when faced with an adversary within. 

Ultimately World War  World War Z is both cautionary as well as hopeful. We are reminded that evil lurks, waiting restlessly to be unleashed when our structures fall apart. It also reminds us that good simmers below the surface, capable of defending and rebuilding a devastated world.

Peace, Goodwill and Commercialism

In the quiet corner of the Internet that this blog space occupies I have set myself a minor challenge to follow a trail of thought that moves against the current tide of collective acceptance. I figure that with search activities at this time of year preoccupied elsewhere, I just might be able raise an alternative voice regarding 25th December without offending. That would not be my aim, so apologies in advance if I err. 

For me as a Muslim, Christmas has never really been part of my foreground, so Al Hamdulilah I have been spared the commercial excesses. Perhaps, this has been fortunate for me. Not that I would ever wish to deny Christendom from marking an important date - as I recognise the importance for collective celebration.

Regardless of the fact that there is real debate about the exact date of the birth of Isa PBUH (Jesus), and the difference of theological interpretation of a great man and his mission by both Muslims and Christians, it would be fair to say that for many the 25th December has missed out the point of it being mass of Christ. Instead, the commercial Santafication is the current iteration of a winter Pagan/Roman celebration. The objection attached to this therefore has even more resonance at a time when the global Occupy protests aim to draw attention to wanton commercial exploitation (See more here).

Does it make sense, therefore, for some to even call this event 'Christ'mas? Personally, I find it difficult to be at ease with the passive acceptance of commercial Christmas, and especially alarming when the neo-con media appear to be complicit in the overlap. Fortunately, as I have already mentioned, I am spared the worse aspects of this indulgence.

Peace and goodwill to all men? Absolutely. 

But you don't need a date for that.

We Are the 99 Percent

The Occupy Wall Street Campaign and the movements inspired by the anti-corporate agenda is led by that sense that we are so marginalised and unable to affect positive change that our futures appear to be little short of staring into the abyss of hopelessness. Sit-ins, protests and demonstrations have been replicated around the globe against what the organisers consider to be the economic misfortuntues caused by a global recession that is directly linked to government policies and banking instutions driven by greed. (Read more here). Consider this from the We are the 99 percent blog:

We are the 99 percent. We are getting kicked out of our homes. We are forced to choose between groceries and rent. We are denied quality medical care. We are suffering from environmental pollution. We are working long hours for little pay and no rights, if we're working at all. We are getting nothing while the other 1 percent is getting everything. We are the 99 percent. 

Today is World Food Day. In an age where there is plenty, the statistic that 1 billion people - that is 1 in 7 are still unable to feed themsleves due to global economic policies is without a doubt, a humanitarian outrage. We should, by all accounts be angry.

Multiculturalism: A Prime Minister Speaks

Nothing really changes. It seems that some people are never pleased, and others will pander to fashionable hysteria. It is the same today as it was yesterday as it was the day before and when I was growing up. Too many of us still need a fall guy; some-one to shift the blame onto; a bogeyman caricature; an enemy to help define ourselves.

Europe's uneasy relationship with the Islamic world is rooted in history and David Cameron speaks with rather common voice:

Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream. We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong.

We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values. So when a white person holds objectionable views – racism, for example – we rightly condemn them. But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn't white, we've been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them.

Europe needs to wake up to what is happening in our own countries. We need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of these terrorist attacks lie – and that is the existence of an ideology, Islamist extremism.

At the furthest end includes those who back terrorism to promote their ultimate goal: an entire Islamist realm, governed by an interpretation of shariah.

Move along the spectrum, and you find people who may reject violence, but who accept various parts of the extremist world-view including real hostility towards western democracy and liberal values.

If we are to defeat this threat, he says, its time to turn the page on on the failed policies of the past. So first, instead of ignoring this extremist ideology, we as governments and societies have got to confront it in all its forms.

David Cameron's speech follows on the heals of Angela Merkel's "Multiculturalism Has Failed" speech in October of last year. So the man at the top of the ladder in British politics, the Queen's representative and the first man of Britain, also knocks "multiculturalism". Frankly, I don't think that Britain in anyway leads on the matter and the failure of multiculturalism must have much to do with Germany and Britain both having allowed downward signalling ghettos to exist - enclaves within their systems where migrants and their kin are forced into the outer edges of mainstream society. Add to that relative poverty and low opportunity and failure stares you right back.

Many, many societies, have people of different racial types, religious views, languages, shades and opinions and whilst no place is perfect, "multiculturalism" is probably not even a word in those places. People just soldier on with their work, their daily routines and get on with providing safety and security for their families. Multiculturalism exists in a day-in, day-out basis. It just is.

Has multiculturalism in Europe failed? Well since Europe is still riding on a past nostalgia, I'm not surprised at these kinds of speeches. It's a "blame" game, nothing else. I don't eulogise most politicians in the slightest, so fortunately I can dismiss Cameron's attempt at courting popular prejudice. For most politicians, even national leaders, I find believing that they can possibly speak without agenda, something of a challenge. But just so that Cameron is reminded - he is no Barack Obama. Barack "Hussein" Obama. You know, the African-American President with a Muslim family. But then again, Britain is no America - where immigrants, Muslims included, are the key components of the contemporary American melting pot.

Cameron and Merkel ...? Hang on to yesteryear. Stay in your little pasts.

Educational Technology Debate

On my journey through the whole Crystal Maze of Educational Technology, I keep coming back to a few simple questions about what works, what is ethical and what are the costs. Some of these questions, perhaps remain open ended, but provide for genuine debate and what I feel would make for valuable areas of investigation for my upcoming research project.

The Educational Technology Debate (ETD) seeks to promote a substantive discussion of how low-cost information and communication technology (ICT) device initiatives for educational systems in developing countries are relevant to the very groups they purport to serve – the students, teachers, and their surrounding communities.

The Struggle

I was visited in school today by a gentleman called Ayedh Al Tamemi whom I mention here because I worked with him for a key part of last year in an advisory capacity. I was responsible for coaching and mentoring him as he worked his way through his first year in teaching. He represents, in many ways, the 'new' face of education in public schools here in the UAE. Forward thinking, experimental, adaptable and ambitious.

This sets Ayedh apart from other teachers, mostly expat Arabs (from poorer backgrounds), who make up the bulk of the system. Ayedh, whilst still growing as an educator, asked me to write him a recommendation so that he could eventually enrol on a Masters in Educational Leadership in New York. Paid in full by ADEC, whilst he will retain his teaching salary. Way to go! I only wish my MA was paid for in the same way and I got to travel. Sounds envious, but I speak here of the wider investment in people both small and on a global scale.

It's difficult for the other teachers in the UAE public system to raise their own motivation levels. Apart from being ill-prepared, their motivations cannot be the same as Emiratis, since they have less stake in the system. Laziness and apathy is only part of it - mostly expat teachers are on the fringes, dis-empowered and unable to affect change within. They are largely unsupported, have fewer opportunities for professional development and cannot grow roots within the UAE because of the expat set-up.

Public schools, here, are on the whole, poor and the process of change is hindered by these very obstacles. Give people a stake - a reason -  and watch desire to see students achieve and professional commitment rise. As an advisor in schools and as a chalkface educator I have long recognised this struggle. It starts with teachers who are happy, supported and appropriately challenged; not with hurdles, bureaucracy, unrealistic expectations, inadequate resources and no clear sense of hope for tomorrow.

Whilst education costs because it requires financial commitment, it should not be at the cost of the individuals who educate.

Millennium Development Goals

"We must not fail the billions who look to the international community to fulfil the promise of the Millennium Declaration for a better world." UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon

Without a major shift in how we run our economies and the politics of power and money, nothing much will change.

When I read that in today's Bangladesh 40 percent of population of 150 million lives on less that $1 a day, I'm reminded that the UN Millennium Goals may end up being empty rhetoric. 10 years from the Millennium Summit in 2000 when the goals were agreed and with 5 years left to achieve them, I wonder at the vastness of the task.

I completely agree with the principles. I'm consumed by a kind of pessimism that means I can't see the change, unless there is that massive shift in economic politics in order to achieve this. To remind us of the goals that were agreed in 2000 (be achieved world-wide by 2015):

• Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
• Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education
• Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women
• Goal 4: Reduce child mortality
• Goal 5: Improve maternal health
• Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
• Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
• Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development

Whilst we are distracted by war, greed and power games, we need a reminder that we have five years left. This is an incredible task. Over the coming postings, I'd like to look at some of these.

The Art Of Manipulation

Propaganda. It's an art.

But it doesn't mean that it's any less conniving.

When I hear about some Mullahs on a UK Foreign Office tour of London it rouses my curiosity. The Mullahs are taken on-board the London Eye, where they recline, feet up, Afghan style and are treated especially well. I'm very happy for them and glad for once that Pashtoons are treated hospitably.

This does shape the visitors' opinions and when they hear of British Muslims for the first time, they learn that Muslims make up a part of the working social fabric of British society. The Mullahs are impressed. In southern Afghanistan, where there is poverty, it is perhaps not known so well that there are well-fed Muslims living in Europe. The Mullahs learn just enough to come away with the impression that British Muslims are well accommodated within British Society - free to worship and pursue their lives, and return with a message to Afghanistan that European and American forces in their country are good and are there to help.

The Foreign Office likes these types of Muslims when it serves their purposes.

But then, why do I, also Pashtoon and desiring to build bridges, not swallow this so easily?

A Very Different Reality

Perhaps, this is because it feels manipulative. I suspect that there is a deeper reason for allowing visiting Mullahs to come to Britain, especially at a time when many Brits probably feel saturated by the global Islamic presence. London is great; it's a city with lots to offer and remains one of my favourite places. Unlike the Mullahs, however, when I am in London, I have to push my way through the crowds and there is no special treatment. So a whistle-stop tour in a dynamic city as part of an official visit can create a rather superficial impression - this isn't the UK society that most Muslims that I know, are exposed to.

Consider the history - during my formative years, I came across a deep institutionalised prejudice that still shapes my thinking. This prejudice, which is built into the bricks and mortar of the social institutions we deal with daily, has still not gone away. The reality is that non-European migrants and their indigenous-born children have been at the centre of many discussions in the UK and not all favourable.

A 'Modern' Hysteria

I know what racism looks like; subtle racism, as well as overt and I know how unpleasant and damaging this can be. I am also aware that racism is primarily about ethnicity and that religious hatred is in truth, is a different thing. But look how they have come together.


The modern wave of post 9-11 anti-Muslim hysteria is traced back to an earlier time and I am deeply concious of how Muslims are continuously scapegoated for many of today's social ills. The UK is typical of its sisters in Western Europe in that Muslims have been ghettoised in the large parts to particular urban areas, often run down; where "white flight" is made up of that combination of racial prejudice and religious intolerance.

Divisions and Spoils

And then there is Afghanistan, where the military campaign is the physical front of the ideological racial and religious divide that I speak of.

President Hamid Karzai, speaks of it too, in an ever increasingly louder voice. If the Mullahs who visited London speak favourably of the military campaign in Afghanistan, then perhaps, this once, I can be forgiven for being a sceptic. There are, after all, many genuine concerns over the effectiveness of the foreign military presence, their behaviours and their governments' intentions.

Afghanistan is in need and no society is perfect. But I think it is particularly unfair to take people from a fatigued, war-torn society where a foreign military campaign is eyed with distrust and where development of social infrastructure is - lets face it - hardly without condition - to become the voice of that failing campaign. Favouring some hand picked Mullahs like this is highly manipulative and the British tactic of patronage and favouritism is how a small island nation managed to colonise half the planet.

Create the divisions and exploit the spoils.

It is an art. Though no less dishonourable.

Global Village

Which one would you have?

Global Village or Globalisation? These terms are used interchangeably or synonymously - we constantly hear through the media that we live in a global village or that globalisation is upon us - it's rather clichéd, either way. But, if given a choice, I wish we had the global village approach rather than a globalisation approach. Think of all the things that a village contains - a micro economy, a sense of community, a shared sense of responsibility and a sense of unity or togetherness. Contrast that with globalisation, which is often understood to be the rise in monopolies out to exploit every corner of the planet. Perhaps that view is pessimistic, but I still vote for the village approach.

The Global Village, rather like a mela/global shopping fair sits just outside Dubai on Route 311 - Emirates Road. It runs, as in previous years, between November and February and I was there twice this weekend. The village is made up of pavilions with country themes - Egypt, India, Iran etc. where crafts, clothes and foods are sold. There's also entertainment - we saw a magnificent dervish from Morocco, who really stood out. I missed the photo op, but the performance was fantastic. Anyway, here are pics showing the Pakistan and Afghanistan pavilions.

Hunger, Poverty, Conflict

Hunger, Poverty, Conflict. It's all a dreary mess, and Afghanistan is one of many places where it all comes together.

In a survey of over 700 people in Afghanistan (reported by the BBC), poverty was cited as the main reasons cited for the ongoing conflict.

The report, by Oxfam, coincides with the World Food Summit that ended on November 18th (and seen, rather pathetically now, as not entirely successful in addressing food 'shortages') and the recent Jeffery Sach's inpsired film, The End of Poverty?

The war on terror lost direction a long time ago. What about a war on poverty, which is seen as one of the root causes of misery and conflict?

The End of Poverty?

Eight Million People

8 million people die each year because they are too poor to survive and yet the tragedy is that with a little help, they could even thrive. We can banish extreme poverty in our generation.

In his book, The End of Poverty, Jeffrey Sachs argues that extreme poverty — defined by the World Bank as incomes of less than 1 dollar per day — can be eliminated globally by the year 2025.

The End of Poverty, is now a documentary film: Here's a clip that reminds us all that Poverty is Not An Accident.

The End Of Poverty? from Philippe Diaz on Vimeo.

As Gandhi, once said, "The world has enough for everybody's need, not for everybody's greed."

In a World of Plenty ...

... why are so many of us hungry?

The child pictured, from Pakistan, is a window cleaner and the sole breadwinner in her family. "Whatever I earn I give to my mother, and when I am a hungry, I eat at the food distribution centre." BBC News

Yesterday's media commentary on the UNICEF report, TRACKING PROGRESS ON CHILD AND MATERNAL NUTRITION raises some alarming statistics - over 90% of the worlds most undernourished children are in Asia and Africa with an estimated 195 million children in developing countries suffering from stunting and poor physical development as a result of undernourishment.

Undernutrition caused by poor feeding and care, aggravated by illness leads to a cycle of recurring illness and faltering growth – irreversibly damaging their development and their cognitive abilities, and impairing their capacities as adults. If a child suffers from diarrhoea – due to a lack of clean water or adequate sanitation, or because of poor hygiene practices – it will drain nutrients from his or her body.

And so it goes, from bad to worse: 1 billion people world-wide are undernourished. and hungry. Children who are weakened by nutritional deficiencies cannot stave off illness for long, and the frequent and more severe bouts of illness they experience make them even weaker. A third of all deaths of under 5s is related to undernutrition.

Fifty-nine percent of under-5s in Afghanistan show signs of moderate to severe stunting and comes out as the country where percentage wise, its the highest. India, Nigeria and Pakistan also have percentages in their 40s.

In a world where there are people over-eating, and too much of our food is wasted, it is outrageous that globally, as we approach 2010, we still have instances when our children go to sleep hungry at night.

Kill the Dragon: The Militant Money Trail

In an earlier posting, I mentioned the Atlantic Council's Afghanistan Report. I'd like to pick out a key point around extremism and the Taliban insurgency that continues to destabilise both Afghanistan and Pakistan. We learn from the report that Narcotics form an under-belly economy, but that this could be effectively be made non-viable if the rural Afghan per capita goes from $1 to $4. Afghanistan is rich in farmland and agriculture is a sustainable livelihood, so (with external support and subsidy) meeting the $4 mark can really turn the situation around.

But coming to the insurgency - and a discussion around the why the Taliban appears to have grown in strength since their ousting from power in 2001. It's difficult to pinpoint this one - the American-led NATO presence in Afghanistan is fast losing public support, especially since ground troops have not policed Afghanistan well and drone attacks into Pakistan (where there is currently no international remit to be there) target innocent villagers. Add to this the fact that clumsy operations in Afghanistan itself leads to an alarming number of civilian deaths and reconstruction efforts are not always coordinated well or concentrated in the Pashtoon belt (from where the Taliban draw their support).

And whilst, many don't agree with their methods or their ideology, the Taliban appear to have positioned themselves as a legitimate militia in order to fend off the advances of the many battalions of foreign troops sitting in pockets around the country. The Taliban is just one of many competing forces for control. There are still any number of other outfits and warlords, with internal and external sponsors able to raise private militias should a major stand off or continued power vacuum occur.

Unemployment

The Taliban issues is now more complex today than it was when the they controlled Afghanistan - they have regrouped, become more covert and find natural allies amongst people disappointed at NATO's lack of progress. Many Taliban recruits are being paid to be "day" Talibs whilst going about regular business at other times, ready to take up arms when commanded by a local chief. The day-Talibs are not driven by ideology, notions of world destruction or a version of rigid theological/tribal society. They are often unemployed youth who are easily manipulated and who are being paid to take part in an insurgency. There's been a whole lot of discussion on education for girls in Afghanistan, but little on the need to create vocational training opportunities to stop male youth drifting to paid Taliban employment.

The Taliban, when they held power, virulently ended the narcotics trade, so I'm not sure how much of this is involved today in financing them. The question to which I seek answers over and over again is another simple one. Who is financing the Taliban? There are rumours of wealthy patrons in oil-rich countries, covert agencies in neighbouring countries, the CIA and so on. Years on from their ousting of power in Kabul, the Taliban in their various guises control whole areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Confusion remains over who really is in control - but clearly somebody knows. If we are serious about removing them altogether, we have to end the money-trail.

Simple.

Kill the Dragon: $1 A Day

The Atlantic Council's Afghanistan Report highlights some very interesting points. Over the next couple of postings, I'd like to pick out some of these as they give us lots of food for thought, but before that lets consider some of the immediate issues faced by the country:

• weak governance and corruption
• flourishing narcotics trade forming an under-belly economy
• weakened education systems
• extremism/Taliban/insurgency

I'm not quite sure where I stand with the whole governance issue - I'm a natural political cynic, (probably more so) knowing that warlords and corrupt officials were invited into the post 9/11 Afghan administration. What I do know for sure is that historically, successive governments in Afghanistan have been subject to interference and manipulation by neighbouring (as well as distant) countries. Fingers, alas, point in several different directions, including the countries on the immediate doorstep.

Living off $1 a day

But the main point I would like to highlight in this posting is the most simple in my opinion. With the rural income per capita at $1 a day, opimium farming is far more profitable than traditional agriculture. Afghanistan has ample potential for being a nation with a strong economy based on agriculture. If the balance could be tipped from $1 to $4 a day, the opium trade would become unprofitable.

Simple.