Reaching a wider audience (above: a cat listens to the live broadcast of the BBC Today Programme on Radio 4 at the British base in Basra Palace, 2006)
Showing posts with label Nomadic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nomadic. Show all posts

Monday, 11 August 2008

Arm Yourself with Books

“You want weapons? We're in a library. Books. Best weapons in the world. This room is the greatest arsenal we could have. Arm yourself!”

I have spent the past week finding out about the media in Afghanistan. I embarked each morning once the suicide hour had passed (by 10am they have either detonated, been caught, or chickened out - allegedly), climbed aboard a deliberately dusty (low profile) Toyota and bumped around the pot holed streets of Kabul visiting various media organisations, until night fall drove me back to my lodge where I gathered thoughts, compared stories and grilled everyone I could lay my hands on about what radio stations they listen to.

On my return, I feel as if I have travelled back (forward?) in time to the reality of the British school holidays, my adrenaline rushes fuelled by breaking up squabbling kids rather than unfounded fears for my safety. I don’t have to look far to see three examples of modern media consumers. My teenage daughter texts and instant messages far more than she speaks and my to sons pour through piles of DVDs, TV channels and YouTube clips of people falling off bicycles in search of entertainment. And (I impress myself here) we even scuttled off to the village library yesterday (open once a week in the old school house) where the kids begged to borrow and the lady who worked there gave my residency in the village the benefit of her doubt. My daughter has been glued to a Louise Rennison “knicker novel” since.

You might think a depressing contrast to last weeks assessments, however despite the lack of media law in Afghanistan, I was struck by the advent of hundreds of radio and TV stations – many of them self funding and commercial (importantly NOT reliant on external money). We picked up a mobile phone for peanuts (with a clever registration system designed to catch out kidnappers) and market stalls were loaded with DVDs for sale (I was told you could buy Ross Kemp for under a dollar – I assume they meant his series filmed in Helmand rather than the man himself). I was also impressed with the sheer numbers of newspapers and magazines bursting onto the scene. One outlet told me that even down south in traditional Pashto areas, women’s magazines were popular. The guest house I was staying in provided more than one English Language newspaper neatly tucked under my pot of green tea every morning with breakfast. Although broadcast media and developments like SMS technology are impressive, it is this return of the written word which moves me most.

A few summers ago, I read about Sultan Khan’s attempts to salvage Afghanistan’s history and literature by secretly buying and selling books in Seiierstad’s novel, The Bookseller of Kabul. Khan risked his life for his passion, but the tragedy is that so much did not survive. As Hamida Ghafour describes in her heart rendering account in the Sleeping Buddha as she searches for evidence of the written words of her late grandmother, “books that survived the communist purges, were looted by the Mujahideen and what was left was burned by the Taleban”.

So to meet, as I did this week, a former Mujahideen commander who had fulfilled his life long dream of opening a public library is hope that there might be a lasting wind change. As a result of recent history, books are at least on the surface treasured by all. The very idea that our second-hand shops and car boot sales in Britain are overflowing with paperbacks would be met with bafflement in Afghanistan, even amongst the illiterate.

Whilst Thomas Carlyle may have said, “the greatest University of all is a collection of books”, there is a more sinister use for the written word than pure learning. In a chilling twist, I learned this week that the insurgents (amongst them foreign Taleban, old school Talibs, and War Lords, but not exclusively so) are using the pen along with their swords of might and have launched in recent months a sophisticated press operation capable of out-spinning both the Government of Afghanistan and the international community put together. Along with a state of the art website, they issue up to ten press statements a day in Dari, Pashto and English, this compares dramatically with NATOs habit of English-only releases and the Governments recorded inability and reluctance to interact with Afghan journalists. I have to wonder – what else have they got planned?

The quotation at the start of this article came not from a War Lord, but from a battle weary Time Lord. My children have been momentarily pacified by Doctor Who, and the squabbles have been abated – but his words send a chill through me and in a poignant moment I wonder whether the Government of Afghanistan and her allies are prepared for this battle. Arm yourself indeed.

Saturday, 12 July 2008

Britains Whispered Policy on Zimbabwe


I awoke this morning to the news that the Security Council has vetoed sanctions in Zimbabwe (yes, I had fallen asleep with my laptop in bed with me again). The British representative said the UN had “failed the people of Zimbabwe”

Recently in Blogcatalogue discussion boards (and in plenty of other places) Britain has been getting a slating for its lack of action (and lack of clear stance) on Zimbabwe. I for one argue that Britain is really not the right person to be making any decisions for Zim (a bit like America not really being the right people to be brokering peace in the middle east). However that doesn’t mean we should keep quiet.

Stripping Mugabe of his knighthood was a pathetic attempt to chastise a man not just capable of rigging elections, but of rigging the state run lottery in his favour (perhaps greater media focus on this would appeal to the sense of fair play of the lottery playing public around the world). Given “Robert Mugabe uses the strident criticism coming from Britain to portray this as the old colonial power trying to brow beat Zimbabwe” (Dermot Murnaghan, Sky News), I expect Mugabe was delighted at the news of his loss of status in Britain – it would have played right into his hands. And the very fact that he is able to travel to Rome to a Conference on the world food crisis makes a mockery of our dithering debate about allowing the Zimbabwe cricket team into Britain. This is British public diplomacy at its worst.

Funny that the Foreign Office website claims it is a “modern and effective Foreign & Commonwealth Office that is clear about its role and focuses its effort where it can make the greatest difference” – I gave up after half an hour trying to find a clear articulation of the UKs policy on Zimbabwe. I found a statement from Gordon Brown which included “The whole international community must speak up against the climate of fear in Zimbabwe……We, and others, stand ready to help rebuild Zimbabwe once democracy returns. I pledge that Britain will be in the vanguard of this effort” Is THAT the policy? That everyone should speak up and then we will help once change happens? I then found some bloggers on the FCO website . Surely the FCO should realise that to use itself as a platform will immediately loose the Harare bloggers their credibility? Blogging is about independent thought – anyone who stumbles upon this will sniff the spin from a mile away. (personal bug bear sorry - the best Milliband could do would be to offer some off the cuff comment on other bloggers sites). There was more about the registration of British Nationals in Zimbabwe and travel advice than about UK policy.

Fact is, Britain spends about 30 million quid on Zimbabwe each year. It is spent on tackling HIV and AIDS and reducing food insecurity. According to Department for International Development website it is also spent supporting orphans and vulnerable children to help keep them in school and protect them from abuse. I want to know more about this. I KNOW it is not British. I KNOW DFiD would NEVER engage in Public Diplomacy, but come on, let’s take some credit where it is due and hear about exactly what we ARE doing in Zimbabwe.

If you believe Michael Holman the situation in Zimbabwe is all Britain’s fault. I beg to differ, 15 years ago I spent some time hitchhiking across Zimbabwe (through the unfortunately named Wankee Game park) and living in the township of Chinotemba (Victoria Falls) and I got to know the people and the country. I go with Robert Guests belief that this is the fault of one man. Mr Robert Mugabe (formerly Sir). The people of Zimbabwe I met were a friendly and hospitable bunch. As Guest writes in his book The Shackled Continent “They should be rich. There is plenty of land in Zimbabwe, much of it ideal for raising cattle or growing wheat, maize and tobacco. Under the ground lies reefs of gold, platinum and other precious ores. The country has a modern banking sector, skilled manufacturers and adequate roads”. It is Mugabe that has stripped his country of hope, it was his ZANU-PF that said Zimbabwe would “be better off with only six million people…we don’t want all these extra people”. (The population is 12 million).

Britain should rebut more. When she is accused of apathy over Zimbabwe she should point to not just the money spent but what this money has bought. When Britain is blamed by the likes of Holman she should articulate a response. Europe is often blamed for Africa’s ills. Again I quote Guest:

Another popular culprit for Africa’s ills is history. Many African’s argue that the current problems spring largely from the traumas that Europeans visited on Africa such as slavery. We must not forget that slavery was not introduced to Africa by Europeans – Arab slavers arrived earlier that the Portuguese, French and the British and Africans were enslaving each other long before the Arabs played their part. And although both Governments deny it slavery still exists in Sudan and Mauritania today.

So when David Miliband said on Sky recently “I think the truth is we've all got to up our game” – I think it is just too weak. If Britain’s stance is to keep their policies to a whisper, they should be aware that saying nothing or saying something quietly actually speaks volumes. There is no such thing as not communicating. And at the moment the message is loud and clear –
“erm….we are not quite sure what to do about this, nor what our role is in all this”.