The Oslo Freedom Forum is an annual human-rights conference, launched in 2009. I am writing you from the third such conference. (Aren’t you impressed with my math?) From last year’s, I wrote a multipart journal. I propose to do the same this year. You can follow along with the conference, at the Freedom Forum’s website: here. At this site, they have livestreaming, in addition to biographies and other useful, interesting information.
As you may have heard me say before, the Oslo Freedom Forum is something rare under the sun: a genuine human-rights conference. A conference at which human rights are discussed. Often, “human rights” means condemnation of the United States, Israel, and maybe a couple of other free and democratic countries. Often, “human rights” conferences resemble the U.N. Human Rights Council. You know how it goes.
But the OFF is different: Whether the country in question is Zimbabwe, Cuba, Burma, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, or Belarus, issues of human rights are aired.
Have you heard me say this before? When I was growing up, “human rights” meant, by and large, South Africa, Chile, and the Philippines. That is, people talked about South Africa under apartheid, Chile under Pinochet, and the Philippines under Marcos. They were far less likely to talk about the Iron Curtain countries, Indochina, African and Arab states, and the rest of the big wide world.
The Oslo Freedom Forum is the brainchild of Thor Halvorssen, the go-getting, indefatigable head of the Human Rights Foundation, and other enterprises. He has a big view of human rights: a view that includes even property rights. How ’bout that?
‐I arrive at the Oslo airport about 7 o’clock — 7 p.m. The sun is shining brightly. You’ve heard of “darkness at noon”? Places like Norway can give you, during certain periods, brightness at midnight.
What’s more, the weather is positively balmy: Norway might as well be Martinique, so soft and warm is it. Strange. And nice.
I arrive on May 8, which is Liberation Day, and also Veterans Day. This is an important day for Norway — not as important as May 17, Constitution Day, but still grand. A day to wave the flag, and the Norwegians do, many of them.
“Liberation Day”? Liberation from what? The Nazis, I should specify.
‐Reporters aren’t supposed to talk about their encounters with cabbies. It’s the most clichéd thing in the world. As longtime readers know, I don’t care: Many a time, I have enjoyed reporting on a conversation with a cabbie. Here I go again.
As in Minneapolis and other cities, you may well be picked up by a Somalian cabbie, here in Oslo. They have made something of a specialty of cab driving. This particular driver is a young man who, as far as I can tell, glides easily between Norwegian and English. He is full of charm, wit, and charisma. He says that Norwegian society, and Norwegian business, is “closed,” very closed. It’s hard to get ahead. Not just for foreign-born people, but for Norwegians, too.
I think, “What would happen if he could find his way to New York? Given his assets — the charm, the brightness — would he meet with success, and fast?”
I have often had thoughts like this, about the young. I remember having them in India, particularly. It’s such a cliché to say, “All a person needs is an opportunity.” But, damn, it’s often true.
This cabbie is not the most politically correct person in the world. He believes in physical differences among peoples. He talks about the great long-distance runners who have come out of Somalia. And he says, “God created the Somalian to run.”
He also talks about the hellish condition of his home country. “The Americans came to help us. But bad people ran them out. Someday, my country will be free. This badness, this evil, can’t last forever.”
He’s right — isn’t he?
‐In the evening, I hear church bells, and they’re playing something unexpected — takes me a second to place it. They are playing “Love Me Tender.” Beautiful song and all, but — is it a sign of the secularization of society?
‐Among the materials greeting Freedom Forum participants is a letter from Bill Clinton. “William Jefferson Clinton,” says the stationery, at the top. Above the name is the presidential seal. (At least, I think it’s the presidential seal.) The letter is signed “Bill Clinton,” in that distinctive hand. The last two paragraphs of the letter are,
The Oslo Freedom Forum is a unique gathering of the best minds, bravest hearts and strongest pillars of the human rights community, and the cross-boundary partnerships fostered here are some of the most valuable in the world. I applaud the speakers, organizers, attendees and supporters for their hard work and untiring dedication.
My best wishes to all of you for an inspiring and productive conference.
Very nice. Could the same sort of letter have been scared up from George W. Bush? I’m sure. But many of the participants, I tell you, would have freaked.
‐Before the formal beginning of the conference, Thor Halvorssen holds a press conference, flanked by about ten of the speakers to come. Thor first talks about someone who could not come: Ali Abdulemam, a journalist and former political prisoner in Bahrain. He was invited to come. But, shortly after the invitation was issued, they “disappeared” him — the authorities did.
Thor notes that there is another Bahraini activist here — here at the press conference — and she is a young woman named Maryam al-Khawaja.
‐Two of the star attractions at the press conference are Nobel peace laureates: Jody Williams and Shirin Ebadi. The former won in 1997, along with her organization, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. (What I mean is, the two — woman and organization — shared the prize.) Williams is an American born in 1950. A taste of her thought and style can be had here.
I have linked to a video of her remarks at a Nobel centennial symposium, held in 2001. This was just three months after the 9/11 attacks. Williams said that “we see a rise of McCarthyism in the United States.” She said that “Draconian laws” were being passed, in order to “take away our freedom.” She went on to say, “Supposedly this great war against evil, Satan, and terrorism is being fought to protect us all.” The scorn in her voice could not have been heavier.
More Williams: “I wonder, also, when the line is going to be crossed where the patriotism in the United States becomes xenophobia. When is the increased surveillance and repression in the United States going to become state terrorism? I hope never. It’s entirely possible.”
Anyway, the video will give you a strong dose of her. Incidentally, a movie about her life has been made. It’s called My Name Is Jody Williams, and it stars Naomi Watts, one of the world’s most beautiful women.
‐Shirin Ebadi is an Iranian who won in 2003. She is a human-rights lawyer. In the Iranian dissident community, she is a highly controversial figure. She has been the type to want to “work within the system” — to reform the Islamic Republic. Others say this is futile, and take a sterner view: They are in the “overthrow” camp. Some exiles picketed Ebadi’s Nobel ceremony, saying that she was an “apologist” for “political Islam.”
Controversial or not, Ebadi is a brave woman who has done noble things. She has not had an easy life, and she has helped many. Yet, in her rhetoric, she sometimes sounds like Noam Chomsky, or Michael Moore, or Fidel Castro. Here she is speaking about President George W. Bush: “When someone claims that he has a mission from God to bring war to Iraq and kill the people of Iraq, this is a kind of terrorism and a kind of fundamentalism.”
Question: Does Ebadi believe that Bush is a terrorist who thought God told him to “kill the people of Iraq”? Or does she just say that kind of thing, to keep the mullahs’ regime from her throat, and from the throats of her family? I don’t know. I have discussed the matter with knowledgeable Iranians. It’s hard to say for sure.
I will excerpt a sentence from her Nobel lecture:
Why is it that in the past 35 years, dozens of U.N. resolutions concerning the occupation of the Palestinian territories by the state of Israel have not been implemented promptly, yet, in the past twelve years, the state and people of Iraq, once on the recommendation of the Security Council and the second time in spite of U.N. Security Council opposition, were subjected to attack, military assault, economic sanctions, and, ultimately, military occupation?
In this single sentence, Ebadi condemned both the Gulf War of 1991 and the Iraq War that had started earlier in 2003. She never said anything about what Iraqis had suffered under Saddam Hussein. Neither did she have anything to say about Kuwaitis under Iraqi occupation — or about Palestinians under both the PLO and Hamas.
Even brave and great women can be maddening.
‐At the press conference, a reporter from Aftenposten, Norway’s leading newspaper, has a question: What do the conferees think of the American hit on Osama bin Laden?
First to answer is the head of Amnesty International in Norway, John Peder Egenæs. I’m thinking, “Is this the guy who called Israel a ‘scum state’?” I look it up later. No, that was the head of Amnesty International in Finland. Can’t tell the Israel-haters without a scorecard.
On the bin Laden hit, Egenæs answers somewhat equivocally. But it’s pretty clear he disapproves.
Next to answer is Jody Williams, speaking as “a U.S. citizen.” She is not at all equivocal. She very much disapproves. She calls the bin Laden hit “the most inflammatory case of extra-judicial execution by the United States since Mr. Bush and his ‘war on terror.’” She goes on to condemn the drone strikes of President Obama, which she says outnumber those of “the two administrations of Mr. Bush.”
By the way, it’s amazing how much hate can be poured into the words “Mr. Bush.”
She says the bin Laden operation will “help to undermine international law.” And she asks, “What will happen when somebody does something similar to someone in the United States?” She further says that bin Laden was unarmed and “could have been captured,” rather than killed. Her final pronouncement is, “I think it makes it easier for the United States not to have to deal with him.”
‐May I congratulate Williams on something? She said “the two administrations of Mr. Bush” — which is exactly the way to put it. W., Clinton, Reagan, Eisenhower — they all had two administrations, not one. What Williams said was slightly old-fashioned, and perfectly right.
‐Izzeldin Abuelaish condemns the bin Laden operation. He says “nobody is above international law,” and he declares a pox on revenge. Let me give the bio that appears for him in Freedom Forum materials:
Izzeldin Abuelaish is a Palestinian doctor who has practiced extensively inside Israel and the Gaza Strip. He has devoted his life to reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians through medicine and understanding. In 2009, his three daughters and his niece were killed by Israeli fire. Despite his tragic loss, Dr. Abuelaish has remained focused on achieving peace in the region. He created Daughters for Life, a foundation dedicated to providing education and health services for women and girls in the Middle East.
‐Another journalist — I think he is a journalist — points out that none of the conferees is speaking in favor of the bin Laden hit. Does that mean that opinion is unanimous? Thor Halvorssen says that others’ silence is not to be construed as agreement. Maybe some simply don’t want to comment on the matter.
I think of something David Mamet said — I believe it was Mamet. It’s a good story, anyway. Mamet (or someone else) said that members of the congregation to which he belonged were furious at their rabbi. They just knew he was a conservative: because he wouldn’t speak about politics. In his sermons (if that’s the word), he talked about God, the Bible, spirituality, and all that stuff. Not politics, which is what they really cared about.
Hilarious.
‐I wish to say something about John Peder Egenæs, the Norwegian Amnesty International guy. In this press conference, he says how humbling it is to be around human-rights heroes, who have endured so much. He himself has a cozy, comfortable life here in Oslo.
I have said something similar many, many times. Sitting in my recliner, on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, I’ll talk to some dissident on the phone — a desperate man or woman in a dictatorial hellhole. After our conversation, I hang up, and walk to the freezer to help myself to more ice cream.
‐Maryam al-Khawaja talks about the dire situation in Bahrain. She says that authorities are “cracking down on anything and everything that’s Shia.” She says that they are “playing the Iran card”: pretending that legitimate democratic protest is Iranian mischief. Khawaja is an assured, effective advocate.
In American English — she went to Brown — she says that she grew up in Denmark, a country that “taught me about freedom and human rights, and brought me where I am today.” She is very disappointed in “the Western world,” she says. “I thought they would help the Bahraini people.” But no.
Look, in the Arab context, Bahrain may be a Garden of Eden. But when you’re being cracked down on: the “garden” is a furnace of depravity, unreason, torture, and murder.
‐George Ayittey is a piece of work. He says, in a loud, almost shouting, voice, “We in Africa are fed up with these dictators. Fed up, fed up!” He says that Africans must not count on the West to defeat the dictators. The dictators must be defeated from within. Opposition groups should unite. The force of dictatorship requires the counterforce of democratic opposition. So far, the opposition has been fragmented, fractious.
Old story — in China, Cuba, everywhere.
Have a look at Ayittey’s bio, which I think you’ll enjoy:
George Ayittey is a Ghanaian economist known for his argument that “Africa is poor because she is not free.” He asserts that corruption of modern oppressive autocrats and complacency of citizens are the bedrock problems of many troubled African states. Dr. Ayittey calls for democratic government, debt reexamination, modernized infrastructure, free market economics, and free trade to promote development. . . . His influential book Africa Unchained helped unleash a new wave of activism and optimism throughout the region.
‐Speaking for Burma, if I may put it that way (and I may), is a young woman named Zoya Phan. She says that she has been “inspired by what is going on in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and other countries.” I have heard the same from Chinese people, in recent months. It is this hopefulness, of course, that has moved Beijing to crack down, hard. Phan makes the point that the “international community” pays no attention to Burma. Which is certainly true.
She tells about the horrors of her country: the slave labor, the rape, the child soldiers — all of that. Burma is one of the most horrific places on earth. Few know it.
‐As the press conference nears its end, Halvorssen asks whether anyone has anything he wishes to add. Ayittey speaks up. He says that the West should not be singled out for demonization: singled out for its support of various African dictatorships. There are other foreigners to blame: China, for instance, and Iran. They are into Africa in a big way. “We just want the dictators removed,” says Ayittey. “We don’t care who supports them. We just don’t want them.”
And Zoya Phan speaks up again, repeating that Burma needs the attention of outsiders, concerned outsiders. She speaks with urgency, as though lives depended on what she was saying, as though she had a great and heavy mission on her shoulders. You have to feel for her, acutely.
Join me tomorrow — or very soon thereafter — for Part II?
#JAYBOOK#