Uncategorized – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

Griefbots: Blurring the Reality of Death and the Illusion of Life

Griefbots are an emerging technological phenomenon designed to mimic deceased individuals’ speech, behaviors, and even personalities. These digital entities are often powered by artificial intelligence, trained on data such as text messages, social media posts, and recorded conversations of the deceased. The concept of griefbots gained traction in the popular imagination through portrayals in television and film, such as the episode “Be Right Back” from the TV series Black Mirror. As advancements in AI continue to accelerate, griefbots have shifted from speculative fiction to a budding reality, raising profound ethical and human rights questions.

Griefbots are marketed as tools to comfort the grieving, offering an opportunity to maintain a sense of connection with lost loved ones. However, their implementation brings complex challenges that transcend technology and delve into the realms of morality, autonomy, and exploitation. While the intentions behind griefbots might seem compassionate, their broader implications require careful consideration. With the rising intricacy of the morality of AI, I want to explore some of the ethical aspects of griefbots and ask questions to push the conversation along. My goal is not to strongly advocate for or against their usage but to engage in philosophical debate.

Ethical and Human Rights Ramifications of Grief Bots

Commercial Exploitation of Grief

The commercialization of griefbots raises significant concerns about exploitation. Grieving individuals, in their emotional vulnerability, may be susceptible to expensive services marketed as tools for solace. This commodification of mourning could be seen as taking advantage of grief for profit. Additionally, if griefbots are exploitative, it prompts us to reconsider the ethicality of other death-related industries, such as funeral services and memorialization practices, which also operate within a profit-driven framework.

However, the difference between how companies currently capitalize on griefbots and how the death industry generates profit is easier to tackle than the other implications of this service. Most companies producing and selling griefbots charge for their services through subscriptions or minute-by-minute payments, distinguishing them from other death-related industries. Companies may have financial incentives to keep grieving individuals engaged with their services. To achieve this, algorithms could be designed to optimize interactions, maximizing the time a grieving person spends with the chatbot and ensuring long-term subscriptions. These algorithms might even subtly adjust the bot’s personality to make it more appealing over time, creating a pleasing caricature rather than an accurate reflection of the deceased.

As these interactions become increasingly tailored to highlight what users most liked about their loved ones, the griefbot may unintentionally alter or oversimplify memories of the deceased, fostering emotional dependency. This optimization could transform genuine mourning into a form of addiction. In contrast, if companies opted to charge a one-time activation fee rather than ongoing payments, would this shift the ethical implications? In such a case, could griefbots be equated to services like cremation—a one-time fee for closure—or would the potential for misuse still pose moral concerns?

Posthumous Harm and Dignity

Epicurus, an ancient Greek philosopher, famously argued that death is not harmful to the deceased because, once dead, they no longer exist to experience harm. Griefbots challenge the assumption that deceased individuals are beyond harm. From Epicurus’s perspective, griefbots would not harm the dead, as there is no conscious subject to be wronged. However, the contemporary philosopher Joel Feinberg contests this view by suggesting that posthumous harm is possible when an individual’s reputation, wishes, or legacy are violated. Misrepresentation or misuse of a griefbot could distort a person’s memory or values, altering how loved ones and society remember them. These distortions may result from incomplete or biased data, creating an inaccurate portrayal of the deceased. Such inaccuracies could harm the deceased’s dignity and legacy, raising concerns about how we ethically represent and honor the dead.

a version of Michelangelo's famous painting "The Creation of Adam" but with a robot hand instead of Adam's — Image 2: A robot version of Michelangelo’s painting “the Creation of Adam” Source: Yahoo Images

Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” Because griefbots are supposed to represent a deceased person, they have the potential to disrespect people’s dignity by falsifying that person’s reason and consciousness. By creating an artificial version of someone’s reasoning or personality that may not align with their true self, griefbots risk distorting their essence and reducing the person’s memory to a fabrication.

But imagine a case in which an expert programmer develops a chatbot to represent himself. He perfectly understands every line of coding and can predict how the griefbot will honor his legacy. If there is no risk to the harm of his dignity, is there still an ethical issue at hand?

Consent and Autonomy

Various companies allow people to commission an AI ghost before their death by answering a set of questions and uploading their information. If individuals consent to create a griefbot during their lifetime, it might seem to address questions of autonomy. However, consent provided before death cannot account for unforeseen uses or misuse of the technology. How informed can consent truly be when the long-term implications and potential misuse of the technology are not fully understood when consent is given? Someone agreeing to create a griefbot may envision it as a comforting tool for loved ones. Yet, they cannot anticipate future technological advancements that could repurpose their digital likeness in ways they never intended.

This issue also intersects with questions of autonomy after death. While living individuals are afforded the right to make decisions about their posthumous digital presence, their inability to adapt or revoke these decisions as circumstances change raises ethical concerns. In HI-PHI Nation’s Podcast, The Wishes of the Dead, they explore how the wishes of deceased individuals, particularly wealthy ones, continue to shape the world long after their death. The episode uses Milton Hershey, founder of Hershey Chocolate, as a case study. Hershey created a charitable trust to fund a school for orphaned boys and endowed it with his company’s profits. Despite changes in societal norms and the needs of the community, the trust still operates according to Hershey’s original stipulations. Critics questioned whether continuing to operate according to Hershey’s 20th-century ideals was still relevant in the modern era, where gender equality and broader educational access have become more central concerns.

Chatbots do not have the ability to evolve and grow the way that humans do. Barry explains the foundation of this concept by saying, “One problem with executing deeds in perpetuity is that dead people are products of their own times. They don’t change what they want when the world changes.” And even if growth was implemented into the algorithm, there is no guarantee it would be reflective of how a person changes. Griefbots might preserve a deceased person’s digital presence in ways that could become problematic or irrelevant over time. Although griefbots do not have the legal status of an estate or will, they still preserve a person’s legacy in a similar fashion. If Hershey was alive today, would he modify his estate to reflect his legacy?

It could be argued that the difference between Hershey’s case and Chatbots is that wills and estates are designed to execute a person’s final wishes, but they are inherently limited in scope and duration. Griefbots, by contrast, have the potential to persist indefinitely, amplifying the damage to one’s reputation. Does this difference encompass the true scope of the issue at hand, or would it be viable to argue that if chatbots are unethical, then persisting estates would be equally unethical as well?

A picture of someone having a conversation with a chatbot — Image 3: A person having a conversation with a chatbot. Source: Yahoo Images

Impact on Mourning and Healing

Griefbots have the potential to fundamentally alter the mourning process by offering an illusion of continued presence. Traditionally, grieving involves accepting the absence of a loved one, allowing individuals to process their emotions and move toward healing. However, interacting with a griefbot may disrupt or delay this natural progression. By creating a sense of ongoing connection with the deceased, these digital avatars could prevent individuals from fully confronting the reality of the loss, potentially prolonging the pain of bereavement.

At the same time, griefbots could serve as a therapeutic tool for some individuals, providing comfort during difficult times. Grief is a deeply personal experience and for certain people, using chatbots as a means of processing loss might offer a temporary coping mechanism. In some cases, they might help people navigate the early, overwhelming stages of grief by allowing them to “speak” with a version of their loved one, helping them feel less isolated. Given the personal nature of mourning, it is essential to acknowledge that each individual has the right to determine the most effective way for them to manage their grief, including whether or not they choose to use this technology.

However, the decision to engage with griefbots is not always straightforward. It is unclear whether individuals in the throes of grief can make fully autonomous decisions, as emotions can cloud judgment during such a vulnerable time. Grief may impair an individual’s ability to think clearly, and thus, the use of griefbots might not always be a conscious, rational choice but rather one driven by overwhelming emotion.

Nora Freya Lindemann, a doctoral student researching the ethics of AI, proposes that griefbots could be classified as medical devices designed to assist in managing prolonged grief disorder (PGD). PGD is characterized by intense, persistent sorrow and difficulty accepting the death of a loved one. Symptoms of this disorder could potentially be alleviated with the use of griefbots, provided they are carefully regulated. Lindemann suggests that in this context, griefbots would require stringent guidelines to ensure their safety and effectiveness. This would involve rigorous testing to prove that these digital companions are genuinely beneficial and do not cause harm. Moreover, they should only be made available to individuals diagnosed with PGD rather than to anyone newly bereaved to prevent unhealthy attachments and over-reliance.

Despite the potential benefits, the psychological impact of griefbots remains largely unexplored. It is crucial to consider how these technologies affect emotional healing in the long term. While they may offer short-term comfort, the risk remains that they could hinder the natural grieving process, leading individuals to avoid the painful yet necessary work of acceptance and moving forward. As the technology develops, further research will be essential to determine the full implications of griefbots on the grieving process and to ensure that they are used responsibly and effectively.

Conclusion

Griefbots are at the intersection of cutting-edge technology and age-old human concerns about mortality, memory, and ethics. While they hold potential for comfort and connection, their implementation poses significant ethical and human rights challenges. The concepts I explored only scratch the surface of the iceberg. As society navigates this uncharted territory, we must critically examine its implications and find ways to use AI responsibly. The questions it raises are complex, but they offer an opportunity to redefine how we approach death and the digital legacies we leave behind.

Democratic Backsliding in Georgia

In recent months, the country of Georiga has seen an increase in anti-democratic policies and government behavior, distancing the nation from Western states and institutions and further aligning itself with Russia and its allies. While political tension has been building within the country over the past decade, the passage of new policies, such as the Foreign Agent Bill and the LGBT Propaganda Bill, has taken this to new heights, receiving domestic and global condemnation as these programs fall in line with authoritarian initiatives taken in other countries. This prefaces the October 2024 parliamentary elections, where the incumbent Georgian Dream Party received a majority of the votes. However, due to the alleged use of voter intimidation and fraud, this result has been widely contested. These events have triggered mass demonstrations throughout the nation as citizens question the state of democracy within Georgia. Due to their longstanding history with Russia and the undemocratic nature of new policies, the events in Georiga warrant monitoring to ensure democracy remains.

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze speaks in front of Georgian and European Union flags — Image 1: Georgian Dream Party chairman and Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze speaks at an event. Source: Yahoo Images

History of the Georgian Dream Party

The policy platform and support of the Georgian Dream Party have seen a notable shift throughout its time in office. The party was founded in 2012 and quickly rose to prominence, receiving enough votes to oust the former administration later that year. During its conception, the party’s primary objectives were to improve relations with Western states and to join international organizations such as the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, while also opening up friendly communications with Russia. Popularity for these policies led to the party gaining an absolute majority in parliament in 2016, however; support dwindled following corruption scandals. Later in this administration, a Russian lawmaker was invited to join a Georgian parliamentary meeting, a decision that was met with great upset. Largescale demonstrations erupted as citizens protested the encroachment of Russian influence in their national institutions, rejecting the potential for future Russian involvement. Regardless, the Georgian Dream party won again in 2020 as it promised to take the necessary steps to join the EU. However, this commitment was halted in 2022, when the relationship between Russia-Georgian relations has seemingly strengthened since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. While numerous countries enacted economic sanctions on Russia, Georiga did not follow suit. Similarly, trade and travel have grown between the countries since 2022.

Not only has the Georgian Dream Party strayed away from its original policy promises, but officials have also begun to spread harmful rhetoric and enact undemocratic policies. In the leadup to the October 2024 elections, the administration promoted that a “Global War Party” was the reason behind the invasion of Ukraine. This theory suggests that Western states are purposefully trying to prolong the war to weaken the Georgian state. The party has also recently passed the Foreign Agent Bill and the LGBT Propaganda Bill, both of which undermine core democratic principles. Though the Georgian Dream Party has not been free of problems, it is clear that, within the past few years, drastic changes have brought the country further away from democracy.

Democratic Backsliding

Foreign Agent Bill

On August 1st, 2024, the Foreign Agent Bill was passed. This piece of legislation requires that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that receive 20% or more of their total funding from international sources must label themselves as companies “pursuing the interest of a foreign power.” Georgia is home to thousands of NGOs, with many monitoring compliance to democratic standards and ensuring there is no return to its communist past. It is estimated that 90% of NGOs would fall under this category, thus undermining the validity of countless institutions and organizations. Furthermore, this bill primarily targets civil society and media organizations. Businesses are exempt from receiving this label, regardless of the percentage of foreign funding. While the Georgian government claims that this policy promotes transparency, the rhetoric that officials use when talking about NGOs suggests otherwise. In a speech given in April 2024, a prominent political figure explained how NGOs “do not love their country or their people because they do not really consider them to be their own”. Between the language used when discussing NGOs and the timing of the bill, many speculate that the purpose of this legislation is to undermine the credibility of opposition and pro-democracy groups, being enacted only 3 months before the 2024 elections.

LGBTQ+ advocates protest for their rights, with one woman wearing a pride flag, and a man holding a poster saying how he wants his country back — Image 2: LGBTQ+ advocates protest against Georgian policies. Source: Yahoo Images

LGBT Propaganda Law

Passed into law only one month after the foreign agent bill, the LGBT Propaganda Law seeks extreme measures to ensure the protection of heterosexuality. Not only does it codify marriage between men and women, but it also bans LGBTQ+ members from adopting children, limits their representation in media, and monitors community events. Furthermore, it overrides anti-discrimination hiring policies and prohibits gender reassignment surgery. The implementation of this bill faced local and international condemnation. Within Georgia, opposition parties criticized the inherent discrimination at the core of the legislation. Similarly, the European Union warns that this legislation threatens the nation’s chances of becoming a member state. The combination of both these bills has raised questions regarding Georgia’s alliances, with many pointing out how these laws signal alignment with Russia over Western powers.

October 2024 Parliamentary Elections

On October 26, 2024, Georgia held its parliamentary elections, where Georgian Dream, the long-standing incumbent party, won a majority. However, these results have been widely contested, with the nation’s own president, Salome Zurabishvili, refusing to recognize the validity of the results. One reason backing these claims is the alleged use of voter intimidation tactics by the Georgian Dream party. Voters discuss cameras monitoring polling booths and the display of a Georgian Dream politician presenting a speech being aired directly outside polling stations. The passing of the Foreign Agent Bill has also warranted concerns as this legislation impacted the credibility of election monitoring organizations and groups ensuring democratic compliance. Furthermore, many changes were made to the electoral system in the months before the election, with this being the first election where parties must receive 5% of the vote to have representation in the parliament, and the first election using an electric ballot counting system. Regardless of these questions surrounding the validity of the election, domestic courts have refused to annul the results or to initiate a recount. Despite its alleged election rigging, the Georgian Dream Party still declares itself victorious. It has also declared a halt to its efforts to join the European Union, causing even more discontent amongst the population.

Protests and Government Responses

These unaddressed concerns triggered a nationwide uproar, with protests fighting for democracy throughout the country. Beginning in early November, these protests demanded that new elections be held in compliance with democratic standards. President Zurabishvili has supported these efforts, protesting alongside Georgian citizens. These protests have continued since the election. Georgian police have reacted with force, unleashing tear gas, water cannons, and rubber bullets on peaceful protestors. Arrested over 20 individuals. The government has also enacted legislation that imposes restrictions on protestors, such as fining those caught hanging posters and stickers in public areas. These acts have also granted Georgian police the ability to proactively detain individuals they suspect will violate these limitations. While Georgian citizens continue to fight for and protect their democracy, it is clear that the current administration is taking steps to silence these voices.

Conclusion

Georgia is experiencing a period of democratic backsliding as the current administration passes authoritarian-leaning legislation and distances itself from Western powers. Though it has never been void of issues, Georgian democracy has drastically weakened in the past few months, resulting in a contested election that reinstated power in the hands of the Georgian Dream Party. Legislation enacted throughout 2024 has also reduced the likelihood that Georgia will be able to join the EU. This backsliding follows a similar trend toward authoritarianism throughout Europe, seen in countries such as Hungary, Romania, Austria, and Poland, and raises concerns over a regional and global weakening of democracy. Similarly, Georgia’s previous relations with Russia make this issue more pressing and in demand of attention.

Behind the Ballot: Corruption, Repression, and Hope in the 2024 Venezuelan Elections

This year, a handful of elections were scheduled. At least 27 countries, including Algeria, Senegal, Pakistan, and Venezuela, held their presidential elections. Because of the varying political climates, let’s visit the most recent Venezuelan elections, which illustrate human rights violations in the form of voter intimidation and political persecution. The development of the events raises questions about the validity of the results and the corruption of the powers of the state. Amid widespread despair, NGOs like Foro Penal, a Venezuelan group offering legal aid to victims of state repression, and international bodies such as Human Rights Watch and the Carter Center are investigating irregularities and violations.

Challenges to Maduro’s Presidency and Popularity

Facing crippling inflation, electricity blackouts, and water and food scarcity, the Venezuelan people had been waiting for a leadership change. Although still appealing to the love people had for former president Hugo Chavez, President Maduro Moros had been increasingly losing popular support.

At the beginning of his term, Chavez gained public trust through social programs addressing inequality, such as adult literacy, health care, and infrastructure. The programs were meant to address the gap between the rich and the poor, a hot issue among voters. His “revolution“ of the old system set up by the administration of Carlos Perez Jimenez was mildly disrupted by a Human Rights Watch report exposing corruption. Nevertheless, his charisma and the benefits he provided kept his supporters loyal.

In 2013, Chavez appointed Maduro as his successor. Disguised as a blessing, Maduro had inherited institutions that were corrupted and allowed him to enrich himself and stay in power. However, years of inflation and poverty eroded Maduro’s connection to the Chavez revolution. As a result, many pro-Chavez supporters have lost confidence in Maduro and continue to mourn the late president, as AP reported.

While his popularity decreased, a new leader had been working to gain the people’s support. Maria Corina Machado, a former member of the national assembly, won a primary election in 2023. Appealing to free the country and grabbing onto the growing dislike for Maduro, Machado became the face of the Democratic Unitary Platform (DUP), an alliance of trade unions, political parties, and former officials.

However, in January 2024, the highest court in Venezuela banned opposition leader Machado from running for the presidency. The ban keeps Machado from participating in any elections for 15 years. The Supreme Court made the decision based on financial irregularities claimed to have happened while Machado served in the legislature. This obstacle is among many presented to political figures who pose a threat to Maduro’s regime. After failing to appoint a replacement for a while, a new candidate was put in the front of the opposition campaign. Edmundo Gonzalez, a former diplomat, became the new candidate of the DUP.

Months Leading to Election Day

Venezuelans outside the country went out to register, uncertain of what turn the elections would take; however, they encountered significant obstacles.

The New York Times reports that Venezuelans living abroad were affected by long waiting times, rejection, and confusing instructions across several countries, including Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Spain. People arrived at consulates as early as 4 a.m., only to face rejection due to suspended registrations.

In addition to the unexplained delays, voters were met with unexpected registration requirements. Before, only a Venezuelan identification, expired or not, was valid for registration. However, as part of the new requirements being enforced, a Venezuelan passport and proof of residency or legal permanence in the host country were needed. This created obstacles, as many Venezuelans in countries like Colombia or the U.S. lack permanent residency despite having other legal documents, such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

National filling out an applications with his passport — Image 1: National filling out a form with his passport at hand. Source: Yahoo Images

What’s more, the government only allowed a 29-day registration period, which differs greatly from the year-round period allowed in the past. However, in countries where diplomatic relations are broken, and embassies and consulates are closed (like the U.S.) Venezuelans can’t register to vote.

As a result of these events, millions of Venezuelans couldn’t vote. Between 3.5 million and 5.5 million Venezuelans who live abroad were eligible to vote, but only about 69,000 were registered.

Election Day – July 28th, 2024

Venezuelans inside the country went to cast their votes at their designated stations. Throughout the morning, locals and the Carter Center mission—sent on June 29th—observed several violations.

Violence and Voter Intimidation

According to electoral rules, a witness is allowed to observe the tally count. People loyal to the ruling party intimidated witnesses and forced them to stay at home or leave their posts halfway through the election.

New York Times (NYT) reported that, in the capital, Caracas, a journalist observed men blocking access to one of the voting centers. Adding to the tension, voters were not allowed entry until over an hour after the poll was supposed to open. Similarly, in the city of Cumaná, about 50 armed police and National Guard officers stood outside with their helmets and armor in what seemed to be a show of power. Over in the city of Maturín, a woman was shot when men on motorcycles drove by a line of voters.

Changing Voting Locations

The NYT also disclosed that constituents’ voting locations were changed without a previous announcement. A worker of the Venezuelan Electoral Observatory, Carlos Medina, stated that the voting stations for 17,000 Venezuelans changed at the last minute. This is the case for Sonia Gomez, a voter who went to vote after verifying her polling site on the electoral council website. However, upon arrival, the workers told her she was registered elsewhere.

Image 2: National casting their paper vote. Source: Yahoo Images

Aftermath

Refusal to Disclose Paper Tallies

In Venezuela, votes are counted digitally by the Consejo Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Council) or CNE and verified using paper tallies collected at each voting station. Some officials in certain locations refused to disclose their paper tallies.

With the digital count, Maduro’s administration celebrated their victory, claiming 51% of votes. On the other hand, the opposition released data showing that Edmundo Gonzalez had received 67% of the vote. According to Machado, the opposition’s numbers came from voting machine tallies that were scanned and calculated.

In response to the allegations made by the opposition on corrupt and ridged elections, Maduro requested the Supreme Court give its expert opinion on the results. It is important to mention that the Supreme Court, closely tied to Maduro’s administration, had previously upheld Machado’s ban. Although the court backed him up, Maduro promised to release the tallies on the CNE website. However, the website has remained inaccessible since the events of July 28th.

Politically Driven Detentions

After the CNE announced Maduro’s victory, Venezuelan protested in the streets. However, they were met with brutal repression by state authorities. Videos circulating on social media showed police and military brutality directed at protesters. Human Rights Watch analyzed these videos, corroborating reports of detentions and deaths. While about 2,400 people were detained during protests, Foro Penal—a Venezuelan NGO that provides legal support for victims of arbitrary detention—claims that the police arrested electoral witnesses at their homes. These events have fueled arguments for election fraud. Most of the detainees are being charged with terrorism and incitement of hatred. Other irregularities include a lack of legal assistance and transfer to maximum security prisons.

Adding to the political persecution, a court issued an arrest warrant against Edmundo Gonzalez for conspiracy and usurping power. This prompted him to flee to Spain. Similarly, other figures, like diplomats, have been targeted, too, as Maduro ordered diplomats who opposed his victory to leave the country.

Image 3: Protests in Venezuela on May 1st, 2019. Source: Wikimedia Commons archive; originally published by Voice of America.

Future Implications

After the return of the Carter Center’s technical election observation mission, the center stated that the elections did not meet the integrity standards. The Organization of American States and several countries, including Argentina and Costa Rica, recognized Edmundo Gonzalez as the president-elect and called for transparency. Nevertheless, as Gonzalez has now fled to Spain, it is unclear what the next steps the international community will take to address the democratic crisis.

Since the elections, Venezuelans have felt both hope and fear. Despite a great number of protests and social media posts, fear of government retaliation has reached a higher level than ever. Some believe it is impossible for Maduro to resign, but only time will tell if democracy can still be restored.

Russia-Ukraine War Update and Interview with Ukrainian UAB Student

Image 1: Two women holding the Ukrainian flag and shouting. Source: Yahoo Images.

Recently, North Korea has promised closer ties with Russia and to further its aid in the Russia-Ukraine war. Throughout the war, many civilian structures have been destroyed, as Russia has continued to target educational facilities, homes, and hospitals. For many Ukrainians, their country has been something they’ve constantly had to fight for.

UAB (The University of Alabama at Birmingham) student, Kate Tkach, was nine years old when she left Ukraine to move to the U.S. For her privacy, I will use an alias to protect her identity. Tkach’s father and his family were in Kyiv when Russia invaded Ukraine in February of 2022. Since then, her grandparents have visited Ukraine during the summer of 2024. Their experiences give an idea of what life was like when the invasion occurred and what nights in Kyiv were like over the summer.

Brief History of Ukraine-Russia Conflicts and the Start of the War

Destroyed civilian building in Ukraine. — Image 2: Destroyed civilian buildings in Ukraine. Source: Yahoo Images.

Ukraine was previously an area of conflict in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. This was one of the first times since WWII that a state in Europe was annexed by another territory. In the fighting between 2014-2021, at least 14,000 civilian people died. Russia and Ukraine have been strongly connected economically, politically, and culturally. However, after the Soviet Union fell in 1991, Ukraine and Russia parted ways. This was considered a substantial loss for Russia’s international standing.

Putin began the invasion of Ukraine to combat Western powers that he claimed had the intention to destroy Russia. Ukraine had begun trading with other countries, much to the displeasure of Russia, who only wanted Ukraine to trade with them. Sources of energy have been a connecting factor between Russia and Ukraine.

President Putin has said that NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the U.S. have violated promises they made not to grow alliances in the former Soviet States. A relationship between Ukraine and the U.S. would be seen as an act of aggression to Russia. Nonetheless, Ukraine was growing ties with NATO, leading to the invasion in 2022. Kyiv has since then backed the idea of fully joining NATO. For more information about the history of Ukraine and Russia, as well as a report from when the invasion first occurred, visit Dr. Reuter’s IHR Blog.

The cultural ties between Ukraine and Russia have given Putin justification for reunification. Over the years, President Putin has described Russians and Ukrainians as “one people.” Regardless of that statement, Russia has continued to target civilian infrastructure in cities like Kyiv. Over 100,000 Ukrainian civilians have been wounded or killed since 2022. Around 8 million refugees have been forced to flee to surrounding countries. One of those refugees was Kate Tkach’s father, who fled to a surrounding country. The roads had been so crowded that it took her father 24 hours to escape to Moldova.

Tkach’s hope for the future is that more awareness will be spread about Ukraine and Russia. While in the U.S., she’s experienced people expressing their confusion over what would be so bad about Russia taking over Ukraine.

“Ukrainian people have died for the independence of our country. Likening Russians to Ukrainians would be like saying, You’re from America? That must mean you’re Canadian. Our languages and cultures are different. We are not Russian; we are Ukrainian” — Kate Tkach.

While President Putin has pushed the agenda that Ukrainians are Russian, that is undoubtedly not the way Ukrainians feel.

North Korea’s Support and Aid to Russia

Image 3: Regional map of Ukraine. Source: Yahoo Images.

In June of 2024, President Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un signed the Russia-North Korea joint comprehensive partnership agreement. The partnership highlights a mutual agreement to help each other in times of aggression. On October 23, 2024, North Korean troops were deployed to Kurkoblast, Russia which borders Ukraine. Reports say that North Korean personnel have been gathering in Russia throughout all of October. Simultaneously, over the past two years, North Korea has sent military equipment and ammunition to Russia as a means to strengthen ties.

Ukrainian intelligence sources stated that six North Korean officers were killed in a strike near Donetsk City. Donetsk City is located near the east side of Ukraine and is around 140 miles away from Russia’s border. President Zelenskyy said that reports suggest Russia is training two brigades that each contain 6,000 North Korean personnel. Recently, King Jong Un met with Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov in November of 2024 to discuss North Korea’s support of Russia. During the meeting, Kim criticized the U.S. for supplying Ukraine with weapons.

When asked about her thoughts on North Korea’s increased support of Russia’s war against Ukraine, Tkach said, “I wasn’t surprised. Atrocity after atrocity keeps happening in Ukraine. At a certain point, all of the bad things have plateaued in my mind. My first thought was, ‘Oh, what’s one more bad thing?’ It hasn’t affected my viewpoint so much.”

Russia’s War Crimes in Ukraine 2024

A destroyed maternity ward and children hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine after a Russian attack. — Image 4: A destroyed maternity ward and children’s hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine, after a Russian attack. Source: Yahoo Images.

According to Amnesty International, war crimes include attacks on civilian and/or civilian infrastructure, killings of civilians, torture, crimes of sexual violence, murder or bad treatment of prisoners of war, and the use of illegal weapons. These are all violations of the International Humanitarian Law. This law is meant to limit the effects of armed conflicts on surrounding communities. It protects civilians, which includes medical personnel and humanitarian workers, as well as refugees and the wounded and sick.

On July 8, 2024, Russia attacked civilian infrastructures in Ukraine. Human Rights Watch reports that 42 civilians were killed, 5 of whom were children. Along with that, the largest children’s hospital in Ukraine, Okhamtdyt, was hit by Russian bombs over the summer of 2024. The intensive care unit, oncology, and surgical unit were severely damaged, while other units, such as the toxicology and traumatology, were completely destroyed.

The first strike had hit the hospital before it could be completely evacuated. The strike occurred when three patients were in heart surgeries. Additionally, one of the children who was evacuated before the strike was in critical condition. After being moved to a different hospital, the child died. Since June 2024, the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine reported that 9,560 civilians have been killed and 21,450 were injured. At least 594 children have been killed since the summer, and 1,207 have been injured.

During the interview with Kate Tkach, I asked her what experience her grandparents had during the summer when visiting Ukraine. In the summer of 2024, Tkach’s grandparents visited both Kyiv and Ternopil. Kyiv is the capital of Ukraine and is located near central north Ukraine. Ternopil is located near the far west of Ukraine.

Tkach said that there is no airfare going across the borders of Ukraine. Because of this, her grandparents had to fly to Moldova and then take a bus all the way to Ukraine. This bus was not allowed to stop the entire way to Ukraine. In addition, every night, the water and electricity would be shut off, so Kyiv looked abandoned. This caused the already hot summer to become even worse. Her grandfather is 86 years old, and her grandmother is 88 years old.

Tkach stated, “I cannot even imagine what it is like now in the winter. Our winters are harsh and having no heat in the buildings at night is a death sentence.”

Looking towards Ukraine’s Future

Ripped Ukrainian flag that's still standing amongst a crumbled building. — Image 5: Ripped Ukrainian flag that’s still standing amongst a crumbled building. Source: Yahoo Images.

At the time that Kate Tkach lived in Ukraine, she was a child. She reflects on her time spent there and her fondest memories. One of those was when the first snow would fall. Every year, all the kids would go up to a hill near their apartments and slide down it. No one knew each other, but everyone was together, and at that moment, they could enjoy spending time with one another. Tkach had lived in an apartment near a school in Kyiv. She is unaware whether or not the place she grew up in is still standing or not.

“I grew up in a very beautiful Ukraine, with beautiful Orthodox churches and green fields [that were] not yet touched by civilization. To think of all of that getting destroyed and left in rubble because Ukraine doesn’t want to surrender to a different country is hard to process. My people wanted an independent country and fought to gain their freedom, [which] is something I take pride in.” — Kate Tkach.

To help, one of the best things you can do is to spread verified news. It is imperative that awareness continues to be spread about the war crimes that are committed in Ukraine. For ways to support, donations can be made to humanitarian relief organizations like The UN Refugee Agency, which helps refugees, and the Ukrainian Red Cross Society, which has continuously sent humanitarian aid to places in Ukraine that most need it.

The Death Penalty in the US: Legalized Murder?

On September 24, 2024, the state of Missouri executed an innocent Black man. Why did they kill him?

Marcellus Williams was convicted and sentenced to death for murdering Felicia Gayle. There was no physical evidence linking Williams to her murder: fingerprints, footprints, hair, and DNA found at the crime scene did not match Williams. The only evidence against Williams was testimony from two witnesses whose accounts were inconsistent and unverifiable. Gayle’s family favored life imprisonment. The county prosecutor favored life imprisonment. Only Missouri’s Attorney General wanted Williams executed – and he got his wish.

Williams was innocent of the crime for which he was executed. He never had a fair trial. The prosecution struck 6 of 7 Black jurors, one of whom was rejected “because he looked too much like Williams.” Missouri knew they were executing an innocent man – and they did it anyway.

History of the Death Penalty in America

Capital punishment has been a part of the American legal system since before the United States was a country. The first person executed in the British colonies was George Kendall, who was executed by firing squad for mutiny in 1608. By the early 1900s, public support for the death penalty was beginning to wane, and some states abolished the practice.

Utilizing capital punishment was briefly illegal nationwide. The 1972 Supreme Court Decision Furman v. Georgia ruled that existing death penalty statutes were discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional. That lasted until 1976, when the Court ruled in Gregg v. Georgia that Georgia’s updated death penalty statute was constitutional, and executions resumed. Since 1976, 1,601 people have been executed. Today, only 21 states still have the death penalty, and only ten have executed people in the last decade.

Methods for capital punishment have varied greatly over the last two centuries. Early in American history, the most common were firing squad and hanging. Over time, hangings have become associated with lynchings. Despite that history, in 2023, a Tennessee lawmaker proposed that “hanging by a tree” be used as an alternative method of execution in the state. In 1890, the first person was executed with the electric chair, which was the most common method for several decades until lethal injection became more popular after its first use in 1982.

A white room with a gurney with several thick straps used for restraining prisoners. — Image 1: A white room with a gurney and several thick straps was used to restrain prisoners. Source: Yahoo Images.

Lethal injection has faced challenges in recent years for a few reasons. Drug manufacturers do not want to be associated with homicide – and thus refuse to sell the required drugs to state governments – and medical professionals refuse to administer the medicines. Instead of medical professionals, correctional workers struggle to find veins and sometimes fail entirely, causing delayed executions. Roughly 3% of executions are botched, and people subjected to botched executions are disproportionately Black – 1/3 of executions nationwide are of Black prisoners, while 1/2 of botched executions are of Black prisoners. Even when not botched, lethal injections have been shown to be less humane than originally believed. The drugs used are painful and cause the lungs to fill with fluid – typically without proper anesthesia.

Black prisoners are also treated differently immediately before they are executed. Jeff Hood, who has witnessed six executions – three of Black prisoners, three of white – told NPR, “I can definitely tell you that the restraints that I have seen on Black folk have been unquestionably tighter than the restraints that I have seen on white folk.”

More recently, there has been controversy over a new execution method: nitrogen hypoxia. The state of Alabama has executed two people – Kenneth Smith and Alan Eugene Miller – by nitrogen hypoxia in the last year. The state had previously attempted to execute both Smith and Miller by lethal injection, but correctional workers were unable to place IV lines in either man over the course of several hours. There is another Institute of Human Rights blog post, published in the fall of 2023, that extensively details execution methods.

Problems of the Death Penalty

Two of the most common reasons given for keeping the death penalty are deterrence and justice. Justice argues an eye for an eye – that, for some crimes, the only possible form of justice is death. That is a philosophical debate, and one I will not discuss today. Instead, I will focus on the effect of the death penalty on homicide rates – deterrence. Deterrence is the idea that the existence of the death penalty deters crime – it reasons that prospective murderers are logical people who will be less likely to kill others if it will result in their death.

In 2012, the National Research Council conducted a literature review on studies examining any deterring effects executions – and the general presence of the death penalty – have on homicide rates. They concluded that studies had not yet demonstrated any effect capital punishment has on homicide rates and recommended that the “research… should not influence policy judgments about capital punishment.”

One of the most powerful arguments used by death penalty abolitionists is about wrongful convictions. Someone who is sentenced to life in prison can be released if they are found innocent; that is not so with someone who is dead, such as Marcellus Williams. Wrongful convictions are common; for every eight executions in the United States since 1977, one person sentenced to death was exonerated. 82% of death penalty exonerations are due to official misconduct and 36% of death penalty sentences are overturned.

Glynn Simmons was exonerated in December 2023 for a crime he did not commit. He spent 48 years in prison. The state knew when he was convicted in 1975 that Simmons was innocent; he was in Louisiana when the crime was committed in Oklahoma. Despite that, it took almost 50 years – 2/3 of Simmons’ life – for him to finally be exonerated. Imprisonment is reversible. Death is not.

A broken chain. — Image 2: A large broken chain. Source: Yahoo Images

What Can Be Changed?

Activists have worked for decades to reform or eliminate the death penalty. Two organizations that have been involved in numerous exonerations are the Innocence Project and the Equal Justice Initiative. Both organizations provide legal aid to innocent prisoners. Other ways to support change include petitioning state and federal legislators to end or reform the death penalty.

The Wine Industry: Years of Exploitation and Human Trafficking

by Caitlin Cerillo

Have you ever had a glass of wine and wondered how it’s made? Or, pondered what it comes from and how long the wine-making process takes? Who is responsible for making it? Surely, the wine industry has been modernized, where mechanical inventions can do most of the handiwork when creating a delicious bottle of wine used for birthdays, weddings, anniversaries, and other milestone celebrations.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. The wine industry has had a history of exploiting its workers by forcing them to work in extremely poor conditions and grueling hours. Wine-making follows an intricate process, starting with the harvesting of grapes in vineyards. Mechanical harvesting does exist and is generally quicker than doing so by hand, as the average human can harvest 1-2 tons a day, while a machine can harvest 80-200 tons. However, human harvesting is still favored because it offers a more precise selection and lessens the severity of oxidation getting to the grapes due to damaged skins.

A person picking grapes to harvest for wine. — A worker manually harvesting grapes for wine. Source: Yahoo Images

The amount of grapes needed to produce a standard-size bottle of wine varies depending on the style of wine. However, a general number given by experts is an average of 1.25 to 1.50 kilograms, or 2.75 to 3.3 pounds. With the amount of wine that is produced worldwide within just a year, this adds up to a huge demand for grape pickers to supply the lucrative wine business. In the world, there are two primary countries responsible for the largest number of wine production: Italy and France. Both countries have come under fire for unethical practices in their wine production and human rights violations that include human trafficking, exploitation, and extremely poor working/living conditions for workers.

What is Human Trafficking and Exploitation?

Human trafficking is a huge issue across the world. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) defines human trafficking as the “recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of people through force, fraud or deception, with the aim of exploiting them for profit.” Human trafficking can come in many different forms, like sex trafficking, forced labor, and child sex trafficking. Victims of human trafficking can come from any kind of age group, gender, and background.

However, specific groups may be more vulnerable than others. These groups include people separated from their families or other support systems, refugees or migrant workers, sexual and gender minorities, people with disabilities, and members of lower socio-economic groups. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), human traffickers will use manipulation tactics and exploit the vulnerabilities of their victims, which is why these specific groups are at heightened risk.

Italy

In September 2021, a humanitarian organization by the name of Oxfam released a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) on the Italian wine supply chain to assess their impact on human rights. The HRIA is titled “The Workers Behind Sweden’s Italian Wine” and focuses on the primary Italian wine supply chain in Sweden, Systembolaget. The HRIA’s objectives were to perform a context analysis on Systembolaget in order to “build an understanding of the nature of the Systembolaget supply chains” and then to “identify the actual and potential human rights impacts in Systembolaget supply chains in practice.”

Oxfam’s HRIA does a great job at going more in-depth with the current human rights violations occurring in the Italian wine industry, along with the potential human rights violations that are at high risk of coming to fruition. To summarize, Oxfam found several serious violations: forced labor, low wages, excessive working hours, health and safety risks in vineyards and wineries, lack of access to remedy, restrictions to freedom of association, sexual harassment and gender discrimination, and unsanitary housing. To read more about Oxfam’s findings, follow this link.

France

France’s primary region for wine production is called the Champagne region, located roughly to the east of Paris. In late 2023, a large portion of the region was shut down by French authorities and put under investigation for human rights violations. Wine-makers in the Champagne region are migrants primarily from West African countries. It was discovered that the lodgings that provided housing to the migrant workers were of poor quality, with makeshift beds surrounded by electrical cables and extremely unsanitary bathroom facilities.

Workers picking grapes in a French vineyard. Source: Yahoo Images

The investigation also found that the contractors responsible for hiring the migrant workers exploited their vulnerabilities, as they were willing to work, even without proper contracts and for extremely low wages. At the end of the 2023 harvest season, another trafficking investigation was opened by authorities, which involved 160 laborers from Ukraine living in poor conditions in another area of the Champagne region.

South Africa

Although South Africa isn’t at the very top of the list of wine-producing countries, it has been accused of violating several human rights for years. In 2011, Human Rights Watch released a report titled “Ripe with Abuse: Human Rights Conditions in South Africa’s Fruit and Wine Industries,” detailing the problems surrounding the country’s industries. For over a decade, numerous attempts have been made to improve them, as well as conditions on farms. For instance, the Wine Industry Ethical Trade Association was created in 2002. Unfortunately, significant improvements have yet to be made to rectify the issues at hand.

South African farmworkers who supply the grapes needed for wine are vulnerable to some of the following human rights violations: exposure to pesticides and harmful chemicals, working long hours, and being forced to work in extreme weather conditions. Many farmworkers don’t even have access to safe drinking water, toilets, or livable housing. They face difficulty in forming a union to bring attention to the injustices they face. Like Italy and France, South African farmworkers receive low wages and little to no protection from the government.

The Future of the Wine Industry

There are many possible routes that can be taken to improve the working conditions for wine-makers. One of the most productive ways includes wineries turning to certifications that can help lay a groundwork for better standards, like environmental sustainability and safe working conditions. These certifications can help ensure that wineries are being held to their promises. Several wineries across the world have turned to certification efforts, like Chile’s Emiliana Organic Vineyards, which is certified under B Corp. B Corp was established in 2006, with the initiative of encouraging accountability, transparency, and environmental performance in business. Similarly, Italy has founded the Equalitas standard in 2015, which is specifically aimed at the wine industry.

Femicide in Kenya: A Silent Crisis

by Grace Ndanu

An image with a group of people holding up a banner that reads, "There is no honor in killing!" — An image with a group of people holding up a banner that reads, “There is no honor in killing!” Source: Yahoo Images (free to share and use)

In recent years, Kenya has witnessed a horrifying increase in cases of femicide. The alarming statistics paint an ugly picture of the state of women’s safety in the country. This issue goes beyond simple statistics as it represents a deep-rooted problem that demands urgent attention. Femicide in Kenya is not just a crime against women but also a violation of basic human rights and an assault on the fabric of society.

Understanding Femicide

Femicide is not a new phenomenon, but the magnitude of the problem in Kenya is shocking. The term encompasses various forms of violence against women, including domestic violence, rape, honor killings, and dowry-related deaths. These acts are driven by deep-seated beliefs and cultural norms that perpetuate gender inequality and elevate toxic masculinity.

According to a 2020 report by the World Health Organization, Kenya experiences one of the highest rates of femicide in Africa, with an estimated 47 women killed each week. Shockingly, this represents a 50% increase in femicide cases over the past decade. Furthermore, the majority of these cases go unreported or unnoticed due to social and cultural factors, making the situation even more alarming.

The Cultural Factors Behind Femicide

An image of a Maasai woman from Kenya holding her baby at her hips. Source: Wikimedia Commons through Yahoo Images (free to use and share)

To tackle femicide in Kenya, it is crucial to dig into the cultural factors that contribute to this crisis. Some of these factors include gender roles, traditions, economic disparities, and the normalization of violence.

Gender roles deeply rooted in Kenyan society perpetuate a patriarchal system that devalues women. Women are expected to be submissive, nurturing, and bound by societal norms. Patriarchy creates a culture of power imbalance, where men feel entitled to control and dominate women, both within and outside the household.

Traditional practices, such as female genital mutilation (FGM), child marriages, and wife inheritance, further perpetuate the vulnerability and defeat of women. These practices condone violence against women in the name of cultural preservation and perpetuate harmful gender norms.

Economic disparities play a significant role in intensifying femicide in Kenya. Poverty and lack of access to education, healthcare, and employment opportunities disproportionately affect women. When women are economically dependent on their partners or families, they are often trapped in abusive relationships with no means of escape.

Society’s normalization and acceptance of violence against women contribute to the perpetuation of femicide. Many cases of domestic violence go unreported due to fear, stigma, or lack of trust in the justice system. In some cases, many people, instead of helping, tend to record videos of women being wronged and post them on social media.

Addressing Femicide in Kenya

An image of a group of women from the Women's Ministerial Breakfast in Nairobi, Kenya. — An image of a group of women from the Women’s Ministerial Breakfast in Nairobi, Kenya. Source: Natalia Mroz; UN Environment Programme through Flickr

To address femicide in Kenya, a comprehensive approach is necessary. It requires collaboration between the government, civil society, community leaders, and individuals alike. Here are some key steps that can be taken.

Legal Reforms and Enforcement

Restoring the legal framework surrounding violence against women is paramount. Stricter laws targeting offenders, along with their effective implementation, are crucial. Adequate training for law enforcement officials and judicial personnel is also essential to ensure cases are dealt with sensitively and expeditiously.

Education and Awareness

Comprehensive educational programs should be implemented from an early age to challenge harmful gender norms, promote gender equality, and raise awareness about women’s rights. This includes teaching both boys and girls, as well as women and men, about healthy masculinity and respect for women.

Empowerment and Economic Independence

Efforts must be made to empower women economically. This can be achieved through vocational training, access to micro-financing, and opportunities for entrepreneurship. Women who are financially independent are better equipped to escape abusive relationships and have control over their lives.

Support Services and Safe Spaces

Accessible support services, including helplines, shelters, and counseling centers, are crucial for survivors of femicide and domestic violence. These safe spaces provide survivors with the support they need to rebuild their lives and break free from the cycle of abuse.

Community Mobilization

Community leaders, religious institutions, and local organizations play a vital role in challenging harmful cultural practices, promoting gender equality, and raising awareness about femicide. Mobilizing communities to change attitudes and behaviors towards women is essential to create a safer environment for all.

Conclusion

Femicide in Kenya is an urgent crisis that requires immediate attention. It is a reflection of deep-seated gender inequalities and cultural norms that perpetuate violence against women. Addressing this issue demands a comprehensive approach encompassing legal reforms, education, empowerment, and community mobilization. Only through collective efforts can we hope to build a society where women can live without fear, violence, and the threat of femicide. Together, we must strive to create a country that embraces gender equality, respect, and the protection of basic human rights for all.

Rethinking Museum Exhibitions in America

by Caitlin Cerillo

As an avid lover of visiting museums, it is important to hold them accountable when their exhibitions can have damaging implications. History and science museums can be among the most fascinating places to visit, as the world has such a rich scientific history. However, there is a fine line between preserving a specific piece of history and exploiting groups of people in the name of science. In recent years, several museums have come under fire for capitalizing on the exploitation of ethnic groups and glorifying the world’s hurtful history of colonialism, imperialism, and the oppression of marginalized peoples.

In recent years, attention has been paid to the sources of acquisition that many popular museums in the United States use. One of the most recent is the American Museum of Natural History, located in Manhattan, New York, and its exhibitions contain the remains of indigenous people.

What is Colonialism?

Colonialism is a practice in which domination over a specific area is carried out by another foreign state. Colonialism has been and is used as a way to consolidate political or economic gain and always leads to the complete subjugation, or conquest, of the people in the colonized area. The foundation of America was built on colonialism, dating back to before the nation was even established. While there are records of British colonies existing prior to the 1600s, the 17th century marked the beginning of the first permanent colonies.

An illustration of what colonialism in the New World may have looked like. Depicts a docked ship on land with settlers. — An illustration of colonialism in the New World. Source: Yahoo Images

The Jamestown Colony was created in Virginia in 1607. Long before the establishment of any colonies in the New World, or present-day America, Native Americans were the first to live on American soil. The region in which the Jamestown colony arrived was the same region as the Powhatan people, an Indian tribe. On many occasions, there would be violent encounters between the tribe and colonists. When establishing colonies in the New World, colonists would bring diseases like tuberculosis and smallpox. While they had immunity to these microbes, they would be fatal for the local Native American population.

As the 17th century progressed, the relationship between colonists and Native Americans would significantly weaken. For instance, King Philip’s War occurred in 1675 after the execution of three members of the Wampanoag people by the government of the Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts. This war is known as one of the deadliest conflicts in American history, with the amount of casualties reaching extreme heights throughout the 14-month period of the war.

Even after America was established as a country, harmful practices against Indigenous Americans continued to be considered legal. Hundreds of thousands of Indians—particularly Indian youth—were forced to assimilate. Cultural assimilation is extremely damaging for multiple reasons. It normalizes public stigmatization of the affected groups and erases their cultural identity.

The American Museum of Natural History

Upon facing public scrutiny, New York’s American Museum of Natural History has created a policy calling for the removal of all exhibits containing human bones. The museum has promised the use of anthropologists to carry out comprehensive analytical processes to determine these remains’ origins and source of acquisition.

Not only has the American Museum of Natural History come under fire for exhibiting the remains of thousands of Native Americans, but also for acquiring the bones of five Black adults who were buried in a cemetery for enslaved people. This brings an important conversation of eugenics, where bodies were exploited and used as “scientific property” against their will. The presence of eugenics and other scientific thoughts entrenched in racism and white supremacy have allowed for other forms of oppression against marginalized groups—specifically Black Americans—like medical racism and healthcare bias. These connections make the museum’s acquisition of these remains even more problematic.

The Smithsonian

Another museum that has come under fire for its exhibitions is the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History in D.C. While this exhibition does not involve human remains, the exploitation of a group of marginalized people under colonialism remains present. The museum held 29 bronze sculptures that originally belonged to the Kingdom of Benin. The Kingdom of Benin was established during the pre-colonial period of what is now southern Nigeria. The sculptures were seized by British military and colonial forces during a raid in 1897. This raid also resulted in the burning of the city and the deaths of the people who inhabited it

Real estate developers Paul and Ruth Tishman collected the Benin sculptures and sold them to the Walt Disney Company in 1984. In 2007, they were donated to the Smithsonian. Without thinking about the implications the sources of acquisition of their exhibition pieces have, the Smithsonian turned a blind eye to their hurtful histories. Fortunately, the Smithsonian recognized this problem and removed the sculptures from public display in late 2021. Museum director Ngaire Blankenberg also enlisted the help of curators to find the places of origin for all pieces that had potential ties to the Kingdom of Benin raid.

Harvard’s Peabody Museum and Warren Anatomical Museum

The Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology and the Warren Anatomical Museum, both owned by Harvard University, recently repatriated the remains of over 300 Indigenous people back to the Wampanoag communities. The university completed the repatriation process in January of this year. Harvard has since aimed to create efforts to better understand and rethink the implications of sources of acquisition. For instance, the Peabody Museum created a virtual exhibit titled “Listening to Wampanoag Voices: Beyond 1620.” The exhibit includes oral histories given by various members of the Wampanoag community.

Photo of the seven people in the Wampanoag exhibit created by Harvard's Peabody Museum. — These are some of the faces of the Peabody Museum’s “Listening to Wampanoag Voices: Beyond 1620.” The exhibit includes oral histories from Jonathan James-Perry, Elizabeth James-Perry, Phillip Wynne, Zoë Harris, Linda Jeffers, and Alyssa Harris. Source: Yahoo Images

Why are Sources of Acquisition Important?

The term ‘acquisition‘ refers to an object purchased or given to an institution, such as a museum or library. ‘Sources of acquisition’ deals with the background of these objects, like their historical context and location of origin. If not taken into careful consideration, ignoring sources of acquisition can be harmful to the affected communities. It normalizes the idea that the oppression of people is something that can be glossed over in the name of science or a glorified museum exhibit. In the case of many museums collecting the remains of marginalized communities, it pushes the notion that the subjugation and exploitation of people are acceptable. As reflected earlier in this post, America was built on the institution of white supremacy and colonialism, which makes the sources of acquisition of exhibition pieces even more important to note

So, what can be done to right the wrongs of these museums? Taking the initiative to go through the repatriation process should always be considered. While this process entails a number of legal procedures that may not be completed within a specific timeframe, it is always worth the exhibition pieces being returned to the rightful institutions and people. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGRPA) was instated in 1990 and is a US federal law that facilitates the repatriation process. As of 2022, there have been many changes made to the NAGPRA. These changes include defining how objects are defined to better accommodate the cultural traditions and customs of the rightful descendants.

Similarly, hiring curators and anthropologists to analyze the origins of exhibitions can be helpful. Next, understanding shortcomings within the pieces a museum inherits through efforts like opening conversations about America’s history of colonialism, racism, and oppression of marginalized people. Giving a voice to those who have been affected by these harmful practices, like the Peabody Museum’s Wampanoag exhibit, is another way of allowing them to reclaim the hurt that has been done.

International Day of Science and Peace

by Wajiha Mekki

November 10 is the International Day of Science and Peace (IDSP), also known as the World Science Day for Peace and Development. The United Nations host this international event.

History of IDSP

Established in 1986, this historical day was initially developed to commemorate the birth of Marie Curie, a notable physicist and humanitarian. Curie was known for her innovative work within radioactivity, contributing to the discovery of radium and polonium. By 1999, its purpose changed to reflect the global needs of the scientific and humanitarian community, utilizing the day to affirm the global commitment to attaining the goals of the Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific Knowledge. The day and annual summit unite governmental, intervention mental, and non-governmental organizations meaningfully to promote international solidarity for shared sciences between countries and renew the global commitment to use science to benefit communities that need it most.

The overall goal of IDSP is to help achieve the UN 2030 Agenda and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, creating a plan for prosperity for people and the planet.

ISDP 2023

The 2023 theme for IDSP will be “Bridging the Gap: Science, Peace, and Human Rights.” This emphasizes the interconnectedness between science and peace, having a role in advancing human rights. Science is a valuable tool for making technological advancements, but it is also helpful in helping address social issues, reducing conflicts, and sustainably promoting human rights.

Photo of space shuttle near body of water.
Source: Flickr

Science and Human Rights

Science is frequently associated with helping improve medical interventions, solving coding bugs, and completing mathematical equations. However, contrary to popular belief, science is essential to human rights. Firstly, science has a valuable role in promoting sustainable development. Utilizing scientific methods, data can be collected to quantify the progress toward fulfilling the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ranging from climate change to poverty to infant mortality, scientific data collection and analysis methods are needed to efficiently and effectively respond to global issues. Research and innovation also contribute to the mobilization of resources to historically underserved communities, allowing them to gain access to necessities.

Within innovation, shared desires and interests help unite countries with singular goals. Scientific diplomacy is valuable in bringing countries to the table of collaboration. This deepens connections between countries as it relates to trade and commercial interests and helps foster peaceful relationships, prioritizing human rights.

With the appropriate distribution of resources, scientific advancements help improve the quality of life for communities internationally. Applying what is traditionally “scientific” to communities gives them a chance to live a better quality of life in a cleaner environment.

It is available to educate the public about the vital role of science and encourage innovation to solve global challenges.

How Countries Can Get Involved

Beyond participating in IDSP, countries can have a role in unifying science and human rights through many different avenues. One route is to protect and invest in scientific diplomacy. By allocating funding to scientific innovation and multilateral collaborations, governments can ensure that they can focus on shared goals with their international counterparts, working collaboratively to promote peace and cooperation. Another route is developing policies that protect innovation while developing guardrails for its usage, ensuring it is mobilized to those who need it most. States have a responsibility to be an advocate and protectors of their citizens, and by working to ensure that scientific diplomacy is used for the betterment of people abroad, they can elicit change in a meaningful way.

INTL and MAST Students Visit US Department of State Source: GU Blog

How Citizens Can Get Involved

Citizens have a responsibility to promote peace with science, as well. The role of a community member is to primarily use one’s voice to advocate for innovation and peace; by doing so and mobilizing one’s own story, organizations are held accountable for their actions. From governmental entities, non-profit organizations, and grassroots movements, stakeholders are supported by the citizenry. It is also important to have open conversations to explore further the nuanced introspection of science, peace, and human rights, continuing to promote awareness and understanding.

International Day for Disaster Reduction

by Wajiha Mekki

October 12 is International Day for Disaster Reduction (IDDR). This international event is hosted through the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). In 2023, the focus has been on fighting inequality and fighting to break the cycle of international disaster.

History of IDDR

IDDR started in 1989 as a call to action by the United Nations General Assembly to help educate and mobilize resources to reduce the burden of ongoing disasters and increase resilience. This annual event focuses on a different theme, interpreted from the “Sendai Seven Campaign ,” established in 2015 at the third-ever UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan. The framework proposed during this time helps mobilize resources to local communities to ensure they can act at capacity during times of need; this also allows for communities to be prepared not only for small-scale and large-scale disasters but also man-made, natural, environmental, and biological disasters.

People in hazmat suits tending to a chemical disaster during a mock drill.
Source: American Red Cross Flickr

IDDR 2023

IDDR, in 2023, will focus on fighting inequality and issues and publish the results of the first-ever global survey on disability and disasters. This survey, with the purpose of championing disability and inclusion, was commissioned in 2013. 2023 also serves as a monumental year for IDDR as it is right after the midterm review of the aforementioned Sendai Framework; this review is vital, ensuring that progress is made to help accelerate action to rescue disaster disparities and prioritize resilience.

Current Burden of International Disasters

Disasters can happen at any time of the day. It is projected that by 2030, the world will face 1.5 significant disasters per day; this results in a total of 560 disasters per year. Of these disasters, a large proportion is caused by environmental, technological, and biological hazards. Disasters don’t discriminate and have an impact on all people; however, it is noted that they have a disproportionate impact on those with disabilities. This compounded impact results in the development of a perpetual cycle of disaster without resources being efficiently invested to prevent and manage these disasters.

Specifically for those with disabilities, it is noted that development infrastructure is not developed to be inclusive and is oftentimes overlooked during all stages of emergency management. This isolates those with limited mobility and requires a caregiver or other health services, preventing them from accessing resources that will allow them to recover effectively.

Within emergency responses, it is noted that people with disabilities are unnecessarily institutionalized during and after disasters; this further isolates them from their families, peers, and communities.

14 firefighters tending to a forest fire.
Source: American Red Cross Flickr

Spotlight: Japan’s 2011 Earthquake

Though there are many examples of international disasters, the horrendous earthquakes in Japan in 2011 highlight the disparities those with disabilities face in times of national emergency. This earthquake, noted as the “strongest earthquake in its recorded history,” was not the only natural disaster that impacted the community; the earthquake caused a tsunami, which amplified the impact and the resources needed to remedy the issue. The earthquake and tsunami destroyed hundreds of businesses, homes, and nuclear reactors. The destruction of these nuclear reactors resulted in toxic materials being released into the environment and communities. Thousands of lives were lost; however,, approximately 25% were disabled. The infrastructure developed for emergencies did not serve them; oftentimes, evacuation centers were not accessible, did not have the needed infrastructure, etc. All of these factors resulted in many people with disabilities not having adequate assistance. These disparities are not unique to Japan and are seen internationally and domestically.

How Countries Can Take Action

The nature of disasters is cyclical; to have the most effective solution, it is vital to break the cycle and do so in a holistic manner. Firstly, there is the preventative lens of the disaster itself; it is vital to understand how disasters occur and to take the actions needed to establish early warning of these disasters. This allows countries to be prepared to make effective decisions that will have a positive global impact. Beyond this, countries and member states should take action to invest in their current infrastructure to make it more prepared for disasters. Though disasters can be mitigated through the above actions, they are not entirely preventable. Therefore, states should be prepared for their response to be inclusive for all; they must build capacity to accommodate vulnerable populations in their emergency response, including those with disabilities, older persons, and women.

How You Can Take Action

Acknowledging IDDR is the first step to helping advocacy for advancements in emergency responses and more equitable infrastructure during times of need. It is a two-pronged fork; communities should work to break the cycle of disaster by improving habits and holding entities responsible, but should continue to invest in making resources more equitable. As a community member, it is your responsibility to use your voice to advocate for both of the above. Another way is to use your time to volunteer alongside community and international partners who are working to make improvements. Together, we can break the disaster cycle and make emergency responses more equitable.