Wednesday 22 September 2010

Taking Ownership of the UN’s failings


World leaders are gathering for the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Each leader will get 15 minutes on an international podium to put forward their agenda and mostly air their grievances and I suspect in the case of the some, notably Iran and Libya if last year was anything to go by, settle ‘personal’ scores. Of course the time limit is only a guidance, many leaders go over this time, though few compare to Gaddafi’s rant last year, lasting a whopping hour and 40 minutes only beaten by Fidel Castro who addressed World Leaders at the UNGA in 1960 for four long and no doubt painful for the audience – hours. Unlike the Academy Awards there’s no music that starts to drown them out as they go past their allocated time nor are they escorted away by burly security guards although the thought of Ahmadinejad being tackled to the ground Jerry Springer style for going over his time would provide much needed entertainment at an otherwise dull male dominated talk shop.

With this annual meeting comes the usual UN bashing – let’s face it we all love a bit of that don’t we? Whether you work within the system, would secretly like to work for it or just like sitting on the moral high ground and pointing a finger, everyone seems to have an opinion when it comes to the organisation that is made up of no less than 192 member states. I guess this is to be expected as the UN is a public organisation, albeit an international one so as our taxes go towards maintaining the organisation, we have as much right to scrutinise it as we do our individual country’s public sector. The issue I have is when World leader’s and their representatives talk about the United Nations’ relevance as though they played no part in making the institution what it is today. The worse culprits being those with veto powers who are the very reason the organisation fails to take any real action.

In 2004 former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan commissioned a panel to make recommendations for a reform of the organisation. In 2005 he proposed these ‘bold’ reforms which included expanding the Security Council, setting out rules on when it can authorise military force and reaching an agreed definition of terrorism. Five years later and these reforms are still being debated.

In a document dated 12th April 2010 from the Ad Hoc Committee Negotiating Comprehensive Anti-Terrorism Convention, the issue of how terrorism is defined was still considered contentious. The second question of when the organisation can authorise military force seems to have to been reduced to an academic debate, the only evidence of it still being a live issue is in a paper presented in February at the Annual Conference of the International Studies Association by a student from Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University. The expansion of the Security Council which could be a key issue in real United Nations reform is no closer to being agreed by the five permanent members than it was when first tabled.

I find it somewhat dishonest when the media talk about the United Nations struggling to prove its relevance and cite failed negotiations with North Korea or the Middle East peace process, as though any government on their own or with others have succeeded where the United Nations has failed. Where diplomacy is concerned, I can’t think of a single state’s triumph following UN failure. Its absolutely ridiculous that the Washington Post should refer to the Middle East process in its article U.N. struggles to prove its relevance without quoting its own government’s repeatedly unsuccessful efforts in reaching a deal, which is even more laughable when we consider how ‘closely’ tied the United States is with Israel. If I can’t persuade my own teenager to turn the music down then what chance does my neighbour have?

Where countries have been ‘successful’ (a term used loosely) is in taking military action, something which fortunately the United Nations is a lot more cautious in doing because let’s face it, the last thing we need is another military power that is able to launch ‘shock and awe’ campaigns killing millions of innocent civilians at a whim.

At an individual level, critique is somewhat justified, as I said earlier we contribute to the running of the institution and therefore have a right to question how it run. However this should be done with a dose of common sense; diplomacy which is at the core of the organisation has never been known to produce overnight results. Negotiating with two parties is difficult at best, let alone negotiating with 192 parties, each and every one fighting fiercely to further its own agenda. I think it’s fair to say that there are areas where the United Nations makes a difference, where if it wasn’t there, countries, groups and individuals would run amok. Granted, there is a lot of room for improvement especially where the attitude of a lot of United Nations employees who are no more than paper pushing civil servants, doing the bare minimum while earning a highly competitive salary are concerned. A lot of people enter the system and become disillusioned and unfortunately many of the disillusioned join the lazy bunch and so continues the vicious and very unproductive cycle. I think this is a great shame and one of the biggest flaws of the United Nations. There needs to be better accountability; the seasoned civil servants who sit in offices with no purpose should be gotten rid of. Those who genuinely believe in the organisation’s aim and purpose should continue to work hard and be true to the values they signed up to and themselves. A friend signs her emails off with the following quote from her mother

"If I sweep the front of my house clean and my neighbours on my right and left do the same thing and everyone on the street does the same thing, the whole town will be clean"

If the member states and UN staff members of this extraordinarily broad organisation that is unlike any other, follow this philosophy, surely we will all end up with a United Nations that does what it was set up to do, i.e. facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and the achievement of world peace. Who then can argue with the relevance of such an organisation?

Sunday 12 September 2010

The angry black woman

I watched a film called 'Not easily broken' with Taraji P Henson and Morris Chestnut and was taken aback by how unpleasant Taraji's character was. As the wife of the handsome, sweet-tempered Mr Chestnut, she spent her time either shouting, no make that shrieking, nagging or rolling her eyes. It was horrible to watch and got me asking the question - is this stereotype of an angry black woman a reality?


I recall quite vividly when the US media tried depict Michelle Obama as another bitter angry black woman who would end up holding her husband back because she couldn't hold her tongue. It was infuriating to watch especially when the despicable Fox News (where the word news is used very loosely), repeated their racist and misogynistic slander suggesting that she was this way because all black women are angry with the exception - they conceded - of Oprah. It was clear as day that there was nothing bitter nor aggressive about the stunning, incredibly smart and supportive Mrs Obama, yet the Republican-backed media did their utmost to sell us an image of a angry black woman, who was racist to boot. Fortunately they didn't succeed in their smear campaign.

But that was then, this is now and this film is based on a novel by Bishop T.D Jakes so try as I might, I cannot find a motive for him wanting to portray black women in a negative light while at the same time portraying black men and white women in a starkly different and positive light. Aside from looking too handsome for his own good, Morris Chestnut is an incredible husband, supportive, caring and hard working. The only white female character in the film is a single mother who dotes on her son and has a positive outlook towards life; in contrast to the black women she is down to earth, kind and thoughtful. Aside from the main female character, there is the mother-in-law who is yet another angry black woman who has nothing nice to say about her ex husband as well as the character of the black female friend who confesses to infidelity and in the same breath suggests fighting any woman who goes after her friend’s man. So in a nutshell we learn that black women are either angry, bitter or aggressive.

Having seen such portrayals time and again, I’m left asking the question - are there really women like that out there? I mean don't get me wrong, I can throw a tantrum or two like the best of them especially when the dishes you promised to wash haven't been washed, the creaky door is still creaking two months after I asked you to fix it and even worse, you show up at midnight having forgotten to tell me you were going for drinks after work. I suspect anyone would lose their temper in such circumstances, be they white, black or yellow. Aside from that I think I'm quite even-tempered and when I think of my friends and family, I cannot find a single one who fits the bill of this angry 'for no apparent reason' black woman.

One of the reasons given in the film for the character's bitchiness, let's just call it by its proper name now, was that she had not been taught how to love by her mother who had an abusive husband who left her angry and bitter about men in general. Like so many women in happy balanced relationships, I was raised by a single woman who taught me to love and respect men starting with my father. I guess the angry mother raising an angry daughter being angry at men may simply not be my reality so I shouldn’t discount the existence of such women. Yet it seems a little hard to believe that a black woman or any woman for that matter will do everything to sabotage her relationship with a near perfect man for no apparent reason which is precisely what this woman does. The man is hard working, though not as successful as she is, he loves and respects her and cannot wait to have children with her and she belittles him, refuses to sleep with him and shows a completely lack of respect at every given opportunity. I mean you'd have to be pretty self-destructive in an age where the pickings are slim and getting slimmer by the day to scoff at a near enough perfect man.

I will stand corrected if someone gives me an example or two of black women who are angry for no apparent reason and live each day this way but I still think this stereotype is a misogynistic and racist myth which sets out to portray us as irrational beings with a chip on our shoulder and a grudge at life. That is not me, nor the beautiful, loving, caring and often selfless women I know as friends and family.

Sunday 5 September 2010

NY-LON Part I – The City that never sleeps

I can assure you that it’s not a myth or hype; there really is something special about New York. The City with more than 8.3million inhabitants is so densely populated you’d be forgiven for thinking the whole world descended on its shores in search of their American dream. In New York however the dream is less American and more multicultural. In 2000 when the last census was taken, 44% of New Yorkers were foreign born and over 170 foreign languages were spoken in the City. More than any other city in the world, New York embodies the term ‘melting pot’.
If you’ve never been to New York but are familiar with London then think of it as an amplified version. Both are undoubtedly impressive cities but New York seems to have more gloss, Times Square dazzles whereas Piccadilly Circus impresses. The statistics of both cities are not unlike each other with New York accounting for a slightly higher population and percentage of immigrants even though the London Olympic Committee claimed that over 300 foreign languages are spoken in the London every day. I would still put my money on New York having a more multicultural feel, because more so than in London, immigrants seem to thrive in the City. African-Americans who make up a quarter of New York’s population also add to its multicultural feel. The home of Essence magazine’s headquarters which celebrates the achievements of African-Americans, New York City is a success story for a number of Black people including but not limited to those who have been formally educated. There are many African-American families who mirror the lives of the Cosby Show’s Huxtables and boast property portfolios that include beautifully preserved Brownstones in Harlem and Brooklyn worth over $1 million. By contrast there is evidence of poverty in parts of the City with a high concentration of Black and Latinos; there are neighbourhoods, admittedly beyond mid and lower Manhattan where high rise apartment blocks hold stories of drugs, crime and illiteracy. The worrying thing is that the gentrification of neighbourhoods like Fort Greene and Park Slopes in Brooklyn as well as Harlem has resulted in poorer people being pushed into deprived areas and the creation of ghetto cities that propagate the cycle of poverty. Today Manhattan’s population is 51% White and Affluent with Americans and expatriate Europeans buying up properties that carry million dollar price tags.

As a visitor, New York captures you; the selection of restaurants, theatre, galleries, museums and stunning parks is enough to send your head into a spin. There is an abundance of choice when it comes to entertainment and because the city has featured so many times on the big and small screen, every location, every yellow cab, department store becomes even more magical and you feel like you’re attending a casting for the love story, New York. The lines between real life and art become even more blurred in a city that is home to so many of the rich and famous. If it’s Star-Spotting you’re into then there are bars and restaurants where you can go and feast your eyes provided of course your wallet can take the pressure.

For me, it’s the little things that make New York so phenomenal. I discovered the city as a fearless 20 year old staying with my uncle in lower Manhattan at the corner of 1st Avenue and 14th street. The first thing that struck me was how noisy the city was and also how hard it was to differentiate between the days of the week, a Sunday was a busy as a Friday with some businesses operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. I realise that this is hardly everyone’s idea of living bliss but for a young insomniac, I relished being able to pick up a tub of Baskin Robbins ice cream at 3 O’clock in the morning. I also loved the fact that I could walk blocks; walking the equivalent of 5 kilometres would feel like a leisurely stroll as each block had its charm, its shops, cafes and people that I could marvel at. I discovered the East Village and then the West and kept going back for more of its eccentricity. Every day was a challenge to see which self-assured African-American man would come up with the most creative chat up line. I was blown away by the fact that they thought my 5ft5 curvy frame as worthy of praise where men in London tended to look through me and hone in on the borderline anorexic blonde. Lines like “Do fries go with that shake baby” and “Are your folks terrorists?.....cos you da bomb” deserve a place in creative language courses in my humble opinion...of course.

I partied with Brooklyn’s Jamaican community at nightclubs on Utica Avenue and tasted the best Trinidadian roti at a small restaurant in Crown Heights. I witnessed the rise of the fashion designed Moshood and his success in fusing Nigerian and African-American cultures within his vibrant and unique pieces. I was blown away years later by the diversity and charm of Fort Greene. As big as the city is, this neighbourhood and others like it feel like a small personable community where everybody knows and cares about each other.

Harlem represented African American achievement and I recall meeting a family of American-Americans who were third generation University graduates and PhD holders. Having come from West Africa where there academic and professional achievement was a given, to London where I discovered that being Black and a doctor was a big deal, it was refreshing to see so many accomplished Black people.

Over the years I’ve been to free concerts in Central park, had my hair braided in Petit Senegal in Harlem, read poetry at the Brooklyn Moon Cafe, been transported in the books I read at the architecturally stunning New York public library. My experiences have been as colourful and varied as the City’s population. The underlying theme though that I think makes New York City the greatest in the World is its lack of conformity. The City refuses to be one thing or the other, it everything to everyone and there is more than one way of making a life in New York, with millions of its inhabitants taking the road less travelled every day. I have countless friends who have shunned the doldrums of a nine to five existence; poets, photographers, jewellers, entrepreneurs working and living successfully on their terms. I’m still amazed to find so many people in parks on a normal work day when you would expect everyone to be pushing paper in congested open-plan offices as the majority do in other cities. I love the fact that although the city is fashionable, you can still walk around in last season’s trends without anyone batting an eyelid. There is a broader definition of style in New York City, far from being all about this season’s colours and cuts; it’s about creating your own unique identity however unconventional.

If you’re the adventurous type, a visit to New York City will make you feel like you just fell down a hole and landed in Wonderland. There is so much to see and do and experience. It can be daunting but the key to the Big Apple is to take one small bite at a time and to savour it as slowly as possible.