Republicans have been vehemently opposing  any and all lowering of the number of warheads, while the conservative

press has been pointing out past nuclear reductions under Republican leadership. Looking to past nuclear reductions is a pointless bit of partisanship. What happened in the past doesn’t matter, what does matter is that the Democratic Administration and the Republican Congress (and the Senate) work together to reduce our arsenal. Countless critics of the current “triad” policy (plane, submarine and land deployed nuclear weapons) have called it antiquated and unable to effectively deal with today’s security threats of terrorism and rogue regimes.

There are several reasons for the US to pursue this policy of nuclear reduction, namely: cost savings, reduced security vulnerabilities, reduced accidental launches, dealing with contemporary threats and the unnecessary nature of having enough weapons to destroy the earth several times over. In this time of budgetary contraints, the US could potentially save billions of dollars a year without the risk of affecting security. Currently, these massive warheads (the land based missiles) are continuously and meticulously maintained. The missiles are removed, disassembled, updated, cleaned and tested on a regular basis. The technology and equipment required is extremely labor intensive and expensive. Additionally, the more nuclear weapons any country has, the more vulnerable it is to sabotage or accidents. The U.S. has the best, multi-layered protection system for its nuclear weapons. But regardless, the more weapons there are, the more weapons that can be stolen/sabotaged, etc. Even with its intense security, there have been several near-nuclear war inducing accidents (see bombs/bombers section) in the U.S. history; most notably when a training simulation program was “accidentally” inserted into a NORAD computer. The program simulated a nuclear attack from the Russians. Luckily, the issue was discovered before the US launched a “second” strike. Finally, our current arsenal is not in line with contemporary security challenges. We do not need to destroy one of the largest countries on the planet in a MAD war, we need to conduct tactical strikes against rogue regimes and combat terrorists. For those purposes, we need a small, highly mobile missile arsenal, not a hundred megaton space ship sized rocket. Small and fast, with a complementary missile defense system.

Republicans are criticizing Obama’s plan of reduction, claiming that it will threaten America’s preeminence and  the credibility of it’s nuclear umbrella. The US and Russia are the only two countries with more than 300 nukes. France has around 300 (not a threat) the UK has around 250 (also not a threat) and China has about 250. We aren’t going to war with Russia, and military specialists have said that the US can go down to 300 weapons without Russia losing any, and we’re still safe. If China launched a war against the US, all NATO countries would be obligated to defend us, which means we would have access to all of their weapons. 300 is enough. 300 can destroy all of our enemies on the planet. I am extremely excited to hear that there is a chance that we might be taking the lead in reducing armaments, and I applaud Obama. Lets just  hope that he can get something significant done without the military-industrial complex poisoning public opinion and conservatives playing off irrational fears.

One of the worst instigators and promoters of state-run oppression is the government’s Fars news agency, which proliferates false information about the upcoming elections. According to Saeed Dehghan’s article in the Guardian on January 10, the Fars news agency reported that “more than 1200 reformists had put their names forward for the elections . . . Many believe that the regime has encouraged many of its own candidates to register as reformists in an attempt to undermine any boycott.”

If the West does not respond with an obvious intent to promote human rights and press freedoms, Iranians will suffer under their country’s oppressive constitution. Press freedoms, determined by the Supreme leader, forbid the media from criticizing Islam or the Islamic Republic.

The Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei

Article 175 of Iran’s constitution, supported by the country’s Press Law, will perpetuate the government’s unlimited regulation of media:

The freedom of expression and dissemination of thoughts in the Radio and Television of the Islamic Republic of Iran must be guaranteed     in keeping with the Islamic’ criteria and the best interests of the country. The appointment and dismissal of the head of the Radio and Television of the Islamic Republic of Iran rests with the Leader. A council consisting of two representatives each of the President, the head of the judiciary branch and the Islamic Consultative Assembly shall supervise the functioning of this organization. The policies and the manner of managing the organization and its supervision will be determined by law (Article 175, Islamic Republic of Iran Constitution).

Since 2011, a number of journalists and bloggers have been imprisoned, exiled and sentenced to death for criticizing the corrupt government and allegedly dishonoring Islam on the Internet. The allegations and arrests illuminate both Iran’s human rights abuses and the fraudulent political tactics to which incumbents resort to win “landslide elections.” As the March 2 parliamentary elections fast approach, Iranians have a sense of déjà vu dating back to the presidential election of 2009. Though officials once again employ corrupt and reactionary tactics to maintain control, the people’s fervid protests continue to challenge government authority.

In response to current reformist MPs who have taken action to limit Ahmadinejad’s power, the president will use the upcoming elections to seat his own supporters in parliament. Western governments need to respond to such rampant abuse by strengthening more targeted sanctions on the Iranian government and endorsing popular opposition candidates. In acting to spread democracy, however, the West must avoid America’s mistake of 1953. If the West were to endorse an allegedly democratic candidate or coalition with little Iranian support, it would fail to threaten the current Iranian government, while weakening Iranians’ faith in America and its allies. Western governments must fund and collaborate with opposition groups to seize control of the government during and after the election process to overhaul government policies and implement constitutional reform.

Iran can significantly damage US interests in the region. According to Lt. Gen. Burgess, Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz and reduce the oil supply to the world. Iran can bomb all of Eastern Europe, including US allies. Iran can bomb US facilities in Iraq or Afghanistan. It can also activate sleeper cells across Europe in the US and in Israel. Hundreds of thousands of civilians could die.

Iran is not Afghanistan or Iraq. Iran has been known for their nuclear weapons development program for years. With a population of 66.4 million of average age of 27, and $12,900 GDP per capita, Iran is one of the youngest and wealthier countries in the world, in spite of 18% of the population living below poverty level. Life expectancy in Iran is 71.14 years and has always been higher than in case of Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, their population is healthier and more capable of withstanding a time of economic hardship.

As an economy, Iran is stronger than Afghanistan‘s or Iraq’s ever were. Besides having a higher GDP per capita than both countries, Iran is not as dependent on food imports as Iraq was. As a result, it can survive for some time with decreased oil revenues and increasing unemployment levels. Iran has also recently been forging strong ties with Russia and China, so that the sanctions by the EU and the USA will not be as effective. Considering the fact that previous sanctions never managed to prevent Iran from pursuing their nuclear weapons program, one can assume that they always somehow managed to earn enough revenue to retain internal cohesion.

Moreover, Iran has a larger military capacity than Afghanistan. The army is composed of 540,000 troops and 585,000 military personnel. Its inventory is consists of over 1,500 tanks, submarines, navy frigates and missiles which Afghanistan never possessed.

Unlike Iraq, Iran has had several years to prepare for a war. War against Iraq was swift. After 9/11, the blaming of Iraq slowly started and Iraq was attacked in 2003, less than two years after 9/11. Iran, on the other hand, has been

Iranian Shahab 3 Missiles

diplomatically attacked for years. They moved their nuclear power research and development underground to protect it. They have updated their submarine system, and have produced long range missiles.

Of course, the US is militarily stronger. Serviceability of Iranian air force is 60% of the US aircraft. Tanks are outdated and military personnel and troops over 100% smaller; but Iran has been updating their inventory. In 2007, Iran launched a new submarine and a navy frigate, all home made.

However, Iran is quite self reliant. If they can build one submarine domestically, then they can build a few more, independent of international sanctions. And as mentioned above, they can always activate sleeper cells.

Sleeper cells are always dangerous, not because of their physical effects but because of their emotional effect. Yes, a well planned suicide attack could kill immediately over one hundred civilians. However, the emotional effect of such a disaster would affect millions. In return, these millions would change their minds during elections, blame the current politicians and perhaps call them to leave the political arena. No politician wants bad publicity.

What is more likely to happen is Cold War. British Foreign Secretary William Hague has made public statements about the inevitability of a new Cold War if Iran develops nuclear weapons. Other countries in the Middle East would either rally around the US or develop their own nuclear capacity. With a threat of total annihilation that nuclear weapons imply, the US would not dare attack Iran. Instead, diplomatic pressure would continue, and the two countries would keep on gathering allies and isolating each other.

In short, whether it is lack of diplomatic ties between the US and Iran, or a historical development which was unavoidable, the current situation presents no bright options regarding the future.

Such controversies raise concern about press freedoms in the U.S. and likely contribute to America’s surprisingly low rank of 48th on the Reporter’s Without Borders Press Freedom Index. Despite these concerns, however, Americans’ rights to openly protest such legislation rival the liberties of most peoples around the world. While justifications including national security, intellectual property rights, and protections against obscenity fuel speculation about the motives of legislators, they do not prohibit Americans from freely exercising their First Amendment rights to assemble, protest, and petition.

In Iran, the government’s media outlets are state-run, and officials brutally oppress and arrest journalists who are audacious enough to challenge their authority. Iranian journalists made international news in 2009 when they defied recently reelected Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Shortly after the news broke about Ahmadinejad’s reelection, protests broke

Iranian Protests during the 2009 Presidential Elections

Due to preexisting laws preventing press freedom, strict censorship, and past crackdowns on journalists, the international community fears a similar climate will seize Iran in the upcoming Parliamentary elections in March. Consistent with its history of political and social oppression, the current government has already denied the candidacies of many Iranian MPs critical of the current government. In addition to restrictions on political participation, press restrictions prevent barred candidates from speaking with foreign media.

In order for protests to effectively change Iranian society, Iranian journalists need outlets by which to expose corruption in the Iranian government. While state-run news agencies prohibit criticism of the government and threaten progressive and reformist journalists with fear of punishment, websites such as Khabarnegaran Iran (The Iranian Journalist), Jaras News, and Kalameh provide forums for journalists to freely publish their ideas. Though their efforts come with a risk (especially since the Iranian government has tried to shut these website down in the past), they serve as crucial weapons in the fight against corruption and political illiteracy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8008170.stm

By Billy Tsang

Much of Africa’s leadership has and continues to see HIV as a heterosexual epidemic. This is not surprising, as most of Africa still deems homosexuality as illegal and punishable by law. Lane (2008) expresses that even in post-apartheid South Africa, the “only African nation with legal guarantees of equal rights for gay and lesbian citizens and highly visible gay and lesbian communities”, there has been  little attention given to the HIV epidemic among men who have sex with men (MSM). Academic literature has widely stated that Africa’s authorities have refused to acknowledge the presence of gay and bisexual men. Almost all of the research on MSM in the past 10 years has noted widespread  discrimination and stigmatization of homosexual behavior.

Lorway (2006) advocates questioning international public health theories that characterize AIDS in Africa as an unambiguous heterosexual epidemic. He goes onto outlining how the “ongoing vilification of “homosexuals” by ruling State officials serves as a stigmatizing backdrop against which young people experience and practice their sexuality.” This is important because the conscious ignorance of gay, bisexual, and other marginalized groups of people stems from homophobia and often results in serious inadequate healthcare interventions. Studies have also shown that homophobia is associated with indicators of poor mental health and increased risk behavior for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI).  Stigmatization of being gay and fear of being HIV-positive presents barriers to making use of the available voluntary HIV testing and counseling services. (Lane, 2006b)

In Dakar, Senegal, a study revealed that MSM have distinct identities and social roles that go beyond sexual practices, that sex with men is driven by many reasons, including love, pleasure, and economic exchange, and that their lives are often characterized by stigma, violence and rejection (Niang et al., 2003). Cloete et al, 2008 found a high level of internalized stigma in HIV-positive men in South Africa.  56% of men reported that they concealed their HIV status from others and experienced social isolation and discrimination resulting from being HIV-positive. This and many other studies have pointed out men have lost their housing and employment, and have even felt discrimination from healthcare workers (HCW).

Lane (2008b) found that “MSM felt their options for non-stigmatizing sexual healthcare services were limited by homophobic verbal harassment by HCW.” In a study of MSM in central and south Malawi, many of the participants reported inaccessible HIV intervention programs, along with discrimination and a fear of sexual orientation disclosure (Ntata, 2008).

In Lockhart’s (2002) examination of HIV infection among urban street boys in Tanzania, he discovered that a boy being labeled a mhanisi, a highly stigmatizing term, could lead to increased emotional and physical abuse by other boys in a peer group. In Dakar, Senegal, the most frequently used term for MSM is the word gor jigeen, which is translated literally in English as ‘man-woman.’ It implies a man who is very close to the world of women, to the point of identifying with them (Niang et al., 2003). The term gor jigeen is currently considered demeaning and stigmatizing. “As one focus group participant stated, ‘the term gor jigeen frightens us. When someone says it in our presence, it makes us shiver. The term is like a siren sound that we expect to be followed by insults, blows, or stones thrown at us by out-of-control mobs.”

Traditional family values, stereotypes of abnormality, gender norms, and cultural and religious influences underlie intense stigma and discrimination (Okal et al, 2008). Fay et al. (2010) found “few (17%) reported ever disclosing same sex practices to a health professional and 19% reported ever being afraid to seek health care. Men reported being denied health care services (5%) and 21% had been blackmailed because of their sexuality.” In addition, strong associations were observed between experiences of discrimination and fear of seeking health care services.

Many of these papers highlight the challenges posed to gay and bisexual men who wish to confront or avoid homophobia, and the hard truth is that current strategies may not be conducive to sexual health promotion in this population. Furthermore, it is evidence that the African public sector needs to increase their number of healthcare providers who are sensitive to the needs of gay and bisexual men. Due to this heavily homophobic culture, appropriate sexual health services for MSM are urgently needed.

References

Cloete, A., L. C. Simbayi, et al. (2008). “Stigma and discrimination experiences of HIV-positive men who have sex with men in Cape Town, South Africa.” AIDS Care 20(9): 1105-1110.

Fay, H., S. D. Baral, et al. (2010). “Stigma, Health Care Access, and HIV Knowledge Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Malawi, Namibia, and Botswana.” AIDS Behav.

Lockhart, C. (2002). “Kunyenga, “real sex,” and survival: assessing the risk of HIV infection among urban street boys in Tanzania.” Med Anthropol Q 16(3): 294-311.

Lorway, R. (2006). “Dispelling “heterosexual African AIDS” in Namibia: same-sex sexuality in the township of Katutura.” Cult Health Sex 8(5): 435-449.

Lane, T., T. Mogale, et al. (2008). “”They see you as a different thing”: the experiences of men who have sex with men with healthcare workers in South African township communities.” Sexually Transmitted Infections 84(6): 430-433.

Lane, T., S. B. Shade, et al. (2008). “Alcohol and sexual risk behavior among men who have sex with men in South african township communities.” AIDS Behav 12(4 Suppl): S78-85.

Niang, C. I., P. Tapsoba, et al. (2003). “‘It’s raining stones’: stigma, violence and HIV vulnerability among men who have sex with men in Dakar, Senegal.” Culture Health & Sexuality 5(6): 499-512.

Ntata, P. R., A. S. Muula, et al. (2008). “Socio-demographic characteristics and sexual health related attitudes and practices of men having sex with men in central and southern Malawi.” Tanzania Journal of Health Research 10(3): 124-130.

Okal, J., S. Luchters, et al. (2009). “Social context, sexual risk perceptions and stigma: HIV vulnerability among male sex workers in Mombasa, Kenya.” Culture Health & Sexuality 11(8): 811-826.

http://borgenproject.blogspot.com/2011/10/ugandan-midwifes-mission-to-save-lives.html

By Sofia Ahsanuddin

Nursing and midwife education plays a pivotal role in developing an innovative and transformative approach to sustainable healthcare. In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) drew attention to a critical shortage of more than 4 million doctors, nurses, and midwives worldwide. In 2010, a report issued by a high-level Commission on Education of Health Professionals and the Sub-Saharan African Medical School Study stated a mind-blowing statistic about the mentioned shortage of trained health professionals; between 1985 and 1994, Ghana produced 489 physicians of which 61% migrated from the country by 1997. Even more alarming than this statistic is that the “population-to-physician” ratio in Sub-Saharan Africa is comparatively lower than other regions. What makes this fact so disturbing is that the disease burden in Sub-Saharan Africa is the greatest in the world. The reasons for this critical shortfall are abundant; they range from a maldistribution of professional educational resources for healthcare providers to “the demands of chronic health care, the globalization of the [labor] market and the tendency of doctors to leave the countries that invested in their training (Chan).” Now, how can functioning health systems provide adequate health services without sufficient numbers of informed healthcare providers? Besides transforming public policy and enforcing institutional reform, it cannot be done without reforming the education of physicians, nurses, and midwives in developing regions.

HIFA2015 is a campaign and knowledge network that advocates for improved access to appropriately-trained healthcare providers. The need for transformative reform is urgent; it is estimated that more than 529,000 women and 5.7 million babies die before, during, or after childbirth, mostly in developing countries. Literally, millions of innocent lives are affected by the growing disparity between what healthcare providers are being taught and many of their countries’ outdated regulatory standards. The cost of educating registered doctors, nurses and midwives is staggering; in nine Sub-Saharan African countries with an HIV prevalence of 5% or greater or with more than one million people infected with HIV/AIDS and with at least one medical school, the estimated “government subsidized cost” of one health care professional, typically a doctor, ranges from $21,000 in Uganda to $58,700 in South Africa. When educational institutions are challenged to “produce more graduates with less resources” in current Sub-Saharan Africa, the path to sustainable socioeconomic development is hindered. It would be ideal if policy-makers, governments, and international institutions like WHO implemented effective strategies designed to meet the challenge of producing more informed healthcare professionals with less cost.

How can we, as young, knowledgeable global citizens, mobilize our efforts and thoughts to increase awareness about such an important issue? Please feel free to leave your comments.

Sources:

International Midwives: http://www.internationalmidwives.org/MidwiferyEducationModules/tabid/378/Default.aspx

Alliance for Natural Health: http://www.anh-europe.org/campaigns/sustainable-healthcare

Edward J. Mills, “The financial cost of doctors emigrating from sub-Saharan Africa: human capital analysis”: http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d7031

From the Director-General of the World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2010/medical_ed_20101214/en/index.html

Global Health.gov: http://globalhealth.gov/global-health-topics/maternal-and-child-health/

President Obama’s budget plan makes a clear statement that we should end the tax cuts given to families making over $250,000 a year, a cut given to families during former President Bush’s years in office. Mr. Obama would also like to create a law stating that anyone making over a million dollars per year must pay a 30% tax rate. These proposals further encourage his message of giving everyone in the United States a fair shot in this economy.

The President is also proposing an increase in the International Affairs Budget. He is putting an emphasis in helping United States citizens, many of whom have jobs that depend on international trade, and cutting spending on international aid efforts. This could be seen as very harmful to the image of the US as we want to continue being a leader in human rights and humanitarian aid efforts. This proposed change is focused on improving the economy of the United States and increasing our national security. For example, the President wants to create an “Incentive Fund” to help countries changed by the Arab Spring. This would show nations in the Middle East that the United States is still invested in the region.

President Obama is proposing cutting back on programs in the Department of Defense, Medicare and Social Security in the next year in an attempt to bring the deficit down and reduce our debt significantly in the long term. Barack Obama is trying to uphold its own interests, and money given to help other nations at the same time, but the President doesn’t want to ignore the people who need help here in the United States. But the President should not forget how important the United States is to other countries; that our monetary and military aid is appreciated and often necessary in situations like the famine in the Horn of Africa. These countries need our help, and we can’t forget them as we cut corners trying to strengthen our economy. Their success is our success, and if we can help create more diplomatic free market countries to trade with, it will benefit our economy as well as theirs. It’s a win-win situation.

Haiti held its first ‘openly gay march’ on November 30, 2008. This participant’s shirt reads, in English, “I am gay.”

By Carly James

In the wake of the second anniversary of Haiti’s 2010 earthquake, much of the world is directing its attention to the social, economic, and political progress that Haiti has made. Since that historic moment in Haiti’s troubled history, considerable strides have been made in terms of rubble removal, medical assistance, and resettlement of displaced persons. In fact, the country was proud to inaugurate the ultra-modern Roi Henri Christophe University, currently one of Haiti’s largest buildings, in mid-January.

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s plea for legitimizing sexual orientation as a basic human right in December 2011 has inflated interest around the world concerning what proactive measures the Obama administration has taken to promote this message across the globe. Furthermore, people are looking inward to their own states to understand what opinions and interests exist with regard to promoting LGBT rights.

In Haiti, like in many other places, the popular perception, political stance, and religious understanding of homosexuality are interconnected and puzzling all the same. Haitian Voudou, the hybridized religion based on West African traditions, Roman Catholic practices, and indigenous West Indies spiritual beliefs, is an inextricable part of much of Haitian daily life. On matters of sexual orientations and gender expression, Voudou does not explicitly promote or deny any practices. Not only does Voudou have a relatively open attitude toward LGBT rights, but it also maintains an undefined moral position on issues of homosexuality. The pairing of Voudou’s deep-rooted influence in Haitian social life and the strong Roman Catholic sway among Haiti’s political leadership in the recent past, however, has muddled Haitian popular perception of the LGBT community. It seems that most LGBT Haitians are still struggling to understand their social niche. Without a distinguishable presence in Port-au-Prince and other populous areas, the LGBT community has yet to be fully recognized within Haitian social life. Educated, upper-middle class LGBT Haitians are visible in Pétionville, an area in the hills where private LGBT gatherings can be comfortably held. For most LGBT Haitians, however, daily acceptance remains much more of a struggle.

While consensual homosexual relationships (the legal age of consent is 18) have been legal since 1986, few protections and provisions have otherwise been made for homosexual couples in Haiti. Issues of adoption, civil unions and marriages, and recognition of homosexuality within the military are all rather unclear.

Constitutionally, LGBT Haitians are technically protected against discrimination in the workplace (Article 35-2). Members of the LGBT community openly hold positions as government officials, NGO workers, etc. Outside of the workplace, however, LGBT Haitians have been known to struggle with discrimination and negative stigmatization. It is not uncommon for madivins (lesbians) and masisis (gay males) to receive hateful remarks when seen in public, especially if cross-dressing is involved. AIDS is another piece of the LGBT puzzle in Haiti, as this disease is still frighteningly prevalent in the country. Stigmas connecting homosexuality and AIDS are unfortunately present in Haiti, and efforts to fight discrimination may never be successful until this important issue is addressed.

Whatever prejudices may exist, it is clear that the LGBT community is not unlike any other in desiring its voice to be heard and its needs to be met. In 2002, Anthropologist Anne Lescot drew attention to these issues in her award-winning documentary Des Hommes et Dieux. Furthermore, years before the earthquake, Haiti proudly held its first “openly gay march” in November 2008. International attention is on Haiti as it is engrossed in a large-scale reconstruction process, and perhaps the issue of LGBT rights is among the many which will undergo an important transformation within the next decade.

Sources:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sgsm14053.doc.htm

http://www.bilerico.com/2011/02/haitian_vodou_and_the_acceptance_of_lgbtq_identiti.php

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2085764/Haiti-earthquake-anniversary-President-vows-redouble-efforts-rebuild-country.html

http://www.der.org/films/of-men-and-gods.html

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/12/haiti-holds-fir.html

But scientists and environmentalists quickly learned that biofuels were not the perfect solution they had envisioned. This fuel production still includes using fossil fuels to produce fertilizer, to run the farming equipment, and the process involves cutting down acres of rainforest and other land to make room for the increased demand of biofuel crops.

One area that is especially affected is the Amazon Rainforest. This region is very much in trouble because Brazil is one of the biggest consumers of biofuels in the world. Last year, Brazil passed a new Forest Code that will allow farmers to cut down more of their land to make room for farming. This deforestation will make it very difficult for the nation to successfully meet their earlier promise to reduce greenhouse gasses. In 2009 Brazil had made promises to help stop climate change by reducing the amount of forest they cut. This new code is going to do just the opposite. We cannot let biofuels take over more of the farmland used to grow food crops. This same deforestation is happening elsewhere in the world. The giant companies of the United States, Brazil, and China are now expanding biofuel crop farming into Africa and cutting down forests there to make room for the high demand in these huge countries. In the entire continent, an amount of farmland the size of the Netherlands has been cut down to make room for biofuel production.

According to Oil Price magazine, crude oil produces 87.5g CO₂/mj. This is less than the carbon produced for fuel made from palm oil (105g), soybean (103g), and rapeseed oils (95g). The problem with biofuels is that while they could be a great alternative fuel, the companies that produce them are using methods that harm the environment and the farmers who have to keep up with the demand. There are better crops like sugar cane which only produces 36g of carbon that these companies could be focusing on to produce biofuels. We could also increase the benefits of biofuels if we found more environmentally friendly ways of producing the fertilizer and harvesting the crops used for this fuel source.  Governments need to work together to acknowledge that biofuels are an environmental failure, and we need to find other means of creating sustainable energy that don’t revolve around food crops.

Many aid agencies suffer losses as a result of the decreased US military presence. Financial allocation to aid agencies in Afghanistan decreased from $4 bn to $2 bn. CARE and Mercy Corps are some of these agencies, whose budgets decreased even by up to 80%. As a result, many schools were cut, adversely affecting the education of Afghani girls. More will most likely be cut in the future, as the US is to cut down on its presence in Afghanistan by 2013.

However, the Afghani government is not able to replace this vacuum with their own resources. Afghanistan has a population of over 28 million and $900 as GDP per capita. The total GDP amounted in 2010 to $27 bn. Around 79% of Afghans are dependent on agriculture. Access to electricity is still a problem for many, as are landmines. Currently only 12% women are literature, versus 43% males, which is also a small figure.

The best solution, of course, would be to keep the US money and take the US soldiers out. The Afghani government will need assistance with regard to provisions of services. Of course, development does not come at once and it rarely comes from outside, but the work these agencies have been doing is of significance to development. Education is important if companies want workers who can read manuals and record their activities and ideas. This is only one of the important factors needed for development. Health is an additional factor.

An independent functioning of service provisions would create sustainable and independent institutions in Afghanistan. Afghani schools, instead of American, would provide more jobs to the Afghanis and enable them to learn how to run and design their own curricula. With independence and increased responsibility, more learning and ideas come along. New ideas in return bring forth more development.

However, the US is undergoing large budget cuts. The US is decreasing its presence in many areas, not just the war in Afghanistan. Whereas some of these actions, such as sponsoring aid agencies, are of crucial importance to the Afghanis, it is also clear to many that the US primarily has a duty towards its citizens and their needs.

It is hard to imagine how the Afghani government will successfully undertake the work of the aid agencies. Though it is of utter most importance that they provide these services, they are faced with a great challenge, more so because the Taliban forces will not disappear once the US forces leave Afghanistan.