Courtesy of Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky, millions of Americans have seen how a single United States senator can use procedural chicanery to prevent important legislation from moving forward.  By withholding his "consent" from a resolution extending unemployment benefits to out of work Americans last week, Bunning prevented social security checks from reaching many thousands of people in need. 

That fracas seems to have thankfully ended, but it does help shed light on another pitched battle between one senator and 99 others that is receiving considerably less attention.  

The senator in question is Dr. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma who has placed a similar hold on the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act which authorizes $40 million to post-conflict recovery efforts in Northern Uganda and directs President Obama to come up with a peace and recovery plan for war-ravaged Northern Uganda.  Though the bill does not actually appropriate any money (that can only happen through the budget process) Coburn objects, in principle, to new funding unless it is offset elsewhere in the budget. Coburn, therefore, has placed a hold on the bill. 

When Bunning used a similar method to block unemployment benefits from reaching thousands of workers on furlough, there was a huge outcry from Republicans, Democrats, and the public at large. Americans could easily identify with people in a tight financial spot that Bunning threatened to squeeze even further.  They are our friends and neighbors who, through no fault of their own, are out of work and need a small amount of government support to get by.  We can relate, in other words, to the victims of Bunning's actions.  

You don't see the same public outcry about Coburn's actions. Why? I fear because it's much harder for us to identify with the victims of the brutal Lord's Resistance Army's 20 year campaign in Northern Uganda.  It's easier to ignore people ike this: 

And this:

And this:

 These images come from the African Youth Information Network, a local NGO in Northern Uganda that aids victims of the the Lord's Resistance Army's campaign of mutilation of children in Northern Uganda.  Thankfully, the war in Northern Uganda has largely subsided. The LRA, though, is still wreaking havoc in neighboring regions.  Two weeks ago, the LRA sacked a town in south west Central African Republic and kidnapped 40 people (including, presumably, many children). 

This is why passing the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act is so important.  It shows our solidarity and common humanity with the victims of the LRA's campaign of terror and mutilation.  It also demonstrates the United States' commitment to bringing the LRA to justice. 

So far, though, Coburn's obstructionism has not received anywhere near the kind of attention as Senator Bunning's similar actions.  At least one group, though, is trying to tip the scales.  A group of activists have been camped out at Senator Coburn's Oklahoma office for the past 114 hours, simply to ask Coburn to find a reasonable compromise that would permit him to lift his hold on the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act.  Is that really not too much to ask. 

Show these folks some love.

Somalia has long been one of the most dangerous places in the world for UN-affiliated aid workers.  Beyond the general lawlessness of the place is the fact that one of the main insurgent groups, al Shabaab, has specificily targeted aid workers and UN agencies as enemies. 

What is striking about al Shabaab's campaign against aid workers was that, until recently, the group displayed a relatively nuanced approach to its violence. They differentiated between aid agencies should be allowed to work in al-Shabaab held territory and which should be targeted for violence.  For example, in a July 27, 2009 press release, al Shabaab decreed that the UN Development Program (UNDP), UN Political Office for Somalia (UNOPS), and the UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDOSS) can be considered “enemies of Islam” for supporting the Somali government and must cease their operations. Al Shabaab accused these agencies of “working against the benefits of the Somali Muslim population and against the establishment of an Islamic State in Somalia." The release further accused the these organizations of financially supporting the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) to “continue their mission of oppression and massacre of the Somali Muslim people.”

Not included in the list of agencies non-grata were strictly humanitarian agencies, like the World Food Program. As opposed to UNDP and UNPOS, the WFP has no political agenda. Their role is simply to deliver food and aid to vulnerable populations.  As such, al Shabaab permitted WFP to operate in Shabaab controlled territory where the WFP kept ordinary Somalis fed.  That changed toward the end of last year, however, when al Shabaab apparently tried to shakedown the WFP for cash.  The group delivered an ultimatum that by January 1, the World Food Program to either purchase food locally (read: from al Shabaab) or cease its operations.   Via Bloomberg the WFP says that al Shabaab demanded $20,000 payments every six months to allow the WFP to continue its operations in Shabaab-controlled territory.   This, predictably, has forced the World Food Program to cease its operations in southern and central Somalia, where al Shabaab has a foothold. 

I do worry, though, that the WFP will soon become a declared al Shabaab target elsewhere in Somalia, where it continues its operations.  This has brought pretty devastating consequences to agencies like the UNDP, which was the target of a suicide bomb attack in northern Somalia, and the AMISOM, which lost 9 peacekeepers, including the deputy force commander, in a suicide attack on its base in September.   It is also worth noting that a top Somali WFP official was assassinated by unknown assailants in October 2008. 

The bottom line is:  Somalia was already a perilous place to conduct humanitarian operations. But these developments may presage a new era of violence directed against the only lifeline for hundreds of thousands of Somalis.   Now, more than ever, the WFP deserves our support.    

Image: Flickr. WFP/Peter Casier

Five Republican members of Congress penned a letter to Ugandan President Yoweri Mouseveni urging him to do everything within his constitutional authority to stop legislation that would criminalize homosexuality, sometimes under the penalty of death, from being enacted in Uganda.  The signatories, Representatives Chris Smith, Frank Wolf, Joe Pitts, Trent Franks and Anh "Joseph" Cao are conservative, members of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission and self-proclaimed "men of faith."  

What is striking is that the letter invokes the Manhattan Declaration, which is a statement of religious principles by three prominent Christian leaders, Charles Colson, Robert George, and Timothy George. Among other things, the Declaration calls homosexuality immoral and includes a long explanation of why homosexuals should be denied the right to marry.

The letter to Mouseveni states, "As Members of Congress and as men of faith, we support the principles set forth in the declaration and are thankful for the principled postion of these faith leaders on a host of issues, from the sanctity of lide for the unborn and others, to religious freedom, to human dignity, to the belief that marriage is an institution between one man and one woman."  However, they say that their faith also compels them to oppose this legislation, which is antithetical to a "foundational Christian belief in the inherent dignity and worth of all men and women." 

Given the utter depravity of the proposed Ugandan legislation these members of congress should be applauded for taking a stand. I also don't doubt the sincerity of the beliefs of these members of Congress.  Still, I can't help but notice incongruity of invoking a document that calls homosexuality immoral to oppose an action that could be considered a manifestation (albeit an extreme one) of that attitude.  

Here is the full text of the letter:

uganda

The New York Times reported yesterday that Nigeria has eliminated Guinea worm. It’s been an entire year since a worm was seen. This is a big deal. Guinea worm is a horrifying monster of a parasite; the worms can grow to three feet long and come busting out of human skin through an open sore. There is no medication for someone infected with a guinea worm. You can wait for the worm to break out of the body, or you can remove it by wrapping the worm around a stick and wrapping a little more of the live worm each day. Time Magazine has an enlightening and horrifying photo essay on Guinea worm.

You can see why we want to get rid of Guinea worm infection. The trick to Guinea worms, though, is that their infection vector lives in standing water. So eradicating the infection doesn’t happen by vaccinating people. Instead, it’s by making sure that everyone drinks filtered water and never consumes any of the water fleas that host Guinea worm larvae. If, however, we can do that, you can get rid of Guinea worms in a single year. Without the human body to digest the water flea and release the Guinea worm larvae, they have no way to reproduce.

It will take two more years for Nigeria to be certified as having eradicated Guinea worm, but seeing no worms for a year is a very, very good sign that the cycle of disease is broken.