Archive | October, 2024

An Electoral Primer for our Deeper Selves, Dr. Robert Zuber

27 Oct

Always forgive your enemies nothing annoys them so much.  Oscar Wilde

I suppose I’ll have to add the force of gravity to my list of enemies.  Lemony Snicket

Prodigious birth of love it is to me, That I must love a loathed enemy.  William Shakespeare

The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because generally they are the same people.   G.K. Chesterton

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it.   Voltaire

Let’s have a toast. To the incompetence of our enemies.  Holly Black

If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man’s life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility.  Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Dear All,

This post is going to be on the “short but sweet end.”  There are many lessons to be learned from this electoral season , including how far we all have fallen down the shaft of greed, indifference, grievance, enmity and ignorance.  With so much political rhetoric seeking to tear us down and exploit divisions beyond what any evidence would suggest, it is time for us to hold our society and our responsibilities to it in a better light, beginning with the thoughtful casting of ballots over the next week or so.

However, you come down on the political spectrum, and this here is not my business, there are at least two core duties which I feel are my business and which we all need to keep in mind.

The first is to reject the notion that our country is so dysfunctional, so ridden with corruption, fear and hatred, that only a singular politician (or group thereof) can save us.  That this is a claim made largely by a rapidly aging former president is certainly to be noted, but it is also a notion which is now baked into our political infrastructure of many stripes, a virtual credo of our unresponsive bureaucracies and elected officials who act as though they’ve been issued an American Express card with such privileges that the metal in which these cards of privilege are made of  has yet to be invented. 

We have messes to clean up to be sure, but we have also allowed the fog of personal and political grievance to seep into our private domains, allowing for the indulgence of more fear, more hostility, more indifference to pain and violence than is good for any of us.  And rather than welcoming and sharing the sun that burns off the fog, too many of our churches have magnified the grievance, have given succor to some of our worst instincts, those which Jesus and indeed all the world’s great religious figures came to highlight and then to offer another path.  I can only speak for my own tradition here, but I am constantly at practical odds with a growing number of “Christians” who have blinded themselves to the complexities of our collective souls, who have as well meandered so far from the teachings of Jesus that they now actually find such teachings quaint or naïve, apparently not what the God of Leviticus had in mind for “His” most ardent followers.

And this leads me to the second point, which in many ways merely flows from the first.  In this political campaign, we have found precious little counterpoint to the more strategic, competent indulgence of enemies and expanding enemies lists which are ridiculous at one level but also  an increasingly dangerous component of the social fabric we are now weaving. People we only know well enough to hate.  People we fear as though the world were little  more at present than a minefield full of the sorts of “horrible” folks not like us who increasingly populate our movie screens and social media feeds.  Indeed, more and more of us seem convinced that the world offers little but scary people and scary movies, a world where your best options are to tend to your own business and vote for people who claim to be “tough enough” to keep the monsters at bay.

But as we know, fear and its co-pilot anxiety are the raw materials for societies whose best features are increasingly closeted.  Not a shining city on a hill but a dark dungeon filled with potential enemies  we don’t know, don’t want to know, and don’t have a shred of sympathy for.  Not a model for the world but a country caught up in the muck of competition among political adversaries who have become acceptable, even desirable, depending on political proclivities. Not a beacon of freedom and opportunity for all but only for some, only for those who can buy their way to political influence without ever having to put themselves in front of a voting public, perhaps also for those who look like the “nice” folks we are, not the folks who invoke anger and discrimination in our often-unexamined selves.

Let us not delude ourselves: These legacies are likely going to be with us regardless of the electoral outcome in just a few days.  We are likely in too deep to just walk away from electoral outcomes as though this one was just like the others.  But we must cast our vote, we must encourage others to do likewise, and then we must all do our next part to clean up the messes our votes have failed to address, including  enmity at the  ready to deliver a package we surely don’t want and likely don’t even remember ordering.

I have heard people I generally respect talking about leaving the country in case their candidate is not elected. That is a choice I will not be making.  This is the country of my birth, the country that many of my relatives fought and died alongside so many others to preserve.  It is also the country that other countries in this world need to be better and do better, to at least project the value of equality, maturity, fairness and generosity even if these and others of their ilk are now more elusive and in shorter supply than we might wish.

 We have work to do before election day.  We have more work to do afterwards.  Please stay the course.

Tags: , ,

Behind the Curtains: Reflections on the Security Council’s Tensions and Contradictions, by Yewon (Hannah) Lim

14 Oct

Editor’s Note: Yewon came to us via the Republic of Korea and Columbia University and she proved herself to be quite an adept commentator on UN events, both in the High-Level Political Forum and in the Security Council. This is the last of the reflections from our summer 2024 cohort and I am particularly pleased to share it with our readers. I am continually impressed by the diverse and talented younger folks who literally fall into our lap. We are so very grateful to have shared with Yewon and the others this small portion of our common journey.

The Security Council (SC) Chamber is adorned with dark turquoise patterned wallpaper that stretches across the two sides of the room, and at the back of the room, behind the nearly perfect circular meeting table, hangs thick, lengthy curtains that flow gracefully from the ceiling to the floor. Between the curtains, a large mural is painted on the white marble wall. All of this creates a space that appears rich and sophisticated, with just a touch of frivolity. As a stranger to this room, the atmosphere seems at first, quiet, calm, undisturbed, almost subtly serene, and still. Yet, what is discussed in this space is often the opposite–intense, stifling, restrictive, cold, and at times, hostile. As I reflect back on my relatively brief time here at the United Nations (UN) this summer, including time at the High-Level Political Forum, there are several observations and personal reflections I want to share specifically concerning the Security Council.

The UN SC meetings occur most weekdays at 10am. For general debates, the meeting continues at 3pm until all states who wish to speak have spoken. As the meeting bell rings announcing the start of the meeting, state members finish taking their seats around the table. I open my laptop laid out in front of me and insert the interpretation earpiece on one of my lobes as the President calls the meeting to order. The President gives the floor to the briefers, and then each of the representatives takes turns deliver their speeches. Heated debates, amicable conversations, and pragmatic outcomes were some of the elements I expected from the meetings. However, it was, in fact, very political, formal, bureaucratic, and curiously unwelcoming and distant. This was especially so because state members would mostly read from pre-written scripts.

One of the meetings I attended which was truly intense, political, and even hostile was the discussion on the situation in the Middle East concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The bombardment of hospitals and schools, military raids, the number of dead women and children, food insecurity, health systems on the brink of collapse, all of these and more were repeatedly mentioned, representatives mostly condemning the acts that led to such devastations, and then calling for a ceasefire. Each of these meetings invited representatives from the State of Palestine and Israel. There were a few instances when the Ambassador  from Palestine would point fingers at the Israel representative, passionately urging state members sitting in the room to uphold the UN Charter and international humanitarian law by acting instead of sitting around simply discussing what to do about this heinous war which has occurred ever since October 7th 2023 attacks by Hamas.

In response, the Israeli representative would use phrases like “child rapists” to describe the Palestinians and argue against the points the Palestinian Ambassador had previously stated. The atmosphere was hostile, intense, far from respectful and void of understanding, as might have been anticipated given that the two states have been at odds for decades. Their deep-seated hostility is historical, passionate, and complex, which is why such discussions were not easy. Indeed, it was obvious that there were no practical outcomes after these heated conversations. All that was addressed was what the situation in Gaza was like and the statistics that supported what each of the member states said throughout the meetings. The death of civilians continues to rise whilst these individuals sit in their suits and ties on the comfortable chairs in the Security Council chamber.

The hostile dynamic between  Israel and Palestine was not the only one. Such political hostility was clear between the United States and Russia, mostly over Ukraine but over Gaza also. The Russia representative would put the US in the spotlight, accusing it of being perpetrators of the longstanding policies of the West that continuously excluded the interests of Russia and other non-Western countries. He painted the US as a serial violator of fundamental agreements and highlighted US reluctance in multilateral engagements. They mentioned  widespread US corruption in one of the meetings, using the example of the Pentagon’s inspector general of the US army who did not report weapons violations, which he asserted was only the tip of the corruption iceberg. On the other hand, the US representative accused Russia of fabricating lies and constantly distorting narratives, mentioning that it is “… unfortunate we all had to sit here and listen to that…”. The members would further elaborate on their respective failure to uphold multilateralism and the UN Charter, highlighting that Russia is hypocritical as they utilize the SC as a platform to broadcast disinformation. As the US and Russian representatives delivered their statements, the other Ambassadors were often on their phones, a clear sign of their political dissatisfaction with each other.

As part of an often-small audience listening to their statements, I was often  shocked and bewildered at the irony of the meetings. The UN was founded on the values of multilateralism and cooperation, peace and security, integrity and accountability, and so on. Few of the meetings represented these values. Instead, they displayed the opposite, pushing for more of a political agenda instead of a peaceful and dignified one. I wanted to have a conversation with each of these representatives and learn more about their personal stances, instead of what their statements represented. What were their names – instead of “the representative of the Republic of Korea”? Do they truly care about the issues they talk about every day, or do they only pretend to care? Are they likewise frustrated about these meetings which are often long on statements and short on progress? I had no way of knowing. After each of these sessions such as the conversation on the situation in the Middle East, I would leave the chamber disappointed and discouraged. I realized the most I could do is write about my observations and experiences during my time here at the UN.

Despite all this, my time at the UN was a profitable one for an evolving  student such as myself, not yet sufficiently exposed to present real-time ongoing global issues and conflict. If learning about the world and the issues our society faces is a priority, sitting inside the walls of a classroom is one way to go, but the opportunity to watch and listen in on Council members was quite another. I learned more about the world, exponentially more in fact, outside of the classroom in these meetings. It was a great space for me to hear first-hand about the current situations in states that are struggling with international peace and security. It was much more tangible and concrete than reading about it from literature, news articles, or textbooks, as important as they can be. I realized the significance of being present in an environment that existed for the purpose of making the world a better place. If there is one difference between myself at the beginning of my internship and now, it is that I am much more educated, informed, and interested in global politics, international relations, and issues relating to peace and security. The frustrations were not simply frustrations but also a catalyst, sparking my passion to change the world, directing my attention to pursuing a career in organizations that actively tackle global issues, specifically in areas that are directly impacted by war, because I believe it is a scourge that needs to be addressed right now. As is often noted in the Council chamber, the fate of so many of the world’s peoples, especially women and children (who often have little or no say in resolving the violence) continue to hang by a perilous thread.  

Clearly, in order to tackle global conflict, the UN  must fix the problems that lie within the institution, and this includes the Security Council. States must step up to the task and rub the dust off their eyes which conceals the reality of these meetings. Such meetings are too often impractical, redundant, ineffective, and unproductive. How can the SC members encourage multilateralism and cooperation when they fail to maintain an amicable relationship between themselves? Of course, there are several Council members  which maintain good terms with others. Yet, I am left to wonder  how many of these are actually grounded in politics, not sincerity, which is a realistic concern seeing that the UN is a fundamentally political organization. However, this too must evolve. Despite apparent differences, states must find it within themselves to eagerly come together each morning to the SC, full of compassion, integrity, and the willingness to listen actively to contrasting views. Members must better cooperate through lively, results-oriented  conversations, instead of reading from their politicized pre-written scripts. .

Tags: , ,

Two Faced: Healing the Ruins of a Broken Year, Dr. Robert Zuber

6 Oct

Let Ruin End Here.  Danez Smith

God hath given you one face, and you make yourself another. Shakespeare

The most common form of despair is not being who you are. Soren Kierkegaard

I have sometimes been wildly, despairingly, acutely miserable, racked with sorrow; but through it all I still know quite certainly that just to be alive is a grand thing.  Agatha Christie

It is a characteristic of wisdom not to do desperate things. Henry David Thoreau

I come into the peace of wild things who do not tax their lives with forethought of grief. I come into the presence of still water. And I feel above me the day-blind stars waiting with their light. For a time, I rest in the grace of the world and am free.  Wendell Berry              

Tricks and treachery are the practice of fools, that don’t have brains enough to be honest. Benjamin Franklin

When one with honeyed words but evil mind persuades the mob, great woes befall the state. Euripides

A year ago this week, as images of horrific violence by Hamas started a year-long recalibration of international relations, indeed of international law itself, people caught up in the wilfull malevolence of violence born of violence and begetting violence which continues to occur on a scale that we have not seen for some many years.

My response in the aftermath of the Hamas attack was to pen a (not particularly well received) piece entitled “Weighing in on Weighing in,” in which I tried to describe the short term, soon to become long term, impacts of old wounds revisited and new wounds inflicted, a Jewish people which had not –could not – assimilate one more of the many abuses perpetuated on them over centuries; and here faced off by another people, long occupied with serial miseries and indignities inflicted at the hands of an Israeli government which early on made it clear that any modicum of restraint – this October – was simply not in the cards.

The reasoning for that earlier piece was my early recognition that wounds had been ripped open in ways that left people little flexibility – perhaps even control – over their more and less intense emotional reactions.  Almost immediately after the attackas opinions hardened to an almost unprecedented degree, friendships frayed, organizational partnerships cooled.  “Who you stand with,” became the litmus test of continued conviviality, as though such “standing” often required something more than clicks on a social media page, or perhaps some street and campus“outrage” generated by high levels of anxiety about the state of the world alongside (as would be the case for me as well) an incomplete understanding of what might just be the most complex geo-political interactions on planet earth.

This hardening of opinions was often swift and unforgiving with implications far beyond individual friendships and organizational dynamics.  The UN also became entwined in it as well as US vetoes kept the Security Council (though not the General Assembly or the International Court of Justice) from issuing resolutions which at least promised some tangible respite from the horrific violence inflicted in reaction to October 7.  A few Council members refused to condemn the Hamas attacks or pay sufficient attention to hostage release.  On the other hand, the Council’s responsibilities to uphold their own resolutions and international law were reduced to mostly handwringing regarding the staggering number of UN personnel, humanitarian workers, journalists and health workers killed by Israeli bombs. But as Council members slowly sought to challenge IDF operations, the more Israel made clear that it will do what it needs to do, while claiming (not entirely without evidence) that any of the other countries around the Council oval would behave just as Israel was behaving if something similar to the Hamas attacks were to happen to them.  On several occasions, Israel’s diplomats even resorted to calling the UN and its Ambassadors “terrorists” for not recognizing and supporting the erstwhile righteousness of Israel’s cause. Even in these diplomatic halls, categorical opinions proved (and still prove, one year on) highly resistant to reconciliation.  Numerous calls for a cease fire and the restoration of respect for international law have been stubbornly rebuked, as were prior resolutions over many years calling for an end to occupation, terrorism, settlement expansion and settler-related violence.  Thankfully in UN forums outside the Security Council, clearer calls were made for an end to what can only be described as collective punishment, the destruction of entire neighborhoods, their infrastructure and inhabitants, justified by intelligence confirming wanted Hamas (and now Hezbollah in Lebanon) elements therein.

I have had something of a front-row seat to the diplomatic dimension of this multiplicity of carnage which has been characterized by reckless military incursions with little regard for civilian life, feckless resolutions with little or no enactment, the desperate measures taken by Gazans to find some basic nourishment and reasonably potable water only to find instead a sniper’s bullet, the “collateral damage” of child after child relegated to a life without limbs let alone any modicum of inner peace, the weapons gushing from multiple fronts into a widening conflict zone which only threatens to widen further, the hardening of “theocratic posturing” by those politicians and insurgents whose theology is anything but beyond reproach, the resurrection of “like it or leave it” governance reminiscent of the US during the Vietnam War, the dramatic rise in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia which seemingly fails every distinction suggested between the dubious actions of governments and insurgents on the one hand, and the deeper traditions struggling (and deserving) to maintain their full dignity and respect on the other.  There has also been a failure, including by some prominent western media outlets, to properly account for the millions across the Middle East and beyond, including in Israel itself, who refuse to swallow the bait, who see in the current carnage a path to ruin which will only grow in intensity and sorrow, which will only catch more and more innocents in its snares.

As with so many other examples nowadays, this is a horrific mess of our own making, a failure to uphold our own creeds while endlessly and obliviously pointing fingers at others all the while claiming some perverted notion of “divine sanction.”  This failure has left so many on the edge of despair and pushed so many others over the edge.  I have an easy life relatively speaking, as there are no bombs exploding outside my apartment window. There are no children in my back room suffering from health-related traumas while wondering if they will survive the next aerial assault.  I am not spending my days preparing funerals of hostages, journalists, children, aid workers, these and more killed during a year-long cycle of violence which has been two-parts predictable and three-parts contemptable. 

And yet throughout this horror and the emotional “dodge ball” that we have all been required to play, I have worried deeply and daily about our capacity to turn back from this newest of brinks, to become “who we are” with the caveat that we are now demonstrating only a portion of that capacity, certainly the portion that revels in destruction and righteous hate, certainly the portion that is willing to swap out our God-given face for a more grotesque version of our own making, certainly the portion that prefers tricks and treachery to honest engagement, including being honest with ourselves.  The Middle East is not the only global venue for horrific violence and abuse, for displacement and collective punishment.  It is not the only place on earth where authoritarians pursue authoritarian goals – including the goal of keeping themselves out of jail once they no longer enjoy unchecked power with which to insulate themselves from accountability. Israel has often reminded UN diplomats over years of occupation critique that Israel is the sole functioning, “moral” democracy in the region without completing the sentence – that democracy is more than voting and that morality transcends – often considerably – ascriptions of national or ethnic interests.

In trying to make sense of this past year and my own generally inept contributions to a peace which passes understanding (to quote my prayer book), a few images and memories have reverberated. I recall several of my Jewish friends who I feel may have been pushed into taking a harder Zionist line than otherwise might have been the case had the violence on October 7 not been immediately followed by more intense, anti-Semitic recrimination on October 8, rekindling fears of discrimination lurking below every human surface.  In addition, my social media feeds over the year have been filled with images from the Auschwitz Memorial archives (@AuschwitzMuseum), images of so many children and their families led to a collective slaughter once more in their collective history for no reason other than being Jewish. At the same time, I have kept a lengthy file from over 20 years of covering the major UN bodies which include multiple files chronicling abuses by an occupying power against an occupied people, abuses which are now being committed on a much larger scale, albeit a scale consistent with a past characterized by episodic bombings, settler violence, home demolitions and more. These allegedly “Godly” policy excesses are accompanied by an almost complete disregard of UN resolutions and other efforts to keep alive a “two-state solution” which is currently, at the very most, on life support.

One wonders if ending the occupation would have prevented an October 7, would have done more to end the toxicity of hatred now directed against Jews and Arabs. I cannot say.  This option is not given to us now. What is given is more saber-rattling by regional states, more bombs falling in civilian areas, more journalists and aid workers under direct attack, more acts of terror and retribution, and certainly more children facing lives without limbs, schools and hope, children who bear no responsibility for the carnage we continue to witness no matter how many officials claim otherwise, no matter how many snipers blithly use the children of Gaza as target practice.

The quotations above, especially from Wendell Berry and Agatha Christie, are there not for your benefit but for mine, this person of privilege and relative access who has not been able to move the pile of violent intent a single millimeter over many years of trying, who has no defensible solution for the acrimony  which has swept over friendships and partnerships like a dense fog, a person who can only incompletely process the profound moral backsliding which people across the world, including in my own country, have succeeded in recent times to normalize.

In some ways I seem to have been broken by all of this seemingly intentional reverting to a dark place from which we thought we might finally have escaped. But if this ruin is to end, and if I and others are to contribute something positive to its ending, then I must – we must reject the darkness, the hatred, the creeping dystopia. Much better is to renew as best we can our full embrace of that “grand thing” which is life itself.  For a time, those of us who have been granted this blessing must learn to “rest in the grace of the world,” if only long enough to be able to return to the practice of discernment, the practice of healing, the practice of peace.  There is, in the end, a way to convert our own blessings into pathways of healing and reconciliation for those who have so long been “racked with sorrow.” May we find and choose that path.

Tags: , , ,

More Intern Reflections on UN Policies and Processes, by Antonio Persi

3 Oct

Editor’s note. While it wasn’t for as long a time as we had hoped, we were pleased to have Antonio Persi with us for at least part of the summer. He missed the High-Level Political Forum in July but was able to attend a number of General Assembly and Security Council meetings and other UN events. As he transitions to the University of Chicago to study Anthropology and Public Policy, I asked him to jot down some of his UN Impressions especially related to how the system engages and includes young people. Excerpts from what he shared with us appear below.

Upon my arrival, I quickly discovered that the UN was riddled with disputes. At surface level this is not alarming, as disagreements and the explication of varying beliefs serve as the basis of representative governments, but as time went on (in both the Security Council and General Assembly) I was alarmed by the longevity and quantity of these quarrels and how these examples of conflict and vocal dissent did not seem to be leading diplomats to any real resolutions. Bickering only seemed to further limit options on already gridlocked attempts at unified international responses to pressing issues. On the other hand, while the atmosphere at 42nd and First Avenue was not always “inviting,” I enjoyed the absence of sugar coatings and was captivated by the shocking reality of where the world stands today.


Achieving a stable Security Council that truly and equally represents the civilians its resolutions seek to affect is a difficult and perhaps unrealistic task for the current Council–a group that already struggles with too many divergent opinions. But this does not excuse the stagnant nature of the UNSC, a chamber which largely reflects the global status quo following World War II. In a particular meeting regarding African Representation on the council the GAPW team sat through remarks delivered by virtually every member state in the United Nations, diplomats who mostly stated and restated that a change must be made, and that Africa “deserves better” which is surely true. The President of Sierra Leone actually saw fit to fly to the United Nations to commence this eight-hour long session of the UNSC which highlighted the Councils–and perhaps the United Nation’s–stubbornness to adopt a more representative process. While never explicitly mentioned, the meeting also seemed to be a clear attempt to remove the right of permanent Council members’ ability to veto a resolution, but I am just as confused as anyone on how this is going to happen. P5 members of the UNSC have vetoed the inclusion of new permanent members time and time again, deadlocking the changes that most states say they desire. Besides getting nowhere, what these day long disputes do is waste precious time and resource needed by countries to resolve more critical issues: the UNSC meeting on African Representation was meant to conclude before 1 PM but went on until about 5 pm, which meant that UNSC discussions scheduled for that afternoon regarding conflict in the Middle East ended up being discussed in more private settings with no transparency or official dialogue observed.

The need for a younger perspective within the United Nations has never been greater. The truth is that the United Nations–and society at large–has fallen victim to the notion that power and influence can and should come with seniority. I won’t negate the importance of longer-term education and experience, but perhaps that very education is the issue at hand. It is–with some variance–the education that shaped our nation’s diplomats and political leaders of today, an education that so often leads to policy gridlock and teaches one how to achieve solutions in the context of international dynamics that are no longer relevant to today. The negative consequences of this can be seen beyond the UN’s lack of perceived authority. In some of our most “objective” areas of understanding, recent discoveries show how scientific technology, and the taught knowledge it relies upon, discriminates and works against minority groups, their communities and interests.


Through interpreting the selective wording in diplomatic speeches and watching the interactions between national representatives when off the clock, it is clear that the neutrality of these chambers is compromised. Diversifying councils, envoys and conferences will continue to be the most effective way to mitigate the effects of this complex network of international alliances. Unfortunately, the word diversity feels almost intrinsically tied to race and other key factors of identity: but as we share our definitions of diversity, we often forget the inclusion of age. Different generations are naturally going to think in different ways, each is facing their own respective world and future that looks so vastly different than the other. I would argue that the world my generation is facing looks more like a pressure cooker than ever before; because of this I feel that we have shown resilience, determination and integrity like never before. In my professional experience I have seen issues like representation handled better through councils of high school students than by diplomats at the United Nation.


This drive to see change and our “blank-slate” naivety is why we as a generation stand out. Advocacy efforts have skyrocketed in my generation proving that we want to be heard, and we are ready to face the complex challenges of today. We just need somebody to truly listen. This act of listening is not satisfied by holding “youth” events in UN chambers at 5 pm on a Friday during which tired interns are talked at for hours on end with no room to include their own opinion.


If our objectivity is stripped from us upon birth (or perhaps upon conception) and we accumulate bias through time and lived experience, then how could reaching objective conclusions on critical issues be as simple as hiring the most experienced candidate? We must look to younger individuals whose formative years are not yet in the past. For it is their lack of exposure to biased “qualifications” coupled with their determination to reach ethical and just outcomes that will ensure that their contributions to the system can be thoughtful and representative of people who see little appeal in the efforts of the officials tasked with governing them. As important as youth involvement will be in revitalizing the efficiency and effectiveness of institutions such as the United Nations I fear that few hopeful peacemakers will want to involve themselves in a system in which life-saving aid is leveraged in the name of hegemony and true representation feels like a utopian dream