These six medical professionals:
Ashraf al-Hajuj
Valya Chervenyashka
Snezhana Dimitrova
Nasya Nenova
Valentina Siropulo
Kristiyana Valtcheva
were working at the al-Fateh Children’s Hospital in Banghazi, Libya in the late 1990s. A year later, about 400 children were diagnosed with HIV; the doctors and nurses were accused of conspiring with Israel and the USA to intentionally infect children with the disease, and were thrown into jail.
Five years later — five years spent in a Libyan jail, where they were tortured with electric shocks and beatings, and two of the nurses were raped! — defenders were able to show that the children were largely victims of HIV exposure prior to the arrival of the accused, and that the real culprit was a policy of poorly trained staff, unsterilized equipment, and generally shoddy hygiene. It didn’t matter; they were convicted in a sham trial, and sentenced to death by firing squad.
They appealed (wouldn’t you?) and are now being retried. Prospects look bleak. Libyans celebrated joyfully when the initial verdict was cast down, and Mouammar Gaddafi…well, let’s just say that having a megalomaniacal dictator running the country in which the trial takes place does not encourage much hope for a merciful intervention. The Libyans are now demanding $5.5 billion in compensation if they are to release the prisoners. This is nothing but a showy and high-priced extortion plot.
Declan Butler has put out a call for more awareness and more vocal protest of the plight of the Tripoli Six, and Nature has published a strongly worded editorial.
…scientists should lend their full support to the call by Lawyers without Borders — a volunteer organization that last year helped win the freedom of Amina Lawal, who had been sentenced to death in Nigeria for having a child outside marriage — that Libya’s courts should order a fully independent, international scientific assessment of how the children were contaminated.
I agree. The prisoners should be immediately released, and if Gaddafi is actually interested in correcting the tragic problems that led to the infection of 426 children with HIV and hepatitis, he’d be better off eschewing this disgraceful scapegoating and instead encouraging a deeper and more honest investigation into the tragedy—something that might help correct problems in Libyan hospitals and avert future adversity.
Wow, we need to go in, get the peoples and then mow our way out.
It’s sad enough that the best we can say about the proposed new “interrogation” rules is “well, at least we’d still be better than LIBYA” Ugh.
Why are batshit insane people allowed to run countries again?
Because we elected them?
Man, and here I was thinking that Libya had become reasonably non-insane over the past decade.
How could it? The good Colonel is still in charge (but you gotta give him credit for not promoting himself to general — he could have done that, you know)
For unintentional humor, try reading his Green Book. Imagine a parody text that combines the worst features of Marxism and Islamicism. Then imagine that the author was sincere.
Yeah. They gave up all those “WMD”‘s. They are the good guys now. They are hereoes of freedom. Our ally in fighting evil and terrorism and all that’s wrong…Wow! How do those on the right get through thinking and believing this without wanting to bash their heads through a wall or, at least, take a shower.
Libya still has the nutter in charge with the all female security force…is he a Bond villain? No, just a Wannabe Bond Villain.
Oh, let’s not forget Lockerby after all these years.
While I sympathize with their situation, and it would be great if we could somehow talk Libya into actually freeing them, I cannot feel completely bad for them. In a very real sense, they knew and, being intelligent doctors, understood the dangers of working in that country.
In the same way as doctors who work in disease-ridden areas of the planet, and die from said diseases, or police officers who are shot in the line of duty. It’s sad, yes, but it’s something everyone understood could happen.
Calling for a scientific examination of how the infections took place, or ANY other course of action that is rational and logical, is useless. Look at their initial assumption! Conspiring with Israel and the US? There is no logic that could dissuade them from their totally illogical biases.
If nothing else, I think that anyone of any intelligence and learning should lift themselves up by their boot straps and flee those god-forsaken hell holes. It’s a dying country, a dying culture, and a dying people. I feel it’s pointless to try and help anyone there. Even the “success” of Amina Lawal was pointless. A single victory in an ocean of injustice.
Just leave them to their paranoia, ignorance, and poverty. Just leave them to die.
The humanitarian thing to do is to try to help these people. It is a rare case where scientists may be able to have a direct impact on a political situation.
So I disagree with Aaron: I do not think we should leave these people to die, and I do not agree that saving Amina was pointless. Saving a human life is never pointless.
Aaron, you sound just like every Libertarian I’ve ever heard expounding on medical or public health issues.
I think I’ll make an extra donation to MSF instead of giving in to nihilism.
Michael,
I disagree on the value of human life. I think it can be broken down to mathematics. There are many lives that need saving. Many people who need help. Which person is most likely to have a positive effect on the greatest number of people. We could save a life in these countries, but then we would need to educate them, clothe them, and change the system in which they live. I would much prefer to expend resources in areas where my resources have an effect on a scale greater than person-by-person.
I do agree that scientists rarely get to have a direct effect on politics, and as such, perhaps it is the better thing to do. I need to think about that.
RavenT,
I don’t consider it nihilism. I want to help people. I want to help change the world in as great a way as I can, but humanitarian efforts in these countries is the same as flushing money down a toilet. We have limited resources. We must pick and choose our battles. This is a battle too large to even consider.
I must sheepishly admit, though, that I am a libertarian of sorts. But I am not nearly as defeatest as you would imply. I am idealistic and politically active where I believe it makes a difference. I donate extensively to charities, I volunteer at homeless shelters, and I vote for social systems. But in a world literally rife with problems, I cannot choose all of them, picking one for emotional or irrational reasons is decidely unscientific, and picking one arbitrarily to hold up as my raison d’être seems rather scattershot. I must choose based on those problems that are actually part of my life, and there are plenty.
“Why are batshit insane people allowed to run countries again?”
Because some folks don’t realize that the only proper tool for the reeducation of a third-world dictator is a bullet to the base of the skull. Some people, through their actions, forfeit their right to life. Holding hostages at gunpoint for a 5.5 billion dollar international ransom is an example of one such action.
When you say that, I’m 100% in agreement with you. I just find it curious that you think the statement above and the following statement:
equivalent in any way. Probably the best way to describe the difference is that you think it’s discrete (“part of my life” is absolutely disjunct to “not part of my life”), while I think of it as analog (“more immediately part of my life” vs. “less immediately part of my life”).
Then again, as a scientist and a medical professional, I’ve got a network, however distant the connection, to other scientists and medical professionals in distant parts of the world–in fact, I’ve just met someone who’s doing AIDS research with Western African professionals, and am excited about the distant possibility of collaboration with her on a project. It may or may not be able to happen, but I’m enthusiastic about the possibility of it happening, and the connection of the scientific method and caring about helping other people is what creates that bond.
Perhaps it’s easier to think of other scientists and health-care workers as totally disjunct from your life if you don’t have such a connection, and that’s what accounts for the difference between us.
“Because some folks don’t realize that the only proper tool for the reeducation of a third-world dictator is a bullet to the base of the skull.”
Careful, this is on the same grounds as violations of the Geneva conventions. If we start executing foreign politicians for allowing capital punishment of innocents then foreign backers might start doing the same to ours. It’s not like the US has a perfect record in this kind of situation.
Too bad we’ve gone and thrown away any credibility we have of being a moral nation.
And Aaron,
You hurt the Libertarian agenda by being so cold and arrogant. These doctors were clearly doing an immense amount of good, helping hundreds of children in a world that offered them little in the way of scientific medicine. Also, it’s not a hopeless case; otherwise these organizations wouldn’t put forth so much energy to put pressure on these leaders.
As a fellow Libertarian, it’s not the US government’s place to spend billions on these nations… which is exactly why they don’t. But for a few doctors to help the helpless, their efforts couldn’t have been much better spent, not in a western nation with public HMO’s or socialized health care. It was the most good for the greatest number of people, even if it does end as a tragic sacrifice. God help us in getting them out of this mess.
RavenT,
I agree. My words were poorly chosen. They come from a sense of hopelessness when dealing with these countries. They are violent, ignorant, and seem to revel in it. After enough time, I threw my hands up and effectively said “Fine. Have at it.”
I also found your distinction between a continuum and a discrete system of classification to be a good point and very well made. I had honestly never thought of it in that sense, but I still feel that the difference between those in other countries, and those in my own is great enough where a black-and-white, yes/no classification is still valid. The separation on the contiuum is great enough to allow this.
Your comment about an extended network has given me pause. That is certainly very valid. They are not part of my world, but they are a part of yours. But still, I think the educated people with whom you network are no different from us. They are the level-headed chaps to which I’m not referring.
Still, I see your point. Your network extends into that area, and as such, your concerns are more far-reaching. I’m sorry if you felt I was insulting your concerns as invalid.
Jon,
I did come off as cold and arrogant. I’m not trying to say I disrespect the doctors, or consider them foolish for what they did. I’m saying that I can’t feel entirely bad for them because they had to know that this was possible. They were in the danger zone, as it were, and these are the consequences.
Do I think we should try to get them out? Yes. I consider them part of our “group,” distinct from the country in which they work. An effort should be made.
My feelings about this, and the thing that prompted my comments, is a feeling that we are actually doing these countries a disservice by “helping” them. As far as cultural advancement goes, they’re living 1,000 years ago. It reminds me of the Prime Directive, in Star Trek. We cannot interfere.
I also disagree that these services must be doing good merely because these organizations expend resources. There have been many historical examples of money spent to no end. Look at our modern drug war. I think our actions have done little to help the situation. In fact, I can think of no studies that imply anything of the sort. Europe was once riddled with violence, famine, disease, and strife. We got out alive. I think they will, too.
While we may disagree on how to proceed, I can sympathize with that feeling. I know people who’ve just totally burned themselves out by trying to deal with medical outreach in the developing world. It’s a very hard problem–we do agree on that much at any rate.
If anyone should be coughing up five billion dollars in “compensation” it’s the Libyans. I can’t think of words strong enough to amplify the phrase “What gall!” to an appropriate level of incredulity and outrage.
“…Mouammar Gaddafi…well, let’s just say that having a megalomaniacal dictator running the country in which the trial takes place does not encourage much hope for a merciful intervention.”
Meanwhile, here in America, W. salivates at that kind of absolute power, as he sits in his Hühnerfalkelager and tries to stare down John McCain.
Thanks for the info.
Why are batshit insane people allowed to run countries again?”
Because some folks don’t realize that the only proper tool for the reeducation of a third-world dictator is a bullet to the base of the skull. Some people, through their actions, forfeit their right to life. Holding hostages at gunpoint for a 5.5 billion dollar international ransom is an example of one such action.
Erm, can we compile a list?
The “government” in Khartoum, getting ready to murder everyone in Darfur.
The Burmese Junta.
Kim Jong-Il
George W. Shrub
The president of (?) Uzbekistan (?) – the one with gold statues of himself, who has sacked all the doctors …..
erm …
The trouble with this, is, once you start, it is very difficult to stop.
Oh dear…..
I don’t think it is a coincidence that Libya is asking for 5 billion. Libya had to pay 2 billion for its alleged responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing. This was the price to pay to get back in the world economy. Apparently it is trying to get that back with interest.
Of course the accused should be released but you need to see the politics behind this.
Libya paid but did not accept responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing, but for the convicted man.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2062236.stm
There are questions about whether the conviction is safe.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0408-01.htm
A review of the affair is here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/740732.stm
Phony science, torture, show trials, an erratic and autocratic ruler who seems to relish writing death warrants….
What a terrible situation for a country to be in. The people should rise up and demand a return to constitutional government.
jim wrote:
Looks like the shrub admin disagrees……
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12799651/
———————————————————————————————————
U.S. to renew diplomatic relations with Libya
Having renounced nuclear weapons, nation to be dropped from terror list
NBC News and news services
Updated: 12:01 p.m. ET May 15, 2006
WASHINGTON – The Bush administration said Monday it will restore normal diplomatic relations with Libya for the first time in over a quarter century after deciding to remove Moammar Gadhafi’s country from a list of state sponsors of terrorism.
“We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya’s continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation Libya has provided to the United States and other members of the international community in response to common global threats faced by the civilized world since September 11, 2001,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a statement.
As part of the process, the United States will open an embassy in Libya, upgrading the current U.S. liaison office in Tripoli.
Removing Libya from the list of countries the United States considers to be state sponsors of terrorism means a 45-day public comment period will begin on Monday, after which Libya would be removed from the list.
The move culminates a process that began three years ago when Tripoli surprised the world by agreeing to dismantle its nuclear weapons program.
“Today marks the opening of a new era in U.S.-Libya relations that will benefit Americans and Libyans alike,” Rice added.
—————————————————————————————————————
“I also disagree that these services must be doing good merely because these organizations expend resources. There have been many historical examples of money spent to no end. Look at our modern drug war.”
You have a point here, Lawyers Without Borders gains recognition regardless of the outcome of the trial, so it’s a no brainer for them to raise public awareness and expend resources. And yeah, almost everything the Govt. invests in is an absolute waste. Here’s what get’s me though about govt. spending, we put almost as much into the Egyptian military as we do into the DEA. Why? I don’t know. But maybe they sholud knock some sense into libya.
http://www.thebudgetgraph.com/
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6466/thebudgetgraphcom3000hi5.jpg
Sure, but why would he want that? It’s better for him to let the tragedy occur, scapegoat someone and use it to scare the people into following a leader – even an insane tyrant. It’s despicable, but it works.
You avert enough adversity and people start thinking about the situation they’re in and how they could improve it. Gaddafi doesn’t want any thinking going on in Libya.
You say that like it would be a bad thing…
As I mentioned before, the conviction of the Libyan is unsafe. There is more on the trial.
http://www.serendipity.li/more/lockerb.htm
The more likely scenario is retaliation, not by Libya, for the American terrorist attack on an Iranian passenger plane Flight 655 which killed 290 people–funny how that is never mentioned in the American press.
“On February 22, 1996 the United States agreed to pay Iran US$ 61.8 million in compensation ($300,000 per wage-earning victim, $150,000 per non-wage-earner) for the 248 Iranians killed in the shootdown, but not for the aircraft, which was estimated to be worth approximately US$30 million. This was an agreed settlement to discontinue a case brought by Iran in 1989 against the U.S. in the International Court of Justice.[12] The payment of compensation was explicitly characterised by the US as being on an ex gratia basis, and the U.S. denied having any responsibility or liability for the incident.
The process of compensation itself proved a major cause for controversy, again by comparison to the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. The Washington Post reported on August 13, 2003 with the headline “Deal Reached With Libya on Pan Am Bombing” [1]:
“Lawyers representing the families of the victims of the Pan Am 103 bombing struck a deal with Libyan officials last year involving a $10 million payment to each victim’s family. An initial $4 million would be paid once U.N. sanctions have been formally lifted. An additional $4 million would be paid once the United States lifts its sanctions. The final $2 million would be delivered if Libya is removed from the State Department’s list of states allegedly sponsoring terrorism.”
Theoretically, this deal stated that the family of each adult victim on board Pan Am 103 would receive 33 times the equivalent sum of the family of each victim on Flight 655, whilst each child or senior citizen on Flight 103 would receive 66 times the amount received by the families of their counterparts on Flight 655.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
That is fair play American style.
So, as I said, it looks like Libya is using these people as leverage to get their money back.
Aaron,
I agree that dumping money and resources into the hands of corrupt governments is not the answer, but neither is leaving people to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps – since they need an education and some kind of market economy to achieve that. One libertarian-friendly solution is private support of grassroots science and business education and outreach programs like Cosmos Education and Trickle Up.
Declan Butler just posted a link to the Mickey Grant documentary Injection. This is a must watch movie!