Fall 1996

Buyoya’s Dubious Promises
by Chris Conway

In a revolutionary movement evoking violent images similar to those in neighboring Rwanda, the minority Tutsi-led army of Burundi overthrew the popularly elected majority Hutu government on July 26, 1996. The coup d’etat follows years of ethnic conflict despite recent advances in the peace process through democratic elections. Ethnic strife has plagued the central African country ever since its independence from Belgium in 1962. Although the Hutu majority constitutes 85 percent of the population, the Tutsi minority has controlled Burundi’s politics, military, civil service, education, and the economy. In clashes between Tutsi army and Hutu rebels, over 150,000 casualties have been reported since 1993.

The slaughter of 300 Tutsi women and children o July 20 most likely sparked the coup. Ironically, retied major Pierre Buyoya, who established the commission that created the country’s first democratic constitution, has now assumed control of the interim government. Buyoya has promised to return to the democratic process, discipline the military responsible for scores of casualties, and unite Burundi under an ethnically mixed cabinet. The coup, however, has drawn sharp criticism form the UN and the Organization of African Unity, along with qualified criticism from the United States. The UN has expressly indicated that it will not accept any government brought in by force. In the meantime, economic sanctions by neighboring Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zaire have forced Burundi, a landlocked nation, to resort to fuel rationing. Promises of retaliation from rebel Hutus will most likely prevent a quick reconciliation between the warring factions.

If Burundi hopes to avoid the atrocities of ethnic cleansing and the anarchy that ravaged Rwanda two summers ago, then all ethnic and political factions will surely have to drop all mutual feelings of distrust. Despite Buyoya’s pretensions of national unity, the country clearly appears to be headed for disaster unless he makes good on his word. Hopefully, the strict stance assumed by the UN and the international community will ensure that the situation is resolved before an escalation to a full-blown civil war.

Saddam’s Real Motives
by Tiffany Hammond

On August 30, Saddam Hussien opened the latest chapter in his assault on the Iraqi Kurds. At the request of the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP), Hussien amassed nearly 40,000 troops, tanks, and artillery outside of Arbil, the scene of intense Kurdish factional fighting, and attacked the KDP’s rival party the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).

Historically, Hussien has not needed to consent to attack the Iraqi Kurds. An enemy of both Kurdish parties, Hussien has suppressed the Kurds since the 1980s. In order to protect the Kurds from annihilation after the Gulf War, the United Nations created a "safe haven" for the Kurds in northern Iraq, establishing a no-fly zone.

This time, however, Hussien may not have been solely interested in persecuting the Kurds. He may have been protecting the territorial integrity of Iraq. The rift between the PUK and the KDP has allowed Iran and Iraq, long-standing enemies, to wage a war by proxy. In mid-August, both Kurdish factions clashed along the Iran-Iraq border. Iran provided artillery support for the PUK. Afterwards, the PUK threatened the KDP with more Iranian attacks. Soon afterward, the KDP asked Baghdad for assistance in defeating the PUK. The Iranian attacks on Iraqi soil provided Hussien validation for his involvement in the conflict.

While it is debatable whether Hussien wold have pulled out of the no-fly zone without U.S. intervention, President Clinton should have given him the opportunity before escalating the conflict by ordering air strikes. If Baghdad had lost control of northern Iraq, it would have essentially opened a door to Iran, a security risk Hussein cannot afford to take.

The air strikes that began on September 3 have not aided the U.S. position in the region. By showing that the U.S. will unilaterally attack a sovereign nation over an internal issue, Clinton has undermined his regional support. Regional states are skittish, wondering what would prevent the U.S. from violating their sovereignty. Clinton’s resolve ensured the security and stability of the region, but maybe it is time for the U.S. to consider the actual needs of states in the region.

Flunking School Reform
by Aiyaz Husain

In the past decade, European universities have made great changes to keep pace with the needs of a new European economic order. Britain has instituted some of the most significant reforms. In an effort to make its limited, elite system of higher education more accessible to the masses, the British government upgrades the nation’s polytechnic (i.e. technical) colleges to university status in 1992. By increasing the number of British universities from about 45 to 88, the British government hoped to increase the percentage of secondary school graduates who entered universities from about 14 percent in the mid-1980s to thirty percent by the end of the century [see "It’s All in the Numbers"]

As a result of the move, universities now face a rising tide of enrollment that greatly strains their resources. Even more troubling to school administrators is the new method in which government grants are awarded. British universities have traditionally received funding through block grants based on research output, reputation, and pre-existing figure. The new plan abolishes this method. Universities must now compete among themselves to develop research programs and faculties. Individual departments are evaluated by a system of peer review in which universities rank each other. These evaluations, which began this year, which will occur every four to five years, and their results will be used to determine allocations of government-based grant aid to universities until the next review period.

The current reforms of the system of higher education in the United Kingdom are detrimental to the university establishment. Promotion of polytechnics to university status compromises the overall quality of degree-granting institutions. Moreover, the sudden increase in student enrollment spreads university funds thin. This in turn forces universities to replace small, tutorial classes with large lectures. The reforms will increase the number of British university graduates at the cost of the quality of their education.

Mistreatment in Maquiladoras
by Lesley Farby

Gender-based discrimination in the workplace is prohibited according to several internationally-sanctioned documents. But for the female majority of Mexico’s half-million maquiladora workers, equality on the job exists only in such abstract agreements as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). In the factories where they work, these paper assurances mean little to the Mexican women who face perpetual harassment and discrimination.

The factories of Mexico’s maquiladora sector routinely subject prospective female employees to invasive questions about their contraceptive use, menstrual cycles, and sexual habits. Urine testing is also mandatory in order to deny pregnant women jobs, and thus avoid the costs of company-funded maternity benefits.

Because the outright firing of pregnant women might raise too many questions, maquiladora personnel often force the women to work unpaid overtime and complete physically demanding tasks in n effort to drive expectant mothers to resign. These mandatory pregnancy tests and cruel labor practices violate Mexican federal laws which ensure equality between men and women. Mexican labor officials are reluctant to castigate maquiladoas because of the sector’s value as a source of employment and foreign income earnings.

The Mexican government must take immediate action to protect the rights of its citizens, including upholding its obligations under NAFTA’s Agreement on Labor Cooperation to enforce labor laws. Responsibility for the infringement upon its laborers’ rights does not belong solely to Mexico. The private corporations which own ninety percent of the factories, including General Electric, General Motors, Panasonic, Zenith, and AT&T, must begin a massive revamping of their hiring practices. In order to make NAFTA work, and in order to provide fair employment and protect human rights governments and the private sector must own up to their responsibilities.

The End of Swiss Neutrality
by Sierra Fletcher

In the beginning of September, the Swiss government announced its intention to join the Partnership for Peace (PFP) program, NATO’s military and political appendage aimed at limiting inclusion of the former Eastern Bloc. Switzerland joins 27 other countries, including Ruddia, in the PFP. A spokesman for the Swiss government stated that "this step is absolutely compatible with Swiss neutrality." Despite such a reassurance, the move raises questions about Switzerland’s neutrality.

Switzerland’s decision to join the League of Nations after World War I, albeit with a special agreement to abstain from military action, was the first departure from its traditional neutrality. A second came during World War II when the country, heavily dependent upon Germany, was accused of aiding the Germans by refusing to let fleeing Jews enter the country.

The official Swiss stance of armed neutrality has not changed, but in practice it has eroded. While Switzerland is one of the few countries that do not belong to the United Nations, it is undoubtedly part of the "UN family." Not only does it have observer status, but it also houses the European headquarters of the UN in Geneva, participates in the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq, and helps fund some UN peacekeeping endeavors.

The Swiss also have membership in many specializes international agencies, such as the International Labor Organization and the World Health Organization. While these agencies are far from a military alliance, membership in the PFP is a telltale move. This year, Switzerland serves as president of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, charged with the task of supervising elections in Bosnia as well as sending unarmed "yellow berets" to the area. The Swiss government has also granted NATO transit rights to move troops and equipment through Switzerland en route to the former Yugoslavia.

Switzerland has enjoyed the stability provided by NATO since the conception of the alliance. It is now time for the country to acknowledge the extent to which it depends on NATO by joining the Partnership for Peace and subsequent organizations formed to maintain regional security.