Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

Why It Matters

SPONSORED BY
  • North Korea's Nuclear Agenda

    Newsweek | Apr 15, 2009 06:52 PM
    ByStephen Noerper, EastWest Institute North Korea’s decision to kick out United Nations’ weapons inspectors dramatically ups the ante in its challenge to President Barack Obama and the international community. In response to the U.N. Security Council... More
  • Europe and Belarus: A Spring Thaw

    Newsweek | Mar 13, 2009 04:04 PM

    By Anna Nemtsova

    Are the wings of change blowing in Belarus, Europe’s last dictatorship? On EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana's recent visit with Belarus President Alexandr Lukashenka, Solana called Belarus "a European country" while Lukashenka spoke of a “thaw in our relations” with the EU.

    There are tentative signs of a Minsk Spring – a gradual slackening of Lukashanka’s tight grip. Two of 15 newspapers banned from distribution in 2006, Narodnaya Volia and Nasha Niva, have now been officially allowed. After pressure from the EU, authorities have released the political prisoners Syarhey Parsyukevich, Andrei Kim and Alyaksandr Kazulin. One of the major opposition movements, For Freedom, has been allowed to register; and representatives of civil society and opposition parties were invited for a meeting with Lukashenka (though not all accepted). Why the thaw?

    More
  • Advertisement
  • The Arab World Gives Obama Poor Grades

    Newsweek | Jan 23, 2009 04:29 PM
    By Seth Colter Walls Back during campaign season, more than a few liberal talking heads predicted that Barack Obama’s international heritage could change America’s image abroad, were he to become president. This week’s insta-reaction from the Arab press... More
  • One Point of Light in Bush's Environmental Legacy

    Newsweek | Jan 20, 2009 09:56 AM
  • Crimes in the Time of Cholera

    Katie Paul | Jan 13, 2009 05:19 PM
    Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe may be the only person left who denies that his country is spiraling out of control, but that hasn’t made it any easier to stop. Tuesday, the U.N. reported that more than 2,000 people have perished in the cholera epidemic sweeping the country since August. Some 40,000 are infected, and the number of cases continues to rise exponentially. Worst of all, the complete collapse of the country’s basic infrastructure—water, sanitation, health care—has given rise to other diseases, including a particularly terrifying drug-resistant form of tuberculosis, which could easily turn an epidemic into a pandemic. Through it all, Mugabe has squandered aid money, chased out humanitarian groups, and suppressed information about the crisis.

    That’s why U.S.-based group Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) upped the ante Tuesday, accusing Mugabe and his government of ‘crimes against humanity’ after collecting damning evidence on a fact-finding mission in December. They want the U.N. Security Council to see the health crisis as threat to international peace and security, then swoop in and take over the health care system (with or without Mugabe’s blessing), and then refer the matter to the International Criminal Court for investigation. Fortunately for them, they have folks with serious street credit behind them—including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former U.N. Chief Prosecutor Richard Goldstone, and former Irish President and UNHCR High Commissioner Mary Robinson.

    The argument boils down to this: systematically denying people access to basic health care is not terribly different than holding guns to their heads. If so, they say, why not call upon the same international laws that are normally applied in conflict settings? The United Nations is then obliged to respond comparably in both scenarios—which means invoking its members’ ‘responsibility to protect’ and mobilizing an intervention akin to those dispatched to the war zones of Kosovo, Rwanda, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, and Darfur. If the argument works, it would expand the paradigm for invoking international human rights law. Why? See Exhibit A: the definition of ‘crimes against humanity’ in the Rome Treaty, which established the ICC back in 1998. The key clauses are highlighted here:

    Article 7: Crimes against humanity

    For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means anyof the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
    (a) Murder;
    (b) Extermination;
    (c) Enslavement;
    (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
    (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
    (f) Torture;
    (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
    (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious,gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
    (i) Enforced disappearance of persons;
    (j) The crime of apartheid;
    (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

    What they would need to do to get the idea to work is to show that the actions—or lack thereof—that precipitated the health crises constitute an attack against the civilian population in and around Zimbabwe. In the chambers of the United Nations, that could be a tough sell. The only other time the Security Council has approached a health crisis as a threat to international peace and security was back in 2000, when it issued a relatively mild statement of concern about the global AIDS epidemic. But signing off on a document filled with words like ‘requests,’‘encourages,’ and ‘interested Member States’ is a far cry from giving the United Nations the green light to take over a recalcitrant sovereign country’s health care system and put its leaders on trial.

    Politically speaking, this is already an uphill battle. Naturally, Zimbabwe’s government is less than pleased, dismissing the group in characteristic anti-imperialist terms as a‘stupid, Western created organization.’ And the chances for success in leveling ICC charges against Mugabe and his thugs have more to do with politics in New York than in Harare. But even there, the PHR is up against the same familiar United Nations stalemate. An indignant China has long covered Mugabe’s back, despite years of damning evidence against him. What’s more, the Security Council now has to contend with Uganda, which just taken its place as a rotating member and has pledged to back only the Southern African Development Community’s impotent ongoing negotiations.

    But before you write off the PHR plan as hopeless idealism, consider this: though novel, their interpretation of international law is pure strategy. "The idea of ‘health’ is less politically charged," said Mary Robinson at a press gathering on Tuesday. "There are a lot of crises right now," she added, pointing to Congo, Darfur, and Gaza, among others. "The health prism is the way to get it into the Security Council and to get them to act on it." No one has been able to take Mugabe down over shoddy elections, tortured journalists, or land seizures, even though those are also violations of international law, but framing his crimes in terms of health could potentially shame the Security Council’s stragglers into supporting the measures. After all, it’s tough for political figures to justify blocking medical care to innocents.

    What do you international law gurus out there think? Without getting tangled in a debate about the merits and demerits of the "responsibility to protect," chew on this in the comments: a) does the argument hold water, and b) will the strategy work?
    More
  • Israel Hits at Gaza

    Newsweek | Dec 27, 2008 08:01 PM

    By Joanna Chen

    Gaza--Early Saturday morning Israeli Air Force planes sped to Gaza, unleashing a massive military operation designed to quash Hamas security facilities and put an end to the renewed barrage of rocket attacks that have hit towns in southern Israel bordering the Gaza Strip for the past week. Throughout the day, Israel carried out up to fifty air strikes on the Hamas-controlled area, killing more than two hundred Palestinians and injuring an estimated five hundred more.  In response, tens of rockets were launched into Israeli territory, sending thousands of panicked Israeli civilians living within a twenty mile radius of Gaza to the safety of bomb shelters.

    It had been only a question of time before the launching of Operation Cast Lead. Israel’s security cabinet had signed off on the attacks earlier in the week, amid growing opposition to Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's apparent policy of restraint.  At a press conference late on Saturday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called for patience from Israeli citizens and also sent a message to the Palestinian people. "You are not our enemies", he said, insisting that Israel would make efforts to facilitate humanitarian aid to the 1.4 million citizens living in the besieged Gaza Strip.

    UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and French President Nicholas Sarkozy were quick to condemn Israel's action, calling for an immediate ceasefire, as did Egypt's Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit.  The White House, however, stressed only that Israel should "avoid civilian casualties" and urged Hamas to give up on terrorist activities.

    After a day of heavy losses for the Palestinians and one Israeli fatality, stunned civilians on both sides are wondering what's next. Barak said that "there is a time for calm and a time for fighting, and this is the time for fighting."  A senior military source told NEWSWEEK that "Israel will continue to target Hamas infrastructure relentlessly" until attacks on Israel cease, however long it take. As hundreds of Israeli ground troops began to gather on the southern border with Gaza late into the night, the worst, it seems, is yet to come.

    More
  • Thailand's King May Play Politics (No Offense)

    Newsweek | Dec 17, 2008 09:37 AM

    Bangkok -- If you happened to have been in Thailand this week and wanted to read the December 6-10 issue of The Economist, you could have searched the country without finding a copy. That’s because it contained an article and editorial that were critical of King Bhumibol Adulyadej. Rather than risk insulting the king and offending his subjects, Asia Books, which imports the British weekly, chose not to distribute that particular edition.

    The pre-emptive move was a sign of respect for the king but also an act of self-preservation. Few people or organizations in Thailand will risk doing anything that might be construed as an insult to the monarch. Thailand’s lese- majeste law may be the most draconian in the world, and it is strongly enforced: Offenders face up to 15 years in jail. Foreigners have been jailed for months and then expelled from the country. The riposte from friendly Thais to a farang contemplating a violation of the law is, “I hope you don’t plan to ever return to Thailand.”

    The Economist, writing about Thailand’s current political imbroglio, alleges that the king, who turned 81 earlier this month, plays a role in politics. Officially, the sovereign, as head of state in a constitutional monarchy, is above politics. That alleged involvement, the magazine argues, is not helpful--especially in this time of political instability. Ever since the military ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in a bloodless coup in September 2006, the country has staggered from one government to the next. Just this week Parliament selected the fourth prime minister since the coup. Few people are willing to bet that the new premier, Abhisit Vejjajiva, of the Democrat Party, will last much longer that his immediate predecessor, Somchai Wongsarat, who hung on for 77 days.

    Members of the royal family are said to be dismayed about the magazine’s stories, which get into controversial areas last visited in “The King Never Smiles,” a 2006 unauthorized biography by freelance writer Paul M. Handley. The book, banned in Thailand before it was even published, makes similar allegations about the monarchy. “The concern is the myth of a conspiracy between the king and the military,” says an individual with links to the Palace who spoke only on condition of anonymity and because he believes the articles are unfair. People in the king's inner circle “are genuinely distressed, because this fosters the ideas of conspiracy theorists.”

    The Economist, the source pointed out, was not banned by the government. There was no need to do so because distributor acted voluntarily to withhold the offending edition. In the age of the Internet, banning publications anywhere is a tricky – and often futile - proposition, apart from in countries like China, Burma and North Korea, which tightly control acces to the Web. “Banning a magazine doesn’t make much sense any more, because it gets through – and they know that,” the source said, referring to the Palace. The Economist argues that the lese-majeste law should be revisited. For now, no such plans are on the drawing board.

    More
  • Sarko and Merkel Discover That They Need Each Other

    Newsweek | Dec 12, 2008 05:21 PM
    By Clare Premo While the German press frequently criticizes French president Nicolas Sarkozy as “Little Napoleon” and mocks the arrogance of the “Great Nation,” these days it is changing its aim to attack German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Germany’s reaction... More
  • Can the World Spend Itself Out of a Depression?

    Newsweek | Dec 11, 2008 09:41 PM
    By Stefan Theil As governments throw around hundreds of billions of dollars, pounds and yuans to rescue the global economy—dwarfed by China’s $586 billion spending plan and Obama’s expected $700 billion plan—the critics of deficit spending have kept mostly... More
  • A Cameo for Comrade Niemeyer

    Mac Margolis | Dec 9, 2008 02:10 PM

    Oscar Niemeyer needs few introductions. For the uninitiated, suffice it to say that Niemeyer is best known as the architect who for decades has jewelled the Brazilian skyline (and a few others as well) with soaring, swooping sculptures of reinforced concrete, which also happen to serve as buildings.

    So perhaps it is only fitting that Niemeyer, who recently turned 101, is the theme of the latest collection by world famous jeweler H. Stern. Only thing is, Niemeyer is also an unreconstructed communist, who never misses a chance to pillory plutocrats and capitalist fat cats, whose fairest necks Stern's creations have exquisitely adorned.

    Marxism isn't what it used to be, of course. And if there's one thing Niemeyer hates more than capitalism, it's the right angle. So as long as there are swerves, loops, bends and curls to create, comrade Niemeyer is at home. Which is apparently exactly what H. Stern had in mind when it signed on Brazil's master builder for the collection that debuts December 15.

    With 160 stores in 12 countries, not to mention the fleet of floating shops on ocean liners, H. Stern is one of the major names in the luxury trade. Founded by German emigré Hans Stern, who died last year at age 85, the Rio de Janeiro based business is known for elevating tourmalines, opals, topaz and other onetime "semi precious" colored gemstones from the bauble business to high fashion.

    The company is now in the hands of the second generation of the Stern family. It is also one of the leading names in the vanishing elite of family owned jewelry empires--reckoned to rank among the top five brands worldwide--and the only major jeweler committed to working all aspects of the  trade, from the mine shaft to the madam: buying stones, cutting and designing jewels, and retailing. In recent years, the company has invested in niche collections, inspired by the work of top Brazilian sculptors, artists and fashionistas, such as Diane von Furstenberg.

    The latest collection takes its cues from Niemeyer's curvaceous and always playful lines, albeit scaled down from the architect's patented epic oeuvre to the jeweler's petite. Highlights includes a bracelet that emulates the Edifício Copan, a serpentine office tower gracing the choc-a-block skyline of São Paulo:  


     And a pair of ear rings that echo the mountainlike facade of the Pampulha, a church and community center encrusted in the hills of Belo Horizonte:

     

     Who says you can't go well-dressed to the revolution?

    More
  • Human Rights in France: A Gray Area

    Newsweek | Dec 4, 2008 05:07 PM
  • Bangkok's Bizarre Power Struggle

    Newsweek | Nov 26, 2008 10:00 PM
    By Jamie Seaton and George Wehrfritz Many Thais believe that a 100-year-old bronze likeness of King Rama V located in downtown Bangkok emits powerful magic. That is why, fully a century after it was cast in Paris, the likeness has become the object of... More
  • France's Socialists: The Mothball Party

    Tracy McNicoll | Nov 26, 2008 09:26 PM
    If the first few minutes of Martine Aubry’s three-year term as leader of the French Socialist Party are any indication, it's going to be a tough time. Last night in Paris, Aubry was granted victory by 102 ballots, or 0.07 percent of the more than 134,700... More
  • How (Not) to Deal with the Somali Pirates

    Barrett Sheridan | Nov 26, 2008 11:30 AM

    By Barrett Sheridan

    Last week, the world cheered a little when an Indian warship said it had encountered a Somali pirate “mother ship” in the Gulf of Aden and, after being fired upon, blew it to smithereens. International shippers needed a reason to celebrate. Earlier that week, Somali pirates had captured their biggest prize yet, a Saudi supertanker carrying $100 million of crude, and, with nearly a hundred attempted hijackings so far this year, were making waters around the Horn of Africa about as welcoming as a bed of nails.   

    Well, put away the champagne glasses. CNN is now reporting that the sunken “mother ship” was actually a Thai fishing trawler and that, while pirates were in the process of commandeering it, the vessel still had 14 innocent fishermen onboard when it was sunk by the Indian navy. One of them, a Cambodian, spent six days adrift before being rescued by a passing ship. (One other is confirmed dead; the rest are still missing.) The sailor is now recovering in a Yemeni hospital, where he had the chance to inform the Indian navy of their mistake.

    The event underscores the difficulty of tracking pirates in waters where they easily blend in with fishing trawlers or other private watercraft. “The bulk of Somali coastal dwellers are still fishermen,” says Peter Lehr, a lecturer in terrorism studies at Scotland’s University of St. Andrews. “They are now caught in the fray and being attacked by western warships. How can you divide a real fisherman and a pirate from one another? They use the same vessels.”

    That means recent military operations in the region—the European Union and NATO now have forces there—might not be a very adequate defense against the pirates. So what line of defense is left? The ships themselves. Armed guards aren’t an option, because they’re too expensive for ship owners, and firefights are risky onboard ships carrying two million barrels of flammable crude oil. But there are alternatives. Hanging barbed wire around a ship’s perimeter is a simple way to dissuade would-be boarders. Electrified fences also work, but they’re out of the question on ships carrying volatile cargoes. The Long-Range Acoustic Device, or LRAD, has become popular after it effectively repelled an attack on a cruise ship in 2005; it blasts a deafening wall of sound at targets up to 300 meters away. Fire hoses also do the trick at shorter ranges. Even simply gunning the engines and picking up speed can deter pirates, who look for easy prey.

    It’s worth trying anything to avoid being taken hostage. Although the Somali pirates, which are currently holding 300 hostages, treat their captives fairly well—they are, after all, worth a lot of money to them—negotiations can last weeks or months. The MV Faina, a Ukrainian ship carrying 33 Soviet-made tanks, was captured in late September and is still being held in the port of Eyl, in the Puntland region of Somalia. “These guys are very patient people,” says Stephen Askins, a maritime lawyer at London firm Ince & Co. “One guy may be having a bad day and he’ll say, ‘I want $5 million,’ and the next guy might say, ‘Well, I’m a bit more reasonable than that.’ It’s not like buying a car. It’s a very long, drawn out process.”

    More
  • Ségolène Royal Wins… Especially If She Loses.

    Tracy McNicoll | Nov 25, 2008 03:30 PM
    photo: AFP The French Socialist Party's search for a leader, already a long, long drama, has recently turned into a farce. For 18 months, ever since right-winger Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president, the Socialists have been so busy turning on each other... More