An inspired choice for the 2004 prize. Here is the press release from the Norwegian Nobel Foundation:

The Nobel Peace Prize 2004

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2004 to Wangari Maathai for her contribution to sustainable development, democracy and peace.

Peace on earth depends on our ability to secure our living environment. Maathai stands at the front of the fight to promote ecologically viable social, economic and cultural development in Kenya and in Africa. She has taken a holistic approach to sustainable development that embraces democracy, human rights and women’s rights in particular. She thinks globally and acts locally.

Maathai stood up courageously against the former oppressive regime in Kenya. Her unique forms of action have contributed to drawing attention to political oppression - nationally and internationally. She has served as inspiration for many in the fight for democratic rights and has especially encouraged women to better their situation.

Maathai combines science, social commitment and active politics. More than simply protecting the existing environment, her strategy is to secure and strengthen the very basis for ecologically sustainable development. She founded the Green Belt Movement where, for nearly thirty years, she has mobilized poor women to plant 30 million trees. Her methods have been adopted by other countries as well. We are all witness to how deforestation and forest loss have led to desertification in Africa and threatened many other regions of the world - in Europe too. Protecting forests against desertification is a vital factor in the struggle to strengthen the living environment of our common Earth.

Through education, family planning, nutrition and the fight against corruption, the Green Belt Movement has paved the way for development at grass-root level. We believe that Maathai is a strong voice speaking for the best forces in Africa to promote peace and good living conditions on that continent.

Wangari Maathai will be the first woman from Africa to be honoured with the Nobel Peace Prize. She will also be the first African from the vast area between South Africa and Egypt to be awarded the prize. She represents an example and a source of inspiration for everyone in Africa fighting for sustainable development, democracy and peace.

Oslo, 8 October 2004.

More information on Wangari Maathai from the Green Belt Movement’s website: her biography and CV.

There’s a profile on About.com’s excellent Women’s History site, with links to further resources.

Report online at the Guardian. I’ll look for more reaction on Saturday.

A whole heap of stuff about tomorrow’s election in no particular order:

ChilOut (Children out of detention) have their election guide to policies on refugees. They are running a campaign to hand out 20,000 flowers of hope tomorrow.

A Just Australia (now RefugeeGuarantee.com.au) has rankings for candidates and whether they have signed AJA’s Refugee Guarantee.

The Justice Project has done candidate rankings on refugee policy in marginal seats and some others of interest. In Griffith, Kevin Rudd is not ranked because he did not answer their questionnaire. Likewise, John Howard in Bennelong and Peter Costello in Higgins.

ChilOut and The Justice Project both lean towards support of the Democrats and the Greens on refugee policy.

ComparePolicies.com.au is a handy database of candidates and their parties’ policies, and in some cases their individual stances.

The Australian Muslim Electoral Taskforce has issued voting guidelines in marginal seats and for the Senate which favour the Greens and the ALP.

Greenpeace Australia has an election guide to environmental policies. While not giving an endorsement, they state that the ALP’s policies are superior to the government’s on environmental matters, but the Greens (not surprisingly) seem to come out on top.

The Wilderness Society has a graphical report card on the parties’ environmental policies on their VoteEnvironment.com.au website. The Liberal Party is condemned after Howard’s cynical Tasmanian forestry announcement on Wednesday (the one where he announced that 17000 hectares of unloggable forest would not be logged). They also express concern over the lead Liberals4Forests candidate in NSW.

The Australian Jewish News’ editorial (“An election too close to call”) focuses on the electorates of Wentworth and Melbourne Ports, but does not give a recommendation. In Melbourne Ports, both the sitting ALP member and the Liberal candidate are Jewish.

And finally, this quote from Christopher Shiel’s Back Pages:

Michael Clarke and Peter Costello have supplied the requisite omens. With Costello playing the ‘96 role of Ralph Willis, Back Pages predicts that, like Clarke yesterday, the young Australian Labor leader, Mark Latham, will make history in his first big election test tomorrow.

Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers all advocate the re-election of the Howard government. Are you shocked?

Let’s do the rounds of the editorials:

The Australian (News Ltd, national) - No convincing reason to kick out Coalition:

On the basis of what they have placed before us in this campaign, neither side of politics merits enthusiastic endorsement. But a choice must be made, and on that basis we should look to Mr Howard’s record and Mr Latham’s promise…. And we know that for all his policy failings, Australia has grown richer under his leadership….

…his [Latham’s] utterly false dichotomy between securing Australia’s borders and acting to defeat terror at its source, which is what we are about in Iraq, shows he still has much to learn about the mainsprings of the US alliance: our shared commitment to values of freedom, democracy and human rights…. [Howard] has managed Australia’s security capably during a period of great instability….

There is a case for change alright, but it would need to be based on a reform program that extends, rather than unwinds, the gains of the past two decades. Labor has not made such a case, and so The Australian believes the Howard Government deserves to be returned tomorrow.

Daily Telegraph (News Ltd, Sydney, one half of duopoly) - Howard deserves another term:

The Daily Telegraph believes the Howard Government deserves to be re-elected. John Howard has not been a perfect prime minister. But he has served the national interest well. …
John Howard along with George W. Bush and Tony Blair has been troubled politically by the failure to find WMDs in Iraq. But as with Mr Bush and Mr Blair, Mr Howard has a compelling answer – he acted on available intelligence, he acted to remove a murderous dictator in Saddam Hussein, he acted to enable elections in a country we must stand by on its path to democracy….

John Howard…has a formula of economic and social conservatism which settles the nerves of a large sweep of voters.

Herald-Sun (News Ltd, Melbourne, one half of duopoly) - Not the right time to change:

Whoever wins government should have the experience and willpower to keep the alliance strong and tackle terrorism aggressively. The Coalition is clearly best placed on both issues….Labor’s deal with the Greens now leaves it in bed with a party whose extreme ideas include controlled access to illegal drugs such as ecstasy….The Herald Sun sees no reason to vote for change tomorrow. The country is in healthy shape and in safe hands.

Courier-Mail (News Ltd, Brisbane, monopoly) - Mr Howard has earned his fourth term:

Prompted by the challenge from the Opposition, Mr Howard revitalised his government, and had his ministers produce a host of policy initiatives, including MedicarePlus, that were announced and put into effect well before the election was called…The policy focus of the past six weeks has taken the light off weaknesses Labor brought into this election. In particular, they are Mr Latham’s ill-considered promise to bring home troops from Iraq by Christmas to the detriment of our most valued foreign alliance…When Mr Howard’s economic record and experience are put in the balance he is clearly the best choice to lead Australia for the next three years.

The Advertiser (News Ltd, Adelaide, monopoly) - An election which offers a clear choice:

The choice is either another term for an entrenched and experienced Coalition government or a fresh start with an innovative but untried Labor Party….In his eight years as Prime Minister, Mr Howard’s economic record is beyond serious criticism. Almost every facet of the economy, from growth and employment to interest rates and inflation, are at or near best-ever levels….

Mr Latham might be ready to be Australia’s next prime minister. But he will be better prepared with an election under his belt and a significant track record in Labor’s top job. Given these considerations, it is too difficult to advocate anything other than returning the Coalition at tomorrow’s election.

Meanwhile, over at Fairfax, a mixed bag.

The Age (Fairfax, Melbourne, one half of duopoly) - On balance, Coalition deserves re-election:

The Government’s solid achievements as economic managers, together with Mr Latham’s inexperience and the fact that he still seems to be a work in progress, lead us to believe it would be best for the nation if the Coalition wins tomorrow’s poll.

and last, but by no means least…

Sydney Morning Herald (Fairfax, Sydney, one half of duopoly) - It’s time for a vote of greater independence:

Elections mark a nation’s changing times. This election marks change for us, the Herald. There comes a time when a newspaper, having expressed its voting preference for more than 170 years, as has the Herald, must renew and reassess its claim on independence so that its pursuit of truth is not only free of partisanship and without fear or favour, but is seen to be so. From today, the Herald no longer will endorse a political party.

Cough! cough! cough! Pardon me while I pick myself up off the floor…

One footnote: Nowhere, in any of those editorials, is there a single mention of “Children Overboard”, “Tampa”, “Pacific Solution”, or indeed refugees at all.

FBI took the hard drives of IMC servers in the UK
http://www.indymedia.org/or/2004/10/111987.shtml

FBI Seizes IMC Servers in the UK
http://www.indymedia.org/or/2004/10/111999.shtml

October 7, 6:30 pm.
http://www.empirenotes.org/#07oct041
October 7, 6:30 pm. Today is the third anniversary of the war on Afghanistan. On the one-year anniversary, I wrote an article summing up the effects. Depressingly, every one of the major points is at least as true today as it was then. On Saturday, Afghanistan will have a “free” “election” for president (”president” — the United States will still run those things it wants to run). Here’s an exce …

I believe that John Howard and his government have shown such impropriety, through their handling of “Children Overboard” and the war against Iraq, to make their return to office untenable. I believe that their standard of global citizenship has been not just bad, but poisonous. On the domestic front, I believe that the main issues can be subdivided into two categories:

Domestic issues:

1. Sustainable socio-economic management
2. Sense of national identity

Sustainable socio-economic management

Sound economic management is not just fiscal policy. It’s not about building huge unspent surpluses. It’s not about selling public assets to retire debt, or to increase the wealth of private enterpreneurs.

It’s about generating an economy which gives fair opportunity to everyone, dignified assistance to those who can’t help themselves, and to those who need help to attain those opportunities.

It’s about creating a level playing field for all Australians - and that includes intensive help for the disadvantaged, especially our indigenous fraternity.

It’s about welcoming foreigners to sincerely help in our growth and share our prosperity.

It’s about considering life in 2020, in 2050, in 2100, when managing our economy, our society and our environment. And remembering that Homo sapiens is not the only life form that matters on this planet.

Sense of national identity

We shouldn’t claim that Australia is the “best place on Earth” - that’s an obscene and arrogant concept - but we should be able to claim that Australia is “a great place for all of us to live”.

We should embrace multicultural diversity.

We should acknowledge the history and ownership - however undocumented - of this continent over the past tens of thousands of years.

We should apologise to our indigenous fraternity for all the wrongs done to them since the European invasion in 1788. We should compensate them for the damage done over the past two centuries or so, not with cash but with the return of land, and with strategies of affirmative action and self-determination.

We should have an Australian head of state, not one who resides in a north-west European island. Whether our head of state is called a president and whether our nation is classed as a republic are semantic issues. Whether our head of state is elected by the people or by parliament is something we have to thrash out once and for all - and soon.

We should get a flag that is distinctly Australian, not one where foreigners have to stop and think “err, is that Australia or New Zealand”?

We should not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexuality or disability.

We should respect the separation of religion and the state, and we should respect the diversity of bona fide religious beliefs.

We should celebrate the arts and the sciences as much as we celebrate sport.

And we should preserve this continent’s extraordinary biodiversity.

I’ve seen “trust” and “truth in government” described as issues in Saturday’s election. As I said yesterday, I think “propriety” is numero uno. John Howard and his government have a long track record of impropriety which, if you or I behaved like that, would have us sacked by our boss. Please remember on Saturday, that we are John Howard’s boss. Sack him.

There are more issues to consider, of course. Even if we have made up our minds not to vote Liberal or National, there’s still the small matter of choosing an alternative - Labor, Greens, Democrat, Family First, Socialist Alliance, One Nation, Christian Democrats, Liberals 4 Forests, The Fishing Party, et cetera et cetera.

I just wanted to set out, as concisely as possible, my expectations of any government of this country, divided into the two broad realms of global and domestic:

Global issues: Australia needs to be a good global citizen.

• We should respect the wishes of the United Nations.
• We should participate in all international treaties.
• We should respect the authority of the International Criminal Court.
• We should maintain a balanced relationship will all nations. The United States is one highly populated, financially prosperous nation, but is not the most important country on Earth, and should not have undue influence over us. Among the more populous nations, relationships with China, Indonesia, India and Japan are more important to us.
• We should not go to war except in self-defence or where asked for help and the UN agrees.
• We should provide our fair share of foreign aid.
• We should do all we can to deter the production and deployment of weapons of mass destruction by all nations and extra-national organisations.
• We should accept that the “war on terror” is an invalid concept, and do more to understand the motivations that drive those extra-national groups who want to attack Australian interests. This is not meant to stop us from eliminating and bringing to justice those extra-national groups who threaten our interests, rather to tackle the problem in a more intelligent, less gung ho manner.
• We should do our utmost to preserve the world’s environment, including and by no means limited to abiding by the Kyoto Protocol.
• We should treat refugees and asylum-seekers with humanity and respect.
• We should wholeheartedly participate in programs aimed at alleviating third world poverty and disease.
• We should abide by, and respect, the Geneva Conventions.

Part 3 will focus on the domestic issues.