radiofree.asia

Category: Afghanistan

  • Plea deal ends personal ordeal for Julian Assange, but still media freedom concerns, says MEAA

    Pacific Media Watch

    The reported plea bargain between WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and the United States government brings to a close one of the darkest periods in the history of media freedom, says the union for Australian journalists.

    While the details of the deal are still to be confirmed, MEAA welcomed the release of Assange, a Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance member, after five years of relentless campaigning by journalists, unions, and press freedom advocates around the world.

    MEAA remains concerned what the deal will mean for media freedom around the world.

    The work of WikiLeaks at the centre of this case — which exposed war crimes and other wrongdoing by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan — was strong, public interest journalism.

    MEAA fears the deal will embolden the US and other governments around the world to continue to pursue and prosecute journalists who disclose to the public information they would rather keep suppressed.

    MEAA media federal president Karen Percy welcomed the news that Julian Assange has already been released from Belmarsh Prison, where he has been held as his case has wound its way through UK courts.

    “We wish Julian all the best as he is reunited with his wife, young sons and other relatives who have fought tirelessly for his freedom,” she said.

    ‘Relentless battle against this injustice’
    “We commend Julian for his courage over this long period, and his legal team and supporters for their relentless battle against this injustice.

    “We’ve been extremely concerned about the impact on his physical and mental wellbeing during Julian’s long period of imprisonment and respect the decision to bring an end to the ordeal for all involved.

    “The deal reported today does not in any way mean that the struggle for media freedom has been futile; quite the opposite, it places governments on notice that a global movement will be mobilised whenever they blatantly threaten journalism in a similar way.

    Percy said the espionage charges laid against Assange were a “grotesque overreach by the US government” and an attack on journalism and media freedom.

    “The pursuit of Julian Assange has set a dangerous precedent that will have a potential chilling effect on investigative journalism,” she said.

    “The stories published by WikiLeaks and other outlets more than a decade ago were clearly in the public interest. The charges by the US sought to curtail free speech, criminalise journalism and send a clear message to future whistleblowers and publishers that they too will be punished.”

    Percy said was clearly in the public interest and it had “always been an outrage” that the US government sought to prosecute him for espionage for reporting that was published in collaboration with some of the world’s leading media organisations.

    Julian Assange has been an MEAA member since 2007 and in 2011 WikiLeaks won the Outstanding Contribution to Journalism Walkley award, one of Australia’s most coveted journalism awards.

    WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange boarding his flight
    WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange boarding his flight at Stansted airport on the first stage of his journey to Guam. Image: WikiLeaks

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Does Israel really want to open a two-front war by attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon?

    ANALYSIS: By Ian Parmeter, Australian National University

    Among the many sayings attributed to Winston Churchill is, “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

    This sentiment seems appropriate as Israel potentially appears ready to embark on a war against the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said this week a decision on an all-out war against Hezbollah was “coming soon” and that senior commanders of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had signed off on a plan for the operation.

    This threat comes despite the fact Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza is far from over. Israel has still not achieved the two primary objectives Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put forth at the start of the conflict:

    • the destruction of Hamas as a military and governing entity in Gaza
    • the freeing of the remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas (about 80 believed to still be alive, along with the remains of about 40 believed to be dead).

    Why Hezbollah is attacking Israel now
    Israel has cogent reasons for wanting to eliminate the threat from Hezbollah. Hezbollah has been launching Iranian-supplied missiles, rockets and drones across the border into northern Israel since the Gaza war began on October 8.

    Its stated purpose is to support Hamas by distracting the IDF from its Gaza operation.

    Hezbollah’s attacks have been relatively circumscribed – confined so far to northern Israel. But they have led to the displacement of some 60,000 residents from the border area. These people are understandably fed up and demanding Netanyahu’s government takes action to force Hezbollah to withdraw from the border.

    This anger has been augmented this week by Hezbollah publicising video footage of military and civilian sites in the northern Israeli city of Haifa, which had been taken by a low-flying surveillance drone.

    The implication: Hezbollah was scoping the region for new targets. Haifa, a city of nearly 300,000, has not yet been subject to Hezbollah attacks.

    The most far-right members of Netanyahu’s cabinet, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, have openly called for Israel to invade southern Lebanon. Even without this pressure, Netanyahu has ample reason to want to neutralise the Hezbollah threat because residents of northern Israel are strong supporters of his Likud party.

    US and Iranian interests in a broader conflict
    The United States is obviously concerned about the risk Israel will open a second front in its conflicts. As such, President Joe Biden has sent an envoy, Amos Hochstein, to Israel and Lebanon to try to reduce tensions on both sides.

    In Lebanon, he cannot publicly deal directly with the Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, because the group is on the US list of global terrorist organisations. Instead, he met the long-serving speaker of the Lebanese parliament, Nabih Berri, who as a fellow Shia is able to talk with Nasrallah.

    But Hezbollah answers to Iran — its main backer in the region. And it’s doubtful if any Lebanese leader can persuade it to desist from action approved by Iran.

    Iran’s interests in the potential for an Israel-Hezbollah war at this time are mixed. It would obviously be glad to see Israel under military pressure on two fronts. But Iranian leaders see Hezbollah as insurance against an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities.

    Hezbollah has an estimated 150,000 missiles and rockets, including some that could reach deep into Israel. So far, Iran seems to want Hezbollah to hold back from a major escalation with Israel, which could deplete most of that arsenal.

    That said, although Israel’s Iron Dome defensive shield has been remarkably successful in neutralising the rocket threat from Gaza, it might not be as effective against a large-scale barrage of more sophisticated missiles.

    Israel needed help from the US, Britain, France and Jordan in countering a direct attack from Iran in April that involved some 150 missiles and 170 drones.


    Israel and Hezbollah conflict: escalating cross-border tensions. Video: ABC News

    Lessons from previous Israeli interventions in Lebanon
    The other factor – especially for wiser heads mindful of history – is the country’s previous interventions in Lebanon have been far from cost-free.

    Israel’s problems with Lebanon started when the late King Hussein of Jordan forced the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), then led by Yasser Arafat, to relocate to Lebanon in 1970. He did that because the PLO had been using Jordan as a base for operations against Israel after the 1967 war, provoking Israeli retaliation.

    From the early 1970s, the PLO formed a state within a state in Lebanon. It largely acted independently from the perennially weak Lebanese government, which was divided on sectarian grounds, and in 1975, collapsed into a prolonged civil war.

    The PLO used southern Lebanon to launch attacks against Israel, leading Israel to launch a limited invasion of its northern neighbour in 1978, driving Palestinian militia groups north of the Litani River.

    That invasion was only partially successful. Militants soon moved back towards the border and renewed their attacks on northern Israel. In 1982, then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin decided to remove the PLO entirely from Lebanon, launching a major invasion of Lebanon all the way to Beirut. This eventually forced the PLO leadership and the bulk of its fighters to relocate to Tunisia.

    Despite this success, the two Israeli invasions had the unintended consequence of radicalising the until-then quiescent Shia population of southern Lebanon.

    That enabled Iran, in its early post-revolutionary phase under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, to work with Shia clerics in Lebanon to establish Hezbollah (Party of God in Arabic), which became a greater threat to Israel than the PLO had ever been.

    Bolstered by Iranian support, Hezbollah has become stronger over the years, becoming a force in Lebanese politics and regularly firing missiles into Israel.

    In 2006, Hezbollah was able to block an IDF advance into southern Lebanon aimed at rescuing two Israeli soldiers Hezbollah had captured. The outcome was essentially a draw, and the two soldiers remained in captivity until their bodies were exchanged for Lebanese prisoners in 2008.

    Many Arab observers at the time judged that by surviving an asymmetrical conflict, Hezbollah had emerged with a political and military victory.

    For a while during and after that conflict, Nasrallah was one of the most popular regional leaders, despite the fact he was loathed by rulers of conservative Sunni Arab states such as Saudi Arabia.

    Will history repeat itself?
    This is the background to discussions in Israel about launching a war against Hezbollah. And it demonstrates how the quote from Churchill is relevant.

    Most military experts would caution against choosing to fight a war on two fronts. Former US President George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq in 2003 when the war in Afghanistan had not concluded. The outcome was hugely costly for the US military and disastrous for both countries.

    The 19th century American writer Mark Twain is reported to have said that history does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes. Will Israel’s leaders listen to the echoes of the past?The Conversation

    Dr Ian Parmeter, research scholar, Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies, Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Call for Alarm

    The unique post-World War II economic and military power of the United States prevented military and foreign policy errors from becoming overpowering disasters. Military adventures in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq upended America’s political system and wounded its psyche. Other than the 2001 attacks on American soil, physical destruction was foreign, appearing as images on television screens. Oil price rises, inflation, increasing debt to finance military costs, and social upheavals temporarily perturbed the US socioeconomic system. A powerful America overcame the impediments and continually extended its power until the Asian Tigers, a rejuvenated China, and progressive Latin leaders appeared on the global stage. America’s hegemony declined and the decline became confirmed by the Russian/Ukraine conflagration, Israel’s invasion of Gaza, and a subsequent attack on protesting students at the UCLA campus. No nation with unique power and in control of that power would have permitted these horrific happenings.

    The US is sliding into a mediocre existence. Heard that before? Hear it again. Four words describe those who have brought the United States to a sorrowful state ─ treachery, treason, tyranny, and traitor ─ harsh words that will be met with smiles, sneers, and derisions. They are correct words and backed by a long list of treacherous, treasonous, tyrannical, and traitorous actors in the American public. The description of the “tyranny in America” is not a repetitious overkill; it is a necessary refrain that punctuates the alarm ─ America is led by pseudo patriots who have betrayed its ideals and Americans must regain its inspiring freedom, liberty-loving, and peaceful aspirations.

    Domestic treachery, treason, tyranny, and traitors

    Running for president of the USA are two traitors ─ Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

    Donald Trump is accused of provoking and aiding the Jan 6, 2021 attack on the US capitol and pursuing an insurrection against the US government. Treason.

    Donald Trump is accused of keeping US government top secrets in his home in locations where they could be revealed to others. He is guilty of violating US espionage laws. Treason.

    Donald Trump solicits Evangelical vote and financial assistance by supporting Israel, a foreign nation, in its genocide of the Palestinian people. Treachery.

    Joe Biden said, “Because even where we have some differences, my commitment to Israel, as you know, is ironclad. I think without Israel, there’s not a Jew in the world who’s secure. I think Israel is essential.” Besides the nonsensical statement that condemns Biden for not knowing that Israel is the only country in the world where Jews have continually suffered from fatal attacks, claim insecurity that seeks security, and exhibit excessive prejudice toward one another — Ashkenazi against Mizrahi, both against Yemeni and Falasha, and secular against ultra-orthodox — Biden admits he has failed to protect the most well-off Americans ─ Jewish citizens (from what??). Treachery.

    By having said, “My commitment to Israel, as you know, is ironclad,” Joe Biden betrayed US interests, which should have a flexible foreign policy. He has allied the US people with genocide. Traitor.

    Hunter Biden had financial dealings with adversaries of the US government. Joe Biden should have known his son’s arrangements and prevented accusations of influence peddling. Joe Biden is guilty of violating his oath of office. Treachery.
    Biden, similar to Trump, brought classified documents to his home and left them scattered in places open to revelation. Despite the Justice Department not pressing charges, Biden is guilty of violating US espionage laws. Treason.

    The US Justice Department (DOJ) indicted several Russians and Chinese who infiltrated America, gathered information, and lobbied for a foreign nation. The US Justice Department has not indicted one of tens of thousands of Israelis (could be one of hundreds of thousands), who have performed similar duties for Israel. Lobbying is only a small part of the damage to Americans done by these miscreant infiltrators, sent by Israel to foreign shores to do their mischief. From the almost one million Israelis living in the United States, hundreds of thousands may have become citizens, voted, and changed a highly contested election. In a coming election in Westchester, New York, Westchester Unites urged Jewish voters in the district  (not non-Jewish voters??) to request ballots so they could vote before the June 25 Democratic primary battle between New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman, who criticizes Israel, and challenger, Westchester County Executive George Latimer, an avid supporter of apartheid Israel’s genocide. Campaign organizers say they will spend up to $1 million to boost voter turnout.

    I’m not privy to the manipulations of the American public performed by the mass of Israeli infiltrators. One example is the declarations by Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, the senior rabbi of Manhattan’s Stephen Wise Free Synagogue. His contrived Amplify Israel Initiative “aims to breathe new life into the principles we’ve been committed to for decades, with an array of programs aimed at bolstering support for Israel and aligning Zionism with liberal ideology.” In clearer words, “influence every man, woman, and child that nationalist, militarist, oppressive, and apartheid Israel is a benevolent country.”

    Who is Rabbi Hirsch? Ammiel Hirsch went to high school in Israel, served as a tank commander in the IDF, and was formerly the director of the Association of Reform Zionists of America, the Israeli arm of the North American Reform movement. In a response to a letter, in which 93 rabbinical and cantorial students harshly criticized Israeli actions in the hostilities between Israel and Hamas, Rabbi Hirsch wrote:

    For the record, the Reform movement is a Zionist movement. Every single branch of our movement — the synagogue arm (Union for Reform Judaism), the rabbinic union (Central Conference of American Rabbis), and our seminary (HUC-JIR) — every organization separately, and all together, are Zionist and committed ideologically and theologically to Israel.

    Why did Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, after receiving training in Israel, come to the United States to guide the Reform movement, which, in previous decades, had been against Zionism, and define it in Israel’s image? By not investigating the actions of multitudes of Israelis residing, the US Justice Department betrays the US people.

    In an espionage scandal involving Lawrence Franklin, a former United States Department of Defense employee, who passed classified documents to AIPAC officials, which disclosed secret United States policy towards Iran, Franklin pleaded guilty and, in January 2006, was sentenced to nearly 13 years of prison. He served ten months of house arrest. The DOJ dropped espionage charges against the AIPAC officials — Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman. Reason (which was treason) — the Department claimed court rulings had made the case unwinnable and the trial would disclose classified information (which can apply to almost every trial for treason). Despite the previous espionage charges and knowledge that un-American AIPAC is a lobby for apartheid Israel, the DOJ has not indicted AIPAC for being an unregistered lobby and has permitted its cadre of Israel firsters to wander the halls of Congress and shake palms with dollar bills. Traitors.

    US representatives know that AIPAC lobbies for an apartheid Israel that is committing genocide and drags US citizens into accusations of aiding the genocide. Politicians accept contributions from individuals allied with AIPAC and vote in accordance with AIPAC’s preferences. The power of the contributions and fear that disregarding AIPAC poses a danger to remaining in office was highlighted in 1984. For voting to permit Boeing to sell AWACS aircraft to Saudi Arabia and for suggesting there were Palestinians and they had “rights,” AIPAC marked as undesirable the popular Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Charles Percy, who had always favored Israel. Paul Simon wrote in his autobiography that Bob Asher, an AIPAC board member, called him to run for Senator from Illinois. Simon unseated the admired and respected Charles Percy who was only 98% pure in his support for Israel. Treachery.

    The US government and local governments favor laws, such as the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which can suppress free speech and free actions that contend Israel’s genocidal policies, and H.R. 3016, Anti-Boycott Act, which “bars U.S. citizens from participating in boycotts of U.S. allies if those boycotts are promoted or imposed by foreign countries.” Federal and local governments tyrannize the US people. Tyranny.

    The Los Angeles (LA) Police Department stood by for hours before halting attacks on peaceful UCLA students and then arrested dozens of student protesters and not any of the vigilantes who represented a foreign power and attacked the students. The LA Police Department supported a group representing a foreign government and failed to protect American citizens. Treason.

    The House of Representatives has had numerous one-sided hearings on campus anti-Semitism that feature callous remarks against Jews from relatively few of the protestors. In none of the hearings has a Committee invited the student protestors to testify; maybe, because they might say, “These students do not represent the protestors. They are angry and frustrated individuals who see Israel identify itself as a Jewish state and note that a great number of American Jews approve of Israel and its genocide of the Palestinian people. They realistically equate Jews with the genocide.” The truth of these hearings is they are more concerned with fictional Jewish feelings than factual Palestinian lives. Let’s face it, these hearings are organized by Israel’s advocates who seek to prevent the US public from gaining awareness of the genocide and shift the protest arguments to a spurious charge of anti-Semitism in America. Elected officials adhere to a foreign nation’s request to stifle American citizens from exercising their right to protest and move dialogue from the horrific victimization of Gazans to an artificially created Jewish victimhood. College presidents committed a huge error by not responding to the committees’ fabricated charges of campus anti-Semitism with a simple statement, “There is no campus anti-Semitism and you are attempting to divert the impact of these demonstrations that criticize Israel policies into a false charge that indirectly enhances Israel’s image.” By representing a foreign power and censoring American students from their right to protest, these elected officials are guilty. Treason.

    Foreign policies exhibit the same treachery, treason, tyranny, and traitors.

    North Vietnam
    President Lyndon Johnson’s reciting a dubious attack by North Vietnamese patrol boats on the USS Maddox in international waters cajoled Americans into accepting an increased US military involvement in the Vietnamese civil war. Global strategists also mentioned the Domino Theory, where if one country falls to communism, then adjacent nations also become communist. A non-functioning Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty (SEATO) tied these fabrications into a call for action. Result was 58,148 uniformed Americans killed, 200,000 wounded, and 75,000 severely wounded. Ho Chi Minh’s followers won the war and none of the neighboring SEATO nations became communist. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, the leading prophet of the Domino Theory, confessed, “I think we were wrong. I do not believe that Vietnam was that important to the communists. I don’t believe that its loss would have led – it didn’t lead – to Communist control of Asia.” Treachery.

    Six-day war
    During the 1967 war between Israel and its neighbors, Israeli torpedo boats and airplanes attacked the intelligence ship USS Liberty in international waters, killed 34, and wounded 171 American service personnel. President Johnson refused to respond to this assault, an insult to all Americans. Treason.

    Yom Kippur war
    In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, President Nixon’s administration supplied arms to Israel and reversed the course of the war. Arab nations responded with an oil embargo that caused huge inflation in the United States, punished the American consumer, and harmed the American economy. Treachery.

    Afghanistan-1980s
    President Ronald Reagan’s CIA covertly assisted Pakistan intelligence in providing financial and military assistance to Osama bin Laden during the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan. In effect, the US played an essential role in creating the al-Qaeda network. Treason.

    International Terrorism and 911
    After Ronald Reagan helped create and popularize Osama bin Laden, later presidents did not heed Osama bin Laden’s warnings. The arch-terrorist clarified his position in the infamous  Osama bin Laden’s “Letter to the American people,” which has been conveniently sidetracked to ensure Americans do not get infected with terrorism germs. It should be titled, “How the United States made me a terrorist.” It is difficult to agree with bin Laden but his statements are not easily contended.

    You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day. It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern.

    Thus the American people have chosen, consented to, and affirmed their support for the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians, the occupation and usurpation of their land, and its continuous killing, torture, punishment and expulsion of the Palestinians. The American people have the ability and choice to refuse the policies of their Government and even to change it if they want.

    You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries.

    William J. Clinton was president during the period that Bin Laden raged his fury at the United States. If Bill Clinton had considered some of bin Laden’s grievances his considerations might have prevented the later 9/11 attack on American soil. Treason.

    George W. Bush and American security officials permitted 19 co-conspirators to enter the country and take preparatory flying lessons in full view of authorities. His DOJ did not pursue information that connected the Saudi royal family with the bombers. Treason.

    Afghanistan-2001
    Without exhausting all means to have Osama bin Laden extradited from Afghanistan and knowing that the Taliban was not directly involved in the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan in a military adventure that had no defined purpose and accomplished nothing. In a war that lasted 20 years, the United States had 2,459 military deaths and 20,769 American service members wounded in action. Twenty years of a useless war that only brought the Taliban back to power. Treachery.

    Iraq
    George W. Bush’s uncalled-for war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom) is the best example of sacrificing U.S. lives to advance Israel’s interests. The cited reason ─ destroying Hussein’s weapons of destruction ─ whose evidence of developments the U.S. based on spurious intelligence and was a farce that no sensible person could believe. This “made for consumption” and fabricated story detracted from the real reason for the U.S. invasion of Iraq — to prevent Iraq from becoming the central power in the Middle East and able to threaten Israel. Neocons succeeded in pressuring President George W. Bush to sacrifice American lives and, by military action, remove Saddam Hussein from power. Discarding the nonsensical assertion that Saddam Hussein, who had no nuclear material, no technology to develop a nuclear weapon, and no ICBMs to deliver a bomb, threatened the United States, and needed to be immediately stopped from turning bubble gum into a mighty weapon solicits a more acceptable reason for the U.S. attack on Iraq. The U.S. Department of Defense casualty website has the US military suffering 4,418 deaths and 31,994 wounded in action during the Iraq War. No coincidence that Iraq was a long-time adversary of Israel and it was in Israel’s interests to have Iraq become militarily impotent. Treason.

    Libya
    NATO declared it intervened in the 2011 Libyan Civil War “to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack.” President Barack Obama remarked, “Gaddafi declared that he would show ‘no mercy’ to his own people. He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment.”

    Reuters report demonstrated significant differences between Gaddafi’s remarks and President Obama’s rendition: Gaddafi Tells Rebel City, Benghazi, ‘We Will Show No Mercy,’ March 17, 2011.

    Muammar Gaddafi told Libyan rebels on Thursday his armed forces were coming to their capital Benghazi tonight and would not show any mercy to fighters who resisted them. In a radio address, he told Benghazi residents that soldiers would search every house in the city and people who had no arms had no reason to fear. He also told his troops not to pursue any rebels who drop their guns and flee when government forces reach the city.

    Logic tells us that few Benghazi residents could even have guns to hide, and Gadhafi’s forces were too limited to carry out any large-scale purge.

    The U.S. vacillated, and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, convinced President Obama to join NATO in removing Gaddafi. NATO eliminated Gaddafi, Islamic extremists gained partial power, discarded armaments were shipped to al-Qaeda “look-alikes” throughout North Africa and soon the Jama’at Nusrat al Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM) coalition, Boko Haram, and Islamic State in West Africa (ISWA) were creating havoc throughout North Africa. The US gained nothing in removing Gaddafi and created more Islamic extremist organizations with which to contend. Treachery.

    UN Vetoes

    As of December 18, 2023, the U.S. vetoed resolutions critical of Israel 45 times. Each time, the Secretary of State offered the excuse that the resolution would not advance the cause of peace, and each time vetoing the resolution did not advance the cause for peace. Why do Americans give deference to Israelis when Israel insults American leaders, uses Americans to die in wars that advance Israel’s interests, causes havoc that brings injury to U.S. relations with other nations,  and sucks money ($3.1 billion annually) from U.S. taxpayers to support its apartheid and oppressive policies?

    Some mentioned reasons, which have changed during the decades, are:

    • Israel was aligned with the US during the Cold War.
    • The US needs a Western-style pistol-packing mama in the Middle East.
    • Israel has an excellent intelligence-gathering network that shares information.
    • The two countries collaborate on the joint-development of sophisticated technologies.

    Pundits confuse support for Israel with support for this Israel. The United States, for military and geopolitical reasons, can support Israel, as it does Columbia, but there is no reason to support and assist this Israel in the destruction of the Palestinians. The Washington establishment and foreign policymakers have incorrectly calculated the tradeoffs between supporting this Israel in its denial of Palestinian rights and in satisfying the Palestinian cause.

    • Israel is no longer dependent on the United States and seeks its own alliances.
    • Israel will not scratch a finger to help the US in any conflict; just the opposite, it convinces the US to fight for Israel.
    • Israel intelligence provides the CIA with intelligence concerning nations that are adversarial to the US due to its close ties with Israel. No close ties, none of these adversaries, and no need for intelligence.
    • Israel has used US and Russian engineers for its technical achievements. No Israel, and the Russian and American engineers will go to work in Silicon Valley.

    Just for money and votes, U.S. politicians sell out their commitment to the American people, follow the dictates of a foreign nation, and make Americans party to the destruction of innocent people. TREASON!!

    Conclusion

    Americans have, at times echoed grievances against their government’s policies and demonstrated their despair, well, some Americans, a small minority of the US population. The rest of the population has been naïve, complacent, and manipulated. Due to America’s intrinsic wealth — natural resources, abundant farmland, temperate climate, rivers, valleys, streams, hard-working population, ocean barriers to foreign incursions —  the treachery, treason, tyranny, and traitors temporarily slowed but did not stop the roaring engine. The roaring engine is beginning to sputter.

    America’s posture as the leading defender of democracy and human rights is hypocritical; its economic system is challenged; its united states are disunited; its pluralistic political system is an epic fantasy; its legislative bodies are divided; and its courts are agenda-seeking rather than law-abiding. Democracy recedes and polarization of citizens widens. Americans are increasingly divided in their aspirations and express increasing fears of one another. An almost self-sufficient economic system proceeds with debt financing imports, trade imbalances, and growth, an unruly situation that can continue until debt hits a financial wall and repaying the debt becomes intolerable.

    Hopefully, more Americans will take cognizance of the failed leadership, meet the challenges they pose, gather the resources, form the organizations, shout much louder, push much stronger, and succeed in disposing of the treachery, treason, tyranny, and traitors that have made the Statue of Liberty weep.

    The words of Patrick Henry, “These are the times that try people’s souls,” are heard again in the cities and villages of a disunited United States of America.

    The post Call for Alarm first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Human Rights Defenders issues at the 56th session of the UN Human Rights Council

    The UN Human Rights Council will hold its 56th regular session at Palais des Nations in Geneva from 18 June and 12 July 2024. And as always the excellent Alert of the International Service for Human Rights permits me to hightlight what concerns HRDs most. To stay up-to-date you can follow @ISHRglobal and #HRC56 on X, and look out for the Human Rights Council Monitor.

    Civil Society Access and Participation The UN is facing a severe liquidity crisis due to member states not paying their membership dues in full and on time. This shortfall is impacting victims and survivors of human rights violations. The crisis risks being used to impose restrictions on civil society participation, although online and hybrid modalities offer cost-effective and environmentally friendly solutions. Over 100 human rights organisations have called on all states to promptly pay their dues to address the liquidity crisis. Additionally, this session States have the opportunity to continue to build on the good practices adopted in the past years and allow for a broader, more inclusive, effective and climate-friendly human rights system, including by providing remote access to informal consultations on HRC resolutions that can greatly benefit from the analysis and lived experiences of human rights defenders.

    Thematic issues Issues on the agenda At this 56th session, the Council will discuss a range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights through dedicated debates with the mandate holders and the High Commissioner, including with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of expression, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, the Special Rapporteur on promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change, the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance In addition, the Council will hold dedicated debates on the rights of specific groups including with: The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of Internally Displaced Persons, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, the Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers

    The Council will also hold debates on interrelation of human rights and thematic issues including with: The High Commissioner on new and emerging technologies.

    The new incoming Independent Expert on violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, Graeme Reid, will present his first report focusing on freedom of expression, assembly and association.

    Environment and Climate Justice The Special Rapporteur on Internally Displaced Persons will present her report on planned relocations of people in the context of the adverse effects of climate change and disasters. This report is building up on previous reports by other mandates and will also look at laws and policies at the national, regional, and international levels. The newly appointed Special Rapporteur on Climate Change will also present her first report looking at the upcoming priorities and some reflections of the progress achieved on some issues in the last 5 years. The report will also provide a snapshot of some other key topics and the impacts on some particular groups. The Special Rapporteur will also present two country visits reports: Honduras and the Philippines. There is currently a call for inputs for her upcoming General Assembly report on access to information on climate change and human rights. The Working Group on Business and Human Rights will present its report on investors, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) approaches and human rights. The report will raise awareness of the responsibilities of investors and will clarify responsibilities on how to align their ESG approaches to human rights. On Thursday 20 June, the President of the Human Rights Council is organising a high-level informal Presidential discussion on ‘The important link between climate change, food security and health security’. The discussion should address the important role of environmental human right defenders in promoting and securing the full realisation of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment; and recognition of the obligation of States to prevent, protect and promote their work in an enabling environment.

    International Solidarity Civil society and international experts have continued to raise grave concern at the attacks on fundamental freedoms when advocating for the human rights of Palestinians by authorities in Western countries, including in universities. The High Commissioner deplored the ‘sharp rise in hatred globally – including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia’. In her report to the Council, the Independent Expert on International Solidarity called on States to ‘eliminate the criminalization of international solidarity expressions and symbols and calls for accountability for violations of public international law norms, such as calls for peace, self-determination or decolonization and the ending of apartheid or genocide […] stressing that States ‘should not conflate them with ‘manifest support of terrorism’ or antisemitism in relevant legislation or regulations’. The Special Rapporteur on racism also raised concern at ‘accusations of antisemitism on the basis of legitimate criticism of treatment of Palestinians by Israel’ in her report following her visit to the United States.

    The Special Rapporteur on Education, following her visit to the United States, stressed that the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism is being used to crackdown against pro-Palestinian protesters, including individuals who ‘self-identify as belonging to the Jewish community or represent Jewish student associations’. The Rapporteur addressed violations against students following the organisation of ‘mass encampments at nearly 40 universities in more than 25 states across the country’, including the detention of more than 2000 individuals, raids by fully armed police on university campuses requested by educational institutions to ‘disperse demonstrators and dismantle encampments’.   During the session, and especially in the ID with the experts on International Solidarity, Education, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly and Association, we urge States to call for an end to the repression and criminalisation of groups and individuals advocating for the human rights of the Palestinian people, including through the instrumentalization of anti-Semitism (IHRA definition) and anti-terrorism policies, including in universities, and especially in the West (including in Austria, France, Germany,  Italy, United States, United Kingdom).

    Reprisals
    HRC56 is a key opportunity for States to raise concerns about specific cases of reprisals and demand that governments provide an update on any investigation or action taken toward accountability. This month ISHR launched a new campaign regarding cases. ISHR urges States to raise these cases in their statements:

    Cao Shunli was a prominent Chinese human rights defender, who sought to share information on the human rights situation in China with the United Nations in Geneva. Cao was arbitrarily detained and died in prison 10 years ago. [for more saee: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/cao-shunli/]

    Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja is a Bahraini-Danish advocate known for his unwavering commitment to freedom and democracy. In April 2011 during the Bahrain chapter of what is known as the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings, while he was leading peaceful demonstrations, Abdulhadi was violently arrested. He went missing for two months and, in June 2011, after a military trial, he was condemned to life-imprisonment on terrorism-related charges, despite grave concerns from the international community about unfair trials. [s`eae also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/11/29/mea-laureate-abdulhadi-al-khawaja-facing-new-charges-for-protesting-injustice-in-jau-prison/ and https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/4d45e316-c636-4d02-852d-7bfc2b08b78d]

    Pham Doan Trang is an author, blogger, journalist and pro-democracy activist from Viet Nam. Trang was prosecuted for her articles and reports on the human rights situation in Viet Nam, including an analysis of a 2016 report on the Formosa Ha Tinh Steel Plant environmental disaster that was shared with the United Nations. See also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/fe8bf320-1d78-11e8-aacf-35c4dd34b7ba and https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/pham-doan-trang/].

    Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj are two Kashmiri human rights defenders. They have conducted ground-breaking and extensive human rights documentation in the Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including through their work within the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS). In 2016, Indian authorities arrested Khurram a day after he was barred from traveling to Geneva to attend the 33rd session of the Human Rights Council. See also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/81468931-79AA-24FF-58F7-10351638AFE3 and https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/khurram-parvez/. Meanwhile, on 20 March 2023, Irfan was summoned for questioning and arbitrarily detained by the NIA in Srinagar also under provisions of the UAPA and other laws. The NIA targeted Irfan for being ‘a close associate of Khurram Parvez.’ Both Khurram and Irfan are presently in pre-trial detention in the maximum-security Rohini prison in New Delhi, India.

    Country-specific issues on the agenda

    The Council will consider updates, reports on and is expected to consider resolutions addressing a range of country situations, in some instances involving the renewal of the relevant expert mandates. These include: Interactive Dialogues with the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar Enhanced Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan Interactive Dialogue with the Independent international fact-finding mission for the Sudan Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Belarus Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Burundi Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Venezuela Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Libya Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Central African Republic Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Ukraine and interim report of SG on Crimea Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Colombia

    Afghanistan On 18 June, Richard Bennett, Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan will present his most recent report on the ‘phenomenon of an institutionalized system of discrimination, segregation, disrespect for human dignity and exclusion of women and girls’ (HRC res. 54/1). The report provides a multidimensional understanding of the design, commission and impact of the harms resulting from the Taliban’s institutionalized system of gender-based oppression. We welcome the Special Rapporteur’s view expressed in the report that the framing of gender apartheid most fully encapsulates the institutionalized and ideological nature of the abuses in the country. We note that the report of the Working Group on Discrimination Against Women to be presented at this session also noted the pattern of large-scale systematic violations of women’s and girls’ fundamental rights in Afghanistan ‘constitutes an institutionalized framework of apartheid based on gender and merits an unequivocal response.’ ISHR considers that the pursuit of justice for Afghan women and girls demands a multifaceted approach harnessing the strengths of various accountability mechanisms, including the establishment of an accountability mechanism for crimes against humanity; with strategic coordination exerting heightened pressure on the Taliban.

    Sudan On 18 June, the Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan will provide its first oral update to the HRC. Since the conflict erupted between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) on 15 April 2023, more than 30 thousand people have been killed while 10 million and a half have been displaced, a majority of which are women and children. Half of the population is now on the verge of famine, and 2.5 million could die of starvation by September. The continued fighting in El Fashir portends a repeated massacre and ethnic cleansing of the Masalit in El Geneina last year. In Aljazeera at least one hundred people were killed by RSF on 5 June, the area is facing grave human rights violations since last December.  Meanwhile, the attacks on women’s rights groups and local response initiatives continue unabated.bHumanitarian responders get arbitrarily arrested, and smeared as traitors by the warring parties, some sentenced for up to 2 years and even killed. States should call for an immediate ceasefire, protection of civilians and adherence to international law by all parties in the conflict. 

    Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel On 19 June, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel will present its report addressing the 7 October attacks by Palestinian armed groups and the commencement of Israel’s war on Gaza.

    Venezuela The High Commissioner will present his report on 3 July with his Office staff still operating from Panama. The Maduro government has still not permitted the return of the Office on the terms of its original mandate. With Presidential elections to be held on 28 July, concerns increase about the safety of human rights defenders and opposition figures. Uncertainty has recently been increased by the re-introduction (and then rapid postponement of adoption) of the NGO Law. HRDs Javier Tarazona and Rocío San Miguel remain wholly unjustifiably detained. States must engage actively in the dialogue with the High Commissioner to make clear their support of the essential work of human rights defenders and of the UN’s essential, multifaceted regime scrutinising the human rights situation in the country. Situations of concern that are not on the Council’s agenda

    Algeria The sustained repression against the pro-democracy movement and human rights defenders in Algeria was addressed in the end-of-session statements of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of association and assembly as well as the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders who conducted official visits to Algeria in 2023. These were the first visits since 2016 by UN mandate holders to the country. The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and Association addressed the ‘criminalisation of civil society work‘, and the ‘suspension or dissolution of political parties and associations, including prominent human rights advocacy organisations’ (including RAJ and LADDH), as well as ‘overly restrictive laws and regulations’ hindering their work.


    Bahrain Thirty-three civil society organisations reiterated that thirteen years since Bahrain’s popular uprising, systemic injustice has intensified and political repression targeting dissidents, human rights defenders, clerics and independent civil society has effectively shut any space for the peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression or peaceful activism in the country. Despite the recent royal pardon issued on 8 April 2024, which included the release of more than 650 political prisoners, marking a change in State policy from previous royal pardons, the pardon excluded many individuals who played significant roles in the 2011 pro-democracy uprising, with an estimated 550 political prisoners remaining behind bars. HRC56 provides an important opportunity to address these developments in States’ national and joint statements, including during the Interactive Dialogues with the Special Rapporteurs and Independent Expert on Health, Freedom of Expression, Peaceful Assembly and Association, Independence of Judges and Lawyers and International Solidarity. We urge States to call for the release of all those arbitrarily, including human rights defenders and opposition activists Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, Abduljalil Al-Singace, Hassan Mushaima and Sheikh Ali Salman as well as death row inmates Mohammed Ramadhan and Husain Moosa, who have now spent over a decade unlawfully detained following torture and unfair trials and remain at immanent risk of execution.

    China The adoption on 4 July of the outcome of China’s fourth UPR review, which exposed strong international condemnation over grave abuses in January, is a key opportunity for States to urge China to fully implement recommendations emanating from existing findings by UN bodies. Any rejection by the Chinese government of UPR recommendations referring to UN expert mechanisms or to constructive cooperation with the UN system should be promptly condemned. Ahead of the second anniversary of the publication of the damning OHCHR Xinjiang report, and its authoritative findings of possible crimes against humanity in the Uyghur region, States should request updates on the implementation of the report’s recommendations. To uphold the integrity of its mandate and put an end to China’s exceptionalism, the HRC must also establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the country, as repeatedly called for by over 40 UN experts and hundreds of human rights groups globally. States should further urge the UN High Commissioner to strengthen follow-up action on his Office’s Xinjiang report, including through public calls for implementation, through translation of the report, and through an assessment of its implementation. States should raise serious concerns at the repression of peaceful protests by over 100 Tibetans who opposed a hydropower project in Derge County, affecting villages and monasteries. States should unequivocally call out the adoption of yet-another national security law further criminalising dissent and human rights promotion in Hong Kong, considered a ‘regressive step’ by High Commissioner Türk. States should echo the latter’s call to ‘release immediately and unconditionally all those arbitrarily arrested and detained under these laws.’ States should further ask for the prompt release of human rights defenders arbitrarily detained or disappeared, including feminist activist Huang Xueqin, human rights lawyers Ding Jiaxi, Yu Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan, legal scholar Xu Zhiyong, Uyghur doctor Gulshan Abbas, Hong Kong lawyer Chow Hang-tung, and Tibetan climate activist A-nya Sengdra.

    Occupied Western Sahara ISHR is concerned over the situation of Saharawi human rights defenders, including lawyer M`hamed Hali, who has been arbitrarily deprived of his right to practice in the Moroccan judicial system due to opinions expressed in support of the right to self-determination for the people of Western Sahara. His hearing is scheduled on 27 June in front of Morocco´s highest court. We urge States to address  the crackdown on Sahrawi civil society including: during the Interactive Dialogues with the Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Expression, Peaceful Assembly and Association, to call on Morocco to immediately put an end to ‘the systematic and relentless targeting of human rights defenders in retaliation for exercising their rights to freedom of association and expression to promote human rights in Western Sahara’; during the Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers to call on Morocco to reinstate M’hamed Hali’s right to practice as a lawyer, stressing that this case sets a dangerous precedent for the independence of lawyers; and during the Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on International Solidarity  to reiterate the recommendation of the expert that ‘States should eliminate the criminalization of international solidarity expressions and symbols and calls for accountability for violations of public international law norms, such as calls for peace, self-determination or decolonization […]’ in the case of Western Sahara.  

    Saudi Arabia On 4 July, the Council will consider Saudi Arabia’s fourth UPR outcome, as the authorities announce whether they have accepted or rejected recommendations issued by States in January. The recommendations address widespread and systematic rights violations in the Kingdom, and have the potential to bring about significant change. They include, but are not limited to: calls for the release of prisoners of conscience, many of whom are serving decades-long prison sentences for peacefully exercising their basic rights, and the repealing of travel bans imposed on human rights defenders following their release; the abolition of the death penalty for child defendants, with several young men at imminent risk of execution for alleged crimes committed as minors; and a raft of legislative measures, including ratifying key international human rights treaties and revising repressive laws. States should use this key opportunity to urge Saudi Arabia to accept them in good faith, and crucially implement them.

    Tunisia In May 2024, Tunisian authorities waged an unprecedented crackdown against Black migrants and refugees, and civil society organisations defending their rights. On 6 May, in the opening address to a National Security Council meeting, Tunisian President Kais Saied reiterated discriminatory and hateful remarks against Sub-Saharan migrants and refugees while inciting against civil society organisations, describing them as ‘traitors and [foreign] agents’ and ‘rabid trumpets driven by foreign wages’, because of their receipt of foreign funding and their ‘insulting’ of the state. The president questioned the sheltering of asylum seekers and refugees by the Tunisian Council for Refugees (CTR) – a nongovernmental organization, partner of the UNHCR, which supports the registration of asylum claims – and described asylum seekers and refugees residing in Tunisia as illegal. President Saied suggested that CSOs should only work with the state and under its instructions. Since 3 May, Tunisian authorities have arrested and opened investigations against the heads or members of at least six organisations working on migrant and refugee rights and against racial discrimination, including the CTR. Five people, including WHRD Saadia Mosbah, President of Mnemty, have remained in pre-trial detention, under unfounded accusations of financial crimes. On 14 May, the Prime Minister announced that a new association law is being finalized, which would replace Decree-Law 88, an internationally lauded legislation that that safeguards Tunisia’s right to the freedom of association. During the interactive dialogues with the Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Assembly and Association, and Freedom of Expression, we urge States to call on Tunisia to put an end to the crackdown on civil society, immediately release all those arbitrarily detained, including individuals providing support or advocating for the rights of migrants and refugees, and to firmly condemn the escalating smear campaign and stigmatisation of human rights and humanitarian organisations receiving foreign funding and working with migrants and refugees, supported by the president’s speeches, often making use of discriminatory and racist language against Black migrants and Black people.

    Adoption of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reports During this session, the Council will adopt the UPR working group reports on Belize, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Congo, Jordan, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Senegal. ISHR supports human rights defenders in their interaction with the UPR. This session of the Council will provide an opportunity for Chad, China, Congo, Mauritius, Nigeria to accept recommendations made in relation to human rights defenders, as proposed in ISHR’s briefing papers.

    Side events

    19 June at 13:00 (room XXV): ISHR will hold a side event to launch the Declaration +25: A supplement to the UN Declaration on human rights defenders. See https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/06/08/launch-of-the-hrd-declaration25/.

    Open Society Institute will hold a side event on human rights in Afghanistan 19 June at 15:00:

    American Civil Liberties Union will hold a side event on human rights in the United States of America

    On 25 June at 16:00: Center for Justice and International Law will hold a side event on human rights in Guatemala

    26 June at 14:00: Amnesty International will hold a side event on the protection of freedom of expression and assembly

    On 27 June at 14:00: International Bar Association will hold a side event on gender apartheid: Case studies

    On 3 July at 12:00: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung will hold a side event on climate change and human mobility

    On 3 July at 17:00: Third World Network will hold a side event on business accountability in the context of armed conflict

    On 4 July at 15:00: Earthjustice will hold a side event on Protection of Environmental Human Rights Defenders #HRC55:

    Alert to the Human Rights Council’s 56th session

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • Their Rules-Based International Order Is the Rule of the Mafia

    Ana Segovia (Mexico), Huapango Torero (‘Huapango Bullfighter’), 2019.

    The skin is the largest organ of the human body. It covers our entire surface, at some points only as thin as a piece of paper and at other points about half as thick as a credit card. The skin, which protects us from all manner of germs and other harmful elements, is fragile and unable to defend humans from the dangerous weapons we have made over time. The ancient blunt axe will break the skin with a heavy blow, while a 2000-pound MK-84 ‘dumb bomb’ made by General Dynamics will not only obliterate the skin, but the entire human body.

    Despite a 24 May order from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Israeli military continues to bomb the southern part of Gaza, particularly the city of Rafah. In blatant disregard of the ICJ’s order, on 27 May Israel struck a tent city in Rafah and murdered forty-five civilians. US President Joe Biden said on 9 March that an Israeli attack on Rafah would be his ‘red line’, but – even after this tent massacre – the Biden administration has insisted that no such line has been violated.

    At a press conference on 28 May, communications advisor to the US National Security Agency John Kirby was asked how the US would respond if a strike by the US armed forces killed forty-five civilians and injured two hundred others. Kirby responded: ‘We have conducted airstrikes in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, where tragically we caused civilian casualties. We did the same thing’. To defend Israel’s latest massacre, Washington has chosen to make a startling admission. Given that the ICJ has ruled that it is ‘plausible’ that Israel is conducting a genocide in Gaza, could it be said that the US is guilty of the same in Iraq and Afghanistan?

    Ficre Ghebreyesus (Eritrea), Map/Quilt, 1999.

    In 2006, the International Criminal Court (ICC) began to assess the possibility of war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then, in 2014 and 2017, respectively, opened formal investigations into crimes committed in both countries. However, neither Israel nor the United States are signatories to the 2002 Rome Statute, which established the ICC. Rather than sign the statute, the US Congress passed the American Service-Members’ Protection Act – known informally as the ‘Hague Invasion Act’ – which legally authorises the US government to ‘use all means necessary’ to protect its troops from ICC prosecutors. Since Article 98 of the Rome Statute does not require states to turn over wanted personnel to a third party if they have signed an immunity agreement with that party, the US government has encouraged states to sign ‘Article 98 agreements’ to give its troops immunity from prosecution. Still, this did not deter ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda (who held the post from 2012–2021) from studying evidence and issuing a preliminary report in 2016 on war crimes in Afghanistan.

    Afghanistan joined the ICC in 2003, giving the ICC and Bensouda jurisdiction to conduct their investigation. Even though it signed an Article 98 agreement with Afghanistan in 2002, the US government fervently attacked the ICC’s investigation and warned Bensouda and her family that they would face personal repercussions if she continued with the investigation. In April 2019, the US revoked Bensouda’s entry visa. Days later, a panel of ICC judges ruled against Bensouda’s request to proceed with a war crimes investigation in Afghanistan, stating that such an investigation would ‘not serve the interests of justice’.

    Staff at the ICC were dismayed by the court’s decision and eager to challenge it but could not get support from the justices. In June 2019, Bensouda filed a request to appeal the ICC’s decision not to pursue the investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan. Bensouda’s appeal was joined by various groups from Afghanistan, including the Afghan Victims’ Families Association and the Afghanistan Forensic Science Organisation. In September 2019, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC ruled that the appeal could go forward.

    Dawn Okoro (Nigeria), Doing It, 2017.

    The US government was enraged. On 11 June 2020, US President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 13928, which authorised his government to freeze ICC officials’ assets and ban them and their families from entering the United States. In September 2020, the US imposed sanctions on Bensouda, a national of Gambia, and senior ICC diplomat Phakiso Mochochoko, a national of Lesotho. The American Bar Association condemned these sanctions, but they were not revoked.

    The US government eventually repealed the sanctions in April 2021, after Bensouda left her post and was replaced by the British lawyer Karim Khan in February 2021. In September 2021, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan said that while his office would continue to investigate war crimes by the Taliban and the Islamic State in Afghanistan, it would ‘deprioritise other aspects of this investigation’. This awkward phrasing simply meant that the ICC would no longer investigate war crimes committed by the United States and its allies from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The ICC had been sufficiently brought to heel.

    Alexander Nikolaev, also known as Usto Mumin (Soviet Union), Friendship, Love, Eternity, 1928.

    Prosecutor Khan again demonstrated his partial application of justice and fealty to the Global North ruling elites when he rushed into the conflict in Ukraine and began an investigation into war crimes by Russia just four days after its invasion in February 2022. Within a year, Khan would apply for warrants for the arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, which were issued in March 2023. Specifically, they were charged with colluding to abduct children from Ukrainian orphanages and children’s care homes and take them to Russia, where – it was alleged – these children were ‘given for adoption’. Ukraine, Khan said, ‘is a crime scene’.

    Khan would use no such words when it came to Israel’s murderous assault on Palestinians in Gaza. Even after more than 15,000 Palestinian children had been killed (rather than ‘adopted’ from a war zone), Khan failed to pursue warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his military subordinates. When Khan visited Israel in November–December 2023, he warned about ‘excesses’ but suggested that since ‘Israel has trained lawyers who advise commanders’, they could prevent any horrendous violations of international humanitarian law.

    Ayoub Emdadian (Iran), The Sapling of Liberty, 1973.

    By May 2024, the sheer scale of Israel’s brutality in Gaza finally forced the ICC to take up the issue. The orders from the ICJ, the outrage expressed by numerous governments of the Global South, and the cascading protests in country after country together motivated the ICC to act. On 20 May, Khan held a press conference where he said that he filed applications for the arrest of Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri, and Ismail Haniyeh and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his head of military, Yoav Gallant. Israel’s Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara said that the ICC accusations against Netanyahu and Gallant are ‘baseless’ and that Israel will not comply with any ICC warrant. For decades now, Israel – like the United States – has rejected any attempt to apply international humanitarian law to its actions. The ‘rules-based international order’ has always provided immunity for the United States and its close allies, an immunity whose hypocrisy has increasingly been revealed. It is this double-standard that has provoked the collapse of the US-driven world order.

    Buried within Khan’s press statement is an interesting fragment: ‘I insist that all attempts to impede, intimidate, or improperly influence the officials of this Court must cease immediately’. Eight days later, on 20 May, The Guardian – in collaboration with other periodicals – published an investigation that revealed Israel’s use of ‘intelligence agencies to surveil, hack, pressure, smear, and allegedly threaten senior ICC staff in an effort to derail the court’s inquiries’. Yossi Cohen, the former head of Israel’s spy agency, Mossad, personally harassed and threatened Bensouda (Khan’s predecessor), warning her, ‘You don’t want to be getting into things that could compromise your security or that of your family’. Furthermore, The Guardian noted that ‘Between 2019 and 2020, the Mossad had been actively seeking compromising information on the prosecutor and took an interest in her family members’. ‘Took an interest’ is a euphemistic way of saying gathered information on her family – including through a sting operation against her husband Philip Bensouda – to blackmail and frighten her. These are clichéd mafia tactics.


    Hamed Abdalla (Egypt), Conscience du sol (‘The Consciousness of the Earth’), 1956.

    As I followed these stories of the blood and law, I read the poems of Chechnya-born Jazra Khaleed, writing in Greek in Athens. His poem ‘Black Lips’ stopped me in my tracks, the last stanzas powerful and bleak:

    Come let me make you human,
    you, Your Honor, who wipe guilt from your beard
    you, esteemed journalist, who tout death
    you, philanthropic lady, who pat children’s heads without bending down
    and you who read this poem, licking your finger—
    To all of you I offer my body for genuflection
    Believe me
    one day you will adore me like Christ

    But I’m sorry for you sir—
    I do not negotiate with chartered accountants of words
    with art critics who eat from my hand
    You may, if you desire, wash my feet
    Don’t take it personally

    Why do I need bullets if there are so many words
    prepared to die for me?

    Which words are slowly dying? Justice, perhaps, or even humanitarianism? So many words are thrown about to assuage the guilty and to confuse the innocent. But these words cannot muffle other words, words that describe horrors and that demand redress.

    Words are important. So are people, such as Gustavo Cortiñas, who was arrested by the Argentinian military dictatorship on 15 April 1977, never to be seen again. He became one of the 30,000 people whom the military killed between 1976 and 1983. On April 30, two weeks after Gustavo was arrested, his mother, Nora Cortiñas (or Norita, as she was lovingly known), joined other mothers of the disappeared to protest in front of the government house Casa Rosada, at the Plaza de Mayo in Buenos Aires, the first in what became a regular feature.

    Norita was a co-founder of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, which courageously shattered the wall of misleading words that tumbled out of the mouths of the military Junta. Though her son was never found, Norita found her voice looking for him – a voice that was heard at every protest for justice and spoke with great feeling about the pain in the world until the weeks leading up to her death on 31 May. ‘We say no to the annexation of Palestine’, she said in a video message in 2020. ‘We oppose any measure that tends to erase the identity and existence of the Palestinian people’.

    Norita leaves us with her precious words:

    Many years from now, I would like to be remembered as a woman who gave her all so that we could have a more dignified life… I would like to be remembered with that cry that I always say and that means everything I feel inside me, that means the hope that someday that other possible world will exist. A world for everyone. So, I would like to be remembered with a smile and for shouting loudly: venceremos, venceremos, venceremos! We will win, we will win, we will win!

  • See also “What is the Rules-Based Order?“
    • The post Their Rules-Based International Order Is the Rule of the Mafia first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Human rights defender’s profile: Elham Kohistani, from Afghanistan

    On 3 June 2024, ISHR published Human rights defender’s story: Elham Kohistani, from Afghanistan

    Elham Kohistani is a human rights defender from Afghanistan. Having witnessed successive governments trample human rights in her country since her childhood, she has dedicated her life to fighting for the basic rights of women and girls.

    In an interview with ISHR, Elham spoke about her hopes for the future of Afghanistan, urging the international community to continue supporting human rights defenders in the long term to achieve peace and prosperity.

    Stand in solidarity with Elham and other women human rights defenders (WHRDs) from Afghanistan: join us in our campaign to push for UN experts and States to explicitly and publicly recognise the situation in Afghanistan as a form of gender apartheid and the need for an accountability mechanism to address gross human rights violations against women.

    https://ishr.ch/defender-stories/human-rights-defenders-story-elham-kohistani-from-afghanistan

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • Britain’s Century Long Opium Trafficking and China’s Century of Humiliation (1839-1949)

    For the Chinese, the trauma of the Century of Humiliation continues as a blunt reminder of their past defeat and neo-colonial servitude, as well as a reminder of the West’s self-righteous hypocrisy and arrogance.

    In 1500, India and China were the world’s most advanced civilizations. Then came the Europeans. They eventually looted and wreaked havoc on both, just as they were to on the Americas and Africa. For India and China, Britain was the chief culprit, relying on state-sponsored drug-running backed by industrialized military power. The British Empire was the world’s largest producer and exporter of opium—the main product of global trade after the gradual decline of the slave trade from Africa. Their “civilization” brought the Century of Humiliation to China, which only ended with the popular revolution led by Mao Zedong. This historic trauma and the struggle to overcome it and re-establish their country is etched in the minds of the Chinese today.

    Before the British brought their “culture,” 25% of the world trade originated in India. By the time they left it was less than 1%. British India’s opium dealing was for the large part of the 19th Century the second-most important source of revenue for colonial India. Their “opium industry was one of the largest enterprises on the subcontinent, producing a few thousand tons of the drug every year – a similar output to Afghanistan’s notorious opium industry [during the US occupation], which supplies the global market for heroin.” Opium accounted for about 17-20% of British India revenues.

    In the early 1700s, China produced 35% of the world GDP. Until 1800 half the books in the world were printed in Chinese. The country considered itself self-sufficient, not seeking any products from other countries. Foreign countries bought Chinese tea, silk, and porcelain, having to pay in gold and silver. Consequently, the balance of trade was unfavorable to the British for almost two centuries, like the situation the US and Europe face with China today.

    This trade slowly depleted Western reserves. Eventually, 30,865 tons of silver flowed into China, mostly from Britain. Britain turned to state sponsored drug smuggling as a solution, and by 1826 the smuggling from India had reversed the flow of silver. Thus began one of the longest and continuous international crimes of modern times, second to the African slave trade, under the supervision of the British crown.

    (The just formed United States was already smuggling opium into China by 1784. The US first multi-millionaire John Jacob Astor grew rich dealing opium to China, as did FDR’s grandfather, Warren Delano, Jr.)

    The British East India Company was key to this opium smuggling. Soon after Britain conquered Bengal in 1757, George III granted the East India Company a monopoly on producing and exporting Indian opium. Eventually its Opium Agency employed some 2500 clerks working in 100 offices around India.

    Britain taxed away 50% of the value of Indian peasants’ food crops to push them out of agriculture into growing opium. This soon led to the Bengal famine of 1770, when ten million, a third of the Bengali population, starved to death. Britain took no action to aid them, as they did almost a century later with their orchestrated famine in Ireland. Another famine hit India in 1783, and again Britain did nothing as 11 million starved. Between 1760-1943, “As per British sources, more than 85 million Indians died in these famines which were in reality genocides done by the British Raj.”

    At its peak in the mid-19th century, the British state-sponsored export of opium accounted for roughly 15% of total colonial revenue in India and 31% of India’s exports. The massive revenues from this drug money solidified India as a substantial financial base for England’s later world conquests.

    In 1729, the Chinese emperor declared the import of opium illegal. At the time it amounted to 200 chests a year, each 135 pounds, a total of 14 tons. The emperor in 1799 reissued the prohibition in harsher terms, given imports had leaped to 4,500 chests (320 tons). Yet by 1830 it rose to 1100 tons, and by 1838, just before the British provoked the First Opium War (1839-1842), it climbed to 40,000 chests (2800 tons).

    A chest of opium cost only £2 to produce in India but it sold for £10 [over $1,000 in today’s prices] in China, nearly an £8 profit per chest.

    About 40,000 chests supplied 2.1 million addicts in a Chinese population of 350 million. China was losing over 4000 tons of silver annually. Addicts were mostly men, twenty to fifty-five years old, which should have been their most productive years. Smoking opium gradually spread to different groups of people: government officials, merchants, intelligentsia, women, servants, soldiers, and monks.

    Just before the First Opium War the Chinese “drug czar,” Lin Zexu, wrote to Queen Victoria, “Where is your conscience? I have heard that the smoking of opium is very strictly forbidden by your country; this is because the harm caused by opium is clearly understood. Since it is not permitted to do harm to your own country, then even less should you let it be passed on to the harm of other countries.” In standard imperialist arrogance, Britain ignored the letter and challenged the very legality of China’s sovereign decision to prohibit opium imports.

    Britain provoked this First Opium War in retaliation for China seizing and destroying 1300 tons of opium held by British drug dealers off Canton (now Guangzhou). This had a value equal to one-sixth of the British empire’s military budget. British Foreign Secretary Palmerston demanded an apology, compensation for the opium, a treaty to prevent Chinese action against British drug-running, and opening additional ports to “foreign trade,” their euphemism for drug dealing.

    The British India Gazette reported on the sack of one Chinese city during the war:

    A more complete pillage could not be conceived than took place. Every house was broken open, every drawer and box ransacked, the streets strewn with fragments of furniture, pictures, tables, chairs, grain of all sorts — the whole set off by the dead or the living bodies of those who had been unable to leave the city from the wounds received from our merciless guns… The plunder ceased only when there was nothing to take or destroy.

    Once Britain defeated China, the Treaty of Nanking gave Hong Kong to the British, which quickly became the center of opium drug-dealing, soon providing the colony most of its revenue. The treaty also allowed the British to export unlimited amounts of opium.

    In 1844, France and the US forced China to sign similar unequal and unjust treaties, with the same unrestricted trading rights.

    In the wake of the First Opium War, a devastating famine hit southern China, causing mass starvation among millions of poor Chinese peasants. Soon the Taiping Rebellion against Chinese imperial rule broke out, claiming 20 million Chinese lives between 1850 and 1864. As with many later civil wars, as in Syria a decade ago, the European states financed the rebels to undermine the national government.

    Karl Marx detailed how Britain provoked the Second Opium War (1856-1860). France joined in the looting. The Times of London, propagandists for their state-sponsored drug mafia, declared, “England, with France . . . shall teach such a lesson to these perfidious hordes that the name of Europe will hereafter be a passport of fear, if it cannot be of love, throughout their land.”

    In October 1860 the British and French military attacked Beijing. Despite French protests, British commander Lord Elgin destroyed Yuanming Yuan, the emperor’s summer palace, in a show of contempt for the Chinese.

    The Summer Palace was the quintessential treasure house of China. No such collection of wealth and beauty had ever existed anywhere on earth. Nor would it ever again.…in some 200 fabulously decorated buildings, thirty of them imperial residences, lay riches beyond all dreams of avarice. Jewels, jade, ceremonial robes, the court treasures, bales of silk, and countless priceless artifacts represented the years of accumulated tribute placed before the Chinese emperors. There were splendid galleries of paintings and irreplaceable libraries…For three days British and French troops rampaged through the palace’s marble corridors and glittering apartments, smashing with clubs and rifle butts what they were unable to carry away.

    When the robbery and destruction was finished, they burned Yuanming Yuan to the ground. An estimated 1.5 million Chinese relics were taken away, many still filling museums and the homes of the wealthy in the West today.

    Britain and France forced China to legalize the import of opium, which reached 5000 tons by 1858, an amount surpassing global opium production in 1995. China had to agree that no Westerner could be tried in Chinese courts for crimes committed in the country, and, ironically, to legalize Christian missionary work.

    The 1881 pamphlet, Opium: England’s Coercive Policy and Its Disastrous Results in China and India, stated:

    As a specimen of how both wars were carried on, we quote the following from an English writer on the bombardment of Canton: ‘Field pieces loaded with grape were planted at the end of long, narrow streets crowded with innocent men, women and children, to mow them down like grass till the gutters flowed with their blood.’ In one scene of carnage, the Times correspondent recorded that half an army of 10,000 men were in ten minutes destroyed by the sword, or forced into the broad river. The Morning Herald asserted that ‘a more horrible or revolting crime than this bombardment of Canton has never been committed in the worst ages of barbaric darkness.’

    By the mid-1860s, Britain was in control of seven eighths of the vastly expanded opium trade into China. Opium imports from India skyrocketed to 150,000 chests (10,700 tons) in 1880. British opium earnings amounted to $2 billion a year in today’s money and accounted for nearly 15% of the British Exchequer’s tax revenue. The London Times (October 22, 1880) outrageously claimed that “the Chinese government admitted opium as a legal article of import, not under constraint, but of their own free will.” Lord Curzon, later Under Secretary for India, “denied that England had ever forced opium upon China; no historian of any repute, and no diplomatist who knew anything of the matter, would support the proposition that England coerced China in this respect.”

    China began domestic production to curtail losing more silver to imported opium. After 1858, large tracts of land were given over to opium production, and provinces turned from growing food and other necessities to opium. Eventually the Chinese were producing 35,000 tons, about 85% of the world’s supply, with 15 million addicts consuming 43,000 tons annually.

    China, now greatly weakened by the British narco state, surrendered territory to Russia equal to the combined size of France, Germany, and Spain. In 1885 France seized Chinese Southeast Asia. In 1895, Japan seized Taiwan and Chinese-controlled Korea.

    The Eight-Nation Alliance (Japan, Russia, Britain, France, the United States, Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary) invaded again in 1900 to crush the nationalist Boxer Rebellion. An indemnity of 20,000 tons of silver was extracted, and China reduced to a neo-colony.

    By 1906, besides British India, opium dealing also provided 16% of taxes for French Indochina, 16% for the Netherlands Indies, 20% for Siam, and 53% for British Malaya.

    That year, the British, still exporting 3500 tons to China, finally agreed to end the dirty business within ten years. The British crown had the distinction of being the biggest opium smuggler in history – a central factor in their wrecking Chinese and Indian civilizations.

    World opium production by 1995 was down to 4,200 metric tons (4,630 tons), mostly from Burma and Afghanistan. The Taliban banned it in 2000, and production fell from 3400 to only 204 tons. The 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan reversed this, and by 2008, US occupied Afghanistan was producing 90% of the world’s opium, reaching 10,000 tons in 2017. After the US was driven out in 2021, the Taliban quickly stopped opium production. The United States Institute of Peace, possibly revealing US support for narco-trafficking, pronounced, “the Taliban’s successful opium ban is bad for Afghans and the world” and “will have negative economic and humanitarian consequences.”

    The blight of opium on China was not resolved until the revolutionary victory in 1949 – though it continued in British Hong Kong. Mao proclaimed “China has stood up,” ending its Century of Humiliation during which at least 100 million Chinese were killed in wars and famines, with up to 35 million during the Japanese invasion from 1931-1945.

    By 1949, China had been reduced to one of the world’s poorest countries. Just 75 years ago four out of five Chinese could not read or write. But since 1981, China has lifted 853 million of its people out of poverty, has become an upper middle income country according to the World Bank, and regained its stature in the world. The West now views China as a renewed threat, again seeking to economically disable it and chop it into pieces. However, this time, the Chinese people are much better prepared to combat imperialist designs to impose a new era of humiliation on them.

    The post Britain’s Century Long Opium Trafficking and China’s Century of Humiliation (1839-1949) first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • “America’s Monster” in Afghanistan


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Human rights defender profile: Sara Nabil from Afghanistan

    Sara Nabil is a human rights defender and artist from Afghanistan, forced into exile. She spoke to ISHR about her dream of one day seeing a ‘free democratic Afghanistan, where each human being [regardless of which] gender they are, man or woman, neutral or other genders, [would be] treated equally.’

    ‘Since the Taliban came to power, Afghanistan [has become] the only country where we see that women don’t have any kind of rights.’

    Learn more about Sara and other human rights defenders like her: https://ishr.ch/defender-stories/

    see also: https://www.dw.com/en/art-in-exile-afghan-sara-nabil-fights-for-womens-rights/a-61732508

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • UK High Court Rules Julian Assange Can Appeal US Extradition

    WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange may appeal an extradition order to the U.S., the U.K. High Court ruled on Monday. The 52-year-old Assange faces 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse due to WikiLeaks‘ publication of classified U.S. documents nearly 15 years ago. He has spent the last five years fighting extradition in London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison. “The High Court’s…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • A Brutal Punishment: The Sentencing of David McBride

    Sometimes, it’s best not to leave the issue of justice to the judges.  They do what they must: consult the statutes, test the rivers of power, and hope that their ruling will not be subject to appeal.  David McBride, the man who revealed that Australia’s special forces in Afghanistan had dimmed and muddied before exhaustion, committed atrocities and faced a compromised chain of command, was condemned on May 14 to a prison term of five years and eight months.

    Without McBride’s feats, there would have been no Afghan Files published by the ABC.  The Brereton Inquiry, established to investigate alleged war crimes, would most likely have never been launched.  (That notable document subsequently identified 39 instances of alleged unlawful killings of Afghan civilians by members of the special forces.)

    In an affidavit, McBride explained how he wished Australians to realise that “Afghan civilians were being murdered and that Australian military leaders were at the very least turning the other way and at worst tacitly approving this behaviour”.  Furthermore “soldiers were being improperly prosecuted as a smokescreen to cover [the leadership’s] inaction and failure to hold reprehensible conduct to account.”

    For taking and disclosing 235 documents from defence offices mainly located in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), the former military lawyer was charged with five national security offences.  He also found Australia’s whistleblowing laws feeble and fundamentally useless.  The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth) provided no immunity from prosecution, a fact aided by grave warnings from the Australian government that vital evidence would be excluded from court deliberation on national security grounds.

    Through the process, the Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfus, could have intervened under Section 71 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), vesting the top legal officer in the country with powers to drop prosecutions against individuals charged with “an indictable offence against the laws of the Commonwealth”.  Dreyfus refused, arguing that such powers were only exercised in “very unusual and exceptional circumstances”.

    At trial, chief counsel Trish McDonald SC, representing the government, made the astonishing claim that McBride had an absolute duty to obey orders flowing from the oath sworn to the sovereign. No public interest test could modify such a duty, a claim that would have surprised anyone familiar with the Nuremberg War Crimes trials held in the aftermath of the Second World War. “A soldier does not serve the sovereign by promising to do whatever the soldier thinks is in the public interest, even if contrary to the laws made by parliament.” To justify such a specious argument, authorities from the 19th century were consulted: “There is nothing so dangerous to the civil establishment of the state as an undisciplined or reactionary army.”

    ACT Justice David Mossop tended to agree, declaring that, “There is no aspect of duty that allows the accused to act in the public interest contrary to a lawful order”. A valiant effort was subsequently made by McBride’s counsel, Steven Odgers SC, to test the matter in the ACT Court of Appeal.  Chief Justice Lucy McCallum heard the following submission from Odgers: “His only real argument is that what he did was the right thing. There was an order: don’t disclose this stuff, but he bled, and did the right thing, to use his language, and the question is does the fact that he’s in breach of orders mean that he’s in breach of his duty, so that he’s got no defence?”  The answer from the Chief Justice was curt: Mossop’s ruling was “not obviously wrong.”

    With few options, a guilty plea was entered to three charges.  Left at the mercy of Justice Mossop, the punitive sentence shocked many of McBride’s supporters.  The judge thought McBride of “good character” but possessed by a mania “with the correctness of his own opinions”.  He suffered from a “misguided self-belief” and “was unable to operate within the legal framework that his duty required him to do”.

    The judge was cognisant of the Commonwealth’s concerns that disclosing such documents would damage Australia’s standing with “foreign partners”, making them less inclined to share information.  He also rebuked McBride for copying the documents and storing them insecurely, leaving them vulnerable to access from foreign powers.  For all that, none of the identifiable risks had eventuated, and the Australian Defence Force had “taken no steps” to investigate the matter.

    This brutal flaying of McBride largely centres on clouding his personal reasons.  In a long tradition of mistreating whistleblowers, questions are asked as to why he decided to reveal the documents to the press.  Motivation has been muddled with effect and affect. The better question, asks Peter Greste, executive director of the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, is not examining the reasons for exposing such material but the revelations they disclose.  That, he argues, is where the public interest lies.  Unfortunately, in Australia, tests of public interest all too often morph into a weapon fashioned to fanatically defend government secrecy.

    All that is left now is for McBride’s defence team to appeal on the crucial subject of duty, something so curiously rigid in Australian legal doctrine.  “We think it’s an issue of national importance, indeed international importance, that a western nation has such as a narrow definition of duty,” argued his defence lawyer, Mark Davis.

    John Kiriakou, formerly of the Central Intelligence Agency, was the only figure to be convicted, not of torture inflicted by his colleagues during the clownishly named War on Terror, but of exposing its practice. McBride is the only one to be convicted in the context of alleged Australian war crimes in Afghanistan, not for their commission, but for furnishing documentation exposing them, including the connivance of a sullied leadership.  The world of whistleblowing abounds with its sick ironies.

    The post A Brutal Punishment: The Sentencing of David McBride first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Flash Flooding Kills More Than 300 in Climate-Vulnerable Afghanistan

    Severe flooding in Afghanistan over the weekend has killed more than 300 people and destroyed thousands of homes in rural villages. The flash floods — prompted by heavy rainfall — came on the heels of an extreme drought in one of the nations that is most vulnerable to the climate emergency, yet has done little to contribute to it. “They’re not net emitters of carbon,” Timothy Anderson…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Deadly Flash Floods Hit Northern Afghanistan


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Detainee protests on rise over deportations from UK to Rwanda

    Hunger strikes at detention centres as asylum seekers get ‘no answers’ from Home Office and fear removal on Gatwick or Heathrow flights

    Protests and hunger strikes among asylum seekers held in detention centres in preparation for deportation to Rwanda are increasing, the Guardian has learned.

    Approximately 55 detainees, including Afghans, Iranians and Kurds, are believed to have staged a 10-hour peaceful protest in the exercise yard at Brook House immigration removal centre, near Gatwick airport from 6pm Tuesday until 4am Wednesday.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • NZ slumps to 19th as RSF says press freedom threatened by global decline

    Pacific Media Watch

    New Zealand has slumped to an unprecedented 19th place in the annual Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index survey released today on World Press Freedom Day — May 3.

    This was a drop of six places from 13th last year when it slipped out of its usual place in the top 10.

    However, New Zealand is still the Asia-Pacific region’s leader in a part of the world that is ranked as the second “most difficult” with half of the world’s 10 “most dangerous” countries included — Myanmar (171st), North Korea (172nd), China (173rd), Vietnam (175th) and Afghanistan (178th).

    New Zealand is 20 places above Australia, which is ranked 39th.

    However, NZ is closely followed in the Index by one of the world’s newer nations, Timor-Leste (20th) — among the top 10 last year — and Samoa (22nd).

    Fiji was 44th, one place above Tonga, and Papua New Guinea had dropped to 91st. Other Pacific countries were not listed in the survey which is based on performance through 2023.

    Scandinavian countries again fill four of the world’s top countries for press freedom.

    No Asia-Pacific nation in top 15
    No country in the Asia-Pacific region is among the Index’s top 15 this year. In 2023, two journalists were murdered in the Philippines (134th), which continues to be one of the region’s most dangerous countries for media professionals.

    In the survey’s overview, the RSF researchers said press freedom around the world was being “threatened by the very people who should be its guarantors — political authorities”.

    This finding was based on the fact that, of the five indicators used to compile the ranking, it is the ‘political indicator’ that has fallen the most , registering a global average fall of 7.6 points.


    Covering the war from Gaza.    Video: RSF

    “As more than half the world’s population goes to the polls in 2024, RSF is warning of a
    worrying trend revealed by the Index — a decline in the political indicator, one of five indicators detailed,” said editorial director Anne Bocandé.

    “States and other political forces are playing a decreasing role in protecting press freedom. This disempowerment sometimes goes hand in hand with more hostile actions that undermine the role of journalists, or even instrumentalise the media through campaigns of harassment or disinformation.

    “Journalism worthy of that name is, on the contrary, a necessary condition for any democratic system and the exercise of political freedoms.”

    Record violations in Gaza
    At the international level, says the Index report, this year is notable for a “clear lack of political will on the part of the international community” to enforce the principles of protection of journalists, especially UN Security Council Resolution 2222 in 2015.

    “The war in Gaza has been marked by a record number of violations against journalists and media since October 2023. More than 100 Palestinian reporters have been killed by the Israeli Defence Forces, including at least 22 in the course of their work.”

    UNESCO yesterday awarded its Guillermo Cano world press freedom prize to all Palestinian journalists covering the war in Gaza.

    “In these times of darkness and hopelessness, we wish to share a strong message of solidarity and recognition to those Palestinian journalists who are covering this crisis in such dramatic circumstances,” said Mauricio Weibel, chair of the international jury of media professionals.

    “As humanity, we have a huge debt to their courage and commitment to freedom of expression.”

    Occupied and under constant Israeli bombardment, Palestine is ranked 157th out of 180
    countries and territories surveyed in the overall Index, but it is ranked among the last 10 with regard to security for journalists.

    Israel is also ranked low at 101st.

    Criticism of NZ
    Although the Index overview gives no detailed explanation on the decline in New Zealand’s Index ranking, it nevertheless says that the country had “retained its role as a press freedom model”.

    However, last December RSF condemned Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters in the rightwing coalition government for his “repeated verbal attacks on the media” and called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to reaffirm his government’s support for press freedom.

    “Just after taking office . . . Peters declared in an interview that he was ‘at war’ with the media. A statement that he accompanied on several occasions with accusations of corruption among media professional,” said RSF in its public statement.

    “He also portrayed a journalism support fund set up by the previous [Labour] administration as a ’55 million dollar bribe’. The politician also questioned the independence of the public broadcasters Television New Zealand (TVNZ) and Radio New Zealand (RNZ).

    “These verbal attacks would be a cause of concern for the sector if used to support a policy of restricting the right to information.”

    Cédric Alviani, RSF’s Asia-Pacific bureau director, also noted at the time: “By making irresponsible comments about journalists in a context of growing mistrust of the New Zealand public towards the media, Deputy Prime Minister Peters is sending out a worrying signal about the newly-appointed government’s attitude towards the press.

    “We call on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to reaffirm his government’s support for press freedom and to ensure that all members of his cabinet follow the same line.”

    Pacific Media Watch compiled this summary from the RSF World Press Freedom Index.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘They are trying to eradicate us completely’: the passion and pain of telling the stories of Afghan women

    Her family have been threatened and her team faces increasing risks in Afghanistan, but Zahra Joya knows she must keep reporting from exile

    On the nights that she manages to fall asleep, Zahra Joya always returns to Afghanistan in her dreams. On good nights she travels back to Bamyan, her home province, with its green mountains and bright blue lakes, or to her parents as they looked when she was a little girl.

    Increasingly though, her dreams are full of roadside bombs or men with guns. Some nights, memories of her last hours in Afghanistan play over and over on a loop: the panicked crowds outside Kabul airport, people being whipped and beaten, the sound of her sisters crying.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Rwanda bill clears parliament after peers abandon final battle over safety amendment – as it happened

    Bill could become law this week as end of parliamentary ping-pong in sight

    Q: Do you think you will be able to implement this without leaving the European convention of human rights?

    Sunak says he thinks he can implement this without leaving the ECHR.

    If it ever comes to a choice between our national security, securing our borders, and membership of a foreign court, I’m, of course, always going to prioritise our national security.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Dozens Dead From Flooding In Pakistan And Afghanistan


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • CPJ calls on Taliban to drop plans to restrict Facebook access in Afghanistan

    New York, April 8, 2024 – The Committee to Protect Journalists is alarmed by reports that the Taliban plans to restrict or block access to Facebook in Afghanistan and calls on authorities not to move ahead on a measure that would further impede the free flow of information in the country.

    On April 6, Najibullah Haqqani, the Taliban’s acting Minister of Telecommunications and Information Technology, announced in an interview with the independent, Kabul-based TOLOnews TV station that the group has finalized a plan to restrict or completely block access to Facebook in Afghanistan.

    Since the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in August 2021, the group has detained journalists, shut down Afghan news websites, and restricted access to foreign media outlets.

    The Facebook pages for foreign news outlets that have been banned in Afghanistan—such as the U.S. Congress-funded broadcasters Voice of America and RFE/RL, the British public broadcaster the BBC, and the German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle—however, are still accessible to readers inside the country.

    “The Taliban’s plan to restrict or block access to Facebook would be a further blow to freedom of information in Afghanistan,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “Social media platforms, including Facebook, have helped to fill a void left by the decline of the Afghan media industry since the Taliban’s August 2021 takeover and the ensuing crackdown on press freedom. The proposed ban highlights the worsening censorship by the Taliban.”

    Facebook is one of the most popular social media platforms widely used by media outlets to disseminate news and information in Afghanistan, including TOLOnews, which has over 4.5 million followers on Facebook.

    When contacted, Taliban spokesperson Zabiullah Mujahid told CPJ via messaging app that “Facebook will not be banned but restrictions will be imposed on it.”


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • FINALLY: a Tory minister is being threatened with PRISON. Yes, prison.

    A UK Tory minister is on a collision course with the law over his refusal to reveal the sources of allegations that British special forces committed war crimes in Afghanistan. Johnny Mercer has been threatened with a fine or even prison if he doesn’t comply.

    Mercer, Britain’s minister for veterans, has said “multiple officers” told him about alleged murders and a subsequent cover-up during the Afghan conflict. However, he has refused to divulge their identities to a public inquiry examining whether a unit executed males of “fighting age” who posed no threat in the war-torn country between 2010 and 2013.

    Independent Inquiry Relating to Afghanistan

    Afghan families have accused UK special forces of conducting a “campaign of murder” against civilians, while senior officers and personnel at the Ministry of Defence “sought to prevent adequate investigation”.

    As the Canary reported, one SAS soldier is said to have personally killed 35 Afghans. Legal representatives for the families claim soldiers carried out around 80 extrajudicial killings at the height of the war between 2010 and 2013.

    The Independent Inquiry Relating to Afghanistan is scrutinising two investigations conducted by the Royal Military Police, which is responsible for the policing of army personnel. No charges were brought under Operation Northmoor, which was set up in 2014 to examine allegations of executions by special forces, including those of children. Three soldiers were referred to the Service Prosecuting Authority, but none was prosecuted.

    Now, the inquiry published a statement on Tuesday 26 March saying it had ordered Mercer to hand over the names next week or face a potential prison sentence.

    Johnny Mercer: name names or face prison

    It revealed that it had issued the MP with a Section 21 notice under Britain’s Inquiries Act 2005 on 13 March. The published order compels Johnny Mercer to provide a witness statement containing the names of the whistleblowers by 3pm on Friday 5 April.

    Failure to comply without a reasonable excuse would be “a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment and/or a fine”, the notice says.

    Signed by the probe’s chairman, Charles Haddon-Cave, it adds that the High Court in London could enforce the order through contempt of court proceedings, which “may result in imprisonment”.

    The order insists the names “will be treated in confidence” and would not be disclosed to anyone who is not a member of the inquiry’s legal team without Mercer’s consent. If he is unable to fulfil the order or believes it is unreasonable, then he has until 3 April to appeal. Mercer is expected to do so.

    He repeatedly refused to disclose the names when he gave evidence to the inquiry last month, during a series of testy exchanges with the inquiry’s counsel. Mercer also refused to reveal the name of a Special Boat Service (SBS) member who said he had been asked to carry a “drop weapon” – a weapon taken on an operation to place next to an unarmed individual.

    “The one thing you can hold on to is your integrity and I will be doing that with these individuals,” said Mercer.

    Haddon-Cave accused the minister of obstructing the inquiry, saying he had a “misguided understanding of the term integrity and an inappropriate sense of loyalty”.

    Johnny Mercer: caving in to the state

    Of course, Johnny Mercer originally dug into what went on in Afghanistan – but then caved in later on.

    As Prospect wrote:

    Mercer deserves great credit for setting out what happened [in Afghanistan] when he came to have doubts. That the explanations he received for these killings of detainees simply do not add up could not have been put in a more persuasive form than his witness statement. But ultimately his doubts led nowhere other than him telling journalists and veterans to look to the Ministry of Defence for answers—the same department that, according to him, would not even give answers to one of its own ministers.

    In other words, Mercer took things so far – and then towed the government line. Now, it seems he might have to face the consequences of his protection of the state and the army personnel that serve it.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via Johnny Mercer – YouTube

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Pakistan Threatens To Close Vital Afghan Trade Corridor With India

    Many parts of Ukraine were experiencing blackouts after a massive wave of Russian strikes on March 22 targeted Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, killing at least four people, hitting the country’s largest dam, and temporarily severing a power line at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant.

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said the assault involved 150 drones and missiles and appealed again to Ukraine’s allies to speed up deliveries of critically needed ammunition and weapons systems.

    As the full-scale invasion neared the 25-month mark, Zelenskiy aide Mykhailo Podolyak denied recent reports that the United States had demanded that its ally Kyiv stop any attacks on Russia’s oil infrastructure as “fictitious information.”

    “After two years of full-scale war, no one will dictate to Ukraine the conditions for conducting this war,” Podolyak told the Dozhd TV channel. “Within the framework of international law, Ukraine can ‘degrease’ Russian instruments of war. Fuel is the main tool of warfare. Ukraine will destroy the [Russian] fuel infrastructure.”

    The Financial Times quoted anonymous sources as saying that Washington had given “repeated warnings” to Ukraine’s state security service and its military intelligence agency to stop attacking Russian oil refineries and energy infrastructure. It said officials cited such attacks’ effect on global oil prices and the risk of retaliation.

    The southern Zaporizhzhya region bore the brunt of the Russian assault that hit Ukraine’s energy infrastructure particularly hard on March 22, with at least three people killed, including a man and his 8-year-old daughter. There were at least 20 dead and injured, in all.

    Ukraine’s state hydropower company, Ukrhydroenerho, said the DniproHES hydroelectric dam on the Dnieper in Zaporizhzhya was hit by two Russian missiles that damaged HPP-2, one of the plant’s two power stations, although there was no immediate risk of a breach.

    “There is currently a fire at the dam. Emergency services are working at the site, eliminating the consequences of numerous air strikes,” Ukrhydroenerho said in a statement, adding that the situation at the dam “is under control.”

    However, Ihor Syrota, the director of national grid operator Ukrenerho, told RFE/RL that currently it was not known if power station HPP-2 could be repaired.

    Transport across the dam has been suspended after a missile struck a trolleybus, killing the 62-year-old driver. The vehicle was not carrying any passengers.

    “This night, Russia launched over 60 ‘Shahed’ drones and nearly 90 missiles of various types at Ukraine,” Zelenskiy wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

    “The world sees the Russian terrorists’ targets as clearly as possible: power plants and energy supply lines, a hydroelectric dam, ordinary residential buildings, and even a trolleybus,” Zelenskiy wrote.

    Devastation In Zaporizhzhya Following Russian Missile Attack
    Photo Gallery:

    Devastation In Zaporizhzhya Following Russian Missile Attack

    Ukrainian rescuers were combing the wreckage of homes in Zaporizhzhya following a deadly Russian missile strike on March 22.

    Ukraine’s power generating company Enerhoatom later said it has repaired a power line at the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant, Europe’s largest.

    “Currently, the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhya NPP is connected to the unified energy system of Ukraine by two power transmission lines, thanks to which the plant’s own needs are fulfilled,” the state’s nuclear-energy operator wrote on Telegram.

    Besides Zaporizhzhya, strikes were also reported in the Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Vinnytsya, Khmelnytskiy, Kryviy Rih, Ivano-Frankivsk, Poltava, Odesa, and Lviv regions.

    Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, has been left completely without electricity by intense Russian strikes that also caused water shortages.

    “The occupiers carried out more than 15 strikes on energy facilities. The city is virtually completely without light,” Oleh Synyehubov, the head of Kharkiv regional military administration, wrote on Telegram.

    In the Odesa region, more than 50,000 households have been left without electricity, regional officials reported. Odesa, Ukraine’s largest Black Sea port, has been frequently attacked by Russia in recent months.

    In the Khmelnitskiy region, the local administration reported that one person had been killed and several wounded during the Russian strikes, without giving details.

    Scenes Of Destruction After Russian Strike Hits Ukrainian Residential Area
    Photo Gallery:

    Scenes Of Destruction After Russian Strike Hits Ukrainian Residential Area

    Local authorities reported one person had been killed and several wounded during Russian strikes on a residential area in Khmelnitskiy in central Ukraine. RFE/RL journalists were on the scene and captured the aftermath.

    Energy Minister Herman Halushchenko called it “the largest attack on the Ukrainian energy industry in recent times.”

    Despite the widespread damage, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said the situation remained under control, and there was no need to switch off electricity throughout the country.

    “There are problems with the electricity supply in some areas, but in general, the situation in the energy sector is under control, there is no need for blackouts throughout the country,” Shmyhal wrote on Telegram.

    Ukrenerho also said that it was receiving emergency assistance from its European Union neighbors Poland, Romania, and Slovakia. Ukraine linked its power grid with that of the EU in March 2022, shortly after the start of Russia’s invasion.

    Ukraine’s air force said its air defenses downed 92 of 151 missiles and drones fired at Ukraine by Russia in the overnight attack.

    “Russian missiles have no delays, unlike aid packages for Ukraine. ‘Shahed’ drones have no indecision, unlike some politicians. It is critical to understand the cost of delays and postponed decisions,” Zelenskiy wrote, appealing to the West to do more for his country.

    “Our partners know exactly what is needed. They can definitely support us. These are necessary decisions. Life must be protected from these savages from Moscow.”

    Zelenskiy’s message came as EU leaders were wrapping up a summit in Brussels where they discussed ways to speed up ammunition and weapons deliveries for the embattled Ukrainian forces struggling to stave off an increasingly intense assault by more numerous and better-equipped Russian troops.

    A critical $60 billion military aid package from the United States, Ukraine’s main backer, remains stuck in the House of Representatives due to Republican opposition, prompting Kyiv to rely more on aid from its European allies.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • NZ government urged to help evacuate Palestinians from war on Gaza

    By Katie Scotcher, RNZ News political reporter

    The New Zealand government is being urged to create a special humanitarian visa for Palestinians in Gaza with ties to this country.

    More than 30 organisations — including World Vision, Save the Children and Greenpeace — have sent an open letter to ministers, calling on them to step up support.

    They also want the government to help evacuate Palestinians with ties to New Zealand from Gaza, and provide them with resettlement assistance.

    Their appeal is backed by Palestinian New Zealander Muhammad Dahlen, whose family is living in fear in Rafah after being forced to move there from northern Gaza.

    His ex-wife and two children (who have had visitor visas since December) were now living in a garage with his mother, sisters and nieces who do not have visas.

    “There is no food, there is no power . . .  it is a really hard situation to be living in,” he told RNZ Morning Report.

    If his family could receive visas to come to New Zealand “it literally can be the difference between life and death”.

    ‘Everyone susceptible to death’
    With Israel making it clear it still intended to send ground forces into Rafah “everyone is susceptible to death and at least we would be saving some lives”.

    Dahlen said New Zealand had a tradition of accepting refugees from areas of conflict, including Sudan, Ukraine, Afghanistan and Syria.

    “So why is this not the same?”

    He appealed to Immigration Minister Erica Stanford and Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters to intervene and approach the Egyptian government.

    “We need these people out,” he said.

    “Please give them visas; this is a first step. This is something super super difficult and huge and requires ministerial intervention.”

    Border permission needed
    At the Gaza-Egypt border potential refugees needed to gain the permission of officials from both Israel and Egypt.

    Egypt had concerns about taking in too many refugees from Gaza so the New Zealand government would need to provide assurances flights had been organised.

    If the government offered a charter flight to bring refugees to this country, “that would be amazing”.

    World Vision spokesperson Rebekah Armstrong said the government had responded with immigration support in other humanitarian emergencies.

    “We provided humanitarian visas for Ukrainians when their lives were torn apart by war, and we assisted Afghans to leave and resettle in this country when the Taliban returned to power. The situation for vulnerable Palestinians is no different.

    “Palestinians are living in a perilous environment, with hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes; children and families starving with literally nothing to eat; and healthcare and medical treatment nearly impossible to access,” Armstrong said.

    Several hundred
    The organisations did not know exactly how many people would qualify for such a visa, but estimated it could be several hundred.

    “We know there’s around 288 Palestinian New Zealanders in New Zealand, and they have estimated that there would be around 300-400 people that are their family members that they’d like to bring here,” Armstrong said.

    “That’s a very small number and as we’ve seen, in the case of Ukraine . . . the actual number of people that have probably come here would be significantly less than that, it’s not like they’re asking for the world. I think it’s quite a conservative number myself.”

    She told Morning Report similar visas for Ukrainians and Afghans had been organised within days or weeks.

    “It would be New Zealand’s response to this catastrophic situation that is unfolding. We want to be on the right side of history and this is one way we could help.”

    She said embassies in the region would need to assist with the logistics of people leaving Gaza.

    NZ government ‘monitoring’
    Stanford said in a statement the government was monitoring the situation in Gaza.

    “The issue in Gaza is primarily a humanitarian and border issue, not a visa issue, as people are unable to leave.

    “People who have relatives in Gaza can already apply for temporary or visitors’ visas for them,” Stanford said.

    But Armstrong said: “If there is the political will, the government can do this.

    “Other countries are doing this . . .  Canada and Australia are getting people out. It’s tricky, but it’s not impossible.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Traffic Accident In Southern Afghanistan Leaves 21 Dead, 38 Injured

    Male students who enrolled in Taliban-run religious schools say that sexual and physical abuse has led some to end their pursuit of an education in Afghanistan.

    The students, all of whom were aged 10 to 17 and spoke to RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi on condition of anonymity out of fears of repercussion, described numerous instances in which they and fellow classmates were pressured to engage in sexual acts with teachers and subjected to corporal punishments.

    The reported cases took place in western and southwestern Afghanistan at Taliban-run madrasahs, part of the network of religious schools that the extremist group has expanded significantly as part of its drive to foster religious education more in keeping with its hard-line Islamist views.

    One 16-year-old student, a resident of Farah Province, described being propositioned by a teacher at the madrasah he attends.

    “One day at school a Taliban member who teaches there made an inappropriate offer, but I did not accept it,” the boy told Radio Azadi, using inexplicit language to describe sexual abuse, a culturally taboo topic in Afghanistan. “When the lessons were over, he bothered me again.”

    The boy said he reported the incidents to a “qari,” a person who has memorized the Koran and serves as a religious authority at the school, to no avail.

    “I told the qari that the teacher was doing bad things to me, and the qari told him not to do these things, that he was a teacher,” the boy said. “The teacher admitted doing it, but it had no effect. He has continued to do bad things and made sexual requests to numerous students at the school.”

    A Taliban-controlled madrasah in Afghanistan
    A Taliban-controlled madrasah in Afghanistan

    Another student in southwestern Afghanistan, a 17-year-old in the 10th grade, gave a similar account of his experience during his six months studying at a Taliban-run madrasah.

    “A Taliban member who teaches at the school proposed having a relationship with me and said some other things that I did not accept,” the boy said.

    After being refused, the teacher swore and issued threats, the boy said, adding that his fellow students have faced similar treatment.

    “He also harassed several of my classmates, and one of them left the school,” the boy said. “He told me I should not go to school anymore because the same teacher is harassing me.”

    The boy said the experience has left him “damaged” and unsure of whom he can confide in. “I can’t tell my family,” he said.

    The Taliban has come under widespread criticism for the severe restrictions it has placed on the daily lives of the Afghans since seizing power in August 2021. In its pursuit to impose its extreme interpretation of Islam, the Taliban has restored many of the draconian rules it was infamous for during its first stint in power from 1996 to 2001.

    The ban on the education of girls past the sixth grade, and the erasure of women’s role in society stand out among the measures the Taliban has taken. But other steps — including prohibitions on music and idolatry through art, and pressure against students and teachers — have affected all walks of life regardless of sex.

    Since the Taliban returned to power, many educators have left the country, while female teachers have been left at home without work due to restrictions on women’s freedom of movement and their ability to teach males.

    Meanwhile, the Taliban has steadily worked to replace secular state schools and informal madrasahs with a system of religious schooling. The system does allow for girl students, including those of university age, but critics say it falls far short of the standards of modern education for girls and boys alike and often promotes extremism.

    According to a report on Afghanistan issued by the United Nations in February, the Taliban has established 6,836 madrasahs for males and 380 for females and was expected to finalize a standardized religious curriculum in time for the new school year beginning this month.

    Afghan boys read the Koran at a madrasah in Kabul.
    Afghan boys read the Koran at a madrasah in Kabul.

    The recruitment of madrasah teachers is also in full swing, according to the report, following a decree by the Taliban’s spiritual leader Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada to have 100,000 new madrasah teachers in place.

    In December, Human Rights Watch gave a stinging assessment of the state of education in general, saying that in addition to the obstacles to the education of girls and women, the Taliban had “also inflicted deep harm on boys’ education” in Afghanistan.

    “Many boys were previously taught by women teachers; the Taliban has prohibited women from teaching boys, depriving women teachers of their jobs and often leaving boys with unqualified replacement male teachers or sometimes no teachers at all,” HRW said. “Parents and students said that corporal punishment, which has long been a problem at Afghan schools, has become increasingly common. The curriculum in many schools appears to be under revision to remove important school subjects and promote discrimination.”

    The rights watchdog said the circumstances had “led many boys to leave school altogether” and “left boys struggling with mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.”

    Shortly after the Taliban regained power, the United Nations highlighted the dire situation for children in Afghanistan, including exposure to sexual violence and increased risk of students dropping out of school.

    A madrasah in Kandahar
    A madrasah in Kandahar

    Difficulties in ensuring the protection of children are exacerbated, according to the UN, by the Taliban’s refusal to consider people below the age of 18 to be children, as is the international standard, instead using the onset of puberty as the basis for adulthood.

    Younger madrasah students in western and southwestern Afghanistan below or at the age of puberty said they were not spared physical abuse and sexual harassment from teachers.

    One young man who spoke to Radio Azadi said he recently learned that his young brother was being subjected to sexual abuse at a madrasah in western Afghanistan.

    The young man said his brother was being assigned extracurricular “homework by a teacher, or to put it bluntly, he was being asked for sex, [the teacher] fondled his hands and feet and kissed him.”

    As a result, the young man said he told his brother not to go to school anymore.

    Fear of sexual harassment and sexual and physical abuse were cited as a common factor leading boys in western and southwestern Afghanistan to give up their studies.

    “Some teachers harass our students and make immoral requests,” said one 14-year-old boy who also described common methods of corporal punishment at his madrasah. “They strike our faces or beat our hands and feet under the pretext of disciplining us for not learning our lessons properly.”

    Afghan boys peek out from inside a madrasah in Kandahar.
    Afghan boys peek out from inside a madrasah in Kandahar.

    The boy said many students were studying hard in fear of being taken to a special room for punishment, and that “some even drop out of school.”

    Another student, aged 10, said his teacher separated him and other students from their class to beat the soles of their feet.

    Afterward, he told Radio Azadi, he stopped going to class because he was afraid. And upon hearing about the incidents, his and his classmates’ parents “did not allow us to go to school.”

    The Taliban authorities did not respond to requests for comment on the allegations of abuse at madrasahs it has established. And efforts to speak to individuals aware of the situations at madrasahs in other areas of Afghanistan were met by refusals to comment due to fear of reprisals.

    A women’s rights activist who asked that her name not be published told Radio Azadi that families have no avenue to lodge complaints about the abuse their children encounter at Taliban-run madrasahs because they, too, would face threats.

    The activist said that not only had she been made aware of sexual harassment against both girls and boys at Taliban-run madrasahs, but the curriculum also serves to “increase the level of extremism in the country.”

    Reducing the risks of both threats, she said, would require greater oversight by the Taliban authorities and ideally, she said, a reduction in the number of madrasahs.

    Najib Amini, a civil society activist in western Afghanistan, said that for now, the onus falls on families to be aware.

    “Children are subjected to sexual abuse in madrasahs established under the Taliban regime,” Amini said. “Families have an important and essential role in this regard. If they do not want their children to be abused in schools, if they want their children to get a basic education…then they should not send their children to madrasahs under the control of the Taliban.”

    Written by Michael Scollon based on reporting by RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • March 8, 2024 was again International Women’s Day

    Like every year, many organisations used the occasion to focus on the role of women human rights defenders. Here a selection of this year’s actions [for earlier posts see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/international-womens-day/]:

    Global Voices has released a special coverage called Empowering voices: Women in politics, which explores the state of women’s political participation around the world. 

    Human Rights First referred to a new report reveals that WHRDs face increasing harassment and threats from a global movement against gender equality and LGBTQI+ rights. The Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation, a leading feminist women’s rights organization, released Hope and Resistance Go Together: The State of Women Human Rights Defenders 2023,  a report that found discouraging growth in harassment of WHRDs.  The foundation surveyed 458 women’s and queer rights activists and interviewed 25 activists representing WHRDs from 67 countries affected by violence or conflict.

    They found that 75% reported facing harassment for their activism, a 15% increase from two years ago, and 25% of respondents have received death threats. Most harassment comes from government authorities, but increased harassment from far-right groups and anti-gender equality actors is also driving these startling statistics. Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) across the world face resistance and violence. In 2022, at least 401 HRDs were killed for their peaceful work. But some of the obstacles facing WHRDs are distinct. https://humanrightsfirst.org/library/recognizing-women-human-rights-defenders-on-international-womens-day/

    Human Rights Watch on 7 March carried a piece by Macarena Sáez who says inter alia:

    On this International Women’s Day, we march for the one in three women who experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime. We cheer for countries like Argentina, Colombia, and Ireland that value our autonomy to choose to be pregnant and have legalized access to safe abortion, while protesting that abortion is still or again illegal in many places, including US states like Alabama and Texas. At the same time, we march to honor the women who marched before us, like the Mexican women who organized the first feminist congress in 1916 to push for family law reforms and their right to vote, and the Nigerians who waged their “Women’s War” against colonization and patriarchal laws in 1929. Their struggles sadly mirror the reality of many women around the world today – especially women who belong to historically marginalized groups – who continue to rally against violence and abuse.

    Fearing the power of women’s solidarity and collective actions, governments have  stifled women’s speech through restrictions on movement, censorship, smear campaigns, and criminal prosecutions. In highly repressive contexts, like Afghanistan and Iran, women suffer arbitrary detention, and even enforced disappearance and torture, for their activism. Meanwhile, social media companies have not done enough to protect women from online violence, chilling women’s freedom of expression on and offline.    These barriers make it hard for women’s equality to become reality. Gender justice requires an enabling environment in which women can express themselves, speak and spread their political views, and participate in political and public life. Instead of repressing or tolerating the repression of women, governments should recognize our collective actions – and consequent power – and enshrine our rights in laws, policies, and practice. [https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/03/07/womens-voices-have-power-drive-change]

    Amnesty International on 8 March highlighted three prominent women who reveal why sexual and reproductive rights are a major human rights issue : Charlotte Bunch, USA Leila Hessini, Algeria Marge Berer, UK [https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2024/03/three-prominent-women-reveal-why-sexual-and-reproductive-rights-are-a-major-human-rights-issue/]

    On 8 March 8, 2024 Almyra Luna Kamilla and Rosalind Ratana 
opined in IMHO on “Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia”

    [OPINION] Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia

    In recent years, Asia has been witnessing rising authoritarianism and shrinking civic space. Among those in the frontlines of resistance are young women human rights defenders. As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let us demand for an enabling world where women human rights defenders can continue their noble pursuits without fear of reprisals.

    In Thailand, the royal defamation law is being excessively used to silence criticisms against the monarchy. Meanwhile in Sri Lanka, economic and political mismanagement has sparked peaceful protests that are met with violence and intimidation. The fate of Asia’s political climate hangs by a thread as elections are held across many countries, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Korea, and Pakistan. Now more than ever, governments across the region are finding ways to solidify their power, putting an even tighter grip on civil society to the detriment of democracy and people’s fundamental rights and freedoms.

    Despite such challenges, many are courageously speaking out and taking collective action to reclaim power for the people. This includes young women human rights defenders – or Youth WHRDs – who are claiming space to call out human rights violations and to demand accountability from oppressive governments. [https://www.rappler.com/voices/imho/young-women-rights-defenders-asia/]

    The Alliance for Human Rights in Afghanistan (a coalition of 9 major NGOs) urgently appealed to the international community to significantly bolster its support and actively safeguard the human rights of Afghan women and girls, including Afghan women human rights defenders who face persecution for their peaceful campaigns for rights and basic freedoms.

    In 2023, the Taliban further intensified its oppressive policies toward women, girls, the LGBTIQ+ community, and religious minorities. Afghan women and girls have seen their rights and prospects increasingly curtailed, from greater enforcement of restrictions on education – including a ban on girls attending secondary schools and universities – to intensifying exclusion of women from political and public life. Women have been banned from a growing list of forms of paid employment, and economic barriers, such as the ban on women registering organisations and undergoing vocational training, have contributed to a sharp decline in women’s participation in the labour market, impeding their right to make a living. This exacerbates financial insecurity, widens gender disparities, and further confines women to the private sphere. Lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women face severe threats, including torture, sexual violence, forced marriage, and death. Victims of gender violence, including those who identify as such, lack minimal legal and practical support. Obstacles to healthcare and education have exacerbated poverty and vulnerability among women and girls. In 2023, new discriminatory restrictions imposed by the Taliban included the closure of all beauty salons, blocking women from overseas travel for study, mandating female health workers in some areas to have a male chaperone while travelling or at work, and prohibiting women from entering a famous national park.

    The oppressive environment extends to female activists, NGO leaders and journalists. Notable cases include the arrests of women’s rights activists Neda Parwani and Zholia Parsi, the enforced disappearance and subsequent discovery of Manizha Seddiqi in Taliban custody to date, the arrest of Matiullah Wesa, founder of an NGO advocating for girls’ education rights, and the arbitrary detainment of Ahmad Fahim Azimi and Seddiqullah Afghan—both dedicated girls’ education activists, among many others. Journalists reporting on the Taliban, facing arrests and threats, equally illustrate the difficulties encountered by the media, particularly women, when covering crimes against women or advocating for women’s rights. Collectively, these cases underscore the near-total denial of freedom of expression, gender equality, or any other internationally recognized right in Afghanistan under the Taliban.

    Amid this growing oppression, segregation and fear, Afghan women human rights defenders have urged the international community to exert greater pressure on the Taliban. They call on international bodies to involve Afghan women in all negotiations with the Taliban and to facilitate direct meetings between women and the de facto authorities to address their concerns. Afghan women have also stressed the importance of advocacy for women’s rights by external actors based on the voices and realities of women inside Afghanistan. They call for coordinated efforts between organisations inside and outside the country to defend the rights of Afghan women and girls.

    https://www.omct.org/en/resources/statements/afghanistan-lifting-afghan-women-from-the-shadows-into-the-light-in-the-face-of-the-taliban

    The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, called on the Taliban to release women human rights defenders as the world marks International Women’s Day.

    I reiterate my appeal to the Taliban to respect all the human rights of women and girls in Afghanistan, including to education, work, freedom of movement and expression, and their cultural rights, and I urge the meaningful and equal participation of Afghan women and girls in all aspects of public life. I call on the Taliban to immediately and unconditionally release all those who have been arbitrarily detained for defending human rights, especially the rights of women and girls.”

    https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2024/03/afghanistan-un-expert-calls-taliban-release-women-human-rights-defenders

    On 8 March, Civil Rights Defenders presented 4 woman human rights defenders and asked them to share their message to women around the world.

    “The future is women.” – International Women’s Day 2024


    On International Women’s Day, the a group of NGOs (ALQST for Human Rights, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR), Front Line Defenders, Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR), HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement, International Service for Human Rights (ISHR),MENA Rights Group, Salam for Democracy and Human Rights) renewed their call on Saudi Arabian authorities to release all women human rights defenders (WHRDs), women’s rights activists and their supporters who are detained in contravention of international human rights standards. The organisations further call on Saudi authorities to lift travel bans imposed on WHRDs and their relatives, and to abolish the male guardianship system. [https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/civil-society-reiterates-their-call-on-saudi-authorities-to-release-jailed-womens-rights-activists/]

    The President of Georgia awarded severl with mesla of honor: co-founder of “Safari” organization Babutsa Pataraia, human rights defender Ana Arganashvili, founders of “National Network for Protection from Violence”: Eliso Amirejibi and Nato Shavlakadze and founder of “Vedzeb” organization Tamar Museridze.

    https://www.interpressnews.ge/en/article/130159-in-connection-with-the-international-womens-day-the-president-awarded-five-female-human-rights-defenders-with-medals-of-honor

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • Taliban Releases 84-Year-Old Austrian Man Detained In Afghanistan Last Year

    Women have borne the brunt of the Taliban’s repressive laws in Afghanistan, where the extremist group has imposed constraints on their appearances, freedom of movement, and right to work and study.

    But women who are unmarried or do not have a “mahram,” or male guardian, face even tougher restrictions and have been cut off from access to health care, banned from traveling long distances, and pressured to quit their jobs.

    The Taliban’s mahram rules prohibit women from leaving their home without a male chaperone, often a husband or a close relative such as a father, brother, or uncle.

    Single and unaccompanied women, including an estimated 2 million widows, say they are essentially prisoners in their homes and unable to carry out the even the most basic of tasks.

    Among them is Nadia, a divorced woman from the northern province of Kunduz. The mother of four has no surviving male relatives.

    “These restrictions are stifling for women who now cannot do the simple things independently,” Nadia told RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi.

    The 35-year-old said women also need to have a male escort to visit a doctor, go to government offices, or even rent a house.

    She said she had to pay a man to be her chaperone in order to meet a realtor and sign a rental agreement.

    An Afghan girl stands among widows clad in burqas.
    An Afghan girl stands among widows clad in burqas.

    Nadia also paid a man in her neighborhood around 1,000 afghanis, or $15, to accompany her to the local passport office. But the Taliban refused her passport application and ordered her to return with her father, who died years ago.

    “Even visiting the doctor is becoming impossible,” she said. “We can only plead [with the Taliban] or pray. All doors are closed to us.”

    Mahram Crackdown

    Women who violate the Taliban’s mahram requirements have been detained or arrested and are often released only after signing a pledge that they will not break the rules again in the future.

    In its latest report, the UN mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) said the Taliban’s notorious religious police was enforcing the rules by carrying out inspections in public spaces, offices, and education facilities as well as setting up checkpoints in cities.

    Released on January 22, the report said three female health-care workers were detained in October because they were traveling to work without a mahram.

    In December, women without male chaperones were stopped from accessing health-care facilities in the southeastern province of Paktia, the report said.

    And in the southern province of Kandahar, the Taliban visited a bus terminal and checked if women were traveling with a male relative, the report said.

    In late 2021, the Taliban said women seeking to travel more than 72 kilometers should not be offered transport unless they were accompanied by a close male relative.

    In another incident, the Taliban advised a woman to get married if she wanted to keep her job at a health-care facility, saying it was inappropriate for a single woman to work, the report said.

    In a report issued on January 18, the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) said the Taliban’s restrictions on single and unaccompanied women has ensured that female-led households receive less income and food.

    “Their share of employment has nearly halved, decreasing from 11 percent in 2022 to 6 percent” in 2023, the report said.

    The report noted that female-headed households typically care for more children and get paid less for their work and consume lower quantities of food.

    “Female-headed households have greater needs for humanitarian assistance and yet report more restrictions to accessing such assistance,” the report said.

    “Unaccompanied access by women to public places such as health facilities, water points, and markets has declined in the past two years,” the report added.

    ‘Deeply Insulting’

    Parisa, an unmarried woman, takes care of her elderly parents in the northeastern province of Takhar.

    With her father bedridden and her two brothers working in neighboring Iran, she has been forced to take care of the family’s needs.

    But she said she has been repeatedly harassed by the Taliban while trying to buy groceries in the local market, located some 10 kilometers away from her house.

    Afghan women wait to receive aid packages that include food, clothes, and sanitary materials, distributed by a local charity foundation in Herat, on January 15.
    Afghan women wait to receive aid packages that include food, clothes, and sanitary materials, distributed by a local charity foundation in Herat, on January 15.

    “What can women do when men in their families are forced to leave the country for work?” she told Radio Azadi, giving only her first name for security reasons.

    “I have no choice but to look after my family’s basic needs. The Taliban’s attitude is deeply insulting and extremely aggressive.”

    Parisa said she has pleaded with local Taliban leaders to relax the mahram requirements. But she said her efforts have been in vain.

    “They start abusing and threatening us whenever we try to tell them that we have to leave our houses to meet our basic needs,” she said.

    Parasto, a resident of Kabul, said the Taliban’s restrictions are preventing single women from seeking the limited health care that is available.

    “The doctors in the hospitals and clinics are reluctant to see unaccompanied women,” she told Radio Azadi.

    Parasto said the Taliban’s mounting restrictions on women, especially those who are unmarried or do not have a male guardian, have made life unbearable.

    “Single women are trying to survive without rights and opportunities,” she said.

    Written by Abubakar Siddique in Prague based on reporting by Naqiba Barakzai, Abida Spozhmai, and Khujasta Kabiri of RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Afghan Girls Banned From Contacting Media In Eastern Province

    Women have borne the brunt of the Taliban’s repressive laws in Afghanistan, where the extremist group has imposed constraints on their appearances, freedom of movement, and right to work and study.

    But women who are unmarried or do not have a “mahram,” or male guardian, face even tougher restrictions and have been cut off from access to health care, banned from traveling long distances, and pressured to quit their jobs.

    The Taliban’s mahram rules prohibit women from leaving their home without a male chaperone, often a husband or a close relative such as a father, brother, or uncle.

    Single and unaccompanied women, including an estimated 2 million widows, say they are essentially prisoners in their homes and unable to carry out the even the most basic of tasks.

    Among them is Nadia, a divorced woman from the northern province of Kunduz. The mother of four has no surviving male relatives.

    “These restrictions are stifling for women who now cannot do the simple things independently,” Nadia told RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi.

    The 35-year-old said women also need to have a male escort to visit a doctor, go to government offices, or even rent a house.

    She said she had to pay a man to be her chaperone in order to meet a realtor and sign a rental agreement.

    An Afghan girl stands among widows clad in burqas.
    An Afghan girl stands among widows clad in burqas.

    Nadia also paid a man in her neighborhood around 1,000 afghanis, or $15, to accompany her to the local passport office. But the Taliban refused her passport application and ordered her to return with her father, who died years ago.

    “Even visiting the doctor is becoming impossible,” she said. “We can only plead [with the Taliban] or pray. All doors are closed to us.”

    Mahram Crackdown

    Women who violate the Taliban’s mahram requirements have been detained or arrested and are often released only after signing a pledge that they will not break the rules again in the future.

    In its latest report, the UN mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) said the Taliban’s notorious religious police was enforcing the rules by carrying out inspections in public spaces, offices, and education facilities as well as setting up checkpoints in cities.

    Released on January 22, the report said three female health-care workers were detained in October because they were traveling to work without a mahram.

    In December, women without male chaperones were stopped from accessing health-care facilities in the southeastern province of Paktia, the report said.

    And in the southern province of Kandahar, the Taliban visited a bus terminal and checked if women were traveling with a male relative, the report said.

    In late 2021, the Taliban said women seeking to travel more than 72 kilometers should not be offered transport unless they were accompanied by a close male relative.

    In another incident, the Taliban advised a woman to get married if she wanted to keep her job at a health-care facility, saying it was inappropriate for a single woman to work, the report said.

    In a report issued on January 18, the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) said the Taliban’s restrictions on single and unaccompanied women has ensured that female-led households receive less income and food.

    “Their share of employment has nearly halved, decreasing from 11 percent in 2022 to 6 percent” in 2023, the report said.

    The report noted that female-headed households typically care for more children and get paid less for their work and consume lower quantities of food.

    “Female-headed households have greater needs for humanitarian assistance and yet report more restrictions to accessing such assistance,” the report said.

    “Unaccompanied access by women to public places such as health facilities, water points, and markets has declined in the past two years,” the report added.

    ‘Deeply Insulting’

    Parisa, an unmarried woman, takes care of her elderly parents in the northeastern province of Takhar.

    With her father bedridden and her two brothers working in neighboring Iran, she has been forced to take care of the family’s needs.

    But she said she has been repeatedly harassed by the Taliban while trying to buy groceries in the local market, located some 10 kilometers away from her house.

    Afghan women wait to receive aid packages that include food, clothes, and sanitary materials, distributed by a local charity foundation in Herat, on January 15.
    Afghan women wait to receive aid packages that include food, clothes, and sanitary materials, distributed by a local charity foundation in Herat, on January 15.

    “What can women do when men in their families are forced to leave the country for work?” she told Radio Azadi, giving only her first name for security reasons.

    “I have no choice but to look after my family’s basic needs. The Taliban’s attitude is deeply insulting and extremely aggressive.”

    Parisa said she has pleaded with local Taliban leaders to relax the mahram requirements. But she said her efforts have been in vain.

    “They start abusing and threatening us whenever we try to tell them that we have to leave our houses to meet our basic needs,” she said.

    Parasto, a resident of Kabul, said the Taliban’s restrictions are preventing single women from seeking the limited health care that is available.

    “The doctors in the hospitals and clinics are reluctant to see unaccompanied women,” she told Radio Azadi.

    Parasto said the Taliban’s mounting restrictions on women, especially those who are unmarried or do not have a male guardian, have made life unbearable.

    “Single women are trying to survive without rights and opportunities,” she said.

    Written by Abubakar Siddique in Prague based on reporting by Naqiba Barakzai, Abida Spozhmai, and Khujasta Kabiri of RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Hospitals Should Be Places of Healing — Not Military Targets

    Many decades ago in Chicago, I operated the telephone switchboard at a small hospital called Forkosh Memorial. The console of coils and plugs included a mirror so operators could keep an eye on the hospital entrance, which on weekends and evenings was also monitored by an elderly, unarmed security guard named Frank. He sat at a desk near the entrance with a ledger book. Security at the hospital…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Afghanistan: Aid Cutbacks Under the Taliban Harm Health


    This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Two Afghans Detained At Guantanamo Bay For 14 Years Released By Oman, Taliban Says

    Listen to the Talking China In Eurasia podcast

    Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google | YouTube

    Welcome back to the China In Eurasia Briefing, an RFE/RL newsletter tracking China’s resurgent influence from Eastern Europe to Central Asia.

    I’m RFE/RL correspondent Reid Standish and here’s what I’m following right now.

    As Huthi rebels continue their assault on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, the deepening crisis is posing a fresh test for China’s ambitions of becoming a power broker in the Middle East – and raising questions about whether Beijing can help bring the group to bay.

    Finding Perspective: U.S. officials have been asking China to urge Tehran to rein in Iran-backed Huthis, but according to the Financial Times, American officials say that they have seen no signs of help.

    Still, Washington keeps raising the issue. In weekend meetings with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Bangkok, U.S. national-security adviser Jake Sullivan again asked Beijing to use its “substantial leverage with Iran” to play a “constructive role” in stopping the attacks.

    Reuters, citing Iranian officials, reported on January 26 that Beijing urged Tehran at recent meetings to pressure the Huthis or risk jeopardizing business cooperation with China in the future.

    There are plenty of reasons to believe that China would want to bring the attacks to an end. The Huthis have disrupted global shipping, stoking fears of global inflation and even more instability in the Middle East.

    This also hurts China’s bottom line. The attacks are raising transport costs and jeopardizing the tens of billions of dollars that China has invested in nearby Egyptian ports.

    Why It Matters: The current crisis raises some complex questions for China’s ambitions in the Middle East.

    If China decides to pressure Iran, it’s unknown how much influence Tehran actually has over Yemen’s Huthis. Iran backs the group and supplies them with weapons, but it’s unclear if they can actually control and rein them in, as U.S. officials are calling for.

    But the bigger question might be whether this calculation looks the same from Beijing.

    China might be reluctant to get too involved and squander its political capital with Iran on trying to get the Huthis to stop their attacks, especially after the group has announced that it won’t attack Chinese ships transiting the Red Sea.

    Beijing is also unlikely to want to bring an end to something that’s hurting America’s interests arguably more than its own at the moment.

    U.S. officials say they’ll continue to talk with China about helping restore trade in the Red Sea, but Beijing might decide that it has more to gain by simply stepping back.

    Three More Stories From Eurasia

    1. ‘New Historical Heights’ For China And Uzbekistan

    Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoev made a landmark three-day visit to Beijing, where he met with Xi, engaged with Chinese business leaders, and left with an officially upgraded relationship as the Central Asian leader increasingly looks to China for his economic future.

    The Details: As I reported here, Mirziyoev left Uzbekistan looking to usher in a new era and returned with upgraded diplomatic ties as an “all-weather” partner with China.

    The move to elevate to an “all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership” from a “comprehensive strategic partnership” doesn’t come with any formal benefits, but it’s a clear sign from Mirziyoev and Xi on where they want to take the relationship between their two countries.

    Before going to China for the January 23-25 trip, Mirziyoev signed a letter praising China’s progress in fighting poverty and saying he wanted to develop a “new long-term agenda” with Beijing that will last for “decades.”

    Beyond the diplomatic upgrade, China said it was ready to expand cooperation with Uzbekistan across the new energy vehicle industry chain, as well as in major projects such as photovoltaics, wind power, and hydropower.

    Xi and Mirzoyoev also spoke about the long-discussed China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway, with the Chinese leader saying that work should begin as soon as possible, athough no specifics were offered and there are reportedly still key disputes over how the megaproject will be financed.

    2. The Taliban’s New Man In Beijing

    In a move that could lay the groundwork for more diplomatic engagement with China, Xi received diplomatic credentials from the Taliban’s new ambassador in Beijing on January 25.

    What You Need To Know: Mawlawi Asadullah Bilal Karimi was accepted as part of a ceremony that also received the credential letters of 42 new envoys. Karimi was named as the new ambassador to Beijing on November 24 but has now formally been received by Xi, which is another installment in the slow boil toward recognition that’s under way.

    No country formally recognizes the Taliban administration in Afghanistan, but China – along with other countries such as Pakistan, Russia, and Turkmenistan – have appointed their own envoys to Kabul and have maintained steady diplomatic engagement with the group since it returned to power in August 2021.

    Formal diplomatic recognition for the Taliban still looks to be far off, but this move highlights China’s strategy of de-facto recognition that could see other countries following its lead, paving the way for formal ties down the line.

    3. China’s Tightrope With Iran and Pakistan

    Air strikes and diplomatic sparring between Iran and Pakistan raised difficult questions for China and its influence in the region, as I reported here.

    Both Islamabad and Tehran have since moved to mend fences, with their foreign ministers holding talks on January 29. But the incident put the spotlight on what China would do if two of its closest partners entered into conflict against one another.

    What It Means: The tit-for-tat strikes hit militant groups operating in each other’s territory. After a tough exchange, both countries quickly cooled their rhetoric – culminating in the recent talks held in Islamabad.

    And while Beijing has lots to lose in the event of a wider conflict between two of its allies, it appeared to remain quiet, with only a formal offer to mediate if needed.

    Abdul Basit, an associate research fellow at Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, told me this approach reflects how China “shies away from situations like this,” in part to protect its reputation in case it intervenes and then fails.

    Michael Kugelman, the director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute, added that, despite Beijing’s cautious approach, China has shown a willingness to mediate when opportunity strikes, pointing to the deal it helped broker between Iran and Saudi Arabia in March.

    “It looks like the Pakistanis and the Iranians had enough in their relationship to ease tensions themselves,” he told me. “So [Beijing] might be relieved now, but that doesn’t mean they won’t step up if needed.”

    Across The Supercontinent

    China’s Odd Moment: What do the fall of the Soviet Union and China’s slowing economy have in common? The answer is more than you might think.

    Listen to the latest episode of the Talking China In Eurasia podcast, where we explore how China’s complicated relationship with the Soviet Union is shaping the country today.

    Invite Sent. Now What? Ukraine has invited Xi to participate in a planned “peace summit” of world leaders in Switzerland, Reuters reported, in a gathering tied to the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion.

    Blocked, But Why? China has suspended issuing visas to Lithuanian citizens. Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis confirmed the news and told Lithuanian journalists that “we have been informed about this. No further information has been provided.”

    More Hydro Plans: Kyrgyzstan’s Ministry of Energy and the China National Electric Engineering Company signed a memorandum of cooperation on January 24 to build a cascade of power plants and a new thermal power plant.

    One Thing To Watch

    There’s no official word, but it’s looking like veteran diplomat Liu Jianchao is the leading contender to become China’s next foreign minister.

    Wang Yi was reassigned to his old post after Qin Gang was abruptly removed as foreign minister last summer, and Wang is currently holding roles as both foreign minister and the more senior position of director of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee Foreign Affairs Commission Office.

    Liu has limited experience engaging with the West but served stints at the Communist Party’s anti-corruption watchdog and currently heads a party agency traditionally tasked with building ties with other communist states.

    It also looks like he’s being groomed for the role. He recently completed a U.S. tour, where he met with top officials and business leaders, and has also made visits to the Middle East.

    That’s all from me for now. Don’t forget to send me any questions, comments, or tips that you might have.

    Until next time,

    Reid Standish

    If you enjoyed this briefing and don’t want to miss the next edition, subscribe here. It will be sent to your inbox every other Wednesday.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Amnesty International Demands Release Of Afghan Educational Activists Held By Taliban

    Listen to the Talking China In Eurasia podcast

    Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google | YouTube

    Welcome back to the China In Eurasia Briefing, an RFE/RL newsletter tracking China’s resurgent influence from Eastern Europe to Central Asia.

    I’m RFE/RL correspondent Reid Standish and here’s what I’m following right now.

    As Huthi rebels continue their assault on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, the deepening crisis is posing a fresh test for China’s ambitions of becoming a power broker in the Middle East – and raising questions about whether Beijing can help bring the group to bay.

    Finding Perspective: U.S. officials have been asking China to urge Tehran to rein in Iran-backed Huthis, but according to the Financial Times, American officials say that they have seen no signs of help.

    Still, Washington keeps raising the issue. In weekend meetings with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Bangkok, U.S. national-security adviser Jake Sullivan again asked Beijing to use its “substantial leverage with Iran” to play a “constructive role” in stopping the attacks.

    Reuters, citing Iranian officials, reported on January 26 that Beijing urged Tehran at recent meetings to pressure the Huthis or risk jeopardizing business cooperation with China in the future.

    There are plenty of reasons to believe that China would want to bring the attacks to an end. The Huthis have disrupted global shipping, stoking fears of global inflation and even more instability in the Middle East.

    This also hurts China’s bottom line. The attacks are raising transport costs and jeopardizing the tens of billions of dollars that China has invested in nearby Egyptian ports.

    Why It Matters: The current crisis raises some complex questions for China’s ambitions in the Middle East.

    If China decides to pressure Iran, it’s unknown how much influence Tehran actually has over Yemen’s Huthis. Iran backs the group and supplies them with weapons, but it’s unclear if they can actually control and rein them in, as U.S. officials are calling for.

    But the bigger question might be whether this calculation looks the same from Beijing.

    China might be reluctant to get too involved and squander its political capital with Iran on trying to get the Huthis to stop their attacks, especially after the group has announced that it won’t attack Chinese ships transiting the Red Sea.

    Beijing is also unlikely to want to bring an end to something that’s hurting America’s interests arguably more than its own at the moment.

    U.S. officials say they’ll continue to talk with China about helping restore trade in the Red Sea, but Beijing might decide that it has more to gain by simply stepping back.

    Three More Stories From Eurasia

    1. ‘New Historical Heights’ For China And Uzbekistan

    Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoev made a landmark three-day visit to Beijing, where he met with Xi, engaged with Chinese business leaders, and left with an officially upgraded relationship as the Central Asian leader increasingly looks to China for his economic future.

    The Details: As I reported here, Mirziyoev left Uzbekistan looking to usher in a new era and returned with upgraded diplomatic ties as an “all-weather” partner with China.

    The move to elevate to an “all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership” from a “comprehensive strategic partnership” doesn’t come with any formal benefits, but it’s a clear sign from Mirziyoev and Xi on where they want to take the relationship between their two countries.

    Before going to China for the January 23-25 trip, Mirziyoev signed a letter praising China’s progress in fighting poverty and saying he wanted to develop a “new long-term agenda” with Beijing that will last for “decades.”

    Beyond the diplomatic upgrade, China said it was ready to expand cooperation with Uzbekistan across the new energy vehicle industry chain, as well as in major projects such as photovoltaics, wind power, and hydropower.

    Xi and Mirzoyoev also spoke about the long-discussed China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway, with the Chinese leader saying that work should begin as soon as possible, athough no specifics were offered and there are reportedly still key disputes over how the megaproject will be financed.

    2. The Taliban’s New Man In Beijing

    In a move that could lay the groundwork for more diplomatic engagement with China, Xi received diplomatic credentials from the Taliban’s new ambassador in Beijing on January 25.

    What You Need To Know: Mawlawi Asadullah Bilal Karimi was accepted as part of a ceremony that also received the credential letters of 42 new envoys. Karimi was named as the new ambassador to Beijing on November 24 but has now formally been received by Xi, which is another installment in the slow boil toward recognition that’s under way.

    No country formally recognizes the Taliban administration in Afghanistan, but China – along with other countries such as Pakistan, Russia, and Turkmenistan – have appointed their own envoys to Kabul and have maintained steady diplomatic engagement with the group since it returned to power in August 2021.

    Formal diplomatic recognition for the Taliban still looks to be far off, but this move highlights China’s strategy of de-facto recognition that could see other countries following its lead, paving the way for formal ties down the line.

    3. China’s Tightrope With Iran and Pakistan

    Air strikes and diplomatic sparring between Iran and Pakistan raised difficult questions for China and its influence in the region, as I reported here.

    Both Islamabad and Tehran have since moved to mend fences, with their foreign ministers holding talks on January 29. But the incident put the spotlight on what China would do if two of its closest partners entered into conflict against one another.

    What It Means: The tit-for-tat strikes hit militant groups operating in each other’s territory. After a tough exchange, both countries quickly cooled their rhetoric – culminating in the recent talks held in Islamabad.

    And while Beijing has lots to lose in the event of a wider conflict between two of its allies, it appeared to remain quiet, with only a formal offer to mediate if needed.

    Abdul Basit, an associate research fellow at Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, told me this approach reflects how China “shies away from situations like this,” in part to protect its reputation in case it intervenes and then fails.

    Michael Kugelman, the director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute, added that, despite Beijing’s cautious approach, China has shown a willingness to mediate when opportunity strikes, pointing to the deal it helped broker between Iran and Saudi Arabia in March.

    “It looks like the Pakistanis and the Iranians had enough in their relationship to ease tensions themselves,” he told me. “So [Beijing] might be relieved now, but that doesn’t mean they won’t step up if needed.”

    Across The Supercontinent

    China’s Odd Moment: What do the fall of the Soviet Union and China’s slowing economy have in common? The answer is more than you might think.

    Listen to the latest episode of the Talking China In Eurasia podcast, where we explore how China’s complicated relationship with the Soviet Union is shaping the country today.

    Invite Sent. Now What? Ukraine has invited Xi to participate in a planned “peace summit” of world leaders in Switzerland, Reuters reported, in a gathering tied to the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion.

    Blocked, But Why? China has suspended issuing visas to Lithuanian citizens. Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis confirmed the news and told Lithuanian journalists that “we have been informed about this. No further information has been provided.”

    More Hydro Plans: Kyrgyzstan’s Ministry of Energy and the China National Electric Engineering Company signed a memorandum of cooperation on January 24 to build a cascade of power plants and a new thermal power plant.

    One Thing To Watch

    There’s no official word, but it’s looking like veteran diplomat Liu Jianchao is the leading contender to become China’s next foreign minister.

    Wang Yi was reassigned to his old post after Qin Gang was abruptly removed as foreign minister last summer, and Wang is currently holding roles as both foreign minister and the more senior position of director of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee Foreign Affairs Commission Office.

    Liu has limited experience engaging with the West but served stints at the Communist Party’s anti-corruption watchdog and currently heads a party agency traditionally tasked with building ties with other communist states.

    It also looks like he’s being groomed for the role. He recently completed a U.S. tour, where he met with top officials and business leaders, and has also made visits to the Middle East.

    That’s all from me for now. Don’t forget to send me any questions, comments, or tips that you might have.

    Until next time,

    Reid Standish

    If you enjoyed this briefing and don’t want to miss the next edition, subscribe here. It will be sent to your inbox every other Wednesday.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.