3986 NEWSLETTER DEL CENTRO DI DOCUMENTAZIONE E RICERCA PER LA CITTADINANZA ATTIVA

20071128 18:11:00 redazione-IT

ANNO 5, NUMERO 17, 28 NOVEMBRE 2007

VERSO LA MORTE DELLA PENA DI MORTE
MILIBAND PARLA DEL FUTURO DELL’EUROPA
PIANO D’AZIONE SU SCIENZA E TECNOLOGIA IN AFRICA
PETROLIO AFRICANO: NERO PER MOLTI, DORATO PER POCHI
MASTER IN SVILUPPO UMANO LOCALE, CULTURA DI PACE E
COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE
SEGNALAZIONE LIBRO DI GABRIELLA GHERMANDI
AGENDA
CHI HA SCRITTO QUESTA NEWSLETTER?

ANNO 5, NUMERO 17, 28 NOVEMBRE 2007
NUOVA NEWSLETTER 1
VERSO LA MORTE DELLA PENA DI MORTE 1
MILIBAND PARLA DEL FUTURO DELL’EUROPA 6
PIANO D’AZIONE SU SCIENZA E TECNOLOGIA IN AFRICA 8
PETROLIO AFRICANO: NERO PER MOLTI, DORATO PER POCHI 11
MASTER IN SVILUPPO UMANO LOCALE, CULTURA DI PACE E
COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE 13
SEGNALAZIONE LIBRO DI GABRIELLA GHERMANDI 14
AGENDA 14
CHI HA SCRITTO QUESTA NEWSLETTER? 15
NEWSLETTER DEL CENTRO DI DOCUMENTAZIONE
E RICERCA PER LA CITTADINANZA ATTIVA

Il Centro di Documentazione e Ricerca per la Cittadinanza
Attiva di Ancona è aperto il Martedì e Giovedì dalle 10 alle 13.00 e dalle 15.00 alle
18.00. Se avete libri da proporre così che noi possiamo acquistarli fatecelo
sapere! Se state facendo una tesi di laurea o ricerche sull’immigrazione, sull’economia
politica, o su temi riguardanti il terzo settore, etc. presso il nostro Centro potete
ottenere informazioni ad hoc previa prenotazione telefonica.
Per contatti ed eventuali prenotazioni 071/2072585
Circolo Culturale Africa – sito web: www.circoloafrica.eu – email: segreteria@circoloafrica.org

NUOVA NEWSLETTER
Gabriele Sospiro

Arrivati quasi al nostro sesto anno di vita abbiamo deciso di cambiare qualcosa della
nostra newsletter sia sotto il profilo dei contenuti e sia del contenitore. I contenuti
cercheranno di approfondire i nostri temi tradizionali ossia l’immigrazione, la
cooperazione allo sviluppo, l’Africa, il rapporto fra un nord del mondo rapace e un sud
sfruttato fino alla fame. Approfondimento che si avvarrà non solo, come si dice, del
contributo dei media mainstream, ma anche di contributi meno strutturati come possono
essere quelli che arrivano, tanto per fare un esempio, dai bloggers più militanti. Come
potete vedere anche il contenitore è cambiato. Per tanti anni una scarnissima email
conteneva tutto il nostro materiale. Abbiamo invece deciso di cambiare il nostro formato
arricchendolo di foto (certo quelle nostre, oddio!!) e immagini che, alcune volte,
comunicano in modo più immediato e incisivo un pensiero che invece richiederebbe molte
pagine. Ci saranno anche due nuove sezioni. La prima, riguarderà direttamente voi lettori
e consisterà nella pubblicazione di alcune vostre email (e dunque vi invitiamo a scriverci).
La seconda, invece, sarà una bacheca dove troverete alcuni degli appuntamenti che ci
vengono segnalati. Certo. Era una cosa che facevamo anche prima. Ma ora ve la
vorremmo, come dire, consegnare un po’ più strutturata (e dunque fateci sapere che eventi
organizzate, quale campagna state promuovendo ora, quale corso di formazione state
pianificando, ecc.)
Insomma, arrivati al sesto anno è normale passare dall’asilo alle scuole elementari. Vi
chiediamo di farci sapere se abbiamo meritato questa promozione.

VERSO LA MORTE DELLA PENA DI MORTE
Tobias Gehring

Le Nazioni Unite hanno aperto la porta per una risoluzione contro la pena di morte. A
ragione, giacché le esecuzioni violano diritti umani e non sono affatto necessarie.
“Per creare la relazione giusta, la pena di morte dovrebbe essere inflitta a un delinquente
che avverte la sua vittima che l’ucciderà in una maniera terribile un giorno specifico e chi,
a partire da questo momento, la tiene in prigione sotto controllo per mesi. E’ difficile
trovare un tale mostro nella sfera privata.” Adesso, anche il Terzo Comitato
dell’Assemblea Generale delle Nazioni Unite è arrivato alla stessa conclusione di Albert
Camus e “chiede una moratoria globale per le esecuzioni […] Si aspetta che l’Assemblea
Generale appoggerà la decisione in una sessione plenaria in Dicembre.” Una tale
risoluzione, sebbene non impegnativa, sarebbe un segno forte contro una pena che viola
gli articoli 3 e 5 della Dichiarazione Universale dei Diritti Umani e di cui “almeno 1.591
persone” cadevano vittime nel 2006. Dati di fatto ed etici supportano gli opponenti della
pena di morte e aiutano di confutare importanti argomentazioni a favore di essa. L’argomento corrente che solo la fortissima punizione disponibile sia abbastanza per
intimidire omicidi non resiste a un’occhiata alla
realtà; a mo’ d’esempio, l’abolizione temporanea
della pena di morte negli USA fra il 1972 e il 1976
non ha avuto come conseguenza una salita
straordinaria degli omicidi, come si può vedere
dal grafico. E l’argomento di intimidazione si
fonda sull’idea che la gente assassina con la
supposizione di essere condannato più tardi, ma
spesso gli omicidi avvengono spontaneamente o
sono progettati cosi bene che l’omicida crede che
non sarà preso. In oltre, uno Stato che uccide
criminali dice ai suoi cittadini che in certi casi
uccidere è una soluzione giusta. Precisamente
come la mentalità di “occhio per occhio” del
vecchio testamento, che forma la base
dell’argomento che la morte sia una “punizione giusta” per gli assassini, un tale modo di
pensare è piuttosto capace d’alzare la predisposizione alla violenza della popolazione se
entra nel suo modo di pensare.
L’argomento della “punizione giusta” chiarisce anche che la pena di morte è
incompatibile con l’interpretazione moderna della legge nella quale gli obiettivi principali
delle sentenze sono la protezione della società e la risocializzazione del delinquente. Come
abbiamo visto, la pena di morte non è un metodo migliore dell’ergastolo per la protezione
della società e, provando il suo arcaismo, manca interamente della componente di
risocializzazione perché cadaveri non possono migliorarsi e, di fatto, l’obiettivo della pena
di morte è semplicemente trasformare delinquenti in cadaveri invece che in uomini
migliori. Però questo può anche capitare a cittadini onesti come Juan Melendez che,
ritenuto un omicida, ha passato 17 anni nel braccio della morte. Adesso, dopo la sua
fortunata liberazione, viaggia in tutto il mondo informando sulla pena di morte e
impegnandosi in prima persona per la sua abolizione globale. Ogni anno, tuttavia,
compagni di sventura meno fortunati di Melendez vengono uccisi del Stato per delitti che
non hanno mai commesso. Se prove dell’innocenza emergono dopo l’esecuzione di gente
innocente, è troppo tardi per alcuna “compensazione”, mentre agli innocenti in ergastolo ,
almeno può essere data la libertà per gli anni restanti fino allo loro morte naturale.
Parecchi sostenitori della pena di morte rispondono con la richiesta che la gente solo sia
condannata a morte se la sua colpa è provata senza alcuno dubbio, però conforme alla
massime “in dubio pro reo”, è gia pratica prescritta negli Stati di diritto che nessuna
punizione può essere inflitta ad accusati se ci sono dubbi riguardo alla loro colpa. La
fallibilità umana insegna che errori giudiziari sono sempre possibili, e per questa ragione
in Stati di diritto con la pena di morte, come gli USA o il Giappone, i carcerati passano
molti anni nella prigione prima della loro esecuzione, nei quali, normalmente, hanno
luogo molteplici processi per ottenere un’assoluzione o una trasformazione della pena in
ergastolo. In altri Stati come la Cina, in media passano due anni tra sentenza ed
esecuzione, che, naturalmente, fa salire il numero di gente uccisa innocentemente. Solo per
tali casi, l’argomento è effettivo che la pena di morte costa meno tasse ai contribuenti
dell’ergastolo. Se un Stato intendesse portare il numero di esecuzioni di innocenti ad un
minimo, la pena di morte sarebbe di fatto persino più cara dell’ergastolo. Per esempio, il
Death Penalty Information Center americano riferisce che “lo Stato di Kansas concludeva
che casi capitali sono 70% più cari che casi simili senza pena di morte.” Inoltre,
l’argomento stesso delle spese può essere considerato antietico, perché attribuisce più di
valore ai soldi che all’inviolabilità della vita umana.
Infine, anche l’argomento che la pena di morte
previene secondi delitti dell’ omicida uscito deve
essere respinto. Innanzi tutto, come ci è noto, la
pena di morte non diminuisce il numero totali di
omicidi, e per un vittima non fa differenza se il suo
omicida è o non è un assassino seriale. Inoltre, gli
effetti abbruttenti dell’uso della pena di morte che
abbiamo mostrato, aumentano la probabilità che la
prevenzione di secondi crimini porti con se
l’aumento di primi crimini. Infine, anche una
risocializzazione riuscita previene il crimine, e
quasi tutte le risocializzazioni sono riuscite, “la
recidività a delitti di uccisione ammonta da uno a tre percento.” E se la risocializzazione si
dimostrasse impossibile, lo Stato sempre può incarcerare criminali per sempre e così
proteggere efficacemente la società senza le esecuzioni.
I numerosi argomenti contro la pena di morte non sono stati ininfluenti rispetto alla
politica; nel corso del 20° secolo, un movimento globale per l’abolizione della pena
capitale ha portato al risultato che oggi la maggioranza dei Paesi del mondo ha più o
meno detto addio alla pena di morte, come si vede anche dal diagramma. Con la nuova
risoluzione delle Nazioni Unite, un altro passo è stato fatto sulla strada verso una morte
globale della pena di morte.

TOWARDS DEATH PENALTY’S DEATH

The United Nations have opened the door for a
resolution against the death penalty. Rightly, for
executions violate human rights and are not at all
necessary.
“To create the right relation, the death penalty had to
be imposed on a criminal who first warns his victim
that he will kill it in a terrible way on a specific day
and who, from this moment on, detains it under his
control for months. You won’t find such a monster in
the private domain.” Now, also the UN General
Assembly’s Third Committee has come to this
conclusion of Albert Camus and made “a call […] for
Death penalty in the world
a global moratorium on executions […] The General Assembly is expected to endorse the
decision in a plenary session in December.”1 Such a resolution, though not binding, would
be a strong sign against a penalty which violates articles 3 and 5 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights2 and to which in 2006 “at least 1,591 people”3 fell victim.
Facts as well as ethics are thereby on the side of the death penalty’s opponents and help to
refute important pro-arguments. The common argument that only the strongest available
punishment would be enough to deter murderers doesn’t bear up under a view on reality;
e.g., the temporary abolishment of the death penalty in the USA between 1972 and 1976
didn’t entail an unusual ascent of the murders, as you can see at the graph.4 And the
deterrence argument is based upon the idea that people would murder on the assumption
of being sentenced later, yet most killings either happen spontaneously or are planned so
well that the murderer believes he won’t be caught. Furthermore, a state which kills
criminals exemplifies to its citizens that under some circumstances killing is a right
solution. Just as the Old Testament “an eye for an eye”-thinking which forms the basis of
the argument that death would be a “just punishment” for murderers, such a pattern of
thoughts is rather able to increase the population’s disposition for violence if it enters their
minds.
The “just punishment” argument also bespeaks that the death penalty is incompatible to
modern judicial conception in which the main purposes of enforcement of sentences are
protection of society and rehabilitation of the delinquent. As we have seen, the death
penalty is no better means of protection than life-long imprisonment and, in proof of its
archaism, completely lacks the re-socialisation component, since corpses can’t ameliorate
and, in fact, the purpose of the death penalty simply is to turn criminals into corpses
instead of into better human beings. Yet this can also befall fair citizens such as Juan
Melendez who, mistaken for a murderer, spent 17 years on death row. Now, after his
fortunate liberation, he tours the world informing about the death penalty and engaging
for its global abolition. Every year until then, however, less lucky comrades in misery of
Melendez will be state-killed for crimes they never have committed. If proofs of innocence
appear after the execution of innocent people, it’s too late for any “compensation”, while
innocent life-long prisoners can at least be given freedom for the remaining years until
their natural death.
Some death penalty supporters react with the demand that people should only be
sentenced to death if their guilt is proved without any doubt; but commensurate with the
maxim “in dubio pro reo” it’s already prescribed practice in constitutional states that no
sentence may be imposed on detainees if there are doubts concerning their guilt. Human
fallibility guarantees that judicial errors are always possible, which is why in
constitutional states with the death penalty like the USA or Japan, death row inmates
spend many years in prison before their execution, in which usually several revision
processes take place in order to sue out an acquittal or a transformation of the sentence
into life-long custody. In other states like for example the global front-runner China,
averagely two years pass between judgement and execution, which of course makes the
number of innocently executed people increase. Only for those cases, the argument takes
effect that the death penalty would cost tax-payers less money than if criminals spend all
their days to come in prison. If a state aims at keeping executions of innocent people to a
minimum, the death penalty is in fact even more expensive than the life sentence. For
instance, the American Death Penalty Information Center reports that “the State of Kansas
concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty
cases.”5 Furthermore, the cost argument itself can be attacked as inhumane because it
attaches higher value to money than to the inviolableness of human life.
Finally, even the argument that the death penalty
prevents second offences by the killed murderer
shall be disapproved. First at all, as it’s known to
us, the death penalty doesn’t diminish the total
number of murders, and it makes no difference for
a victim whether its murderer is a serial killer or
not. Also the brutalizing effects of the death
penalty’s use that have been pointed out, make it
likely that the prevention of second offenders goes
along with the creation of first offenders. And
ultimately, also a successful rehabilitation prevents
further crimes of a person, and almost all rehabilitations are successful, “the recidivism
rate at killing delicts accounts for one to three percent.”6 And if rehabilitation should proof
impossible, the state can shut away criminals for ever and in this vein effectively protect
society without executions.
The various arguments against the death penalty are not lost upon politics; over the course
of the 20th century, an ongoing global trend to abolish capital punishment has started
with the result that nowadays the majority of the world’s country’s has more or less said
good-bye to executions, see also the diagram. With the new UN resolution, another step is
done on the way to a world-wide death of the death penalty.

APPROFONDIMENTI:

Hugo Adam Bedau et al., "Debating the Death Penalty: Should
America Have Capital Punishment? The Experts on Both Sides
Make Their Case", Oxford University Press USA, 2005
Amnesty International, "Amnesty International Report 2007: The
State of the World’s Human Rights", Amnesty International, 2007
5 Death Penalty Information Center, “Costs of the Death Penalty”, deathpenaltyinfo.org
6 amnesty international, “Pro und Contra”, amnesty.de, 05. 1998
The graphs used for this article have been created by the author.

MILIBAND PARLA DEL FUTURO DELL’EUROPA

Jiske van Loon

Il 15 novembre il segretario degli affari esteri inglese, David Miliband, ha tenuto un
discorso al Collegio di Bruge (Belgio) sulle relazioni tra il Regno Unito e l’Europa e sul
futuro dell’Unione Europea. Secondo lui l’Europa del futuro dovrebbe essere un modello
di riferimento per il resto del mondo, dedicata al mercato libero, all’ambiente e alla lotta
agli estremismi. Dovrebbe occuparsi di temi globali e aprirsi ai paesi esterni agli attuali
paesi membri. A questo proposito, ha suggerito che l’Unione Europea dovrebbe lavorare
al processo di inclusione della Russia e dei paesi dell’Europa Orientale e Nord Africani,
ma ciò mi sembra poco realistico. Fa sorgere la domanda su cosa sia l’Europa e la nostra
comune identità. Ti senti europeo? L’Unione Europea significa qualcosa per te?

MILIBAND ON THE FUTURE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

The 15th of Novembre the British Foreign Secretary David
Miliband held a speech at the College of Europe in Bruges
(Belgium) about the relationship between the United
Kingdom and Europe. In this speech he reflected on the
existence and future of the European Union and in my
opinion he said some interesting things about this. For
example he suggested that the European Union should work
towards including Russia, Middle Eastern and North
African countries.
At first Miliband was talking about superpowers. Under superpower he understands: "a
country that has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the
world…and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemon." According to Miliband
there is only one superpower and that are the United States. New superpowers like China
and India are coming up, but Miliband says that Europe will never be a superpower.
Economically and demographically Europe will even be less important in the world of
2050 than it was in the world of 1950. However, Miliband sees Europe in the future as a
model power, a model of regional cooperation for the rest of the world.
In his speech he summed up various treats that exist at this moment: protectionism,
religious extremism, energy insecurity, rogue and failing states and climate changes.
According to Miliband these treats provide a new reason for the EU to exist. The single
nation states of the EU are too small to deal on their own with these big problems, so that
is why the EU is important at this moment. It should be a leader and a pioneer: “As a club
that countries want to join, it can persuade countries to play by the rules, and set global
standards. In the way it dispenses its responsibilities around the world, it can be a role
model that others follow.”
For the last fifty years the EU was focussed on internal change, but Miliband says the
challenges are now global instead of national. In the future wars within the borders of the
EU will not be the problem, but Europe will be struggling to cope with forces like religious
extremism, which are beyond its borders. He speaks about a world which in the future
will be divided by religion, between countries and within countries. He mentions the clash
between the western world and the Islam, a growing inhospitality towards Europe and
threats like rogue states and terrorists. Europe is build on shared values between the
different nations states, so Miliband says that now the EU needs to find and express
shared values between Europe and it’s Muslim neighbours. According to him we should
use the power of shared institutions and shared activities to overcome religious, regional
and cultural divides. As example he gives the Erasmus programme, with which students
can easily study abroad. According to Miliband one third of the Erasmus exchanges
should be to countries beyond the borders of Europe, like Middle-Eastern and Northern
African countries.
Also in other ways he wants to bring Russia, Middle-
Eastern and Northern African countries closer to Europe.
He suggests a free trade area around the periphery of the
current European Union. This would be a "version of the
European Free Trade Association that could gradually
bring the countries of the Mahgreb, the Middle East and
Eastern Europe in line with the single market, not as an
alternative to membership, but potentially as a step
towards it". So with this sentence he suggests that maybe
one day these countries will join the European Union.
According to him enlargement of the European Union is
the most powerful tool for extending stability and
prosperity. The prospect of becoming part of the EU drives
countries to democratisation and transformation and that’s why Miliband says we should
keep our doors open. Miliband says regarding to enlargement that it is important that we
keep our promises to Turkey and the western Balkans. In the debate about the accession of
Turkey to the EU the United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark are the most strong
proponents.7 Also Italy is positive about the accession of Turkey to the EU, but Sarkozy is
strongly against it.
In his speech Miliband also talks about migration and he links this with open trade. He
makes a division between unwanted migration of people from the poorest countries and
wanted migration of “the world’s best talent”. According to him migration is necessary
because the European population is ageing and declining, but we Europe can’t be “a tent
of the world’s poorest people”. To diminish the unwanted migration, he says we should
tackle the problem at it’s roots. According to him the root cause of migration is the poor
economic prospects in neighbouring countries. To change this we should continue to open
up markets. Miliband wants more free trade and investments. He says that if we will hold
back on open trade, we will hold back the process of modernising our economies and
raising productivity and at the same time he thinks open trade will diminish the
unwanted migration.
7 Kloor, Robin van der. Sito web di Elsevier, 22 novembre 2007
http://www.elsevier.nl/nieuws/europese_unie/artikel/asp/artnr/180549/rss/true/index.html

So, according to Miliband Europe should in the future be a role model for the rest of the
world, dedicated to free trade, the environment and tackling extremism. It has to deal with
global issues and should be open to countries around the current member countries. I
think it is important and interesting to think about the current and future role and position
of the European Union in the world, because the world keeps changing and individual
countries are often not able to deal with global issues. The problem of migration is an
example of a global problem which should be dealt with on global level, because every
member state can not have his own policy. However, the idea of an European Union with
Russia, North-African and Middle-Eastern countries sounds very strange to me. For me it
calls up the question what is Europe? Do I as a citizen of the Netherlands at this moment
living in Italy feel ‘European’? And does an inhabitant of for example Italy or England
have the same image in mind of what is Europe? And when Morocco would join the
European Union, how would this change the concept of Europe? I think this is not
realistic. As being Europe we have a common history and shared values, but how far
should we go with accepting more countries to join? Miliband is a proponent of
enlargement and wants to go very far with this, but in the end there will be no common
identity any more. But what is the common identity of Europe and how strong is this? Is
the European Union just a collection of neighbouring countries who try to work together
on higher level, but does it have no meaning for individuals living in Europe? For me
Europe is important, but what does it mean for you?

PIANO D’AZIONE SU SCIENZA E TECNOLOGIA IN AFRICA

Bengu Bayram

Gli sforzi per sviluppare la scienza e la tecnologia hanno subito un’accelerazione in Africa. A
questo scopo, i capi Africani si sono riuniti per trasformare le università in posti migliori, in cui
l’insegnamento della scienza e della tecnologia possa avvenire su vasta scala. Questi capi, che
hanno dichiarato il 2007 come l’anno della scienza e della tecnologia, hanno approvato un
programma che aprirà la strada alla ricerca nelle biotecnologie. Questo progetto ha la finalità di
creare un sistema nell’agricoltura, ambiente, infrastrutture e nell’educazione. Al suo interno
contiene delle idee di sviluppo della tecnologia. Riconoscendo che la scienza può contribuire a
risolvere i problemi della mancanza di energia, le malattie e la penuria dell’acqua, i capi africani
hanno cominciato a focalizzare l’attenzione della gente sull’importanza della scienza e della
tecnologia. Per questo motivo, tutti dovrebbero rendersene conto e più gente dovrebbe essere
formata per aiutare a dare una spinta all’economia Africana.

AFRICA’S SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CONSOLIDATED PLAN OF ACTION

Efforts to develop science and technology have gained momentum in Africa. To this end,
African leaders have unified in an attempt to make the universities in Africa much better
places where the teaching of science and technology can be promoted on a larger scale.
These leaders, who declared 2007 as the year of science and technology, have approved of
a programme which will pave the way to research in biotechnology.
“Africa’s Science and Technology
Consolidated Plan of Action” is aimed at
constructing a system on research into
agriculture, environment, infrastructure and
education. With the help of this plan, new
ways will be sought as to how biodiversity
can be conserved and how biotechnology can
be developed. The plan also includes ways in
which how drought and desertification can
be tackled.
However, good and inspiring the plan may sound, the problem of how to finance the plan
has not been settled yet by the leaders. The total cost of the plan is estimated to be $ 158m.
Mosibudi Mangena, South African Science and Technology Minister has drawn on the
importance of the plan by pointing out the gravity of the current situation in Africa and
added that Africa has to benefit from the global economy if it is to get rid of poverty.
The implementation of the plan is vital in that Africa is currently in need of viable science
and technology in order to encourage industrial and agricultural productivity, combat
diseases and help people to gain access to clean water. Yet, there is a dearth of scientists in
Africa as opposed to industrial nations in Europe. Because there is a wide gap between
Africa and the rest of the world in terms of science and technology, Africa has always
found itself in a position where it only made futile attempts to catch up with the rest of the
world. Of the many reasons behind this gap are lack of funding, insufficient infrastructure
and brain drain.
However, the picture is not so frightening. There are signs of development in
technological terms. In Mali, villagers are using a device to shell groundnuts. Able to be
operated by a single person, this device can meet the needs of 2000 people in a village. The
last few years have witnessed a rise in the interest in science and technology. Realizing
that science can help solve the problems about energy deficiency, diseases and water
scarcity, African leaders have started to divert the people’s attention to the importance of
science and technology. For this reason, everyone is aware of the fact that many more
people should be trained and employed in the realm of science to help give a boost to
Africa’s economy.
Many development planners are very
well aware of the advantages of solar
technology, which can be an alternative
energy source. However, many countries
have so far been reluctant to adapt this
technology because of financial
constraints. But, the fact remains that
over the next 20 years, Africa will lose
half of its water reserves and therefore it
is high time planners invested in ways in
which they can find a solution to the
problems of conserving and distributing
water.
The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs is helping Africa’s less industrialized
countries by running a project to encourage information and communication technologies,
biotechnologies, nanotechnologies and fuel technologies.
As part of this project, the UN and a number of African governments, private companies
and academics recommended setting up science and technology parks. Ghana and Senegal
were chosen to begin work on such parks. When they are completed, there will be lots of
companies in Senegal which will be selling computer software and hardware. There will
also be pharmaceutical centers in these parks. For all these to happen, education,
unsurprisingly, is a must. Countries that do not place the required attention on education
always lag behind technologically forward countries.
After most African countries gained their independence in the 1960s, the number of
students in Africa soared to a record level as there was a demand for skilled workers.
Although the number of universities has grown exponentially since the 1960s, there has
always been a lack of funding. Currently, many African universities are suffering from a
deficiency of qualified staff. To overcome this problem, it was proposed in 2005 that Africa
come together with other developing nations such as India and Brazil to acquaint its
students with science and technology so that brain drain can be prevented and more
qualified staff can be held in universities.

PETROLIO AFRICANO: NERO PER MOLTI, DORATO PER POCHI

Tobias Gehring

Il prezzo del petrolio sale, la sua domanda resta alta. Così. il commercio col petrolio può
fruttare tanti soldi, anche per dittatori che dominano Paesi africani d’esportazione del
petrolio come la Libia o l’Angola. Con i petrodollari, i despoti assicurano la loro forza.
Conflitti sul petrolio risultano inoltre svantaggiosi per la popolazione, per esempio
inquinamento ecologico, la distribuzione e l’investimento ingiusto dei soldi. Quindi ci
sono scontri armati fra governo, imprese e ribelli. Ma se l’Europa si ritirasse dal mercato
Africano, la Cina supplirebbe. Perciò, il commercio continua ad essere un affare di winwin
per governi ed imprese mentre la popolazione soffre di povertà e vengono violati i
loro diritti umani.

AFRICA’S PETROLEUM: BLACK FOR MANY, GOLDEN FOR FEW

In petroleum exporting countries, global concerns and authoritarian regimes form unholy
alliances. The brunt has to borne by the men-in-the-street.
At the beginning of this month, only 1.38 US-$ separated the price for one barrel of
petroleum from the 100 $ mark. A worldwide demand which has topically reached 86
million barrel per day, scantily exceeding the daily range, makes sure that this process
continues. “80 up to 150 dollars […] would be possible within the next five years”8,
forecasts German economist Otto Wiesmann.
Petroleum trade is a million dollar business, but not always, the opulences ambulate into
the right cashes. Amongst the twenty most exporting countries of 2006 are Libya and
Angola, whose government is accused of “human rights violations [including] torture and
unlawful killings.”9 The receipts of the oil export stand in good stead for those regimes
who secure their power with the aid of petrodollars. “Studies document that petroleum
exporting countries averagely spend more money for the construction of army and
armature than countries which are poor of resources.”10
Also in more democratic countries, petroleum is a constant apple of discord. The interests
of the multinationals often collide with those of indigenous people under whose territory
petroleum has been found. To protect themselves from eventual resistance on the part of
the natives who don’t want to put up with their environment becoming polluted or
themselves having to leave it – often without compensation – the petroleum concerns
“conclude contracts with army, police or private security corporations [who] don’t shrink
away from rape, murder or torture.”11
Another source of conflict is that the monies the corporations and the states engage by the
petroleum trade don’t trickle down to the population, and a just distribution is a distant
prospect, if any at all, due to corruption, a lack of transparency and governments and
concerns who both often only have an eye for their particular interests, less for those of the
country. In states like Sudan or Kongo, for instance, there are strong separatist
movements. The governments thus don’t channel their gains into these regions, so that e.g.
“ambitious sky-scrapers, financed out of the petroleum business, emerge in [Khartoum],
while southern Sudan carries on living in absolute poverty and the reconstruction is a long
time coming after decades of war”13; and “the oil industry produces in insular economy
enclaves and doesn’t arrange for growth and jobs in the local economy.”14 The
corporations, in fact, invest in infrastructure, but only in “communes close to the
petroleum installations”15, which shows that a main motivation for these arrangements is
that the concerns want to use the
infrastructure for their own purposes. In case
of doubt, thus, interests of the corporations
outweigh those of the local population. All
this may explain phenomena like this one;
that in Nigeria, while having “gained 280
billions US dollars by petroleum extraction
alone in the past 30 years[,] the bulk of the
population has to get by on less than one
dollar per capita a day.”16 The fact that who
controls the petroleum trade acquires the
money as well as the power to decide what it
is used for makes it an attractive aim for rebel
groups who either want to undertake control
over the installations or to destroy the
pipelines. “The provisional force on the
resource becomes the most important
domestic conflict in the countries of Africa
which are rich in petroleum”17, thus
prognosticates amnesty international.
Yet the conflict will also have an international component, for not only African states’
governments and rebels, but also petroleum importing countries and global petroleum
corporations have their interests concerning Africa’s oil and will advance them. Following
the labile Middle East and Europe plus the former Soviet Union, Africa possesses the
third-biggest slice of the world’s petroleum reserves. First at all, the Chinese develop this
market, thereby bringing Europe and America into a dodgy position, because China, the
second-biggest importer of petroleum in the world, doesn’t care whether the countries it
trades with violate human rights or other international standards and “avoids every
embargo against African dictatorships.”18 Offered the choice of trading with dictatorships
or yielding the market to the Chinese, Europe mostly decides to put human rights in the
rear. “Espousal of human rights and democracy is privily seen as competitive
disadvantage by many western politicians”19 as well as by the economy. There is, for
instance, the Global Compact, aiming to shape globalization in a more social way, yet of
77,000 transnational corporations, only 2,500 have signed the Compact, among which for
example Exxon, in 2007 the world’s second-biggest corporation on the basis of business
volume20, can’t be found21. Especially in non-constitutional states, the corporations, which
exert great influence around their African positions, are equipped with a charter to
penetrate their interests also by illicit means, as it happened for example in the Niger delta
region, where the Joint Task Force, whose task is to abet the petroleum corporations, has
“killed, raped people, destroyed houses and villages.”22 In such cases, the population has
no chance against syndicates of governments which allow the concerns to act in whatever
way seems fit to them and which encash the money for allowing the global players to use
their nation’s petroleum, and corporations which extract the petroleum and briskly trade
with it at the glutton world market.

APPROFONDIMENTI:

P. Le Billon, "The Geopolitics of Resource Wars", Routledge, 2005

MASTER IN SVILUPPO UMANO LOCALE, CULTURA DI PACE E COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE

Master di I livello in Sviluppo Umano Locale, Cultura di Pace e Cooperazione
Internazionale: teorie, metodi, esperienze interdisciplinari e buone pratiche tra saperi
locali e saperi globali.
L’Università di Firenze, insieme con il Programma Universitas dell’Iniziativa ART, ha
sviluppato questo Programma postlauream, che si prefigge di contribuire alla qualità dei
Programmi attuali e futuri di Cooperazione Internazionale per lo Sviluppo Umano
fornendo professionisti esperti dal Sud e dal Nord con il sapere e le competenze specifiche
richieste per progettare, gestire e coordinare tali programmi.
Il Master si concentra su una nozione specifica di sviluppo umano e cooperazione
internazionale in cui le comunità locali, con le proprie istituzioni e attori pubblici e privati,
sono i protagonisti di un processo di sviluppo endogeno. Un processo che è tuttavia
strettamente connesso alle politiche e ai programmi sia a livello nazionale sia
internazionale.
Per ulteriori informazioni: http://www.scform.unifi.it/mastersviluppo/

MASTER IN LOCAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, PEACE BUILDING
AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

First Level Master in Local Human Development, Peace building and international
cooperation: theories, methods, interdisciplinary experiences and good practices between
local and global knowledges.
The university of Florence, together with the Program Universitas of the ART Initiative,
has developed this postlauream program, which aims to contribute to the quality of actual
and future International Cooperation for Human Developement programs, providing
professional expertises from North and South, with the knowledge and specific
competencies needed to project, handle and coordinate these programs.
This Master focuses on a specific notion of human developing and international
cooperation in which local communities, with their own istitutions and public and private
actors, are the main actors of an internal development process. A process that is strictly
connected with national and international politics and programs.

For further informations: http://www.scform.unifi.it/mastersviluppo/

SENGALAZIONE LIBRO DI GABRIELLA GHERMANDI

Gabriele Sospiro

Lo sentiamo un po’ nostro questo libro di Gabriella Ghermandi
intitolato Regina di fiori e di perle, pubblicato per Donzelli ormai
qualche mese fa. L’autrice, italo-etiope, racconta di una grande
famiglia patriarcale di DebreZeit, a poca distanza da Addis Abeba.
Un lungo viaggio nel tempo e nello spazio, in cui scorrono la vita e
le vicissitudini di una famiglia etiope nel periodo della dittatura di
Mengistu Hailè Mariam, e nel decennio successivo
dell’emigrazione. Un libro intenso che l’autrice presenterà venerdì
30 novembre alle ore 18 presso la libreria Feltrinelli di Ancona.

AGENDA Circolo Culturale Africa
Altri

Giovedì 29 novembre alle ore 17.00 presso la sala del consiglio della facoltà di
economia dell’Università Politecnica delle Marche vi sarà la presentazione del libro
“Discorso sulla decrescita” di Maurizio Pallante (Ministero dell’Ambiente) con la
partecipazione di Stefano Sylos Labini (ENEA). Vista l’importanza del tema si
consiglia la partecipazione.
Venerdi 30 Novembre alle ore 18:00 presentazione del libro “Regina di fiori e di
perle” di Gabriella Ghermanti presso la libreria Feltrinelli di Ancona.
Giovedì 6 Dicembre alle ore 10.00 presso la Facoltà di Scienze Politiche
dell’Università di Macerata sarà presentato il rapporto sullo Sviluppo Umano
dell’United Nation Development Program (UNDP) 2007 – 2008. Si ricorda che dal 27
novembre sarà possibile “scaricare” gratuitamente (www.UNDP.gov) il rapporto del
2008 dal titolo “Fighting climate change: human solidarity in a divided world”.
Quindi quest’anno il rapporto si concentra sul tema dell’ambiente e della relazione
tra quest’ultimo e la povertà e lo sviluppo umano.

WWW.CIRCOLOAFRICA.EU

3986-newsletter-del-centro-di-documentazione-e-ricerca-per-la-cittadinanza-attiva

4742

EmiNews 2007

Views: 14