21st Century Vision

Land Rover Replies

Matthew Taylor, the Managing Director of Land Rover has issued a reply to The Times article concerning arms and Uzbekistan. He says, Land Rover has never, either directly or through an intermediary, supplied armoured Defenders to the Uzbek military (reports, May 26 and 27).

The Defender featured in your photograph is the same as that used by farmers and four-wheel-drive enthusiasts. It was made, as you reported, under licence by Otokar of Turkey and supplied to the Turkish Army, which is involved in a co-operative training exercise with the Uzbek Army. We are not aware of any armoured vehicles being provided.

The UK Government does not classify the Defender as a weapon and there are currently no international trade or arms sanctions against Uzbekistan, so no “loophole” has been exploited.

Land Rover sells vehicles in 140 countries where no trade restrictions are in place. What happens to them after being sold is clearly outside the control of Land Rover.

We are not aware of any “Special Operations Land Rovers” being developed in Jordan and no “hardened military vehicle” is produced in South Africa “with Jordan” or any other country. Supplies to Zimbabwe and local assembly of cars ceased in 2000.

Arms To Uzbekistan

BRITISH military equipment was used by troops who massacred hundreds of protesters in Uzbekistan this month despite government promises that it would block arms exports to tyrannical regimes.

Photographic evidence examined by The Times shows Uzbek soldiers crouching for cover alongside armoured Land Rover Defenders as they pointed guns at unarmed demonstrators in Andijan on May 13 — when up to 500 men, women and children were shot dead.

The disclosure threatens to cause deep embarrassment for the Government ahead of a G8 summit next month when Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, will table Britain’s plans for an international arms trade treaty banning the sale of any weapons which might be used against civilians.

Labour claims that it has pioneered efforts to crack down on arms exports. Legislation passed by Parliament in 2002 is supposed to ensure that exports are prohibited to countries which fail EU standards on human rights, armed conflict and sustainable development. Uzbekistan, which the United Nations has condemned for the “systematic” use of torture, would certainly have fallen foul of these rules.

However we do know that the US and the UK looks on the Uzbekistan regime as an ally and the UK did suspend their ambassador there for speaking out about human rights abuses. Do we have a moral foreign policy or do we merely pick and choose?

Darfur AND Aid

Some of the world's top diplomats are gathering in Ethiopia to discuss how to address the emergency in Darfur, Sudan.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is chairing the one-day conference, which senior Nato, EU and US officials will also attend.

They are expected to agree funding for a major expansion of the African Union (AU) peacekeeping force in Darfur.

The conflict in western Sudan has killed more than 180,000 people, while two million have fled their homes.

On Wednesday the head of UN peacekeeping made a plea to the international community to supply the under-equipped AU force with flak jackets, maps, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.

EU To Reach 0.7% Target

The Guardian reported that the European Union ministers last night surprised and delighted aid agencies around the world when they agreed a dramatic increase in help to countries in Africa and the rest of the developing world that will see the EU's richest states reach the United Nations' historic goal of giving 0.7% of national income in aid by 2015.

The move, which came just six weeks ahead of the G8 industrial nations' summit at Gleneagles, will mean a virtual doubling of the EU's combined aid by 2010, when the rich 15 all pass the 0.51% mark.

The unexpected success in Brussels will intensify pressure on other rich countries, notably the United States, to increase their own efforts to "make poverty history". It will also raise hopes that the pro-development partnership between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will end on a high note, not with the damp squib many critics have feared.

See full story ..

Drumming Up Support for Africa Aid Plan

Tony Blair is to embark on a frantic round of diplomacy in an attempt to persuade the world's richest nations to agree a new plan to help the poorest at the G8 summit in July.

The Prime Minister will meet the leaders of Italy, Germany and the US, thought to be most likely to scupper a historic agreement, proposed by Britain, to tackle Africa's problems by doubling aid to the developing world from $50bn (£27bn) to $100bn a year.

British officials deny that the proposal, first made by the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, is in trouble, saying that the aim of Mr Blair's tour is to "keep up momentum" before July's meeting at Gleneagles. Despite his bad back, he is expected to clock up more than 50,000 miles in the next four weeks.

But there are growing fears that the three countries may regard Britain's blueprint as too ambitious and costly, and be more concerned about economic problems closer to home.

See full story …

UNA-UK Features the Enfield & The Barnet's Branch

  In each issue of New World (The UNA-UK magazine) it seesk to high-light innovative work being undertaken by a UNA member, branch, region or national UNA. This time we profile Enfield & The Barnets UNA. Francis Sealey outlines how the branch is using new technology to enhance its outreach work and to influence MPs.

The Enfield UNA was formed shortly after the 2001 attack on the twin towers in New York. Some of us felt it important to put pressure on our local MPs to ensure that, in this changing security environment, respect for internationalism and the rule of law remained paramount. So, over the last three years, we have developed a number of activities to further these aims including amalgamating with the Barnets UNA just about a year ago!

MPWatch

How to interact with our local MPs and other decision makers was the critical question. Our answer was to launch a website called MPWatch for questioning MPs online, publishing their answers and encouraging debate. This has proved very successful: all four local MPs have participated and the site has now expanded to involve MEPs, as well as Assembly members and local Councillors.

We have now developed this further by publishing a Weblog (or Blog) called "21^st Century Vision" which allows us to post comments daily. It regularly appears in search engines and the hits on the site are growing exponentially.

Website:http://www.mpwatch.net/

21st Century Weblog: http://mpwatch.blogs.com/

Realtime Meetings

Developing the website has meant that we have built up a significant database of contacts that we use to publicise our postings. We have been using this as a resource for attracting audiences to actual meetings where local MPs participate in a Questiontime. Often these vents take the form of a debate with others we invite to share the platform with the MPs.

We try to invite each of the four MPs at least once a year!

Civil Society Forum

We also convene meetings for about 16 to 20 local organisations, with the aim of developing a Civil Society Forum to serve as a link between local action and global issues. This is in keeping with the UN's view that non-governmental organisations can play a vital role in world development. We envision the Forum developing into an extensive community network with UNA playing a leading role.

The Civil Society Forum is also planning to hold a number of hustings in advance of the expected general election this year, and our local UNA is also planning to publish an online hustings to complement this.

Book Group & Other Activities

Much of the work we do is educational. We have carried this forward by starting a local book group where we choose a book to discuss every two months. We publicise the group on the website Meet UP, and we feel that this model could be applied to London.

Meetup Book Group: http://bookcrossing.meetup.com/611

The EU & Aid For The Poor

The Guardian yesterday reported that Peter Mandelson, Europe's trade commissioner, is seeking to persuade Tony Blair to revise Britain's pro-poor country stance on trade liberalisation, a centrepiece of the government's development agenda for 2005, leaked documents from Brussels revealed last night.

A letter from Peter Carl, the European Commission's top trade official, said Mr Mandelson - still a close confidant of the prime minister - was being used to reverse what Brussels condemned as "a major and unwelcome shift" in the UK's approach.

News of the leaked letter prompted a strong response in Whitehall and from development organisations. A Department of Trade and Industry source said: "Our position is based on principle. We regret that the commission has misunderstood our views and we will be taking this up with them."

Gareth Thomas, a Department for International Development minister, said: "[Mr Carl] is wrong in his analysis. We are keen to make EPAs as development friendly as possible."

A spokeswoman for Oxfam said: "This is an example of the European Commission gagging pro-development member states. Tony Blair is trying to do something to help the world's poor and is being hampered by the self-interest of Europe as a trading bloc.

See full article ..

UN Calls For Independent Investigation In Uzbekistan

The BBC reports that the UN's top human rights official has called for an independent investigation into reports that Uzbek troops shot dead hundreds of protesters.

Louise Arbour, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said she was "deeply concerned" about last week's violence. The Uzbek government said 169 people died in the shootings, but a local army source told the BBC 500 were killed.

UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and the European Union have backed calls for an independent inquiry into the events. Speaking in Washington, Mr Straw called on the Uzbek president to allow full access to Andijan, where the killings took place, to enable a "credible and transparent investigation".Mr Straw said action needed to be taken to tackle what he called "the root causes of the discontent" and "develop a much more open and pluralistic society in Uzbekistan".

Washington has been under pressure to take a tough line against the repressive Uzbek regime, which is a key US ally in Central Asia. On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Uzbekistan needed "openness" and "reform".

Are The UK and US Governments Serious About Uzbekistan?

Last October a UK diplomat, Craig Murray, was withdrawn as ambassador to Uzbekistan and was suspended on full pay. He said the reason for his removal was his criticism of the use of intelligence allegedly obtained under torture by the Uzbekistan Government – in other words, the abuse of human rights.

We commented - How long before the UK Government recognises the abuse of human rights taking place in Uzbekistan? Probably when the Central Asian Republics refuse us their oil or natural gas!

We recommended that people “Watch this space.” Well low and behold the massacre in Uzbekistan has now embarrassed the government into speaking out against the abuse of human rights in that country. Perhaps they should reinstate Craig Murray to show the seriousness of their concern or are their utterances merely for cosmetic purposes?

The United States has also been put under increasing pressure over its policy on Uzbekistan after the hardline government's suppression of protests, in which hundreds are feared to have died.

Washington has been consistently critical of Uzbekistan's record on human rights but it has also relied on President Islam Karimov's help in its "war on terror".

The US has a large military base in Uzbekistan that is seen by the Pentagon as important for the projection of US power into the region. It also has an eye on the Uzbek oil and gas reserves.

So while deeply concerned about the outbreak of violence, the United States has tried to avoid taking sides in public. That position is becoming untenable, however.

Is Nuclear Power the Answer?

The government says the UK is on course to meet the Kyoto targets on climate change but has admitted it is slipping behind its own tougher targets. Rather than concentrate on alternative energy sources, the government is considering building a new range of nuclear power stations. This may well be one of the great debates of Labour’s third term – the extension of nuclear power supported by the Tory opposition.

There are others who believe that relying on nuclear power for energy produces tonnes of radioactive waste that costs billions to store and will pose a risk to humans for thousands of years after disposal . The safety factor is also a major concern not just because of major accidents in the USA and the former Soviet Union and our own Windscale in the 1950’s but only recently a leak of highly radioactive nuclear fuel dissolved in concentrated nitric acid, enough to half fill an Olympic-size swimming pool, has forced the closure of Sellafield's Thorp reprocessing plant.

The closure could hardly have come at a worse time for the nuclear industry. Britain is struggling to meet its target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20% of 1990 levels by 2010, despite a substantial programme of wind farm construction, while generating capacity will also be hit by the rundown of some of Britain's coal-fired power stations.

The decision on whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations is among the most sensitive Tony Blair faces at the start of his third term. 

The leak is not a danger to the public but is likely to be a financial disaster for the taxpayer since income from the Thorp plant, calculated to be more than £1m a day, is supposed to pay for the cleanup of redundant nuclear facilities.