Elections Commission Signs Understanding Agreement with Parties

Elections Commission Signs Understanding Agreement with Parties

The registered political parties’ Memorandum of Understanding allocates two seats to each of the 15 counties, bringing the total to 30 seats out of the 64 seats to be established.

Violence is natural, but it can be tamed

Violence is natural, but it can be tamed
Terence Kealey
Men are inherently aggressive, but some societies have discovered how to temper that dangerous instinct

WE DON’T LIKE feral young men. When the Bluewater Shopping Centre in Kent banned the wearing of hoods, its number of visitors rose by more than 20 per cent. If the EU had put an anti-hoody clause into its proposed constitution, it might have won its referendums.
Young men are predators. As Tennyson asserted in The Princess, biology forces them into predation: “Man is the hunter; woman is his game.”

Charles Darwin explained why sex forces men into predation. To males, females are private goods. Once a male has consumed a female by making her pregnant, she is useless genetically to other males. Like a meal that has been consumed by someone else or a car that has been bought by someone else, she is spent. And, as economists remind us, people compete for private goods. It is because only one male can impregnate any particular female that males across the animal kingdom will fight over her. Males, therefore, are instinctively aggressive, and they instinctively wear hoods to intimidate shoppers at Bluewater.

Yet to a female, males are public goods. No woman can monopolise a male’s sperm. John can bonk Sue in the morning but he has still got reserves for Jennie at lunchtime, Priscilla mid-afternoon and Suzanne for le cinq à sept before returning home to impregnate his wife in the evening. And because no female can monopolise a male — her tactic is to be coy and selective between courting males — she need not fight other women.

We are now so familiar with this theory that we forget that until recently it was heretical. In the 17th century John Locke, observing how societies differ from each other, proposed that man is born with a mind that is a tabula rasa. According to Locke, parents and teachers inscribe behaviour on children’s minds in the same way that teachers chalk on blank blackboards. If men are aggressive and women coy, then they have been taught to be so.

Until recently Locke’s views were standard among biologists. And they were right because different cultures do bring up children in very different ways. The result is that native Maori men, say, are transparently more aggressive than some Buddhist ones. Moreover, when children from one race are brought up by adults from another, they acquire the culture of their adopted society, not of their birth parents. Cultures — including male tendencies to violence — are indeed taught and learnt, and we know how.

Neuroscience research has shown that the brain’s areas of moral discretion, the frontal lobes, are not fully-formed until an individual is in his early twenties. We also know that those areas — and the moral values that they furnish — are moulded by early experiences, including those delivered by parents, teachers and peers.

But there are inherited sexual differences as well. In their book, Homicide, a survey of murder across 35 different societies, Martin Daly and Margo Wilson, the biologists, found that although murder rates varied hugely between cultures, the relative male propensity to kill did not. Men were on average 26 times more likely to kill than women. The message from anthropology is clear: males are innately aggressive but some societies have discovered how to modulate that dangerous instinct. So, what to do?

Consider sport. This week Robin van Persie, the Arsenal striker, was arrested on suspicion of rape, and regardless of the details of that case we know that sport today degrades. During the 19th century, under the influence of men such as Dr Thomas Arnold, of Rugby, Britain propagated a Corinthian view of amateur sports that promoted co-operation. But today we live in a world where professional sports promote an ethics-free obsession with ego and with winning above all else. Research papers such as Jeff Benedict and Alan Klein’s Arrest and Conviction Rates for Athletes Accused of Sexual Assault have chronicled some of the consequent moral squalor: sportsmen hit their women much more often than the rest of us. An official report from Clemson University, South Carolina, in 1998, noted that students most complained of sexual harassment from “athletes in particular and some male professors”.

But sportsmen are rational, and if they live in a world that rewards only winning then it is also because we have produced sportsmen who treat women as their private goods, and hit them. So we need, instead, to create a world where rational people learn to be good. That world is called the middle class, which is why crime, especially crime committed by young men, reflects the social classes. The poor have too few chances. This is seen at its most extreme in the US. Incredibly, according to a study of college freshmen (The Source of the River) by the sociologist, D. S. Massey, a third to a half of college age black men are in prison, on parole or under court supervision.

In Britain, the poor are short not of money but of control over their lives. Because they are not allowed to make enough important choices, their sons do not have the opportunity to learn the hazards of being bad. And it was the middle classes who took the workers’ autonomy away. In the 19th century, the schools, hospitals and social security systems were voluntary: created, paid for and controlled by ordinary people. They functioned well, as books such as James Bartholomew’s The Welfare State We’re In have chronicled. But the voluntary systems were nationalised, politicians and bureaucrats took control of them, while — under pressure from the taxpayer — their budgets failed to rise sufficiently.

If working-class boys inhabit a world where their schools, houses, hospitals and social security are free but inadequate, and where their legal incomes and legal pleasures are taxed, but their illegal ones, such as drugs, are not, how will they learn to be good? Will they not evolve into a Roman proletariat, whose irresponsibility is bolstered by free bread and vicious footballing circuses?

Young men are innately aggressive, but they are also rational, and it is for the rest of us to create incentives through which they learn to be good. Banning hoodies is not enough.
Terence Kealey is a scientist and vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham

THE SECRET DOWNING STREET MEMO

The secret Downing Street memo

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY


DAVID MANNING From: Matthew RycroftDate: 23 July 2002S 195 /02
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq. This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based. C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.

The two broad US options were:

(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).

(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.

The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:

(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.

(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.

(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.

The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. There were different strategies for dealing with Libya and Iran. If the political context were right, people would support regime change. The two key issues were whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.

On the first, CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions.

For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary.

The Foreign Secretary thought the US would not go ahead with a military plan unless convinced that it was a winning strategy. On this, US and UK interests converged. But on the political strategy, there could be US/UK differences. Despite US resistance, we should explore discreetly the ultimatum. Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.

John Scarlett assessed that Saddam would allow the inspectors back in only when he thought the threat of military action was real.

The Defence Secretary said that if the Prime Minister wanted UK military involvement, he would need to decide this early. He cautioned that many in the US did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route. It would be important for the Prime Minister to set out the political context to Bush.

Conclusions:

(a) We should work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action. But we needed a fuller picture of US planning before we could take any firm decisions. CDS should tell the US military that we were considering a range of options.

(b) The Prime Minister would revert on the question of whether funds could be spent in preparation for this operation.

(c) CDS would send the Prime Minister full details of the proposed military campaign and possible UK contributions by the end of the week.

(d) The Foreign Secretary would send the Prime Minister the background on the UN inspectors, and discreetly work up the ultimatum to Saddam.
He would also send the Prime Minister advice on the positions of countries in the region especially Turkey, and of the key EU member states.

(e) John Scarlett would send the Prime Minister a full intelligence update.

(f) We must not ignore the legal issues: the Attorney-General would consider legal advice with FCO/MOD legal advisers. (I have written separately to commission this follow-up work.)

MATTHEW RYCROFT (Rycroft was a Downing Street foreign policy aide)

Daily news bulletin for June 16, 2005

Daily news bulletin


Bulletin of June 16, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
An official of the Liberia Unification Party (LUP) says the wave of violence by former fighters and soldiers of the Armed Forces of Liberia is worrying. The Secretary General of LUP said the behavior of ex-fighters and AFL soldiers creates the need to revisit the disarmament, demobilization, rehabilitation and reintegration programs. Mr. Cletus Sieh believes this would remove Liberia from disorderly activities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Liberia Action Network on Small Arms (LANSA) on Wednesday presented a petition to the transitional assembly, calling for a national program on small arms. LANSA said peace in Liberia can only be achieved when government help to fight the flow of small arms in the country.
Receiving the petition, the Assembly’s Committee Chairman on Executive said the petition made strong recommendations. Assemblyman Mohammed Sheriff said the body would develop a resolution on the control of small arms in Liberia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chief of UNMIL’s Human Rights Section says the newly adopted Truth and Reconciliation Commission will strongly address the problem of impunity. Ms. Dorota Gieryez said there would be some kind of conclusion for whatever crimes committed by individuals. Ms. Gieryez said the act stipulates that cases involving violation of International law, crimes against humanity and gross human rights violations are not entitled to amnesty and reconciliation. She said these cases are subject to proper court proceedings. Ms. Gieryez said the measures are critically important for the society, as they would provide the basis for reflection and assessment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Liberian Government has submitted a proposal of ninety million United States dollars to the global funds. Health Minister Dr. Peter Coleman said the money would be used to fight Malaria, Tuberculosis and HIV/Aids for the next five years. Dr. Coleman expressed the hope that Global Funds would approve the proposal at the end of the existing two-year program against the diseases. He said when such extra funds are infused in the health system, it would help to change the health status of Liberians. Dr. Coleman made the statement Wednesday when he received a consignment of drugs, equipment and vehicles from Global Funds.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Government of Liberia has suspended the signing of all contract and concession Agreements. A statement issued by the Executive Mansion said the government will not honor any contract or concession agreements signed by any government ministries or agencies. The government said all contracts and concession agreements entered into by ministries and agencies will be reviewed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Elections Commission (NEC) is holding its Seventh National Consultative and Awareness Meeting today at the Booker Washington Institution campus in Kakata. The meeting brings together local and traditional leaders from Montserrado and Margibi Counties under the Theme: “Enlisting Local Leaders to ensure Participation, Inclusiveness and Transparency in the 2005 Elections.” It would discuss, among other things, the role of local and traditional leaders in the October Elections.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lofa County Labor Officer has complained of lack of cooperation from local and international non-governmental organizations operating in the county. Mr. Prince Ngombu NGOs in the county refused to forward to his office listing of their personal payrolls and contractual agreements. Mr. Ngombu told Star Radio several citizens complained to his office about the status of their contracts with the NGOs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information of the day: Heavy rain in Monrovia