by Candyce Torres, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio News Service. Financial expert Peter Tufano of the Harvard Business School speaking at the Brookings Institution regarding savings, credit and banking among low-income households. (3:03)
International Commission of Jurists, on Feb. 27, 2009, held a panel at the Brookings Institution to outline their investigation into human rights during counterterrorism efforts. Arthur Chaskalson, former Chief Justice of South Africa, reads the report’s recommendation to the U.S. to reaffirm its commitment to humanitarian law. (00:18)
The ICJ held a panel today at the Brookings Institution consisting of human rights experts, judges, and lawyers from around the world, who for the past three years have investigated over forty countries treatment of human rights in counterterrorism efforts. The report found that counterterrorism policies put international legal respect for human rights in jeopardy. The panel was the first presentation of the report to a U.S. audience, thus the focus was on U.S. obligation to end its practices since the “war on terrorism” was coined, that the state of war provides justification to set aside human rights safeguards.
The panel reports that human rights violations in counterterrorism come in many forms. Individuals are abducted and held in secret prisons, being tortured and ill treated, not given access to lawyers, courts, or fair trial. Additionally, the culture of secrecy has become pervasive to the point where “innocent victims find themselves with no avenue for redress.”
Suzanne Spaulding, Principal of Bingham Consulting Group, explained that by declaring a “war on terror,” the U.S. put human rights into jeopardy because collateral damage is accepted much more in war time and the president is given significant power and fewer checks and balances. Of the increase in presidential power, Spaulding stated, “I think that is one of the most damaging consequences of our having taken this very broad, global ‘war on terror’ approach.” Spaulding concluded that she feels very “gratified” that President Obama has not used the term “war on terror.”
Robert Goldman, Professor of Law at American University, outlined the process that should be taken when a human rights violation occurs. “When there is a serious human rights violation the remedies are clear. One, there has to be effective access to court.” When the government tries to plead “state secrecy” for actions which it knew were illegal, it is “utterly inconsistent with human rights law.” Second, in order to go along with international human rights law, each case deserves “thorough and impartial investigation.”
Arthur Chaskalson, former Chief Justice of South Africa, presented the fact that some U.S. representatives have argued that human rights law does not apply in times of war. He then read the recommendation of the panel to the United States as a response to this point of view: “The incoming U.S. administration should reaffirm the U.S.’s historic commitment to fully uphold and faithfully apply international humanitarian law, the laws of war, during situations of armed conflict and recognize that human rights law does not cease to apply in such situations.” The concluding argument is that while the U.S. is at war, and must use force, this force needs to be “necessary and appropriate.”
Senator Lieberman (I-Conn.) speaks on how bringing a better life to civilians in Afghanistan will bring a secure end to the war on terror. January 29, 2009, at the Brookings Institution. (00:47)
The Brookings Institution held a discussion in which in unveiled “Voices of America: U.S. Public Diplomacy for the 21st Century,” a plan to improve U.S. public diplomacy.
“Power is diffusing into a larger and more diverse group of nations, non-governmental organizations and multinational corporations than ever before,” said Kristin Lord, a fellow at Brookings and author of “Voices for America.”
Lord called for the creation of a non-profit organization called U.S.A.-World Trust which would “conduct and commission research and analysis…and convey it in a form useful to public diplomacy practitioners.” It would also “tap the vast potential of the private sector…to engage companies, non-governmental organizations, universities, think tanks and others to work on innovative new initiatives” and “provide grants and venture capital to endeavors that advance the nation’s public diplomacy objectives.”
“The goal in all the instances would be to attract new talent and new voices to the challenge of improving U.S. public diplomacy,” said Lord.
The panelists agreed that one of the most important things the U.S. should do is listen to public opinions in foreign countries. “Listening conveys respect, and a lot of people in the Muslim world feel that we don’t respect them,” said Martin Indyk, Senior fellow at Brookings and Director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy. “The consequence of listening is that you have to show that you’re going to change something about what you do as a result of listening. Otherwise, people get the sense you aren’t listening at all even though you say you are.”
Martin Indyk, Senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and Director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy speaks about America’s image in the eyes of the Middle East public. (0:40)
UN Correspondent Tala Dowlatshahi will be attending a UN briefing on women and violence.
The Washington Bureau will be covering a discussion on “Voices of America: U.S. Public Diplomacy for the 21st Century” at the Brookings Institution, a discussion on “World Energy Outlook: Energy Projections to 2030,” a news conference by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group to release its 23rd annual toy safety report, and a conference call on how President-elect Obama can improve the domestic HIV/AIDS situation.
The Brookings Institution hosted the third seminar in a series on “Issues, Ideology, Gender and Race in the 2008 Election” featuring Sunshine Hillygus, Associate Professor of Government at Harvard University; Daron Shaw, Associate Professor of Government at University of Texas at Austin; and Shankar Vedantam, columnist for the Washington Post.
The panelists discussed specific factors pertaining to the 2008 Election such as; campaign tactics, youth involvement, the role of race, gender, ideology, character, and party identification. All three panelists agreed that voters participate in “proximity voting” whereby they determine their own vague ideas on an issue and gravitate towards the candidate that seems the most similar. In this way, they rationalize their own vote choice based on the comfort they feel from their candidate. The youth vote was a large
point of discussion due to the efficiency with which the Obama campaign has used first-time voters and the new millennial generation to his advantage.
The challenge they outlined for Senator McCain, who has fallen behind in recent polls particularly due to the economy, is for him to swing voters who “have a foot in each camp.” Those voters, such as pro-life Democrats, have a large decision to make and it will be up to both candidates to convince those voters that the issues that matter to them are the issues each respective candidate can support.
The Brookings Institution held a discussion this afternoon regarding perspectives on the global economic landscape. The panel addressed concerns over the declining value of the dollar, rising inflation, the role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and what these factors mean for the future of the global economy.
According to John Lipsky, first deputy managing director of the IMF said that the Fund predicts global economic growth will drop an entire percentage point to 4 percent this upcoming year. In addition, Lipsky stated that a primary concern for the upcoming year should be increased inflation, particularly in developing economies.
Lipsky also expressed concern over the continued decline in the value of the dollar. While the United States has seen increased exports as a result of this decline, the drop has been one of the largest sustained episodes of dollar decline in the last 50 years. However, Lipsky said that despite drops in the value of the dollar, he believes it will retain its role as the dominant international currency in the long term, though perhaps sharing it with other powerful currencies like the euro.
Lipsky also predicted an economic slowdown in the EU. He said that this could potentially be more devastating than economic issues in the United States, due to a lack of coordination of financial markets within the EU.
Domenico Lombardi, nonresident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution and president of the Oxford Institute for Economic Policy expressed concern over IMF attempts to regulate currency imbalances. While the organization has been particularly useful with developing economies, Lombardi worries that highly developed nations like the U.S. may be less forthcoming with financial information, and less cooperative with policies and oversight from the Fund.
A discussion on “Promoting safety together: Domestic violence and healthy marriage programs” was held hosted by the Brookings Institution. Mary Myrick, project director of the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center (MNHRC), said that various healthy marriage programs and domestic violence organizations have consistently done more than what is required of them. (more…)
