Drone strikes by the CIA and the military increased dramatically as he worked as deputy national security adviser with President Obama, and Brennan has been described as the face of the drone program.

But Daniel Klaidman, who tracked the Obama-Brennan relationship for his book “Kill or Capture,” says that Brennan’s attitude toward drones is more complicated than the popular image would suggest.

Leaked drones memo shakes up CIA confirmation hearings: Brennan was “the principal coordinator of a ‘kill list’” slnm.us/FX8v4PH

— Salon.com (@Salon) February 6, 2013

He’s troubled by the vague language in the leaked Justice Department memo (PDF), and tells anchor Marco Werman why he thinks the lack of judicial oversight in targeted killings is a ‘recipe for disaster.’

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: Amos Guiora gave legal advice on targeted killings to the Israeli Defense Forces in the 1990s. Today he is a professor at the University of Utah where he writes and lecturers about counter-terrorism and law. Amos, you’ve read through the leaked Justice Department memo that contains guidelines for the targeted killings of US citizens abroad. So compare this for us with the Israeli approach, which you know pretty intimately. Are the courts a part of a decision-making process there?

Amos Guiora: In Israel because of the High Court of Justice, which is a branch of the Supreme Court, there is very engaged and robust judicial review of the executive decision-making process. That’s in direct contrast to here in the United States, where frankly there really is, in context of something like the drone policy there is no robust judicial review. And so when the Israeli Supreme Court a number of years ago ruled an Israeli targeted killing policy, it very much set down guidelines criteria for the Israeli executive and its decision-making process. And that frankly is in direct contrast to the American system. And if you read through this memo, well if you get into the details of it, in articulates, establishes a paradigm that from my perspective is not really rooted in the rule of law, not really reflective of morality in armed conflict, and raises some pretty important questions about its effectiveness.

Werman: So get into the details then, because from what I read of the Israeli decision, they won’t attack civilians unless the civilians for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities, then they will. So how does that differ from the US construct?

Guiora: It’s probably the wrong expression, but you hit the nail on the head. The two most important sentences in the DOJ memo suggest or articulate that there need not be clear evidence that a specific attack on US persons and interest will take place in the immediate future. And that’s how imminence is defined, meaning there really is no imminence requirement, and that you’re absolutely right. The DOJ…

[crosstalk]

Werman: So how does Israel define imminent threat then?

Guiora: Imminent threat is defined as imminent threat, that’s an attack that is going to occur, that the plan is well under way, and it’s not abstract, nor ephemeral, and that you need to have clear evidence that it’s a specific attack. It’s not vague. And this DOJ memo, not to wear too much the legal hat, but it’s overbroad with broad breadth and an amorphousness in the context of a clear lack of specific guidelines and criteria. The moment that it says–and I’m reading from the memo–does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on US persons and interest will take place in the immediate future. Probably the best way to put this in the colloquial, and I apologize for the expression, it’s carte blanche. And there’s nothing more dangerous in operational counter-terrorism than to give a commander carte blanche.

Werman: Is it possible Amos Guiora that there is a strategic advantage to the ambiguity in the Department of Justice memo? There are scenarios that a country just can’t anticipate like of 9/11.

Guiora: Right. I think that this ambiguity and vagueness, I understand it. I have sat at the table of operational counter-terrorism for 20 years. That said, my fear is that we’ve opened the flood gates extremely broadly in terms of the very loose definition of legitimate target/direct participant. The business of counter-terrorism is an ugly business. And the moment that commanders have been given this extremely broad definition by the Administration through the DOJ memo, my great concern is that we’re going to proceed forward in a targeted killing or drone policy paradigm that is not predicated on rational-based decision making, devoid of criteria, with no guidelines and no self-imposed restrains. I find that deeply disturbing.

Werman: And generally speaking Amos Guiora, what’s your take on the morality of targeted killing, target assassination?

Guiora: Targeted killing, I don’t call it assassination because assassination according to international law is of a political leader. Political leaders aren’t being targeted here. Terrorists are being targeted. I think that targeted killing when done, predicated on rational-based decision-making was very strict, criteria and guidelines in the context of self-defense reflects morality in armed conflict. But, a paradigm which is so broad in terms of no clear evidence, that may not take place in the immediate future, I would suggest that this memo morphs into that disturbing gray area where morality crosses into the line or sphere of immorality.

Werman: Amos Guiora, thank you very much for your thoughts on this.

Guiora: It’s absolutely my pleasure, any time.

Werman: Amos Guiora, a legal expert on targeted killing at the University of Utah.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Right now it’s hosting the PuSh International Performing Arts Festival.

One of the performances there requires audience members to be blindfolded and led around the city by a volunteer guide.

And that city is Vancouver, British Columbia.

Marsha Lederman is an arts correspondent for the Globe and Mail newspaper and she took this blindfolded tour of Vancouver.

So I toured the streets of Vancouver for almost 3 hours, blindfolded. Do You See What I Mean? is part of @pushfestivalsoc.li/yRItkgQ

— Marsha Lederman (@marshalederman) January 30, 2013

• Geo Quiz Podcast on iTunes
• Geo Quiz Podcast via RSS
• The World on Facebook
• Follow @geoquiz
  

President Barack Obama meets with his national security team for a briefing on Afghanistan and Pakistan in the Situation Room of the White House in December 2010. (Photo: White House/Pete Souza)

The United Nations is launching an investigation into the impact of drone strikes and so-called targeted killings on civilians.

Anchor Marco Werman speaks with Daniel Klaidman of Newsweek and the Daily Beast, who has interviewed hundreds of US officials about the Obama Administration’s embrace of drones as a major national security tool.

Analysts monitoring internet usage on the island say Cuban officials appear to have activated an undersea cable line linking the island to the internet via Venezuela, as opposed to the slower satellite-based access the island has had for years.

Marco Werman finds out more from Doug Madory of the Internet monitoring company Renesys.

Another factor that cemented the nascent France-Germany friendship in the 1960′s was a song by French singer Barbara.

The lyrics expressed her love for the German town of Göttingen and its people.

Anchor Marco Werman finds out more about Barbara’s role in European reconciliation from journalist Pierre Haski in Paris.

Subscribe and follow The World’s Global Hit

• Global Hit Podcast on iTunes
• Global Hit Podcast via RSS
• Global Hit Archive (prior to June 2009)
• Global Hit on Facebook

Charles de Gaulle (left) and Konrad Adenauer in 1961. (Photo: Bundesarchiv/Wiki Commons)

It was concluded following three devastating military conflicts: the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71 from which emerged the modern German nation state and the two world wars, fueled at least to some extent by the notion that the two nations were “arch enemies.”

The Élysée treaty put an end to all that: it wasn’t simply a peace agreement but called for consultations between France and Germany on all important questions and regular summits between high level officials were established.

Among the direct consequences of the treaty were the creation of the Franco-German Office for Youth, the creation of Franco-German high schools and direct partnerships between numerous French and German towns, schools and regions.

Young people from both countries would meet and get to know each other instead of thinking they’re arch enemies. In that regard the treaty has been a spectacular success: a war between Germany and France is now pretty unthinkable.

Like many others, I myself visited France many times when I grew up in Germany and our family hosted French exchange students. France was no longer the enemy across the Rhine of my parents’ generation but a weekend trip to Paris.

There are disagreements, of course, and being good neighbors is very important again in times of economic hardship say the leaders France’s and Germany’s socialist parties in a joint article.

“The crisis in the eurozone can only be overcome if Germany and France work together,” write Harlem Désir und Sigmar Gabriel in Der Spiegel and Libération.

And that’s exactly the plan according to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. “Germany and France intend to work together on proposals on how to improve economic coordination in the European Union this spring as the continent struggles to overcome its debt crisis and generate growth,” Merkel said after meeting with French President Francois Hollande in Berlin.

But first there’s time for a little celebration: as part of the “festival of friendship,” France and Germany are issuing stamps, coins and other memorabilia.

And more than 500 French lawmakers are coming to the German capital for a joint session with the Bundestag.

George Friedman is CEO of Stratfor, a global intelligence company based in Austin, Texas. He speaks with anchor Marco Werman about his recent article “Avoiding the Wars that Never End”.

Visualize tweets for this story: Click on the image below to see tweets

The protests are being led by Tahir ul-Qadri, who’s frequently been described in the press as a ‘firebrand cleric.’

But that phrase doesn’t convey what an unusual figure Qadri is: He preaches a progressive form of Islam, which embraces women’s rights; he wrote a long, detailed fatwa that condemned terrorism as inherently un-Islamic; and he even went on a ‘peace tour’ of the world, including visiting Pakistan’s arch-rival India.

Host Marco Werman talks with Shamila Chaudhary of the New America Foundation about the mysterious cleric.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Werman and this is The World, a co-production of the BBC World Service, PRI, and WGBH Boston. They want to throw the bombs out. Sounds like Washington, but these demonstrators calling for change today were in Islamabad, Pakistan. This was the third day in a row that protestors took to the streets of Islamabad to demand the resignation of the Pakistani government. They accuse the government of being corrupt, and they want an interim government to take over while a new election is organized. The protestors are followers of a Muslim cleric named Tahir-ul-Qadri.

Tahir-ul-Quadri [recorded speech, translated]: “It’s the beginning of a revolution, of reforms, of vote rigging, which will bring transparency, accountability, and eligibility of the candidates. This should be done now, not after the election.”

Werman: Tahir-ul-Qadri is frequently described in the press as a firebrand cleric, but that phrase doesn’t convey what an unusual figure ul-Quadri is. Shamila Chaudhary is Senior South Asia fellow at the New America Foundation and has been following Quadri’s movements. Tell us first of all, Shamila, who Tahir-ul-Qadri is and why he is such an unconventional politician in Pakistan terms.

Shamila Chaudhary: Ul-Qadri was a politician in the 80s in Pakistan, and he left politics in protest of the rampant corruption and bad governance that plagued it, and moved to Canada and became a Canadian citizen. But at the same time he had started a large religious organization in Pakistan which is rumored to have thousands of schools and a large following, so he’s been maintaining this organization from Canada. He himself is fairly conservative but not provocative and not very closely aligned with the Jihadist mentality that we see strong in Pakistan right now. He himself is fairly educated, is a constitutional law professor, has studied American and British law. So this is someone who’s extremely knowledgeable about the world and is trying to mesh modern values in business and financial affairs with conservative Islam. He’s not just appealing to this kind of radical, small, 2% group of individuals who align themselves with more conservative, militant organizations.

Werman: Just a couple of examples of how unconventional Qadri is, he preaches a progressive form of Islam embracing women’s rights, he’s written a long detailed Fatwa condemning terrorism as un-Islamic, he’s even gone on a peace tour with people from arch-rival, arch-enemy India. So how compatible are these things with conservative Islam?

Chaudhary: I think it’s extremely compatible. That’s not the confusion that’s affecting the situation right now. The confusion is actually, why has he arrived right now at this moment, and why is he calling for regime change? If he in fact is pro-democracy like he says and wants legitimate democratic change in Pakistan, he should let the government finish its term. It’s a very historic moment for civilian leadership in Pakistan. If the PPP can finish its term, it will be the first ever government in Pakistan history to be uninterrupted by military rule or extra-constitutional measures to get rid of it. So I actually question his motives and his agenda. If in fact he’s pro-democracy, this government needs to finish its term so all the political actors and stakeholders can understand what it means to have a peaceful transfer of power. He’s just coming in and interrupting that entire process.

Werman: I was going to ask you how popular is Quadri? Is there a chance he could make a difference?

Chaudhary: I think we’re already seeing that. His mark has generated a fair bit of momentum to make a difference. Then you have, I think, some parts of the political establishment amongst the political parties who are also curious about this, and they’re waiting to see what comes of this. What I think is actually going to happen is that the government is likely to respond to some of this pressure. It’s pretty significant, and the images of people spending the night in the streets, and there have been reports of unprecedented numbers of women and children in the streets protesting, these are pretty significant. I don’t think that the government wants the international media to focus on these too much.

Werman: As to those protests where there are women and children out on the streets, the protests that Quadri is leading, what do you make of the fact that we’re seeing a different side of Pakistan, a different demographic out protesting?

Chaudhary: I think it was inevitable that we were going to see this in Pakistan. For at least a decade now the international media has overwhelmingly focused on the counter-terrorism problem in Pakistan, which is a very real issue, but it’s been at the expense of these democratic forces and the evolution that’s been happening in the country. It’s been independent of the counter-terrorism issue and of the United States and of the war in Afghanistan. I think what we’re seeing on the streets this month means that there are actually organic Pakistanis that are also eager for change, and they want to see their country move forward, and they’re sick and tired of status quo politics.

Werman: Shamila Chaudhary with the New America Foundation, thanks so much for telling us about Tahir-ul-Quadri. We appreciate it.

Chaudhary: Thank you.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

It’s a combination flashmob, religious pilgrimage, and parade, called Kita Nago.

But what exactly is this Kita Nago? And where’s it going?

Participants say they’re walking across Haiti, from the western tip of Haiti’s southern peninsula, all the way to the country’s northeast corner.

Their goal is to reach a city along the border with the Dominican Republic.

Can you name that city?

Well, the final destination of this pilgrimage is a Haitian city called Oanaminthe. Journalist Kathie Klarreich says all along the way Kita Nago is generating a buzz as thousands and thousands of people including politicians, dancers, musicians, and locals join in to be part of a new ritual that symbolizes national unity.

• Geo Quiz Podcast on iTunes
• Geo Quiz Podcast via RSS
• The World on Facebook
• Follow @geoquiz
  

The idea is to deter sexual violence and other types of crime.

Anchor Marco Werman hears more about the plan from Pamposh Raina, a journalist at the New York Times’ Delhi bureau.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Werman. This is The World. The gang rape that sparked so much outrage in India recently took place on a bus in Delhi and this weekend there was a report of another gang rape involving a bus, this time in the Northern Indian state of Punjab.
These cases may be forcing a rethink when it comes to bus security in India, or at least in the city of Gurgaon, just south of Delhi. Officials there are planning to install closed-circuit cameras on city buses and at some bus stops. The idea is that the cameras would work to deter crime and help in the prosecution of perpetrators.
Pamposh Raina lives in Gurgaon and works for the New York Times bureau in Delhi. She says technology alone won’t solve any problems.

Pamposh Raina: There has to be a setup where people who are monitoring the situation or the footage is being recorded actually is being monitored 24/7 by trained officials.

Werman: Hasn’t the city of Gurgaon built monitors into this proposal, people who will be the watchers?

Raina: There is a proposal that; yes, there will be people monitoring it. But my concern is the actual implementation. If there are trained officers who actually monitor the situation and take action, then the step can make a lot of difference. But if trained officials are not in adequate numbers to take on this additional task, then that could be a problem and then it could just be a function of adding another level of security which probably will not be half as effective as they want it to be.

Werman: Do any areas around Delhi use CCTV’s already, where it is effective?

Raina: All the national monuments, all the government buildings, they have CCTV cameras already built in. So there are security officials on duty who are always monitoring the footage that is recorded there. It is not that this is a new step for Gurgaon, or for Delhi, or, for that matter, any metropolitan city in India, or any big city in India. I think the challenge here is to find officers who can actually monitor it constantly, especially in areas where cases of sexual assault have been reported in large numbers.

Werman: What about on the Metro, the underground subway (that you regularly use, I understand)? Do they have CCTV’s there?

Raina: Yes. I think the surveillance on the Metro, the subway, is very good. Because all the time, there is a heavy presence of security officials, police officials. So they seem to be on the guard, but the one thing I would say they should sort of ‘step up’ is the presence of female officers. Because if you’re traveling late at night and you see male police officials, that’s not very reassuring often because as a woman, I don’t feel very comfortable or very confident walking up to a policeman and actually talking to him and relating any episode of sexual assault which I might have encountered because there’s just no understanding and there’s no sensitization among the police force to a large extent, especially men. I don’t think they are sensitive to what a woman goes through when she undergoes a situation as happened recently in Delhi which was the gang rape case.

Werman: Pamposh, I gather you don’t travel much on the buses around Delhi. Why not?

Raina: I’ve taken buses before but now I wouldn’t feel safe on a bus because they’re too overcrowded. There’s no way that you can be on your guard and make sure that there’s nobody who’s standing next to you and trying to harm you in some way or trying to actually molest you. Because no matter what, you will always be sort of pushed; somebody will try to feel you up. Somebody will try to sort of nudge you, and it’s always a man.

Werman: So Pamposh, I saw another report, unbelievably, of another gang rape that started on a bus this past weekend and continued in a home. And it seems it happens a lot and the rapists sense some kind of impunity. What would make you ultimately feel safer in Delhi.

Raina: I think, first of all, the police force has to make a concerted effort to sensitize the officials who are on duty. As I said before, whenever a crime of such a nature is committed, a woman who has been victimized does not feel comfortable enough walking into a police station and registering a complaint: because of the kind of questions that she is asked at the police station; because of the lack of understanding by the police officials of what she might have gone through; because they are not sensitive enough to understand the trauma of a rape victim or a victim who has been sexually assaulted or molested. Right now, it just seems that they are very insensitive to such situations.

Werman: Journalist Pamposh Raina who works in Delhi and regularly takes public transportation. Thanks very much for telling about this plan to put closed-circuit TV on some buses there- appreciate your time.

Raina: You’re very welcome. It was a pleasure talking to you.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

One of those who died there was human rights activist Irfan Ali, who was immediately mourned by fellow activists on Twitter.

Anchor Jeb Sharp speaks with Marvi Sirmed, a human rights activist in Islamabad and friend of Irfan Ali.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Jeb Sharp: I’m Jeb Sharp and this is The World. Shiite Muslims refuse to bury the dead today in the Pakistani city of Quetta. It was an angry active protest against the government demanding more protection for their community. A series of attacks against Shiites yesterday in Quetta and elsewhere killed about 120 people. A Sunni militant group claimed responsibility for the deadliest blasts. Before I’d even heard about the bombings the story of Irfan Ali, a young man who died in the attacks, came to my attention through Twitter. I was drawn in by the emotion of the tweets eulogizing them. They called him a gem, a bright mind, a brave soul, someone born to fight for human rights and peace. We called up Irfan Ali’s friend and fellow activist, Marvi Sirmed in Islamabad to find out more about him.

Marvi Sirmed: At a personal level he was a very passionate and caring person, despite the fact that he had to leave his hometown, Quetta, a year and a half ago because of the security reasons. He left Quetta, tried to settle in Islamabad. He got some freelance work, but despite all these hardships the inner activist in him, the caring, very soft, emotional person, passionate person in him did not die down. He was [inaudible 01:26] and strong in his resolve as he could be. If you know the situation in Pakistan even a little bit, you wouldn’t know that being Hazara and being Shiite in Pakistan, and then not budging and still speaking up for the rights of others, it takes a lot of courage. It takes a lot of spine. It takes a lot of heart. And that’s what he was.

Sharp: You referred to his background, that he’s a Shia Hazara, this attack is presumed to be an attack on Shiites by extremist Sunnis linked to the Pakistani Taliban, exactly the kind of sectarianism he fought against. Is that right?

Sirmed: Absolutely so. He used to say that he would like to die fighting and while helping others. And that’s how he died at the end. He died as a volunteer who was just cuing people who were injured in the first blast. He died in the second blast, which was planted in an ambulance.

Sharp: And Marvi there’s so many activists and in Pakistan especially, is there a story you have that would help us understand why Irfan Ali was so special himself?

Sirmed: Irfan was very, very clear about so many things. He would say what they were, he thought was right. For example, I tell you that in 2010 there was an attack on Ahmadis, another minority community in Pakistan, which is very, very ferociously targeted here. There was an attack on Ahmadis community in their mall, on two of their malls. And over a hundred people died in that incident. And I gave a call for a protest and so much is the fear among the civil society that no one turned up. It was only Irfan and I who were standing there holding a placard at the end of the day. No one was there. And I cannot forget this–then he was coming to Islamabad, he was very clear that he would want to live another day to fight and to help people. And that’s what happened on the last day. This blast happened right in front of his house, the native house at [inaudible 03:40] Road. And after the first blast he dashed along with this brother and brother-in-law. He rushed. There were people who were stopping him and the volunteers. People were feeling that there would be another blast and there was another blast. And this time he could not survive, he could not, he just could not save himself.

Sharp: Marvi Sirmed, human rights activist, telling us about the human rights activist Irfan Ali. Our condolences to you all.

Sirmed: Thank you so much.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Irfan’s last tweet:

#Hazara families of #Machh,Khuzdir finally succumbed to the genocidal pressure&moving out. Sad day for diversity in #Balochistan.

— irfan (@khudiali) January 10, 2013

Irfan (@khudiali) was in Quetta to deliver a peace training to young activists. #RIPKhudiAli

— Marvi Sirmed(@marvisirmed) January 10, 2013

Fellow blogger Shiraz Hassan notes Irfan’s death:

“I am born to fight for human rights & peace. My religion is respect and love all the religions.” -@khudiali, RIP twitter.com/ShirazHassan/s…

— Shiraz Hassan (@ShirazHassan) January 10, 2013

Irfan survives previous attack:

#Quetta, was on the way to home nearly escaped from bomb blast 11 ppl dead

— irfan (@khudiali) January 10, 2013

That’s when a new law takes effect that allows most Cubans to travel without seeking special government permission but some restrictions will still remain.

Host Jeb Sharp speaks with independent Cuban journalist Miriam Leiva in Havana, a former member of the dissident group Ladies in White.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Jeb Sharp: I’m Jeb Sharp and this is The World. A new law goes into effect next week in Cuba. It will allow Cubans to travel out of the country without having to first get permission from their own government. That’s potentially a huge change for the Communist-ruled island. But like other new rules being introduced in Cuba today, there are limits. Miriam Leiva is an independent Cuban journalist in Havana. Independent means her work is published overseas, not in Cuba’s state-run media. Leiva is also the founder and former member of the Ladies in White, an opposition movement of wives and other female relatives of jailed dissidents in Cuba. Miriam, will the new law that takes effect on Monday mean a Cuban can simply book a flight and head out of the country? Is it that simple?

Miriam Leiva: No, it’s not that simple. You have to apply for a passport and maybe you would not get it.

Sharp: How did the old law work and what did it cost?

Leiva: The old law said that you have to apply for an invitation from someone abroad. Then you have to get the visa from the country and you have to apply for a passport. And also you have to ask for permission to leave. They call it here the white card. The white card. Why? Because the leaf that you receive was white. You know, everybody talk here about the white card, and that was the permission to leave the country.

Sharp: And how much did that cost, the whole process?

Leiva: It cost around $250. If you weren’t granted the permission, you would lose all the money.

Sharp: Lose all the money. You would lose all the money.

Leiva: Yes.

Sharp: And the new law, how is it different, and is it cheaper?

Leiva: Well, the passport costs $100 more or less, and if you are granted the passport you can leave, but still the government can say, well, we’re not going to grant you the passport and then you can’t travel.

Sharp: So you think it’s all going to come down to whether someone is granted a passport or not.

Leiva: Yes, and besides that, the law states that everyone needs to be authorized by the place where they work. For example, if you’re an official or you are a professional, you need to be authorized by the place where you work, and here in Cuba, most of the employers are from the state, are state-owned places.

Sharp: Do you know anyone who’s going to test the law?

Leiva: Yes, I know many people who are going to apply for the passport, and are hopeful. Millions of Cubans that are not professionals or already retired and don’t have, let’s say are not marked by political problems, know that they would get the passport. And many, many others are wishing but are not sure that they would. But anyway, there is a great social pressure inside Cuba, and this is a way to let them go out, when they are away they can work, they can send money to their families here and they might come back and be even useful because of their expertise when they come back.

Sharp: So you see why the government is trying to do this?

Leiva: Yes. Mainly, I think the government is doing this because it needs to ease the social pressure that is in Cuba. Cubans are losing fear, they are speaking out, they are each day more worried about their situation and striving more for the everyday life that is very harsh. And besides that the government knows that it’s going to receive money back because there will be [xx]. Right now, the money that is sent by Cubans abroad is one of the main incomes that the Cuban government has in hard currency, in foreign money.

Sharp: Miriam, your English is really good. I’m curious why.

Leiva: Well, when I was a little girl, I lived in Connecticut for three years. My parents decided to go to the United States in 1956 because there was a dictatorship here in Cuba, and there was an economic crisis too. We have relatives, we had relatives in Connecticut so we went there, had a normal, good life, and I studied in school in Connecticut, and I had very good experiences. And, you know, so I lived in the United States.

Sharp: How did you end up back in Cuba?

Leiva: My father was very hopeful, and, you know, he was enthusiastic about the revolution and the changes that could come up, and that’s why we came back.

Sharp: Great, we’ll leave it there, Miriam. Miriam Leiva has been speaking to us from Havana. She’s a Cuban independent journalist who’s been involved in human rights in Cuba since the early 1990s. Thanks again, Miriam.

Leiva: Thank you. Bye.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Amy Wilentz has a new book about Haiti called Farewell, Fred Voodoo.

She tells anchor Marco Werman about the erosion of Haitian culture since the earthquake, including the disappearance of everyday objects that used to be made there.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Werman, this is The World. Author Amy Wilentz has a new book out today about Haiti. It’s called “Farewell, Fred Voodoo.” That’s what some foreign correspondents used to call the Haitian man on the street, Fred Voodoo. Most reporters wouldn’t use the term these days, it’s gone by the wayside, like many things in Haiti in the decades since Amy Wilentz started visiting the island nation. In her new book she chronicles those changes, including what’s happened to everyday objects, like chairs? Wilentz recalls the first chair she bought in Haiti. She says it was the model there in the 1980s.

Amy Wilentz: People made them in their own houses or there were sometimes studios where they were made by bunches of people, but they were authentically Haitian peasant chairs and everybody sat in them. And you sat in them if you were a market lady, and you sat in them if you were a tourist at a grand hotel, and you say in them if you were a rich person up in the hills or a poor person in the shanty towns, so everywhere.

Werman: A truly democratic chair.

Wilentz: A democratic chair, exactly.

Werman: So what’s happening to the Haiti chair? Why are you so dismayed?

Wilentz: Well, I guess no one in the world will be surprised to hear that the little Haitian chair is being replaced by the little Chinese plastic mold white chair that everybody knows so well. I mean there are two that sit on my corner in L.A. in someone’s garden.

Werman: That’s happening everywhere. Why do you kind of feel it’s more acute, this issue in Haiti?

Wilentz: To undercut a Haitian article of some kind, a Haitian item, you have to be selling very, very cheap, but that is in fact, what happens with the Chinese chair. It undersells the Haitian chair. It’s cheaper to make, it’s cheaper to make and take across the ocean and bring to Haiti than it is to make a Haitian chair. Also, I have to add this because of disclosure, and the Chinese chair is more comfortable.

Werman: What would Haitians rather sit in?

Wilentz: Well, wouldn’t you rather sit in a chair that’s more comfortable? Yeah, often outside observers have sentimental, and this is true of me all the time with Haiti because I’ve been going for so long, we have a sentimental attachment to something Haitian, that Haitians like roll their eyes and say, “Yeah, but the two legs on the chair were always sticking into my butt.”

Werman: What is lost by this kind of switch from the Haiti chair to the Chinese molded plastic chair?

Wilentz: Well, it’s symbolic more than the chair itself, but a Haitian, a cultural identity, cultural sovereignty control over the way your environment is and looks, and I see that eroding more and more in Haiti in so many ways.

Werman: I mean if it were just a chair that would be one thing. It would be kind of a curiosity, but as you point out, there are other things as well that kind of are emblematic of this. Talk about that.

Wilentz: I’m seeing it all over the place. One thing I point out in the book is that you can have an entire Haitian creole dinner and when you look at it you realize all the produce, the tomato paste, the rice, it all comes from another country. Then you also see it in the clothing; instead of Haitian seamstresses and Haitian tailors making Haitian clothing, very typical old fashioned clothing, you now see American secondhand clothing. You see it in the tourist icon of Haiti and in Africa also was the proud, beautiful, slender woman carrying produce in a basket on her head. You know, that’s the typical postcard, but now that same Haitian woman carries produce from the Dominican Republic in a bag on her head, and the bag is a plastic bag, overstuffed plastic bag. It doesn’t mean that Haitians are no longer Haitian, but it just means little by little the culture is eroded.

Werman: Amy, as the third anniversary of the earthquake approaches this Saturday, what images of Haiti do you flash to and which still trouble you?

Wilentz: Well, I think of the National Palace, to be honest. The National Palace was the building that was built with the help of the United States Marines during the American occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934, which hardly anyone here remembers anymore, but the Haitians certainly do. And it was a beautiful three-domed building, where endless dictators and hopeful popular presidents had worked and ruled. And in the earthquake it was kind of knocked askew. And it looked kind of drunk and sad and the domes were leaning up against each other like you know, drug addicts on the corner. And then it stayed there for almost three years after the earthquake, looking out at the people of Haiti and them looking back at it, this symbol of national sovereignty like the White House. In fact, I sometimes call it the White House…in ruins among them in the center of the city. And now, finally, it’s been taken down. And I’m so glad it’s been taken down because I thought it was a really bad for one’s spirit and psyche to have that facing one all the time. But who was it taken down by? Another foreign group, Sean Penn’s group in concert with others took it down, so it took foreigners to build it, it took foreigners to take it down. So where does that leave Haiti really? Is this country in charge of its own fate, you know, that’s what I keep thinking about.

Werman: Amy Wilentz’ new book “Farewell, Fred Voodoo” is out today. Thank you very much, Amy, good to speak with you.

Wilentz: Thanks a lot.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Michael Hirsh, Chief Correspondent for the National Journal talks about how both the war defined the world view of both men, and another shared trait: both men have been trusted foreign policy mentors to the President since Obama was a freshman senator.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Wermen, this is the world. President Obama today nominated former senator Chuck Hagel to be his next defense secretary, and he selected White House counter terrorism adviser John Brennan to head the CIA.

President Obama:…My number one criteria in making these decisions was simple. Who is going to do the best job in securing America? These two leaders have dedicated their lives to protecting our country. I am confident they will do an outstanding job…

Werman: The president urged congress to confirm his nominees as quickly as possible. With Hagel’s nomination for defense secretary, and his nod to John Kerry for secretary of state, president Obama is building a national security team headed by Vietnam veterans. Michael Hirsh of the National Journal has reported on both men and their relationship with Obama. He says the significance of their nominations goes beyond the fact that they are both combat veterans.

Michael Hirsh: Well, it’s quite remarkable. It’s not just that they were both in Vietnam, it’s that by both their admissions – that is Hagel and Kerry over the years – their experiences were profound in shaping their world views. Kerry, of course, became famous. He really was first rocketed to national celebrity in 1971 when he made an appearance before the same senate foreign relations committee that he now chairs, and said, you know, how do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? Which was a much quoted comment. It even inspired a Bruce Springsteen song years later. And according to people close to Kerry, this is going to inform, in a very profound way, his tenure as secretary of state. As one of his aides described to me, Kerry is the kind of guy who is going to get on that plane and go for another round of diplomacy when everyone else says it’s not going to work, simply because he’s had the experience of war that was so bitter and so personal to him. Hagel has talked about his Vietnam experience in a very similar way. He was there during the Tet Offensive, he was an enlisted man, as president Obama said today, who was hit, you know, wounded by shrapnel, involved in life threatening situations, earned two purple hearts, has said to me and other reporters over the years, repeatedly, that he swore to himself when he was on the ground in Vietnam, during combat, that if he ever got the chance, if he was ever in a position of responsibility, that he would not let an unnecessary war happen again. And of course Hagel became, I think, most noted in the early days of the war on terror after 9/11 when he broke with his president, President Bush, and his own party, to initially oppose the Iraq invasion.

Werman: As far as Chuck Hagel, I mean, it sounds like what you’re saying is, having seen the real consequences of foreign policy decisions made when he was in Vietnam, that’s going to affect him as security of defense. Specifically, how do you see that playing out?

Hirsh: I see Hagel advocating, as he has in the past, for a very restrained US response to new crisis situations, whether it’s Libya or the Syrian civil war that’s going on now, and there’s debate inside the Obama administration about how forthrightly the US should get involved, whether we should directly aid Syrian rebels with weapons, Hagel – very plainly, based on his past experiences, voting record, things he’s said as senator, he spent twelve years in the senate – all those things indicate that he is going to be the voice of extreme restraint.

Werman: Now Michael, you have pointed out in National Journal something else that senators Kerry and Hagel have had in common over the years. They have been foreign policy mentors to Barack Obama. Can you talk about this group? I mean, you have referred to them as the ‘team of mentors’.

Hirsh: Yeah, it’s really interesting. In his comments – particularly going all the way back to 2008, Barack Obama has talked about the influence of Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book, ‘Team of Rivals’, which of course referred to the cabinet that Abraham Lincoln assembled. Obama cited that as a model, and of course he ended up picking his number one rival, Hillary Clinton, as his secretary of state. Now in the second term, though, what we are seeing is more of a ‘team of mentors’ approach, as I call it, because Obama is gathering around him as his closest top aides in his cabinet, senators who really sort of tutored him, brought him along when he was a freshman senator from Illinois. Recall that Obama was actually a senator for a very brief time, and so he sought the advice of Joe Biden, now his vice president, John Kerry, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, and of Chuck Hagel, who was, sort of a Republican centrist and maverick. So you do see a remarkable alignment of views here, and you see this president, after one term, reaching back to this team of mentors who helped him along when he was really very new on the national scene. I think it’s very striking.

Werman: Michael Hirsh, chief correspondent for the National Journal. Thank you.

Hirsh: Thank you.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Read tweets about President Obama’s nominations