www.doingfreedom.com

Compromises?

Thanks, Too damned principled(?)

Dear TDP,

First, congratulations for sticking with your principles. That's becoming increasingly rare, even among libertarians, these days. So you can get rid of the question mark -- in our opinion, you're not too principled (can there even be such a thing?).

Having a partner who values your principles is good; yet it sounds like you're questioning the degree to which your wife really does value your principles. If you've read any Ayn Rand you know what she says about compromise -- it just isn't an option for a principled person. And would you really want to compromise, and lose your self-respect?

Here are some more questions you might wish to consider while thinking through all this. Were you willing to cooperate with unconstitutional searches of your person and property at airports prior to 9/11? If so, what's changed your mind about cooperating? How would you feel about compromising your principles and then explaining that to your children? What's more important to you -- being true to your principles or marital happiness?

We understand being angry about the abandonment of civil liberties in the wake of 9/11, and trying to avoid airports and other more egregious demonstrations of same. We understand that compromising on principles leaves a nasty taste in one's mouth. Yet there are ways to work through the situation without compromising.

Have you talked with your wife about your willingness to revisit the issue of flying in the future, once you do have children? If she knows this, it should make things better now. It's probably a good idea to take a close look at your budget, too, to see if you need more income to be able to provide for any children you may have. They don't need to be as expensive as many folks seem to think: midwifery care is generally safer and less costly than using an MD for prenatal, delivery, and postnatal care; breastfeeding is easier and much cheaper than formula; and basic common sense about buying things and handling the inevitable scrapes and sniffles will keep child care costs down.

If you were to choose to cooperate with the Thought Police Security Follies at airports, that wouldn't be compromising, in our view. You would be choosing a more important value -- keeping a job that enabled you to meet your responsibilities to your family -- than that specific political protest. You might wish to engage in other protests in order to be true to your principles. Or, it might be possible to avoid the problem altogether by finding or creating an income stream that doesn't require air travel. Or, is becoming a pilot and flying yourself to job sites an option? Choices are rarely "either-or"; a little creative thinking often turns up other solutions that will work for the parties involved.

Regarding your concluding question, if your wife knew what your principles were when she signed on, then your marriage promise was made within that context. She shouldn't expect you to compromise them. But if your principles changed to a more freedom-valuing position after your marriage, then the issue is different. You've changed, in a fairly fundamental way, and your wife may not grok all those changes. If this is the case, have you tried to have a thorough talk with her about the changes you've undergone, and what they mean? She needs to understand your way of being in order to be a good partner to you. And you need to be honest with yourself, and her, in order to be a good partner to her. Which commitment is more important -- the one to your wife or the one to yourself -- is something that each individual needs to decide for him- or herself. We wish you all the best.

Ex-pat-to-be

Thanks, Tim

Hi Tim, We don't know much about South America, and if you've been following the news, several countries there are in various states of turmoil (Venezuela, Colombia, and Brazil come to mind). They've historically been fairly collectivist in orientation, and not particularly respecting of individual rights -- especially for "ordinary Joes" -- so we really can't recommend that as a destination to you.

A little farther north you might find some viable options, depending upon what you view as "despotic". Sad as it may be, overall the U.S. is still among the freest countries in the world, particularly when it comes to gun ownership. Mexico is a very affordable place to live, and if you can blend in to some degree, and keep a low profile, you'll find that in many ways it's much freer than the U.S. For example, many people earn their livings off the official books, and many also don't file taxes and such. However, being able to do this and other things may occasionally necessitate greasing a few palms here and there. If that kind of thing is repulsive to you, it could be difficult to do business in Mexico. Also, the gun issue is a big one; they simply don't allow firearms ownership for most people, and forget about trying to bring anything in. If you're caught, you'll be sitting in a Mexican jail for a long, long time. There are occasional stops of all road traffic for searches, and they're pretty harsh about illicit drugs, but if you keep a low profile and stick to the ingestible intoxicants that are licit, you should have few problems. With respect to that last, Mexican pharmacies are much more open than American ones -- other than barbiturates, you don't need a prescription for pretty much anything. (Mexico is a place where drugs just aren't taken as commonly as the U.S.) Not everything that's available in the U.S. is available there, but we know of individuals with chronic medical problems who've been able to find medications that work for them with few problems.

Another option that a lot of Americanos have been examining lately is Costa Rica. It does allow firearms to be brought in (but you'll need to be prepared to be stamped, indexed, briefed, etc. sigh

Our correspondent The Breeze has written on both of these places, and others have written on Mexico as well. We suggest you browse the articles available, and talk with people you know who've been to whatever places you end up considering. Before you pack all your stuff in the truck and set out for tropical climes, we strongly suggest you plan an extended visit first. You can enjoy the tourist stuff, but your primary goals should be to discover what it's like to live there, in the manner you intend, and to see if the culture is one you can live in. Despite people's strong desires to live more freely, the change in culture can be a shock that's difficult to adjust to. See our article on blending in for some idea of what to expect.

With the uncertainty and turmoil around the world, trying to find a safe haven is a very tough proposition. Some may think that sticking it out in the U.S. is the safest bet; others, like you, look south of the border. Both Mexico and CR have as-yet untapped potential, with CR having the political edge, freedom-wise. Do your research, plan as much as you can in advance, and go for it full-out to make your dreams come true. We wish you a great, fulfilling adventure.

Mail Drops

Thanks, Keith

Hi Keith, Hoo boy! Even without knowing what kind of "sensitive items" you're interested in, we know what a tough nut this is. Still, there are ways to do it, if you've the resources and/or friends to help you.

The "easiest" way to accomplish this would be to get a mail box at a place like Mail Boxes Etc using completely fabricated information. But getting fake ID that's convincing can be a challenge (although many of these places won't run a check on the information -- they just want to see the "proper papers"). And these places will often cooperate with the Thought Police's nosiness without letting you know you're under surveillance. If you're the only customer getting boxes of stuff marked "ammunition", for example, you'll be very memorable to them, and that's not in your favor. All things considered it might be better to consider other solutions.

A fairly straightforward solution is to enlist a trusted friend's help. You have to be able to trust this person, not only to handle your sensitive stuff, but to be able to withstand possible interrogation by the Thought Police. If your sensitive material is things like books or merchandise that's politically incorrect (like, anything from Paladin Press or Loompanics, or gun parts or ammo), it'd be less flag-raising if your friend already receives such mail. The downside of this is that it makes your friend a target. Do you really want to risk trashing a friend's life over your contraband or politically unpopular shipments?

You know, despite the increased rhetoric the US Postawful has given to checking addresses and only delivering to "valid" addresses, they don't seem to do it a lot. We have a friend who regularly receives mail at her box for several "people", and no one has questioned the arrangement or asked to see ID for all the names getting mail delivered there. If someone you trust already has a private box, perhaps you could simply add a name to the recipient list without the rigamarole of showing papers and the like. Or, if there's an empty (but not too derelict) house close to you, consider using that address. Give it a test run by mailing an envelope with a couple of sheets of blank paper to the name you wish to use, and see if it gets delivered (we bet it will). If so, you're in business ... and you don't need to be out of business, necessarily, if someone move in to the house. You can explain that your friend lived there previously, and you pick up the mail that occasionally finds its way there, and send it on its way for him (or her). This won't work as well for packages, especially if you receive them frequently, but again, providing a plausible cover will often work.

If you aren't in a hurry for the items, other things to consider are combining these solutions into a chain of mail drops. If a friend in the chain will repackage the material for you so it looks more innocuous, so much the better. Or, if you've the money (and possibly the patience), consider hiring a private courier who can pick up the material at its point of origin/sale and deliver it to you without going through any postal system. Again, the details of such an arrangement might be tricky, and require an individual you can trust implicitly and who's willing to bear the risk of the task, but it can be done -- especially if you're willing to pay to make it so.

Get Claire Wolfe's Think Free to Live Free from Laissez Faire Books

Copyright © 2003 by Doing Freedom! magazine. All rights reserved.

www.thestar.com.my BY LIM CHYE KHIM

BRASILIA: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad will arrive here today for a three-day official visit during which he will have discussions with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to further improve ties between the two countries. 

“The visit is at the invitation of President Lula to enhance bilateral ties, which have been very good,” Deputy Foreign Minister Datuk Dr Leo Michael Toyad said. 

He said that the meeting between the two leaders tomorrow (Monday) would also be an opportunity for Dr Mahathir to follow up on outstanding matters with the new president, who took office in January. 

This is the Prime Minister’s second visit to the country. Dr Mahathir, who will be accompanied by his wife, Datin Seri Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali, and several government officials, last visited Brazil in 1991. 

Dr Toyad said besides trade, the discussions tomorrow would cover regional and international issues, including the threat of war against Iraq and other problems in the Middle East, terrorism and globalisation. 

Also expected to be brought up at the meeting between the two leaders are co-operation between the two countries in international fora, like the G15, United Nations and the World Trade Organisation, as well as regional co-operation between Asean and Mercosur, the economic grouping comprising Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. 

“Our experience in economic development and how we tackle social issues and the (Asian) financial crisis are also likely to be brought up,” Dr Toyad said at a briefing here yesterday. 

He said Malaysia was the biggest Asean trading partner for Brazil while Brazil was Malaysia’s second biggest trading partner in Latin America, after Mexico. 

“We have three big investments here in Brazil – Supermaxx Importadora S/A – US$2mil (RM7.6mil) which distributes examination gloves, Abric S/A , manufacturer of seals for containers and trucks – US$3.67mil (RM13.9mil) – and Amaplac S/A Ind. de Madeiras – US$13.2mil (RM50.16mil) – which is into plywood manufacturing,” he said.  

Major exports to Brazil include electronic integrated circuits, TV and radio parts, natural rubber, semi-conductors, computers and computer components, gloves, transformers for radio and television sets, cameras and palm oil. 

Malaysia’s overall export figure for 2001 was US$347mil (RM1.31bil), while last year it rose to US$357mil (RM1.35bil). 

Imports from Brazil last year amounted to US$281mil (RM1.06bil), the main items of which were sugarcane, soya bean, iron ore and military weapons. 

Dr Toyad said that the various states of Brazil (the country has 26 states and one federal district) were keen to have their own joint projects with Malaysia. 

Another area where Brazil was interested to go into was agricultural development, with Mardi and Embrapa (Brazilian business enterprise for agricultural research) are likely to extend their co-operation into the fields of bio-technology and bio-diversity. 

He said that the two countries had signed an agreement on science and technology in 1996. 

Other bilateral agreements that have been concluded between Malaysia and Brazil – the largest South American country with a population of 176 million – include an air services agreement (1995), bilateral trade agreement (1996) and, partial visa abolishment agreement (1996). 

Dr Toyad said that after arriving here, the Prime Minister would attend a dinner hosted by Malaysian Ambassador Tai Kat Meng at Rumah Malaysia.  

Tomorrow Dr Mahathir will proceed to Palacio do Planalto, the office of the president, for the official welcoming ceremony where he will be received by Lula. 

This will be followed by a meeting between the Malaysian and Brazilian delegations and later Lula will host a state lunch for Dr Mahathir at Itamaraty Palace. 

The next day Dr Mahathir will go to Sao Jose dos Campos for a visit to Embraer, the aircraft manufacturer, and Avibras, the military equipment maker. 

He will leave for home on Wednesday via Buenos Aires.  

www.wavy.com Saturday,March15,2003,8:43 PM

Caracas, Venezuela-AP -- Venezuela's state oil monopoly says its crude oil production has topped three (m) million barrels a day. That's the same level that occurred before a crippling national strike.

Oil executives fired for participating in the strike dispute the government figures, saying daily production is at two-point-one (m) million barrels.

Government officials admit work still needs to be done before the industry fully recovers.

The two-month walkout was meant to force President Hugo Chavez to resign or call early elections.

Before the dispute, Venezuela had been the world's fifth-largest oil exporter.

economictimes.indiatimes.com PTI[ FRIDAY, MARCH 14, 2003 12:21:02 PM ]

UNITED NATIONS: UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has raised the possibility of a summit of interested world leaders on Iraq "to get us out of this crisis" while continuing his efforts to keep the Security Council members united over the issue.

Annan on Thursday welcomed the idea of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva for a summit of interested world leaders, not necessarily members of the Council.

But media reports suggest that the US is not enthusiastic and is unlikely to support the idea with diplomats saying it is too late for any summit to make a difference. Besides, there might not be enough time left for such a meeting and it is better not to have it than having a futile one, they say.

However, Annan continued his efforts to bring unity among the members to save the Council from becoming ineffective in a crisis situation and held one-on-one meetings with ambassadors of all 15 member countries. But diplomats doubted it would have any effect on the course of events.

Annan made yet another appeal for united Security Council action in ridding Iraq of Weapons of Mass Destruction as the Council continued to wrestle whether to give UN inspectors more time or to declare Baghdad in default by next Monday.

"I think what is important is that governments have to find a way of working together," Annan told reporters.

"Regardless of how this crisis or the current issue is resolved, the Council will have to work together, and the member states will have to work together to deal with the situation in Iraq, in Middle East and on many other issues."

Annan said he spoke to British Premier Tony Blair on Monday and he seemed "very genuinely looking" for a compromise and a way forward.

www.nytimes.com By LAURA SILBER

Two weeks ago in Belgrade, I walked into Zoran Djindjic's living room and sat down on the couch. There he was, Serbia's first democratically elected prime minister, talking away, telephone in one hand and remote control in the other. It is hard, now, to believe he is gone, gunned down outside his office on Wednesday.

A pair of crutches lay next to a pile of books on a coffee table; I think "Bush at War" by Bob Woodward was on top. We looked at photographs of my daughters, and he marveled at how the little one resembled my husband. The three of us had been friends back in the days when few outside of Serbia knew Zoran, the man who would one day become leader of his country and send his political arch-enemy, Slobodan Milosevic, to the war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

Over a long night of talk and wine, we discussed America's code orange security alert, Iraq, Serbia and the world as phantasmagoria: this was Zoran Djindjic, a hundred things at the same time. It was the way he ran Serbia — masterminding, pressing forward with plans to wrench a fractured country into the modern age.

We talked about a failed assassination attempt on him a few days before — a truck had swerved into his car. He seemed unshaken. I told him I was worried about how easily I had entered his house. He made a call to bolster security. I think he assumed he was smarter than his enemies. He and his wife, Ruzica, did not seem afraid. I felt humbled by their courage.

Fit and slim, Zoran was on crutches after rupturing his Achilles tendon the week before in an exhibition soccer match: the government versus the police. He laughed at how the police officers were surprised to see him, and did not know whether to win or to throw the game to the prime minister.

Upbeat and full of plans, this was not a man who expected to die soon.

His murder is a tragedy for Serbia, and a lesson for the United States. When he and his fellow reformers overthrew the Milosevic regime in 2000, they inherited a security system that had been built up Soviet-style by Marshal Tito. Under Mr. Milosevic's stewardship and through years of war and economic decline, that force became an amalgam of paramilitary and organized crime.

Zoran and his reformers were able to remove Mr. Milosevic, and later to send him to be tried, because the secret service units had become disillusioned with the Serbian strongman. But even with him gone they remained unreformed and untouchable.

Something similar is likely to play out wherever America tries to uproot a nasty dangerous despot — as it helped to oust Mr. Milosevic and is trying to oust Saddam Hussein. Even having American troops occupy a country is unlikely to make a difference in the short run. A regime, in particular one that has developed in isolation like Iraq, Serbia and North Korea, does not die with one man. And the security apparatus becomes like a Hydra fighting for survival.

The reformist government lacked the strength to dismantle that system. Indeed, after taking power in 2001 Zoran opted at first to live in an uneasy coexistence with the security forces. However, he knew that organized crime and corrupt security officers presented a major obstacle to reform. In the last few months Zoran was gearing up for a final showdown with the renegade special forces and their taskmasters in the Serbian police who make up the Zemun mafia clan — brutes with monikers like Idiot, Fool and Bugsy. These men spilled blood in Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia, the streets of Belgrade and abroad; now they dominate the traffic in drugs and prostitutes and immigrants throughout the Balkans. The prime minister knew they were threatening his life. But he told me he would simply let the thugs kill each other and then send the survivors to The Hague.

His murder is another reminder to the Serbian people that those who committed crimes against Croats, Bosnian Muslims and Kosovars came to roost at home. And these men could not stand the fact that Zoran was trying to wrest control of Serbia.

Two weeks ago I asked Zoran when Serbia would send the remaining indicted war criminals — especially Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb general — to the the dock in Hague. It was too difficult at the time, he answered, there was no one who dared to arrest Mr. Mladic. But he told me he planned to send three army officers accused of crimes committed at Vukovar in Croatia right away. After that, he said, he had been told that the West would stop exerting so much pressure on him to comply with the tribunal.

Zoran Djindjic loved the world. He told me how he had met Fidel Castro at the inauguration of the new Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Mr. Castro said he had expected Zoran to be taller — after all, Yugoslavia is a world force in basketball. "It's the technique, not just the height," Zoran responded.

Mr. Castro said, "I thought you only liked Americans."

"No, I like Cubans, too," Zoran replied, pulling a thick cigar out of his jacket. Castro looked down, laughed, and said the cigar was fake. Later that night the he sent a humidor full of the finest Cuban cigars to Zoran at his hotel.

Perhaps it is only the sort of man who can joke with Fidel Castro and also win the approval of the White House who could hope to forge a new Serbia. There is no doubt that the men who killed Zoran represented a nexus of hard-core nationalists and criminals who hated him because they knew he wanted to rein them in. They hoped that with those bullets, Serbia would fall into disarray and stop cooperating with The Hague, and that the next elected leader would pale next to Zoran Djindjic in courage and intelligence. I fear they were right.

Laura Silber, senior policy adviser at the Open Society Institute, is co-author of "Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation."