Today, I find myself in Johannesburg, South Africa, immersed in the vibrant energy of the G20 Foreign Ministers Meeting. This is the first meeting of its kind to be held on African Soil. The air is thick with anticipation and tension as leaders, diplomats, and ministers from the world’s largest economies gather under the shadow of Nasrec Expo Centre. This is no ordinary meeting—it’s South Africa’s moment to lead as the G20 presidency holder for 2025, and I’m here to witness history unfold.
The G20, formed back in 1999, was originally a response to the Asian financial crisis, uniting finance ministers and central bankers from twenty of the world’s most significant economies to stabilize global markets. Since then, it’s grown into something much bigger. Elevated in 2008 to include heads of state, the group—which now comprises 19 countries, the European Union, and, as of 2023, the African Union—represents over 85% of global economic output, 75% of world trade, and 80% of the planet’s population. Its purpose? To coordinate policy on everything from trade and health to climate change and geopolitical crises. Past summits have tackled the 2008 financial meltdown with a $4 trillion stimulus, debated Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and even brokered partial ceasefires in Syria. But today, as I walk among the delegates, it’s clear the group’s unity is fraying, and South Africa is stepping into this fractured spotlight with a bold agenda.
Under South Africa’s 2025 presidency, the theme feels urgent and ambitious: addressing the challenges of a world divided by war, economic disparity, and environmental collapse. President Cyril Ramaphosa opened the meeting , with a powerful call for multilateralism and adherence to international law. Standing at the podium, his voice carried a weight of conviction as he warned that “an already fragile global coexistence” is at risk. He’s not wrong—geopolitical rifts, especially over Russia’s war in Ukraine, loom large. The absence of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio underscores the strain; the U.S. pulled back after President Donald Trump cut aid to South Africa, citing disputes over land reform and its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice. Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s presence here stirs the pot further, with EU nations vocally supporting Ukraine just across the room.
South Africa’s G20 agenda builds on the momentum of recent years. In 2023, India brought the African Union into the fold, amplifying the voice of 1.3 billion people and a $3.1 trillion economy. Last year in Rio, Brazil’s President Lula pushed for a “Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty” and reforms to make global institutions like the UN and World Bank more responsive to developing nations. Now, South Africa is doubling down. Ramaphosa’s vision for 2025 centers on equity—tackling food insecurity, climate resilience, and economic recovery for the Global South. There’s talk of strengthening the G20’s Common Framework for debt relief, which has faltered since 2020, with only four countries benefiting so far. Emerging economies, battered by inflation and a strong U.S. dollar, need more than promises—they need action.
As I wander the halls, the diversity of voices is striking. Delegates from Argentina, China, India, and Saudi Arabia mingle with those from Canada, Germany, and Japan. Spain’s here too, a permanent guest, while the AU’s presence feels like a quiet revolution. Yet, beneath the diplomatic smiles, divisions simmer. Climate change, a perennial G20 focus, remains a sticking point—China and India resist firm coal phaseouts, and post-Ukraine energy crises have some nations backtracking on fossil fuel pledges. Trump’s recent reelection and his talk of a “universal tariff” add another layer of uncertainty. Will the U.S. pull further away from the free trade principles the G20 once championed?
The sidelines, though, are where the real drama unfolds. I catch whispers of bilateral meetings—tense exchanges between EU officials and Lavrov, a warm handshake between Brazil’s envoy and South Africa’s foreign minister. These impromptu talks often outshine the main agenda, like when Trump met Putin in 2017 or Biden and Xi faced off in 2022. .
Reflecting on it all, I can’t help but feel the weight of Ramaphosa’s words, and hope that they are truthful and meaningful. The G20 matters because it’s a microcosm of our world—messy, powerful, and teetering on the edge of cooperation or collapse. South Africa’s push for unity through law and equity feels like a plea to hold it together. As the sun sets over Johannesburg, I wonder: can this fractured group still rise to the moment?
Tomorrow’s sessions will tell. For now, I’m just grateful to be here, scribbling notes in the heart of it all and speaking to some of the most powerful people on the globe.
[Submitted by Kevin Rademeyer]
South Africa made history as the first African nation to assume the G20 Presidency, hosting its inaugural Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Johannesburg at the Nasrec Expo Centre. Under the theme “Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability,”
President Cyril Ramaphosa opened the two-day event, emphasizing the interconnected challenges of geopolitical tensions, rising intolerance, conflict, climate change, pandemics, and energy and food insecurity. He stressed the need for inclusive, coordinated responses, noting the significance of hosting the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Africa later this year to amplify African voices on sustainable development, the digital economy, and green energy.
The first day’s discussions reflected both promise and tension. Ramaphosa called the G20 an opportunity for collaboration amid strained South Africa-U.S. relations—marked by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s absence—and growing U.S.-EU friction. “The nations of the world look to the G20 for leadership,” he said, advocating for a globally representative UN Security Council and citing conflicts in Ukraine, Congo, Sudan, the Sahel, and Gaza.
He welcomed the Israel-Hamas ceasefire as a step toward peace, urging diplomatic solutions rooted in international law.
South Africa’s G20 priorities took center stage: enhancing disaster resilience, ensuring debt sustainability, mobilizing just energy transition finance, and leveraging critical minerals for inclusive growth. Ramaphosa highlighted the debt crisis—where 3.3 billion people live in nations prioritizing interest payments over health or education—and pressed for climate finance from high-emission countries to support vulnerable ones. Day two will build on these themes, focusing on Africa’s development via Agenda 2063.
Despite a lack of consensus among G20 nations, representing two-thirds of the global population, Ramaphosa’s call for solidarity and reform set a bold tone for a presidency aiming to bridge divides and champion equality.
[Submitted by Kevin Rademeyer]
For the first time, Africa will host the G20 Summit, marking a historic milestone under the theme Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability. For South Africa, this presents a crucial opportunity to boost tourism, attract investment, and strengthen its global economic standing.
Since the formation of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in July 2024, South Africa has seen positive economic momentum. The Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) has performed well, government bond yields have declined from 11.04% to 9.36%, and S&P Global Ratings has upgraded the country's outlook to positive. The strengthening rand and rising foreign direct investment (FDI) highlight renewed confidence in South Africa’s economic trajectory.
The G20 Summit is expected to drive significant economic activity. Thousands of international delegates, including government officials, business leaders, and media representatives, will generate increased demand for accommodation, hospitality, and local services. According to the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), the tourism sector employed 1.46 million people in 2023, a figure projected to reach 1.7 million in the short term. Tourism’s contribution to GDP has grown from 8.2% in 2023 to 8.8% in 2024, with expectations for continued expansion.
Additionally, the Tourism Ministers G20 Meeting and Tourism Investment Conference, set for September 2025 in Mpumalanga, will showcase South Africa’s tourism potential and drive further investment into the sector.
South Africa has proven its ability to host major international events, with the 15th BRICS Summit and 20th African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) Forum in 2023 successfully attracting global leaders. The G20 Summit will further cement its position as a top-tier destination for high-profile gatherings.
South Africa’s Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, and Exhibitions (MICE) industry is a key growth driver. Valued at $6.6 billion in 2023, the sector is expected to expand fourfold by 2031, reaching $25.9 billion. Meanwhile, the country has secured bids to host 25 international business events by 2029, contributing over R240 million to the economy. Between April and August 2024, 48 additional bids were submitted, with an estimated impact of R586 million.
In trade, South Africa recorded a R12.8 billion surplus in September 2024, with China, Germany, and the US as key partners. The G20 Summit provides a platform to deepen these relationships and position South Africa as a critical hub for global investment.
The country’s air travel infrastructure has rebounded strongly, with 72 international routes serviced by 55 airlines, offering over 7.8 million seats across 52,000 flights. Domestic capacity has also surged, with 18 million seats in 2024 and 4.2 million seats projected for Q1 2025. The Route Development Marketing Strategy, recently approved by the government, aims to further expand South Africa’s aviation network, supporting increased visitor arrivals.
Beyond business, G20 delegates will experience South Africa’s rich heritage, vibrant culture, and diverse landscapes across all nine provinces. The government is actively promoting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and lesser-known destinations to ensure broad-based economic benefits.
With 40 heads of state expected to attend, representing 85% of global GDP, 75% of international trade, and two-thirds of the world’s population, the G20 Summit is a strategic opportunity to elevate South Africa’s international profile. The event will reinforce the nation’s economic resilience, showcase its world-class infrastructure, and solidify its reputation as a premier destination for both business and leisure.
[Submitted by Estea Rademeyer]
.In a sector that has long been associated with health risks and fatalities, South Africa’s mining industry is rewriting the narrative. The mining industry in the country, once considered one of the most dangerous professions in the world, is undergoing a transforomation towards one where workers’ lives are no longer seen as collateral for economic progress. The latest figures released by the Minerals Council South Africa tell a powerful story of significant progress, commitment and a vision where no fatality is acceptable.
The industry reported 42 fatalities in 2024, a 24% decrease from the year prior. Workplace injuries dropped 16%, and the number of cases of occupational disease fell 17%. These figures are not merely data points in a report, they represent the large number of workers who came home safely to their families rather than becoming another statistic.
Yet as leaders in the industry observe these advances, they confront a sobering reality: 42 lives lost is still 42 too many.
The mindset change: moving from compliance to caring.
For decades, mining safety involved little more than compliance. Companies took steps by following guidelines, auditing their operations and improving safety protocols. But these efforts, although critical, were often reactive — addressing incidents once they occurred as opposed to stopping them from happening in the first place.
The industry is slowly turning towards human-centred design. This transformation is key to Khumbul’ekhaya, a CEO-led initiative launched in 2019. It puts an emphasis on leadership, accountability and proactive risk management. Khumbul’ekhaya will make its re-entry into the marketplace as a recalibrated version 2 in 2025, focusing on new technologies, enhanced risk management practices and increased collaboration between the mining houses, labour unions and government.
And this is echoed by Japie Fullard, the Chair of the CEO Zero Harm Forum:
“The less we pay attention to injuries, the lower our death rates will be. It’s not about what we do after events, but what we do before the time to make the workplace as safe and healthy as possible.’
CEOs of mining companies now gather monthly to discuss incidents — not just to analyse what went wrong, but to make sure that it never happens again. The culture of transparency and learning is a key contribution to the progress of safety in the industry.
Notes on Progress, Through the Numbers
The evolution of mining didn’t start flying into high gear yesterday — it’s a long-term success story.
Over the past 30 years, fatalities have decreased by 91% — from 484 deaths in 1994 to 42 in 2024.
Workplace injuries over the same period went down 78%, from 8,347 to 1,841 cases.
Tuberculosis (TB) and silicosis cases have declined by over 80% over the last 15 years with TB cases half the national average for South Africa.
Noise-induced hearing loss is down 55% but is an ongoing target for more intervention.
These improvements are a result of industry-wide collaboration, technological advances and a focus on worker safety.
Technology and Innovation: The New Frontier
Aside from leadership and accountability, technology is also a crucial facilitator in reaching Zero Harm. Automation, real-time monitoring, and predictive analytics are enabling mines to identify risks before they are fatal. Wearable tech, artificial-intelligence-enabled hazard identification, and automated mining techniques all mitigate employees’ exposure to unsafe locales.
In addition, health surveillance programs are aiding the early detection of occupational diseases, helping workers receive the appropriate medical attention before conditions deteriorate further.
Is it Possible to Achieve Zero Harm?
Skeptics might say better alternatives are impossible, because mining is inherently risky, but South Africa’s own safety record tells a different story. Goal: Zero Harm Not a Dream: Everyone is Protected
It is already proven that with leadership commitment, collaboration, and appropriate interventions lives can be saved in the industry. Every such safety milestone is a reminder that no worker should have to risk their life to make a living.
For decades, mining has been the mainstay of South Africa’s economy. It could now transform itself into a laboratory for workplace safety and a model for human-centered leadership. The question is no longer the extent to which mining can be made safe — it is how far, and how quickly, the industry is prepared to go to ensure that every miner gets home safely, every day.
[Submitted by Kevin Rademeyer]
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, President Cyril Ramaphosa outlined a forward-thinking agenda for the G20, emphasizing bold climate action, inclusivity, and global cooperation. His vision stands in sharp contrast to the isolationist policies of U.S. President Donald Trump, whose administration has moved decisively away from environmental commitments and diversity initiatives.
Ramaphosa’s address underscored the urgent need for collaborative efforts to tackle global challenges, from climate change and pandemics to economic inequality and artificial intelligence. He called for renewed commitment to multilateralism, warning against the rising tide of nationalism and protectionism that threatens international stability.
Divergent Global Leadership Approaches
In recent weeks, the Trump administration has reinforced its opposition to climate change mitigation, withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and prioritizing fossil fuel expansion. Trump’s approach has been described as favoring economic deregulation at the expense of environmental and social considerations. His administration has also moved to limit recognition of gender diversity, leading several major U.S. corporations to scale back their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) frameworks.
In contrast, Ramaphosa positioned South Africa’s G20 leadership as a champion of inclusivity and sustainability.
“As we confront the challenges of the 21st century—ranging from climate change and poverty to artificial intelligence and global conflict—we must embrace the power of cooperation and shared responsibility,” he stated.
He highlighted the risks posed by geopolitical tensions, rising debt in developing nations, and a declining sense of collective purpose. Stressing the need for unity, he urged world leaders to work together in resolving conflicts and alleviating human suffering.
Prioritizing Sustainable Development and Equity
While Trump’s administration continues to reject DEI principles, Ramaphosa affirmed their integral role in economic growth.
“The pursuit of equality and solidarity is inseparable from sustainable development,” he said, emphasizing that economic progress should be inclusive and benefit marginalized communities.
On trade, Ramaphosa distanced himself from Trump’s protectionist stance. While Trump has threatened punitive tariffs on BRICS nations should they establish a common currency, Ramaphosa advocated for expanding trade agreements with developed economies to foster inclusive growth.
“As the G20, we must work toward a more equitable global economy, ensuring that trade and investment uplift poor nations, women, and young people,” he asserted.
Climate Commitments at the Forefront
Climate change negotiations are set to be a key focus of the G20 under South Africa’s leadership. Days after Trump reaffirmed his administration’s opposition to the Paris Agreement and encouraged increased fossil fuel extraction, Ramaphosa reiterated the necessity of decisive climate action.
“All countries have a vested interest in reducing emissions, and industrialized nations must support the transition efforts of developing economies,” he said. He further emphasized that mobilizing financing for a just energy transition would be a priority for South Africa’s G20 presidency.
The Road to the 2025 G20 Summit
As South Africa prepares to host the G20 in 2025 before the U.S. assumes leadership in 2026, the ideological divide between Ramaphosa and Trump is becoming increasingly evident. While Trump aligns with the wave of nationalist strongman leadership, Ramaphosa is positioning South Africa as a beacon of progressive governance.
Speaking at a Brand South Africa event in Davos, Ramaphosa reaffirmed his commitment to amplifying underrepresented voices in global decision-making.
“At a time when division and discord threaten international cooperation, we must uphold the values of solidarity, equality, and sustainable development,” he stated.
Defining a Legacy
Domestically, Ramaphosa’s recent policy decisions—including signing the Expropriation Bill, the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill, and the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act—signal his ambition to leave a lasting legacy in land reform, healthcare, and education. Whether these reforms will be effectively implemented remains an open question, but his commitment to progressive governance is clear.
As global leaders prepare for the upcoming G20 summit, Ramaphosa’s vision for a more inclusive, sustainable, and cooperative world will be tested against the forces of unilateralism and economic nationalism. The outcome of these ideological battles will shape the trajectory of international relations in the years to come.
[Submitted by Kevin Rademeyer]
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – The 19th G20 Summit, held from November 18-19, 2024, brought together the world's leading economies to address critical global challenges under the banner of "Solidarity, Equality, and Sustainability." With pressing issues like climate change, economic instability, and global conflict dominating the agenda, the summit underscored the importance of collective action in shaping a more inclusive and sustainable future.
Major Outcomes from the Summit
1. Launch of the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty
The Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty launched a groundbreaking initiative to combat these enduring issues by 2030. With over 80 countries signing on, this alliance represents a decisive move toward achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. By mobilizing resources and fostering collaboration, we aim to create pathways for equitable growth and food security worldwide.
2. Commitments to Climate Action and Energy Transition
The G20 nations made significant strides in addressing climate change by committing to double global renewable energy capacity by 2030. Leaders also acknowledged the urgency of phasing out coal power to mitigate environmental damage. Another notable achievement was India's spearheading of the Global Biofuel Alliance, which promoted sustainable energy alternatives to reduce carbon footprints.
3. A Call for Peace and Security
The summit reiterated its commitment to peace in conflict zones, including Ukraine, Gaza, and Lebanon. While the leaders collectively condemned the use of force for territorial gains, the declaration tactfully avoided direct reference to Russian aggression. Calls for comprehensive ceasefires and diplomatic resolutions marked a step toward fostering geopolitical stability in these volatile regions.
4. Push for Global Governance Reforms
Reforming global governance was a focal point, with discussions emphasizing the need for inclusive and equitable financial institutions. The G20 recognized the importance of amplifying the voices of developing nations by ensuring that decision-making processes reflect a more balanced global representation.
Implications for the World
Economic Stability
The summit's emphasis on financial cooperation and debt sustainability aims to bolster the resilience of the global economy. Measures to address trade tensions and fiscal imbalances could pave the way for sustained economic growth.
Social Inclusion
The Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty signals a pivotal shift toward addressing inequality and fostering inclusive development. By tackling hunger and poverty head-on, the G20 is aligning itself with a more socially equitable global agenda.
Environmental Sustainability
With commitments to renewable energy and sustainable biofuels, the G20 reaffirmed its dedication to combating climate change. These initiatives aim to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy, mitigating environmental degradation while promoting economic opportunities in green industries.
Geopolitical Stability
By advocating for peaceful resolutions in conflict zones, the summit highlighted the importance of diplomacy in fostering stability. The focus on ceasefires and territorial integrity underscores a collective desire for a more harmonious global landscape.
A Pivotal Moment for Global Cooperation
The 19th G20 Summit showcased the power of multilateralism in addressing the most pressing challenges of our time. From combating poverty and hunger to tackling climate change and fostering global peace, the summit's outcomes lay the groundwork for a more sustainable and equitable future.
As the global community continues to grapple with complex challenges, the role of the G20 as a platform for international cooperation remains indispensable. The commitments made in Rio de Janeiro are a testament to the potential of solidarity and shared vision in shaping a brighter tomorrow.
[Submitted by Kevin Rademeyer]
Nearly one year after the onset of the global pandemic and things are still not back to normal for much of the world. Scarce food, shortages in medical equipment, and general economic unease in the United States prompted a raft of government policies meant to shore up the public welfare system and keep the economy going. But for citizens of the island nation of Cuba, long-existing under oppressive communist rule, economic hardship, scarcity, and insecurity about tomorrow is not only normal, it’s a way of life for millions of Cubans trapped under the Díaz-Canel regime.
The pressures of such a harsh, unforgiving existence finally erupted again in 2020 in the SOS Cuba movement, one of the island nation’s largest popular uprisings since the revolution that brought Castro and his cronies to power. Centered in the capital of Havana and radiating out to the other cultural capitals of the world such as Miami, the plight of the Cuban people and their struggle for freedom came to the forefront as the world grappled with newfound realities already too familiar to those oppressed by Castro and his regime.
While much of the movement was prompted by continuing human rights violations and shortages in daily goods and supplies, the boldness of the SOS Cuba protests is what caught the eye of global observers. Carrying signs reading, "No tenemos miedo" (We are not afraid) and "Queremos libertad!" (We want freedom!), the protesters seemed to signal a fundamental break with the status quo imposed by the regime and, in the process, drew world attention to an ongoing human-rights struggle that has waned in recent years in terms of popular attention. Many popular goods and daily necessities are supplied via government-backed stores in Cuba and the inability of this logistics chain to grapple with COVID-19 pushed thousands over the edge in Havana to protest even though doing so is personally dangerous and risky.
One issue that the US is facing is how to balance the need for harsh economic measures to pressure the Díaz-Canel regime to change with humanitarian relief and economic necessity. Long reliant upon its diaspora community in the United States, cutting off the internet, communications and the sending and receipt of money in Cuba has not only exacerbated the situation but it has made it that much more difficult for the United States to have some degree of control over the regime.
The SOS Cuba movement highlights the state of the Cuban domestic population in order to hopefully get reforms in place. The movement has demonstrated that, if close linkages are utilized in an effective way, it is more effective to push for real political change and an end to any atrocities.
Photography by Vince Rubiera
[Submitted by Vince Rubiera]
---
https://www.local10.com/news/politics/2021/07/19/sos-cuba-movement-is-golden-political-opportunity-for-biden-experts-say/
https://www.distractify.com/p/what-does-sos-cuba-mean
By Bhakta Ghimire, USA
In December 2006, in the tiny Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, the then ruling King, 51 years old Jigme Singye Wangchuk announced that he would abdicate his throne, setting the country to a path toward parliamentary democracy. Earlier in 1991 too, he had made similar type of announcement stating, “If the problem in south is not solved positively, I will abdicate my throne.” It was with the students of Sherubtse college, then only one in the country. He took the time frame of three years to do the job. But surprisingly in 2006, without hinting a bit of solution to the problem; without mending the fences for democratic setup of government, he just passed over his absolute, autocratic post to his son in the name of ‘abdication.’ He actually gave way to so-called parliamentary, by-party system of ‘democracy graced by an almighty king’. He and the palace have been just irrigating their vested inner desires through the channel of this fake parliamentary system called ‘Democracy’. The rigid royal followers are just utilizing the newfound democracy as a weapon to embark on others instead of making it rooted in the hands of Bhutanese people in real sense.
Anyone can say that the heart of Bhutan’s parliamentary democracy is plugged on to Jigme Singye’s remote brain. What a abdication he chose, when his own kind of kingship is taken over by the young Jigme Khesar?
Learned in Oxford with palace luxury, Khesar does not have proven experience of leading the constitutional monarchy with the basic tenets of traditional politics changed. That’s why he is just going as his father’s obedient pupil in ethno-politics. As a guardian of Bhutanese constitution, he seems less bothered about the refugee problem in general as well as the functioning of democratic organs that can ensure a good governance which Bhutanese people want in real sense and not a illusion.
Very desperately, we have to say that mainly India and the western world persuaded king Jigme assuming his steps as sacrifice to the people of Bhutan. The western world might have taken king Abdullah of Saudi Arabia as a role model. But, king Jigme and Bhutan can’t be compared with such a Middle East power block in politico-economic terms. Bhutan remained aloof for dozen of decades from the outer world and so was the political structure, economic activities, civic life and issues of government-citizen relations. For decades, the kingdom home to only six hundred thousand people, has been the adobe of interest by social scientists, independent journalists and even the natural scientists.
Unfortunately, a large chunk of the internal revenue and external grants from the donors went to the palace and its vicinity including the stagnant army. The country was kept off-limits to the world influence by means of restricting television and internet to the public until 1999. A few foreigners who traveled to Bhutan have always been the special guests and taken on a guided tour to some hinterlands of northern Bhutan, away from the human settlement, to view the chhortens, monasteries or dzongs having cultural value. Even some of them are told about the ‘insecurity’ in southern part, if they wish to go some tourist destinations other than the guided ones.
Until these days, in so-called parliamentary democratic system, Bhutan has no precise legal and constitutional provisions protecting freedom of speech, expression, association, and exhibiting dissidence incase of impeachment of fundamental rights of citizens. The forceful use of traditional dress code to other ethnic groups against their will is the violation of civil rights. It only shows the fake nationality superimposed by one ruling ethnic group to other ethnic groups. The direct interference of the home authority on practice of Nyngmapa sect of Buddhism by Sarchhop community is yet another violation of freedom to religion which the Bhutanese delegates to human rights forums have been promising every time.
Instead of promoting western notions like gross national product, gross individual earnings and its productive use, Jigme has created a hazy concept called ‘gross national happiness’ influenced in part by Buddhism, which is limited to the Royal elites.
According to political analysts, Jigme has explained gross national happiness as the “acquisition of contentment rather than capital”- feeling of well-being derived from social and economic development, preservation of culture and environmental conservation among other things. Western academicians pitched upon the idea, introducing annual conference on gross national happiness that features papers like “Planning for sustainable Happiness: Harmonizing our Internal and External landscapes”.
Bhutan’s rural and urban pictures are distantly different. In rural areas, Bhutan remained almost unaffected by the passage of time. Dzongs, the massive fortress and monasteries consisting of white stone citadels with imposing pagoda-roofs-towered over the landscape, pristine marvels compared to the ruined regions of Nepal, Tibet and northern India, much of which are scarred by logging and industry. Inside the dzong prayer halls, red robed novice monks chanted sutras and burnt smoky butter lamps in front of imposing statues of local deities. In the plains around the dzongs, men threshed rice by hand and cut new fields with small trowels, while local women shooed cows, boars and wooly yaks along the footpaths.
But, in Thimpu, the capital, there can be found that gross national happiness didn’t always live up to its advertising. Frustrated by the lack of economic opportunity, seeing the relative modernity of India on Indian TV broadcasts and chafing at restrictions on dress and speech, young Bhutanese have begun to lash out. In recent years once-sleepy Thimpu has witnessed a crime wave and one study showed that a significant number of young Bhutanese watch TV twelve hours a day. In downtown Thimpu, young class shucked their traditional Gho-checked, bathrobe-like outfits cut off at the knees-for jeans, T-shirts and mobile phone holsters at night. They prowled in bunches and mock-brawled in city squares, mimicking the American professional wrestling shown on TV. Adolescents have also developed major drinking problems- there can be seen young Thimpu residents spending evenings sucking down drugs and cough syrup and then fighting in the streets for real. One night, a few years ago a tourist saw two young men bloodying each other on the icy main drag. Like audiences of a film, referees waiting for combatants to fall on the ice, a small crowd let them fight until they hit the ground and then separated the boys.
Bhutan’s supposed uniqueness has also attracted upscale Western travelers who have brought on the very change Bhutan supposedly resisted. High-end hoteliers have set up shops in Bhutan, building luxurious resorts complete with Yoga classes, masseuses imported from Thailand, and pan-Asian cuisine that could have come straight from Bali (Indonesia). Celebrities have been decamping onto tiny Thimpu. One day, a tourist went hiking with a local Bhutanese guide, Ugyen. He hurried him up a mountain and when the tourist reached the top, Ugyen told him,”We’re making pretty good time…May be if we get to space 34 [ a local night club] early we’ll see Cameroon Diaz”. “Cameroon Diaz?” the tourist asked, befuddled. The idea of seeing a Charlie’s Angel in a place where some of the countries still lacked electricity seemed at the least, far-fetched. “Yeah, she was here recently”, Ugyen said to the tourist, ” She was on the dance floor all night at space 34, dancing real sexy with a group of people…..I think she had some rapper with her, too. You know that guy-Redman?” (The tourist later found out she was actually shooting an MTV show on the environment in Bhutan).
A depressing tale, perhaps-just another traditional culture that could not stand up to modernity, indeed when there are many Westerners in Bhutan who’d come to see the gross national happiness and left disappointed by Bhutan’s nightclubs, parties and cell phones. Except that in recent years the king had made propaganda that he himself apparently decided to grace his people that his subjects could embrace elements of the modern world without losing their unique identity.
Now, having known all these realities can’t we say Bhutan’s new hazarded parliamentary democracy is cornered in Thimpu, and it is unknown to the real Bhutanese people?
[Submitted by Bhakta P Ghimire]
In the past months several News Media outlets have posted articles concerning what is called the separation of government powers and the check and balances that are suppose to exist for the protection of citizens. Wikipedia defines this as: The separation of powers is a representation for the governance of a state. Under this model, a state's government is divided into branches, each with separate, independent powers and responsibilities so that powers of one branch are not in conflict with those of the other branches.
As we all learned this in school this was to ensure that a government was not allowed to use their powers against the people, it was a check and balance system each branch overseeing the other. But does this really exist in the South Carolina State Government? This being an election year one truly has to ask this question: Have the branches been taken over by Attorney/Legislators for profit?
In the South Carolina State Senate there are 18 Attorney/Legislators and 27 Non-Attorney Legislators. At first glance this seems alright to the average citizen, but as we began to take a closer look things didn't seem so straight forward. Most of these 18 Attorney/Legislators held key positions on the 15 Committees within the State Senate. Such as Senator Luke Rankin who sits on 5 of the 15 Committees including the Judiciary Committee and Ethics Committee. Senator Rankin's participation in questionable Judge Elections, and alleged cover ups of ethical violations has been reported on by several News Media outlets. We know of one Judicial election that Senator Rankin failed to inform the General Assembly about, concerning the highly questionable and possibly illegal actions of, Judge Monet Pincus, a Family Court Judge At Large, back in 2018.
It seems that Attorney/Legislators hold many of the seats on the 15 Committees governing the Senate side of the South Carolina State Government. As practicing attorneys these legislators have a conflict of interest, because that is where they earn their bread and butter. So, it's not a leap to imagine that these Attorney/Legislators would sway the laws in their favor to benefit them financially in their chosen carrier paths. On the Judiciary Committee alone 13 seats are held by practicing Attorney/Legislators out of the 23 seat committee. In fact nearly half of all the 15 Committees seats are held by Attorney/Legislators.
In the House of Representative side of the State Government the numbers look like this; there are 34 Attorney/Legislators and 90 Non-Attorney Legislators. Again they seem fair with a few exceptions such as the Judiciary Committee that consists of 23 seats and 19 are held by practicing Attorney/Legislators such as Rep. Beth Bernstein and Peter McCoy, who is the Chairman. And again it's not a leap to imagine these practicing Attorney/Legislators to manipulate the system for profit. Even in the Ethics Committee on the House side of the State Government 7 of the 10 seats are held by Attorney/Legislators.
Now it can be argued that Attorney's are ideal for these positions due to their knowledge of the law. And certainly not all of these Attorney/Legislators use their position for their personal bottom line. But how many of these Attorney/Legislators actually vote or even truly listen to their constituents? How many of them vote their personal believe instead of that of the people who but them in office?
Rep. Bernstein openly is against a Shared Parenting Bill (H3295) which is sponsored by another Attorney/Legislator Jason Elliott. Rep. Bernstein's Firm practices Family Law, and H3295 would change the Family Court system from a money maker, to even ground for children simply by guaranteeing a child's right to both loving and fit parents in their lives equally. It would also remove the long standing preponderance of the evidence standard, which is the lowest standard possible in Judiciary and only used in Family Courts, with a Clear and Convincing Standard. Not to mention 21 other States have already passed similar bills for the Best Interest of the Children.
There are Attorney/Legislators who do listen to the people they represent and even to South Carolina Citizen not within their Districts. Rep. Jason Elliott who took the time to listen to the hundreds of Parents (Custodial and Non-Custodial) demanding Shared Parenting for their Children. He was joined by other Attorney/Legislators such as Rep. Adam Morgan
Has the State Government forgotten "For the People, By the People" and replaced it with "For Attorneys, by Attorneys"? This election year we have noticed more common people running for State Government, such as John Gallman. Gallman, is running against Sen. Luke Rankin in Horry County's Seat 33. Gallman, among others running for positions throughout the State have stated they want Government to listen to the people once again. As South Carolina ranks among one of the most corrupt governmental states in the Country only time will tell if this election year changes anything.
[Submitted by Nicolas Knight]
