Tag Archives: miscellaneous

On Rape and Piracy

2 Mar

Taking a brief break from blogging about humanitarian aid work, here…

I’m sure that many of you were horrified by the account of Ms. Lara Logan, Chief Foreign Correspondent for CBS, being attacked and sexually assaulted in Tahrir Square, now almost three weeks ago. For those who don’t know, Ms. Logan was no newcomer to dangerous and volatile places. This was not her first, nor at first glance, necessarily the most troubling place she’d deployed to in the line of duty. Yet on February 11, things did go horribly wrong for her there. (Here’s the story)

The cacophony of ill-informed opinion on the incident both in mass and social media was truly astounding, and ranged from mildly idiotic noise to full-on over-the-top sexism and racism. I won’t drive traffic to any of those blogs or twitter accounts. Here are a few that I felt treated the issue well.

Then a few days after that, Somali pirates captured and then killed four Americans (Jean and Scott Adam, Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle) traveling around the world by yacht. These four were not new to sailing and had to have known something about the possibility of being attacked by pirates in the greater Horn of Africa / Red Sea vicinity. (Here’s the story)

Not long after, I found myself embroiled in lively skype and email conversations with @shotgunshack, @itsjina and a few others over how we saw the similarities and differences between the two events. Surely it would be equally inappropriate to blame the victims in either case. Both involved the taking of some level of risk. It seemed there was some similarity. Yet my own initial reaction on hearing of the attack on Lara Logan was moral outrage. While my reaction on hearing of the four Americans being killed by pirates was essentially, “those dumbasses should have known better.”

Fully aware that I now tread on ground that is highly emotional and (perhaps therefore) at times unstable, I’ll share with you for posterity my own thinking on how those two events compare and contrast:

It seems to me that the primary issue is how we perceive, assess, and respond to “risks” and “threats.” Indeed, much of the discussion in the blogosphere around Lara Logans’ situation seemed to center on what “risk”, in particular means. Drawing on what I’ve learned in some of the security and risk management training that I’ve been subjected to at different times, it seems that even outside of the discussion of collective action turning violent and then sexual, the natures of the threats of rape and of abduction/death by pirates are fundamentally different.

The threat of rape, it seems, is almost always there but diffuse and inspecific. Rape can happen in a darkened alley, in a persons’ own living room, on a subway, totally out in the open… And it seems that what escalates the threat of rape into actual commission of the act (especially in a so-called “mob” environment) comes down to some tough-to-pin down, ethereal elements of context and opportunity. Someone can walk through the same stairwell every day with no problem, but then one day something changes – and rape happens.

What I imagine this meant for Lara is that when she first went into Tahrir Square she was not more at-risk of being raped than normal. The facts about her – woman, attractive, etc. – as so many others have argued, were immaterial. I can’t say for sure, but I suspect that attractive Western women move unmolested through that same space all the time. Equally immaterial were the facts of who did the assaulting. I don’t imagine there are any statistics on this, but I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of Egyptian men (and more broadly, Muslim men, for that matter) go through their entire lives without ever assaulting anyone.

What was important is that in that place at that time the context changed. Ms. Logan was either unaware or unable to get away. She was caught in an terrible “perfect storm” and her being assaulted was the result.

Unlike the threat of rape which seems to condense and evaporate, often unpredictably, from what I understand the threat of piracy near the Horn of Africa is highly specific and constant. Everyone knows the pirates are there and that they prey on everything from privately owned sailing yachts to ocean-going freighters. I’ll bet someone smarter than me could even calculate the risk numerically (maybe Texas In Africa already has…): “Sail a boat between the ports of Aden and Mocha and you run a 72% chance of being attacked by pirates…”

And to me, that is a much more important difference than who went for work versus who was on vacation, who was attractive or not, who was male or female. Lara went into her situation with no reason to assume that things would go as they ended up going. From what I understand, from a security/risk perspective, it truly was random. She did not take more risk than normal (she’s been in more volatile places), and she didn’t do anything particularly wrong from a security perspective.  She was quite simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Personal note: Many of us have jobs which involve going into dangerous places, and while glamorizing it (being an “adrenaline junkie”) is famously problematic, so is refusing to act. Your job is what it is and you do it. As an aid worker, I personally reject outright the notion that Lara Logan should have stayed home, or that she was somehow unsuitable for danger zone reporting because she is female.]

Whereas the yachters knew that they very specifically ran the risk of being attacked in that place at that time. They made an informed decision, took their chances and paid the price.

Did anyone deserve what they got? Of course not. No one – no one – deserves to be raped or killed. In a better world neither event would have happened. My assessment of what happened in Tahrir Square is now more nuanced than before: It was a terrible event, but at the end of the day Ms. Logan couldn’t have known better. However my assessment of what happened in the Indian Ocean between Oman and Somalia is still pretty much the same: Jean and Scott Adam, Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle didn’t deserve to die. But they absolutely should have known better.

“God gave rock ‘n’ roll to you…”

10 Oct

Mo-ha-med’s tweet of 24 September kind of cracked me up…

It’s a reminder for me that the most amusingly surreal moments in my life as an aid worker have involved music.

I’ve already blogged about the house band in Phnom Penh, wading through their rendition of Pink Floyd… to this day, whenever I hear the line, “…just a little pin prick…” I chuckle involuntarily.

There is also the vague recollection of a Chinese restaurant in northern Bangladesh where the staff insisted in playing a Michael Jackson mix cassette every time I ate there. Or of being dragged onstage at a Can Tho nightclub to sing the only English song in the house band’s repertoire: Love Potion #9.

Somehow music, more than many other things, has the power to inadvertently transcend cultural boundaries. It boldly goes where angels fear to tread. Or something like that…

* * *

So, several months ago I’m riding across the countryside in another country with a mixed group of colleagues mainly from around Eastern Europe and the Middle East. There’s a mix-tape of western 80’s/90’s vintage pop/rock. It’s hard to hear over the road noise, but I thought I recognized Aerosmith. I asked the Canadian woman next to me if she knew what it was, but before she could answer, the Iranian guy sitting ahead of us turned around and said, “That’s ‘Angel’ from the Permanent Vacation album.”

Turns out my Iranian colleague knew a lot about western hard rock and heavy metal. We spent the rest of the trip talking about bands that we liked in common: of course Aerosmith, the Scorpions, The Best Ever To Record On Vinyl… The best was when he asked, “Do you know the KISS?” (“… the KEEEEEESSSS”)

Hell yeah, I know ‘the KISS.’

I’ve met some interesting characters in my time, but an Iranian guy who knows all of the words to “Cold Gin Time Again” is definitely a first.

Even more amazing, though, was the story he told about what it was like exchanging contraband pirated tapes of western rock music as a high school student in Tehran. I mean, he could have spent time behind bars, as could have his parents.

And it seems somehow amusing and surreal and also – well – wild that my Persian friend once defied the Revolutionary Guard Corps, all for a dose of ‘the KISS.’ That is dedication beyond what even Paul Stanley imagined when he wrote the lyrics to “God Gave Rock ‘n’ Roll to You.”

* * *

I don’t know if any of you have heard of Salman Ahmed.

No? I hadn’t either until just a few days ago when I saw this little news clip about him.

And he’s pretty good on the guitar!

Decades of “win hearts and minds” strategies or attempts to co-opt foreign aid as extensions of foreign policy have not made the hoped-for progress towards the world being a better, more stable place. After all of the scholarly analysis and dissertation writing and research, we’re now finally to this: The US Government (among a few others, apparently) are backing Salman Ahmed. He’s going to wage “rock ‘n’ roll Jihad.”

* * *

One way or another, whether as one more option for achieving world peace, or simply as the source for more amusing surreal moments; somewhere between the mental image of a bunch of Arabs shouting “Mazel Tov!” (thanks @TravellerW) and the memory of ”Love Potion #9″, I’m beginning to think that maybe Paul Stanley was on to something:

“Put your faith in a loud guitar…” 

Incentive

21 Jul

The basic problem with international aid is that nobody in the mix has real incentive to get it right.

Regardless of what aid agency or donor or UN propaganda might say, the Humanitarian Aid Industrial Complex as a whole is structured to deliver a product that is lukewarm. I’ve written before that the primary architecture of the Aid Industry is around leveraging and tracking the flow of massive quantities of resources. This, rather than ensuring solid outcomes that benefit the objects of aid: the “beneficiaries”, “The Poor”, survivors of disaster and conflict.

Donors – whether we’re talking about governmental donors like USAID or DFID, large charitable foundations like Ford or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, or individuals – have hopelessly conflicted agendas when it comes to what they fund, where, and how. Agendas that run the gamut from foreign policy objectives to market share to “laying up treasure in Heaven.”

INGOs may do many good things, but they are basically not structured to deliver effective aid to the poor. They are structured achieve and maintain their own existence. And while it is easy to want to point at the large household charities as examples, it is no less true of the smaller ones.

Governments very often have multiple, sometimes conflicting priorities that distract from helping their own impoverished citizens.

For all of it’s insistence on “fact” and “Truth”, even mass media lacks incentive to promote truly appropriate, effective aid, rather than bad aid.

I am not blind to the fact of many, many highly committed, often exceptionally capable, and perhaps genuinely altruistic people in all of these categories who continue to dedicate their lives to alleviating human suffering, to addressing the plights of those far less fortunate. But we must not be naïve to the reality that Humanitarian Aid as we currently know it is set up to achieve – at best – modest gains on behalf of the world’s poor. Sometimes incentives run the other way, and those same actors actually benefit more by delivering less.

There is no one in the Aid equation right now who gains if and only if, and when and only when the poor also gain. Even more pointedly, besides the poor themselves, there is no one in the Aid equation who loses when the poor lose.

Until we resolve this basic problem, Aid successes will never get better than one-off, incremental, marginal, equivocal.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 672 other followers