For more information, see this week’s Research Report.

When presidential candidate Morgan Tsvangirai pulled out of last week’s election in Zimbabwe, was it an act of integrity or a failure of moral courage?

By all accounts, Zimbabwe is a mess. The African nation’s aging strongman, former terrorist leader Robert Mugabe, came in second to Tsvangirai in the initial round of voting on March 29. With the run-off election approaching, Mugabe was so determined to hold onto power that he bragged that “only God” could remove him. So he unleashed his thugs in a campaign of violence and intimidation against supporters of Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

Five days before the June 27 election, with an estimated 80 or more MDC supporters murdered, some 10,000 injured, and more than 200,000 people displaced, Tsvangirai withdrew from the race. His reasons were twofold. He could no longer ask Zimbabweans to go to the polls when, he said, “that vote could cost them their lives.” He added that the election had degenerated into “a one-man competition” that bore little relationship to democracy.

Yet there were plenty of reasons to remain in the battle. Staying the course could have inspired his followers and possibly brought an end to the economic disaster that Zimbabwe has become. That’s how reform often happens. Somebody stands in front of a Chinese tank in Tiananmen Square. Nelson Mandela risks assassination by assuming a high-profile role in apartheid South Africa. Boris Yeltsin leaps onto a Russian tank to bring an end to a coup.

As the world inches its way toward democratic governance and human rights, we’re rightly fascinated by revolutions and reforms. We study them from various angles — political power, constitutional law, tribal tensions, religious divides, economic incentives, military might — hoping to glean useful lessons. But we tend to overlook the ethics angle until, as in Zimbabwe last week, the moral issues rise so powerfully to the surface that they can’t be ignored.

In this case, those issues fell into two categories. The first, journalistically compelling but conceptually uninteresting, concerns questions of right versus wrong. How the world responds to what the Economist calls “the ogre that has shamed an entire continent” makes headlines. In the past week, Queen Elizabeth II stripped Mugabe of his honorary knighthood, President Bush ordered tougher sanctions in light of what he described as “a sham election” conducted by “an illegitimate government,” and the United Nations called for the first-round elections to be respected — a position that could leave Tsvangirai the winner. But nobody has debated whether murder, rape, threats, bribes, pillaging, self-dealing, nepotism, fraud, theft, and arson are anything but wrong. On that question, there’s nothing left to say.

The second ethics category concerns right versus right. As Tsvangirai decided whether or not to withdraw, the world-class dilemma he faced pitted his loyalty and responsibility to the MDC — he is, after all, their candidate — against the truth that his followers were being attacked and murdered. It found him in an individual-versus-community struggle about saving himself versus bringing his people to power. It forced him to ask whether a short-term retreat would create a long-term loss, or whether the only way to achieve long-term success would be through intense short-term suffering that could cost him his life. And it pitted the need to defend justice and democracy for his nation against the need to show mercy and compassion for his followers.

Which of those arguments is right? All of them. So how to decide? If Tsvangirai stood by the ethical precepts of the ends-based, utilitarian construct — “do the greatest good for the greatest number” — he could argue for estimating the consequences of his actions and backing away. If, on the other hand, he followed the leanings of rule-based, Kantian logic — “follow the principle you want to see become a universal law” — he could argue that the principles of democracy were worth more than any single life, even his own. Finally, if he honored the care-based ethic of the Golden Rule — “do to others what you would want them to do to you” — he might say, “I want leaders who know how to keep fighting” — though he might say instead, “I want leaders who know how to stay alive.”

There is, in other words, a moral case for staying in the race and a moral case for withdrawing. Tsvangirai couldn’t do both. He had to choose what for him seemed to be the higher right. Will history show that he did the right thing? If things turn out well, the ends-based thinkers who judge by outcomes will applaud — just as, if things go badly, they’ll chastise him. By contrast, the rule-based thinkers will care only about the principle, not the consequences. In their eyes, he’ll be right whatever happens, as long as he stood by his highest principles.

And that’s the tough judgment. There is a high principle in standing up to tyranny and fighting to the finish. It is also highly principled to care about the lives and well-being of your followers. Either way, for Tsvangirai, last week took courage.

©2008 Institute for Global Ethics

Questions or comments? Write to newsline@globalethics.org.

– A senior official at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), speaking to the New York Times last week about White House efforts to water down findings supporting the regulation of greenhouse gases. The EPA emailed its original analysis to the White House last December after the Supreme Court ordered the agency to determine any danger posed by greenhouse gases. The White House refused to open the email, replying that the EPA’s findings would not be acknowledged. After six months of pressure from the White House, the EPA’s original findings have been slashed and weakened, eliminating “large sections of the original analysis that supported regulation, including a finding that tough regulation of motor vehicle emissions could produce $500 billion to $2 trillion in economic benefits over the next 32 years,” reports the Times.

* * *

“I find it troubling, not only that the Department of Defense is in flagrant violation of final orders issued by the EPA, but that DOD is now attempting to circumvent the law and Congress’ intent by calling on the Department of Justice and the Office of Management and the Budget to intervene. The EPA is the expert agency charged by Congress with enforcing our environmental laws, and the Administration needs to allow them to do their job to protect the public health and safety.”

– Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, in a statement criticizing the Pentagon for refusing to cooperate with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in cleaning up toxic and pollution-ridden sites that pose “imminent and substantial” dangers to the public health and the environment. The Department of Defense (DOD) has refused to sign agreements, known as final orders, requiring the cleanup of 12 military sites, and is resisting cleanup orders for three other badly damaged sites, asking the Justice Department to block enforcement efforts by the EPA, reports the Washington Post.

Sources: Washington Post, June 30 — New York Times, June 25.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Jan. 29, 2007 — Related Newsline story, June 13, 2005.

HARARE, Zimbabwe
In a scenario that has raised fundamental questions about ethics, human rights, and the responsibilities of the international community, Robert Mugabe took the oath of office for a sixth term as Zimbabwe’s president over the weekend. The ceremony followed an election condemned as a sham by, among other nations, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

Mugabe won the runoff election after opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew, citing violence against his supporters, Bloomberg reported. While Tsvangirai won more votes in the first round of polling, a runoff was required since neither he nor Mugabe won an outright majority of the popular vote.

Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe since the nation gained independence from Britain in 1980. Critics say his regime is thoroughly corrupt and that he has retained power by intimidation and torture.

In the immediate aftermath of the election, U.S. President George Bush called on the United Nations to impose an international trade embargo on Zimbabwe.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown also called for sanctions, reported the London Daily Mail.

Canada condemned the election, with foreign minister David Emerson saying “the government of Zimbabwe’s systematic use of violence and intimidation represents a grave violation of human rights and democratic principles,” reports the Agence France-Presse.

The stance of leaders of various African nations remains unclear. As the Christian Science Monitor reports, while many African leaders have supported Mugabe’s goals of ridding Africa of the vestiges of colonial rule, events at a meeting of African leaders convening this week in Egypt may signal a change.

“We are saying we want the African Union to send troops to Zimbabwe,” Kenya prime minister Raila Odinga said on Saturday, according to the Monitor. “The time has come for the African continent to stand firm in unity to end dictatorship.”

The call was echoed by South African archbishop Desmond Tutu, reports the Monitor, while several East African nations are calling on Mugabe to share power with opposition leaders.

At the same time, many multinational businesses are evaluating their involvement with Zimbabwe, reports the U.K. Guardian: “It’s tough doing business in Zimbabwe. Corporate executives operating in the basket-case economy have so much to worry about: 1,600,000-percent inflation, power and water outages, an unpredictable legal environment and bad politics. And for some managers, things just got harder…Multinational corporations operating in Zimbabwe are increasingly the target of human rights campaigners.”

The paper predicts that institutional investors, who “nowadays ask more questions about governance, ethics, and human rights,” also are likely to turn up the heat for reform.

Sources: Christian Science Monitor, June 30 — Bloomberg, June 29 — AFP, June 29 — Daily Mail, June 29 — Guardian, June 25.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Apr. 28 — Related Newsline story, Apr. 17 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 2, 2004 — Related Newsline story, Sep. 22, 2003 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 26, 2002.

VARIOUS DATELINES
Corruption is intensifying in two-fifths of the world’s nations, growing in tandem with poverty, political instability, and crime, according to a report from Transparency International (TI).

Graft also is causing disruption of the world’s water supply, the international watchdog claims.

Transparency International annually rates countries on perception of corruption, surveying country specialists, businesspeople, human rights monitors, and other experts. Nations are rated on a scale from 0 to 10, with the lower numbers indicating a higher rate of corruption.

Forbes reports that the corruption ratings generally follow economic fault lines, with 40 percent of the countries rated under 3 classified as low income by the World Bank.

This year’s index rates the least corrupt countries as New Zealand, Denmark, and Finland, each tied at 9.4. The nations perceived as most corrupt are Somalia and Myanmar, each with a ranking of 1.4.

The United States ranked as the fourth least corrupt, and the United Kingdom as the fifth least corrupt. Canada was number 7, according to Forbes.

In its report, Transparency International notes that more than one billion people worldwide do not have reliable access to drinkable water or sanitation, often as a result of corruption. The group predicts that by 2025 more than three billion people may be living in water-stressed countries, reports the CBC.

Graft often increases the cost of connecting a household to a water network by more than 30 percent, TI maintains. Connecting to a water utility can cost about six months of income for the poorest residents of Kenya, reports the Sunday Nation of Nairobi.

In Pakistan, nearly a quarter of the rural population pays bribes to obtain irrigation water, according to the TI report, notes the Daily Times of Lahore.

Corruption also extends to other basic services, claims TI, with one out of three families living below the poverty line in India being forced to pay a bribe in order to admit a family member to the hospital, file a police report, or enroll a child in school, reports CNN.

Sources: Lahore Daily Times, June 28 — Forbes, June 28 — Forbes, tabulation of results of survey, June 28 — CBC, June 28 — CNN, June 28 — Nairobi Sunday Nation, June 27.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 6 — Related Newsline story, Dec. 17, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Oct. 1, 2007 — Related Newsline story, July 30, 2007 — Related Newsline story, May 29, 2007 — Text of TI report.

BEIJING
Three ethics-related stories from China made news this week:

• A teacher who ran away from his post, leaving his students behind during China’s recent earthquake, not only has become the target of national scorn but is apparently the motivating factor behind a recent revision of China’s ethics rules for educators. A draft of revised ethics regulations specifically states for the first time that teachers have a moral responsibility to protect their students, according to official state media. Teacher Fan Meizhong, now nicknamed Runner Fan, ignited a firestorm of controversy when he fled his classroom and then justified his actions on his blog, according to China Daily.
• Chinese authorities say they have punished or fired more than 40 officials because of irregularities in distribution of relief supplies following the quake, the Voice of America reports. China, in the midst of large-scale anticorruption efforts, vowed it would crack down hard on those who misused relief supplies.
• Antigraft authorities in the southern Chinese city of Dongguan are mining what is turning out to be a rich vein of information: intelligence from mistresses of suspected corrupt officials. Reuters reports that mistresses are common among government officials in China and are blamed often for fueling bribery because of their financial demands on their powerful boyfriends. State media say at least 80 percent of the officials charged with corruption in Dongguan had mistresses, and those mistresses gave up important information that otherwise would have been difficult to obtain.

Sources: BBC, June 28 — Reuters, June 26 — China Daily, June 26.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 23 — Related Newsline story, June 16 — Related Newsline story, June 9 — Related Newsline Commentary, June 2 — Related Newsline story, May 27.

WASHINGTON
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) last week indicated that it may crack down on the use of props on popular television shows when those items — such as cookies, soft drinks, and sneakers — are really paid pitches.

FCC chairman Kevin Martin told the Washington Post that so-called product placement has increased in recent years, primarily as a result of viewers using digital recording devices to fast-forward through standard commercials.

The ethics issue now surfacing, reports the San Francisco Chronicle, is the recent trend among TV producers to manipulate plot lines in order to accommodate profitable prop products.

“This often subtle but always insidious blurring of the line between content and commerce is an issue not just for the creative community but for the American viewing public as well,” said Writer’s Guild member Philip Rosenthal, creator and executive producer of “Everybody Loves Raymond,” during testimony before Congress on the topic last year, according to a report from ABC News.

While there are requirements that certain product placements be disclosed on broadcast TV shows, the FCC may require more large-print notifications to be displayed for longer period. The agency also is pondering extending product-placement notification regulations to cable TV, feature films, and children’s TV, according to the industry trade journal Broadcasting and Cable.

In addition, the FCC is looking at tougher regulations that would require “video news releases” — segments prepared by companies, organizations, and the government, which are aired by TV news organizations often without disclosure — be labeled on-air, reports Broadcasting and Cable.

Sources: Washington Post, June 27 — ABC News, June 27 — San Francisco Chronicle, June 27 — Broadcasting and Cable, June 26.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 16 — Related Newsline story, May 27 — Related Newsline story, May 19 — Related Newsline story, Mar. 21, 2005 — Related Newsline story, May 24, 2004.

WASHINGTON
The United States and the European Union are close to an agreement on the complex legal and ethical issues surrounding sharing personal information for law enforcement and security.

According to a report from the New York Times, the expected agreement will allow law enforcement agencies to trade information such as credit card transactions, travel histories, and Internet browsing habits both ways across the Atlantic.

But UPI reports that a few points remain to be negotiated, including whether citizens on either continent should be able to sue other governments for misusing data.

The United States previously had sealed several bilateral deals with individual European nations, including a deal with Germany to facilitate the automatic exchange of information about suspected terrorists, reports the Berlin-based news service Deutsche Welle.

Europe generally has much more stringent restrictions on the handling of personal data than does the United States, reports the San Jose Mercury News.

Sources: Deutsche Welle, June 27 — San Jose Mercury News, June 27 — New York Times, June 27 — UPI, June 27.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 9 — Related Newsline story, June 2 — Related Newsline story, May 19 — Related Newsline story, May 5 — Related Newsline story, Apr. 28.

LONDON
The new chief executive of British defense contractor BAE Systems promised a break from the company’s troubled history, according to press reports last week.

The U.K. Guardian reports that new BAE Systems CEO Ian King, promoted from his post as the company’s chief operating officer, will assume as his first task the process of addressing a major report that recommended sweeping changes in the firm’s ethics.

Harry Woolf, a former British law lord hired by BAE to chair an independent committee, said the firm had not paid enough attention to ethics, making 23 specific recommendations for bolstering best practices and avoiding bribery, reports the International Herald Tribune.

Among other current problems, BAE faces an upcoming hearing into whether the government should resume a probe of allegations of impropriety in arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The original investigation was halted in 2006, reports the Times of London, over the government’s fears that it would endanger national security.

Also, reports the Financial Times, the U.S. Department of Justice has launched a separate investigation into whether U.S. bribery laws were breached. BAE has denied wrongdoing.

Sources: Financial Times, June 28 — Times of London, June 27 — International Herald Tribune, June 27 — Guardian, June 27.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, May 12 — Related Newsline story, Apr. 14 — Related Newsline story, July 30, 2007 — Related Newsline story, May 14, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Dec. 18, 2006.

NEW YORK
While hospital medical-ethics teams increasingly are called on to help resolve agonizing end-of-life decisions, such as mediating among family members who disagree about removing a patient from life support, there is escalating concern about the qualifications of committee members, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal.

Journal reporter Laura Landro writes: “The complex ethical issues arising from new life-prolonging medical technologies are throwing up new challenges. And hospitals face potential legal liability if patients and families feel they haven’t been properly counseled or provided with all the information they need to make decisions.”

Landro reports that several hospitals have “taken note of deficiencies in their bioethics consulting and are taking steps to fix them.”

The Department of Veterans Affairs, she writes, is asking the 153 hospitals in its system to evaluate ethics consultants for competency and provide mandatory training for consultants.

But there are critics of mandatory bioethics training and credentialing, some of whom argue that health care personnel gain adequate on-the-job training from handling ethical issues over years of practice, according to the Journal.

Source: Wall Street Journal, June 27.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 16 — Related Newsline story, Apr. 28 — Related Newsline story, Apr. 14 — Related Newsline story, Mar. 17 — Related Newsline story, Jan. 7.