Fighting terror

LUC is excited to welcome Sir Nigel Rodley, Professor of Law and Chair of the Human Rights Centre, University of Essex, to talk about 'Fighting Terror' on Wednesday 4th May, 16-18.00, in the college Manor (LV44).

After various academic and professional positions in the US and Canada and after receiving his 2nd LLM degree in 1970, Nigel returned to the UK to become the first Legal Adviser of the International Secretariat of Amnesty International, a position he held until 1990; during the same period he taught Public International Law at LSE. In 1994 he became Professor of Law at the University of Essex.
In March 1993 he was designated Special Rapporteur on Torture by the UN Commission on Human Rights, serving in this capacity until 2001. Since 2001 he has been a member and vice chair of the UN Human Rights Committee. He was elected a Commissioner of the International Commission of Jurists in 2003 and is a member of Council of its British Branch, JUSTICE. He is a Trustee of the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture. Nigel Rodley was knighted ‘for services to human rights and international law’ in 1999.

Current affairs and ice cream; 20 April

Maybe it was appropriate that on the hottest day of the year so far, a group of LUC students and staff sat down to discuss the events going on in the arid desert of Libya. While their immediate thirst may have been quenched by an ice cream break half way through the night, their thirst for stories, opinions and knowledge kept them hanging on the lips of the speakers until security guards ushered them out of the building and shut the door behind them.


Going back to where the night started, the first LUC Current Affairs Night began, in true student style, about 15 minutes late. Gathered in the Student Lounge at the Lange Voorhout, a handful of professors, three speakers and around 40 students sat in a circle ready to informally ‘discuss foreign affairs with a glass of wine’. After a quick introduction and recap of the world headlines that week Jaap de Hoop Scheffer started off the evening by talking about Libya. As the subject rapidly ventured out to include Europe’s dependence on the US, the nature of Resolution 1973 and humanitarian intervention, the time was up and questions and remarks had to wait, as Aernout van Lynden took the spotlight.

The war correspondent and previous university professor spoke of ‘An Arab Awakening?’, where he distinguished between the different types of unrest the Middle East is experiencing. Reminding students never to make comparisons, he described how the countries differ immensely in terms of ethnic makeup, national priorities, governmental system and political histories, and how this fundamentally influences the current unrest. He reminded us of the near-permanent state of conflict Europe experienced between the late 19th century up until the end of the Cold War, shedding light on the bizarre expectation the global media and policy makers hold in terms of the war in Libya and other conflict being over within months. Cut off by a bleeping sound marking the end of his time, Chris Goto-Jones broke up the theme of civil unrest by addressing the situation of disaster-struck Japan.

While in reality civil unrest seemed not so far from the truth in Japan either, it was refreshing to focus on a completely different part of the world, and Chris surprised many about the semi-secret relationship the US and Japan have had since the Second World War. Furthermore, he spoke about Japan’s attitude towards aid and the politics involved in it, as well as the strange position Japan is experiencing suddenly being the receiver rather than the giver of aid.

After a quick break and re-building of the furniture, the audience, now divided into three groups, engaged in small-scale discussions addressing one of the three topics with the respective speaker. This format allowed everyone to contribute and fire individual questions to the speakers, as well as comparing perspectives on particular issues (‘Gaddafi: Should he stay or should he go?’). After 20 minutes and at the tune of the latest hits, the speakers rotated groups, allowing everyone to engage in each of the topics before the end of the second hour.

After a wrap up of the event people were invited to stay longer, and many students, still plagued by the heat and the prospect of empty water bottles and lack of leftover ice creams, took up on this offer and relocated themselves to the outside courtyard. Here conversation among students and one of the speakers continued until the security guard forcibly removed the group and set them on the doorstep of the Lange Voorhout. Still sparked by arguments and engaged in intense discussion, the closed green wooden door did not deter the students and Aernout, and after relocating to a nearby café, tales and conversations about the Middle East could be heard resounding far into the night.

For me, the fact that conversation and intense discussions did not end as the Current Affairs Night did, and even prevailed over the fact we were set outside of the building and found ourselves standing in the dark late at night, shows that it was a success. The night was meant to spark a greater interest for discussing current affairs, and the enthusiasm and active participation shown last night illustrates that our student body really is engaged and ready to discuss, and eventually face, these Global Challenges surrounding us.

A huge thank you goes to Aernout van Lynden, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and Chris Goto-Jones for coming to speak and contribute their invaluable insights, as well as Cissie Fu for helping coordinate the event. Lastly a thank you goes to the students, whose participation and constant questioning in search of answers made me confident that even on the hottest and most beach-appropriate day, we are ready to engage in international and globally significant matters. And who knows, maybe next time we can devise a way to combine beach and heated discussion…


Cecilia Diemont, 1st year student, LUC

Oppression and revolution

 

London's critical utopia

Imagine the world in the XXVII century. Imagine a society in which capitalism as a ruling system has given its way to the Brotherhood of Man. Now, imagine a diary written in 1932 has been found, the biography of a great revolutionist called Ernest Everhard, written by his beloved wife and fellow comrade Avis. You are then presented with a detailed account of the first revolutionaries' struggle to overthrow the Oligarchy, the Plutocracy, the Iron Heel which is the entity that controls the power and wealth of the United States.
The greatness of The Iron Heel is that it speaks on behalf of different people, first of all Ernest, the eloquent socialist hero; Avis, the highly educated girl converted to the Cause of Socialism, and finally the academic notations of a man who now leaves in the utopia envisioned by the revolutionaries.
Through Avis's passionate and subjective record of Ernest's talks on the injustices of the Iron Heel towards the members of the labour class, London creates a first layer of narration, through which he can express his critical analysis of the American class struggle, and possibly his delusion for the failure of the 1905 Russian Revolution. London actually writes the novel in 1908, a period of labour's struggle in the USA against the evergrowing power of corporations that constitutes the suffocating regime Avis and Ernest dream to overthrow.
The second layer of narrative, the perspective of the XXVII century scholar, serves as more than one function; firstly, it represents a utopian age in which the socialist dream has finally been achieved, when people don't even remember certain practises or they find them barbarian; secondly, it balances Avis's account by correcting or explaining certain facts or characters that she talks about. London uses this second narrative-framing voice, both as a device to take distances from Avis's story, but also as yet another way to criticise and to make bitter remarks about his own society.
Description of the utopian society of the XXVII century, that so critically describes those of the XX century, are only hinted in the foreword and footnotes, and the reader is not to know how the centuries' long struggle eventually positively ended with the establishment of the Brotherhood of Man – London is concerned with the description of the present conflicts and does not bother with the explanation of a reality that is, in its nature, utopic. Knowing that there is the future perspective of a fair society is enough to provide for a happy ending that Avis's story, abruptly interrupted in the middle of a sentence, actually does not have.
The Iron Heel is about injustices, violence, conflicts. London shows how these actions are perpetuated by both sides of the “enemy line”, as both Oligarchists and Revolutionaries adopt violent methods to confront each other. However, London's sympathy, and the reader's, cannot help but falling with the rebels, who are striving for change in face of the oppressive status quo.
The society that the Oligarchy shapes and controls through its power relationship and invisible claws still bears remarkable similarities to the present US society, where lobbies and trusts are able to influence government's policies, where freedom of speech is threatened by the laws made ad corporationes, where the poor are denied health insurance or good education. London's text shouldn't be read as prophetical, but as a starting point from which to reflect upon the status of our present society. Do we still live under the Iron Heel? Do we have to wait for other six centuries before getting rid of systems of oppressions? Is Capitalism THE best economic-political-social system we can think of, or is a (modernised) socialist Utopia still a suitable option for designing our society? Food for thought, my friends, but remember: the fight goes on.

Sofia Lotto Persio, 1st year student, LUC

Three hundred and forty-six

Accused as ‘slacktivism’, a feel-good type of activism, by a student (who, might I say, never took up the offer of explanation or discussion) I’d like to remind all those who did participate in the recent Amnesty Letter Writing Campaign that their efforts weren’t in vain. Yes, they did contributed to a wonderful and entertaining evening in the LUC Common Room, but let us also not forget the impact and support oppressed families around the world will experience upon the arrival of hundreds of letters of support.

The recent turbulent events in North Africa and the Middle East have shown how people and ideas can be empowered by the use of mass media, essentially shedding light on the immense power of the propagation of words. History has shown how the impact of people writing letters can be enormous too, and thus also play major role in ensuring justice is done.
Since Amnesty International’s earliest days in the 1960s, letter writing has been an integral part of the campaign for demanding human rights and the release of political prisoners. Hundreds of prisoners have been freed due a continuous stream of letters from Amnesty members calling for the respect of human rights, as well as voicing their support for political prisoners.
And letter writing is exactly what LUC students undertook last Monday night. Starting at 22:00 and going all the way through to 04:00, a dedicated group comprising of roughly half the College gave their time, creativity and ink to Write for Rights. Besides formal letters to politicians and diplomats (regarding the detainment of Burmese political prisoners and the exploitation of illegal immigrants in Malaysia), students settled down in the Common Room and feverishly wrote notes of support and encouragement to a host of political prisoners and human rights NGOs. As the night progressed and the impressive pile of filled envelopes grew, various musical performers, litres of hot drinks and snacks drove the group to produce letters of praise, poems and drawings.

Throughout the night a humanitarian-focused movie was shown, students performed a preview of the LUC play, some sang or DJed, while others contributed lame dance moves during their letter writing breaks. The buzzing atmosphere and insane amounts of sugary snacks kept everyone in high spirits, while friendly (and completely beneficial) competition saw students such as Limo Baroud and Sarah-Louise Todd write non-stop for the whole six hours. These latter two students produced a spectacular 106 letters between them. If anyone were ever entitled to a hand massage, or possesses these skills, please look no further than these two!

Slashing all expectations, 04:00 saw a considerably large group bearing down into the depths of the box with letters, two last students calling out from the other side of the room that they were ‘nearly done! Just two more! Please! Give me a few more minutes!’ With great pride we’d like to announce that a total of 346 letters were written over the course of 6 hours and 49 students.
Due to LUC students’ incredible effort we are sending letters of protest and support over the whole world this week. So whether you are a true believer of blog-driven revolutions or more cautious about the power of the spread of words, your commitment to take action through words on Monday night is truly appreciated, and on behalf of SAIM The Hague we would like to say: thank you thank you thank you, and we are so proud of all of you who participated.
 
Cecilia Diemont, 1st Year Student, LUC, Co-Chair of SAIM (Student Amnesty Int. Movement)

A big thank you also goes to those students who attended the Amnesty Training Day on Wednesday. Through a very interactive and informative session led by two regional Amnesty employers, members of SAIM learnt vital information about Amnesty’s founding, the structure of the organization, worldwide membership and brainstormed for ideas for campaigns in the future. To Marianne and Naomi—thank you for coming down to visit and inspire us, and we will keep you updated on our activities!

Fundraising result

LUC and MEARC are delighted to be able to announce the success of our collaborative efforts to provide information about and promote fundraising for the reconstruction in Japan following the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear crisis of March this year.
Following our information evening and panel event on 1 April, we are proud to be able to announce that we have now raised over 2,000 euro. The money has been donated to the Red Cross.
Many thanks to all those staff, students and other participants from around the Netherlands who supported this event and this cause.
LUC and MEARC wish to extend their ongoing support to the people of Japan at this difficult time; we will not forget that the process of recovery will take a long time, and we hope to be able to play a small role in the future.