Description: You see the potential in others. Very often, in fact, the potential is all you see. In your view, no individual is fully formed. On the contrary, each individual is a work in progress, alive with possibilities. And you are drawn toward people for this very reason. When you interact with others, your goal is to help them experience success. You look for ways to challenge them. You devise interesting experiences that can stretch them and help them grow. And all the while you are on the lookout for the signs of growth – a new behavior learned or modified, a slight improvement in a skill, a glimpse of excellence or of “flow” where previously there were only halting steps. For you, these small increments – invisible to some – are clear signs of potential being realized. These signs of growth in others are your fuel. They bring you strength and satisfaction. Over time many will seek you out for help and encouragement because on some level they know that your helpfulness is both genuine and fulfilling to you.

Analysis: Training and developing others has always drawn my attention. Living and working with others, and helping them unleash their potential is what energizes me every day. I believe everyone has the potential to do something powerful, and so, helping people develop their potential and do what they desire is how I invest in their future. Helping someone discover and use their capabilities to the fullest gives meaning to my life. Sometimes taking people out of their comfort zone can be challenging, but I enjoy walking with individuals through their fears with optimism that at the end of the journey they will be proud of themselves.

Other Strengths

Flexible

Adaptive

Diverse

Empathetic

Helpful

Multilingual

Public speaker

Traveler

BENGHAZI PROJECT

Tisiya Mahoro

POL 103

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I Introduction

I I Segment One: BORN TO SERVE: What the White House Needed to Save

III Segment Two: BEFORE THE ATTACK

IV Segment Three:  THE FAILURE OF AFRICAN UNION (AU)

V Segment Four: THE COMPLEXITY OF POLITICS

VI Segment Five: CLINTON AND POOR COMMUNICATION

VII Segment Six: US IN THE MIDDLE EAST, WHY?

VIII REFLECTIN

IX APPENDIX & CITATIONS

X CITATION

INTRODUCTION

Benghazi is the second largest city in Libya after Tripoli. It is located in North East of Libya.

Area: 121.2 mi²
Elevation: 6.562′
Population: 631,555 (2011)

In 2012 Benghazi experienced a revolution that stemmed from the Arab Spring that started in December 2010. Arab Spring was a democratic revolution that took place in the Islamic countries in the middle East such as Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and others.  At the time of revolution, Muammar Gaddafi was the president of Libya. Gaddafi had kept people in the regime with no freedom for about 42 years, which motivated the civilians to join the revolution. His power was a threat to people’s lives for a long time.

During this time period, America had interest in helping the rebels in Benghazi gain freedom and  Christopher Stevens was appointed a United States’ ambassador to work in Benghazi. When the situation became unpeaceful, the African Union (AU) told Gaddafi to stop threatening people. The African Union is an African organization set to solve political African problems, but according to Kasaija, Phillip Apuuli, the AU was unable to help Libya at this time because the AU did not have enough manpower to fight Gaddafi, and he knew this. Apuuli adds that Gaddafi was one of the AU funders which tells us that Gaddafi knew the weaknesses of the AU. The segments below discuss the complications of  international relations, taking Benghazi as a case study. We look at Stevens’s life before he was appointed as an ambassador, the relationship with US and Libya,  the failure of the AU, the complexity of politics and America in the Middle East.

1. BORN TO SERVE: What the White House Needed to Save

As we dive in the story about Benghazi and the attack that took Stevens’s life, it is important to note that the story about Benghazi is told in different ways, which leaves the audience unable to recognize the loss and the mistakes made by officials at the White House. If we can neglect the Benghazi attack as a whole and focus on Christopher Stevens, a US ambassador who was killed during the September 11, 2012 attack , people may understanding what America has lost.

Who is Christopher Stevens and why him? In the article the “Murder of an Idealist” by Sean Flynn, Habib Bubaker gives some background about Stevens. Bubaker was a friend and a translator for Stevens while he was in Benghazi. According to Bubaker, Stevens was a dedicated man who was determined to work and serve others. He had passion for working in the foreign service since his early years of life. His passion started during his college years and he was determined to pursue it at all costs, even his own life. Stevens always wanted to be involved in foreign services and he had moved to different countries such as Italy and Spain during his school time to explore and learn about other cultures. His interest in service can also be traced through his academic history. He studied History in college and  participated in the Peace Corps before he worked in foreign service. Later, Stevens went to teach English in Morocco for two years after which he returned to California (his home) for his law degree. By 1990 he was practicing international trade law in the Washington office of a large and prestigious firm (un named) in Washington DC. In 2012, Stevens became a US ambassador to Libya and was moved to Benghazi where he was welcomed and had a good company.

According to Sean Flynn, many people described Stevens as their best friend. With the mission to help people in Benghazi attain peace and freedom, Stevens was a friendly person and warm to be around which helped him get people’s attention so fast. We witness this from Benghazi civilians and especially his translator Hbib Bubaker (Flynn, Parag.4). At the time of Stevens’ arrival, Bubaker ran an English school in the city, and when he met Stevens he offered to be Stevens’s translator for the whole time Stevens had worked in Benghazi. From this we not only learn about Stevens’s passion for making an impact but also his transformational leadership style is being revealed.

Stevens was also a brave man. He ignored the threat of insecurity put ahead of him and focused on the goals and destination of his mission of serving as an ambassador. When he arrived in Benghazi in May 2012, the situation was not favorable because the rebels were demonstrating against Gaddafi. It was dangerous, but Stevens decided to operate from the center of the problem. Soon the Americans were given warnings about an attack, but Stevens did not think of leaving the consulate. Bubaker, puts it right, “If Chris was afraid, he would not have been in Benghazi on September 11” (Flynn, 1). Though it was dangerous to stay in the city on September 11, going away was not an option to him. Instead, Stevens sent a cable to Washington recounting the locals’ concerns about the lawlessness, and requested for more security measures to be put in place, though his request was under-estimated. The mistake of carelessness and of ignoring his requests was not the first one to happen. The same thing had happened during the Rwandan genocide in 1994. One other US ambassadors was killed in the Rwandan genocide after several requests for more security that went unanswered.  Because the US ambassadors were dying due to irresponsible officers in DC, we see it as an overall weakness of the nation.

2) BEFORE THE ATTACK

The reason for the attack is unclear. However, looking back, we find that US had conflict with Libya. On 14 April 1986 US bombed Libya, targeting the terrorist centers including headquarters of Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi (Eiric Schmitt and Michael R. Gordonjan, 2017). The authors say that in 1970 Libya had financed terrorists and anti-US and anti-British terrorist groups worldwide which had become a threat to America. However, from 1986, America had found a way to collaborate with and operate in Libya. In september 2012, a video was made in the US mocking the Islamic leader, prophet  Mohammed. This is said to have catalyzed the Islamist extremists to attack the Consulate. The attack is not in anyway to be assumed that it was a surprise.

According to Geoff Porter, the president, North Africa Risk Consulting, the interest of US , especially the CIA was to collect the weapons. On CNN (2012), Porter said that on September 9,10 and 11, things were out of order and it was predictable that something bad was about to happen. He adds that the offices in the States were informed but nothing happened. One could say that when the attack happened it was too late to help since the distance was too long from US to Benghazi. However, in July 2012 Diplomat Eric who was working in Benghazi had asked for 16 more persons to stay up to mid September and this was ignored. Back to the real situation when the attack was about to happen several signs were given.

According to GEN. Michael Hayden, the former Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Consulate had the Act I known as Norming or Warning after warning. Hayden acknowledges that “what they had decided to do with the security question was inconsistent with the threat assessment” at the time. A person who is in the system that is chaotic himself understands that security was inadequate. British were warned to leave. He add that CNN was also alerted, yet Clinton says on CNN timeline report that no one in the state department raised a recommendation of closing Benghazi. Clearly the State’s department and the white House undermined what was told to them. This is again, hard to judge as to why there was not enough response. Was the ignorance because of the fact that this was in Africa not in Iraq, or Russia?

Did the location really affect the need to respond to need for security? Africa is always described as a starving nation, undeveloped and other negative image. However, Ambassador Christopher Stevens is gone for good. He is gone for the reason that no one even in the State House can answer. What they will tell you is that he was committed to serve, but is that the reason to die? They will say that the consulate was attacked when he was in Benghazi, but is that enough to answer the question? The answer is simple, Stevens was denied security hence denied his life and his passion ended on September 11. RIP.

3) THE FAILURE OF AFRICAN UNION (AU)

If International Relations was football, everyone would just watch it everyday. Unfortunately every failure in the International Relations counts, which leaves it with no space for errors. This part tells you how the African Union was helpless during the Benghazi situation. It also shows that being in the office does not mean having enough ideas to save a life.

Steve’s death had many strings attached to it. First, working on a lawless continent like Africa. Second, there was no clear system of operation laid to secure the Americans from Gaddafi’s regime as they were operating against him. There was also no foundation laid down of how the system should operate and procedures to follow particularly in Benghazi. I think that things could have been better if the International Community collaborated with the AU. The States did not do enough research of what could have happened in Benghazi which could have helped them know what approach to use. From the first segment “Murderer of an Idealist”, we understand that Stevens was sent to work with rebel groups who were fighting against Gaddafi, but there was no collaboration between the US and the AU on how to join hands and deliver people of Benghazi. If the AU had power to fight Gaddafi, the US would have had less to lose in this case.

Another contributing cause to Stevens’ death is the lack of alternative clear solutions regarding his safety. While the UN peacekeepers get pulled out of the country when war starts, Stevens was not given such alternative to move out of Benghazi and lead from behind. This raises a question of whether the situation in Benghazi was considered less harmful or something else. With lots of requests sent out, there was not even an idea for Stevens on how to handle to situation. This can be easily connected to the notion that issues can be resolved peacefully without intervention or a clear resolution as mentioned in Barack Obama’s speech two weeks after the consulate attack. Clearly we see how Americans thought that everyone should understand and move according to their notion.

Part of Obama’s speech

“But understand, the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America. They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded—the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war; that in an interdependent world, all of us have a stake in working towards greater opportunity and security for our citizens.”

4) THE COMPLEXITY OF POLITICS

Another problem that affected the outcome in Benghazi was the failure of the Humanitarian aid, a UN branch to collaborate with the international military and come to a consensus about how they should work together. According Williams, Paul R., and Colleen (Betsy) Popken, on March 11, 2012 the U.N. Security Council signed the 1973 resolution that accepted  Military intervention in  Humanitarian activities. These two entities were to work together in Benghazi, but these two organizations had different objectives. Because each party had to operate in line with their objectives, the Humanitarian aid, was concerned with operating with the militaries which would get them in a wide political involvement. The objectives of Humanitarian are to save lives, alleviate suffering, and maintain human dignity during and in the aftermath of man-made crises and natural disasters, as well as to prevent and strengthen preparedness for the occurrence of such situations. The Objectives of National military are to Deter, deny, and defeat state adversaries.
Disrupt, degrade, and defeat violent extremist organizations.
Strengthen our global network of allies and partners. Whereas Humanitarian would work towards saving lives, National Military would work to defeat the opposition side (Gaddafi’s side) who at some point might need Humanitarian assistance hench conflicting interests.

Although they raised concerns about this collaboration, according to the Security Council the humanitarian aid operations seemed inadequate (Resolution 1973 2011). In 1990s there was a Humanitarian crisis and debate regarding the legality of humanitarian intervention that led to the development of Responsibility to Protect (RtoP).This was a way for the international community to intervene when they felt that it was needed. Responsibility to Protect was carefully designed and composed of three pillars; (1) states’ responsibility to protect their own citizens; (2) the international community’s responsibility to aid states in protecting their citizens; and (3) timely and decisive action by the international community if states manifestly fail to do so (Resolution 1973, 2011).

The complexity of this intervention, however, if looked at attentively  clearly shows how it is hard for the international community to get involved in another country’s issues. The three pillars are important but are limiting to some extent because it can take time for the international community to assess if the first two pillars have failed, before applying the third pillar. On the other hand after assessing the failure of the first two pillars, there seems to be no room for asking for consent from the state where the resolution is being applied. This clearly shows why the humanitarian aid was against the international military intervention.  Thomas Weiss said that “the main challenge facing the Responsibility to Protect is how to act, is not how to build normative consensus”. Unfortunately we are left to think of how it ended up working. Put yourself in the shoes of Stevens who was in Benghazi committed to work when decision makers had failed to come to a conclusion. Stevens was committed to his service though the power behind him was not helpful when he needed them most.

Another concerning situation is that the Security Council remained largely silent on the  RtoP because of many factors, including continuing contestation over what responsibilities the principle entails, who precisely bears the international responsibility, and when a state’s responsibility to protect its own population has distinctly failed. As an alternative, throughout the last decade the Council  has focused on elaborating and implementing the agenda related to the Protection of Civilians (PoC)—”a principle first introduced to the Council by former secretary-general Kofi Annan in his report on African conflicts during the UN Security Council Enlargement and U.S. Interests.”  To some extent it is easy for these two entities to be confused. However they are different in some ways; for example, RtoP can use force whereas PoC cannot apply force. When the International community had determined that Humanitarian intervention, referred to as the responsibility to protect, needed to be implemented, the Security Council authorized the use of force to protect civilians. (Patrick

Plainly at this point we forget the meaning of the term sovereignty.

5) CLINTON AND POOR COMMUNICATION

I am sure many of us have been wondering what really was Clinton’s role in the death of the Ambassador Stevens. Let’s pull back the curtain in the White House a little, just a little for what is in the White House is  massive. The 2015 campaign made Clinton say what she would not have said. Have you wondered perhaps as to why some people doubted of electing Clinton? Nicholas, Peter; Tau, Byron, reporters at The Wall Street Journal, can now take us through a story of how Mrs. Clinton was tripped up by GOP members “on national television and uncovered her mistake of exposing Americans stationed in Benghazi to unacceptable risks that led to their deaths, including the US ambassador to Libya.” Let us look closely at how the government and Clinton played a role in the death of Stevens and his fellows.

Clinton on TV

Clinton: “I would imagine I’ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together,” she said. “I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together. I have been racking my brain about what more could have been done or should have been done.” In her statement, Clinton showed how she cared more than any other people yet her communication confused everyone which took their trust away. When the Republicans heard her statement they released a new email that she shared with her daughter Chelsea on the night of the attack in Benghazi. The email stated “the attacks were undertaken by an “Al Queda-like group.”  This statement surely showed that Clinton knew who is attacking Benghazi. Presumably Clinton knew forehand information because the email was sent the same night that Benghazi was attacked. However her miscommunication leaves us in a confusion.

Similar content was given to American people in a different way. During Clinton’s interview on the National Television, Republican  Mr. Jordan said  that before Clinton sent an email to her daughter, she had sent “an email that said Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.” Mr. Jordan followed up with a statement that everyone would say. Mr. Jordan said: “You tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story.” Nevertheless, Clinton had her own excuses. According to the street report magazine, Mrs. Clinton said that “she was careful in how the State Department statement was worded, emphasizing that it made clear how “some” have sought to justify the “attack” as a response to the video that mocked Mohammed Clinton again made the case that American diplomats need to operate in dangerous places and accept the inherent risks of those missions. Her statement during the political and social crisis does not give the image that America has given as a strong country willing to help other countries during trouble times. Operating in areas where security is not a guarantee US was supposed to respond quickly even if the diplomats have to work in hard and unsafe situations.

6) USA IN THE MIDDLE EAST, WHY?

Unlike some parts of this world whose problems go or stay unnoticed or even unattended to, if the world kept silence towards the issues in the Middle East, its struggles would affect the world significantly and that is why the “American security becomes as a guarantee.” We talk of people’s security not necessarily Stevens’ security. It is known that “America and Arabs are stuck together”. You might wondering how this can be connected to Ambassador Stevens now- He was not the only thing America had to give attention to.

America is viewed in many ways as the powerful country and the only country that is involved in more conflicts than most other powerful countries. However it is clear to some extent that it participate for its own benefit. No wonder why the USA was indirectly involved in the British-French Coalition. They first reviewed the 1973 resolution before it was finally implemented in Benghazi.( Paul, Popken 226)

On the other hand, if we read what other people think about the involvement, they will be pitiful that (as US says itself) US have been involved in different wars, spending lots of money in order to help affected countries, yet US get blamed for the problems in the affected areas. The statement- How gratifying it would be just to walk away, dust off our hands, and say you’re on your own. But we can’t”- shows how much it is hard for US to step down and keep quiet when they know people are dying in different countries. However, how much would US get involved in all the conflicts without benefiting from it? I don’t have an answer, as it had never occurred to me earlier, so we share the homework. The reflection of the US situation after the loss of the ambassador Stevens seemed to highlight the neglected effects of their own actions.

At the same time of conflicts in Egypt and Libya, America did not know which side to take either to withdraw or to keep the courage. Around the same time, Egypt was against the States and the western world as a whole. While they got involved in helping Egypt to have an elected leader, Mahamad Morsi, who was later detained after one year, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the current president at the time of the attack, was not in good terms with the US. Egypt is turning away from the States. US have continued to stay in Egypt not because he is cooperative, but because they think their investment can bring them something.  Sis is said to collaborate either the Islamic brotherhood not because he wants to, but because he wants to keep them in check to avoid fighting a war that he would easily lose.

It is a chaos. While everyone was a little bit confused, Stevens was determined to invest all he could afford to make the situation better in Benghazi. However it can be realistic to say Clinton’s miscommunication could have been caused by a mixture of factors. She didn’t know exactly what the cause of the attack was though she kept on trying to tell people what she thought to have been the cause and because of this people had limited knowledge that could help us judge her miscommunication. One worse decision made, however, was denying the security request. at this moment security should have been the first priority. Here I can define security in terms of life, and when they denied security requests from Ambassador Stevens, they denied him life.

Sometimes we don’t have control over situations. It is not easy to understand how the situation in Egypt can affect or be connected to Stevens’s life. Many people have questioned it, but if we can reflect and think of the connection of Islam and the brotherhood in both countries we could make sense out of it. Though I don’t expect everyone to understand this complexity of the International relations.

REFLECTION

Taking this class was exciting and confusing at the same time. Sometimes the content was so annoying and stressing to me especially when we did the blogs about Bowe Bergdahl. I wondered why some decisions were taken especially keeping Bergdahl for all of five years. However reading about Syria’s situation and how Donald Trump, the current president of America, invaded the country just because of their own mess in their own country made the situation worst.

I thought life is easy and that I can live just by making simple decisions. I was proved wrong. For the first few weeks while I was taking this class I thought this might not be a good way to go. I did not want to deal with all the mess in the international relations, but as the semester went by, I realized how there is no such thing of making a simple decision. I had lived a life of single story that leaders are meant to make good decisions and serve people. I had not put much value on what it takes to make right decisions until I started the Benghazi project. This project was also a challenge especially understanding why Ambassador Christopher allowed to stay in Benghazi yet he knew how dangerous it was to stay in that place. It’s only through reading different sources that I now understand that life is not about easy decisions. It’s about living for a purpose.

APPENDIX

1. Flag and Map of Libya

1. Map Showing a Region of Arab Spring

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arab_Spring_and_Regional_Conflict_Map.svg (Image Commons)

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Slain-US-Ambassador-to-Libyas-Ties-to-Bay-Area-Go-Deep-169452886.html

2) D.Clinton on the National Television

3) Stevens on the Right and Bubaker on the Left

Porter, Geoff. “Benghazi Timeline: ‘We Are Under Attack.’”  YouTube. YouTube, 7 August 2013. Web. 29 April 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8y1Q_4tDUU

Perf. Gen. Michael Hayden. Why Didn’t the U.S. Military Respond in Time in Benghazi. CNN, 6 Aug. 2013. Web. 30 Apr. 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E_Ts4Zr7tA

RJ Middleton, Lisa Fernandez, Jodi Hernandez and Christie Smith. NBC Bay Area. NBC

Bay Area,  http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Slain-US-Ambassador- to-Libyas-Ties-to-Bay-Area-Go-Deep-169452886.html

Remsen, Ian. Wikipedia Commons. N.p., n.d. Web. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arab_Spring_and_Regional_Conflict_Map.svg

Rubin, Jennifer. “Can Hillary Clinton Survive Benghazi?” The Washington Post. WP Company, https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/01/15/can-hillary-clinton-survive-benghazi/?utm_term=.ac204db246a7

Works Cited

Eric Schmitt and Michael R. Gordon. “U.S. Bombs ISIS Camps in Libya.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 Jan. 2017. Web. 05 May 2017.

Barack, Obama. “What Gives Me the Most Hope.” United Nations. Vital Speeches of the Day, vol. 78, no. 11, Nov. 2012, pp. 379–383.

Porter, Geoff. “Benghazi Timeline: ‘We Are Under Attack.’”  YouTube. YouTube, 7 August 2013. Web. 29 April 2017..

Dettmer, Jamie. “So Much for the Arab Spring.” Maclean’s, vol. 125, no. 38, 10/1/2012 2012, pp. 32–35.

Flynn, Sean. “Murder of an Idealist.” GQ: Gentlemen’s Quarterly, vol. 82, no. 12, Dec. 2012, pp. 282–299.

Humanitarian Policy Group. “Friend or Foe? Military Intervention in Libya.” Overseas                                                                Development Institute, May 2011, 

Kasaija, Phillip Apuuli. “The African Union (AU), the Libya Crisis and the Notion of ‘African Solutions to African Problems.’” Journal of Contemporary African Studies, vol. 31, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 117–138.

U.S. Department of State and Department of Defense. United States Activities in Libya. May 2011,

Tau, Byron, et al. “Clinton Grilled on Benghazi.” Wall Street Journal – Eastern Edition, 23 Oct. 2015, pp. A1–A4.

Totten, Michael J. “no exit: Why the US Can’t Leave the Middle East.” World Affairs, no. 4,     2013, p.8.                            

Perf. Gen. Michael Hayden. Why Didn’t the U.S. Military Respond in Time in Benghazi. CNN, 6 Aug. 2013. Web. 30 Apr. 2017. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E_Ts4Zr7tA>.

Williams, Paul R., and Colleen (Betsy) Popken. “Security Council Resolution 1973 on Libya: A Moment of Legal & Moral Clarity.” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol. 44, no. 1/2, June 2011, p. 225.

Love and Service

In the summer of 2017, I had a chance to intern with New American Pathways as an Operations Intern. New American Pathways is a successful refugee resettlement agency in Atlanta. In my first week, I was amazed about how the work environment was like a family place. When I paid more attention, I learned how much staff members have to do in order to have an immigrant well settled. This made me more curious and I wanted to know what goes on in the background in order to have such success. I came to learn that all it takes is love. Love is not a qualification one can take and employ in every field, although it is an important aspect of human life. Although New American Pathways, like any other nonprofit organization, faces challenges of limited resources, the love they put in their work is immeasurably another force behind their success. They take time to understand the behaviors of their clients and determine how to serve each of them. It does not matter if someone is tempered (as a result of experience) or not

Knowing that at the internship is a place of learning, I made myself flexible and offered to be helping with tasks that needed to be done especially with immigrants’ walk-in days of the week.  While interning with the operations department, I volunteered to work at the reception in order to enhance my experience. While working at the reception, I observed behaviors of human nature of selfishness where everyone wanted to be served immediately without considering who came first. Some expected me to listen to them and do what they wanted because they were elders. This is how some cultures are.  At this internship, I was first challenged culturally as I did not know how to send people back and tell them to stay organized in the order of their arrival. However, I learned how to communicate assertively while being mindful of the people I was serving and their needs. Although talking assertively to an elder person can be considered disrespectful in my culture, I learned that American culture different from mine. I also learned more ways of approaching situations in different settings.

My identity as an intern and my responsibility at the site did not only teach me to love my work and those I am serving others, but also to be supportive in every way I could while at my internship site. In fact, the experience I got from working at New American Pathways, both office work and the interactions with people while working at the reception increased my love for public service.

This experience relates to learning outcomes:

Communicate effectively through writing and speaking, especially across cultural or linguistic differences

Articulate and appraise problems and solutions from multiple perspectives, critically considering diverse sources of information

Identity

Credit: Identity by Tisiya Mahoro licensed by (CC BY-NC-ND4.0)

If there is an identity one can ever take, it is that of a global citizen. I don’t mean just saying it with your lips. Living like a global citizen gives an experience that can never be replaced. Of vital importance to global citizenship is becoming a mindful citizen. Born in D.R.Congo, growing up in Uganda, living in South Africa, then to the United States of America have given me a rich identity. An identity I cannot derive from policies made by political leaders, but from my lived experience. In the spring of 2016, my global class was planned to travel to Martinique. I was excited until I realized that I cannot go, because of Visa issues. However, I was ready for anything to come my way. My alternative destination became New Orleans where I found a place that made my spring break one of my best moments in the USA.

I love to hear and learn from people’s lived experiences. Traveling to New Orleans, I met people who were still suffering the effects of hurricane Katrina after 15 good years. It was surprising and disappointing at the same time seeing an American struggling to have a good housing. I asked myself why, but I never got a satisfying answer. I didn’t need to know either, but rather do what I could be able to do. I was with a team of students and two staff members and we worked with a group called “Rebuilding New Orleans”, helping to rebuild houses that were later sold to teachers in the area. Although it was tiring, I was encouraged to work as much as I can especially digging the road that was not rebuilt since Hurricane Katrina. Because this road was never rebuilt, when it rained, the place always experienced flash flood which is always a threat to peoples’ lives

Credit: “identity” by John Hain is licensed under public domain

For the course of the week, every day left me with strength and courage to face the future. I wondered where the government was when its people were dawning in the hurricane Katrina, I wondered why are people still not well settled after 10 years, and I wonder why people from other countries fail to build their own home and yearn to go to America. I learned to appreciate my own home, though I don’t have a home as everyone would describe it… I am a global citizen.

I love to hear stories, but hearing from Katrina survivors opened my mind. I stopped having a perception that all Americans have a stable life. I stopped complaining about being a refugee and not having someone I could cry to after hearing from a woman who lost a family after days of struggle yet she had a government she looked up to for salvation. After hearing from a woman who became a refugee in her own country, and now he was about to occupy a house that I contributed to its construction, was the most empowering experience.

It did not end in New Orleans and it will never end. I am committed to serving people everywhere I go. Home is where I can serve those who need my service.

This experience relates to SUM learning outcomes below

Critically examine the relationship between dominant and marginalized cultures, subcultures or groups

Identify, explain, and analyze global themes, processes and systems

They call it Summit, I call it experience.

Agnes Scott is diverse, but it wouldn’t be significant if diversity was just different colors on this campus. Agnes Scott’s mission of educating women to think deeply, live honorably and engage the intellectual and social challenges of their times wouldn’t be meaningful if it was not the true experience we get from being part of the school/ community. Agnes Scott has created a diverse environment where one is able to gain global experience, but most importantly, Agnes Scott has enabled me to learn and live its values through Summit.

My favorite topic under the summit/ global class was mindfulness. Under this topic, I read stories of people who were judged based on their identity and how it made their lives hard. These readings made me reflect back on my secondary school experience and how I always got questioned about my identity and how it was a draining experience every time I had to deal with it. The USA is my fourth country to live in (RDC, Uganda, South Africa & USA), nevertheless, I still experienced cultural shock and stories I read made me understand how my behaviors can impact someone’s experience either positively or negatively. Another important part was the research about the cultures and history of Martinique, a country that was to be a travel destination for my global class. In this research, I was able to connect people’s cultures with their history. Learning about people through their history is the best way of learning and celebrating diversity. In my classes, I was not only taught to be diverse but also my mind was challenged and every day I learned how to question my beliefs, my perceptions about different behaviors and accept other people’s lifestyle without compromising my values.

While I learned and questioned my perception, I found the courage to question some aspects of Agnes Scott operational culture. For the first few weeks at Agnes Scott, I felt the orientation had not prepared me enough to live in such a diverse environment.  It was through a crucial discussion with professors and staff members that I came to understand how diverse the school was and how much the school have done to make everything possible. Through this, I was able to give feedback and also got involved in campus activities so that I can contribute to bringing changes that I desired. The following year, I was involved in the student orientation council where I participated in Orientation for first years. I was not only happy for contributing to first years’ experience as they started the next chapter of their lives, but also seeing that the feedback I shared was incorporated into the program. After this experience, I was determined to get involved in different activities in order to experience the beauty of Agnes Scott College. I am humbled to serve as a vice president of international students Association.

I am not only encouraged to be part of my community at Agnes Scott College, but beyond.

This experience relates to learning outcomes below

Identify and assess one’s values, interests and abilities

Analyze human behavior or social relations

Recognize, analyze, and employ effective teamwork