Friday, January 28, 2011

Egypt and Mubarak's State of the Union

The protests of Cairo, Alexandria, and Suez stem from the unrest of Tunisia, although these instances are not too uncommon in Egypt. Tunisia, and the cases of self-immolation have been a fire-starter (no pun intended) for the commoners in Egypt to try to take back the streets from Mubarak and his 30 year rule. The citizens of Egypt are fed up with the dilapidated economy, zero job prospects, poor health care, and lack of housing. Although the unemployment rate is around 10%, 88% of people between the ages of 15 to 29 are unemployed - meaning they have nothing else to do except remain on the streets and 'fight for their right.' Basically they have nothing else to do, except to drink tea or coffee, smoke tobacco, and converse.

It was not unusual either for the Egyptian government to clampdown on the internet, specifically social media sites Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube. This happened in Iran in the past year. This only makes the crowds more angry that their freedom of expression is cut off. It also prevents the outside world from seeing what's really happening on the ground in Egypt. There is never a total blackout of information dissemination, fortunately for the outside world and news outlets. Obviously the world is too globalized for this. But cutting out social media does cut into momentum of the mob and hurts their cause since it is difficult to pass information or post pictures and videos of any abuse.

It took a while for Hosni Mubarak to speak, practically two and half days. It was interesting to hear him say that the government was following his orders, to suppress the views of the public. Unless the translation was wrong (I followed everything on Al Jazeera Live). Yet he dissolved the government, at not fault of his own. It was the government's fault, not his, that people were rioting. He will designate a new government tomorrow that will shoulder new duties and prepare for the opportunities of tomorrow. The people, he said, were allowed to demonstrate - this is their right - and they are able to do this because of the reform he has support. However he does not tolerate demonstrations that endanger the public; hence he was putting the blame of violence on the public. But directly after this, he stated that he gives "sovereignty to the people;" even though he understands the need to suppress views to defend security of Egypt.

But Mubarak vaguely laid out how he intends to appease the masses. It was his own state of the union address. The youth, he said, are the wealth of Egypt and he aims to increase education and economic opportunities for Egypt so that they can harness their energy into something productive, not destructive. He urges them to stay away from chaos and to stay away from those who are chaotic. But he stands by the people of Egypt and has always been for the poor. Hence he will continue the economic and social reforms and will improve education and healthcare. This he hopes, will be accomplished with a new government.

What is going to happen tomorrow? This is the question of the day. There will be a new government, but not a new leaders. This is what the masses are calling for - new leadership, Mubarak to step down. Mubarak symbolizes dictatorship, and the agonies of the Egyptian people. There will probably be no vacuum of power now, although Gamal Mubarak, the son of Hosni Mubarak, will probably not be succeeding his father. But other than this new government, nothing will happen, and the youth may remain on the streets. The anger will remain in their hearts.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Assimilation in Minneapolis

An article published by the East African Perspective journal, Mashriq Quarterly. It is basically a synopsis of my findings for my thesis. Hopefully I'll be able to publish my thesis at some point.

*********************************
THE QUESTION OF ASSIMILATION IN MINNEAPOLIS

Like most Americans, I was intrigued by the story of the missing Somali boys – the 20 or so Somali American males who left the United States to join the terrorist organization al Shabaab in Somalia. Hence, I decided to travel to Minneapolis to conduct research on the Somali community for my recently completed Master’s degree thesis. The premise of my thesis describes how the securitization of immigration by the media, with regard to news reports of the missing Somali boys does precious little in analyzing and describing a dynamic and vibrant community. Securitization of immigration is not a new phenomenon, but it plays heavily into domestic perceptions of identity politics as well as into counterterrorism measures. The main concern of the missing boys was not that they left America to fight for an extremist organization in Somalia, but their potential to come back to the United States to wage war. Fortunately this has not occurred, but what has occurred is damage to the image of the Somali community in Minneapolis.

The damage has come primarily through media reports linking Somalis to “homegrown extremism” and al Shabaab, such as Andrea Elliot’s “A Call to Jihad,” and Neela Banerjee’s “A Call to Arms.” What these media reports suggest is that of failed assimilation of Somalis in Minnesota. By assimilation, I do not mean the stripping of cultural traits or the homogenization of different immigrant groups. Rather assimilation is the participation and contribution to society by an immigrant group, who in turn, sees themselves as part of society, not as outsiders. Although I did not read Allison Taylor’s “Getting the Story Straight” from Mashriq Quarterly’s Spring 2010 issue until after my visit, I shared her main viewpoint that in order to get an unbiased and comprehensive view of the community, I must talk with different individuals in different occupations. I spoke with students and locals, as well as respected community workers and organizers, including Mr. Hussein Samatar of the African Development Center, Mr. Mohamed Mohamud of the Somali American Parent Association, and Mr. Adbirahman Hassan of the Somali Action Alliance.* I thought I would come under resistance to obtain interviews since the American media has put the Somali community in the spotlight; but it was a very nice surprise to be welcomed into the community and given the opportunity to talk candidly with those I interviewed. It speaks highly of the hospitality and friendliness that is inherent in Somali culture.

What I found was the quintessential, successful immigrant story, but not without its problems – problems that are not wholly explicit to the Somali community. The Somali community experiences an overall lack of emphasis on education, mostly within the older generations, which has created an intergenerational gap between Somali parents and their children. Many parents are trying to adjust to American life and are working to support their family, thus not having the extra time to spend watching their children or trying to understand their children’s lives and feelings. Nor do they have the time to take classes to get an education, which exacerbates the gap between parents and children because children assume power over their parents as children believe they are more intelligent since they attend school. This is more apparent in single-parent households, specifically female-headed households, as responsibilities are greater when only one parent is present. But two-parent households can display the same distance between parents and children because while one parent may be working the other is busy arguing Somali politics over coffee. From my interviews, this parent is usually the father figure. Hence as parents are not present in the lives of their children, Somali youth turn to their friends, television, music, and the internet as companions. This, in turn, can lead to Somali youth dropping out of school, particularly males who do not share the same high rate of college attendance that females exhibit. This also stems from peer pressure from friends, specifically those involved with gangs, as well as trouble with drugs, alcohol, and even teen romances. The hip-hop scene and its influences are growing within the youth, and bad examples from hip-hop culture are taken and made part of life in Minneapolis.

The bicultural lives Somali youths lead in America, namely being Somali at home while being American at school and with friends, is taken into account in the intergenerational gap. Somali youth are considered “more American” by the older generations, and they are the cultural brokers for their parents because they speak English and understand American systems, such as schools, transportation, and laws. For this reason, children do not think their parents understand the difficulties, trials, and tribulations associated with growing up in America. This plays into a trust and communication issues between parent and child because parents want their children to become accustomed with Somali culture and language, which is a noble effort to keep Somali tradition alive. Finding a balance between “Somali-ness” and “American-ness” that is acceptable to both the child and the parent puts undue pressure on Somali youth to act certain ways in different circumstances. But because there is a lack of communication in the family, and some topics for discussion are taboo, such as drugs, alcohol, and relationships, Somali youth turn to toward their friends to develop their own identities and opinions on these topics. This is not to say that all Somali youth are delinquents, quite the opposite! But because the youth cannot talk to their parents about these subjects, they are not properly informed by those they love the most, and actually shut their parents out from their lives. This has not gone unnoticed in the community, and the Egal Shidad video, “Raising our Children, Strengthening Parent-Youth Relationships” tries to address these issues by using a focus group of Somali teenagers, allowing them to talk about the changes they would like to see in their parents’ attitudes and relationships toward them.

Although I was told of the problems the community faces, there was by far more uplifting sentiment on how Somalis are successfully assimilating into Minneapolis. There are numerous advocacy and developmental organizations that were created and are headed by Somali-Americans, such as the Confederation of Somali Community, Somali American Parent Association, and the Somali Education Center, to name a few. All three of these organizations strive to resolve those problems that affect the community, and they give full service to those community members who are willing to help themselves. This type of commitment – commitment to developing solutions that will transform Somalis in Minneapolis into educated and knowledgeable citizens – is what needs to be publicized to the American public to show that there is much more than alleged links to extremism. Furthermore, the Somali malls and businesses that are abundant in Minneapolis display not only their entrepreneurial spirit, but the contribution to society and the Minneapolis economy. They provide services and goods that were not present in the city twenty years ago while developing an already diverse local economy.

Most importantly, Somalis are participating in the political process. The Somali Action Alliance, among other organizations, not only educates on the American political system but also encourages Somalis to vote, which brings positive recognition to the community from the mainstream. The voting bloc the community commands does not go unnoticed by Minnesotan politicians. Minneapolis mayor RT Rybak, Congressman Keith Ellison, and Congresswomen Karen Clark and Amy Klobuchar have sought the community’s voting support and link their campaigns to the needs of the community. Courting of a racial/ethnic group is common, but as the Somali voter base grows, so will the courtship of Minnesota politicians. All of this is very good and very encouraging to the community. Moreover, those Somali-American politicians, including Hussein Samatar and Sadik Warfa, are role models for the community at large. Samatar’s recent political success shows that Somali participation in American politics does make a difference.

On the whole, Somalis are assimilating in Minneapolis and the development of their community is rapid. Those I spoke with conveyed their happiness to live in America, a place where they can practice their religion freely, and were outspoken in identifying themselves as Americans. I was told of the dream many hold dear of returning to Somalia to pick up where they left; however this dream is fading due to the constant deterioration of the social, political, and economic environment in Somalia. Although Somalia will always be in their hearts, most want to concentrate on improving their lives in Minneapolis, and they are well aware this takes time. As one businessman told me, “All in all, we are a good people and we trying to learn the American systems. It’s like the first child when he is born, you teach him how to walk before he goes to school. And how long does it take to raise a child, like 18 years?” The small amount of time Somalis have lived in Minneapolis has been used to carve out their own place in the city. Increasingly, Somalis realize their lives are in Minneapolis and their future is in America.

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Gun Control (or not)

Below is an article by an economics professor with the Graduate Program in International Affairs at New School, with whom I had a course. This is not the first time I heard this argument today - that although Arizona is a gun-heavy state, there was not one person who returned fire in the name of protection at the shooting in Tuscon this past weekend. It is not known who actually had a gun with them at the event held by Congresswomen Gabrielle Giffords, but it is known that nobody used a gun in defense or to try to put an end to the attack perpetrated by Jared Loughner. There are many reasons for this, including the fear factor and the rapidity of the event, causing one not to think to use the gun. Apparently gun and ammunition sales have soared this past week, playing on the insecurity that the nation feels about the frequency of shooting attacks, such as this. It will be interesting to see how the gun control talks develop and whether there will be more forceful arguments about how guns do not actually protect people in the US, because they do not really use them in major events such as this.


___
Armed Citizens Don't Shoot Back

Max Fraad Wolf

There is an interesting and obvious fact that has not been mentioned regarding the terrible events in Tucson this past weekend. Arizona is a heavily armed state. The state has very liberal gun laws and a large portion of its pubic has firearms. The argument is usually made that lawful gun owners can act to protect themselves and their communities from armed criminals. Saturday we saw this not happen, again. Of course there are cases where it does occur. However, these seem to be rare and exclude the terrible spree killings that afflict us.

A seemingly disturbed young man brought so much sorrow and death to a peaceful exercise of democracy. There are few rituals more mundane and essential than those that surround an elected official meeting and listening to constituents during Saturday errands. Positive empowerment and change comes from citizens peacefully meeting and making demands of their elected representatives. No, this does not always work. Yes, many are angry and disappointed by their elected officials. No, individuals can't solve social problems alone. No weapon brings social change. Yes, our problems can be solved or reduced through peaceful organizing and group action.

We are at a crossroads. Many Americans don't believe they or their elected representatives can, or will, make life better. As Americans suffer sustained high unemployment, inequality of opportunity and corruption, some lose hope. If we give up on making our lives better, we slip toward seeking satisfaction in making life worse for others. This is caustic and increasingly common. In grotesque detail we see this in the Arizona shooting.

In Arizona we know the public is armed. Sadly, Jared Lee Loughner was legally and heavily armed. The crowds in the shopping area must too have been armed. Yet, as a gunman methodically targeted and shot innocent people, none of the armed folks in the crowd fired on the gunman. I am not blaming any of the innocents -- armed or unarmed -- that were there that day. All are victims and none bare any responsibility at all. My point is that in case after case our loose gun ownership and possession laws do not produce armed citizens defending themselves and others. So many of us have guns and we are all vulnerable.

It has been too long since we organized and made demands for more opportunity and security. That is the safe way forward. No individual can arm herself/himself from a society that is in turmoil. There simply is no way. We need mental health care. We need systems that refer those in need to care and, if need be, institutionalization. That will protect us far more than the guns we are buying.

In case after painful case, crazed gunmen open fire and slaughter innocents. We saw this in Fort Hood Texas, at Virginia Tech and so recently in Tucson. In none of these cases were our armed citizens able to do any more than their unarmed fellow citizens. Great courage was shown in reporting on suspects, protecting others and subduing suspects. However, armed citizens have been totally unable to do what arming our citizenry is supposed to do. Weapons possession seems definitively not to protect us from or during spree shootings. It appears that shootings are so fast, chaotic and overwhelming that citizens -- armed and not -- can't react rapidly enough to save themselves and others. It is likely that citizens attempting to fire on a suspect would accidentally harm or kill others in a dangerous crossfire. Life does not imitate action film/TV art in this respect. The lone gunman is curative in film and destructive on our streets and in our communities. This is not really about the guns. This is about how modern life works and does not work.

I mention this as gun sales soar nationwide and another tragedy feeds our sense of insecurity and a rush to be heavily armed. We are already the most heavily armed developed country. We already suffer the highest rates of gun injury and death. As we buy more guns, are we making the same mistake that Arizona made? Is it time to face that social problems require social solutions?