Milli became the first Thai rapper to perform at Coachella, where she performed her song “Mango Sticky Rice ” while eating a bowl of the dessert on stage. After her performance, mango sticky rice went viral on social media and sales of mango sticky rice soared in Thailand. Thailand’s government even nominated mango sticky rice for UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage list. It is clear that the performance was not just a dedication to Milli’s favorite dessert, but also a testament to the significance of soft power, specifically gastrodiplomacy. 

Right after Milli’s performance at Coachella, one of the world’s most popular music festivals, mango sticky rice exploded on social media. Google searches for the dessert surged up to 20 times. On Twitter #khanonieomamuang (mango sticky rice) was trending in Thailand, and #MILLILiveatCoachella was trending worldwide with over 1.39 million tweets. 

Thai citizens also applauded Milli’s  performance for representing Thailand in a positive light on a global stage. Nongnapath, a Thai illustrator based in Bangkok, Thailand told NBC News, “I like Milli eating mango sticky rice [onstage]so much. Because I’m Thai too, so I know and eat mango sticky rice since I was young.” 

Suphakomkao Klaypongpan, a mango sticky rice customer in Bangkok, stated, “I normally love to eat mango sticky rice but…after watching Milli on stage, I am now eating it nearly every day.”

Milli’s performance not only made the dessert viral online, but also helped boost sales of the dessert in Thailand. In fact, Thanyarat Suntiparadorn, the owner of mango sticky rice vendor Mae Varre, noted that online orders increased by 100%. There were so many orders that the owner had to shut down online orders throughout the day to keep up with the demand. 

Other countries also took notice of Thailand’s dessert. Manop Kaeowongnukun, president of a mango growers association in Chacheong, claimed that countries abroad have shown interest in Thailand’s mangoes thanks to Milli. Previously, a kilogram of mangoes would range from 20-40 baht/kg, though now after Milli’s performance, prices have increased to 110 baht/kg.

Kaewongnukun claims that “mango sticky rice fever will help drive up consumption and thus prices.” Milli’s influence spread from vendors of the dish to mango growers in Thailand, showcasing the impact of cuisine and celebrities as tools for soft power. 

The publicity around mango sticky rice was so widespread that even the Thai government took notice. Thai politician Pita Limjaroenrat posted on Twitter: “MILLI aka Thailand’s closest hope for soft power!” after Milli’s Coachella performance. The Thai government even decided to nominate mango sticky rice to UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage list. 

According to UNESCO, the purpose of this list is to “help demonstrate the diversity of [intangible heritage elements]and raise awareness of its importance.” This is significant, because if the dish is recognized as an intangible heritage element, it will not only bring greater global awareness to the dish, but to Thailand as a whole. 

By being on the list, Thailand can also receive other indirect benefits such as culinary tourism, which can help increase revenue to Thailand’s economy as more tourists decide to visit the country to experience the cuisine. The impact of Milli’s performance makes it clear that through the arts, countries can showcase their food and culture in a public, global manner made for wider audiences.

While it was not Milli’s intention to become a tool of soft power, she does have pride in her country and wanted to represent Thailand through her own eyes on stage. She said, “When you look at Thailand travel brochures, it’s always either giant statues, temples or floating markets. I’m not here to represent the conventional ‘Thainess’; I’m here to represent who I am as a Thai person…There are other aspects of Thai culture that often get overlooked and I want to make sure that my music reflects the essence of that.” 

Milli did just that through her performance and the lyrics of her song “Mango Sticky Rice.” Her love of mango sticky rice and Thailand resonates throughout her song. In her lyrics she raps about the mangoes that one can only find in Thailand and expresses her love for the dessert when she raps lyrics like “sprinkle it with crunchy things. This foody goody mango sticky rice you can eat it eat…Juicy, tasty makes me greedy.” By creating a visible, positive representation of mango sticky rice, Milli crafted a positive image of Thailand while generating increased interest in the country around the world.

The Thai government’s quick capitalization on Milli’s performance was not the first time it has used its cuisine as a tool for soft power. In fact, gastrodiplomacy, a term used to describe the act of a country generating global interest in its cuisine to elevate its status and therefore increase tourism and revenue, was first coined to describe Thailand’s Global Thai initiative in 2002. 

The initiative was created to increase the number of Thai restaurants around the world from 5,500 to 8,000. To achieve this, the government implemented different strategies such as sending Thai chefs abroad and offering loans to open up Thai restaurants. The goal was that by increasing positive representation of Thai cuisine, the country would enjoy benefits such as increased visibility, status, and revenue. Eventually the efforts paid off, as the number of Thai restaurants abroad increased from 5,500 to 15,000. 

For Thailand, there is a concentrated effort for pushing soft power through gastrodiplomacy because it leads to an array of economic and status benefits for the country as whole. By making the country’s cuisine globally visible, Thailand can similarly become a visible force on the global stage. 

Additionally, when people have positive associations with a foriegn country’s cuisine and its culture, they are also enticed to visit the country, driving up tourism revenue for that country. Gastrodiplomacy can also increase national pride in the country campaigning their cuisine, as evident in Thailand through the citizens’ positive reaction to Milli’s performance and the spike in mango sticky rice sales. 

Milli’s Coachella performance is an example of how food can be a powerful force in the diplomatic sphere and be used to shape public perception, as Thailand has successfully been able to do and continues to do so with the sudden popularity of the mango sticky rice dish. Milli’s performance shows that celebrities are not just entertainers, but also ambassadors of their country. Milli represents how, as celebrities become increasingly visible thanks to social media, they will continue to be a force for soft power by representing their country and its products on a global scale.

The post Mango Sticky Rice: Representing Thailand at Coachella appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

South Korea has over 200,000 Asian migrant workers, mainly from Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia and Nepal, who came to South Korea through the Employment Permit System (EPS). The program was launched in 2004 as a solution to labor shortages, but has been increasingly important given the recent labor shortages due to COVID-19-related restrictions on immigration.

However, activists are demanding a rehaul of EPS because of its contribution to the exploitation of migrant workers. Under EPS, migrant workers can stay up to three years in South Korea and if they are labeled “diligent workers” they can re-enter the country and work for another four years and ten months. One problem with EPS is that during their stay, migrants can change their workplace only up to three times with an employer’s consent, and those who end up leaving their jobs without consent could be reported to the police as illegal immigrants and face deportation. Migrants are also discouraged from speaking up about their mistreatment because if they are involved in a dispute and no longer labeled “diligent workers,” they then have lower chances of re-entering the country.

Migrant workers argue that this system violates their rights and is equivalent to forced labor because migrants are discouraged from leaving their employers even if they are exploited. Kim Dael-song, a pastor who runs the Pochean Migrant Workers Centre, says that “the hardest thing for workers is that there’s absolutely no freedom of movement and the workers are bound entirely to the owners. A complete master-servant relationship. This is the source of all the violations of human and labor rights.” Rights for farm workers are even worse than that of factory workers because the nation’s Labor Standards Act, which regulates working hours and break times, does not apply to workplaces with four or fewer employees, which is the typical number of laborers on farms. 

This means that oftentimes, migrant workers, especially those working on farms, are overworked and underpaid. Activists argue that in Pocheon, migrants working on farms are farming for 10-12 hours a day with only two Saturdays off per month with meager salaries that are below what their contracts promised them. A migrant worker from Nepal who works on a farm considers finding work in a factory, because he claims that on a farm “it’s just an extreme amount of work (each day). You don’t get bathroom breaks. You don’t even have time to drink water.”

In addition to the grueling working hours and poor pay, many migrant workers are also living in substandard living conditions. On South Korean farms, nearly 70% of migrant laborers live in shipping containers or other types of makeshift homes that are far below safety and sanitation standards. 

In response to these poor labor conditions, activists and migrant workers have fought to create reform. They have organized protests and even created a Migrant’s Trade Union in 2005 to improve their working conditions. After the death of Sokkheng, authorities stopped issuing employment permits to workplaces where they were housing migrant workers in greenhouses or other forms of substandard housing. Though there has been little government reform in improving working conditions, and the exploitation of migrants continues. 

One factor that makes it difficult to improve working conditions is South Korea’s negative perception of migrant workers. Steve Hamilton, chief of mission of the International Organization for Migration to Korea, has noted that the “negative perception towards foreigners has prevented officials from being more open to migrant workers.” Due to the local media’s poor portrayal of foreigners and their impact on the country, there is less incentive to improve their labor conditions. Hamilton added that “fear-based misconception of foreign labor displacing jobs and decreasing wage levels should be tackled… a step that must be taken while reforming Korea’s immigration policies at the same time.” In fact, a study on immigration in South Korea found that 42% of South Koreans favored maintaining the current level of immigration, 32% supported a decrease in levels, while just 19% supported an increase. 

To improve the working conditions of migrants, an overhaul of the EPS needs to be implemented to remove the dependency immigrants have on their employers. The negative perception surrounding migrants in South Korea also needs to change if improvements are to be made. In order to tackle this narrative, Hamilton suggests that migrant workers should be granted permanent residency in South Korea rather than having workplaces continue to replace them. He claims that “providing more room for migrants to settle and achieve success could also in return change the perception of migrants here.” 

As South Korea faces labor shortages caused by an aging labor force and declining birthrate, migrant workers continue to be a crucial part of South Korea’s workforce and should be treated as such. The importance of migrant workers has been highlighted, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, which exacerbated labor shortages as a result of halts on immigration. Looking forward, there needs to be a change in how migrants are perceived and a rehaul of the EPS system so migrant workers can have the basic human rights they deserve. 

The post South Korea’s Exploitation of Migrant Workers appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

Lockdowns and other restrictions have only exacerbated violence against women and poverty. While countries in the Northern Triangle and the United States have taken steps to tackle these issues and limit migration, they have been largely unsuccessful.

The pervasive gang violence that plagues the Northern Triangle is one of the main reasons that compels so many migrants to leave their homes. A history of political instability and the transnational drug trade, fueled by the United States which is the leading consumer of illegal drugs, has led to the high amounts of gang violence in the area. According to a report by the  Congressional Research Service, gangs such as the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) and the 18th Street gang (M-18), engage in violence when competing with other gangs for territory to control the drug trade. Connections between local law enforcement  and gangs have led to high levels of impunity and allow violence to continue unpunished within the region. 

Gang violence also contributes to gender-based violence.  A United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) report interviewed women who fled from the Northern Triangle and found that 64% of them stated that threats or attacks against them from criminal groups was one of the main reasons for migrating. 

Violence against women not only occurs due to gangs but also as a result of threats within their own homes. Many women in the UNHCR report also described physical and verbal abuse from their own partners. The pandemic has increased levels of domestic violence against women within the Northern Triangle. In 2020, the Organization of Salvadoran Women for Peace found a 70% increase in reports of domestic violence in Central America between mid-March and late May. This was largely attributed to lockdowns, which forced women to remain housed with their abuser, as well as pandemic-related stress, which increased abusive behavior amongst men. The daily gang threats and domestic violence that women experience is a large factor in pushing them to migrate to the United States in search of a safer future.

The issue of violence in the Northern Triangle is magnified by the poverty in the region. This widespread poverty exists because wealth has historically been concentrated within a small group of elites, leaving widespread poverty among the rest of the population. As a result, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, in 2019, all three nations in the Northern Triangle ranked among the lowest for gross domestic product compared to the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean. 

Poverty combined with a lack of educational and job opportunities pushes people to either join gang organizations or migrate to the United States in hopes of better job prospects. Pandemic restrictions such as lockdowns have only worsened poverty by preventing people from working and effectively crippling the informal sectors that largely sustain these countries’ economies. 

Recent environmental disasters have further contributed to economic insecurity in the Northern Triangle. The coffee sector, which is a source of income for about 1.3 million families, has especially been affected. The CRS report notes that coffee rust, a fungal disease, has reduced production since 2012 and low international coffee prices makes it difficult for farmers to pay off debts and replant trees. In 2020, Hurricanes Eta and Iota also forced families to migrate away from their homes, contributing to annual economic declines of “nearly 9% in Honduras, 7.9% in El Salvador, and 1.5% in Guatemala” according to the International Monetary Fund. 

While governments within the Northern Triangle have created policies to help alleviate these widespread issues, they have fallen short in creating any significant change. For example, governments created anti-violence policies that attempted to crack down on violence through expanding police powers and issuing harsher punishment for gang members. Though they were unsuccessful and only worsened the problem by leading to mass incarcerations which burdened already overcrowded prisons. These policies were also criticized for contributing to police violence and poor prison conditions. 

In 2014, the Northern Triangle worked with the United States to create the Plan of the Alliance for Prosperity, which aims to tackle poverty through increasing production, developing human capital, and increasing security and transparency. The plan also included a $750 million dollar budget for development in the region. 

However one criticism is that much of the budget goes towards security measures rather than development. The plan created greater militarization of the border but this forces migrants to take more dangerous routes and puts them at greater risk for contacting gangs. The plan also contributes to increased militarization against violence, though this strategy has been found to only increase violence and human rights abuses in the region. Another problem is the focus on foreign investments, specifically U.S. companies, because this often leads to the exploitation of the environment and local communities. These companies also contribute to unstable employment and low paying wages. 

Currently, the plan has the potential to aggravate the violence and poverty that the Northern Triangle faces. 

The United States has also implemented policies to mitigate mass migration from the Northern Triangle; however, they have been criticized for largely being reactive to spikes in immigration numbers. The Obama administration implemented the Central America Regional Security Initiative to combat drugs and support the police and judicial systems in the region, though its implementation coincided with increased violence and human rights abuses in the region. The Trump administration tried to curb immigration by implementing a zero-tolerance policy that criminally prosecuted all illegal immigrants and separated children from their parents. Other policies included sending migrants back to their countries and withholding aid from the Northern Triangle over their failure to curb immigration. Policies under the Trump administration have been criticized for aggravating the issues plaguing the Northern triangle, violating U.S. laws, and human rights abuses. 

Currently, the Biden administration’s approach has been to roll back policies implemented during Trump’s presidency and create a $4 billion plan to help mitigate the root causes of immigration such as poverty and violence. The plan includes initiatives such as funding civil society organizations, supporting programs that prevent youth from joining gangs, and creating national level reforms to fight corruption. 

However, there is skepticism as to whether that aid can help reduce immigration; some posit that it may even increase immigration to the United States by giving more people the resources to leave. 

That aid should be combined with more community level interventions to be successful. For example, according to CFR Latin America Studies Fellow Paul Angelo, in Honduras “…U.S.-funded community policing programs and provided lampposts to illuminate streets and prevent crime, [are]seeing reductions in homicides of up to 60 percent in those communities.” 

The Biden administration has taken steps to collaborate with communities in the Northern Triangle, which is a positive step in tackling the root causes of immigration. However, the United States needs to ensure that these initiatives are implemented long-term to avoid hindering progress within the region, as was the case during the Trump administration 

While government policies have not been effective in solving the issues plaguing the Northern Triangle, there have been NGOs and civil society organizations working within communities that have seen success. 

For example, the NGO Cure Violence worked to reduce violence in Honduras through preventing violence before it breaks out. In early 2015 the program was implemented in 5 zones and as a result shootings and killings dropped by as much as 88%. 

In addition, the U.S. Agency for International Development started a Community-Based Crime and Violence Prevention Project, where USAID partnered with NGOs to curb violence in El Salvador through various methods such as providing vocational training for youth, jobs, and counseling support for people at risk and survivors of domestic violence. As a result of the program “murders reported fell by 40%, extortion and blackmail fell by 52%, and residents became 40% less significantly likely to avoid dangerous areas of the neighborhood out of fear of crime.” 

In El Salvador there are also multiple organizations working to reduce violence against women. The Shaira Ali Cultural Center in El Salvador has worked in 29 communities to educate women and students on violence prevention and support women who have experienced violence. 

Looking forward, supporting community based initiatives are the most effective pathway in reducing the issues plaguing the Northern Triangle and curbing mass migration to the U.S. border.

The post Rights Around the World: Efforts in Central America’s Northern Triangle appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

But faced with this convergence of crises, Latin American countries are now at the COP26 summit in Glasgow, Scotland with a proposed solution: debt-for-climate action swaps.These swaps would allow these countries to gain access to more funding for climate projects that reduce carbon emissions, while simultaneously reducing their growing debt. 

Debt-for-climate action swaps are designed to allow nations to pay off their debt by redirecting the money they owe into climate action projects. Creditor nations will reduce debt “either by converting it into local currency, lowering the interest rate, writing off some of the debt, or through a combination of all three.” The debtor country will then redirect the saved revenue towards climate action projects such as preserving biodiversity or reducing carbon emissions.

These initiatives have a history of success for both parties. However, given the growing severity of climate change, these agreements ought to be reformed to create lasting and sustainable incentives for growth. Most critically, debt-for-climate action swaps should increase the amount of debt “forgiven”  in order for countries to fund the large-scale, and realistically expensive, projects needed to tackle climate change. The scale of debt-for-climate action swaps must be reconfigured to match the scale of impending climate catastrophe.

Additionally, these agreements should include a mechanism to monitor countries and ensure that governments are meeting their emission goals. Holding borrowing countries to their environmental commitments appears especially crucial as countries like Argentina call for increased debt-for-nature swaps, even as they remain reliant on fossil fuels and fail to comply with their climate pledges.

Latin America’s economic struggle amid COVID-19 drained funding for climate change projects. In fact, according to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, the region’s GDP dropped by 7.7% and is not expected to recover until 2024. Since there is a limit on the amount of debt that a country can incur, loans were taken out to help fund the region’s economic and health sectors. For many of these countries, climate change mitigation projects were forced onto the backburner. 

For instance, Honduras took out loans to deal with the public health costs incurred by COVID-19. For the country, which feels the impact of climate change through increasingly severe hurricanes and droughts, increasing costs in other sectors limited the amount of loans directed toward initiatives and policies focused on climate resiliency. 

With Latin American countries already laden with debt and struggling economies, debt-for-climate action swaps provide a viable solution to help reduce their debt and free up revenue that can be applied to projects to reduce their emissions. 

These swaps began in 1989 and have been largely successful. Stockholm University economists found that “since 1990, debt-for-nature swaps globally have raised at least $900 million for conservation, erased nearly $3 billion in debt in at least 21 low- and middle-income countries and resulted in statistically significant reductions in deforestation.” 

In 2005, Uruguay exemplified how debt swaps can potentially fund climate projects. In a debt-for-clean energy swap with Spain, a portion of Uruguay’s debt was swapped in exchange for the installation of solar equipment. As a result, Uruguay now ranks among the cleanest energy systems in Latin America, producing more than 97% of its electricity from renewable sources.

Uruguay’s success demonstrates how these initiatives can be advantageous for Latin America going forward. But, it is crucial to consider the risks involved with these swaps and address the need to increase the scale of debt swaps.

First, it is difficult to verify if a country is hitting its goals for carbon offsets, and there is a risk of countries “greenwashing” how they use the funds. Similar to accountability issues plaguing the nature-based carbon offset market, risks of countries claiming to have protected forests that were in fact never vulnerable to deforestation obscure measurements of these swaps’ efficacy. 

Though satellites and land-based technologies can help monitor carbon emissions to ensure that countries are putting this  money toward meaningful initiatives to offset their emissions. 

Furthermore, the magnitude and urgency of the climate crisis now dwarfs previous debt swap efforts.

The Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development states that billions of dollars of debt will need to be restructured or forgiven to tackle existing climate challenges. Currently, swaps occur at or under $50 million. For example, Seychelles, an archipelago off the coast of East Africa, recently used a debt for nature swap to erase around $22 million dollars of debt in exchange for creating 13 new marine protected areas. While pollution and overfishing severely threatened the biodiversity in the area and made this swap necessary, ongoing destruction and depletion of marine ecosystems in Seychelles and worldwide reveal the insufficiency of current debt-for-climate action swap efforts.

Latin American leaders will need to implement debt-for-climate action swaps at drastically larger levels than ever before. This debt reduction is especially important in developing countries where there is “toxic indebtedness,” according to Argentinian President Alberto Fernández, which refers to the debt crisis that Argentina has faced since 2018 and the increased spending among Latin American countries because of COVID-19. 

Climate-for-debt swaps have the potential to create meaningful change and are desperately needed in a time when Latin America’s economy is struggling. With the consequences of climate change fast approaching, debt-for-climate action swaps are one way — among many — to tackle the climate crisis. 

And for Latin America, solutions are needed now more than ever. According to a news report by the UN, deforestation and forest fires are major concerns, both locally and globally, considering Latin America is home to 57% of the world’s forests, storing approximately 104 gigatons of carbon. According to the World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Professor Petteri Taalas, “[f]ires and deforestation are now threatening one of the world’s largest carbon sinks, with far-reaching and long-lasting repercussions.” 

The UN news report also points out that 27% of the population in Latin America and the Caribbean live along coastal shores, which now face mounting threats from ocean acidification, climbing temperatures and rising sea levels. Droughts across Latin America and the Caribbean have also impeded inland shipping routes, reduced crop yield and limited food production and distribution, exacerbating food insecurity in many communities throughout the region. These are only some of the consequences of climate change already endangering Latin America, and their severity will only worsen without urgent, sweeping action.

If the world hopes to meet its carbon emission reduction goals — as world leaders have recently debated at COP26 — these swaps must be considered, reformed and implemented as one tool in the toolbox.

The post Latin America Will Feel the Worst of Climate Change appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.