A new mobile technology is helping battle HIV in Biwindi, Uganda where most people walked days through the tough terrain to get medical care. Photo: youngrobv (Rob & Ale)

Could you imagine having to walk a full day to get medical care, and then wait weeks to learn your test results? Well, that was the reality for people in Biwindi, Uganda until just a few months ago, the BBC reported earlier this month. Now, new technology is bringing medical testing to people living in the middle of Uganda's forests.

This new technology is called the PointCare NOW machine. It's a portable blood-testing device that analyzes what's wrong with you within 10 minutes. It's also the first portable machine that can diagnose HIV within minutes. Developed by PointCare, a U.S.-based company specializing in diagnostic equipment for developing countries, the machine easily fits in the trunk of most vehicles.

PointCare's founders Petra Krauledat and Peter Hansen came up with the idea for a portable, durable HIV-testing device on a trip to southern Africa a few years ago. Krauledat and Hansen say the battery-powered machine has a 180,000-day lifetime.

PointCare is piloting the technology in rural Uganda, where the need for fast and comprehensive medical care is obvious. One in 20 Ugandans is infected with HIV, according to Avert, an international AIDS charity. One in 12,500 people in Uganda is a doctor. And 70 percent of the population lives in rural areas.

Dr. Williams, a physician from England that opened a small hospital in Uganda, sings the praises of the PointCare NOW machine. He tells the BBC:

"I started a testing centre in the hospital, then the mobile testing services, and then, once we had access to drugs, developed a treatment program. Now our death rates from HIV are very low. We're able to diagnose it early, manage it early and keep people living with HIV fit and well. Over a reasonably short period of time, we've been able to change HIV from being a death sentence into something that people can live with and lead productive lives."

ATMs Abiding by Islam. Photo: トリプ tripu (flickr)

In Iraq and need cash? It's not easy. All banking has to be done in person at the branch where you hold an account, your salary is paid in cash — not check — and a Visa card won't buy you anything at the market. It's almost not worth graduating from your childhood piggy bank.

But this month, people in Baghdad can begin to say goodbye to this antiquated and unwieldy system— thanks to banking monolith Rafidain's introduction of Iraq's first electronic clearing system.

This is good news for Iraqis because now they can have their paychecks directly deposited into their accounts instead of stashing their money at home. By September they will be able to choose from ATMs at 147 branch banks scattered around Baghdad — and count on them to be functional.

This step towards a modern banking system could help bring prosperity to Iraq. As the Economist noted optimistically, "Iraq’s overdue conversion to fully electronic banking should help woo investors from abroad and pep up the economy as a whole."

But some are worried this ATM hustle-and-bustle means a transition to modern finance that Iraq isn't ready to support. First, the use of ATMs and electronic banking may lead to other aspects of Western banking, such as loans and credit cards. This could prove problematic because Shariah (Islamic law) prohibits credit and "non-benevolent" loans that charge interest.

This isn't a new obstacle: Other developing Muslim countries have faced the transition to a modern financial system while still following Islamic banking standards. This form of finance is based on a common prudence among banks, lenders and individuals— because they all share the risks of investment, and divide any profits. It has already been successful in many Muslim countries — ranging from the strict model followed in Qatar, to a more relaxed one, as in Malaysia. It is even being implemented in secular countries with a Muslim minority population like the U.K., and in Western financial hubs like Switzerland.

What's more, some say the Islamic model is more insulated from the recent global financial crisis than conventional banking systems. This is because the theological framework of the system prevents excessive risk-taking — such as the use of unstable financial instruments like derivatives. Majed al-Refaie, the head of an Islamic investment bank in Bahrain, explains in the Washington Post:

The beauty of Islamic banking and the reason it can be used as a replacement for the current market is that you only promise what you own. Islamic banks are not protected if the economy goes down — they suffer — but you don't lose your shirt.

For these reasons, some say Iraq's potential for financial growth through Islamic banking is high, provided the country is stable enough to support stimulation.

But even Islamic finance is not recession-proof, as economists noted at the recent Islamic Banking and Finance Summit in Dubai. This model also requires stability and responsible management for success — which Iraq may not be ready for. Islamic finance may not be the best answer for impoverished Iraqis either: It is more difficult for poor people to get loans under this system than conventional ones. This is because borrowers need a higher income and more collateral to meet the stringent lending rules set by Islamic banks.

Opting to go the conventional banking route, on the other hand, could create another pitfall for Iraqis: credit cards — and more specifically, credit card debt. Ballooning credit card debt can easily lead to the entrenchment of poverty, not its alleviation.

The potential downfalls of either financial system — Islamic or conventional — could pose problems as Iraq modernizes. But for now, at least Iraqis can finally ditch those piggy banks and go to a working ATM instead.

Earlier this month, Obama began taking the first small yet significant steps to implementing a different relationship with the island by signing new measures into law. These new measures will allow Cuban-Americans to send more money to family members and travel more freely between the U.S. and Cuba.

Since 2004, travel to Cuba under the Bush administration was limited to once every three years for Cuban-Americans, with visits limited to only nuclear family and no longer than 14 days. Remittances were also only allowed to be sent to nuclear family and limited to $300 every three months.

In contrast, the new measures under Obama remove all restrictions on the amount and frequency of remittances and travel to the island. The changes also make it easier for telecommunications companies to do business in Cuba, which would allow quicker and easier access to the Internet for Cubans.

Cuba has been receptive to these changes. Raúl Castro has unexpectedly and publicly declared that Cuba is ready to "discuss everything" with the U.S. There are still no official plans for future talks between the two countries. Until then, the question remains of whether or not these measures will help to significantly alleviate poverty in Cuba and improve people's standard of living.

In Cuba, the mood among citizens ranges from cautiously optimistic to skeptical. An article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch profiles Cuban citizens like Ivan, a computer programmer, who expresses hope that Obama will bring about a much needed change. "Obama, to Cuban people, is our, how do you say, our hope," Ivan says. "We believe he wants to lift restrictions on Cuba. To Cubans, he is a very good presidente."

For the most part, the Cuban-American community has reacted with enthusiasm to the new measures. The Cuban American National Foundation, the leading organization for Cuban exiles in Miami, has expressed its support for a new course in U.S.-Cuba policy, calling for "a break from the past" that would "chart a new direction."

In Little Havana, a strongly Cuban neighborhood in Miami, residents seemed to welcome change in U.S.-Cuba relations. "It is stupid to have no relationship with Cuba," said a middle-aged man, identifying himself only as Alex. "It didn't work for 50 years... The way the system will change is by having a relationship."

In a country where the average salary is $20 a month, the ability to receive money from relatives abroad is likely to become an economic lifeline for thousands of people. However, with U.S. economic sanctions still in place, BBC correspondent Michael Voss thinks the remittances will have little effect:

It will give more spending power, it will allow people to buy mobile phones, possibly, you know, have a slightly better standard of living. But in terms of kick-starting the economy, I don’t think we’re going to see that at all.

Nevertheless, with Cuba's poverty level as one of the lowest in the developing world, even small improvements could make a noticeable difference. With the Obama administration now planning informal meetings with Cuban diplomats, hopefully any future change in U.S.-Cuban policy will make the Cuban people its central focus.

Pirates stock up on goats, cigarettes and other supplies when they return to shore. Photo: CharlesFred (flickr)

Piracy along Somalia's coastline represents a very lucrative business — as the pirates collectively earned an estimated $150 million in 2008 — but what is piracy's effect on Somalia's economy?

Somalia's economy is in a fairly grim state. An estimated 73.4 percent of the country's population lives in general or extreme poverty and the average Somali earns only $600 per year, making Somalia one of the poorest countries in the world.

Fishing used to be one of Somalia's most profitable industries. But as piracy has increased — there were roughly 100 attacks in 2008 — the New York Times reports that foreign ships have become reluctant to brave the waters surrounding Somalia's coastline to buy fish and other exports. The amount of goods coming into Somalia, including aid, has also declined.

Pirate money has also skewed prices. In the town of Garowe, near Somalia's central coast, resident Mohamed Hassan told the BBC that "piracy has a negative impact on several aspects of our life," including a financial one:

They have made life more expensive for ordinary people because they "pump huge amounts of U.S. dollars" into the local economy which results in fluctuations in the exchange rate.

On the other hand, pirates are putting wealth back into the Somali economy — an estimated $1 million to $2 million is made from each captured ship.

Whenever a ship is seized, pirates stock up on sheep, goats, water, fuel, rice, spaghetti, milk, and cigarettes in towns up and down Somalia’s coast. Sugule Dahir, a local shop owner in Eyl, a town just off the coast in central eastern Somalia, feels the incoming money has had a positive impact. He tells ABC News that, because of the pirates, more businesses are beginning to emerge and the general public seems better off. "There are more shops and business is booming because of the piracy. Internet cafes and telephone shops have opened, and people are just happier than before."

Government officials are getting a fair sum of pirate money as well. By allowing the pirates to work in controlled areas, the regional Puntland Government is given shares of the pirate's earnings. About 30 percent of the collected ransom goes directly to government officials, Farah Ismael Eid, a captured pirate, tells Time.

Some Somalis are worse off because of piracy. But it's clear that the pirates do spread the wealth.

For many local business owners in Syria, they hope that the economic transition will improve business and living standards. Photo: hazy jenius (flickr)

Syria’s economy is undergoing some real changes. Once known for its socialist policies, Syria is now attempting to spur economic growth through market-based reforms. While such growth is expected to boost Syria's income, experts differ on how, or if, they believe money will reach the poor.

The reforms include cutting back on government subsides, expanding the private sector, and attracting foreign investment. A World Bank report states that between 2006 and 2007, Syria's foreign direct investment nearly doubled — reaching $885 million by the end of 2007. What's more, foreign investment is expected to expand following the opening of the Damascus Securities Exchange — Syria's new stock exchange.

Robert F. Worth of the New York Times says Syria is being forced into a new economic model.

Socialist self-sufficiency is no longer an option for Syria. The oil reserves that once provided the mainstay of state revenues are running out. Exports have tumbled in recent months, as have remittances sent home by Syrian expatriate workers.

In the mid 1990's Syria's oil output hovered around 600,000 barrels per day. Today, output has shrank to 350,000 barrels a day — a decline of nearly 60 percent.

But, as Syria transitions, critics question whether these changes will actually reduce poverty.

“In Syria the growth rate is a strong 6 percent, but the question is: who gets this growth?" says Safi Shujaa, director of the Syrian Economic Center. "According to some economists, 70 percent of gross domestic product goes to only 30 percent of Syrians.” Shujaa thinks that cut backs on government subsidies — which range from agricultural products to fuel, water, and electricity — have pushed many economically vulnerable Syrians directly into poverty. On the other hand, the subsides have simply gotten too expensive for Syria to bear along with its mounting debt. In 2008, subsidy costs for the government reached $7 billion.

Syria's economic transition comes at an interesting time. With talk of a new and improved relationship between Syria and the United States — and possibly Israel — Syria's economic strategy may be aided by improving political relationships with the west.

"If relations will improve," says Mohammed Salem, a Damascus perfume-shop owner, "the economy will improve too."

Are the people who've lived on this planet the longest the best-suited to protect it?

Liza O’Reilly thinks so.

She's a researcher with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy who spent last week in Alaska at a climate change summit with native peoples around the world. Participants from Borneo, Mexico, Kenya, Nepal traveled to attend … like the rest of us, they all recognize the earth is in peril. What they're saying is, "Let us help save it."

O'Reilly says it makes sense to take them up on their offer, in part because many indigenous groups are themselves affected by climate change. Not far from the conference site, even, the village of Newtok has lost 320 residents because of swollen rivers and melting permafrost.

Another reason for inviting indigenous peoples to the table is their strong spiritual connection with the earth, O'Reilly says. Because of this, they're more likely to come up with solutions that are sustainable over the long haul.

This very timeless wisdom recognizes [Indigenous peoples’] capacity to lead "developed" Nation/states, corporations, and other failed institutions and models out of the dark, wiping the soot out of their infirmed and capitalistic eyes to look at the Indigenous-based model of micro-energy, developed and controlled by the people.

So what would a climate change solution engineered by indigenous peoples look like? Well, it wouldn't involve massive-scale energy solutions like big dams and new nuclear power plants. Instead, it would curb the production of new fossil fuels and call on the various UN agencies to work with indigenous peoples to "address climate change impacts in their strategies and action plans."

Check out O'Reilly's posts on the Indigenous Peoples' Global Summit on Climate Change.

It's been six years since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In recent months, stability has improved, but the gains will unravel unless progress is made toward strengthening the economy.

The financial crisis and lower-than-expected oil prices have changed things considerably for the Iraqi government. Last month, parliament made big cuts, revising the budget from $79 million to just $58.9 billion.

A major portion of this budget was supposed to be allocated toward rebuilding the infrastructure that has been devastated during the past six years. The New York Times reports that infrastructure projects are being put off, including the cancellation of a $600 million General Electric contract to lay electric cables and upgrade switches to allow the grid to increase electricity output.

Unemployment is also a big issue. A UN report released in February shows that unemployment is estimated to be around 18 percent. An additional 10 percent are underemployed, working part-time.

Adding to the frustration of locals, the government hasn't been able to meet basic needs like providing safe drinking water, electricity and education. The Iraqi Environment Ministry estimates that 36 percent of Baghdad's drinking water is unsafe as raw sewage, which still runs down Baghdad streets, mixes with drinking water. Furthermore, the demand for electricity still exceeds supply.

People expected things to go differently. Just last year, the Iraqi government was flush with cash. Record high oil prices prompted the government to offer big raises to employees. Now the shortfall has left the Iraqi government struggling to pay salaries for government employees and hundreds of thousands of new security troops.

But a shaky Iraq could force the Obama administration to adjust their plans. The Times points out that unless the economy strengthens and security gains continue, President Obama's timetable to withdraw troops could be delayed.

A stable Iraqi economy and an adequately prepared Iraqi military are crucial if American combat troops are to withdraw by August 2010, as aides to President Obama suggested this week. And illustrating just how closely the two countries are still intertwined, a faltering Iraq could also complicate Mr. Obama’s plan to lower the American deficit with billions in savings that would come from such a withdrawal.

Although the progress on the security front has given in a sense of normalcy, but the financial crisis has made it even more urgent for the government to develop a long-term strategy for stabilizing the economy, creating jobs, attracting foreign investment, which will ultimately mean prosperity for the Iraqi people.

According to Hazim al-Nuaimi, a political analyst in Baghdad, “The only thing that has changed is that now there's a light at the end of the tunnel. But it seems six years is not enough to be able to reach that light.”

A young girl walking on the outskirts of Kibera, the largest slum in Africa. Photo: subcomandanta (flickr)

More than $50 billion of foreign aid is given to African countries every year to address poverty on the continent. Although this may seem generous, and to some a solid strategy to treat Africa’s ailments, Dambisa Moyo — a Zambian economist with a background that includes Harvard, Oxford and Goldman Sachs — says just the opposite.

In her new book, Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How There is Another Way for Africa, Moyo claims that foreign aid has been "an unmitigated political, economic and humanitarian disaster.”

In a recent op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, Moyo writes that although she isn’t completely against humanitarian aid, she doesn’t believe "charity-based aid" can provide long-term sustainable development for Africa. Her biggest issue is with “government-to-government aid,” and funds from large monetary institutions like the World Bank. Moyo says the $60 trillion of this aid that's been given in the past 60 years is not working, evident from the fact that the number of Africans who live on less than $1 day has doubled in the last 20 years. And most foreign government aid, she argues, has been pocketed by corrupt politicians.

Trade, foreign investments and microfinance opportunities can provide a better future for Africans, Moyo said in an interview with the New York Times.

As expected, Dambisa Moyo’s claims have come under fire. In an interview with Newsweek, ONE Campaign co-founder Jamie Drummond says “Dead Aid” is “a poor polemic, with nothing new of substance, filled with anecdotal micro examples which ignore mountains of evidence." Madeleine Bunting from the Guardian calls Moyo’s claims “poorly argued” with “frequent pre-emptory glib conclusions.”

I wanted to get another perspective on Dambisa Moyo's assertions regarding the effects of foreign aid on Africa. So I asked Laura Miller — Program Officer for Central Africa at Mercy Corps — to respond to some of Moyo's claims based on her experience in the international-aid business, including stints in the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.