Human Rights

How a universal basic income can end financial exclusion

The main argument for a universal basic income (UBI) is that it would reduce poverty and income inequality. Yet UBI advocates often overlook a range of other potential benefits. Digital UBI payments can bring people into the financial system and build their financial capability, unlocking a range of development benefits for citizens and governments alike. Take Mongolia for example. In 2014, 92 percent of adults had a bank account—by far the highest share in the developing world. (By comparison, only 43 percent of adults are banked in similar lower-middle income countries.) Young adults, a population often financially disenfranchised, see some of the most impressive usage of financial services; account ownership among Mongolians aged 15-24 years old is 93 percent. Smart policies, digital payments, and greater inclusion of traditionally marginalised groups all helped Mongolia achieve nearly universal account ownership. The Mongolian Human Development Fund (HDF) distributes revenues from the mineral and mining sectors with the objective of redistributing wealth. A flagship program funded by the HDF is the Child Money Program (CMP), launched in 2012. As part of CMP, the government makes monthly electronic deposits into savings accounts opened in children’s names, helping to ensure that all Mongolians will eventually be banked. The program pays about $10 a month to all children aged 0 to 17, thus ensuring that the parents of every new born open an account in their child’s name. Alongside South Africa, Mongolia has one of the developing world’s largest shares of adults receiving government transfers—35 percent—with two-thirds of these payments made directly into bank accounts. Seventy percent of account owners in Mongolia make or receive any payment through their account, while in East Asia and the Pacific the share is 50 percent. These accounts aren’t only passively utilized to receive payments—they are also actively used for monthly cash management and longer-term savings. […]

Why today's protests are not revolutionary TM website

Why aren’t today’s protests leading to revolutions?

-Peter McPhee, Emeritus professor, University of Melbourne We live in a world of violent challenges to the status quo, from Chile and Iraq to Hong Kong, Catalonia and the Extinction Rebellion. These protests are usually presented in the media simply as expressions of rage at “the system” and are eminently suitable for TV news coverage, where they flash across our screens in 15-second splashes of colour, smoke and sometimes blood. These are huge rebellions. In Chile, for example, an estimated one million people demonstrated last month. By the next day, 19 people had died, nearly 2,500 had been injured and more than 2,800 arrested. How might we make sense of these upheavals? Are they revolutionary or just a series of spectacular eruptions of anger? And are they doomed to fail? Key characteristics of a revolution As an historian of the French Revolution of 1789-99, I often ponder the similarities between the five great revolutions of the modern world – the English Revolution (1649), American Revolution (1776), French Revolution (1789), Russian Revolution (1917) and Chinese Revolution (1949). A key question today is whether the rebellions we are currently witnessing are also revolutionary. A model of revolution drawn from the five great revolutions can tell us much about why they occur and take particular trajectories. The key characteristics are: long-term causes and the popularity of a socio-political ideology at odds with the regime in power short-term triggers of widespread protest moments of violent confrontation the power-holders are unable to contain as sections of the armed forces defect to rebels the consolidation of a broad and victorious alliance against the existing regime a subsequent fracturing of the revolutionary alliance as competing factions vie for power the re-establishment of a new order when a revolutionary leader succeeds in consolidating power. Why today’s protests are not revolutionary […]

Iran vows revenge for Soleimani’s killing

Shahram AkbarzadehProfessor of Middle East & Central Asian Politics, Deputy Director (International), Alfred Deakin Research Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University US President Donald Trump has not held back on threatening Iran after the targeted killing of General Qassem Soleimani, a veteran of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s and a key player in expanding Iran’s links with armed groups across Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. In addition to extreme sanctions, Trump’s latest threat includes hitting 52 military and cultural targets in Iran. As might be expected, the Iranian leadership has doubled down on its anti-US rhetoric and promises of retribution. Soleimani was too important to the regime to let this slide. As the commander of the Quds Force in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Soleimani was in direct contact with Hezbollah in Lebanon. He mobilised the militant group to defend Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad against US-backed rebels and armed Islamist groups. Soleimani also visited Moscow in 2016 to make a case for, and coordinate, Russia’s military involvement in Syria. Soleimani made frequent trips to Iraq to bolster the Kurdish and later the Shia militia push-backs against the Islamic State. The recapture of Mosul from the Islamic State in 2016 by the US-backed Iraqi army and the Shia Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) was greeted in Iran with joy. Soleimani was celebrated as a national hero. The Iranian regime praised him for serving the national security doctrine of offensive defence: defeating ISIS beyond Iran’s borders. Direct military confrontation is unlikely It makes sense, then, that the Iranian regime feels compelled to respond to Soleimani’s assassination. Iran cannot afford to let its national hero be slain without retribution. When Soleimani’s daughter asked President Hassan Rouhani, “Who will avenge my father’s blood?”, his response was swift: “We will all take revenge”. But what can Iran do? The […]

The countries where it’s best to be a woman

Norway and Switzerland are the best countries to be a woman and Yemen and Afghanistan the worst, said research on Tuesday which found the state of women’s rights is not “all doom and gloom” around the world. While life for women has improved in some 60 countries, it has deteriorated in Yemen and other war-torn nations, research organizations Georgetown University’s Institute for Women, Peace and Security and Peace Research Institute Oslo concluded. The researchers looked at 167 countries since 2017 when the first Women, Peace and Security Index was compiled, weighing variables such as access to bank accounts, jobs and security. Rounding out the top of the list were Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Austria, United Kingdom, Luxembourg, Sweden and Netherlands tied for ninth place, followed by Canada. At the bottom were Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, South Sudan, Iraq, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Mali and Libya. “There are important areas of progress. It’s not all doom and gloom,” said Jeni Klugman, managing director of the Georgetown Institute and lead author of the index. Gains were strongest in women’s access to financial accounts, either mobile or at conventional banks, in fewer discriminatory laws and through increasing legislative representation. “A national election can bring about big changes, both positive and negative,” Klugman told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. “We have a number of countries which boosted the share of women in their national legislatures. We also had several countries which went the other way,” she added. Iceland lost its top spot from 2017 after elections brought a drop in the number of women in parliament. The United States inched up to No. 19 from No. 22 two years ago, in part due to 2018 elections when a record number of women were elected to Congress. But Klugman said the United States […]

As Turkish troops move in to Syria, the risks are great – including for Turkey itself

Turkey did not waste much time in launching an attack on Syrian soil just days after US President Donald Trump announced he would withdraw US forces from northern Syria. As this development opens a new chapter in Syria, Turkey maybe unwittingly sinking deeper into that country’s civil war. This is not the first time president Trump has mentioned withdrawal from Syria – he voiced it in April 2018. Alleged gas attacks by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s incumbent government followed, which resulted in the US continuing its stay in Syria despite its reluctant president. The US government has always been tentative with its Syrian policy, which was openly exploited by Russia in its bid to support the Assad government’s grip on power in the embattled country. It is also not the first time Turkey has talked about a military presence in Syria. In January 2018, it sent troops to north-western Syria, establishing its control over lands to the west of the Euphrates river. Turkey has increased its military build up on the Syrian border ever since. The US contained any further Turkish advances by making it clear Turkey was not welcome to the east of the river, especially when the US needed the support of Kurdish forces in ending Islamic States’s presence in Syria. Why does Turkey want to increase its military presence in Syria? There are three main reasons Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is eager to send more troops in to northern Syria east of the Euphrates river. The first is the prospect of free Kurdish states near its borders inspiring the sizeable Kurdish populations in the south east of Turkey to seek similar aspirations. Northern Iraq is slowly moving towards independence. If Kurds in northern Syria were to establish an autonomous region, it would only be a matter of time before the same demands were raised in Turkey. […]

Greta: the voice of climate activism who says ‘don’t listen to me’

She’s the voice of a global movement who mobilised millions of young people to demand action against climate change. Yet Greta Thunberg’s message to the US Congress – a hotbed of climate scepticism – was: “I don’t want you to listen to me. Little more than a year ago, we hadn’t heard of Thunberg. That changed after August 2018 when she held her first skolstrejk för klimatet, a ‘school strike for climate’, ducking out of class to protest outside Sweden’s parliament. “I want you to listen to the scientists.” Before long others joined her school strikes and, within a matter of months, a global movement was born. By March 2019, more than 2 million students across 135 countries were holding school strike demonstrations. Thunberg has come a long way in a year, both literally and figuratively. Just weeks after her 16th birthday she attended the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting in Davos, where she famously urged world leaders to “panic” at the seriousness of the situation. “I don’t want your hope,” she told the audience. “I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I do. Every day. And want you to act. I want you to behave like our house is on fire. Because it is.” In March Thunberg was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. Time magazine named her one of the world’s most influential people ans put her on its cover. She has addressed the European Parliament, the French National Assembly, the UK’s House of Commons, and met with Pope Francis. Now she is addressing the United Nations Climate Summit, a meeting she travelled to by carbon-neutral yacht. “It is insane that a 16-year-old would have to cross the Atlantic to take a stand,” she told reporters on arrival at the harbour. “The climate and ecological crisis is the […]

How China’s propaganda machine tried to control the message in the Hong Kong protests

China is known for the strict control it exercises on information, especially online. Discussion of events that might reflect unfavourably on the government is often censored, or framed in such a way that it becomes pro-government propaganda. That’s why so many Chinese citizens remain unaware of, for example, the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Online discussion of the recent protests in Hong Kong against a now-suspended extradition bill was no different. But this was also a rare occasion when China’s news propaganda machine was mobilised to simultaneously target several audiences both inside and outside China. China’s propaganda network is made up of a constellation of domesticand international news outlets. They span social media, mobile apps, websites and traditional media. The news is tailored to particular audiences according to different agendas. Everything, however, comes under the direction of the Central Publicity (formerly translated as “Propaganda”) Department of the Chinese Communist Party. This is an amazing time lapse of the hundreds of thousands of protesters in Hong Kong. Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen the China extradition bill elevated from a local Hong Kong controversy to a story of international concern following the protesters’ lobbying campaign targeted at the G20 summit. As events escalated from peaceful rallies focused on a single issue to at times violent confrontations seeking a range of demands, including the resignation of Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam, the agendas of several spheres of China’s propaganda converged. The first day protesters took to the streets was March 31. That was two days after the extradition bill was published in the Gazette, the official publication of the Hong Kong government. The same day, two Chinese-language newspapers that have long acted as de-facto official media of the Chinese government in Hong Kong (but not openly declared as such) swung into action. Wen Wei Po and Ta Kung Pao both used either the entire or the majority of the second […]

Three Lessons from the Hong Kong Protests

Protests this month in Hong Kong over a proposed extradition law have revealed the depth of citizens’ concern for their way of life, and of their anger at Chief Executive Carrie Lam’s gross mismanagement. Lam now seems unlikely to serve out her full term in office – but China also has lessons to learn from recent events. LONDON – The massive protests in Hong Kong in recent weeks have demonstrated the depth of its citizens’ determination to uphold their democratic way of life – something they were supposedly guaranteed when the United Kingdom returned sovereignty over the city to China in 1997. Moreover, the protests hold three powerful lessons: for Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, for the demonstrators themselves, and for China’s rulers. The Roots of Our DiscontentTITO BOERI interviews RAGHURAM G. RAJAN about the plight of left-behind communities, migration, and the war on expertise.9Add to Bookmarks Over the past few years, the Chinese authorities have steadily increased their interference in Hong Kong’s affairs, gradually eroding the “one country, two systems” principle that was meant to ensure a “high degree of autonomy” for the city after 1997. The current crisis stems from China’s desire for a legal framework to return fugitives from the mainland who have allegedly used the city as a safe haven for ill-gotten wealth. In many respects, the extradition law introduced by Lam represented an extension of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption campaign to Hong Kong, and was intended to avoid further incidents like Chinese security officers’ 2017 abduction of tycoon Xiao Jianhua from the city. There is no evidence that China gave Lam detailed instructions on enacting the law. Instead, she seems to have taken it upon herself to introduce it. However, Lam exceeded her remit by making the proposed extradition law applicable not only to fugitive mainland Chinese, but […]

Press freedom in Myanmar requires real reform

Myanmar’s president has released more than 6,000 prisoners, including two Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists imprisoned for reporting on a military crackdown on the Rohingya Muslim minority in Rakhine state. Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, who work for the news organisation Reuters, were arrested in 2017 and, after a corrupt trial engineered by the military, sentenced to seven years in prison. While the presidential pardon is welcome, there are still a number of serious, ongoing issues for freedom of expression and democracy in Myanmar. The influential military and its supporters in the government continue to work against press freedom in particular, waging what a UN human rights report referred to last year as a “political campaign against independent journalism.” Mishal Husain✔@MishalHusainBBC This is the extraordinary reporting for which Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo were arrested https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/myanmar-rakhine-events/ …1,2236:22 PM – May 7, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacyMassacre in Myanmar: One grave for 10 Rohingya menReuters uncovers how Myanmar forces burned, looted and killed in a remote village.reuters.com1,079 people are talking about this Why did the government release the prisoners now? The pardon coincides with traditional New Year in Myanmar, which started on April 17. It is customary for government officials to release prisoners around this time. It was also a way to at least partly ease the increasing international pressure on the Myanmar government. Foreign governments, NGOs, and international organisations have heavily criticised the government for its failure to protect freedom of the press, its record on human rights, the Rohingya crisis, and its scant progress on meaningful democratic reform. A\nother way to look at the president’s decision to pardon Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo is as a balancing act. The ruling National League for Democracy must toe a careful line in terms of dealing with pressure from the West and appeasing the powerful military and the Burmese ethnic majority, who overwhelmingly […]

Aung San Suu Kyi fall from grace

It is her international reputation that is most in tatters. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate, imprisoned for 15 years over a 21-year period in her struggle for human rights and democracy, has suffered a swift and dramatic fall from grace as a global icon. She is now widely seen as an enabler of ethnic cleansing and genocide. In just the last few days, Canada stripped Suu Kyi of her honorary citizenship and the Malaysian prime minister stated publicly that she has lost his support. Failures of Suu Kyi’s government Suu Kyi has been the subject of much criticism since taking power 2½ years ago, but the most recent and vociferous condemnation has centred on two events: the jailing of two Reuters journalists who exposed a massacre of Rohingya civilians by the military, and her government’s failure to respond to international investigations into allegations of ethnic cleansing and genocide. In September, the two Reuters journalists were convicted of possessing official secrets, despite testimony by a policeman that they had been entrapped. The journalists had reported on a 2017 massacre of Rohingya Muslims by security forces, which resulted in the eventual conviction of seven soldiers for murder It is notable that it was Suu Kyi’s civilian government that prosecuted the journalists, not the military. Suu Kyi could have ordered the charges dropped, as she did for student protesters during her early days in office. Instead, before the trial was over, she commented that the reporters were guilty of violating the Official Secrets Act, and once even allegedly referred to them as “traitors”. Reuters journalists Wa Lone (center) and Kyaw Soe Oo (top left) are escorted by police after their first trial in January. Lynn Bo Bo/EPA The second great disappointment has been the government’s response to the UN Human Rights Council’s report into the violence that drove almost 700,000 Rohingya Muslims to flee to Bangladesh last year. The report, released in full in September, […]

«‹ 3 4 5 6