Work

To give readers an idea of what I was writing while at the United Nations, here's a piece I sent in for publication but did not eventually make the cut (I met Dr. Sengupta at a press conference and had a wonderful conversation with him):

17 October 2006—GENEVA—World Food Day, yesterday, was an occasion for me that brought to mind the current situation in the United States. Hunger remains a constant source of global malnutrition and stunted childhood development.

These are not the only problems, of course, but even in a country such as the United States, poverty persists, with the result that the US is counted along with countries with hungry citizens worldwide.

The recent report presented in Geneva by the United Nations independent expert, Dr. Arjun Sengupta, to the Human Rights Council on extreme poverty in the United States was startling.

During the two years of Sengupta’s mandate so far, many countries have received special visits, all places typically associated with extreme poverty. There was one exception that caught my eye.

For 12 days, Sengupta traveled throughout the United States, visiting New York, Washington state, New Orleans, and mining regions of Appalachia, in an attempt to show that extreme poverty exists in developed nations as well.

If poverty is defined by the United Nations as surviving on two dollars a day (not a very good global demarcation as prices vary greatly from country to country, but currently a universal standard), then extreme poverty is defined as surviving on only one dollar a day and, thus, comprises an even more needy group within the impoverished.

Sengupta reported that the US’ impoverished under the definition of extreme poverty are a racially indifferent group, composed of several ethnicities. Is essence, extreme poverty in the US is arguably colorblind. Indicative of this group is a lack of healthcare (if any at all), education, and employment.

In a press conference on September 28, 2006, Sengupta responded to questions about the US’ alleged violation of human rights in this regard. Noting that since the US is more than capable of helping these people rectify the aforementioned indications of extreme poverty, the US has in effect made a choice not to help, and is violating the human rights of the extreme poor—including their right to life.

Unfortunately for the United States government, the report makes specific reference to a glaring deficiency in the US position on human rights criticizing that it “… has not accepted economic, social, and cultural rights as legally valid rights.”

Another key to identifying the extreme poor, according to Sengupta, is social exclusion, which prevents the access to opportunity which, in theory, could alleviate extreme poverty. The US contention that such people aren’t trying hard enough would seem to be the stock response.

The US delegate Steven Hill responded to the report in the Human Rights Council saying the US was pleased that Sengupta referred to several agencies at a federal level addressing poverty. However, Hill wished more sources had been consulted, such as academic sources. Not a stunning defense, if the delegate felt one was needed.

Looking at the situation from a global perspective, one would not suspect a problem with the US’ poor. But from an outsider’s perspective, the US has a pronounced problem. Sengupta’s visit to the Appalachia region is telling, as mining has declined there and unemployment has progressively increased with the shutdown of each mine. The damage to the environment ostensibly created by the mines, along with the concomitant harm to overall health plus a lack of adequate housing, have created one of the poorest regions in the US.

Given the reportedly deteriorating conditions in New Orleans, it is time the US government took a hard look at impoverished regions both in out of the media’s scope of vision and not only acknowledge the problem, but enact change.