Feb 10, 2003 5 min read

An extensive study in Sweden has revealed that children of single parents suffer more serious addictions and psychological problems as young adults than their counterparts from more traditional home environments. What are the implications for South Africa, where increasing numbers of children are growing up without any parents at all? … When the instability caused by migrant labor is coupled with the stresses of urbanization and the impact of the AIDS epidemic on the domestic situation of millions South Africa’s next generation, a picture emerges that makes the mere 7 percent of Swedish children growing up without traditional parenting look like a Sunday school picnic.

We live in a society plagued by violence, including much child abuse and rape, and equally plagued by general crime and corruption…

Can the Swedish study help to focus our attention on at least one of the causes of this profoundly disturbing spiritual disarray?

On combatting terrorism:

The Indonesian security authorities are to be commended for their dispatch in arresting a terrorist suspect, the wanted Singaporean Jemaah Islamiyah leader Mas Selamat Kastari. They had acted on information given by the Singapore police. The various operational and intelligence branches of the Indonesian military and police had, in common with some senior political figures such as Vice President Hamzah Haz, been under fire before for not taking seriously the terrorism danger confronting the country in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.

It was fortuitous, if regrettable, that Indonesia had to endure its own Sept. 11, in Bali on Oct. 12 last year, before the threat was acknowledged.

But change has been noticed. The thoroughness of the Bali investigation, and a number of key arrests resulting, show Indonesia is intent on making up ground in going after known cell leaders so as to disrupt regional links in terror networks of indeterminate reach. Quick action in detaining Mas Selamat at the request of the Singapore security services is fresh proof.

On strike against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez:

At the moment all are claiming to have won. Hugo Chavez sees himself as the winner because the opposition has had to end its two-month-long strike. The protesters point out that the mediation of Jimmy Carter has forced him to agree to negotiations leading to a referendum which could more than halve his term in office. But in actual fact this power struggle has produced no victors, but only losers. The strike has cost Venezuela between 25 and 30 percent of its economic strength. Hundreds of businesses are bankrupt. It will take months for the economy to recover. …

On the rush to war:

There is great temptation – especially for those opposed to military action in Iraq – to blame the upcoming adventure on Americans to control oil in that part of the world. It is an interpretation also embraced by most of the Arab and Moslem world. Then there is the even shallower argument that the rush to war is all about this president’s desire to get the man his father failed to nail. Most of the world loves a simple answer.

The truth is more complex. This is not only about oil, although it certainly plays a part, and it isn’t about a son’s revenge. This is about enormously complicated geopolitics. It is about maintaining and slowly altering a delicate balance of power in the Middle East and it is about disarming a disgusting dictator. So, let us not be shallow about the reasons for war in Iraq. They are many and they are deep.

That does not answer the question of why and why now. Why, after tolerating the nonsense of Saddam Hussein for a decade, must we send 100,000 troops into war now? Why must we expend the wealth of the nation at a time when most Americans are struggling with a stagnate economy? Why must we delve into this firestorm knowing it will bring on the wrath of most the Arab nations and feed the trough of terrorists worldwide? …On gas mileage standards:

President Bush’s pledge to spend $1.2 billion to help develop more environmentally friendly cars is an excellent long-term investment for this country.

But his short-term plan to deal with gas-guzzling cars is lacking.

In his State of the Union speech, the president said the money would go to help bring hydrogen-powered cars to the market. Yet his idea does nothing to mitigate this fact: Despite technological advances, American vehicles are burning more gas than ever before, largely because of SUVs. These popular vehicles are classified as trucks, allowing their manufacturers to avoid the higher gasoline-mileage standards imposed on cars. As more sport utility vehicles hit the road, the nation’s fuel efficiency numbers are actually getting worse. And that doesn’t help reduce either greenhouse gas emissions that pollute the air or our dependence on foreign oil.

That trend must be reversed. Regrettably, the Bush administration has put forth only a modest proposal. It has announced light trucks, including SUVs, will have to gradually improve their average fuel economy by a mere 1.5 miles per gallon over a five-year period. That means an increase in fuel efficiency from the current 20.7 miles per gallon to 22.2 mpg by the 2007 model year. The standard for cars, 27.5 mpg, would not change.

That proposal is inadequate. …

U.S. automakers have to start changing their ways. Most of the fuel-efficient cars on the market today aren’t even made by American-based companies. Congress can help, too, by providing more tax breaks for corporations using cleaner technologies and less for those relying on fossil fuels that pollute the air. …

The Poughkeepsie (N.Y.) Journal