The Foreign Service Journal, October 2013

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | OCTOBER 2013 15 Post WorldViews blogger Max Fisher praises Azuiked’s depiction as “two quick, funny, easy-to-understand min- utes.” (Think of it as laughing to keep from crying.) Meanwhile, Mugabe has wasted no time in pronouncing his reputation fully rehabilitated. As we reported in the July-August 2012 edition of Cyber- notes (as this department was then known), last year the United Nations’ World Tourism Organization appointed Mugabe and Zambian President Michael Sata, a political ally, as “Global Leaders for Tourism”—a position they will hold until 2015. Shortly after Mugabe’s victory, the two leaders co-hosted a meeting of the UNWTO General Assembly. Critics were quick to note the irony of the appointment: Mugabe remains subject to comprehensive European and American sanctions that include travel bans, making it rather difficult for him to promote tourism effectively. In an Aug. 23 press release the nongovernmental human rights group U.N. Watch expressed “grave disap- pointment” at the U.N. decision to go ahead with the global tourism summit, calling it a “disgraceful show of support — and a terribly-timed award of false legitimacy—for a brutal, corrupt and authoritarian regime. “Amid reports of election-rigging and ongoing human rights abuses, Zimba- bwe is the last country that should be legitimized by a U.N. summit of any kind,” commented U.N. Watch executive director Hillel Neuer. According to local media, Neuer added, the Mugabe regime wants to use the event t o rebrand in the post-election period. “ It’s outrageous that the U.N. is allowing itself to be used like this as a propaganda tool,” complained Neuer. The NGO welcomed reports that Britain and Canada will not be sending any representatives to the event. But despite calls for other countries to stay away, more than 500 diplomats and dignitaries from 150 countries attended the UNWTO’s 20th General Assembly at Victoria Falls. Human rights activist Ephraim Tapa told SW Radio Africa on Aug. 20 that the U.N.’s decision to allow Zimbabwe to host the meeting is “hypocrisy at its worst.” Tapa stated: “We would have thought this was a good opportunity for the U.N. to remain true to its values of freedom, of human rights, the rule of law and democracy, which in Zimba- bwe were sold short.” He added: “If this is the stance of the United Nations, then where else can Zimbabweans turn to (for human rights protection)?” — Steven Alan Honley, Editor Gamesmanship A lexandra Petri, who writes the Washing- ton Post ’s humor blog, ComPost, devoted an Aug. 4 column to a riff on board games. Spe- cifically, she expresses mock consternation at the announcement that Hasbro, which makes Monopoly, has come out with a new version, Monopoly Empire, that players can theoretically finish in just half an hour. As Petri observes, “Is speed really worth it? If speed is all that we crave, we’ll ruin everything! And if Hasbro is doing this to Monopoly, what are game- makers going to do to the rest of the board-game world? What next?” Though Petri doesn’t include Diplomacy in her list of answers to that anxious question, here are a couple of other board games whose “new and improved” versions might interest Jour- nal readers. RISK: Instead of invading territories to take control of the board, the new Risk requires United Nations approval from other players. Kamchatka’s permanent seat on the Risk Security Council makes any movement difficult. The highlight of the game is when you all send a single cavalryman to observe an election in Irkutsk, and it goes pretty okay. (This is not shorter than regular Risk, but it is too boring to play for more than 20 minutes at a time.) BATTLESHIP: The new edition includes a nuclear option—a button to sink all of the other player’s ships at once. And destroy the entire board. Pro: Game ends in a single second! Con: Have to buy a new game board; rest of toy box con- taminated with fallout. Petri offers an alternative version of the game that is even quicker, in which the goal is to close the Strait of Hormuz instead of nuk- ing the board. Then she adds, “That’s crazy ! Who would close the Strait of Hormuz?” — Steven Alan Honley, Editor n