1-5-2016
Assignment 1
Intl 500 Research Global Intelligence and Security Studies: Forum Post Week 1
Title: “How International Pandemics,
Relate To, And Support: International Terrorism”
Miss. Bayo
Elizabeth Cary, AA, BA, MLIS
2nd
Master’s Degree:
Intelligence
Officer In Training
Cell:
1-352-872-4774
Email: bailiza@yandex.com
Thesis Statement:
How do International health standards fail to protect the
healthy, while, at the same time, supporting the activities, of International
terrorists, and their organizations.
Body of Paper:
It
is important, when looking at the current state, of International health
affairs, to first briefly review, the contemporary response, to International
health emergencies. WHO, the World Health Organization, is the most
contemporary, of world health organizations, which deals specifically, with
International pandemic disease threats. WHO, with all efforts mobilized, to
combat threats of International disease, such as: flu and HIV/AIDS-has made
almost no impact, to improving the health and lives, of people, anywhere in the
world. In my opinion, WHO, is outdated, and intentionally ineffective, due to
current world politics, which are not restricted the political processes within
the US.
A Contemporary History of International “Health Security,”
in the Framework, of WHO-the World Health Organization (WHO Online Hyperlink)
http://www.who.int/en/ :
In early 2007 the Indonesian government announced that it
would cease sharing H5N1 influenza virus samples with the World Health
Organization’s Global Influenza Surveillance Network. At the heart of the
government’s complaint was the fact that samples were being passed by the WHO
to pharmaceutical companies which developed, and patented, influenza vaccines
that the Indonesian authorities could not purchase. The decision gained
widespread support among advocates of greater equity of access to medicines,
and in response the WHO established an intergovernmental process to agree a
framework for influenza virus sharing. The process officially concluded in April
2011 and a new Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework (PIPF) was agreed at
the 64thWorld Health Assembly in May 2011. (Kramradt-Scott and Lee, 2011, 831)
Relevant Historical Commentary, From A Director of: WHO, In
Relation To Improving World Response, To Pandemic Flu, And Other Disease
Threats, To: “Global Health” and Closely Related Security Issues:
Since 2001, attempts by the World Health Organization (WHO)
to engage more actively with foreign policy have been framed in terms of
‘global health security’, with a particular focus on the spread of infectious diseases
(McInnes and Lee,2006). As the WHO Director General Margaret Chan observed in
2007, ‘better security calls for global solidarity ’which, she argued, can only
be achieved through greater ‘diplomacy, cooperation, transparency and
preparedness’(WHO,2007a,p.vii). (Kramradt-Scott and Lee, 2011, 831)
Although it is clear, WHO-the World Health Organization, has
made sincere efforts, to share publicly, their restructuring and creation of
new rules, and new policies-at the very same time, it is also clear, that the
changes made to the organization, have not effected enough alteration. WHO, is
no more effective today, after a media blitz of change was last announced, than
they were, before, when there was no change at all. Oft times, an
Organization-even a country, such as the US, publicly announces, and runs media
show and tells, based on massive; “Changes,” when in fact-no changes will occur
at all, and, it is simply a distraction, from, the continued and prolonged:
“status quo.”
Specific International Flu Virus Sharing
Outline/Guidelines-Deemed As Insufficient and Not Workable-Even After
Restructuring-Due To A Number of Reasons-Based On the Greed of An International
Market Economy, And, The Continued Leadership, By: WHO:
Influenza is, arguably, the most democratic of viruses, with
the potential for some strains in today’s globalised world to affect entire
populations regardless of age, gender, socioeconomic status or geographical
location (Jones, 2010; Kilbourne, 2006). The ease and speed with which influenza
viruses can spread and, in the case of lethal strains such as H5N1, their
potential to cause high numbers of infections and deaths, present a significant
risk to the international community. It is this risk that led to the formation
of the GISN 60 years ago under the auspices of WHO’s Global Influenza Programme
(GIP). The network operates by receiving influenza virus samples from
participating countries via their National Influenza Centres (NICs) which are
then forwarded to one of six designated WHO Collaborating Centres (WHO CCs).
The virus samples are then isolated to identify which strains of the virus are
circulating and where at a given time. Augmenting GISN’s work is FluNet, an
internet-based programme operated by WHO which links together the NICs and WHO CCs
in a virtual worldwide network to ensure the rapid exchange of global
surveillance data. The information generated by these two networks is then
passed to pharmaceutical manufacturers which use the data to develop seasonal
influenza vaccines and, in the event that a novel strain emerges against which
there is limited or no human immunity, a new pandemic-specific vaccine. (Kamradt-Scott
and Lee, 2011, 833).
Sometimes, a change in leadership, can lead to a positive
forward movement, for an organization-or even for a country. If the new
director/leader, is an improvement upon the last, and, if the new hire, takes
the initiative, to improve, and to reinforce the organizational improvements.
However, too often-even if a more effective director is hired, and takes the
time to improve the rules, and, even if the new rules are written and, then
widely shared-there is still, a reinforcement of rules-problem. Who is going
ensure, that new rules, will be reinforced, by law? Police? Lawyers? Judges?
In regards
to: WHO and IHR-when effective and safe rules, for an organization are in
place, to create and support, effective positive movement forward, and then,
there is no person, and organization, to reinforce the improvements-the
situation is essentially: “status quo”-again. The IHR-International Health
Regulations, supported by WHO, are not effectively supported or reinforced, by
any legal system anywhere in the world-that I can detect. International human
rights courts, do exist, and “bioterrorism,” is an issue, that should be able
to be addressed, in such a legal environment. I have searched, and have found
no reliable evidence, that the International court system-pertaining to human
rights, or to any other issues, are accessible, to anyone in need.
In particular
there is a high level of agreement evident over what the major threats to ‘health
security’ are and what should be done about them. These are a particular set of
health risks which are primarily seen as major threats by Western developed
nations, and contemporary global responses – often couched in the language of
global health security – have a tendency to focus on containment rather than
prevention. (Rushton, 2011, 779)
“Health Security In General:”
“In particular some have pointed to
a danger that public health will become subjugated to powerful security
interests, with potentially negative consequences for the health of individuals
and communities” (Rushton, 2011, 779). I think the biggest concern, regarding
public health and safety, can now be identified as an: “International Health
Crisis” and not just an American situation. When dealing with something, that
extends beyond US borders-due to increased accessibility to world travel-what
needs to considered, is more than the American political perspective. America
does not normally consider the needs or concerns of “under-funded” nations,
and, as such- the US is not so beneficial, to the US-either.
At this point, as the Obama
Administration of America, comes to a close, health concerns in the US, have
been subjugated, by a greed, displayed by Democrats in America, for more money,
and for more control over other people, and other nations. The Obama
Administration, supports organizations, and political leaders, who support
International terrorism: illegal illicit drug trafficking, arms dealing, human
trafficking, sex slaves, etc. In supporting International terrorism, by
creating a prostitute economy in the US, America now, is a global threat, to
the health and lives, in other countries, all over the world. The new America
story, that the Obama Administration wrote, is: sick and sad, and an
irreversible American reality-which, completely missed the promised: “American
Dream.”
The US, from what I can comprehend, has
changed from a market economy, to a prostitute economy-like the ones utilized
in Africa. Therefore, what America values the most, is not: intellect, it is a
wet slimy: “blow-job.” Prostitute economies-regardless of where they are
located in the world, support International terrorism, in part, by spreading
and intentionally sharing, pandemic diseases. I did not vote for, or support
the Obama Administration. I have been homeless, unemployed, denied almost
everything I need in the US, and literally hunted, as an American dissident, as
well as continuously tortured, for refusing to prostitute, in a country with
legal, which clearly state, I have rights: The US Constitution and Bill of
Rights.
“Health Security Threats:”
“This, it is argued, centres around a
relatively small number of health issues: rapidly spreading infectious
diseases; HIV and AIDS; and biological weapons/bioterrorism.” (Rushton, 2011,
780). Although, it seems like: HIV/AIDS, is a small health risk, because it is
only one incurable disease, that is not, in fact, the nature of the disease.
There are many varieties of AIDS, people say, just AIDS, just like people say
just: hepatitis.
Additionally, as AIDS mutates-because
of the nature of the disease, more antibiotics must be applied. As AIDS disease
becomes more resistant to antibiotics, the more diseases, that AIDS patients
catch and carry-opportunistic infections, which-have to be are treated with
antibiotics as well, and the new diseases become resistant to antibiotics-as
well, i.e.: antibiotic resistant TB. Thus, AIDS patients, actually create new
diseases, which can be, in many ways, just as dangerous, and difficult to
treat, as: HIV/AIDS itself. AIDS, is not a simple chronic illness.
The Current Gold Standard Response To
International Health Threats:
“The nature of existing global
health governance responses, which tend to be overwhelmingly characterised by a
focus on containment rather than prevention (Aldis, 2008; Labonté and Gagnon,
2010, p. 5), heightens unease about ‘whose security’ really counts” (Rushton,
2011, 780). If AIDS, were a simple chronic illness, like: diabetes, then
continued treatment-with almost no alteration, of human interactions and
behaviors-might be appropriate? However, HIV/AIDS-is a serious illness, that
causes certain death-even if people can live a while, on strong antibiotics.
Terrorists, utilize diseases like: HIV/AIDS, to effect genocide upon an entire:
village, or community, or country. HIV/AIDS, is “bioterror” tool for
terrorists, just like when: “crack cigarettes,’ are utilized for chemical
warfare, and, just like when, atom bombs, were dropped during WWII, on Nagasaki
and Hiroshima, Japan-genocide.
2011 The Perspective On Global Pandemic
And Uncontrolled Spreading Was Unrealistic: Border Containment:
“Clearly, protecting populations
from disease is a good in itself, and populations in the West have as much
right as those elsewhere to benefit from such protection” (Rushton, 2011, 781).
Protecting populations from disease, should be the overall design, and goal, of
International organizations, like: WHO, and the United Nations-although, that
is not the case. Sometimes, it is difficult for people to see the truth, even
when you highlight everything important, in the brightest yellow pigment
attainable. Ethics and morals, come into play, when a political situation, is
not beneficial. Sometimes people care a little, while at other times, people do
not care at all, and only pretend to care.
Many Americans, are soo
lethargic, uncaring, and apathetic-even towards their own: family, friends, and
neighbors-that, it is hard for me to believe, why anyone in the world, would
trust a nonprofit organization, or NGO, sponsored by America, or Americans.
There is no separation, of church and state, in the US anymore, because of the
second Bush Administration. Americans go to church, and listen to a hateful
sermon. American Christians oft times, act out illegal and inappropriate
behaviors, with the consent, of US state financially sponsored, pro-Obama
religion-which is not Christianity. Obama calls, his form of American
government state sponsored Christianity, the: “Devil Worship Bank Church For
Worship of Black ‘Illuminauti’ Money.”
Clarified Explanation About How
International Security And International Health Problems Meet-Pandemic Nexus:
The characteristic
claims associated with health security in the literature can be boiled down to three
common arguments (see Feldbaum and Lee, 2004, pp. 22–4):
(1) that the
fast-moving nature of infectious disease in a globalised world poses a threat
to individuals, populations or states;
(2) that pathogens
may be weaponised, either by terrorists or through state-sponsored biological
weapons programmes, and used against military forces and/or civilian
populations;
(3) that a severe burden of disease (HIV/AIDS
is by far the most commonly cited) can have social, political, economic and
military impacts which threaten the stability of states and regions.
(Rushton, 2011,
782).
Some of Popular
Organizations Internationally Actively Participating In International “Security
Health” Conversations-Currently Contributing and Actively Affecting International
Policy/Rules/Regulations/Medications, etc.:
1) WHO
(World Health Organization);
2) IHR
(International Health Regulations);
3) U.N.
(United Nations) Security Council;
4) U.S.
National Intelligence Council;
5) U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services;
6) H.M.
(Her Majesties) U.K. (United Kingdom) Government National Security Strategy.
(Rushton, 2011, 782-783)
“Tobacco-related
diseases, although they threaten health on a massive scale, are seldom if ever discussed
in ‘health security’ terms” (Rushton, 2011, 783). In my opinion, International organizations, in
considering International health risks, that can be safely associated with
International terror, are too often, intentionally not considered-by
International NGO’s and other International government organizations. Intentionally
overlooking, an International health risk, in support of a political stance or
opinion, in support of terrorism, for one: religious/political belief, or
another-and is wrong, while at the same time-illegal. Terrorism, is an illegal
means, to create power and control, in the political environment-instead of
reliance, upon the legal modality of choice in the West: Democracy and a Market
economy.
When, looking at: causes of
disease (pathology), chemical warfare, and bioterrorism, tobacco, is not the
only serious health risk, that US government refuses to consider, as: terror
supported “bio-chemical warfare.” Specifically speaking, I can easily refer to
diseases created, and spread, by; tobacco, and other products-legal or not,
that are mixed-into, and hand-stuffed into, tobacco products, which are sold
and distributed Internationally. Sometimes the root of evil, can be your next
door neighbor, in the US, however, we have such an immigrant problem here now,
because of the Obama Administration, that, the root of all evil, might be, your
neighbor’s family, on the other side of the world.
“Importantly for the
argument here, the range of recognised health security threats is actually even
more limited than this suggests since not all infectious diseases have come to
be widely seen as threats to health security” (Rushton, 2011, 783). Often
time-dangerous tobacco products, are: sold and distributed, by and for,
countries that support: International terrorism, to raise additional monies, to
support their International terror activities.
Some Western countries,
now-appropriately identify many tobacco products-if not all, as: chemical
warfare, due to the toxic nature, of the smoke which emanates-the US, is an
exception. In 2013, a Nobel Peace Prize, was granted, to an International
organization: (OPCW) Organization For the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(Online Hyperlink: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2013/
), for identifying, and complaining effectively, with scientific empirical
evidence, against: “tobacco products,” for supporting International terrorism (Nobel
Media AB, 2017, Nobel Peace Prize 2013).
When International organizations, like
WHO, fail to protect, the International public good-in regards to: International
health standards-that present, a significant threat-an: “International security
threat, to global health,” then, there are supposed to be, other organizations,
to turn to. One such International organization, closely connected to WHO-is purportedly
concerned, about: “Global Security Health Threats,”: The I.H.R. (International
Health Regulations).
The International Health
Regulations (IHR) remain the primary international legal treaty specifically
focused on infectious disease control. In the mid-1990s, international public
health officials recognised the need to overhaul the IHR to make them more
relevant to the modern world. In revising the IHR, the treaty vastly expanded
the scope of reportable conditions, strengthened and widened reporting
requirements, and sought explicitly to incorporate human rights considerations
– all in the name of reducing transborder risks associated with infectious
disease. (Youde, 2011, 813).
Due to the fact, that it
is evident, too many issues still persist Internationally, related to the rapid
spread of infectious, and incurable diseases, such as: dangerous strains of the
flu, and: HIV/AIDS-clearly, the close relationship between: WHO and IRH, is
inhibiting the ability of IRH, to deal with legal issues, related to WHO. Too
often, organizations, are separate, however, they work soo closely together-all
of the time, that, therefore, the two organizations cannot consider their
professional relationship, as: disinterested. Essentially, WHO and IRH, are the
same organization, with no division of cares or interests.
When two parties, are in constant interaction
with each other-as organizations, and as individuals, their professional
interests, become combined, and then-a final result, of the interactions,
cannot legally be considered-in the best interest, of the: “public good.” Because
parties relate to each other-as literally-the same organization, with no third-party
evaluation or audit participation-the activities, of IRH, do not benefit the
legal needs of WHO-in any meaningful way. In such a situation, the organizations,
both need to be dissolved-if and when, they are unwilling, to reach out to a
new, third-party, which-is really and honestly-disinterested.
The Stated Employment
Objectives, Allocated To IHR-Which, Due To Lengthy Close Relations With
WHO-They Are Unable To Effectively Accomplish-And, Unfortunately-To The
Detriment, Of The Entire Planet:
The International Health
Regulations (IHR) remain the only international legal treaty that explicitly
regulates a state’s obligations to the international community on the spread of
infectious diseases. The IHR empower the World Health Organization (WHO) to act
as the central repository of all required disease surveillance information, and
they detail the circumstances under which states have a legal obligation to report
disease outbreaks to the rest of the world. They act as a key element of
mediating the risk associated with infectious disease outbreaks in the
international community and significantly influence how we perceive the nature of
health risks. The IHR also provide the international legal underpinnings to
global health governance systems, facilitating information sharing and
surveillance activities among state and non-state actors involved in
cross-border health concerns. (Youde, 2011, 813).
When International
governments, talk of: White collar crime, collusion, corruption, and fraud, the
reference, is usually to an accounting department somewhere. However, “criminal
minds” in action, are not segregated, to the academic field of accounting. The
medical profession, has its share, of dishonest: nursing, medical, pharmacy,
and bio-medical engineering, university applicants. People wearing a lab coat,
of any sort, are only as ethical, as their: country, academic program,
community, and International milieu permit.
When there are no systems of checks
and balances, because the legal authoritative body, such as: the IHR-is not
ethical or moral enough-in of its self, to put WHO in check, then, the health
of the entire planet, is at risk, and out of balance-as is, the current state
of the world, right now. Internationally, humans, are now experiencing, an:
“International Global Security Health Threat and Crisis.” Turning to
organizations, like: WHO, and IHR-which, have never helped in the past, will
not be effective-again, and, is never going to be the answer, of how to, secure
the planet, from: “Global Security Health Threats.”
In my initial evaluation of: IHR and
WHO-not effectively treating, or confronting, “Global Security Healthy
Threats,” in the past, IHR and WHO-will never be trust worthy. An entirely new,
and necessarily, not integrated through the US, or attached to old
organizations, auditing third party organization and support network, must be
created. The health issues are International in scope, and therefore, I argue,
that new International health care organizations, need to be Internationally
funded-to protect life, and to improve: International-morbidity and mortality
actuarial table rates-as they relate to the global spread of pandemics.
I assert, that, the continued: “Global Health
Security Threat,” of pandemic diseases, do in fact support, International
terrorism-in many documentable, and reportable ways. I had no difficulty, in
locating online peer-reviewed information, that is genre and topic specific, in
regards to my above stated, thesis statement.
References
Kamradt-Scott, Adam and
Kelly, Lee. 2011. “The 2001 Influenza Pandemic Preparedness
Framework: Global Health
Secured or a Missed Opportunity?” Political
Studies, vol.
59: 831-847.
Nobel Media AB. 2017.
“Nobel Peace Prize 2013.” Nobel Peace Prize (OCPW).
Rushton, Simon. 2011.
“Global Health Security: Security For Whom? Security From What?”
Political Studies, vol. 59: 779-796.
Unknown Author. 2017. “WHO
World Health Organization General and IHR Information.”
WHO International
Organization. Accessed January 5, 2017. http://www.who.int/en/
Youde, Jeremy. 2011.
“Mediating Risk Through The International Health Regulations and
Biopolitical Surveillance.”
Political Studies, vol. 59: 813-830.
No comments:
Post a Comment