Energy Poverty and "Akon Lighting Africa"

Do you know how much of your daily routine is dependent on having simple electricity? Can you imagine your education, working environment or home chores with out reliable supply of energy? Simple use of ATM machines, iPhones, Macs, Laundromats, Printers and even as simple as use of a toaster in morning are all dependent on electricity. People in developed countries simply don’t realize what a blessing it is to be provided with constant energy. Having electricity and being able to use it is so normal to us that we forget its true value.

An ugly reality is that not the entire world is gifted with reliable sources of energy. Even further, lives of so many people around the world are at stake because hospitals can’t keep vaccines refrigerated. People can’t store their food under required temperature. Very often huts get caught on fire because people use other unsafe sources of energy like ceresin lamps instead of electricity.  Many children can’t acquire basic education and drop out of schools and poverty of these countries just grows bigger and bigger. Just to see the severity of this problem, try to imagine that 7 out of 10 people in Sub-Saharan Africa lack basic electricity. That is a heart-breaking and horrifying fact.

Growing up in Uzbekistan, that is a former USSR country and is located in Central Asia south of Kazakhstan and north of Afghanistan and Iran, I was unlucky enough to experience lack of stable energy flow first hand. Ironically “Uzbekistan was the third largest natural gas producer in Eurasia, behind Russia and Turkmenistan in 2011.” On the contrary about 3 to 4 out of 7 days a week my family would spend with out any sign of electricity. I remember how my grandmother would get so devastated and upset when just as she’d buy groceries and put them in the fridge, the power would go off for days and the entire fridge of food would get thrown away because we can’t eat it all before it went bad.

During one of the coldest winters in Uzbekistan when temperature dropped below zero degrees Fahrenheit we were out of electricity as well as hot water for a week. In order to sleep and not get sick my mom made me wear all my warm clothes, including boots, gloves, puff jacket, hat, and scarf before I got under several layers of blankets. Now living in LA and enjoying this blessed beautiful weather sometimes I still get horrified by memories of those days and nights that all you do is just hope that electricity will come back on and I’d be able to have a cup of warm tea or water.

A person that also was unlucky enough as myself and had to experience hardships of life without electricity is Akon. Akon is an international Philanthropist, business mogul, hip-hop and R&B recording artist, songwriter and record producer. He was born in Saint Luis, Missouri and ended up growing up in Senegal. He is known for his chart-dominating singles “Smack That” and “I Wanna Love You.” In February 2014, Akon began and initiative that would bring electricity to more than one million homes in Africa by the end of 2014. “Akon Lighting Africa” is an effort that will address immediate needs of people in Africa. “This initiative will address the concern that more than two-thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa is without electricity, and that more than 85 percent of those living in rural areas lack access.”

Akon is being assisted by One a “campaigning and advocacy organization of more than 3.5 million people taking action to end extreme poverty and preventable disease, particularly in Africa. Cofounded by Bono and nonpartisan, they raise public awareness and work with political leaders to combat AIDS and preventable diseases, increase investments in agriculture and nutrition, and demand greater transparency in poverty-fighting programs. ONE also works closely with African activists and policymakers as they fight corruption, promote poverty-fighting priorities, monitor the use of aid, and help build civil society and economic development.”

This past Monday Akon and One with help of Michael Drachkovitch, who is USC Dornsife alumnus, manager of marketing and external relations at ONE brought the entire campaign to USC. As a former International Relations student Michael saw an opportunity to seek help of young, innovative and passionate International Relations student. Students were presented with a challenge of how to efficiently use social media and draw attention to the Energy Poverty problem and stimulate young people to send online letters to Congress. “These letters will urge Senators to support legislation that will bring modern energy to more than 50 million people living in sub-Saharan Africa for the very first time - all at zero cost to the US taxpayer. Letters are one of the most effective ways to influence the way Congress votes. The goal of the #PowerProject is to generate 50,000 letters to Congress.”

This campaign made me very proud and happy that there are people in this world that don’t forget their roots and where they came from, like Akon. Others like Michael Drachkovitch and One Campaign team are able to see beyond their own community and country and reach out to people in need in other parts of the world with the attempt to positively change their lives.

Forgive But Don't Forget

How much is enough when you punish people for their wrong doings? How much should they suffer for their mistakes? Should they experience just as much loss and pain as they brought upon others? Or maybe even more that they can learn their lesson? Or should they be given a second chance to get educated and rehabilitated? Can they possibly be brought back to our society as fully functional members? Or maybe they need to be kept isolated from the rest of us because they don’t belong here anymore.

If you have clear answers for all of these questions, you might not be interested in this post. But if you even had a slight moment of hesitation answering any of these questions above, keep reading.

Last week I read an article in The Guardian about an Iranian mother taking a noose off of her son’s killer. Apparently in Iran it’s very common when family of victims determines a type of death for the killer of their loved ones. It all happens through the legal system of criminal justice. After court determines that a person is at fault, family of a victim can choose and pick the way this person will be going to die. The honor of killing the murderer (sounds paradoxical) goes so far that the family can actually put a noose over murderer’s head and push the chair under his feet. To some it may seem as a fair exchange. If you took somebody’s life, expect to loose your life as well. But how far can we go away with that until we run out of people? In The Guardian’s article this procedure went as far as having a noose over killer’s head, but all over sudden the mother of a dead son changed her mind. She changed her mind and didn’t want to bring the same sorrow and grieve to the family of the killer. She said she doesn’t wish her pain to anybody. She said that her vengeance went away after she spared his life and she felt in peace after all these years of suffering. The killer’s life was saved, but he still going to remain imprisoned in a system where he is a lost case. He will be seen as a killer for the rest of his life and won’t ever have a chance to regain any rights or possibilities not even close to other members of society. Or should he?

After reading this article I remembered another article that I read about a year ago in The Guardian as well about very different judicial system in Norway.  In this article, James Erwin talks about his trip to one of the most extra ordinary of prisons that is located in Norway. Bastoy prison is placed on an isolated island, which lies a couple of miles off the coast in the Oslo fjord, just 46 miles southeast of Norway's capital. This prison has people of different ages and with different types of sentences. Prisoners' convictions may vary from stealing to drug smuggling, from single murders to man slaughtering and massacres. One of the first interesting notions that I discovered in this article is the fact that Norway doesn't use life sentences or death penalties at all. Thus, any prisoner after 5 years of being in a regular prison and the ones that show some attempts of admitting and realizing consequences of their crimes, as well as trying to put some effort to become better people, can be potentially transferred to Bastoy.

As mentioned earlier, Bastoy is a very unusual prison, where prisoners have a chance to reconcile and not forget what the free life is about. All the prisoners live in small houses that can accommodate up to 6 people. Everybody in Bostoy is occupied by paid jobs and extracurricular activities. These men have a chance for some education if they wish to pursue such and access to religious establishments. There are 70 members of staff on the 2.6 sq km island during the day, 35 of which are uniformed guards. The main job of these guards is very different from what we are used to. They don’t monitor prisoners; they don’t physically abuse or humiliate them. They simply keep the count of them. It is so contradicting with our mainstream understanding of prison guards, such as punishing, restricting, monitoring and dehumanizing prisoners.

You begin to understand the logic of this prison step by step from the words of different prisoners of Bastoy, when they describe their own experience there, where Bastoy is “an arena of developing responsibility,” where “ they [are] give[n] trust and responsibility” and where the prisoners “treat[ed] like grownups.” Later in the article James Erwin introducers the reader to one of the female guards called Rutchie. After her several words you finally realize what Norwegian government is trying to do with these people. She says, "There is so much to learn about the people who come to prison. We need to try to understand how they became criminals, and then help them to change. I'm still learning." Norway realizes that you don't change people by power. Instead, you give prisoners respect; this way you teach them to respect others, while they are being watched all the time. It is important that when they are released they are less likely to commit more crimes. “That is justice for society,” says a clinical psychologist Nilsen.

Both of these systems of dealing with criminals are so critically different. Bastoy seems like a great opportunity to rehabilitate people, to try and give them a second chance. Maybe even regain our members of society as better people. On the other hand, it is hard to judge families of Iran that are wishing for justice after their loved ones death. Even after writing this, I am still not sure if we can forgive that much. And if we forgive, how much should we forget?

Oligarch's benefits are citizens' costs.

Some say “be careful of what you wish for, otherwise you might just get it,” sadly Ukrainians forgot to.

By coming out to Maidan Square and demanding Yanukovich’s ouster and close economic ties with the European Union, Ukraine’s citizens are digging their own grave.

At the end of 2013 president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovich refused to sign already agreed upon association trade agreement with the European Union. In the future this agreement could’ve led Ukraine to join European Union as some Ukrainian citizens wished. Some people even believed that this trade agreement with the EU would improve Ukraine’s economic stability. Yanukovich’s revoke of the agreement drove Ukrainians to come out on Maidan Square in Kiev, capital of Ukraine. People began riots and demanded impeachment of the president for betraying their trust and driving economy of Ukraine into a crisis.

Yanukovich’s choice of keeping business and economic relationships with Russia is a no-brainer to understand. If Ukraine is to remain a political and economical partner of Russia, it can receive unconditional financial and political assistance as well as price relief on energy. Russia can offer so much more of the financial aid, no strings attached. While IMF, EU and USA’s money will come with extensive lists of conditionality that will put Ukraine’s economy even further in a deep debt-hole. The reality is that the EU still cannot afford to deliver on promises of significant financial aid. Nor will the USA, which is quietly trying in the background to convince western European governments to ‘backstop’ (restore) financial aid Europe may commit to the Ukraine. Obama will not risk a Ukraine aid package of any significant dimensions in a US election year.

If to think realistically in terms of colossal economical losses and gains, it is in Ukrainians’ best interest to stick with “big bear brother” Russia. Other wise, good luck to Ukraine’s people with suffering, loosing jobs and jumping off a ledge that they were balancing on through all of the revolution. Meanwhile, their oligarch’s are enjoying new opportunity of trading with more of Western partners through EU community than ever while expanding their business.

It’s very important for Ukrainians to understand that Yanukovich was never the problem of Ukrainian economy, or at least he wasn’t the one and only. He wasn’t the dictator who made all the decisions on his own in order to suppress and control people as well as increase personal gains. Right next to him were his two main supporters and two people that controlled half of Yanukovich’s party. These two men, Rinat Akhmetov and Dmitry Firtash, are the most influential oligarchs in the country.

All three, Yanukovich, Akhmetov and Firtash, became skyrocketing rich after USSR collapsed and all the businesses were in the hands of people. They split Ukraine’s market and worked back to back all the way to the top until they reached the highest point and made Yanukovich the president of Ukraine. All the decisions that were made by Yanukovich were made with the approval of the other two and never alone.

As Yanukovich’s popularity was on the decline, Akhmetov and Firtash realized that they need a plan of action that would allow them to stay in power and not let their businesses to suffer too much. They carefully began looking around for new candidates for power and shifted attention from Yanukovich to let him drown on his own. They began supporting new, inexperienced and ambitious people like Vitaliy Klitchko with his party UDAR and Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who took over Yuliya Timoshenko’s Fatherland alliance.

Ukrainian people can think that they’ve got a new, non-corrupted Westward looking type of politicians, but in the end it is the same people, Akhmetov and Firtash that are in charge of Ukrainian government. By changing the leader they couldn’t change the regime and instead of Yanukovich’s ‘crony capitalist’ regime they’ve got tons of new young and power-money hungry economic vultures that are manipulated by the same two.

If to blame Yanukovich for the entire Ukrainian economic crisis it is to overlook the bigger picture that is much more complicated. Any economic trends do not occur overnight or even in couple of years. It takes decades to build and even more time to rebuild or implement any drastic economic changes. It is a fact that Ukrainian GDP per capita was rising safely, compare to other former USSR countries, until the ‘Orange Revolution’ in 2004. It was happening because of tightly integrated economic relations with the Russian Federation. After the ‘Orange Revolution’ and attempts of shifting Ukrainian exports and financial flow to the West, Ukraine experienced natural adjustment period of slower economic growth. Further, it was negatively affected by oil price shocks, financial crash of 2008, inability of western economies to generate a robust sustained recovery since 2008, and emerging markets crisis today.

When Viktor Yanukovich came to power in 2010, Ukrainian economy was already all the way down the hill. That doesn’t mean that his golden mansions helped Ukrainian economy to rise. Contrary, corruption and policy ineptness of his regime may well be included among the various causes of the Ukraine’s current economic problems, but nonetheless broader historical economic causes are involved as well. The smartest and tactical of all his decisions was probably his refusal to sign the association agreement with the European Union, a major reason that encouraged the protests.

Energy reform was one of the main aspects of the association agreement. This reform would force Ukrainian government to lift up energy subsidies that are put in place to make it cheaper for regular citizens and small businesses. If to do so, a lot of business will be closed down and people will be cut off energy flow that they are not able to pay for.

Putin's Defense Plan

     As a response to questions and concerns of Sabina Bhatia and Misunderstoodmetropolis I’m writing this post. I tried to keep my last post very distant from the Crimean annexation, but I guess it’s hard to talk about parts of conflict when there are a lot of different aspects and issues involved at the same time. It’s actually very surprising that in the US media there are less articles and news reports about issues of Ukrainian nationalism and new neo-Nazi government leaders and more articles about Putin being a crazy communist former KGB agent. I’m sorry for anybody’s hopes and/or aspirations that could be shattered by this post. After careful research I may guarantee that Putin is neither crazy, nor is he trying to rebuild Soviet Union, nor will he try to invade other parts of Ukraine or any other countries of ex-USSR territory. Putin is nothing but a rational actor that is concerned about his country’s security and tries to protect his boarders, as well as takes advantage of a situation.

    Hear me out; I’m not anybody’s supporter. I have a cold mind and heart when I'm evaluating this situation; even though, my heart is bleeding when I watch poor civilians dying because of simple bureaucratic games.
   

       Crimea has a long troublesome history of being concurred, occupied, given away and rented out. Crimea locates just South of Ukraine and South West of Russia by the Black Sea. Before Crimea got its modern name the Greeks and Romans knew it as “Taurica” which means “fortress” or “stronghold” because of its strategically important location. The Greeks, Romans, Gothic tribes, the Kievan Rus’ state, the Byzantium Empire, and Mongols all occupied Crimea at different times. During mid-1400s under protection of the Ottoman Empire, it was also known as the Crimean Khanate. 

"The modern name 'Crimea' seems to have come from the language of the Crimean Tatars, a Turkic ethnic group that emerged during the Crimean Khanate. The Tatars called the peninsula 'Qirim'." 

Russian queen Catherine the Great annexed Crimea in 1783. It remained a Russian territory until 1917, when Russian Empire collapsed after October revolution. For a short period of time Crimea was a sovereign state, but in 1921 it once again became a part of a newly born Soviet Union as the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1954 for very unusual and uncertain reasons Premier Nikita Khrushchev gave Crimea away to Ukraine and it remained as such until couple months ago.

     In 1997 Ukraine and Russia signed a bilateral Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership, which legally allowed Russia to keep it Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol, Crimea. While renting out Crimean ports Russia was partially subsidizing Ukrainian purchases of Russian natural gas. This seemed like a beneficial for both countries agreement. Here Ukraine gets to purchase cheaper natural gas and have a great military protection of a bigger brother Russia. Meanwhile, Russia gets to protect its Southwestern boarders, which as we can observe from historic evidences is extremely important military strategic location.

     Its 2014 now and Ukraine experiences a revolution where some people are eager to join the European Union, while others are not so eager and support keeping long-standing relationship with Russia. We also have people in Crimea that speak predominantly Russian and if not all the people but a majority of them see Ukrainian turmoil as an opportunity to gain Crimean independence and join Russian Federation.

    Lets try to become psychics and foresee future of Ukraine and Crimea specifically if Ukraine joins the European Union. However, you don’t need to be a psychic to realize that if Ukraine joins the EU it will eventually join NATO, as all of the other new members of European Union did. Now what’s going to happen to Russian Black Sea Fleet if Ukraine joins NATO? Hmmmm… No need to think too long or be some outstanding political analyst to understand that Russian Black Sea Fleet would be removed and United States Fleet would be placed instead. In this case we would’ve had a Cuban missile crisis but in reverse and it would’ve been called “Crimean missile crisis.” The US could have been as close as it gets to Russian boarder eye-eye staring at each other through riflescopes.

     Putin as a rational actor that understand how the world works could not allow this to happen and did everything to prevent a possible conflict and/or threat on his own boarders. But didn’t we do the same during the Cuban missile crisis, protected our boarders and prevented threat. If so, how can we blame Putin for what he did? Is he crazy? Not at all. Is he strategic? Very much so. Did he violate international laws? Yes he did, but who didn’t? It is quite hypocritical of United States to judge and sanction Russia

 “[a]fter invadingIraq illegally in 2003, with no sanction from the UN, and no imminent threat being posed by that country to either the US or to any of Iraq’s neighbors, after years of launching bombing raids, special forces assaults and drone-fired missile launches into countries like Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, and killing hundreds of innocent men, women and children, after illegally capturing and holding, without charge or trial, hundreds of people it accuses of being terrorists and illegal combatants, after torturing thousands of captives […]

How many times has the US sent troops into neighboring countries based upon the claim that it had to protect American citizens during a time of turmoil. We have Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989, the Dominican Republic in 1965, and Haiti in 2003, for starters. Would the US hesitate for even a moment to send troops into Mexico if the Mexican government were overthrown in an anti-American coup, and if demonstrators who had led to that overthrow were attacking Americans? Of course not.

The Panama invasion, and the overthrow and arrest and removal to the US of Panama’s elected President Manuel Noriega, is particularly instructive, as it involved protecting a strategic US overseas base — the US Canal Zone — much as Russia is protecting its naval bases in Crimea, operated under a long-term lease from Ukraine but threatened by the recent Ukrainian coup. The US, headed at the time by President George H.W. Bush, invaded Panama under the pretext of protecting Americans in that country, but the attack (which had been planned well in advance of any threats to Americans) quickly morphed into an overthrow of the Panamanian government, the arrest of its leader, and the installation of a US puppet leader."  

    Further on, Russia has no interest in occupying any other parts of Ukraine or any other countries of former SovietUnion. Most of these countries are extremely underdeveloped and will be more costly than beneficial for Russian economy that is still in developing process itself. Even now, after annexing Crimea Russia already suffers quite a lot offinancial and economic discomfort. That’s why there is no even need of any discussions of possibility of Russia annexing anybody