On Wednesday, September 15, the Institute for Human Rights at UAB welcomed Dr. Courtney Andrews, Program Manager for the Institute for Human Rights and UAB Adjunct Professor of Anthropology, and Dr. Julie Price, UAB Assistant Professor of Public Health, to the Social Justice Café. Dr. Andrews and Dr. Price facilitated a discussion entitled “Human Rights and Climate Change.”
Dr. Andrews began by defining climate change and introducing the audience to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report. The report offers the most conclusive evidence to date that humans have contributed significantly towards the current state of climate change. Climate change has increased occurrences of drought, heavy rain, tropical cyclones, and wildfires in nearly every region of the world. A sense of urgency was conveyed during the Social Justice Café when Dr. Andrews stated global warming will continue to worsen unless we [society] make collective efforts to prioritize ending climate change. According to the IPCC, the global production of greenhouse gas must reach a net zero by 2050 to effectively minimize climate change damages. Dr. Andrews then stated climate change will affect all regions but, we should not expect climate change to affect all regions equally. The most severe impact will be on those already most vulnerable due to poverty, governmental instability, and lack of educational opportunities. Dr. Andrews acknowledged that “those hit the hardest by climate change are the people that have contributed the least to climate change.” The challenges associated with climate change transcend generations by limiting our sustainability options.
Dr. Price, an expert in sustainability, shared with the Social Justice Café audience that the loss of biodiversity caused by climate change will have a lasting effect on society. Dr. Price offered sustainability suggestions to include reduction of human emissions and to start growing crops in untraditional geographical areas. According to Dr. Price, the foundation of sustainability is to “evaluate the whole picture and consider the social and environmental impact of our decisions.” Following Dr. Price’s introduction to sustainability, a Social Justice Café participant asked, “how does climate change violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?” Dr. Andrews answered the question by circle back to her earlier point that unstable societies are hit the hardest by climate change because of a lack in resource and access. The lack of resource and access afforded to these countries is a violation of their human rights. Dr. Price then pointed out that “paying for air conditioning is an energy burden. When you already have people struggling for necessities, tensions will rise and increase the potential for neglect in the event of natural disaster.” Also, Dr. Price notes that in the event of natural disaster, caused by climate change, “the ability to evacuate is not afforded to the most vulnerable of society.” It is vital to consider that there are countries that do not have social safety nets to provide care for their people amid tragedy and chaos. Dr. Andrews then added context by drawing a direct connection to the current events occurring in Louisiana, following Hurricane Ida. If people were able to leave their homes, to avoid the hurricane, “what will those people return to?” In conclusion, Dr. Andrews stated that we must “reshape public sentiment surrounding climate change.” In addition to legislative action, public outcry has the power to positively impact climate change.
Thank you, Dr. Andrews and Dr. Price and thank you everyone who participated in this eye-opening discussion. The Institute for Human Rights at UAB’s next event, “An Evening with Clint Smith,” will take place September 22, 2021, at 5:00 pm (CT). Please join us and bring a friend! Our next Social Justice Café will be held on Wednesday, September 29, and we will be discussing gun control and human rights.
To see more upcoming events hosted by the Institute for Human Rights at UAB, please visit our events page here.
Twenty years after the events of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent war on terrorism, the United States military has ended its operations in Afghanistan. The country, ravaged by war and too fragile to stand on its own, was immediately overtaken by the very forces the U.S. sought to defeat. After two decades, three administrations, and 170,000 American lives lost, the U.S. is leaving Afghanistan in much the same shape as it was found.
What is to become of Afghanistan and what toll will the inevitable economic and humanitarian crisis take on its people, many of whom do not know where their next meal will come from? What will happen to a generation of women and girls whose education and employment are now at stake and whose rights are tenuous under the new/old regime? What will happen to the millions of children under five that are expected to become acutely malnourished in the next year? What will happen to those that managed to escape – will they find safe refuge in neighboring countries, or will they suffer the plight of many refugees and displaced peoples around the world? All remains to be seen, but at this point, the outlook is dire. Here we provide a brief history of Afghanistan over the past century and consider what lies ahead for the struggling nation.
Afghanistan is located centrally in southeast Asia and shares a border with Iran, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. It is home to at least 14 distinct ethnolinguistic groups, and the mountainous terrain has kept these clans separate and made it difficult for a central government to take hold. The strategic location of the country, however, has made it very enticing to those seeking to procure a hold on southeast Asia. After a period of relative stability after its independence from colonial rule in 1921, the country has been plagued by invasion and power struggles since the 1970s.
In 1953, the pro-Soviet General Mohammad Daoud Khan became prime minister of Afghanistan, and in 1956, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev agreed to help Khan establish economic and military ties. At this time, women were granted a more public presence and were allowed to attend university and join the workforce. In 1973, Khan abolished the monarchy and replaced it with The Republic of Afghanistan, naming himself president and keeping close ties with the USSR. While creating his new government, Khan proposed a new constitution in which women were granted more rights, and the country set out on a path to modernization. This did not sit well with local clan members who believed in a strict interpretation of the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam. Tensions rose under the surface until they eventually boiled over.
In 1978, an armed revolt broke out in the countryside, led by conservative Islamist and ethnic leaders who were protesting social changes Khan was trying to implement. This group became known as the mujahideen, or “holy warriors.” Backed by the United States, the mujahideen killed Khan, and a full-scale war broke out from 1979 to 1989: communists versus mujahideen. This being the height of the Cold War, the US continued to provide weapons and tactics to the rebels in order to defeat the Soviets.
Around 1988, Saudi Islamist Osama bin Laden founded the group al-Qaida (“the base”). Though the US had backed the mujahideen in defeating the Soviets, bin Laden argued that the US stood as the primary obstacle to the establishment of a truly Islamist state. By 1995, a newly formed Islamist militia, the Taliban, rose to power, promising peace to the war-torn people of Afghanistan. Calling themselves “students of Islamic knowledge,” the Taliban imposed strict sharia law, stripping women and girls of their basic human rights and instituting public floggings and amputations of those who broke the law.
September 11, 2001: Al-Qaeda operatives hijack four commercial airliners and crash them into the Twin Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. Close to 3,000 people die in the attacks, thousands more are injured, first responders are exposed to toxic fumes that will later be listed as the cause of cancer, and a nation that has never before been attacked on its own soil mourns an incomprehensible loss.
Most of the 9.11 hijackers originated from Saudi Arabia, none from Afghanistan, though the mastermind behind the attack, Osama bin Laden, was operating out of the country. The ruling authority in Afghanistan, the Taliban, was accused of harboring terrorists. In the coming weeks, George W. Bush’s “war on terrorism” provided the U.S. blanket authority to invade any country accused of sympathizing with or aiding Muslim extremists. On October 7, 2001, the U.S. military began a bombing campaign against Taliban forces in Afghanistan. Ground combat troops arrive two weeks later. Thus began what would become the longest war in U.S. history.
Both the Obama and the Trump administrations tried to leave Afghanistan, but the situation remained too precarious to do so safely. President Biden, convinced that there was never going to be a safe time to leave, was determined to put an end to the loss of American lives, especially in a situation of no measurable progress. “It’s time to end America’s longest war,” he declared. The remaining 3,500 troops in Afghanistan have been withdrawn despite the failure of intra-Afghan peace talks and the increase in Taliban attacks on Afghan security forces and citizens. The Taliban wasted no time storming the capital of Kabul, forcing president Ghani into exile, and reasserting its authority.
Biden says Washington will continue to assist Afghan security forces and support the peace process, but what does that mean? As the U.S. officially ends its military operations in Afghanistan with precious little to show for it, much is at stake for those who remain in the country, most notably women and children.
The ensuing humanitarian crises is expected to affect nearly half of children in the country. Food stocks will soon run out, and a third of the country will not have access to basic goods and services. Afghanistan does not have sufficient funding in its international humanitarian response plan; as of August 2021, it is only 38 percent funded. This translates to approximately 1.2 million children losing protective services, leaving them vulnerable to violence, sexual exploitation, and forced early marriages, and about 1.4 million women left without a place of comprehensive support.
Displacement and a Refugee Crisis
Although President Biden did agree to allow Afghani people who worked with the US coalition to come to America with US troops, there were several tens of thousands that could not board the planes. Images of the Kabul airport being jam-packed with families awaiting airlift, along with videos of people handing their babies to American soldiersand absolute strangers for the sake of safety and refuge did circulate our social media pages the past few weeks. The outpouring of compassion did overwhelm the global community, but now that airlifts have ceased, about 39 million Afghans remain trapped in the humanitarian crisis that is yet to emerge in the country. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), around 3.5 million people have already been displaced due to violence in Afghanistan. These people are fearful of returning to their homes, but they also lack the finances to survive.
Consequently, the people of Afghanistan will seek refuge in neighboring countries, where many of their fellow citizens already live. For four decades, Pakistan and Iran have hosted millions of Afghan refugees. But these countries are also not capable of doing this for too long due to their own lack of international humanitarian aid. The UNHCR has called on countries to leave their borders open and permit refugee status to the people of Afghanistan in order to evade any more human rights violations and to prevent a greater humanitarian crisis from emerging.
In an article about the challenges that the Taliban now faces, Dan Bilefsky of the New York Times writes: “Will the Taliban engage the world with a more inclusive approach? Or will they return to the ways of the past?” So far, the Taliban have been cracking down on protests, rounding up known opponents, and violently suppressing the news media. Unfortunately, from a human rights perspective, it appears that the worst is yet to come.
I graduated from the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Anthropology of Peace and Human Rights (APHR) graduate program a year ago, and I will be starting law school at Emory University School of Law this upcoming fall. I decided to pursue a master’s degree in APHR both to increase my knowledge about human rights and because human rights law is one of the fields of law that really interests me. When choosing a graduate school program, I think it’s important to take into consideration previous students’ experiences, so I would like to share my favorite things about the program in the hopes that I can provide some insights that you may not otherwise have access to.
There are a lot of qualities about the program that I liked, but I will specifically focus on three. First, my experiences with my peers. In every program, there is the expectation that one will learn from the course reading and material, which is true, but I also found that I learned a lot from my peers. The unique character of the program lies in the fact that it combines anthropology, human rights, and peace work altogether, and, because of this, the program attracts students with a wide range of interests. Thus, I was exposed to worldviews and perspectives different from my own, and, through this, was able to engage in and learn about topics that I otherwise would not have.
Second, my thesis work. In preparation for the thesis, we were required to take a research and methodology course, which readied us for the thesis research and writing process. For my thesis, I chose to work with Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, a topic that is of much interest to me. The program has little to no limits on what topics one can choose for their thesis, and the faculty members encourage each student to invest in and work through topics that are important to them. This, to me, really made the thesis process an enjoyable one.
Third, my work at the Institute for Human Rights (IHR). Under the leadership of Dr. Tina Kempin Reuter and Dr. Courtney Andrews, the IHR is a human rights advocacy and research center. Students in the master’s program can be recruited to work at the IHR, where the work mainly involves writing blog posts about current human rights issues. Students are given complete autonomy about what they want to write about, which is a great opportunity for one to explore personal passions and interests. Also, students who work with the IHR organize on campus events to raise awareness of ongoing human rights issues around the world.
When I first applied to the APHR graduate program, I had no idea what my time in the program would look like. One year later, I can easily say that this was the best decision I could have made after graduating from undergrad. I am very grateful for all the lessons I learned and all the opportunities I was given while in this program, and I truly believe that this experience was indispensable for my personal and career growth!
In the northernmost part of Ethiopia, there is a region composed of an ethnic minority called the Tigrayans that oppose increasing the power of the central government. This region has 7 million ethnic Tigrayans, which is 7% of Ethiopia’s population, and they have a significant influence on national affairs. The conflict between the government of Ethiopia and Tigray has been growing since the current Prime Minister took power in 2018. Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed wants to unify the country by increasing the power of the federal government and taking power away from autonomous regions like Tigray.
Prior to Abiy taking office, the regional government called Tigray People’s Liberation Front had a lot more authority. TPLF had been in power for more than three decades until they were forced to step down by protestors. President Abiy created a political party that united several ethnic minorities to form the Prosperity Party. TPLF decided to not become a part of this party and remain in control of the Tigray region. After this decision was made, key Tigray leaders were taken out of power due to accusations of corruption. The Ethiopian government also delayed elections in 2020, which the leaders of Tigray opposed. In resistance to Abiy’s government trying to take away their autonomous power, Tigray held regional elections in September 2020.
In response to the regional elections, the federal government declared them illegitimate and cut funding to the region in October. Ethnic tensions in Ethiopia have been a problem since the military junta overthrew the centuries-old monarchy in 1974. The TPLF and another political party representing the Oromo people pushed against the junta because they perceived the takeover as a domination of the Amhara people and language. Since then, violence has occurred as tensions rise between different ethnic groups. In July 2020, accusations of ethnic cleansing against Oromo youth were made when groups targeted Amhara and Gurage people in the Oromia region. Most ethnic groups in Ethiopia have faced violence from other groups or exclusion by the central government depending on which political party was in power.
The situation in Tigray escalated to violence in November 2020, when TPLF laid siege to a key Ethiopian military base at Sero. In response to the attack by mortar and tanks, the Ethiopian government launched an offensive against the Tigray region. By the end of November, the federal government’s forces had retaken Mekelle, the capital city of Tigray. In the aftermath of the conflict, accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing of Tigrayans have been made against the government of Ethiopia and their Eritrean allies. The most notable figure to bring this light has been the leader of the Tigray region, Debretsion Gebremichael. In an interview in February, Gebremichael called for an independent probe into the alleged killings, rapes, and torture.
The US State Department has released credible reports and accounts that support claims of ethnic cleansing and other human rights abuses. Reports include indiscriminate shelling on civilians by the Ethiopian government and looting by soldiers after Tigrayans fled the area. The abuse allegations are not limited to the government of Ethiopia. Eyewitnesses report that Eritrean soldiers fired on a crowd of Tigrayans leaving Maryam Dengelat church in Dengelat, a village in the east of the Tigray region. CNN also spoke to doctors that are reporting sexual violence used as a weapon against women in the area.
The conflict has led to tens of thousands of Tigrayans fleeing as refugees into neighboring Sudan. Thousands are believed to have been killed, though numbers are only estimates since human rights organizations are unable to get into the area due to fighting. One Ethiopian official said around 2.2 million people have fled their homes. In the past few weeks, journalists have finally been able to get into the region to release witness accounts and situation reports. In recent decades, Ethiopia has been a close ally of the United States and a stable presence in the Horn of Africa. Analysts worry that the recent human rights abuses and conflict may upset this status and make Ethiopia a source of instability.
Reports of genocide and ethnic cleansing in Tigray are just the most recent reports of violence against minorities in Ethiopia. The linguistic and religious makeup of the country makes it one of the most diverse in the region. Minority Rights Group International keeps a world directory based on census data, and Ethiopia consists of over 90 distinct ethnic groups that speak 80 different languages. The country is 43.5% Orthodox Christian and 33.9% Muslim, with the remainder following Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, and traditional religions. The largest ethnic groups include the Oromo at 34.9% of the population, Amhara at 27.9%, and Tigray at 7.3%. The unique makeup of groups with different beliefs creates a difficult terrain for the government in power to navigate and future cooperation against violence is necessary to end the hate against minority groups.
On Tuesday April 6th, the Institute for Human Rights at UAB welcomed acclaimed author and activist Brittany Packnett Cunningham to speak. Brittany facilitated a conversation entitled “Pursuing Justice with Love and Power.” The discussion was moderated by IHR graduate assistant Jaylah Cosby and IHR intern Faiza Mawani.
Brittany began with discussing her inspiration for the phrase “love and power.” The phrase was actually borrowed from a lesser known piece of writing by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It can be utilized in word format or in a series of emojis: the heart emoji to represent love and the fist emoji to represent power. Love and power are conceived as two opposites. For example, love is perceived as soft whereas power is perceived as intense. However, Brittany emphasizes the importance of the two together. Our power can be informed with our love. This can be seen in a political landscape with loving policies that empower people where they are.
Brittany then pivots the conversation to discuss love and power in the context of community building. Community building begins first by being in and participating in the community. She describes 2014 as a pivotal turning point in American history and in her personal history. With 2014 came the protests in Ferguson where young people protected the American people’s right to protest. Communities showed their love for themselves and for others by standing up to the injustices in local, national, and international communities. Love is the root of protests. Brittany states, “We don’t need to know the people who have died by police violence to love them.” To actualize what love looks like, it is required to be in community with people.
When asked about whether the term “community” can mean an integrated community or a homogenous community, Brittany confirmed that both are necessary in making sense of our racial identity in the world. Affinity spaces allow for safety and comfort in what we know and understand. Finding community in those affinity spaces often provides the opportunity to find community in multicultural spaces. While working towards that multicultural community can be difficult and uncomfortable, that safe space from the homogenous group is still there at the end of the day. In answering this question, Brittany emphasizes the need to push for integrated spaces while also understanding the simultaneous need for affinity spaces.
In the time of COVID-19, digitalization has become ever more present in all spaces an advocacy is no exception. Brittany acknowledges how digital spaces have somehow made it easier to work as an activist. She describes digitalization as another tool in the toolbox that works toward justice. It changes the way people can view work, life, and accessibility. However, the digitalization of life and work has also allowed misinformation to flourish. Brittany’s example of the dangers of misinformation is with voter suppression. The most effective form of voter suppression is to convince voters to stay home by encouraging them to believe that their vote doesn’t count. Similarly, Brittany warns against performative digital advocacy. If an Instagram post is being created with the sole purpose of gaining followers, this is an example of performative digital advocacy. Instead, advocacy posts should encourage action and therefore be productive. Most importantly, digital advocacy must amplify the folks most affected by the issue whenever possible.
A question from the audience inspired Brittany to discuss the intersection between religious faith and social justice. In response, Brittany stated, “I identify as political not in spite of my faith but because of it.” Brittany speaks from the perspective of a Christian and highlighted many of the issues modern Christianity has.
The conversation began to orient towards the Derek Chauvin case, which was ongoing at the time of the event, and policing in the United States. Brittany admitted to not watching the trial but looking at the coverage after the fact. Her primary reason for doing so is an understanding that nothing in the Derek Chauvin trial will bring back George Floyd. She highlights the important difference between justice and accountability in this section of the conversation. Justice would be an anonymous, alive, George Floyd sitting with his family and friends and living his life. That will never happen due to the actions of Derek Chauvin. However, Chauvin can be held accountable for his actions. When discussing the trial, Brittany states how she hopes that from the spectacle that is the trial, people are able to understand that police officers should never be expected or allowed to be the judge, jury, and executioner.
Brittany’s perspective on policing in the United States is that it needs to cease to exist how it is. She cites the “abolitionist tradition” of the United States. The people who fought against the abolition of slavery often argued the economics of slavery and the reliance the United States had on it, a similar argument we see occurring now when discussing police systems. Brittany asks the audience that if reimagining what public safety looks life scares you, to ask yourself where you would have stood on the abolition of slavery. “The safest communities,” Brittany states, “are not those with the most cops, both those with the most resources. Period.”
Brittany ended the conversation with advice on how to “get on the train” of activism. She says that the most important things to do are to listen, learn, and act but acknowledges that the temptation in activism is to default to whichever of those three is your are comfortable with, which is often “learn.” Brittany explains that it is easy to fall into the trap of sitting in the corner of your house, reading the literature and listening the people but never exiting to help build the communities and act. Learning is only half of the work. With such a digitalized world, there is an opportunity to learn and listen from the people we are the least like. Brittany advises to write down what gives you a privilege and an advantage in the world and follow the people who do not have your privileges. She also advises to act locally, highlighting the fact that you do not have to travel to another place to be an activist. “Link up with the organizations in your community,” Brittany advises, “and that is how we get to work.”
The country of Nicaragua is rich in agriculture yet still suffers when it comes to the meeting the basic needs of the Nicaraguan people. However, women are the most severely affected by this as they are the primary bread winners of their homes, yet they do not have access to the same job opportunities that men do, and they are also fighting for their healthcare rights. The structure and dynamic of families vary from culture to culture–in Latin cultures, for instance, men have been taught to be the head of the household, provide, protect, and lay a solid foundation for the family, and the role of women usually consists of tending to the responsibilities of the home and caring for the children. Most of these roles are shaped by the behavior and values of the family as well as by society, which persuades or enforces the presence of certain behaviors and norms. Men are portrayed as dominate figures while the women are docile. Men take pride in their dominate role to an extent that may not be frequently seen in other cultures. This heavy presence of men dominating women is known as the machismo culture, and it has inevitably affected the way that women are portrayed in society and has negatively impacted their access to healthcare.
Machismo is learned through social interactions and is instilled in boys from the moment of birth through adulthood. “Boys quickly learn that they are not supposed to cry, that they have far greater freedom than their sisters and that adaptation, submissiveness and responsibility for children and domestic work are for girls” (Berglund, Liljestrand, Marín, Salgado, & Zelaya, 2000). Boys are taught that crying is a sign of weakness and that deprives them of the ability to express all their emotions and by developing a nature of pride and coldness, they are forced to swallow emotional burdens rather than voice them. Consequently, this process affects how they treat and view the women in their lives. Women, therefore, never escape the cycle of being viewed as docile creatures who’s only value comes from how well they can perform household chores and care for children.
Because the unemployment and poverty rate are so high in Nicaragua, women are often taught that they need to depend on a man for economic support. However, the high pregnancy rate is also a consequence from the lack of sexual education in schools and in homes by parents. The country is heavily influenced by Christianity, which emphasizes the importance of purity before marriage; however, many homes fail to educate or emphasize the role that men play in this as well. The nature of machismo emphasizes or rewards men who are womanizers, which inevitably leads to amounted responsibility if they get a woman pregnant. It is common for men to have a wife and children but also have a few girlfriends that they see from time to time to “destress” from their home or work life. While the man can go out and have fun with other women and have unlimited liberties, if a woman is even suspected as being unfaithful her husband may beat her. While an outsider may easily suggest that the women in the relationship should leave if they find themselves under these circumstances, it is not that easy, especially when the man is considered the family’s stability and support. However, other family members have a heavy influence on why a woman stays with her husband. Adriana, a young lady in her twenties who participated in a study about adolescent pregnancies in Nicaragua said that “they teach us that you have to endure, to suffer, because that is our obligation. Maybe it’s because their mothers treated them like that…. Consequently, they teach us to be only mothers and housewives” (Berglund, Liljestrand, Marín, Salgado, & Zelaya, 2000). This tradition is so deeply rooted in the culture that it has ingrained the idea that a women’s value is lost if they leave their husbands. Their first husband shall be their last and if they leave, no one else will love them. Women often question every decision they make for this same reason and if they are abused by their husbands then they have been psychologically conditioned to think they are the ones to blame.
One of the characteristics of machismo is respect and to challenge a decision made by one’s husband, who is seen as a superior, is like challenging their masculinity and it is a symbol of disrespect too. Men submerged in the machismo culture are also evaluated as a man based on their ability to have children therefore, more is better. Men have been able to justify this view is by finding ways to manipulate women so that they maintain their power. A study conducted in the cities of Managua and Leon evaluated how men viewed reproductive health and their responses to participating in gender training programs. One of the men stated that “He aims to help other young people avoid the negative consequences of unsafe sexual behavior, such as unintended pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, and HIV” (Torres, Goicolea, Edin & Öhman, 2012). This is an important finding as it successfully communicated how the behaviors of men were affecting not only the women but also their own health. The men take immense pride in having intercourse with women without using protection because it was another way of asserting their dominance. However, many were not aware of how those habits were exposing them to health dangers.
Despite the raise in awareness, men in Nicaragua still fail to break the cycle of violence and take any real initiative. In fact, in many areas the problem has worsened which affects women and children living in the home as they become exposed to situations that they begin to perceive as normal. “The fact that children are so often witnesses to violence against their mothers is of particular concern, not only because it exposes them to the risk of abuse themselves but also, in the case of boys, to the risk of becoming battering husbands as adults” (Ellsberg, Peña, Herrera, Liljestrand & Winkvist, 2000). The violence that women and even children are exposed to has more than physical consequences, it can also lead to a higher risk of illness further along in their lives. There is only so much stress that the body can take without releasing it, therefore, the body can become ill from all the intensity and constant fight for survival. The main reason men may have not been compelled to change their behavior is due to their social circles, especially other men. Most men have the “fear of rejection and discrimination” because of the “peer and family pressure to conform to traditional norms and values” (Torres, Goicolea, Edin & Öhman, 2012). Without the support of the people closest to them, they are less likely to step out of their comfort zone. They would also have to battle with being perceived as crazy because advocating for women’s rights is wrong or does not matter. No one likes to be rejected, especially if your masculinity is in question. A male who begins to speak out against domestic violence and the cultural norms would be deemed unworthy of respect because they have become soft and weak.
Women’s centers known as Casas de Mujer in Nicaragua have been successful in holding men to a high behavioral standard by equipping women with the knowledge of their rights by laws of the countries. Overall, the houses have provided a safe space for women where they can feel reassured, unashamed, or guilty, and be educated on their legal options, as well as on their value as a human being. The houses also help women unravel how machismo has affected their lives, make self-defense available, and teach women how they can play a role in breaking machismo norms with their sons. However, while there are great NGOs that have parted the way for women, the few that are present may struggle to remain open due to funding and support. Women around the country still battle with violence in their homes, especially in rural areas. The country must provide women with equality in the work force so that they do not have to be dependent on males, and so that they have access to healthcare. The women should also be allowed to follow their dreams, aspirations, and seek a life worthy of respect and dignity without being forced to confide to a life that is hidden in the dark. There is still an abundance of work to be done.
This 2021 Spring Semester, UAB’s Institute for Human Rights had the privilege of partnering with Clínica Verde in Nicaragua to dive into the human rights issues that women in the country face, especially regarding health care. The internship, directed by Dr. Tine Reuter and Dr. Stacy Moak, has opened doors to important conversations about the importance of voicing and advocating for people who need support. Although the semester just started, those involved with the internship have already been exposed to several educated and experienced scholars that are making a mark on the country and are looking to equip and inspire others to do the same. In just one month, students have learned about the life of women and children have struggled to find economic stability, and access to basic resources. The purpose of this partnership with Clínica Verde is dive deeper into the ways that UAB (University of Alabama at Birmingham) students can serve others even during a global pandemic. Through the development of the course students will develop programs and educational presentations that aim to advocate the same values and goal displayed by the staff at Clínica Verde to reach out to more people in the clinic’s surrounding community but also to those in more rural areas.
Feed My Starving Children (FMSC)
Yolanda Paredes-Gaitan was the first speaker invited to speak to the students. She lived in Nicaragua for twelve years but is now currently living in California and working for the U.S. government. While in Nicaragua, she worked alongside Clínica Verde helping find ways to advocate for human rights issues, now she does that in partnership with the U.S. Valuable information shared through her presentation revealed that 65% of people in Nicaragua live in rural areas that are usually only accessed by walking or horses. Although the country of Nicaragua is rich in resources such as coffee, chocolate, and honey, however the country has been deemed the second poorest country, after Haiti. So why does this matter? It matters because it affects everything, including the quality of life in the country. Every community in the country has what is known as a health post. Each health post is usually the primary place for individuals to go to for basic health care needs, especially since few people have access to a nearby hospital. However, the problem is that most of the posts are rundown and in need of repairs. With the help of Clinica Verde, one post which had a structure that was falling apart, had holes in the roof, had no running water was transformed into a new and improved post that is now a green building that has natural ventilation, lighting and has access to water and the resources needed to provide the community with quality services. The goal of Clínica Verde is not to keep all the knowledge to themselves but instead to spread it with those in the country. Another thing that the clinic has been able to do is to provide posts with the knowledge necessary to run an intensity garden. The reason the clinic does this is because they are not looking to provide the women and children with short term solutions to their problems. They want to equip people with the knowledge to improve their lives long term, so they are more educated on how to live a more healthy and sustainable life.
Who visits the clinic?
People from all around the country visit the country. One lady traveled by bus and walked two hours up a hill just to get back home, but she did it because she loved the care provided by Clínica Verde. However, unlike the traditional view that when patients need care, they must go to the clinic, Clínica Verde travels to rural communities three times a week. Their mission goes beyond what the four walls of their building. They make it a priority to reach those who would otherwise not have time to visit the clinic. Another important thing to note is that the clinic also Nicaragua had no education in optometry until one donor came to the country and changed that. Now the team at Clínica Verde also has a program that helps provide people in the community with free glasses which is centered around the students but also anyone in the student’s lives that may also need glasses. This optometry program has also allowed senior citizens to have surgeries that have saved them from going blind.
In the past year, there has been a drastic rise in hate crimes against Asians across the globe. This was fueled by inflammatory language and anti-Asian rhetoric surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent hate crimes and acts of discrimination against people of Asian descent are not isolated to the past year. Anti-Asian language and rhetoric is beginning to garner widespread media attention in light of the Atlanta shootings during which six Asian women were killed. It’s incredibly sad and concerning that it took this instance to gain media attention for the injustices that have been plaguing Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities. Asian American communities face a unique reality regarding racism and racial violence that’s not often seen in other racialized communities. On one hand, Asians are praised and encouraged to be the perfect minority, and on the other they are still placed in the racial hierarchy that seeks to oppress them via harmful stereotypes and nationalist ideals.
While some of the hate crimes are due to overt racist attitudes, others are due covert cultural stereotypes about Asian Americans that are reinforced in the media and pop culture. These stereotypes present Asians as submissive and hardworking. “People don’t think that Asians will fight back” so they are more easily targeted by others who don’t fear the consequences. As a result, the elders in the Asian community have had to bear this burden of violence. Asian American stereotypes are a direct result of this community being portrayed as the model minority.
What Is the Model Minority Myth?
The model minority term was coined by William Petersen in 1966, a white male who argued that Japanese Americans could not experience racism because they were capitalistically and socially performing better than other groups of color. This is incredibly ironic because of the Japanese concentration camps that were built by the US government during World War II. This model minority myth stereotypes Asians as studious, successful, hardworking, and smart. It is this population that despite being a minority has challenged the odds and accomplished the “American Dream.” Even though this stereotype has seemingly positive overtones, it is especially damaging for Asian Americans and other minorities. The model minority myth pits minorities against each other, while also simultaneous ignoring the systemic racism that plagues Asian Americans. It also takes a huge toll on the mental health of Asian populations, because of this burden to succeed and compete against other minorities in a distinctly white dominated country. Asian Americans that don’t fit this model minority mold, who are of lower socioeconomic status, and work in low-wage industries are more susceptible to experiencing hate crimes and racial violence. Asian women encounter even more difficult odds. Asian women are fetishized, sexualized, and marginalized. Asian women are also in an extremely precarious position and vulnerable to facing violence.
Gregg Orton, national director of the National Council of Asian Pacific Americans, says that there is a narrative that says we are alright, that we don’t have problems and so we should not complain. Rewriting the challenge of this narrative speaks for itself, especially since it emphasizes the type of work that needs to be done to combat this notion and these harmful stereotypes. While not every act of discrimination or crime that takes places against Asian Americans is a hate crime or racially motivated, these repetitive and familiar acts of violence and complacency are certainly something to address.
The model minority myth contributes to the oppression Olympics and damages the unified front that people of color are attempting to uphold against individual and systemic acts of racism. This myth has been weaponized against the Black community and against Asian forms of resistance. Illustrating Asian Americans as the epitome of the “American Dream” damages the lives of Pacific Islanders, Native Hawaiians, and Southeast Asian Americans. Their needs, struggles, and harms they face are made invisible. This does not mean that Asian Americans do not benefit from the oppressive nature of the model minority narrative. This is not an excuse to discount the racial violence and discrimination that the AAPI community faces every day. To move beyond this myth and fight it, there needs to be solidarity between AAPI groups and other marginalized communities. We have already seen this in action in light of the Black Lives Matter protests this past summer and especially this past month.
Every significant economic market in the world has a large reliance on the global supply chain, or globalization. These supply chains rely on canals to connect one side of the world to the other, including the Panama Canal and the Suez Canal. On Tuesday March 22nd, one ship single handedly disrupted the entire global supply chain. The Ever Given, one of the largest container ships in the world, ran aground in the middle of the Suez Canal. This event blocked any other container ships from crossing the Suez Canal in either direction, effectively cutting off a major link between Asian markets and European markets.
According to an analysis by Bloomberg, the Suez Canal blockage created by the Ever Given is holding up $9.6 billion of goods. Some blocked ships are carrying oil, others are carrying items from electronics to clothes. Should the blockade in the Canal last for two weeks, nearly one-fourth of the container ships that would normally be in European ports will be blocked. Normally, approximately 12% of global trade passes through the Suez Canal. Every day, the canal is able to move about 106 large shipping containers between Asia and Europe. To put this in perspective, before it was released, it is estimated that the Ever Given was holding up about $400 million an hour.
The world has recently been relying on markets that reduce the need for stockpiling items and instead provide products “just in time.” The internet and the current system of global shipping allow companies and consumers to buy and receive products right when they need them, instead of stockpiling. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a fantastic example of how “just in time” manufacturing has major flaws. From toilet paper to essential medical protective gear, certain products were in very high demand around the world. There was the assumption that these products could be delivered quickly and dependently to those who needed them at the start of the pandemic. However, this calculation was severely flawed and the high demand from all corners of the world for the same products caused months of delays in manufacturing leading to deadly consequences.
The Suez Canal runs through Egypt, connecting the Mediterranean Sea to the Indian Ocean. The canal was initially owned by French investors when it was conceived in the mid-1800s. The construction of the canal began in 1859 and took 10 years and 1.5 million workers. These workers were drafted from Egyptian peasants, approximately 20,000 peasants every 10 months, for extremely difficult work that was very poorly compensated. Many of these workers died of various diseases, including cholera, during their time working on the canal. Throughout the World Wars, Britain controlled the canal. However in 1956, British powers withdrew after many years of negotiating with Egypt. At that point, the Egyptian government led by President Gamal Abdel Nasser had control of the canal. The Suez Crisis began in 1956. Nasser had decided to nationalize the canal once the British forces departed. Israeli, British, and French forces decided to stage a military intervention after deciding the Egyptian response to the canal could be seen as a security threat. The crisis ended in 1957 due to the first-ever United Nations’ peacekeeping force.
The Suez Canal blockage created by the Ever Given has brought to light how much the world relies on cargo ships. 90% of the global trade is carried out within maritime supply chains. As the COVID-19 pandemic has continued, thousands of workers on ships have been stranded due to COVID-19 restrictions, unable to return to home countries and unable to be relieved. This has become a humanitarian crisis. Seafarers are the ones providing the world with food, essential supplies, and any other items purchased by consumers. However, they have been unable to leave their ships and go home to their families.
Crews on the ships are supposed to rotate on and off the vessels every 11 months. However due to the pandemic, many seafarers have long surpassed this 11 month marker and still have no notice as to when they can return home. Even before the pandemic, seafaring is a difficult job. The shifts are long, sleeping quarters are tight, and there is very little contact with those off of the ship. At the beginning of the pandemic, the situation was even described as bordering on forced labor. A major problem is the growing levels of fatigue experienced by the crew on ships. The number of reported suicides within this population has doubled, with this statistic not including the cases that were deemed accidents or missing at sea.
While the blockage of the Suez Canal by the massive ship, the Ever Given, has prompted memes and jokes around the world, it has brought more attention to the world’s reliance on shipping industries and to the lack of welfare experienced by seafarers. The Ever Given rendered the Suez Canal virtually useless for many days and the ramifications of this will fall primarily on the backs of shipping industry workers. It is important to recognize how COVID-19 has impacted the global economy as well as seafarers and to work towards achieving fair rights for these workers.
On Wednesday, March 31, the Institute for Human Rights at UAB welcomed Dr. Peter Verbeek, Associate Professor in Anthropology and peace behavior scholar, to the Social Justice Café. Dr. Verbeek facilitated a discussion entitled “The Rise in Anti-Asian Violence.”
Dr. Verbeek began by recounting several of the vicious attacks leveled against Asian-Americans in recent weeks. Apparently stemming from the hateful rhetoric and blame-casting around the origins of the pandemic, the nature of the attacks on Asian-Americans listed by Dr. Verbeek included various forms of physical and verbal assault, discrimination, and homicide. After hearing of the horrid assaults that have been perpetrated against Asian-Americans there was an uncomfortable pause in conversation as participants digested the magnitude of the reality and the necessity of standing in solidarity against anti-Asian violence. Looking back to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ Preamble, which reads “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,” Dr. Verbeek explained how these attacks constitute a violation of the basic human rights of persons of Asian-descent. He reminded participants that “peace is an ongoing process” and that while pursuing peace, we will constantly face challenges and uncomfortable situations.
Dr. Verbeek then began discussing the mass murder that occurred in Atlanta, Georgia on March 16, 2021. At this point, participants began to share their personal experiences with discrimination and racism. This particular part of the conversation was guided by participants of Asian descent that were extremely candid while sharing their experiences. Many of the stories shared during this segment were heartbreaking and utterly disturbing. One participant expressed how the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated their level of discomfort and fear of being in public spaces. The participant was more afraid of being attacked while being in a grocery store than they were of contracting the deadly COVID-19 virus. The participant also stated they have greatly altered the manner in which they travel in public by wearing heavy clothing, hats, and sunglasses in an attempt to be less noticeable. Hearing the firsthand experiences, fears, and obstacles faced by men and women of Asian descent was a somber but important lesson for all.
In discussing how to support the Asian-American community during this time, Dr. Verbeek commend the actions of UAB faculty, specifically citing Dr. Kecia M. Thomas’ call for unity and understanding following the mass murder in Atlanta. One participant questioned the power in mass statements calling for unity and how we, as a community, can conceptualize the idea of peace and unity and apply those principles. Dr. Verbeek acknowledged that anti-Asian hate and violence in the United States stems from the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. The hatred and violence experienced by Asian people in the United States is not new and will continue to evolve. Dr. Verbeek found statements of solidarity to be valuable and a necessary tool used to introduce new audiences to the ancient history of white supremacy and oppression of minority communities in the United States.
While discussing mobilization and peaceful activism, a participant asked for advice on how they can better communicate and motivate those in their sphere of influence to become active and speak out against anti-Asian violence and discrimination. The participant’s request for advice was answered by a fellow participant. The advice included the tips to “first be gentle with yourself” then “be gentle with others” meaning, when engaging with others their level of understanding and outrage may not match yours, and this is ok. Be patient and understand that when introducing people to new ideas and concepts the gestation period will vary and to always be gentle with self-criticism. In conclusion, a participant offered a final call to action for all participants to continue to “educate, help organize, and raise awareness” and to continue to advocate for the protection of human rights domestically and globally.
Thank you, Dr. Verbeek and thank you everyone who participated in this eye-opening discussion. The Institute for Human Rights at UAB’s next event, “Pursuing Justice with Love and Power: A conversation with Brittany Packnett Cunningham,” will take place April 6, 2021 at 4:00PM (CT). Please join us and bring a friend!
To see more upcoming events hosted by the Institute for Human Rights at UAB, please visit our events page here.
UAB is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer committed to fostering a diverse, equitable and family-friendly environment in which all faculty and staff can excel and achieve work/life balance irrespective of race, national origin, age, genetic or family medical history, gender, faith, gender identity and expression as well as sexual orientation. UAB also encourages applications from individuals with disabilities and veterans.