Excellant collyk. I will concede the point that some international organization have recognized alternate sexuality as a human right, and some haven't. Thanks for the additional reading material but I'm not that interested in gays. If you read my originaly reply to the story, my focus is that the US has enough problems to keep Obama busy w/o him poking his nose all over the world. As a Realist, it's easy to see he just opened the door for China to make huge inroads in the enire African continent. Not a good geo-political move. Peeps should also consider the potential unintended consequenses. I think it was in Egypt where the US supportrted a gay parade and the simple fact that the West was trying to tell them how to live enraged the population and they attacked numerous gays and gay hangouts.

I don't think Obama's plan was thought thru and I think he should focus on his domestic problems.

Barrow to Obama: We don’t care!

In an interview with Amandala today, Belize Prime Minister Dean Barrow frowned upon a recent indication from United States (US) President Barack Obama last Tuesday, via a presidential memorandum, that the US has declared “combat” against countries that it may deem guilty of violence or discrimination against “lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender” persons, dubbed LGBT for short—a war which could have implications for foreign aid allocations to poor nations.

Barrow told Amandala that he has not yet seen the memo himself, but he doesn’t care what it says, as the Government of Belize will not move from its stance.

The Belize Government has decided to defend the law which pronounces unnatural sex illegal and which permits a 10-year prison term for persons found guilty of sodomy. In reality, though, Belizean law enforcement authorities do not prosecute homosexuals, except in cases of rape and the molestation of minors.

As regards to the Government of Belize’s decision “to defend the law on the nation’s statute books,” said Prime Minister Barrow, if the US is saying that it will cut foreign aid to Belize, “they will have to cut off their aid,” Barrow told us.

No one can tell the Government of Belize what to do on this matter, which is an internal matter, he said.

While the Obama memo was issued out of the White House in Washington, D.C., it was directed globally, to nations including Belize, who may face repercussions in terms of foreign aid allocations from the US.

“Agencies engaged abroad are directed to strengthen existing efforts to effectively combat the criminalization by foreign governments of LGBT status or conduct and to expand efforts to combat discrimination, homophobia, and intolerance on the basis of LGBT status or conduct,” said Obama.

Prime Minister Barrow told our newspaper that there is not much that the US government gives to Belize, apart from its aid for security, which, he said, is not much and is for the US government’s self-interest, because they are worried about the drugs going to the US—which, he added, is such a huge and unforgivable consumer of the vast majority of the illicit drugs.

The US president’s memo stated that, “Under my administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action to promote the fundamental human rights of LGBT persons everywhere. Our deep commitment to advancing the human rights of all people is strengthened when we as the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.”

The constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court of Belize by Caleb Orozco’s United Belize Advocacy Movement (UNIBAM) is known to have major international support.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has written in her annual human rights reports on Belize for the past two years that, “The law [of Belize] does not protect sexual orientation or gender identity...”

She also mentioned UNIBAM in her report, identifying it as, “The country’s sole lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender advocacy organization...”

Clinton said that UNIBAM had reported that “continuing harassment and insults by the general public and police affected its activities; however, its members were reluctant to file complaints.”

In his memo last Tuesday, Obama declared the US’s intent to embark on “swift and meaningful U.S. responses to human rights abuses of LGBT persons abroad,” and to “vigorously advance” its goal to promote the rights of those who choose to have same-sex relations, including homosexuals and bisexuals, and those transgender persons who may decide they want to be a man today and a woman tomorrow.

PM Barrow indicated that he intends to review the Barack memo to see what other issues he has raised in the document; but Government’s decision to defend its position in local court stands, nonetheless, he indicated.

Amandala

Unintended consequences -- this is what happens when the President of the World and the Prime Minister of the World consider themselves to be superior and can wave a magic wand and everything will be fine. Lack of planning, lack of good policy, poor decision making, and lack of building a coalition vice dictating will continue to cause more problems...



Mark Canavera, RPCV Burkina Faso, has been a frequent contributor to our enewsletters and web site. This article recently appeared in the Huffington Post with a slightly different title. Not in our name: African human rights activists reject UK aid conditionality

An oft-told African proverb (whose precise culture of origin often changes with the teller) asserts that “When elephants fight, the grass suffers.” Put another way, the powerless are trampled in the clashes of mammoth decision-makers. An elephant match is currently underway between the government of the United Kingdom, which have threatened that it will consider reducing foreign aid to countries that criminalize homosexuality, and the governments of many African nations, who have stridently rebutted the threat. In the process, the “grass”–that is, Africans who support the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) people–is suffering. But African social activists are refusing to take the trampling lying down. These are standing up and speaking out.

In October of this year, a coalition of pro-LGBTI African social activists came together, representing 51 organizations and 86 individuals from at least 19 countries in Africa, all four regions of the continent, and the African diaspora. This spontaneous coalition released a strongly worded statement that essentially rejects the UK’s proposed aid conditionality. This “not in our name” statement–by which these activists used virtual tools like listservs, emails, teleconferences, and discussion forums to reach rapid-fire consensus–argues that the UK’s decision would create backlash against LGBTI people across the continent by positioning them as scapegoats for decreases in aid revenue. The UK’s position also undermines the burgeoning LGBTI movement in Africa, the coalition claims.

“We developed this statement for three reasons,” explains Joel Gustave Nana, the Executive Director of African Men for Sexual Health and Rights and the author of the first draft of the statement. “First, we were tired of being collateral damage in international politics. Second, statements by Britain and other Northern countries affect the work that we do on a daily basis to ensure that LGBTI people are protected on the continent. And third, and perhaps most importantly, we needed to say, ‘not in our name.’ If you decide to cut aid to these countries, do not do this in our names.”

Nana explains that the UK government did not consult any African activists before taking its decision and making it public. When I asked the Office of the Prime Minister of the UK about the activists’ concerns, it replied with a statement that reiterates its reasoning: the UK hopes to ensure that its foreign aid contributes to the international strengthening of human rights. The reply does not address the concerns raised by the coalition of African activists, most notably the potential scapegoating of LGBTI people in the wake of the UK’s announcement.

For their part, the African governments that continue to criminalize homosexual acts have responded vociferously to the UK. As collated on the blog Towleroad, the governments of Uganda, Ghana and Malawi responded angrily, with a Malawian government spokesperson calling the threat “unacceptable and provocative” and a Ugandan presidential adviser describing the UK’s position as “an ex-colonial mentality.” (“We are tired of being given these lectures by people,” the adviser is reported to have told BBC Newshour.) A Ugandan newspaper reported additional reactions from Zanzibar, Tanzania, and Kenya, in which officials argued that they would rather lose foreign aid than kowtow to the Brits.

Nana believes that these government reactions were predictable and reflect the very concerns that the coalition of activists laid out in their statement. “African leaders who feel that they are being bullied to embrace values that they don’t believe in feel like this aid conditionality is an attempt to violate their sovereignty,” he says. He predicts that the UK aid conditionality will be more harmful in countries with more heavy-handed rulers, asserting, “The more authoritarian a government, the more strongly it will come out in opposing this conditionality. And the more severe the impact will be for LGBTI people.”

Issues of aid conditionality are always tricky, especially where human rights are concerned. Nana concedes that there are legitimate concerns for donor governments who want to ensure that their citizens’ tax dollars are not blindly handed over to oppressive regimes. Moreover, just last year, some Ugandan activists praised the role that some European countries’ threats of aid reductions played in combating Uganda’s infamous Anti-Homosexuality Bill, deemed odious by Barack Obama himself. Nana points out, however, that no human rights or LGBTI activists from Africa have publicly opposed the coalition’s recent statement.

Whether or not the UK’s decision will help or harm the cause of LGBTI people in Africa remains to be seen. The early verbal reactions by some African governments do not bode well. What is evident for now, however, is that the UK government has so far neglected to engage with or to listen to the very people whom its policies purport to assist. The African activists’ statement is a tremendous opportunity to hear the voice of the grass, whispering its crystalline message on the wind, even as it is being stomped by those elephants on high.

Barrow told Amandala that he has not yet seen the memo himself, but he doesn’t care what it says, as the Government of Belize will not move from its stance.

Well just great that he does not need to be informed.
This thread is probably being observed...time for this country to take a deep look at the problems of their people. Starting first with education. On Caye Caulker only a few get to go to school past the 6th grade. And then its crime and drugs and theft. No wonder they wont deal with our gay friends........