Deconstructing the “UN Goodwill Ambassador” tag

After Salman Ahmed and Strings, Faakhir is the latest artist who has become a UN Goodwill Ambassador. Besides giving United Nations a much-needed facelift, how effective are UN Goodwill Ambassadors for Pakistan and the world at large?

 By Maheen Sabeeh

Behind the glorious tag

In October, Faakhir become a UN Goodwill Ambassador (UNGA). That’s the same as Angelina Jolie and of course as following in the footsteps of Strings and Salman Ahmed who are also UNGAs. Of course, Angelina Jolie with all her celebrity has addressed the biggies at the UN Headquarters and juggles UN assignments along with managing her skyrocketing Hollywood career. Yet apart from her, one doesn’t really register what other UN ambassadors are up to, which make us wonder, what is it that a United Nations Goodwill Ambassador actually does? According to UN literature, “The goal of the
program (Goodwill Ambassadors) is to allow celebrities with a demonstrated interest in issues to use their fame to draw attention to important issues. This may take the form of public appearances and talks, visits to troubled regions, which draw attention from the media, and use of their political access to advocate causes.”
That’s noble indeed. UN Goodwill Ambassadors all over the world have used their celebrity power to endorse causes. So they jet set from the glamour of the red carpet to places of real deprivation. Angelina Jolie who is often hopping all over the world, starting from Africa to Iraq to Darfur, shedding light on refugees’ problem to poverty to Nicole Kidman advocating women’s rights. But in the end, they do go back to their lives of unbelievable comfort amongst mega millions. The one criticism people often have of the United Nations is that more than alleviating poverty, the organization has created more high powered jobs with more people flying first class, living in luxury and traveling in limousines. But that could be seen as a Western criticism. The lives of our celebrities can’t hold a handle to their counterparts in the West.
Right here at home, we have Pakistani-American Salman Ahmed who is UN Goodwill Ambassador for HIV / AIDS and Strings who are UNICEF National Ambassadors for HIV and AIDS. And now pop act Faakhir is the latest addition to this list. Although it’s rather nice to see Faakhir take up a cause that is not AIDS and actually healthcare.
Since Strings have been signed up by UNICEF, they have made efforts to create awareness on the issue of HIV/AIDS via visiting rural areas and connecting with the youth, shooting documentaries and even bringing up this issue in their interviews and concerts. Similar is the case with Pakistani-American musician Salman Ahmed. Salman even made a video on HIV/AIDS ‘Al-Vida’. It was the first video on the subject that came out of the Muslim world. But other than that, Salman hasn’t really been around in Pakistan enough to do any more grass roots work.
Since the 1980s, HIV/AIDS has been a growing epidemic in Pakistan. And let’s face it, Pakistan is a conservative society where more attention is bestowed on the defence budget than health and education. Coupled with the fact that HIV/AIDS remains a taboo subject, it is important to have celebrities clearing the air on the issue. But other than creating awareness what does a UN Goodwill Ambassador achieve? Taking part in walk a cause with NGOs to raise funds once in a while, is that really enough? Okay, so UN ambassadors make people aware but what about the expensive medication that is inaccessible to people in the rural areas? What about mammoth amounts of funds that is required to cut this problem off from its roots? Being a goodwill ambassador may sound very important. And to a certain extent, it is.
Celebrities are icons and when it comes to social causes, they have a strong role to play. The big question, however, is this: how effective are they in the real world? How much do their roles amount to in the larger scheme of things.
Take a look back at true pop activism Singers have been making political statements for a while. John Lennon campaigned so long and hard against the Vietnam War that the American intelligence agencies maintained files on him. He was threatened, he was warned and he was deported, but he stuck to his guns. After this, the great tour de force to make the world a better place was Bob Geldof’s Live Aid. Held on July 13, 1985, the concert aimed to generate funds for famine relief in Ethiopia. It was so successful that it became an insituation, generating funds worth 150 million pounds when the aim had been to earn one million. It carries on and was held as recently as 2005.
This was the year that Live 8 happened. It took place in 9 countries and it was the strongest political statement celebrities have ever made in over two decades. Live 8 was the brainchild of Bob Geldof that preceded the G8 Summit that was taking place in Scotland. G8 stands is an international forum for the governments of 8 of the world’s richest and toughest countries and that includes United States, United Kingdom, Japan, Russia, Italy, Germany, France and Canada.
Now what is the connection between Live 8 and G8? Simple: Live 8 was a call to all the leaders of the g8 countries to drop debt against the poorest of nations, in particular against Africa and improve aid. You’d think that Bob Geldof and Bono would be pleased after the governments agreed? But no, these guys have followed up the promises of the governments. Since 2005 a report is formulated every year that tracks the moves of all G8 countries and points out what actions they have taken. The result led to exceptional economic growth in many African countries because of liberation from crushing debt. 20 more children are now in school and the treatment has moved from 50,000 people to 1.34 million.
None of the governments have fully fulfilled their promises but things have taken a sharp turn in the right direction. Live 8 managed to convince world leaders to increase aid from 25 billion dollars to 50 billion dollars to Africa. Now that is effective. But what it takes are celebrities, committed to a cause, advocating it, working the system to their advantage and lobbying world leaders from a platform that they have created. With the UN, it often seems more like an organization
coopting a celebrity. Think about it. What has been Angelina Jolie’s greatest role to date – what has she boosted more – the profile of refugees all over the world or the profile of the UN itself? It’s a question well worth pondering.
Making a difference versus signing up for a role Okay, so with a non-existent concert network, in terms of ticketed events, widespread piracy and the fact that playing music remains a social taboo, perhaps it’s too much to expect our musicians to Bob Geldof and Bono, but some of them are trying. Abrar ul Haq with Sahara Trust and Shehzad Roy with Zindagi Trust have proven more effective to the Pakistani masses than our UN Ambassadors. Sahara Trust came into being in
June 2000 and Abrar, through his celebrity status, has done more than raising funds via one-off concerts. In July 2003, Sahara Trust opened its major project, Sughra Shafi Medical Complex in Narowal, outside Lahore. The facility is a 200 bed hospital focusing on the mother and child care, emergency & trauma, mental health, ophthalmology, ENT, tuberculosis and infectious diseases with general medical and surgical services, providing free outdoor and indoor treatment to the deserving patients.
Then there is Shehzad Roy with Zindagi Trust. This trust essentially focuses on education. In three major regions of Pakistan, Zindagi Trust operates approximately 54 schools with roughly 2500 students. The statistics speak for themselves. Abrar and Shehzad have done so through sheer determination and raising funds through their star power for something that will prove effective for generations! Locally, Salman Ahmed and Strings have definitely had an impact. But what about a call to the government and the UN to increase funds for purposes related to health besides AIDS/HIV? No doubt it is a definite issue but so is the issue of women’s healthcare in Pakistan. According to a report by United Nations Population Fund (UNFP), Pakistan has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in the world. This is a sad testament to the problems that plague Pakistan. Why not unite like global musicians did on Live 8 platform and ask for more? What about education and other health issues like women health care that seems to be far bigger and more immediately pressing for Pakistan than AIDS? Granted we don’t have the systems, but our pop/rock stars are huge celebrities capable of pulling in a great crowd in urban centers. What they have lacked so far is the will to do it. Angelina Jolie is a UN Goodwill Ambassador who goes off to far flung countries from Ethiopia to Cambodia and adopts children. Angelina also regularly donates millions to various causes but that is predictable considering her and beau Brad Pitt are one of the world’s highest paid actors. Donating 2 million from an annual 50 million earn is nothing too impressive. And that is exactly what UN Ambassadors do. They are, after all, the politically correct heroes, unlike Bob Geldof who made history irrespective of the fact that the nations he was addressing are military powers and nuclear active! Consumer culture tick tock… Ever wonder why Pepsi-India keeps signing Shah Rukh Khan again and again to be its brand ambassador? Why Ali Azmat sells Warid and why the Pakistan Cricket Team keeps teaming up with Pepsi Pakistan? Simple: no matter how bad Pepsi is for our bones, we’ll continue to drink it because the young captain of our cricket team is endorsing it. Coca Cola enjoys more market share than Pepsi in the world. In the subcontinent Pepsi is huge because SRK is selling it to us. The point is, we’ve inherited a world consumed by consumer culture where branding is the name of the game. United Nations is an international organization. But it is not free and fair. In 1994, the Rwandan Genocide drew massive criticism for the United Nations. The genocide that was carried out by two extremist groups, caused 500,000 lives. According to one death toll, the number was between 800,000 and 1,000,000. Throughout UN did nothing. They sat and watched. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’ son Kojo Annan was involved in the Oil-for-Food programme scandal, which was formulated by the Clinton government. It meant that Iraq could sell oil to the world in return for food and other humanitarian needs in the face of severe sanctions. Kojo boy was eating up the money and later admitted to it after a probe was reluctantly agreed upon. Then there’s Guantanamo Bay and America has broken international laws. American media has lashed out against the Bush administration over and over. The UN has even stated it but no major efforts have really pulled through by UN. And generally, UN is the first to throw sanctions. But in the case of America, little efforts have been made to stop treating prisoners in inhumane manner. These are some examples of how UN is not fair game. In such a state, getting famous celebrities works perfectly for them. Shakira, Nicole Kidman, Strings, Salman Ahmed, Faakhir, Sarah Jessica Parker, Angelina Jolie, Liv Tyler, Lucy Liu, Jackie Chan and Amitabh Bachchan are some of their high profile ambassadors, endorsing various causes attached to the UN. Isn’t that oh-so-impressive? It works for the UN because when such high profile celebrities are attached to them, public opinion is bound to change. At the very least, it gives them some credibility. Otherwise why would these major names associate themselves with the UN? And to give these stars credit, almost all of them have spoken out against causes, made appearances, discussed issues in media spotlight and those issues are important to the world. But individually or collectively, not one of them has held the impact that Live 8 stands proud of. Neither Salman Ahmed nor Strings have made efforts as strong and powerful as Abrar ul Haq or Shehzad Roy. They may have taken one step forward but in order to make a serious effort, they need to speak out more often and regularly and that too without any fear. So if you were wondering what a UN Ambassador does, we’ve got the answer – he/she paints a nice picture of UN and creates “awareness” while being politically correct!

No Smoking**

*ing: John Abraham, Paresh Rawal, Ayesha Takia and Ranbir Shorey

Directed by Anurag Kashyap

The promos of No Smoking promise that this is not an average Bollywood film. It sees John Abraham in a new avtar and it is shot in the remotest of all places, Siberia as well as Kazakistan. It sees a new pair onscreen for the first time – the cute Ayesha Takia with hot rod John Abraham. Throw the always dependable Paresh Rawal in the mix and there is a film that looks enticing enough to be seen as soon as it is released.

But all that advertising and the item song, ‘Phook De’ between John and beauty Bipasha Basu do not save this film. Nothing does.
No Smoking that attempts at making statements but fails miserably, like most films, due to poor execution.

The film shows Kay, played to perfection by John Abraham, as a chain smoker. He smokes in the bathroom, bedroom, elevator and everywhere else in between. His smoking is the biggest bone of contention between him and his wife Anjali (Ayesha Takia).

A run-in with a once-smoker friend, Abbas (Ranvir Shorey) and fragile relations with his wife leads him to Prakash Guru Ghantal Baba (Paresh Rawal) who runs a rehabilitation centre. And thus begins the strange, inexplicable story…

Cigarette is a metaphor for free will and self-control. Ghantal Baba’s rehabilitation center is a take on Hitler and Nazi camps. The surveillance that Kay goes through after entering the facility is a representation of how life in the modern world is always under the eye of someone and no one is safe.

These are intelligent statements to make. The problem is that symbolism alone can’t make a film. For instance, as soon as Kay enters the rehab facility, he is told that if he smokes again, his fingers will be chopped off.

The rehab is located in an area that would scare the boldest of men because it reflects dark danger from afar. Why does an intelligent, educated man like Kay go there to begin with? There is a fine line between curiosity and stupidity.

Furthermore, Kay travels half way across the world and Ghantal Baba knows that he lit a cigarette. Without ever meeting him, Ghantal Baba has shots of him trying out his first cigarette in a bathroom with his friend Abbas. Ghantal Baba is not the head of CIA or NSA. It doesn’t connect. Should one choose to get past these little loopholes that keep on coming throughout, you just might like the movie.

The whole film is a chase between smoking and avoiding Ghantal Baba. Fingers chopped off by Ghantal Baba magically join back the hand without so much as a scar. Is it magic? Nothing connects here. The entire plot is lost because you just don’t get past the powers of Ghantal Baba. At the end one wonders if he exists at all or is it a metaphor.

Often films tend to blur the line between reality and illusions. The Butterfly Effect did it to perfection as did Prozac Nation. It makes the film worth while and offbeat. An important film that reflects the big brother role of all intelligence agencies came with the movie, Enemy of the State. Anti-Trust dealt with the idea of corporate manipulation of intelligence and that too was filled with nuances taking cue from everything starting from Hitler to modern day greed in giant corporations.

All those films symbolized the modern day era but never were they as bizarre as No Smoking.

Not surprisingly, this film has been slammed by most Indian critics and is another dud for John Abraham who hasn’t had a hit since Taxi Number 9211 that came out in early 2006. The fact that the role of Kay is tailor-made for John and he pulls it off with a natural ease still doesn’t help the film at all.

Another knockout performance comes from Paresh Rawal as Ghantal Baba. It is a refreshing new role for him after a long stint he has had with comedy. Ghantal Baba is merciless and bordering on insanity. Paresh plays it with finesse that only an actor as classy as him can play.

Ayesha Takia and Ranvir Shorey give decent performances in supporting roles. But Ranvir Shorey is definitely an actor who deserves meatier roles.

That said, the funky and offbeat music, slickly shot dreams (if one can call them that), fabulous performances and the quirky humour just makes it bearable to drag one to the end.

There are two sides to Indian cinema. One is the glossy and glamourous one and the other is realistic and meaningful. That is the cinema that makes film on Gujrat riots but never gets enough publicity.

But slowly even the glamourous Bollywood is taking steps towards more than masala and comedy. It is going towards social messages even if there are a handful films and filmmakers attempting it.

Lage Raho Munnabhai brought the ideas of the forgotten hero Gandhi to the youth, Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna shows a different side of infidelity – conservatives can cheat too and not just the outgoing, party lovin’ liberals. Chak De India was about women, the sporting spirit and a dying form of sport in the subcontinent, and there is the upcoming Aamir Khan flick Taare Zameen Par about autistic children.

No Smoking joins this list. It tells you about the harmful impact of smoking. No doubt the message comes across and if you are a smoker, you’ll be a tad alarmed… but that is only if you have enough patience to see the whole movie.

Symbolism will only take you so far. In the end, an intelligent execution was needed especially if a story is as convoluted as this and here Anurag Kashyap falls big time. Only watch this film if you’re a die-hard John Abraham fan or if you’re in the mood to waste a few hours.

– Maheen Sabeeh

*YUCK
**WHATEVER
***GOOD
****SUPER
*****AWESOME