Search This Blog

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Man makes surgical history after having his shattered face rebuilt using 3D printed parts

           Surgeons used scanned 3D images of Stephen Power's                  face to design guides to cut and position bones, as well as              print titanium implants

Stephen Power photographed before the operation, left, and following the procedure 

By 
The survivor of a serious motorbike crash has made surgical history after his entire face was rebuilt using 3D printed parts.

Stephen Power is thought to be one of the first trauma patients in the world to have 3D printing technology used at every stage of the medical procedure to restore his looks.
Doctors at Morriston Hospital, Swansea, had to break his cheekbones again before rebuilding his face in an eight-hour operation.

Despite wearing a crash helmet Mr Power, 29, suffered multiple trauma injuries in the accident in 2012, which left him in hospital for four months.

“I can't remember the accident - I remember five minutes before and then waking up in the hospital a few months later. I broke both cheek bones, top jaw, my nose and fractured my skull," he said.

Consultant maxillofacial surgeon Adrian Sugar said: “We were able to do a pretty good job with all his facial injuries, with the exception of his left cheek and eye socket.
“We fixed his facial fractures pretty well but he had damaged his left eye and the ophthalmologists did not want us to do anything that might damage his sight further.

“That was a good move because his eyesight has mostly recovered. But as a result we did not get his left cheekbone in the right place and we did not even try to reconstruct the very thin bones around his eye socket.

“So the result was that his cheekbone was too far out and his eye was sunk in and dropped.”

Last year, surgeons started planning the surgery to restore the symmetry to Mr Power’s face.

The project was the work of the Centre for Applied Reconstructive Technologies in Surgery, a partnership between Morriston Hospital’s Maxillofacial Unit and the National Centre for Product Design and Development Research (PDR) at Cardiff Metropolitan University.

The team used scanned 3D images of Mr Power’s face to design guides to cut and position the bones, as well as plates to hold the bones in place. All the models – along with the finished guides and medical-grade titanium implants – were produced by 3D printing.

Mr Sugar said: “Stephen had a very complex injury and correcting it involved bones having to be re-cut into several fragments.

“Being able to do that and to put them back in the right position was a complex three dimensional exercise. It made sense to plan it in three dimensions and that is why 3D printing came in – and successive 3D printing, as at every different stage we had a model.


An x-ray of Stephen Power's skull
Mr Power, from Cardiff, still has a long way to go with his overall physical recovery. But the success of his facial reconstruction has huge implications for others.

Looking at the results of the surgery, Mr Power says he feels transformed - with his face now much closer in shape to how it was before the accident.

"It is life changing," he said.

"I could see the difference straight away the day I woke up from the surgery."

Having used a hat and glasses to mask his injuries before the operation, Mr Power has said he already feels more confident.

"I'm hoping I won't have to disguise myself - I won't have to hide away," he said.

 
(Lt-Rt) A 3D mould of Stephen's face was made before the titanium imaplants were created

(Lt-Rt) A 3D mould of Stephen's face was made before the titanium imaplants were created

"I'll be able to do day-to-day things, go and see people, walk in the street, even go to any public areas."

Mr Sugar described it as an evolution of 3D technology, taking what had been done before not just one step but two or three steps further.

“Previous efforts elsewhere to take it to this step have failed and so we have had to learn from those experiences.

“This is really the first time we’ve taken it to this stage, where everything to the very last screws being inserted has been planned and modelled in advance – and worked sweetly.”

Mr Sugar said the same techniques would be used to help many other patients in future.

Design engineer Sean Peel said the latest advance should encourage greater use of 3D printing within the NHS.

"It tends to be used for individual really complicated cases as it stands - in quite a convoluted, long-winded design process," he said.

"The next victory will be to get this process and technique used more widely as the costs fall and as the design tools improve."

Mr Power's operation is currently being featured in an exhibition at the Science Museum in London, called 3D Printing: The Future.

Source: telegraph.co.uk

U.S. Oil Firm Creates Tension over Western Sahara


Advocacy Groups like the Western Sahara Resource Watch (WSRW) contest the legality of foreign businesses, like Kosmos, working with the Moroccan government to exploit Western Saharan resources. Credit: Karlos Zurutuza/IPS




WASHINGTON, Mar 11 2014 (IPS) - Even as U.S. and Moroccan executives meet to discuss strengthening private sector ties between the two countries, advocacy groups are raising concerns about plans by a U.S. energy firm to explore for oil in the contested territory known as Western Sahara.


Government and business leaders from the United States and Morocco are gathering in Rabat this week for the second annual Morocco-U.S. Business Development Conference. The Moroccan government hopes to capitalise on its 2006 free trade agreement with the United States and encourage U.S. investment in the country by presenting it as a gateway to European, Middle Eastern and African markets. 

“There’s a lot going on in Morocco, and the question is how can it leverage what it has to attract American investments to Morocco that can then be directed to a European market or south to the African markets,” Jean AbiNader, the executive director of the Moroccan American Trade and Investment Centre, a non-profit established by Morocco’s King Mohammed VI, told IPS.

Morocco has placed a high emphasis on oil and gas exploration in its energy policy. At this week’s conference, participating energy companies, such as Dow Chemical, were given the option to attend sessions on Morocco’s energy sector, highlighting the potential for both renewable and carbon-based investment in the kingdom.

While international investors in renewable energy have long favoured Morocco, enabling the construction of solar plants and wind farms, U.S. and European corporations are also rushing to take advantage of concessions for possible oil reserves, some of which are potentially located in the Western Sahara, which many people view as under Moroccan occupation.

One such firm is the Texas-based Kosmos Energy, which has already begun offshore hydrocarbon exploration in three blocks of Morocco’s AgadirBasin. More controversially, Kosmos now intends to start oil exploration in an area off the Western Saharan coast, known as Cap Boujdour, in October.
Advocacy groups like the Western Sahara Resource Watch (WSRW) contest the legality of foreign businesses, like Kosmos, working with the Moroccan government to exploit Western Saharan resources.

“Morocco is not willing to allow the people the right to self-determination today, and the oil industry is becoming an obstacle in terms of putting pressure in Morocco to accept that right,” Erik Hagen, WSRW’s chair, told IPS.

“Sahrawis [indigenous Western Saharans] are standing on the sidelines of this project, waving their arms and telling companies to stop doing this on behalf of the Moroccan government. [These companies] are working with an occupying government.”

Corell opinion

After calling for Western Saharan independence from Spain, Morocco took control of the territory, which it calls the Southern Provinces, in 1976 after the Spanish withdrew. Following years of armed conflict between Morocco and the Algerian-backed Polisario Front, the international community established the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) in 1991.
MINURSO intended the referendum to determine whether the Western Sahara would become an independent state or part of Morocco, but the vote was never able to be implemented due to disagreements over who was eligible to take part. Unlike Morocco, the Polisario Front did not want to allow Moroccan settlers in the Western Sahara to participate in the referendum.

To date, no other state recognises Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara, which is on the United Nations list of Non Self-Governing Territories.

In 2002, Morocco awarded contracts for oil exploration in the Western Sahara to a U.S.-based company, Kerr McGee, and the French-based Total S.A. In response, the United Nations issued what is known as the Corell Opinion regarding the legality of resource extraction in Western Sahara.

Since then, however, both multinational energy firms and Western Saharan advocacy groups have construed the U.N. opinion to favour their respective stances.

The Corell Opinion recognises Morocco as the de facto administrative power of Western Sahara. But it also states that “while the specific contracts … are not in themselves illegal, if further exploration and exploitation activities were to proceed in disregard of the interests and wishes of the people of Western Sahara, they would be in violation of the principles of international law applicable to mineral resource activities in Non-Self-Governing Territories.”

AbiNader, with the Moroccan American Trade and Investment Centre, believes that Morocco’s resource-extraction activities are creating net economic benefits for the local Sahrawi population, as stipulated in the Corell Opinion.

OCP, Morocco’s state-owned phosphates company, “has done a really strenuous job,” he said. “They brought PricewaterhouseCoopers [an American consulting firm] in and did a two-year study of who’s accruing benefits from the Bou Craa mine in Western Sahara. Very clearly it’s not really contributing to their bottom line but it is creating jobs – it’s creating value added to the people in the community.”
Also citing the Corell Opinion, Kosmos Energy maintains that because Morocco purports to equitably and fairly distribute resources extracted from the Western Sahara with the native Sahrawi population, oil exploration and potential extraction in the territory will meet the international community’s standards for legality.

In a position statement, Kosmos highlights a 2013 report from King Mohammed VI’s Economic, Social, and Environmental Council (SCEC). The report declares that “the aim of the Council is to contribute to the collective effort required to rise to the challenge of achieving social cohesion, prosperity and equitable benefit from the resources” of Western Sahara.

However, WSRW’s Hagen said he doubts the intentions of the Moroccan government to adequately share the wealth with Sahrawis. Instead, he argues that the Sahrawis do not want the Moroccan government and multinational corporations exploiting their resources – which, he says, renders Kosmos’ activities illegal under the Corell Opinion.

Hagen also points to routine human rights abuses in both the Western Sahara and Morocco proper.

“The [U.N.] Special Rapporteur on Torture’s report from 2013 is very illustrative of how people are abused or tortured while in police custody, and that is frequent,” Hagen said. “Every week we hear reports of Sahrawis taken in by the police for a couple of days or a couple of hours and then released again.”

WSRW is not only calling on Kosmos to abandon its plans to explore in Western Sahara, but is also urging a U.S.-based drilling firm, Atwood Oceanics, not to provide Kosmos with the rig it has ordered for use in Cap Boujdour.

Neither Kosmos nor Atwood responded to IPS’s inquiries by deadline.

Scotland aims to be smoke-free by 2034 but what about e-cigs?



Scotland strategy paving the way. Ale'streets, CC BY

Given just how well established anti-smoking campaigns in Britain now are, many of today’s smokers, and younger smokers in particular, have taken up the habit with at least some awareness of the damaging consequences of smoking on their long-term health. And despite these campaigns, the number of people smoking is still too high – particularly in Scotland, where, according to the Scottish Health Survey, one in four adults continues to smoke every day compared with around one in five in England and Wales.

In comparison to some of the more complex messages that public health campaigns need to get across, such as how many minutes a week we should all be active or how many units of alcohol we should be drinking, the message about tobacco harm is simple. So there is clearly more work to be done and the reasons behind smoking uptake still need to be fully understood.

The big picture

Each year, tobacco use is associated with around a quarter of all deaths in Scotland. It accounts for 56,000 hospital admissions, and costs NHS Scotland £400m in treating smoking-related illnesses. It’s an issue that bears consequences not only on those who smoke, but for Scottish society and its economy.

Since the Scottish Health Survey began in 1995, smoking among adults has declined by nearly 10%. The number of cigarettes being smoked has fallen too, from an average of 15-a-day to just over 12. Almost a third (29%) of those who smoke every day are between 25 and 44, making them the largest proportion of smokers.

Vast inequalities exist though. Those living in the country’s most deprived areas are more than three times as likely as those living in areas of least deprivation to smoke.

In March 2013, the Scottish government published Creating a Tobacco-Free Generation, an ambitious new tobacco control strategy that aims to create a smoke-free Scotland by 2034. The strategy puts Scotland right up there as a world leader on tobacco control. The standardisation of packaging of tobacco products, prohibition of tobacco vending machines, and a restriction on the display of all tobacco and smoking-related products as laid out in the strategy will also all serve to help undermine the marketing efforts of tobacco companies.

The first of the strategy’s milestones is to reduce prevalence to 17% by 2016. We therefore have a few more years to wait before we get a sense of just how ambitious the aim for a smoke-free generation is. It should be taken as read that the tobacco industry are watching on with great interest.

E-cigarettes bans

The increased profile and availability of e-cigarettes has thrown a bit of a spanner in the works. Are they a stepping stone to tobacco use or if properly regulated could they act as a useful alternative to cigarettes? The long-term effects of e-cigarettes are not yet known. They may in time prove to be a useful quitting aid but as yet there is little evidence to support this. In the meantime, sales of e-cigarettes have increased by 340% in the past year while in the same period sales of licensed nicotine replacement products has slowed.

The danger lies in e-cigarettes use, or “vaping”, becoming a way of simply replacing one habit, proven to be damaging to health, with an alternative habit, about which little is currently known. Until we know more about their long-term health effects then perhaps the focus should be on discouraging habitual nicotine use more generally. It’s encouraging to see that Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games is the latest event to have banned the use of e-cigarettes from its venues in the same way tobacco smoking has been banned. This follows on from initiatives by other organisations including ScotRail, Starbucks and Wetherspoons pubs, none of whom allow “vaping”.

We’ve also changed the Scottish Health Survey in 2014 to include questions on e-cigarette use for the first time. This means we will soon have robust data on the prevalence of e-cigarette use in Scotland, how it varies across different groups in society and how it relates to other health behaviours.

A recent EU Directive will also clarify the status of the e-cigarette as a product. The framework allows products to “opt in” to medicines regulation or, failing that, be subject to a range of new controls which include safety and quality requirements as well as restrictions around advertising. With legislation to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to under 18s already passed in England and Wales, it is likely that Scotland will follow soon.

There are currently also no specific guidelines governing e-cigarette advertising but the Committee of Advertising Practice recently launched a public consultation on the marketing of e-cigarettes after one prime time advert attracted over 1,000 complaints. The consultation ends in April and any new rules arising out of the consultation are expected to be implemented soon after.

Good news

The good news is that, according to a recent survey by Ash Scotland, Smoking among young teenagers is at its lowest level since 1990, an indication, perhaps, that this generation has taken more notice of – or been perhaps been more exposed to – effective anti-smoking campaigning.

We know from the latest Scottish Health Survey that 73% of smokers would like to stop and 41% have tried to quit on at least three occasions, so most smokers clearly want to change their behaviour.

The challenge is to help and support these people give up, protecting others from second-hand exposure and fostering an environment where young people in Scotland do not want to take up smoking. In tandem with this is the challenge for the health community to figure out where e-cigarettes fit in with this in regards nicotine addiction and harm reduction.

Source: theconversation.com

Somalia: Are Corruption and Tribalism Dooming Somalia’s War on al-Shabaab Extremists?


Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 12 Issue: 4



An African Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) soldier keeps guard on top of an armoured vehicle in the old part of Mogadishu (Source Reuters)

After decades of conflict that have nearly destroyed the nation, Somalia now stands poised to make a final drive with international assistance to shatter the strength of radical al-Qaeda-associated Islamists in central and southern Somalia, but there are indications that Somalia’s leaders may be posing an even greater obstacle to Somalia’s successful reconstruction.



Arms Embargoes and Missing Weapons

In mid-February, the UN Somalia and Eritrea Monitoring Group issued a report to the UN Security Council’s sanctions committee claiming that weapons obtained by the Somali government under a temporary easing of UN arms sanctions were being sold to Somalia’s al-Shabaab extremists in what was described as “high-level and systematic abuses in weapons and ammunition management and distribution” (Reuters, February 13). A UN arms embargo was placed on Somalia in 1992, but in the last year the Somali government has been able to obtain once-restricted small arms and other weapons such as rocket-propelled-grenades under a partial lifting of the embargo designed to help fight al-Shabaab terrorists.

Among the observations contained in the report were the following:

  • Shipments of weapons from Ethiopia, Djibouti and Uganda could not be accounted for.
  • The Somali government cancelled several UN inspections of armories
  • A key presidential adviser from President Hassan Shaykh Mohamud’s own Abgaal sub-clan was involved in planning weapons transfers to al-Shabaab commander Shaykh Yusuf Isse “Kabukatukade,” another member of the Abgaal.
  • A government minister from the Habr Gadir sub-clan made unauthorized weapons purchases from a Gulf state that were transferred to private locations in Mogadishu for use by a Habr Gadir clan militia.
  • The Monitoring team photographed rifles sent to Somalia’s national army for sale in the Mogadishu arms market with their serial numbers filed off (Reuters, February13; AFP, February 16).
The easing of the Somali arms embargo is scheduled to end in March. Though a final decision on its future has yet to be made, it seems likely that the easing will remain in place until a new report on arms violations is due in October. The Somali government is looking for a complete removal of the embargo, allowing it to obtain heavy weapons and sophisticated military materiel (Reuters, February 14). The Monitoring Group has recommended either the full restoration of the embargo or a heightened monitoring regime to accompany an extension of the partial easement. 

Somali security officials have complained that the UN monitors have not provided them with any information regarding the alleged arms sales to al-Shabaab or the alleged activities of Abgaal and Habr Gadir insiders at the presidential palace arranging such arms sales. One security official complained that the UN allegations could not be proven without examining al-Shabaab’s arms: “If they haven’t inspected al-Shabaab’s [arms], how are they arriving at the conclusion government weapons are being sold to al-Shabaab. This is a dangerous and creative position by the UN” (Suna Times/Waagacusub.net, February 18).

The head of Somalia’s military, General Dahir Aden Elmi “Indhaqarshe” described the UN report as fabricated, false and without credibility, though he acknowledged an investigation into how al-Shabaab obtains its arms would be worthwhile, as the movement “does not get arms from the sky.” However, the Somali army commander sees darker purposes behind the work of the UN monitors: “The UN Monitoring Group want al-Shabaab to be an endless project in order to gain funds from the world while they are struggling hard to make Somalia’s government weak and nonfunctional” (Raxanreeb, February 17).

Shady Dealings and Economic Challenges

Some light was shed on the murky financial dealings of Somalia’s central government when central bank governor Yussur Abrar quit after only seven weeks on the job following repeated efforts to force her to approve dubious transactions benefiting members and friends of the government. In her resignation letter to Somali President Hassan Shaykh Mohamud, Abrar described corruption and constant government interference in Central Bank operations”

From the moment I was appointed, I have continuously been asked to sanction deals and transactions that would contradict my personal values and violate my fiduciary responsibility to the Somali people as head of the nation's monetary authority… The message that I have received from multiple parties is that I have to be flexible, that I don't understand the Somali way, that I cannot go against your [Mohamud’s] wishes, and that my own personal security would be at risk as a result (Suna Times, October 30, 2013).

Turkey has been the main supporter of Somali reconstruction, offering technical support, materials, medical teams, hospitals, machinery and various other means of assistance, including, apparently, lots of cash. A recent Reuters report cited various officials within the Turkish and Somali governments that Ankara had decided in December to stop its direct financial support to Mogadishu, which took the form of $4.5 million in U.S. $100 dollar bills transferred to the Somali central bank every month (Reuters, February 13). However, three days later, the Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that the payments were in line with procedure in light of the fact Somalia has no banking services and that efforts were “underway to provide budget support to the Somali Federal Government in the year 2014” (Hurriyet, February 16). The Turkish statement did not outline what measures, if any, were taken to trace the end use of these funds, but the potential for abuse is apparent in the absence of verifiable banking and accounting procedures in Mogadishu.

Over two decades of social and political chaos mean that the challenges to Somalia’s reconstruction efforts only begin with the elimination of al-Shabaab:
  • Somalia lacks trade agreements with the West, lacks a proper certificatory regime and is not a member of the World Trade Organization, making exports difficult. The vast bulk of Somalia’s current exports consist of charcoal and livestock heading to the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Yemen.
  • Multiple currencies are in circulation, some of them worthless. Monetary control remains elusive with no new official bank-notes having been printed since the overthrow of Siad Barre in 1991, leading to a thriving black market in currency.
  • The national government has begun signing oil and gas deals that are in conflict with deals signed by regional administrations like Puntland during the absence of an effective central government. (IRIN, February 14).
AMISOM Operations: Fighting Somalia’s War 

The growing deployment of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), now 22,000 strong, includes troops from Uganda, Burundi, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia and Sierra Leone, as well as police from Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Uganda.

While Ethiopia has continued to mount its own independent military operations in regions of Somalia bordering Ethiopia since its general withdrawal from Somalia in 2009, lack of coordination with AMISOM tended to give al-Shabaab militants space to withdraw and operate elsewhere until Ethiopian operations were concluded. It was therefore regarded as good news when Ethiopia decided to integrate its Somali operations into the AMISOM command in January [Dalsan Radio [Mogadishu], February 18). Ethiopian forces followed their integration by deploying to Beledweyne in Hiraan Region (where they are establishing a new base) and to Baidoa in Bay Region, where they will be responsible for security operations in the Bay, Bakool and Gedo Regions (Shabelle Media Network [Mogadishu], January 28).

Uganda, which has roughly 8,000 troops in Somalia, has just rotated in 1,600 fresh troops under Colonel William Bainomugisha (Xinhua, February 14).

The Somali army is about to launch new operations in cooperation with AMISOM forces to re-take Bardhere in the Juba River valley and the last major port under al-Shabaab control, Barawe, which has also acted as an important headquarters and training base for the militants since the loss of Kismayo to Kenyan troops (Garowe Online, February 11; Raxanreeb.com, February 11).

If successful, this new offensive would divide Shabaab forces, significantly reduce the area under its control and eliminate the movement’s last major source of revenue. Unfortunately, rather than align for a final push against the militants, some units of the Somali Army in the Lower Shabelle region have been using their new arms to fight each other, based on clan allegiances (Shabelle Media Network, January 28; January 30; Garowe Online, January 29).

According to AMISOM spokesman Colonel Ali Aden Humad (part of the Djiboutian contingent of 960 troops deployed in Hiraan Region), the offensive will suffer from a lack of naval forces (suggesting Kenya will continue its policy of consolidating the area it has taken in southern Somalia rather than move further north) and helicopters, which AMISOM hopes will still arrive from some African Union country. Most important, however, is the failure of the Somali Army to build up a force as large as AMISOM that could not only participate in operations in a meaningful way, but also undertake important garrison and consolidation duties that must now be carried out by AMISOM forces.

Colonel Humad admitted it was a mystery that the national army remained small despite years of international training programs and funding: “AMISOM trained many Somali soldiers and equipped some. So, the question is where have they gone? When we train them, we turn them over to the government. So, where do they go? Where are they kept?” (Sabahi, February 7).

Al-Shabaab Leaders Go to Ground

The continuing American drone campaign in Somalia is a major concern for al-Shabaab, which has seen several senior members targeted and killed in the last year.

The movement has responded with mass arrests of suspected spies believed to help in the targeting, including a number of al-Shabaab fighters.

The drone strikes have also damaged communications within al-Shabaab and restricted the movements of its leaders, with many senior members, including al-Shabaab leader Abdi Godane, believing that contact with mobile communications equipment can be tracked to target drone strikes. Like the Somali army, there is infighting within al-Shabaab, which might divide into smaller groups if Godane is killed. Having narrowly survived at least two recent attempts on his life, Godane is reported to have even grown suspicious of his own bodyguards in al-Shabaab’s Amniyat intelligence unit (Sabahi, February 7). Al-Shabaab has actually succeeded in intimidating a major Somali telecommunications provider to cut internet service in southern Somalia to prevent any type of communications with U.S. or AMISOM intelligence groups (Suna Times, February 10). Last October, the United States began deploying a number of military trainers and advisors in Somalia. 
Conclusion
Despite disappearing arms and soldiers and the distractions provided by incessant clan warfare, Somali Prime Minister Abdiweli Shaykh Ahmad Muhammad says that, with international assistance, “The plan is to have al-Shabaab out of the areas that they control by the end of 2014” (Xinhua, February 19). Meanwhile, the insurgency continues to wreak havoc across parts of central and southern Somalia. New UN figures indicate that two million Somalis (of 10 million) suffer from food insecurity, with 850,000 of those “in desperate need of food.” Most of the latter have been displaced by fighting and insecurity (Independent, February 19). In recent days, al-Shabaab attacks in Mogadishu and its airport have been on the rise, including a February 13 suicide bomb that killed seven just outside of Mogadishu’s Aden Adde airport, which also serves as a secure base for AMISOM and foreign diplomats (Raxanreeb.com, February 13; Reuters, February 13). Eliminating the Shabaab threat will remain impossible no matter what degree of international assistance and funding is provided so long as service in national and local administrations in Somalia is seen as a means for personal self-enrichment and the furtherance of clan interests at the expense of national interests. Ultimately, the path Somalia will follow will depend not on UN assistance or AU military deployments, but rather on the interest Somalis themselves have in the national project.

Andrew McGregor is the Senior Editor of Global Terrorism Analysis and the Director of Aberfoyle International Security, a Toronto-based agency specializing in security issues related to the Islamic world.

Source: jamestown.org
 

How Reagan Enforced US Hypocrisy


Exclusive: 
The mainstream U.S. news media has so fully bought into the U.S. government’s narrative on Ukraine that almost no one sees the layers of hypocrisy, an achievement in “group think” that dates back to Ronald Reagan’s war against “moral equivalence,” writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry


Official Washington’s hearty disdain for anyone who cites U.S. hypocrisy toward the Ukraine crisis can be traced back to a propaganda strategy hatched by the Reagan administration in 1984, dismissing any comparisons between U.S. and Soviet behavior as unacceptable expressions of “moral equivalence.”

This “moral equivalence” concern stemmed, in part, from the prior decade’s disclosures of U.S. government misconduct – the Vietnam War, CIA-sponsored coups and other intelligence abuses at home and abroad. In that climate of heightened skepticism, U.S. journalists felt it was their job to show some skepticism and hold U.S. officials accountable for their behavior.

For President Ronald Reagan, that meant journalists taking note of his administration’s support for terrorism by the Contra rebels in Nicaragua and for death-squad-tainted governments slaughtering civilians in countries such as Guatemala and El Salvador.

So, to counter this P.R. problem, Reagan administration officials developed a propaganda “theme” that, in effect, asserted that the U.S. government should not be held to the same human rights standards as the Soviet government because the United States was morally superior to the Soviet Union.

According to documents recently released by the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, the Reagan administration established a “Moral Equivalence Working Group” in 1984 reporting to Walter Raymond Jr., who had been a top psychological warfare specialist at the CIA before being moved to Reagan’s National Security Council where he oversaw a wide-ranging program of domestic and foreign propaganda.

Though the working group’s core complaint was something of a straw man, since it would be hard to find anyone who equated the U.S. and USSR, the Reagan administration made clear that anyone who continued to apply common moral standards to the two governments would be accused of “moral equivalence.”

This framing proved effective in tarring U.S. journalists and human rights activists as, in essence, Soviet apologists. The “theme” was most famously expressed by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick at the Republican National Convention in 1984 when she decried anyone who would “blame America first.”

Link to the Present

As an Associated Press reporter, I encountered this “moral equivalence” attack line when I questioned State Department officials about their hypocrisy in applying strict human rights standards to Nicaragua’s Sandinista government while excusing far more serious abuses by the Contras and other U.S. allies in Central America.

Neocon intellectual Robert Kagan, who then was a senior official in the State Department’s Office of Public Diplomacy for Latin America, warned me that I was edging dangerously close to the line on “moral equivalence.”

Ironically, Kagan’s wife, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, is now at the forefront of U.S. support for the Ukrainian coup, which relied on neo-Nazi militias to overthrow a democratically elected president, though the official U.S. narrative is that this was a “democratic” uprising. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Neocons and the Ukraine Coup.”]

Over the past three decades, the argument against “moral equivalence” has changed little, though it has morphed into what is now more commonly described as American “exceptionalism,” the new trump card against anyone who suggests that the U.S. government should abide by international law and be held to common human rights standards.

Today, if you make the case that universal rules should apply to the United States, you are accused of not embracing America as an “exceptional” country. As a result, very few mainstream observers in Official Washington even blink now at the U.S. government taking contradictory positions on issues such as intervening in other countries.

Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are “justified” as are drone strikes and aerial bombardments of countries from Pakistan to Yemen to Somalia to Libya. It’s also okay to threaten to bomb Syria and Iran.

Supporting the overthrow of sovereign governments is also fine – for the United States but not for anyone else. Just during the Obama administration, the U.S. government has backed coups in Honduras, Libya and now Ukraine. U.S.-endorsed secessions are okay, too, as with oil-rich South Sudan from Sudan.

Yet, when the geopolitical shoe is on the other foot – when Russia objects to the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s duly-elected President Viktor Yanukovych and, as a result, supports a secession referendum by Crimea on whether its citizens want to join the Russian Federation – Official Washington cries out in moral outrage.

Suddenly, we see mainstream American journalists searching for some clause in Ukraine’s constitution that prohibits secession, though these journalists had no problem with the violation of the same constitution’s procedures for impeaching a president, rules ignored by the coup regime with barely a peep from U.S. news outlets.

Framing the Debate

These ever-moving goal posts on this ever-shifting moral playing field was defined by the Reagan administration’s propagandists in the mid-1980s, coincidentally in the iconic year 1984, according to documents at the Reagan Library. I found in Raymond’s files a “concept paper” for a conference to address “moral equivalence,” attached to a memo dated Sept. 4, 1984. The paper read:

“The Moral Equivalence Working Group … has for some time been examining ways to counter the common (and for US, very damaging) concept of the ‘moral equivalence of the superpowers,’ i.e., the notion that there is no moral distinction to be made between the US and the USSR, particularly in the areas of foreign and military policy. … Moral equivalence is a particularly insidious problem because it permeates almost every level of public discourse both at home and abroad.”

The “concept paper” offers no specific examples of anyone actually engaging in this “moral equivalence,” but it insists that the problem is widespread among elites and could be detected when people, for instance, compared the U.S. invasion of Grenada to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The paper reads:

“This is not to suggest that moral equivalence is in fact a majority perception. There is reason to believe that it is primarily an elite problem and that the broad mass of people has a sounder instinct on the inherent moral differences between the US and Soviet systems. However, given the dominance of morally equivalent thinking among elites, particularly in the media and in academia, public resistance to moral equivalence is provided with little informational or intellectual support.”

The paper then proposes a high-level conference sponsored by the neoconservative Center for Strategic and International Studies with the goal of analyzing “the Moral Equivalence misconception” and devising ways “to combat the problem” including addressing “intellectual fashion and ways to have an impact on it.”

Over the intervening three decades, these U.S. government’s propaganda efforts against holding the United States to the same moral standards as other countries have proved remarkably successful, at least within U.S. opinion circles.

It is now common for mainstream journalists to accept the principle of “American exceptionalism” in both implications of the word: that the United States is a wonderfully exceptional nation and that it is exempted from international law.

Indeed, it is rare for anyone in mainstream journalism to assert that the United States should conform to international law, i.e. respecting the sovereign borders of other countries. Yet, the same opinion leaders express outrage when Russia intervenes in Ukraine in the wake of a neo-Nazi-spearheaded coup on Russia’s border.

No longer do mainstream U.S. journalists and academics try to apply the same rules to Washington and Moscow. The “problem” that Reagan’s team detected in the 1980s has been solved. Today, American hypocrisy is the accepted “group think.”

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon andbarnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.
Source: consortiumnews.com

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Somaliland public is highly appreciative of Israel’s assistance




jpost - The Somali public is highly appreciative of Israel’s assistance to those in dire need, and will remain close friends with the people of Israel forever.

When crisis erupted in Somalia and the lights went out in the 1990s, it became obvious that Somalia had been abandoned; no country acted to alleviate the Somalis’ enormous suffering.

Somalia has received various kinds of aid over the years, from various sources, but in the post-Cold War era, as Somalia’s strategic importance to the great world powers has waned, the country has effectively been left to rot. Its healthcare infrastructure, for example, is damaged to a degree which seems irreparable. Somalis seeking urgent medical care thus must often cross the border into Ethiopia, or seek treatment further abroad.

I am not a doctor by profession, but have served for many years as an interpreter for Somalis seeking medical care in Ethiopia. It was in this capacity that Special Adviser to the President of Somalia Dr. Omar Dihoud and I met with Mohammed Mohamud and Farah on March 4 at the Nati Hotel in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, prior to their 9 p.m. departure for Tel Aviv.

It was a remarkable occasion for all of us.

The two young men were overjoyed, but also a little shocked; they hadn’t expected anything other than rejection from the Israelis they had been taught all their lives to consider “immortal enemies.”

“When we were told Israeli embassy in Addis Ababa had granted us the visas, it blew our minds!” said “We’re grateful to the Hadassah organization that offered us to treat us. We’ve life threatening injuries and yet no money” to go to Germany for similar treatment, added, explaining that “[the treatment] costs a minimum of $100,000 for each of us.”

“Our people, friends and families phoned us from all over the world when they heard the good news” Mohammed said with a broad smile. Their phones kept ringing all night long.

Whether their treatment is successful or not, one thing is certain: the Hadassah organization’s place in the hearts of these two young men is secure Mohammed’s CT scan results are in front of me: “hyperdense foreign body noted (displaced skull bone fragment) … Conclusion: (1) right occipito post-traumatic encephalomalacic cyst, (2) dense foreign body in the cranial cavity….”

According to Mohammed, the foreign body lodged in his skull, is a bullet, which he says is the reason he’s paralyzed. His condition is critical, but treatment wasn’t available in Somalia or Ethiopia, so he was obliged to seek treatment overseas. However, he couldn’t afford the treatment, and had given up hope.

Enter the State of Israel. Israel, which has one of the best healthcare systems in the world today, offered to fly Mohammed and Farah to Jerusalem, a holy city for Muslims, Jews and Christians alike, via Tel Aviv for the delicate surgery.

Moreover, this wasn’t a unique occurrence; Israel has been engaged in this type of activity for quite some time, and hopefully will continue to do so until Somalia can rebuild its shattered health infrastructure.

By way of comparison, in reply to those like Mohammed and Farah seeking health care assistance abroad, Saudi Arabian philanthropists say: We finance Madrassa and Haj tours for specific people who contacted our hidden representatives in Hargaysa or Islamabad.

Indeed, the Saudis are obsessed with spreading the radical Wahabi cult to the poor masses of Somalia, and are prepared to give alms only if doing so serves this end.

While willing to fund places of worship – as long as they fall in line with the Saudi brand of Islam – the Saudis at the same time, fuel so-called “jihad” from Afghanistan to Somalia, and bribe the major oil companies to prevent oil exploration in the Horn of Africa and beyond.

In fact, it is Saudi “aid” that has kept Somalia at war for the past six years. The Al-Haramayn and Muntada Islami organizations feed orphans in Hargaysa and Mogadishu, true – but indoctrinate them at the same time. Raising jihadis under the banner of feeding the poor is an activity the Saudis have been engaged in since at least the 1990s.

To truly care for an orphan is to raise them into adults capable of living independently, not into jihadis whose only purpose is to increase the number of new orphans.

I call on Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud to make a trip to the Holy Land, instead of wasting time in countries whose influence and contribution is quite limited, or comes with strings attached. Israel, the Silicon Valley of the Middle East, has the ability to help turn Somalia into a paradise in a short period – if our leaders can find the courage to ask.

Many Somalis are unaware of the fact that Jews and Christians fall in the same category according to Islam: People of The Book (Ahlukitab in Arabic), and that it is no more wrong to seek help from Israel than from the predominantly Christian West.

And we need to ask for the help of each, on grounds of common humanity rather than religious affiliation, clan or color. The Somali public is highly appreciative of Israel’s assistance to those in dire need, and will remain close friends with the people of Israel forever.

Opinion Contributed By Dirye for Revisit -jpost -The writer is a Somaliland activist and senior editor at The Democracy Chronicles, African news edition. dirye@democracychronicles.com
-

HAN & Geeska Afrika Online (1985-2014), The oldest free indepedent Free Press in the region, brings together top journalists from across the Horn of Africa. Including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Sudan, Djibouti, South Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Oromo, Amhara, Somali, Afar and Harari. Plus, we have daily translations from 150 major news organizations in the Middle East and East African regions.



Independence: Why Scotland Is Facing the Same Political and Media Backlash as Somaliland




Let's get this out of the way. Scotland is not an official country and neither is Somaliland. Neither has a seat at the EU or a seat at the AU, respectively, nor do either have a seat at the UN. Their governments pass local laws and govern everything within their borders, but others speak on their behalf (and receive money in their name) on the world stage. Scotland may be referred to as a country, but aside from preferential terminology, it is not recognised as a country. This is where the Scottish struggle for independence comes in.

Scotland's call for independence in the last few years is an ideological one, born out of political and economic gains that independence will bring. Somaliland's call for independence since 1991 was born out of necessity, as a last option to the 100,000s of lives lost during the attack of the military regime of the government at the time on Somaliland. They have since had their referendum, agreed to be independent and have been lobbying for international recognition ever since.

The first concrete step towards Scotland's Independence was the Edinburgh Agreementbetween the UK Government and the Scottish Government on having a Referendum in Scotland. Somaliland does not have such an agreement with the Federal Government of Somalia, as there was no-one to negotiate with for the last two decades. The permanent Government of Somalia that has recently been created and is fundedsupported, andprotected by the international community is not willing to support Somaliland's independence claims and sees them only as a region, and not a country.

There have been white papers, Question Time debates on Scottish young voters and independence as well as the independence argument between Scottish MPsScottish Parliamentary debates, to make the case for and against Scotland's independence. Somaliland has had very little of this in comparison, but it is long overdue.

But the strongest influence on public opinion comes from two age-old instruments, political institutions and the media. In my previous article on ethnic conflict, I highlighted how we use the same tactics on ourselves that the old colonial powers used to use on us. One of those colonial powers was Great Britain and they had perfected their techniques, because they used it on Scotland, Wales, and Ireland over the last few centuries. They were willing to 'give' their colonies independence, but are not as willing to give it to the neighbours they've colonised. And the politicians are using the media to spin their stories.

If a country wants to join the EU, they have to submit a membership application, and the European Commission assesses the applicant's ability to meet the Copenhagen criteria, split into the 35 chapters of the 'acquis'. But when you have the President of the European Commission telling the media that Scotland joining the EU is near impossible before they have even submitted an application, you can very quickly see how opposition is building up even outside of the UK. Members of the EU are worried that Scotland's independence will trigger secession calls within other EU member states, which is why Spain has been against allowing Kosovo to join the EU, as it would face further pressure from within their own borders. As the only major country in Western Europe refusing to recognise Kosovo, Spain has made clear that recognising their independence would cause implications regarding its own issues with independence movements in the Basque Country, Galicia and Catalonia.

Somaliland is facing a similar issue with the African Union and the UN. Kofi Annanreported to the General Assembly in 2000 that "'Somaliland', in particular, remain[ed] firmly outside the peace process." The UN (driven by US policy) is concerned that recognising the independence of Somaliland will further destabilise South-Central Somalia, and does not want to destabilise the relations they have with their allies in the regions, such as Ethiopia. The African Union is also apprehensive, considering the possibility that allowing the secession of Somaliland will trigger more calls of secession with the other African countries. They are quite keen to keep the borders that were drawn up by their colonisers and the previous colonial powers support them in that decision. It's a mind-set that desperately needs changing. Despite the AU fact-finding report in 2005, the African Union still has not had a complete debate on possibility of recognising Somaliland. And the rest of the world will not recognise Somaliland if the AU is unwilling to.

But the biggest obstacle to the independence of Scotland and Somaliland are the administrations they are trying to separate from. England believes in 'Great Britain' which includes Scotland; and Somalia believes in 'Greater Somalia' which includes Somaliland. The ideology behind this is dressed up as an economically, politically and socially driven policy where the Nation is stronger together. But the truth is, nobody wants to give up control of a region within their current borders, as this may strengthen the new independent region, but would weaken the country they have separated from. It's about survival.

Perhaps both countries should be independent, perhaps they shouldn't. The arguments on both sides are very convincing for Scotland and Somaliland. But what should definitely happen is that an open debate should be held that considers this from all perspectives and that everyone remains true to the strongest pillar of democracy, the pillar that protects the right of self-determination of any people. You want Scotland or Somaliland to vote for or against independence? Then organise the debate to happen openly and fairly, and convince the citizens why your case is in their best interest, and allow the citizens to choose for themselves.

Follow Awoowe Hamza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AwooweHamza

Source: huffingtonpost.co.uk