Posts Tagged ‘ukraine’

Damian Kolodiy: Circus at the Ukrainian Parliament 9/7/2010

Tuesday, September 7th, 2010

From my journalist friend Zenon Zawada, ont he ground in Kyiv, Ukraine Zenon Zawada Kyiv Bureau Editor Read More… More on Ukraine

See the article here:
Damian Kolodiy: Circus at the Ukrainian Parliament 9/7/2010
Iluvnutrition

20 Things I’ve Learned From Traveling Around the World for Three Years

Monday, August 23rd, 2010

On March 13, 2007, I handed over the keys to my house, put my possessions in storage and headed out to travel around the world with nothing but a backpack, my laptop and a camera. Three and a half years and 70 countries later, I’ve gotten the equivalent of a Ph.D in general knowledge about the people and places of Planet Earth. Here are some of the things I’ve learned: 1) People are generally good. Many people are afraid of the world beyond their door, yet the vast majority of humans are not thieves, murderers or rapists. They are people just like you and me who are trying to get by, to help their families and go about living their lives. There is no race, religion or nationality that is exempt from this rule. How they go about living their lives might be different, but their general goals are the same. 2) The media lies. If you only learned about other countries from the news, you’d think the world was a horrible place. The media will always sensationalize and simplify a story. I was in East Timor when the assassination attempts on President José Ramos-Horta, and Prime Minister Xanana Gusmão in 2008. The stories in the news the next day were filed from Jakarta or Kuala Lumpur, not Dili. It was all secondhand news. I was in Bangkok during the political protests this year, but you’d never have any idea they were taking places if you were not in the immediate area where the protests were taking place. The media makes us scared of the rest of the world, and we shouldn’t be. 3) The world is boring. If there isn’t a natural disaster or an armed conflict, most places will never even be mentioned in the news. When is the last time you’ve heard Laos or Oman mentioned in a news story? What makes for good news are exceptional events, not ordinary events. Most of the world, just like your neighborhood, is pretty boring. It can be amazingly interesting, but to the locals, they just go about living their lives. 4) People don’t hate Americans. I haven’t encountered a single case of anti-Americanism in the last three-and-a-half years. Not one. (And no, I don’t tell people I am Canadian.) If anything, people are fascinated by Americans and want to know more about the US. This isn’t to say they love our government or our policies, but they do not have an issue with Americans as people. Even in places you’d think would be very anti-American, such as the Middle East, I was welcomed by friendly people. 5) Americans aren’t as ignorant as you might think. There is a stereotype that Americans don’t know much about the rest of the world. There is some truth to that, but isn’t as bad as you might believe. The reason this stereotype exists is because most other countries on Earth pay very close attention to American news and politics. Most people view our ignorance in terms of reciprocity: i.e. I know about your country, why don’t you know about mine? The truth is, if you quizzed people about third-party countries other than the US, they are equally as ignorant. When I confronted one German man about this, I asked him who the Prime Minister of Japan was. He had no clue. The problem with America is that we suffer from the same problem as the rest of the world: an obsession with American news. The quality of news I read in other parts of the world is on a par with what you will hear on NPR. 6) Americans don’t travel. This stereotype is true. Americans don’t travel overseas as much as Brits, Dutch, Germans, Canadians or Scandinavians. There are some good reasons for this (big country, short vacation time) and bad ones (fear and ignorance). We don’t have a gap year culture like they have in the UK and we don’t tend to take vacations longer than a week. I can’t think of a single place I visited where I met Americans in numbers anywhere close to our relative population. 7) The rest of the world isn’t full of germs. Many people travel with their own supply of water and an industrial vat of hand sanitizer. I can say in full honestly that I have never used hand sanitizer or gone out of my way to avoid contact with germs during my travels. It is true that in many places you can get nasty illnesses from drinking untreated water, but I don’t think this means you have be a traveling Howard Hughes. Unless you have a particularly weak immune system or other illness, I wouldn’t worry too much about local bugs. 8) You don’t need a lot stuff. Condensing my life down from a 3,000 sq/ft house to a backpack was a lesson in knowing what really matters. I found I could get by just fine without 97% of the things I had sitting around my home. Now, if I purchase something, I think long and hard about it because anything I buy I will have to physically carry around. Because I have fewer possessions, I am more likely to buy things of higher quality and durability. 9) Traveling doesn’t have to be expensive. Yes, if you insist on staying in five-star hotels and luxury resorts, travel can be very expensive. However, it is possible to visit many parts of the world and only spend $10-30 per day. In addition to traveling cheap, you can also earn money on the road teaching English or working on an organic farm. I’ve met many people who have been able to travel on a little more than $1,000/month. I met one man from the Ukraine who spent a month in Egypt on $300. 10) Culture matters. Many of our ideas for rescuing other countries all depend on them having similar incentives, values and attitudes as people in the west. This is not always true. I am reminded of when I walked past a Burger King in Hong Kong that was full of flowers. It looked like someone was having a funeral at the restaurant. It turned out to be people sending flowers in celebration of their grand opening. Opening a business was a reason to celebrate. In Samoa, I had a discussion with a taxi driver about why there were so few businesses of any type on the island of Savai’i. He told me that 90% of what he made had to go to his village. He had no problem helping his village, but they took so much there was little incentive to work. Today the majority of the GDP of Samoa consists of remittances sent back from the US or New Zealand. It is hard to make aid policies work when the culture isn’t in harmony with the aid donors expectations. 11) Culture changes. Many people go overseas expecting to have an “authentic” experience, which really means they want to confirm some stereotype they have in their mind of happy people living in huts and villages. They are often disappointed to find urban people with technology. Visiting a different place doesn’t mean visiting a different time. It is the 21st Century, and most people live in it. They are as likely to wear traditional clothes as Americans are to wear stove top hats like Abraham Lincoln. Cultures have always changed as new ideas, religions, technologies sprang up and different cultures mingled and traded with each other. Today is no different. 12) Everyone is proud of where they are from. When you meet someone local in another country, most people will be quick to tell you something about their city/province/country that they are proud of. Pride and patriotism seem to be universal values. I remember trying to cross the street once in Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world, and a high school kid came up to me and said, “This is how we cross the street in PALAU!” Even crossing the street became an act to tell me about his pride in his country. People involved in making foreign policy should be very aware of this. 13) America and Canada share a common culture. This may irk Canadians, but we really do share a common North American culture. If you meet someone overseas, it is almost impossible to tell if they are American or Canadian unless they have a particularly strong accent, or they pronounce the letter “z.” It is easier to tell where in England someone is from than it is to tell if someone is from Denver or Toronto. We would probably be better off referring to a “North American” culture than an “American” culture. What differences do exist (Quebec being the exception) are more like differences between states and regions of a similar country. 14) Most people have a deep desire to travel around the world. Not shocking, but every day I meet people who are fascinated by what I do and how I live. The desire to travel is there, but fears and excuses usually prevent people from doing it. I understand that few people can drop what they are doing and travel around the world for three years, but traveling overseas for even a few months is within the realm of possible for many people at some point in their lives. Even on an island in the middle of the Pacific, people who would probably never leave their home island talked to me of one day wishing they could see New York or London for themselves. I think the desire to explore and see new things is fundamental to the human experience. 15) You can find the internet almost everywhere. I have been surprised at where I’ve found internet access. I’ve seen remote villages in the Solomon Islands with a packet radio link to another island for their internet access. I’ve been at an internet cafe in the Marshall Islands that accessed the web via a geosynchronous satellite. I’ve seen lodges in the rainforest of Borneo hooked up to the web. I once counted 27 open wifi signals in Taipei on a rooftop. We truly live in a wired world. 16) In developing countries, government is usually the problem. I have been shocked at the level of corruption that exists in most developing countries. Even if it is technically a democracy, most nations are run by and for the benefit of the elites that control the institutions of power. Political killings, bribery, extortion and kickbacks are the norm in many places. There is little difference between the Mafia and the governments in some countries I’ve visited. The corruption in the Philippines was especially surprising. It isn’t just the people at the top who are corrupt. I’ve seen cops shake people down on the street for money, cigarettes or booze. 17) English is becoming universal. I estimated that there were at least 35 native languages I would have had to have learned if I wanted to speak with locals in their own tongue. That does not include all the languages found in Papua New Guinea or Vanuatu or regional dialects. It is not possible for humans to learn that many languages. English has become the de facto second language for the world. We are almost to a point where there are only two languages you need to know: whatever your parents speak… and English. English has become so popular it has achieved an escape velocity outside of the control of the US and UK. Countries like Nigeria and India use it as a unifying language in their polyglot nations. Other countries in the Pacific do all their schooling in English because the market just isn’t there to translate textbooks into Samoan or Tongan. 18) Modernization is not Westernization. Just because people use electricity and have running water doesn’t mean they are abandoning their culture to embrace western values. Technology and culture are totally different. Japan and South Korea are thoroughly modern countries, but are also thoroughly Asian. Modernization will certainly change a culture (see #11 above), but that doesn’t mean they are trying to mimic the West. 19) We view other nations by a different set of criteria than we view ourselves. On the left, people who struggle the hardest for social change, decry changes in other countries that they view as a result of globalization. On the right, people who want to bring democracy to other countries would be up in arms at the suggestion that another country try to institute change in the US. In both cases, other nations are viewed by a different set of rules than we view ourselves. I don’t think most people around the world want the help or pity of the West. At best, they would like us to do no harm. 20) Everyone should travel. At some point in your life, whether it is after college or when you retire, everyone should take some extended trip outside of their own country. The only way to really have a sense of how the world works is to see it yourself.

More:
20 Things I’ve Learned From Traveling Around the World for Three Years
Iluvnutrition

Seth Shostak: Where Are the Aliens? Fermi Paradox Redux

Sunday, August 8th, 2010

Some say the story is apocryphal, but even uncorroborated tales are often instructive. It seems that Enrico Fermi and some physicist pals were sitting around a lunch table in 1950, when Fermi suddenly blurted out “so where is everybody?” That small statement hardly sounds remarkable — it’s the kind of thing I’ve said at fundraisers for fresh-water otters. But Fermi was no schlub — he had won the Nobel Prize a dozen years earlier, and you can bet dollars to Doritos, he meant something deep. His meaning seems to have been the following: A simple calculation (surely one that Fermi could manage between two bites of a sandwich) shows that colonizing every star system in our galaxy would only take a few tens of millions of years. Since the Milky Way is more than ten billion years old, what Fermi realized was that, if extraterrestrial life is commonplace, there’s been more than enough time for an ambitious society to spread out and build their own United Federation of Planets. But we don’t see any evidence for a galactic empire, other than on Star Trek re-runs. Does that mean that Homo sapiens is the smartest species within 100 thousand light-years? That would be remarkable and, judging by my daily interaction with said species, scary. I have always thought it much more likely that the cosmos is replete with thinking beings. After all, my day job is to look for them. Reconciling an optimistic view of extraterrestrial intelligence with the failure to see any signs of galaxy-wide colonization has become known as the Fermi Paradox, a conundrum that has tempted the imagination of many people. The suggested explanations can — and have — filled books. Just to give you a mini-sample: Some folks have opined that no aliens have colonized the galaxy simply because they inevitably blow themselves up in massive, hi-tech wars before completing the project. Others say that it’s too expensive — you can better stay home, and improve lifestyles in your natal solar system. A personal favorite of mine is the idea that the galaxy might be urbanized, and we happen to live in a largely empty, rural district. The onset of the digital age has spawned other suggestions: Maybe truly advanced societies don’t build big stuff — honking interstellar rockets for boldly going to someone else’s galactic quadrant. Rather, these sophisticated sentients start miniaturizing their technology, eventually uploading their minds into some sort of microelectronic computer, at which point colonizing star systems will seem as tempting as oxcart travel. A more draconian explanation for why we don’t see the trappings of empire is the suggestion that there really is no galaxy and no us. Everything we experience is just a software simulation run by someone as an experiment (or as an amusement). Our daily lives are no more than computer code. And the rules of this giant matrix-like existence forbid contact — just because . Fermi’s remark continues to pique our imagination, and explanations for his provocative question keep popping up like whack-a-moles. Last month, two researchers in the Ukraine, Igor Bezsudnov and Andrey Snarskii, reported on a computer simulation in which galactic civilizations randomly arise, spread out to a greater or lesser extent, and then — eventually — fail and fall. As a time-lapse movie, this would look something like raindrops hitting a pond. Splashes would occur here and there, generating brief waves of local colonization. But eventually each splash would dissipate and die. Well, there’s nothing new in this — the model is just saying that every culture has a finite lifetime. But the Ukrainian scientists added a twist: if two civilizations chanced to overlap in time and space, the resulting contact would give the merged society a longer lifespan. In other words, the researchers assumed that meeting the neighbors was ultimately good for you. When the simulation was run, it turned out that in some cases (depending on the birth and death rates of societies, not to mention the degree to which they could be mutually beneficial) a galaxy-wide society would emerge. A galactic federation. The authors of the study claim that their work gives insight into Fermi’s Paradox by suggesting that either the Milky Way doesn’t produce sophisticated societies very often (in which case, we’re largely alone), or that it’s still too soon to expect a pangalactic empire. While interesting, the Ukrainian work certainly hasn’t satisfied those who are dismayed by the lack of Klingon colonists as far as the eye can see. In the end, of course, the only way we’ll resolve Fermi’s notorious, sixty-year-old puzzle is to find the aliens, if they’re out there. I suspect Fermi probably felt the same way. He doesn’t seem to have continued the conversation over dinner.

The rest is here:
Seth Shostak: Where Are the Aliens? Fermi Paradox Redux

Chris Guillebeau: Free Trip to Thailand: Travel Hacking Case Study

Monday, July 26th, 2010

When I haven’t been contemplating the puzzle of how to do everything , I’ve been planning my final international trip of the year. Yes, it’s only July, but come September, I hit the road to meet readers in 63 cities for the Unconventional Book Tour . Therefore, next month’s trip is my final chance to get in a couple of new countries before putting my Frequent Flyer cards back in the drawer for a long four months. When outlining the trip a few weeks ago, I decided to try to hit up three countries: Algeria , Belarus , and Turkmenistan . All three of these are fairly difficult to get to or arrange, at least for U.S. citizens. Algeria doesn’t see a lot of tourists dropping in for a visit, and therefore has a 20-day waiting period before approving a visa request. Belarus I’ve tried to visit twice and was shut out both times; this will be attempt number three. Lastly, Turkmenistan requires a letter of invitation to be issued before you can even apply for a visa. You can probably see the problem — the mix of these three countries was a bit too ambitious for one trip. Even with two passports, it just takes too long to send them off to embassies in Washington and “hurry up and wait” for everything to come through. In the meantime I have to confirm the flights and other logistics, so everything hangs by a thread as I wait to see how it’s going to go. Anyway, I could see that something would need to be cut, and since the Turkmenistan thing was going to take the longest, I took it out. Alas, I’ll have to sort that one out later. This trip was arranged with US Air miles booked on Lufthansa–just like the past couple of trips have been. Earlier this year I earned 800,000 US Air miles in one fell swoop , and because I don’t want to keep so many in one account, I’ve been rapidly going through them. I’m down to 300,000 now, but it’s been a fun ride — bringing me to Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Ukraine, Cape Verde , and back and forth across the Atlantic a couple of times. Here’s the interesting part of this particular reservation: A trip to Asia, via Europe, costs 120,000 miles. A trip to only Europe costs 125,000 miles. So my first thought was, “Nice, I save 5,000 miles and get a free return flight to Turkmenistan.” But then I didn’t need to go to Turkmenistan anymore, and in fact, I’d have to take it out. The irony is that I would then have to pay more miles NOT to fly to Turkmenistan. Random, but true. So I started looking around, wondering if there is another South or Central Asian city I could pop into before heading home. And indeed, Thai Airways showed up with good availability on the flights from Frankfurt and Munich. At first I wasn’t sure it would work — could I really get a free Star Alliance flight to Bangkok, all the way from Frankfurt, without ponying up more miles? Well, yes — I could. And that’s not all. I go to Bangkok several times a year, but I’ve never been to Chiang Mai in the north. So at first my plan was to buy my own budget airline ticket from Bangkok to Chiang Mai for $88, which is a good value. But then! It got even better. I realized that I could actually include Chiang Mai on the itinerary, and fly there and back on Thai Airways instead of Air Asia. Now I have lounge access on both sides, an $88+ savings (the Thai flights actually cost quite a bit more), and much better flight times. Another bonus! The final itinerary, booked mostly in Lufthansa and Thai Airways First Class, ended up like this: PDX-DEN-FRA-BKK-CNX-BKK-FRA-EWR-ORD-PDX And here’s a basic USA–> Europe itinerary, which would cost more : PDX-DEN-FRA-DEN-PDX Voila! It wasn’t hard to choose between those. To be fair, it’s not a 100% perfect itinerary — I have to go home via the East Coast instead of back to Seattle, Denver, or Vancouver — but all in all, it’s pretty good. Free trip to Thailand, free flight up to Chiang Mai and back, and I save 5,000 miles by taking a flight that would otherwise cost $5,000 or more. To do this yourself, it’s good to become familiar with the mileage redemption charts of various airlines. This is where I first realized I could head to Thailand — or almost anywhere else in Asia — for less than just going to Europe. For example, the current US Airways one (what I used in this case) is over here . Next year I’m planning a travel hacking membership site as part of my ongoing goal to democratize travel, but until then, I’m happy to share what I know here on the blog and through the Frequent Flyer Master updates. I hope it helps in your own pursuit of adventure. *** Speaking of, if you’re out on the road yourself this summer, Happy Travels! More on Thailand

More:
Chris Guillebeau: Free Trip to Thailand: Travel Hacking Case Study

Russia’s Putin sings with expelled agents

Sunday, July 25th, 2010

By 2010-07-25T13:33:16Z FOROS, Ukraine (AP) — Vladimir Putin says he met with the Russian spies who were expelled from the United States, joining them in singing an unofficial KGB anthem and promising them good jobs and a bright future back in their homeland….

Read more:
Russia’s Putin sings with expelled agents

Marcia G. Yerman: Pavel Vinnitsky’s Vision: To Revitalize Jewish Music

Saturday, July 24th, 2010

Pavel Vinnitsky is a man on a mission. His goal is to revive the Klemzer tradition, seek out composers to write original music based on Jewish themes, and combine the presentation of this music with a standard classical repertoire. As the artistic director of the Jewish Arts Ensemble of New York , he is well on his way. The journey began in the Ukraine, just hours from the capital of Kiev, where Vinnitsky was born and lived until he was sixteen. Here he began his classical music training — while simultaneously being exposed to his town’s Klezmer musicians. Before the Soviet Union fell, and until the time that the sizeable Jewish community emigrated in the 1990s, Jewish culture and music were suppressed. Klezmer was played underground and at weddings only. Equally immersed in both the Klezmer and classical idioms, Vinnitsky felt as if he were “living two different musical lives.” When Vinnitsky’s family put down roots in Israel, they moved to the north of the country near Haifa. After serving in the Israeli Artillery Forces, Vinnitsky attended the music academy at the University of Tel Aviv, where he received a Bachelor’s Degree in clarinet performance. He was accepted into a Klezmer trio, adding the sounds of his clarinet to those of a violin and an accordion. The group toured Europe, made recordings, and performed in festivals. For a period of five years he was doing full time gigs, giving as many as one hundred concerts in a year. “That,” he told me, “is where I got my Klezmer training.” The trio both improvised and worked out fixed arrangements. By 2003, Klezmer melodies were constantly reverberating in his head. He was only doing a small number of classical recitals. Yet when he met his future wife, Anna, a pianist who focused on scores from the late Renaissance to Chopin, he realized that he wanted to reconnect with his classical past. Together, they formed a chamber duo and came to America. Vinnitsky attended the Yale School of Music, where he studied with David Shifrin . He moved into a full-time, freelance career as a guest performer for New York City chamber music ensembles, the American Symphony, the American Ballet Theatre Orchestra, and the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra. The concept of the Jewish Arts Ensemble of New York evolved as an answer to Vinnitsky’s search for a way to combine the two sides of his musical personality. He began developing a musical catalogue based on Jewish thematic sounds and folklore. When he realized that there was a dearth of material, it became his passion to fill in that gap. Vinnitsky began to seek out composers. Music composed solely by Jews is not the criterion. Rather, it is the utilization of source material and themes that have a specific harmonic language. Vinnitsky is looking to build a sound that emanates from Jewish liturgical chants and regional folk music. He explained to me, “Jews didn’t have a land, so we were influenced by the neighboring people we were listening to.” Vinnitsky has the model established by the Hungarian composers Zoltán Kodály and Béla Bartók –who merged the strains of national folk melodies into their contemporary scores. Klezmer has its roots in the songs, dances, and instrumental compositions that were played at the rituals of Eastern European Jews. “Klezmer is a valuable treasure not just to Jews, but to the whole world,” Vinnitsky emphasized. He added, “The music I’m interested in is not just Klezmer. It can be Sephardic, cantorial music, even theatrical–like Ha-Dybbuk .” The latter has been performed in various iterations, including a 1937 Yiddish film . As part of the “Arts at the Park” series in Manhattan, Vinnitsky’s Jewish Arts Ensemble offered a program that encompassed Mozart, Rossini, and Klezmer. Featured was an original composition for the violin, cello, and piano, entitled T’filah . Composed by Peter Alexander, it was commissioned by congregation Da’at Elohim . A brief history lesson by Vinnitsky paints a picture of 20th century St. Petersberg as a center where Jewish folkloric music was collected and documented. It was acknowledged that the most authentic part of the Jewish musical tradition was the music of the synagogue, which dates back to the Second Temple in Jerusalem. From these two foundations, composers wanted to develop new music. However, national politics, the rise of Communism, anti-Semitism, and later Stalinism, got in the way. As a result, the goals of the New Jewish School of music were thwarted. Vinnitsky is moving forward, supported by his group of instrumentalists which includes Ragga Petursdottir on violin, Junah Chung on viola, and Anna Vinnitsky on piano. His endeavor is to build on “beautiful source music” through instituting what he defined as a “living lab” for composers. He hopes to “reestablish the Jewish National Movement in music” to create a “distinct national Jewish sound.” When I saw Vinnitsky performing the Klezmer pieces, he threw his body into the music, bending at the knees and lifting up on his toes. I thought of Benny Goodman, who also actively straddled the world of popular and classical music. In 1939, Goodman’s band had the number one song in America, And the Angels Sing . It was a rerecording of trumpet player Ziggy Elman’s 1938 instrumental number, Freilach in Swing . Elman had first gained recognition as a trombonist with Jewish bands in Atlantic City and Philadelphia. Goodman and Elman would appreciate Vinnitsky’s efforts. When the music video hits 1:51 in, you will know what I mean. This article originally appeared on mgyerman.com .

Original post:
Marcia G. Yerman: Pavel Vinnitsky’s Vision: To Revitalize Jewish Music

Andranik Migranyan: Russian-American Relations in Search of a Proper Balance

Saturday, July 17th, 2010

This is the full version of the article, published in the National Interest on-line on 07/15/2010 The recent summit in Washington, DC and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tour of the Eastern European countries and the post-Soviet space that followed the Summit give us an opportunity to evaluate the current state and the immediate prospects for the evolution of Russian-American relations. Upon its arrival in the office the new Obama administration declared its course aimed at “resetting” the relations between the United States and Russia. According to its architects, the main component of this “resetting” was improving the relations with Russia, which was not to be achieved at the expense of worsening Washington’s relations with its Eastern European partners and the countries of the post-Soviet space having pro-West orientation and aiming to join NATO or the European Union. After the successful Moscow summit, going beyond just verbal declarations, the US administration sent Vice President Biden to the countries of Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet space with a mission to clarify Washington’s new policy there, right on the spot, and to convince the allies that the improving relations with Russia did not mean that the countries of Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet space would be handed over to Russia on a silver platter, or that giving up the idea of placing anti-missile defense elements in the Czech Republic and Poland and abandoning further expansion of NATO by inviting Ukraine and Georgia into the club, did not mean that the United States would be giving Russia a carte blanche in the relations with those states. John Biden’s visit was somewhat scandalous: it was taking place when the policy of “resetting” had just been declared and was yet devoid of any real substance. Many people, both in Moscow and in Washington, were skeptical about the prospects of that policy. It was yet to be tested by the upcoming elections in Ukraine, the US-sponsored resolution of the UN Security Council on Iran, the level of US-Russian cooperation on Afghanistan and a number of other challenges related to international politics on which the respective stands of the United States and Russia often significantly diverged. It may have been for that specific reason that Vice President Biden was less reserved, less diplomatic, at times tactless and even offensive in his statements with regard to Russia and Russian policy vis-à-vis the post-Soviet space. The second Obama-Medvedev summit held in Washington, DC took place in a completely different environment when the policy of “resetting” had already been tested by signing the strategic arms limitation treaty, when the Ukrainian elections, unlike the previous presidential election, had not become a catalyst in aggravating the conflict between Moscow and Washington but, on the contrary, manifested the readiness of the two countries to interact constructively in order not to allow the Ukrainian political forces to entice Moscow and Washington against one another in their own interests. That summit took place after Russia had supported the Security Council resolution tightening the sanctions against Iran, and after the parties had displayed their readiness to work in a constructive manner on a wide range of world policy issues taking into account each other’s interests and concerns. However, not everyone is thrilled with the current state of Russian-American relations. The Obama administration is subjected to serious criticism on the part of Republicans and neo-conservatives for allegedly giving up too much in favor of Russia by way of giving up the idea of deploying elements of the anti-missile defense in the Czech Republic and Poland, turning a blind eye on the violations of human rights in Russia, giving Russia a free hand in the post-Soviet space and, in fact, agreeing with Russia’s right to veto on the issue of the NATO expansion and on a number of other matters. It was for the purpose of addressing such criticism and once again clarifying the policy with regard to Russia that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made her visit to the countries of Eastern Europe and post-Soviet space after the Washington summit. Speaking in Poland, Kiev, Tbilisi, Yerevan and Baku, she tried to respond to all the critical comments made by the opponents of the Obama administration in Washington. In her statements she pointed out that the Obama administration was concerned at the human rights issues in Russia and China, that it was not indifferent to the destiny of the Eastern European countries, that it was ready to deploy an anti-missile defense base in Poland, that NATO doors were open to new members, meaning Ukraine, Georgia and other states of the post-Soviet space, that Russia had no right to veto NATO’s expansion and the decisions of independent states to join military alliances, that the United States continued to support the idea of diversification of oil and gas deliveries to the West and therefore was in favor of the Nabucco project, that it was still actively engaged in the settlement of conflict situations in the post-Soviet space, including a serious and constructive involvement in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem as part of the Minsk group, and the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations. However, it seems to me that Hillary Clintyon’s visit after the Washington summit is radically different from Biden’s visit after the first Moscow summit, both in terms of its tonality and target audience. As noted above, the scandalous nature and tactlessness of Biden’s many remarks resulted, to a great extent, from the lack of real content in the “resetting” policy, while Biden’s remarks were addressed primarily to the Russian political leaders and the Russia public at large. Unlike those of the Vice President, Hillary Clinton’s remarks were quite correct in terms of tonality and were addressed primarily to the American people and the US political circles – thus, they were intended for domestic consumption. This is the reason why Moscow’s response to all Hillary Clinton’s critical statements, unlike its reaction to Biden’s remarks, was quite calm; this time Moscow understood that in fact the current US administration has made its strategic choice. Although no member of the Obama administration will mention it publicly, the choice was made in the spirit of the recommendations contained in the report prepared under the leadership of the former Senators Chuck Hagel and Gary Hart by a group of experts at the Nixon Center. The report says that every country has “vital interests” and “interests”, and in pursuing its “vital interests”, in the relations with other countries one sometimes has to either sacrifice or pay less attention to secondary interests at a certain stage because quite often one set of interests contradicts the other. During her tour Hillary Clinton clarified the “interests” of the United States in that region. However, at the same time the Obama administration also defined its “vital interests” and its readiness to take Russia’s interests into account in case of constructive cooperation between Moscow and Washington with a view of achieving its “vital interests” by the United States. This is the significant feature of the recent summit and the subsequent visit by the Secretary of State. I believe that this is understood in Moscow, in Eastern Europe and in the post-Soviet space, and this is the basis of the Obama administration’s new pragmatic policy which, in my view, proceeds from two very important premises. First, today, the United States cannot afford to pursue a policy of unilateral domination in the world because even such a rich country as the US does not have sufficient resources and therefore needs to look for partners and allies and take their interests into account. Second, without a dire necessity the United States should not increase the number of its enemies and ill-wishers. Although, we know that American foreign policy is not always conducted by pragmatism and political realism and not all members of Obama’s team are in favor of the policy of “reset” and clearly understand the new place of the US in the modern world, I believe that current Russian-American relations have a significant potential of positive development in the foreseeable future. That democracy is not caused by personal tastes or preferences of the current US President and the new administration, but follows from the objective needs of the United States. More on Barack Obama

Read more from the original source:
Andranik Migranyan: Russian-American Relations in Search of a Proper Balance

Phil Ramone and Danielle Evin: Dog Ears Music: Volume 132

Friday, July 16th, 2010

A Fine Frenzy A Fine Frenzy is the brainchild of Seattle native/L.A import singer/songwriter Alison Sudol. Shortly after graduating high school, Alison formed her first professional band. By 2007, A Fine Frenzy signed with Virgin Records and has a prolific collection of recordings to date. Tours/shared stages include The Stooges, Rufus Wainwright , and Brandi Carlile. Appearances include Letterman, The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson, and a guest spot on CSI: New York. Credits include House, How I Met Your Mother, and Defying Gravity. Get “Stood Up,” from A Fine Frenzy’s 2009 release Bomb in a Birdcage (Bonus Track Version). Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Pop Artist : A Fine Frenzy Song : Stood Up Album : Bomb in a Birdcage (Bonus Track Version) Isaac Stern with János Rolla and Franz Liszt Chamber Orchestra Master violinist Isaac Stern was born in the Ukraine in 1920 and raised from infancy in San Francisco. Fluent in piano and violin before grade school, Isaac debuted with the San Francisco Symphony at age 16. A fierce supporter of the arts, Stern made his mark at Carnegie Hall beginning in 1943, both as a virtuoso (with over 200 performances) and as an administrator (he helped save the hall in 1960 and again in 1986). Collaborations include San Francisco Symphony, Jean-Pierre Rampal, Yo-Yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman, Pinchas Zukerman , Emanuel Ax, Fritz Kreisler, Jascha Heifetz, Arthur Rubinstein, Pablo Casals, André Previn , Aaron Copland , Igor Stravinsky , Leonard Bernstein, and Benny Goodman. Accolades for this French Legion of Honor commander (1990) include the first Albert Schweitzer Award (1974), Kennedy Center Honors (1984), a Lifetime Achievement Grammy (1987), an Emmy for Outstanding Individual Classical Music Performance (1987), and Israel’s Wolf Prize (1987). Download “Grave,” from the 1998 release Caprice Viennois: Music of Kreisler. Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Classical Artist : Isaac Stern with János Rolla and Franz Liszt Chamber Orchestra Song : Grave Album : Caprice Viennois: Music of Kreisler The Beau Brummels Pop-rock quintette The Beau Brummels was founded in Flower Power-era San Francisco by Sal Valentino, Ron Meagher, John Peterson, Ron Elliott, and Declan Mulligan. In 1965, they inked their freshman deal with Autumn Records and cut two albums with visionary musicman Sly Stone at the helm. From ’66 until their disbandment in the ’70s, they made Warner Brothers their home. Credits/appearances include music TV shows Shindig and Hullaballoo, The Flintstones cartoon, and the film Village of Giants starring Ron Howard and Beau Bridges. Dig the early California Sound with “Just a Little,” from Introducing The Beau Brummels. Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Rock Artist : The Beau Brummels Song : Just a Little Album : Introducing The Beau Brummels Tom Tykwer Composer, director, screenwriter, and producer Tom Tykwer was born in the former West Germany in 1965. Tykwer’s love of music and film began in childhood. He later fused his talents and is now in demand the world over. Directorial credits include Run Lola Run, Heaven, The Princess and the Warrior, and Perfume. Soundtrack credits include the title track for The Matrix: Revolutions, True, and The International . Tykwer’s thumbprint of creativity includes the Pale 3 collective, with Johnny Klimek & Reinhold Heil. Discover “Tailing the Consultant,” from 2009′s The International (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack). Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Soundtrack Artist : Tom Tykwer Song : Tailing the Consultant Album : The International (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) Dorothy Fields Songwriter/lyricist Dorothy Fields was born in 1905 of Vaudeville royalty (her father was actor Lew Fields). In a household rumbling with music and entertainment, Dorothy caught the bug early and started writing songs. After meeting songwriter Jimmy McHugh in 1928, her career took off. Fields went on to pen classics “I Can’t Give You Anything But Love, Baby,” “On the Sunny Side of the Street,” “Don’t Blame Me,” and the Oscar-winning “The Way You Look Tonight,” written with Jerome Kern. Broadway credits include Sweet Charity, Redhead, and A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Collaborations include brother Herb Fields, Max Steiner , Fritz Kreisler, Oscar Levant, Mike Todd, Rodgers and Hammerstein, Harold Arlen, Cole Porter, and Quincy Jones. The songstress passed away in 1974. Remember her with the 1951 track “He Had Refinement,” from An Evening With Dorothy Fields. Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Soundtrack Artist : Dorothy Fields Song : He Had Refinement Album : An Evening With Dorothy Fields Little Freddie King Bluesman Little Freddie King was born Fread E. Martin in McComb, Mississippi, just before World War II, into a musical family, the cousin of Lightnin’ Hopkins . As a boy, Little Freddie learned the guitar from his blues-guitarist dad, and in his teens, he relocated to New Orleans to make his bones. After issuing a limited release in the mid-’60s, King cut his full-fledged debut album in 1971 for New Orleans-based Ahura Mazda Records. He went on to record for the Orleans, Fat Possum, and MadeWright labels. Shared stages include Bo Diddley, John Lee Hooker, and Harmonica Williams. Discover the fresh-as-ever “Messin’ Around tha House (Hip Hop Beat),” from his 2008 Messin’ Around tha House. Buy : Amazon.com Genre : Blues/Hip Hop Artist : Little Freddie King Song : Messin’ Around tha House (Hip Hop Beat) Album : Messin’ Around tha House

See original here:
Phil Ramone and Danielle Evin: Dog Ears Music: Volume 132

Clinton Criticizes Russia For Occupying Georgia

Monday, July 5th, 2010

TBILISI, Georgia — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton rebuked Russia on Monday for failing to live up to the cease-fire agreement it signed nearly two years ago to end the fighting in this small former Soviet state. She asserted that Russia is occupying parts of Georgia and building permanent military bases in contravention of the truce. “We’re calling on the Russians to enforce the agreement they signed,” she told a news conference with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili at her side. She said that includes pulling its troops back to the positions they held before the invasion. Several times she pointedly referred to Russian troops as occupiers of the breakaway Georgian territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. She said the U.S. was “appalled and totally rejected” Russia’s rationale for the invasion, which temporarily put U.S.-Russian relations in a deep freeze and prompted NATO to suspend cooperation with Moscow. “The United States is steadfast in its commitment to Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” she said. “The United States does not recognize spheres of influence,” she added, referring to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s claim that his country has “privileged interests” and special influence in Georgia and other former Soviet states. Georgia gained its independence in 1991 with the collapse of Soviet communism. Asked about Clinton’s comments, Russia’s powerful Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warned Georgia against trying to rally U.S. support. “They mustn’t seek solutions outside,” Putin said, according to Russian news agencies. “It’s necessary to conduct a dialogue without citing third parties.” Russia wants to retain clout in the region as a counterweight to the eastward march of NATO, which in recent years has expanded its frontiers to include the former Soviet states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Ukraine also had been pursuing membership but reversed course this year with the election of a more Moscow-friendly government. Clinton said she and Obama raised the Georgia issues with Medvedev when he was in Washington last month. The invasion remains a major point of contention between Washington and Moscow. It complicates U.S. relations with Georgia, which has been skeptical of the Obama administration’s policy of adopting friendly relations with Moscow in an attempt to overcome the deep divides that developed during the administration of President George W. Bush. Saakashvili told reporters, however, that upon further reflection he thinks Obama’s Russia policy is the correct one. “It’s exactly the right way,” he said. He and Clinton took a stroll through a portion of the oldest section of Tbilisi, stopping at a cafe to toast her visit with a glass of Georgian wine — a Teliani Valley satrapezo, according to Clinton’s aides. Saakashvili and Clinton seemed at ease with each other. He told her that on her next visit she should make a point of sampling the capital’s night life. “I’m too old for your night life,” she said with a hearty laugh, and he replied, “That’s the first statement that I disagree with you on.” Earlier, Clinton met with several hundred Georgian women leaders from a range of fields, including law and labor unions. During a question-and-answer session, one woman asked if the Obama administration has a “real democracy agenda” for Georgia. She said her country suffers from a range of human rights abuses and that these were largely ignored by the Bush administration. “The United States always has a democracy agenda,” Clinton responded. “Continuing to try to perfect democracy is one of the key challenges for any country – both its government and its citizens.” She applauded recent progress in Georgia, but added that the administration “raises as a friend” its concerns about limits on freedom of expression. “We take seriously threats to democracy, wherever they occur,” Clinton said. “So we’re going to continue to support democracy here in Georgia.” Another woman asked about Russia’s continued occupation of parts of Georgia. The key for Georgia in dealing with the Russia problem, Clinton said, is to concentrate on improving its democracy and solving its internal problems and its economic prospects. “That is the rebuke that no one can dispute,” she said. Her unspoken point seemed to be that Georgia should not contemplate any military solution in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. She advised that Georgia not take any actions that would offer Russia an excuse to perpetuate its occupation. “I think it is a mistake to focus on the past,” she said, alluding to the remaining anger over the August 2008 invasion. Clinton said the U.S. still supports Georgia’s bid for membership in the NATO military alliance. Georgia was the final stop on a Clinton tour that began Thursday in Ukraine and also took her to Poland, Azerbaijan and Armenia. She was flying back to Washington to join Obama for a meeting Tuesday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. More on Vladimir Putin

View post:
Clinton Criticizes Russia For Occupying Georgia

Joe Amon: 18th International AIDS Conference: Action not Rhetoric on HIV and Human Rights

Friday, July 2nd, 2010

The following is based upon a press release by Human Rights Watch. The upcoming 18th annual International AIDS Conference should focus on reaching the most vulnerable populations and removing barriers to their treatment. With its theme of “Rights Here Right Now,” the conference, which opens in Vienna on July 18, 2010, will bring together more than 25,000 scientists, government leaders, and AIDS activists from around the world to examine the successes and shortcomings of the global AIDS response. However, advances in science and medicine will have limited impact without changing the harmful laws and policies that drive people who are at risk away from HIV testing and prevention, and that make it hard for those who need treatment to get it. Laws in more than 160 countries criminalize specific groups or behaviors. These include laws targeting sex workers, drug users, men who have sex with men, and HIV exposure or transmission. These laws, as do laws protecting “morality” or “decency,” impede HIV outreach and treatment, and also create a risk of selective or arbitrary prosecution. In particular, governments and international donors need to address the transmission of HIV through drug injection. Outside of Sub-Saharan Africa, as many as one-third of all new HIV infections occur among people who inject drugs. Within Sub-Saharan Africa, injection drug use is increasing. In some countries, in particular Central and Eastern Europe and East Asia, statistics show that injection drug use is the primary driver of HIV epidemics. International health and drug-control agencies, including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, UNAIDS, and the World Health Organization, all endorse comprehensive harm reduction – a proven, evidence-based approach – both inside and outside prisons as critical to addressing HIV among people who use drugs. Harm reduction includes opioid substitution therapy with methadone or buprenorphine and needle and syringe exchange. In some countries, comprehensive harm reduction measures have virtually eliminated new HIV transmission due to drug use. Yet these lifesaving measures remain largely unavailable to the vast majority of people who need them. In many countries, drug-control efforts directly interfere with access to HIV services, and government health ministries and those that work on drug control often pursue contradictory approaches that undermine HIV prevention. Criminal laws in some countries, such as those concerning possession of drug paraphernalia, may keep many people from carrying sterile syringes or injecting equipment, and cause them to avoid drug treatment or harm reduction services for fear of arrest. Even without such laws, some drug users avoid harm reduction measures for fear of targeted prosecution for other offenses. Research published in 2010 found the global investment in harm reduction in low and middle-income countries amounts to about 3 cents per injector per day, an estimated $3 billion less than needed in 2010. Governments around the world have pledged universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, and care by 2010. But 2010 is right now. Unless we reach everyone who needs HIV services, the progress that has been made fighting AIDS will be squandered. Background Criminalization of HIV transmission / exposure and homosexual conduct Since 2005, 14 African countries have passed HIV-specific laws that potentially criminalize all sexual behavior among HIV-positive individuals, including those who use condoms, regardless of disclosure and actual risk of transmission. In Africa and elsewhere, laws criminalizing HIV exposure or transmission discourage HIV testing, potentially subjecting those who know their status to criminal penalties, while exempting those who are unaware they are HIV-positive. According to UNAIDS, these laws may hit women hardest, as they are routinely tested during antenatal care and therefore more likely than men to know their HIV status. Laws criminalizing homosexual conduct provide a basis for state-sponsored violence and harassment, and keep people from seeking HIV-related information or services out of fear of discrimination and abuse. • In Zambia , efforts to include men who have sex with men in HIV testing and treatment programs and efforts to introduce condoms and other harm reduction measures in prison are seriously hindered by laws criminalizing consensual homosexual conduct among adults. • In Uganda , a proposed law introduced in May would criminalize “attempted transmission” and require mandatory testing of pregnant women and forced disclosure of HIV status. These provisions threaten people living with HIV by exposing them to stigma, discrimination, and physical violence. • In Senegal , calls to decriminalize same-sex relations intensified in January 2009 when nine HIV/AIDS advocates were sentenced to five years in prison on charges of “indecent and unnatural acts” and “forming associations of criminals.” The ruling had a chilling effect on organizations addressing HIV/AIDS in Senegal, especially those working with men who have sex with men and other marginalized populations. • In Kenya , where homosexual conduct is punishable by up to 14 years in prison, violent attacks in 2010 against suspected homosexuals – including at a government health center providing HIV/AIDS services to men who have sex with men – have undermined HIV outreach and services to this vulnerable population. Compulsory detention of drug users for “treatment” In many Asian countries, hundreds of thousands of people identified as drug users are detained in locked facilities for months, or even years, without trial or due process, in the name of drug “treatment” or “rehabilitation.” The detention of people who use drugs usually takes place without a clinical assessment of whether the person is, in fact, drug-dependent. Inside the centers, they are often denied evidence-based drug treatment and other basic health services and instead are forced to perform arduous physical exercises, military drills, or forced labor. Many face torture and extreme physical cruelty. • In Cambodia , people who use drugs are routinely rounded up by police and arbitrarily detained in government-run drug detention centers. Detainees – among them hundreds of children, many housed alongside adults – face torture and extreme physical cruelty, including electric shocks, sexual violence, and beatings with electrical wire. Harsh military drills and forced labor are the mainstays of their “treatment.” • In China , approximately half a million people are interned at any given time in compulsory drug detention centers, where they can be detained without trial or due process on suspicion of drug use for up to six years. Detainees are routinely beaten, denied access to effective treatment for drug dependency, and subjected to unpaid forced labor. • In Vietnam , between 32,000 and 35,000 people who use drugs are locked in drug detention centers for terms as long as four years, without trial or due process. Detainees in these centers are engaged in what the government calls “therapeutic labor” rather than provided evidence-based treatment for drug dependence. They are forced to work long hours for below-market wages, beaten if they fail to meet work quotas, and subject to solitary confinement for violating center rules. • Since 2003, thousands of people in Thailand have been coerced into “drug treatment” centers run by security forces. Before “treatment” even begins, people are held for “assessment” for extended periods in prison. In the centers, military drills on the orders of security personnel are a mainstay of “treatment.” Thailand’s coerced treatment and rehabilitation policy has had long-term consequences for the health and human rights of drug users, as many continue to avoid drug treatment or any government-sponsored health services out of fear of arrest or police action or abuse. Lack of access to harm reduction services in prison: Less than 40 countries provide medication-assisted therapy (for example, with methadone or buprenorphine) to prisoners, but they often restrict it to those who have been receiving such treatment prior to incarceration. Only 10 countries provide needle and syringe exchange in prison, despite numerous recommendations from the UN and clear evidence that such programs can work safely and effectively in prisons. • In the United States , at least 20 percent of people with HIV have a history of incarceration. One in five incarcerated people is there for drug-related crimes and many others are incarcerated for crimes committed to support a drug habit. Yet most prisoners have no access to comprehensive harm reduction services. Methadone is unavailable to most prisoners, and in many prisons, harsh punishment of drug users denies treatment to those who may need it most. Condoms are considered prohibited contraband in most prisons and jails in the United States. • In Ukraine , which has the most severe HIV epidemic in Europe, an estimated 15 percent of prisoners are HIV-positive. Since 2006, Ukraine has taken important steps to increase access to methadone and buprenorphine in the community, but neither is available in prison. • In Zambia , poor conditions of confinement and minimal medical care for prisoners expose them to HIV and tuberculosis, including difficult-to-treat and potentially drug resistant strains, threatening the lives and health of inmates and the general public. • In Vietnam , nearly 30 percent of the prison population is living with HIV. Lack of access to palliative care for people living with HIV The global AIDS community has focused on bringing anti-retroviral treatment to people living with HIV. But a widespread and incorrect perception that palliative care is no longer needed has led to the poor integration of such services into treatment and care programs. • Various studies show that many people living with HIV require palliative care because the burden of pain, other symptoms, and psychosocial problems remains high even among those on anti-retroviral treatment, and that such care, when offered simultaneously with treatment, enhances treatment outcomes by improving adherence and retention in care. • The World Health Organization estimates that 1 million end-stage AIDS patients face moderate to severe pain but have no access to pain treatment. Much of this suffering could be alleviated by morphine, an effective, safe, and inexpensive medication. Exclusion of persons with disabilities from HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment Marginalization and discrimination faced by people with disabilities increases their vulnerability to HIV. • According to the World Health Organization, at least 10 percent of the world’s population (as many as 660 million people) lives with a disability, with an estimated 80 percent of them in developing countries. • A 2004 study by the World Bank and Yale University found that people with disabilities have an HIV infection rate up to three times higher than that of people without disabilities because of their risk of physical abuse, isolation, poverty, and lack of access to services and information. • The lack of accessibility to HIV/AIDS treatment facilities and the lack of appropriate prevention education are key obstacles for persons with disabilities. This includes lack of physical accessibility, such as ramps and handrails, as well as communication barriers, such as the limited availability of sign language interpreters and information in Braille, large print, and easy-to-understand formats. • According to the UN Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization, only 1 to 2 percent of children with disabilities in developing countries receive basic education, which means they are denied potentially lifesaving information on sexual health. More on Civil Rights

Excerpt from:
Joe Amon: 18th International AIDS Conference: Action not Rhetoric on HIV and Human Rights