Category: China

  • Foreign affairs committee calls for import ban on products from Xinjiang, where it says there is ‘industrial-scale forced labour’

    Britain must act to stop China’s atrocities against Uyghur Muslims by banning the import of Chinese cotton and solar panels from Xinjiang province, as well as by announcing that no government officials will attend the Winter Olympics in Beijing, a report by MPs says.

    The chair of parliament’s foreign affairs committee, Tom Tugendhat, said that without action the UK would be allowing China “to nest the dragon deeper and deeper into British life”.

    Related: France investigates fashion brands over forced Uyghur labour claims

    Continue reading…

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

  • In a statement 22 June 2021, the ISHR on behalf of over 20 civil society organisations called for unequivocal action by the High Commissioner to monitor and report on the human rights situation in China. The violations targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims, the groups underlined, have been determined by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch to constitute crimes against humanity.

    ‘The Special Procedures and treaty bodies have repeatedly, for the last five years, raised serious concerns about the human rights situation in China,’ said Sarah M Brooks, ISHR programme director. ‘But despite these efforts, little has changed. More is needed.’

    The gravity of the situation was underlined also by a joint statement delivered by Canada, on behalf of more than 40 states, earlier today. Listing a range of concerns about treatment of Uyghurs, those governments pressed China to allow ‘immediate, meaningful and unfettered’ access to the region for the High Commissioner.

    The weight of evidence and the gravity of allegations of crimes against humanity against Uyghurs demands that the High Commissioner commence remote monitoring and public reporting immediately. The full statement can be accessed here

    Anadolu on 29 June 2021 reported that Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, says she has countless reports about mistreatment of activists in China.

    The UN’s independent expert on human rights defenders said that she feared activists in China were arbitrarily sentenced to long prison terms, house arrest and tortured and also denied access to medical treatment, their lawyers and families.

    Condemning human rights defenders…to long terms in prison for their peaceful human rights work, abusing them in custody and failing to provide them with adequate medical care…cannot continue,” Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, said in a statement.

    She said she had “countless reports” pointing to the mistreatment of human rights defenders in Chinese custody, which is “endemic.”

    Geneva’s Chinese mission spokesman Liu Yuyin later refuted Lawlor’s criticism, accusing the UN expert of having “deliberately smeared China, spread disinformation and interfered in China’s judicial sovereignty under the pretext of human rights.”

    “The individuals that Ms. Lawlor and other special procedure mandate holders mentioned have committed a series of crimes such as inciting subversion of state power and splitting the state. The facts are clear and the evidence is solid,” he added.

    Lawlor said the treatment meted out to those jailed may amount to torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, despite a plethora of recommendations from the UN mechanisms over the years, including from the Committee Against Torture.

    Some defenders, such as Gao Zhisheng, have been “forcibly disappeared,” while others such as Guo Hongwei have died in prison, she said. Lawlor said she knew of at least 13 human rights defenders sentenced on “spurious charges” such as “picking quarrels” or “provoking trouble” to 10 years or more in prison for peacefully defending the rights of others. Among them is Qin Yongmin, sentenced to 35 years in prison for work that included promoting engagement with the UN, and Ilham Tohti, a “moderate scholar” serving a life sentence.

    “Tohti was arbitrarily arrested, allegedly tortured and sentenced to life after a closed-door trial. He was not allowed any family visits and no information has been provided by Chinese authorities since,” said Lawlor. He is a much-recognised defender: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/37AE7DC4-16DB-51E9-4CF8-AB0828AEF491

    Human rights defender Chen Xi, serving 10 years in prison, has chronic enteritis, which causes dehydration and fever. In winter, he contracts severe frostbite on his hands, ears and abdomen, and in his lifetime, he has been sentenced to 23 years in prison, said the expert.

    https://www.ishr.ch/news/hrc47-governments-ngos-call-high-commissioner-step-work-protect-uyghurs

    https://www.globalvillagespace.com/un-expert-raises-concern-on-jailed-activist-in-china/

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

  • It’s been dubbed ‘tangping’ – shunning tough careers to chill out instead. But how is the Communist party taking the birth of this new counterculture?

    Name: Low-desire life.

    Age: People – young ones especially – have been rebelling, dropping out, rejecting the rat race for pretty much ever, since the rat race began. But in China, it’s becoming more common. On trend, you might say.

    Related: How hard does China work?

    Continue reading…

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

  • A roundup of the coverage on struggles for human rights and freedoms, from Chile to Cambodia

    Continue reading…

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

  • 4 Mins Read A new report on the alternative protein market in China says firms should target the country’s 700 million young consumers.

    The post China’s 700 Million Young Consumers Key To Mainstream Alternative Protein, Report Says appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • By Guyon Espiner, investigative reporter, RNZ In Depth

    New Zealand Labour MP Louisa Wall has accused China of harvesting organs from political prisoners among the Uyghur and Falun Gong populations.

    The MP, who is part of a global network of politicians monitoring the actions of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), also says her own government needs to do more to counter what she calls the slave labour trade in China.

    “Forced organ harvesting is occurring to service a global market where people are wanting hearts, lungs, eyes, skin,” Wall said.

    China expert Professor Anne-Marie Brady of the University of Canterbury, describes the New Zealand government’s political strategy on China as something close to a cone of silence.

    “Our MPs seem to have a pact that they’re not allowed to say anything at all critical of the CCP and barely mention the word China in any kind of negative terms.”

    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta refused to do interviews for the new Red Line podcast, which examines the influence of the CCP in New Zealand.

    But Wall has broken ranks.

    ‘Used as slaves’
    “I’m concerned that there appears to be a million Uyghurs being imprisoned in what they call education camps, but essentially, used as slaves to pick cotton.”

    Wall, along with National’s Simon O’Connor, is one of two New Zealand MPs in the International Parliamentary Alliance on China, a network of more than 200 politicians from 20 parliaments, set up to monitor the actions of the CCP.

    She thinks New Zealand should be doing much more to counter the slave labour trade from Xinjiang, in the north west of China.

    “What the UK and Canada have done is they’ve got modern slavery acts and they want to ensure the corporates who are taking those raw materials, actually ensure that the production of those raw materials complies with the modern slavery act. I like that mechanism.”

    She says the government also needs to pass new laws to stop New Zealanders getting organ transplants sourced from China or from any country that cannot verify the integrity of its organ donor programme.

    This photo taken on May 31, 2019 shows the outer wall of a complex which includes what is believed to be a re-education camp where mostly Muslim ethnic minorities are detained, on the outskirts of Hotan, in China's northwestern Xinjiang region.
    A 31 May 2019 photograph of a complex in Xinjiang believed to be a “re-education camp”. Image: RNZ/AFP

    China sources some organs from political prisoners, she said.

    “The Uyghur population, and also the Falun Gong population, both have been designated as prisoners of conscience,” she said. “We know that they are slaves. We also know that they’re being used to harvest organs.”

    Tribunal finding
    She bases that on findings from a recent independent tribunal chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice, a British QC, who previously worked with the International Criminal Court (ICC).

    His 600-page report, called the China Tribunal, says the killing of political prisoners for organ transplants is continuing in China and that many people have died “indescribably hideous deaths” in the process.

    “Based on a report from Lord Justice Nice from the UK, we now know that forced organ harvesting is occurring to service a global market where people are wanting hearts, lungs, eyes, skin,” Wall said.

    The Chinese embassy in New Zealand ignored requests to talk about this issue.

    China announced back in 2014 that it would no longer remove organs from executed prisoners and when the China Tribunal report was released in 2018 the CCP dismissed it as inaccurate and politically motivated.

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


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • On February 25, 2021, China’s President Xi Jinping announced that his country of 1.4 billion people had pulled its people out of poverty as it is defined internationally. Since 1981, 853 million Chinese people have lifted themselves out of poverty thanks to large-scale interventions from both the Chinese state and the Communist Party of China (CPC); according to the data of the World Bank, three out of four people worldwide who were lifted out of poverty live in China.

    The post China Pulls Itself Out Of Poverty 100 Years Into Its Revolution appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The post News on China | No. 57 first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • A conversation about what rising U.S.-China tensions mean for workers and the labor movement in both countries.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • Thailand’s Defence Technology Institute (DTI) has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Royal Thai Army to develop a medium-range tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for the service’s Army Aviation Centre. The new UAV – called D-Eyes 04 – is expected to replace the army’s Searcher Mk II UAVs made by Israel Aerospace Industries […]

    The post Thailand pursues new tactical-class UAV, based on a Chinese design appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Chinese rule in Tibet has been characterised by brutal repression and ethnic cleansing, writes Terry Philpot – and yet the rest of the world takes little interest

    Your otherwise excellent editorial on the centenary of the Chinese Communist party (29 June) ignores entirely, as do so many commentaries on China, the appalling suffering of the Tibetan people, citing only the oppression of the Uyghurs. Tibet’s plight under Chinese rule goes back even longer. Tibet was an independent country when invaded by the Chinese army in 1950. Its spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, fled to a life of exile and his young successor was kidnapped by the Chinese and never seen again.

    Chinese rule is characterised by brutal repression, ethnic cleansing (partly by the mass settlement of Han Chinese and the promotion of Mandarin Chinese over Tibetan), persecution of religious believers, torture, murder, “disappearances”, and incarceration without trial. Tibet evokes little interest from governments (including successive British ones) and none from the left or the right. Its cause is kept alive in the UK largely by Free Tibet.
    Terry Philpot
    Limpsfield Chart, Surrey

    Continue reading…

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

  • Students experience harassment and intimidation from classmates for criticising China’s government, Human Rights Watch reveals

    Wu Lebao, 38, recounts receiving a string of insulting messages and calls from a fellow student calling him stupid and a traitor to China.

    The alleged harassment experienced by Wu – who is studying mathematics at the Australian National University in Canberra – recently took a disturbing turn.

    Related: Chinese students in Australia fear reprisals at home if they speak out, inquiry hears

    Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

    Continue reading…

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

  • The world facing desperate situations of climate change, planetary degradation and nuclear war preparation desperately needs protection from inhumane deceiving war promoting Western media, and from where shall it come if not from the bountiful and powerful two great designated adversaries of the Western powers, China, the world’s most populous nation and largest economy, and the Russian Federation encompassing 11% of the planet’s landmass.

    Seems That the World Has Let Americans Get Away With Murderous Genocide in So Many Countries

    Let’s begin with acknowledging that officials of the United States of America, its military, its clandestine operating CIA, and personnel within its criminal media cartel have been committing crimes against humanity free of any worry or concern of prosecution.

    Let us also acknowledge that though there is relatively free speech throughout most of the world, no one seems to ever be talking about the multitude of legally prosecutable monstrous crimes against humanity committed by Americans with impunity, many of which involve the death of millions of innocent men, women and children. There is a strange absence of much talk about them even as the horrific acts of genocide that they were.

    The World Court of Public Opinion Is Not Yet in Session Regarding US Crimes Against Humanity

    Sure, there are quite a few anti-imperialist books in print that are critical of US genocides, but the great court of world pubic opinion has not been in session since 1945 when there was consensus among people throughout the world for demanding the ultimate legal punishment of the leaders of the nations for the murderous horrors perpetrated during their invasions and bombings in the course of the Second World War.

    American Officials are Vulnerable for Having Confessed or Bragged about Their Illegal, Unconstitutional and Genocidal Crimes

    How is it that even government officials of nations presently under attack by the United States of America, and those of nations invaded and bombed by the US in the past, passively continue to allow Americans to get away with murder, the present murdering of thousands and the past mass murder of many millions, when massively murderous crimes against humanity have even been openly admitted to by high officials of the government of the United States of America by their openly characterizing them either as having been mistakes or by bragging about their having been successful.

    –  American officials claiming that their mega genocidal invasions, bombings and occupation wars in Vietnam and Iraq were honest mistakes are the two most devastating examples. “We were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why.” –former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.1 “It was a mistake, and I acknowledge that.” — Presidential candidate Joe Biden referring to his vote in favor of the Iraq invasion war when he was chairman of the powerful US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.2 But no talk of Americans paying for their years of ‘mistakes,’ murder and maiming of millions and the destruction of their countries.

    –  The CIA official in charge of the the US/UK covertly engineered bloody overthrow of Iranian democracy in 1953 has even written a book bragging about his crime,3 which the CIA has publicly admitted to.4

    –  American murderous invasions of Cuba, Dominican Republic, Panama, Grenada and covertly arranging and financing devastating civil wars in Guatemala and El Salvador that are openly acknowledged (without any sense of responsibility for the suffering).

    –  The undercover arrangements for the brutal assassination of democratically elected popular first Congo President Patrice Lumumba were entertainingly reviewed in a televised segment of the US government’s Smithsonian Institute Channel in US mainstream media,5 no contrition indicated.

    No Uproar in Reaction to Americans Massive Murdering of Millions of Innocent Men, Women and Children in Their Own Beloved Countries far away from the Invading United States of America

    Martin Luther King’s & Nelson Mandela’s Exceptional Outcries

    Oh, from time to time there have been accusing outcries from individuals: “The greatest  purveyor of violence in the world is my own government,” Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1967 made headlines in newspapers throughout the world,6 and South African President Nelson Mandela in 2003, “If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities it is the United States of America,”7 Of course, CIA controlled criminal mainstream media vilified King, didn’t report Mandela’s outcry, and has made sure that few people ever heard of King’s condemnation of his government again. However, neither King nor Mandela called for prosecution of the perpetrators and compensation for victims of the atrocities they decried. (King did say that Americans ‘must make what reparations they can for the damage they did and provide the medical aid that is badly needed, making it available in the US if necessary, but said nothing about prosecution of Americans.)

    In Western alternate media, the finest independent journalists, top intellectuals and historians stick to reporting and chronicling events of human horror as if they were imperial RealPolitik, as unchallengeable as the weather, rarely including the whole truth that they are obviously prosecutable as crimes against humanity, crimes against peace and genocide. Inversely, in the case of domestic homicide on a city street anywhere in the world, the public clamors to know whether or not what happened was a crime or not. Amazingly, in world coverage independent journalism this writer finds the word ‘crime’ is never or hardly ever employed. Journalists report mass murderous world events as terrible or mistaken foreign policy, rarely, if ever, citing a need for reparations, indemnity, or compensation for surviving victims.

    Sadly, when an Iraq mom, managed to get her lawsuit against President Bush and members of his administration as far as a US Federal Court of Appeals, it received only a very modest amount of coverage even in anti-imperialist independent alternate media.

    There’s Freedom of Speech but No One is Speaking Out

    Why is there is no outcry around the world against the dozens of US invasions, bombings, occupation wars and deadly sanctions in and on smaller nations? The US bloodletting is probably rarely even much of a topic of pubic conversation anywhere except within the populations of the countries under US attack. Independent peoples historians assume that it is because of the enormous influence of monopolized CIA overseen giant worldwide media conglomerates.

    For decades, powerful CIA controlled Western news and entertainment media, with it’s television’s worldwide satellite reach has mesmerized and totally bamboozled its planetary audience into ineptitude with its programing of indulgence, of very restricted and twisted selective news, deceitfully blacked out critical information, misinformation, and often outright lies ultimately portraying the many US regime change invasions, bombings, sanctions and occupation wars as benevolent and necessary to protecting American freedom and democracy.8

    Way back in 1950, Albert Einstein explained “Under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.”9

    Albert Einstein wrote that in 1950, even before the CIA operation Mongoose10 had completed its control over everyone of any appreciable importance in American media and sources of information and in much of Western Europe and on the other continents, see the lengthy article: Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A. 12/26/1977, The New Times.11,12

    Powerful Western Media Has Anesthetized Majority Humanity but Why Are Even those Nations under US Attack Relatively Silent Re US Crimes Against Humanity?

    Unfortunately, some nations currently under American military attack have pro US war lord governments installed by American occupying forces as in the case of Afghanistan and Somalia, and the populations of many nations formerly invaded, bombed and sanctioned by Americans, like Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia want to put their enormous suffering behind them. Their governments seek to avoid confrontation with the USA, long become trading partners.

    A majority of small countries in the world once attacked by Americans, British or French have governments either economically, politically and militarily controlled by the USA or by a Western colonial power, or if enjoying a degree of independence, fear criticizing the US would bring economic punishment and/or covertly arranged disturbances.

    Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Syria, Yemen and North Korea For Years Under Mortal Attack From USA! China & Russia  Targeted with Nuclear Missiles — All Have Independent Governments

    This is all to say that humanity can only hope for calls for international law to come down on the past and present murderous lawlessness of the  American empire from nations presently under attack which have independent governments free from US control, like China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Syria, Yemen and North Korea. However, up to now, the these nations have not taken advantage of the US wars confessed to as mistakes, which it seems could easily be profiled into world public awareness of USA guilt of genocide, at least in Vietnam and more recently in Iraq.

    Likewise would the repeated quoting publicly of Martin Luther King’s blistering condemnations of his government damage the credibility of Western media, which has for more than a half-century blacked-out Kings damnation of his government. These glaringly obvious ways to fight back against the insanely criminal USA that is attacking their nations and constantly threatening world war are not being taken advantage of though many nations suffer US sanctions and worse.

    Solidarity and Truthful Counter-Propaganda from Independent Nations Under US Attack Woefully Insufficient

    The US was sued by Nicaragua in the World Court in 1984 for mining Nicaragua’s harbors and other hostile acts (Nicaragua v. United States). The Court ruled in Nicaragua’s favor and found the US in violation of customary international law. The court put the United States of America under obligation to make reparation to the Republic of Nicaragua for all injury caused to Nicaragua. The US ignored the ruling but apparently stopped the mining. The suit brought international attention to US being guilty of crimes against a tiny country and it considering itself above the law.

    This conviction by the International Court of Justice should not have been allowed to be forgotten as well as the US mega genocides committed in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Iraq, and all the other regime change murderous invasions, bombings and deadly sanctions of Latin American, Middle East and African nations.

    An Absence of Law

    No leader anywhere ever seems to call for prosecution of US invasions under the Nuremberg Principles of International Law. Even the very leaders of nations under illegal US NATO attack fail to even speak of laws broken during yearly UN General Assembly Debates

    There has long been an atmosphere of appeasement in the UN General Assembly’s yearly General Debate. Delegate after delegate from Africa, Asia and Oceania seem to adhere to some ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ not to embarrass the great and powerful United States of America when describing the appalling conditions prevailing throughout the 3rd World.

    How strange, mysterious, unexplainable, illogical, baffling and painful for millions grieving over past genocidal military action and the millions facing death or worse today, that since the inception of the United Nations, no delegate to the UN General Assembly, with one exception (to the best of this historian’s knowledge), has called for justice under the law, for any of the the tens of millions of survivors of past mega profitable crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and forms of genocide. The single exception this author could find was Muammar Gaddafi’s comprehensive UN General Assembly address calling for investigation of all wars and restitution for victims of US NATO UN crimes against humanity.

    That one exception occurred during the UN General Debate in 2009, when Gaddafi, leader of the Revolution of the Socialist Peoples Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, spoke in the name of the African Union: “We are about to put the United Nations on trial; the old organization will be finished and a new one will emerge.”  Gaddafi called for investigations into past wars of permanent members of the Security Council, the US, UK and France, to be followed by trials of those guilty of causing these wars and millions of deaths and suffering “that has surpassed that brought by the Nazis.”

    Speaking before the UN General Assembly in 2009, Gaddafi, had called the Security Council a “Terror Council” for the sixty-five wars it has failed to prevent, even approving or participating in most of them. How prophetic for what would come Gaddafi’s way so soon. (See “Time to Expose Media Manufactured Uprising CIA Terrorists US-NATO Air Strikes on Wealthy Libya“)13

    By not using their veto power, two giant independent nations, Russia and revolutionary China, gave the colonial powers the 2011 No-Fly Zone resolution which US and NATO military used to destroy all Libya’s army and militias which had been successfully fighting a CIA created terrorist rebel army that was executing black Libyans.14

    China and Russia also voted for a resolution precipitously accusing Libya’s government leaders and armed groups of violently suppressing peaceful demonstrations.

    However, the Prosecutor of International Criminal Court Fatou Bensouda, stated that Mr. Gaddafi is just one of several individuals in Libya whose alleged criminal acts could fall within the jurisdiction of the ICC which continues to monitor criminal actions of armed groups in the country. These armed groups represent a major threat to long-term peace and stability in Libya.” There never was a single documenting video or photo of a peaceful anti-government demonstration, let alone, one being fired upon. To the contrary, there was a near million wildly demonstrating in favor of Gaddafi and Libya’s Green Book socialism while NATO planes bombed never reported in the New York Times or elsewhere in the US or Europe.15

    The colonial powers had sufficient influence in both the Arab League and the African Union to have both organizations vote against Gaddafi, which in turn influenced China’s UN posture.

    China, after indicating it was against military intervention, abstained instead of voting no on the UN Security Council resolution calling for war on the Libyan government with the fig lief of enforcing a no-fly zone to protect civilians — a war by white neocolonialist powers on their former African colony that had raised its Arab socialist living standard to be higher than nine European nations including Russia.

    China lovers were instantly stumped into incomprehension, bewilderment, dismayed, the rug pulled out from underneath their feet. Their confidence lost that the fifth of Mankind with wisdom gained during five thousand years of practical living would protect the rest of us from the insanely barbaric, homicidal imperialism wrought by predatory capitalism that had once colonized the whole nonwhite world, including China. This confidence or hope was now destroyed with our witnessing China going along with a classic example of false flag violence fostering a civil war in the age old imperialist principle of divide and conquer.

    Vladimir Putin was not president of Russia during the Libyan debacle, and this author later published “Russians Calling Medvedev a ‘Traitor’ for Not Vetoing UN NATO War on Libya in Larger Context” — the article’s larger theme is the willingness of humanity to accept White world profitable investments in genocide until world economic power shifts from Europeans and their descendant nations overseas to the six sevenths of humanity they plunder. Article portrays the immediate before and after of the preposterous destruction of Libya.

    The White folks nations led by the US have been throwing up a solid anti-Russian and anti-Chinese barrage of accusations, but the two great designated adversaries of the West remain polite and defensive.

    China is accused of cultural genocide in Xinjiang, US President Biden labels Russian President Putin “a killer,” while even the West’s obvious backing of horrific ISIS goes unmentioned by the Russians and Chinese. (See “An American Senator Writes of ISIS ‘Hellish Filth We’ve Recruited, Armed and Trained for 8 Years!’” “The Syrian War had ” much to do with clandestine actions of CIA, MI-6, Mossad, Turkish MIT, French DGSE, Saudi GID and others. It would never have occurred without American planning and execution (and criminal media complicity).16

    In ISIS IS US, a panel of cutting-edge researchers tell what ISIS really is, and what has been going on behind the scenes in Iraq, Syria and Libya. The conclusion: Like Iran-Contra, the ISIS death squads were set up by the US to crush a nation.))

    Chinese & Russian Diplomacy Quiet Re America’s Massive Genocide17 in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Afghanistan

    About 2.4 million people have been killed as a result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, while about 1.2 million have been killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan as a result of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. About 250,000 Libyans have been killed in the war, violence and chaos that the U.S. and its allies unleashed in Libya in February 2011. It is estimated that about 1.5 million people have been killed in Syria since the Islamic terrorists, ISIS and others were introduced into Syria. Estimates of people killed in Somalia since 2006 must be somewhere between 500,000 and 850,000. Estimates for Yemen are about 175,000 people killed, a minimum of 120,000 and a maximum of 240,000.

    After 16 years of war, about 6 million violent deaths, and the killing continues as we read this.

    After 21 years of war, 6 countries utterly destroyed and many other destabilized, and this reality carefully omitted from what qualifies as the evening news on telecasts in America, Europe and most of the TV watching world audience.18 Would that a compassionate supreme being looking down at planet Earth, would somehow see to this information being presented to Earthlings, that they might be motivated to put a end to such a inhuman catastrophe.

    The world facing desperate situations of climate change, planetary degradation and nuclear war preparation desperately needs protection from inhumane deceiving war promoting Western media, and where shall it come if not from the bountiful and powerful two great designated adversaries of the Western powers, China, the world’s most populous nation and largest economy, and the Russian Federation encompassing 11% of the planet’s landmass.

    Until now, seems that both Russia and China have confined themselves to presenting convincing domestic media and have spent only modest resources in reaching out internationally beyond cultural and scientific news coverage.

    It bears mention that if China and Russia sought to seriously expand their international news coverage to include some occasional  overview of the mega massive loss of life in the millions brought about by the genocidal foreign policies of the United States of America and its allies since 1945, both could expect some somewhat similar charge of at least one genocidal policy each. China’s invasion of Vietnam in 1976, as the New York Times alleged that leader Deng Xiaoping stated as to teach Vietnam a lesson — a lesson that took the lives of 30,000 human beings. Over the span of years from 1991 through 2017, Russia first lost the Chechian war for independence, then reconquered Chechnya amid a terrific loss of life and deadly Islamic terror, and in 2008 fought a heavy handed war with Georgia over the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia.

    However, it is China and the Russian Federation that represent humanity’s hope and profound desire for a peaceful world of cooperation and non-belligerence. At present a wild insistence is being broadcast for war preparation with its seemingly unlimited financing constantly demanded in the media of the US-led Western neo-colonial capitalist democracies. The list of genocidal regime change wars, invasions, bombings and sanctions perpetrated by the US led Western powers since 1945 is inclusive of nearly a majority of the formerly militarily colonized peoples of the world and the deadly violence continues in more than a half dozen nations. This is what needs media attention for protection of those who will otherwise continue to suffer death, maiming and immeasurable suffering.

    Though for the Chinese, confrontation, both in the martial arts, as in Kung-fu, and in social behavior and personal demeanor is a face and balance losing stance, Chinese cities are targeted with US nuclear warheads, and since either by accident, mistake or intention, a million-fold catastrophe could occur, it would seem some outspoken attention, some awareness, some warning for all humanity is in order. NATO has threateningly declared China a global security challenge.19

    Military and nuclear confrontation seems to be no problem for President Putin, however given the awesome challenge of climate change and planetary degradation being derailed by the mega enormous financial and human resources wasted on military spending, a facing off in a tough cold war posture does not seem a sufficient response to the continuing menace from the United States of America and her allies.

    In this no win situation, may some Chinese philosophical wisdom be introduced in some fresh world media in time to prevent the third world war being so assiduously invested in, planned, prepared for and promoted, while the effects of climate change and Earth degradation slowly inundates humanity in a lethal future.

    1. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, writing in his 1995 memoir, In Retrospect, on the management of the Vietnam War.
    2. Presidential candidate Joe Biden referring to Iraq invasion war. During a 2020 presidential debate, Biden delivered an apology for Iraq War vote] As Chairman of Foreign Affairs Committee, Senator Joe Biden’s enthusiastic support for war on Iraq was crucial.
    3. Countercoup: The Struggle for the control of Iran is the memoir of CIA man Kermit Roosevelt, grandson of former US President Theodore Roosevelt.the book recounts his role in overthrowing democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh with triumphant zeal.
    4. The CIA has publicly admitted for the first time that it was behind the notorious 1953 coup against Iran’s democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, in documents that also show how the British government tried to block the release of information about its own involvement in his overthrow. The US national security archive at George Washington University published a series of declassified CIA documents. 8/19/2013, The Guardian.
    5. Devil Eisenhower ordered the assassination of President Patrice Lumumba, YouTube 1/13/2017, BBCFOUR Smithsonian Channel telecasted https://www.bing.com/videos/search.
    6. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence,” 4 April 1967, Riverside Church, New York City.
    7. AP in Johannesburg and agencies, 30 Jan 2003.
    8. Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent revisited,” The Listening Post 12/22/2018, You Tube.
    9. Albert Einstein, Essays in Humanism.
    10. Mockingbird was a secret operation by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to influence media. Begun in the 1950s, organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA’s views, and funded some student and cultural organizations, and magazines as fronts and also worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns.

      After 1953, Operation Mockingbird had major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. The usual methodology was placing reports developed from intelligence provided by the CIA to witting or unwitting reporters. Those reports would then be repeated or cited by the preceding reporters which in turn would then be cited throughout the media wire services. These networks were run by people with well-known pro-American big business and anti-communist views.

      The CIA currently maintains a network of individuals around the world who attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda, and provide direct access to a large amount of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.”

      After leaving the Washington Post in 1977, Carl Bernstein spent six months looking at the relationship of the CIA and the press during the Cold War years.

      — Carl Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

      For those unfamiliar, Operation Mockingbird was a CIA operation began as the Cold War ramped up in the 1950’s. In an attempt to gather …

      Newly Declassified Govt Docs Reveal Operation Mockingbird is Alive and Well,” Oct 2, 2015.

    11. Church Committee (the United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) was a U.S. Senate select committee in 1975-6 that investigated abuses by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Chaired by Idaho Senator Frank Church amazingly criminal findings must have the publishers of the New York Times some obligation to report on covert criminal activity the Church Committee had brought to public attention.

      Philip Agee and Louis Wolf, Dirty Work: The CIA in Western Europe, 1988.

      The agency appears to be a serial violator of human rights around the world including inside America itself. The books shows everyone how to identify CIA …

      Operation Mockingbird, CIA Media Control Program,” YouTube

      1976, Senator Church live with his investigating committee re Operation Mockingbird

    12. Ed Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent 1988, Pantheon Books.
    13. A month before French and British planes would eventually destroy Libyan Armed Forces and militias, and hunt Gadaffi down there was a massive pro-Gadaffi Green Libya demonstration of a near million Libyans and Gadaffi address the multitude from hiding even while NATO planes bombed. It went unreported in Western media and videos of the event have recently been removed, blocked. For years they could be viewed at HUGE PRO GADDAFI RALLY IN TRIPOLI – RAW FOOTAGE, 7/2/2011, http://www.blacklistednews.com/?news_id=14505 among other alternate media sites. All now blocked or no longer available.
    14. There were armed attacks on police stations (even traffic police) and vicious attacks on Chinese and Korea construction workers already two days before, and during the anniversary of the Danish Cartoons or “day of rage,’ executions of 50 captured Libyan soldiers, one beheaded, some hung along with police officers. And who knows how many ordinary Libyan civilians harmed by tough guys brought in to Benghazi and other Cyrenaican towns. This was reported by Reuters and BBC, but not CNN. There are (now were) some horrifically gruesome cell phone videos on the Internet of grisly hangings, beheadings, bloody beatings of blacks and others loyal to their government. (Libya has a black population, mostly in South Libya, of half a million. Libya under Gaddafi has eliminated a good deal of race discrimination, so black Libyans are especially loyal to the government.) Jay Janson, “There Was No Libyan Peaceful Protest, Just Murderous Gangs and Nic Robertson,” 16 June, 2011, Countercurrents.org.
    15. [14]
    16. Ask Hillary Who Buys ISIS et al Terrorists Helping US Oust Assad NewToyota Trucks/ Heavy Weapons.” Sec. Hillary oversaw regime change wars in Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, S. Sudan, Syria, Yemen; should be asked to explain new Toyota trucks/heavy weapons coming to ISIS/other terrorists, who have been mass murdering US designated enemies in Assad’s Syria and Shiite wherever they are; why superpower US ‘fighting’ for 5 years can’t defeat ragtag force of 25,000; involved false flags attacks on US to prove innocence?

      John-Paul Leonard, ISIS IS US: The Shocking Truth: Behind the Army of Terror

    17. Article 2 of the The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the United Nations General Assembly effective 1/12/1951, defines genocide as

      … any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:

      (a) Killing members of the group;

      (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

      (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    18. Nicolas J.S. Davies, “How Many Millions Have Been Killed in America’s Post-9/11 Wars? Part 3: Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen,” Consortium News, April 25, 2018.
    19. M.K. Bhadrakumar, “NATO declares China as global security challenge in World, 18/06/2021.
    The post China and Russia Quiet about US Past Genocides and Ongoing Genocide in the Middle East and Africa first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • China’ overwhelming objective is clearly economic development, a policy to which it has hewed closely and which it declares for its future. That is no surprise; it is the dream of every developing nation. It is “The Chinese Dream.”

    If such goals were no more than words on paper, there would be no problem.  But China is succeeding as is widely acknowledged now.  Its economy surpassed the U.S. in terms of GDP (PPP) in November of 2014 according to the IMF and is growing faster.  Over 700 million have been brought out of poverty, with extreme poverty eliminated in 2020. The middle class now comprises over 400 million people.  The retail market is enormous and the ecommerce market by far the world’s largest.  China is the world’s largest manufacturer and trader.

    The post A Deadly Contradiction: The Root Of The US- China Conflict appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Each week the Pacific is getting even more crowded with military ships, submarines and aircraft from countries in the region and from outside. NATO countries- United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands- are sending military vessels and aircraft. The Russian navy conducted military maneuvers off Hawai’i. The U.S. is on the verge of creating a permanent Pacific naval task force as a part of its aggressive response to China’s naval presence in the Pacific. The largest land exercise in Asia and the Pacific is taking place in Australia with 17,000 U.S. and Australian military.

    In March 2021, President Biden directed the Pentagon to establish a China Task Force to examine China-related policies and processes and give its recommendations to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

    The post Increasing Pressure On China appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Renewable energy will rely heavily on an industry already berated for human rights violations

    Interest in Dogger Bank was once restricted to insomniac enthusiasts for the BBC’s Shipping Forecast. Not anymore. Today, the shallow sandbank located 120 miles off the UK’s north-eastern shoreline, is home to the world’s largest windpower project. When fully operational, giant turbines will transmit 3.6 gigawatts (GW) of electricity, enough to power 5m homes, into the national grid at prices well below current levels.

    Welcome to the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era. Across the world, solar and wind now represent the cheapest source of new electricity generation – and prices are tumbling. Electric vehicle (EV) batteries are driving oil towards obsolescence. Stripped of government subsidies and corporate lobbying carbon-based fuels are a busted flush. The future of energy is green – and the future can’t come soon enough to tackle the climate crisis.

    Related: The rush to ‘go electric’ comes with a hidden cost: destructive lithium mining | Thea Riofrancos

    Related: Record metals boom may threaten transition to green energy

    Continue reading…

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

  • Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has staged parallel protests outside the Chinese embassies in Paris and Berlin, holding funeral-style processions to denounce the “killing” of Apple Daily by the Hong Kong government, and to raise alarm of the threats posed by the Beijing regime to press freedom globally.

    Arriving at the Chinese embassy following a hearse, RSF representatives in Paris staged a mock funeral procession, delivering a coffin and funeral flowers with a placard inscribed “Apple Daily (1995-2021).”

    In Berlin, RSF representatives staged a parallel action, “burying” the daily newspaper which was one of the last major independent Chinese-language media critical of the Beijing regime.

    Two days prior, Apple Daily announced that it must cease all operations from June 27, with the last print edition of its newspaper to be published on June 24, due to the government’s decision to freeze its financial assets, leaving the media outlet unable to pay their employees and suppliers, reports RSF in a statement.

    RSF condemns the killing of the outlet perpetrated by Chief Executive Carrie Lam by order of Chinese President Xi Jinping, and calls for the immediate release of all detained Apple Daily employees as well as the media outlet’s founder Jimmy Lai, RSF 2020 Press Freedom Prize laureate.

    “We have gathered today to raise alarm about the urgent risk of death to press freedom in Hong Kong,” RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire told reporters gathered outside the Chinese embassy in Paris.

    “Democracies cannot continue to stand idly by while the Chinese regime systematically erodes what’s left of the country’s independent media, as it has already done in the rest of the country.

    International community ‘must act’
    “Today’s funeral is for Apple Daily, but tomorrow’s may be for press freedom in China. It’s time for the international community to act in line with their own values and obligations and defend what’s left of the free press in Hong Kong, before China’s model of information control claims another victim.”

    Deloire also called out China’s Ambassador to France Lu Shaye, who last week gave an interview labelling media critical of the Chinese regime a “media machine” and journalists criticising Chinese authorities as “mad hyenas”.

    Lu Shaye believes there is no need for a plurality of media: “With two or three groups and a few people, we can become the vanguard of the war of public opinion and we can coordinate this war well.”

    Lu Shaye has previously been critical of French media, stating last year at the beginning of the covid-19 pandemics: “I’m not saying the French media always tell lies about China, but much of their reporting on China is not true.”

    Earlier this week, RSF submitted an urgent appeal asking the UN to “take all necessary measures” to safeguard press freedom in Hong Kong.

    Hong Kong, once a bastion of press freedom, has fallen from 18th place in 2002 to 80th place in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

    The People’s Republic of China, for its part, has stagnated at 177th out of 180.

    Pacific Media Watch works in association with Reporters Without Borders.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The post News on China | No. 56 first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has released its hotly anticipated UFO report, which at nine pages in length with no new information is about as spectacular a letdown for UFO enthusiasts as you could possibly get. It does however contain multiple lines which will likely be useful for cold warrior policymakers going forward, just as we forecast earlier.

    In summary:

    • The ODNI says there do appear to be unidentified objects in US airspace behaving in ways the government can’t yet explain.
    • No direct mention is made of the possibility that these objects could be extraterrestrial in origin.
    • Direct mention is made of the possibility that UFOs could be highly advanced Russian or Chinese technology.
    • UFOs “pose a hazard to safety of flight” and could be a national security threat.

    Those last two points are the only ones which US policymakers of any significance are going to pay attention to.

    “UAP [Unidentified Aerial Phenomena] clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to U.S. national security,” the report says. “Safety concerns primarily center on aviators contending with an increasingly cluttered air domain. UAP would also represent a national security challenge if they are foreign adversary collection platforms or provide evidence a potential adversary has developed either a breakthrough or disruptive technology.”

    “UAP pose a hazard to safety of flight and could pose a broader danger if some instances represent sophisticated collection against U.S. military activities by a foreign government or demonstrate a breakthrough aerospace technology by a potential adversary,” the report adds.

    “Some UAP may be technologies deployed by China, Russia, another nation, or a non-governmental entity,” it also says.

    While the authors of the report also say they “currently lack data to indicate any UAP are part of a foreign collection program or indicative of a major technological advancement by a potential adversary,” the fact that Russia or China magically leapfrogging US technology by centuries seventy years ago has been validated as a possibility by the report is a gift to cold warriors eager to ramp up aggressions and inflame a high-budget arms race against those nations.

    Among those cold warriors is Senator Marco Rubio, one of the handful of individuals behind this strange new UFO narrative’s entry into mainstream attention. Rubio released the following statement shortly before the report was published:

    “For years, the men and women we trust to defend our country reported encounters with unidentified aircraft that had superior capabilities, and for years their concerns were often ignored and ridiculed. This report is an important first step in cataloging these incidents, but it is just a first step. The Defense Department and Intelligence Community have a lot of work to do before we can actually understand whether these aerial threats present a serious national security concern.”

    As I’ve been saying repeatedly, the odds of this new UFO narrative entering mainstream consciousness courtesy of the Pentagon, military/intelligence operatives, and corrupt warmongering politicians at the same moment the US begins implementing a new cold war against Russia and China is far too convenient for mere coincidence to be a likely explanation. We can expect to see the hawkish agendas of warmongers like Marco Rubio further advanced by this new UFO narrative going forward.

    _________________________

    Sorry for no audio on this one; we’re out of town today.

    The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at  or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi or . If you want to read more you can buy my books. Everyone, racist platforms excluded,  to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, 

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • In Wong Kar Wai’s movies, nostalgia is the characters’ constant state. In 2046, a sense of imminent loss gives the director’s vision an edge of defiance.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • 4 Mins Read Plant-based group LIVEKINDLY Collective unveiled two new flagship brands, Giggling Pig 咯咭藸 [Ge Ji Zhu] and Happy Chicken 哈皮鸡 [Ha Pi Ji] in China. The brands have been specially created for Chinese consumers by Chinese food experts. This marks the first time the group has developed brands developed in-house. Plant-based trend growing in China Founded […]

    The post Livekindly Collective Launches New Vegan Food Brands Created For Chinese Consumers appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • One has to seriously wonder what game Joe Biden thinks he is playing. Fresh from what appears to have been an amiable meeting with Vladimir Putin in Geneva, the United States promptly announced a new range of sanctions upon Russia. The ostensible reason for the latest sanctions was the imprisonment of minor Russian dissident Alexei Navalny. This man has been the subject of more media attention in the western mainstream media than any other Russian figure apart from President Putin himself.

    The latest episode of publicity springs from Navalny being sentenced to 2 years imprisonment. What is missing from the vast majority of western accounts of this imprisonment is that it was the activation of a previously suspended sentence on counts of dishonesty. Navalny blatantly breached the terms of his conditional release on these charges. He knew he would be sent to prison for this yet voluntarily returned to Russia after a spell in a German hospital.

    The reason Navalny was in hospital was that he became ill on an internal Russian flight. The aircraft was diverted to enable Navalny to be admitted to hospital. There he was treated by Russian doctors who diagnosed various illnesses that Navalny had a history of. At his request he was released to a German hospital when it was announced that he was suffering from exposure to Novichok.

    No evidence of this substance has ever been released by the German authorities. We are expected to believe that this was undetected in the Russian hospital where Navalny was first treated. This simply defies common sense. It is even more unlikely that if Navalny did have evidence of an alleged poisoning he would be freely released to a western hospital. Unfortunately, truth and logic are two components conspicuously missing in all western media reports of his illness.

    Navalny chose to voluntarily return to Russia where he knew he would be sent to prison for parole violations. Again, if Russia had indeed tried to kill him, it defies logic that he would return to the site of his alleged assassination attempt. To give them a second chance to finish him off?

    The logic behind western support for this minor politician has always been a conspicuously absent component of the saga. Navalny was at best a minor player in the Russian political stakes. The last time he stood for public office he barely received 2% popular support, hardly the sort of figures to cause Vladimir Putin any serious headaches.

    Now the Americans are using Navalny’s imprisonment as the ostensible reason for further sanctions. It simply does not make any sense at all to use this minor political irritant as a reason to impose further sanctions upon Russia. It is especially puzzling given the obvious attempts by the Americans to de-freeze their Russian antipathy. It needs to be remembered that the summit between Biden and Putin was at the strong request of the Americans.

    They were clearly playing a different game in requesting the meeting and what appears to have been an effort to de-freeze US –Russia relations. It is not rocket science to anticipate the real American motives for wanting to de-freeze the relationship between the United States and Russia.

    The United States knows it cannot take on both Russia and China at the same time, and it clearly sees China as the greater threat to its long-standing hegemony upon the world stage. Hence, to clear its decks for a full-scale assault upon the Chinese, it needed to subvert the Russian-Chinese relationship. That relationship has never been stronger. The two countries recently celebrated the 20th anniversary of an agreement between the two States to cooperate more fully with each other.

    The relationship has grown notary stronger in the past two or three years, helped in no small part by the obvious antipathy to the two nations shown by Biden’s predecessor Donald Trump. It is one of life’s little ironies that Trump was heavily and continuously attacked by his political rivals as being “Putin’s puppet,” although in truth there was never any kind of relationship between the two men, let alone one that could be used as a political weapon against Trump.

    Yet we now see Biden, anxious to sit down with Putin only a few months into his presidency. He was able to do so without chorus of antipathy that was a constant feature of the Trump presidency toward any gesture that Trump may have made — or wanted to make — toward Russia.

    Apart from seeking some clear air for the American concentration on China, the United States has another motive for the meeting. There is now a serious gap between Russian and American military technology, and Biden was anxious to negotiate some type of freeze in Russian military technology advances. Repeated independent commentators such as Andrei Martyanov (Disintegration, Charity Press 2021) estimate the United States is now at least 10 years behind Russia in military technology, and has the capacity to wipe out its American competition.

    The Americans, who have already ceded economic supremacy to the Chinese, are keen to ensure that the military status does not follow the same fate. To this end they are mounting a relentless campaign against China, accusing them of multiple human rights abuses in Hong Kong, and especially against the Uighur population of the autonomous region of Xinjiang.

    There have been lurid allegations against China over the alleged ill-treatment of the Uighur population ranging from mass imprisonment to enforced abortion and genocide. That these allegations are completely devoid of a factual basis has not stopped the relentless western propaganda.

    The crucial involvement of Xinjiang in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and abundance of natural resources, including a recent discovery of huge oil deposits, is not unrelated to the motives behind the western attacks. The latest population data from the region, showing a higher growth rate than for China as a whole, is but one factual element that destroys the lurid allegations of “genocide”. These and related stories of systematic abuse by the Chinese authorities were recently demolished by Max Blumenthal (thegrayzone.com 30 April 2021).

    Facts have a troubling way of destroying the propaganda. Unfortunately, it is unlikely to see a cessation of the constant attacks on China by its geopolitical enemies who clearly are moving to a different agenda.

    The Russian-Chinese alliance will, however, continue to make enormous strides in reshaping the geopolitical and trading agenda. The United States will just have to adapt to these new realities.

    The post The United States Continues to Play its Geopolitical Games but the Rest of the World Moves On first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • In August 2020, the foreign ministers of ASEAN member states signed a joint statement “on the importance of maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia.” In one of the articles in the statement, ASEAN member states agreed to reaffirm the Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality Declaration (ZOPFAN) that was signed in 1971. This practice was followed in the subsequent ASEAN Summit held in November 2020, where the organisation reaffirmed its neutrality in Southeast Asia. However, looking more closely, it has been five years since the last time “neutrality” was included in high-level ASEAN documents.

    The Background of “Neutrality” in ASEAN

    Behind the reaffirmation of neutrality in ASEAN are growing uncertainties in the changing geopolitical landscape, as stipulated in the August statement. Growing tension between China and Quad members, in particular the United States and India, may have influenced policymakers to reaffirm their commitment to ASEAN neutrality. The 1971 ZOPFAN Declaration had a controversial story behind its formulation, as explained by historian Nicholas Tarling.  Malaysia, as the main proponent of neutrality in Southeast Asia, sought guarantees from the United States, the Soviet Union, and China on Southeast Asian neutrality, as they believed that national fiscal policies would be better allocated on social services. Indonesia saw the notion of Belgium-style neutrality guaranteed by other nations as a violation of their “free and active” foreign policy and rejected the scheme of foreign guarantee. They countered with a proposal that neutrality in Southeast Asia should be guaranteed by ASEAN member states themselves. The Indonesian proposal was accepted, and no foreign states were requested to act as guarantors.

    However, due to diverse national interests and the need for consensus, The ZOPFAN Declaration left the interpretation and means to achieve regional neutrality up to the capacity of each member nation. In other words, there would be no unified framework on how to ensure that Southeast Asia maintained its neutrality. Indeed, the ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint upheld ZOPFAN as a political instrument, but it did not explicitly explain how to create a neutral Southeast Asia. To this day, ASEAN has not yet implemented anything that signifies its neutrality commitment because there is no specific framework or guidance to refer to.

    The Lack of Framework

    The lack of a united framework to act as guidance endangers the security and credibility of ASEAN, as rogue member states could seek to prioritise narrow national interests at the expense of regional commitment to neutrality. If one member state invites foreign powers to opened up a military presence in Southeast Asia, including but not limited to logistical base and garrison forces, most likely the adversary of that foreign power would also want to have their presence as an act of classic balance of power. Hu Jintao, the former president of the People’s Republic of China, expressed this phenomenon clearly in his speech about the “Malacca Dilemma”, in which he asserted that, as the choke-points in the Malacca Straits are vulnerable to interdiction, the Chinese Navy should project its power to mitigate that possibility.

    Currently, the United States has a military presence in Singapore, while the United Kingdom has a military presence in both Singapore and Brunei Darussalam. Regarding recent Pentagon reports that the Chinese military seeks to build its military presence in Southeast Asia, it should be noted that Beijing is just following its policy according to the Malacca Dilemma: if the United States and its allies forcefully prohibit Chinese trade in the Malacca Strait, China would respond by deploying their military to eradicate this threat. The result could see the whole of Southeast Asia become their battlefield.

    The Case for Armed Neutrality

    For all ASEAN member states to reach an agreement on creating a framework to achieve regional neutrality, political will itself would not be sufficient to deter those who seek to violate this neutrality. Legal and political deterrence needs to be bolstered by military deterrence. The stronger a neutral party’s military is, the less likely it will be dragged into the conflict, as the cost of violating neutrality is higher and will be abandoned if the probability of victory is small.

    From a legal perspective, armed neutrality is indifferent to normal neutrality. Under Hague Convention (V) 1907, which has become customary international law, neutral parties are allowed to use force if their neutrality is infringed by a belligerent, and under the UN Charter Chapter VIII, regional collective security arrangements are allowed. However, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger may differ. In his analysis of Austrian foreign minister Metternich, Kissinger signifies armed neutrality as a policy of a willingness to engage deliberately the contesting powers while maintaining its legal position as a neutral party, not a belligerent. With a strong national capability, Kissinger argues that mediation effort by an armed and neutral party would be more influential in comparison to the effort of a less powerful third party.

    Although ASEAN does not use the term “armed neutrality” in any of its documents, Kissinger’s explanation of the goal of armed neutrality is exactly what ASEAN wants it to be in an era of renewed great power competition. The ASEAN Outlook on Indo-Pacific (AOIP) seeks “ASEAN Centrality” and “Inclusivity”, where it dictates ASEAN primacy in conducting pacific settlement of disputes with all stakeholders. However, while it engages with powerful stakeholders such as China and the United States, it maintains a position of neutrality (as mentioned in the 2020 joint statement) and does not take sides in the quarrels of other power. Although defence integration between ASEAN member states has progressed, particularly in the COVID-19 Pandemic era, there have been no renewed talks on the concept of neutrality in ASEAN.

    Armed Neutrality with ASEAN Characteristics

    For diplomatic reasons, the term “armed neutrality” may never come into ASEAN documents due to its ambiguous connotations; after all, Kissinger was a realist and had some controversy himself. However, the practice in which a neutral party possesses a strong and cohesive capability to influence the pacific dispute settlement process should be taken into account by policymakers. In this regard, “strong” and “cohesive” should be underlined to develop the framework in which ASEAN defines its neutrality. “Strong neutrality” means that ASEAN has to possess the minimum military capacity required to show a force of deterrence, by setting up a multinational rapid response-capability unit. “Cohesive neutrality”, on the other hand, means that all ASEAN member states would maintain an unequivocal voice on the policy of regional neutrality on the international stage. Whether it would be the United Nations or other multilateral forums, all ASEAN member states should support each other in reaffirming ASEAN neutrality. No member should make statements that undermine and questions the credibility of ASEAN neutrality.

    The ideal implementation of this policy would mirror that of the European Union Battlegroup (EU BG), but other examples should also be taken into consideration, such as the African Standby Force (ASF) and the Peninsula Shield Force (PSF). The EU BG, while still needing development, would be the most effective and efficient example of the three, as it has a clear command-and-control hierarchy, would only take 5-10 days to be deployed and could be continued to 120 days until further instructions are received. Although the ASF and the PSF, also possess rapid response capabilities, are a compromised version where the command-and-control hierarchy is in a legal grey zone to gives member states more political leverage in the decision to intervene or not. Although the current state of ASEAN might prefer the ASF-PSF model, it should not be a reason to decline reforms that would introduce definitive terms on the division of power between the regional organizations and the member states. Even the African Union is on its way to reform the ASF.

    Reform is Paramount

    Implementing this policy will mean that ASEAN will be confronted by the question of the need for institutional reform. Conflicts, including territorial matters between member states, are mostly solved by maintaining the status quo for the sake of stability. But the decades-long practice of status quo primacy is hindering the development of trust and identity-building efforts. As each dispute arises, such as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) intrusion of one state into another due to the lack of agreement, public opinion turns to nationalistic sentiments, risking the progress of ASEAN’s integration efforts as governments account for their constituents’ positions. Therefore, this practice of maintaining the status quo should be replaced with a committed diplomatic or legal approach to the conflict settlement mechanism, with a clear timetable and reports of progress to the public. These last two are most important for the authority to show accountability to the people, thus increasing trust in the unity of ASEAN.

    Quad and the Test for Indonesia’s Leadership in ASEAN

    Will the initiative complement or sideline the existing regional architecture built by ASEAN?

    The alternative to this kind of reform is the continuation of the traditional “ASEAN Way” doctrine: bury the dispute, prioritise stability, focus on the economy, and political relations will improve by themselves if each state focuses on their own issues. This doctrine could have worked in a world where politics and economic issues are separated, such as during the Cold War. However, the advent of globalization and digital technology makes it hard for governments to keep the economy and politics on a separate course, as the call for a moralistic foreign policy is becoming stronger. This phenomenon is clearly shown in the recent Australian diplomatic confrontation with China in regards to the Uyghur and Hong Kong issue, despite the strong trade relations between the two countries. The recent ISEAS report also shows that economic influence does not necessarily translate into good diplomatic relations between China and ASEAN. This puts the notion of progress from a strong economic relationship towards a strong political relation into question.

    China and the United States, as superpowers in the Pacific, will benefit from this policy as long as ASEAN can prove its neutrality continuously. The main concern of the United States is the status of the rules-based international order that it has built since the Second World War;  a key component of the rules-based international order is the “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP). ASEAN’s version of armed neutrality would not contradict the FOIP as it would not disrupt peacetime freedom of navigation. Once again, it should be emphasised that ASEAN’s rapid response should only be deployed in times where conflict arises on its doorsteps. If there is no open conflict, then the unit would not be deployed. Likewise, China would benefit from a truly neutral ASEAN as long as the economic relations between the two go unhindered. With the negotiation of a South China Sea Code of Conduct nearing its scheduled completion, the elephant in the room of China-ASEAN relations will be removed, and thus economic cooperation between China and ASEAN will attract less resentment from the public. Assuming China’s military buildup is meant to defend its homeland, they should have no problem with ASEAN upholding its neutrality. Besides, the recent ASEAN-China foreign ministers meeting in Chongqing implies that China has finally agreed on a South China Sea Code of Conduct that follows the 1982 UNCLOS and other relevant international law.

    The current version of ASEAN is inadequate to implement a robust neutrality enforcement policy that follows a “strong neutrality” and “cohesive neutrality” principle, as rigorous reform in regards to settling the multiple disputes between member states is needed to boost trust and confidence between member states. If ASEAN is serious about guaranteeing its neutrality, it should develop a framework for how to achieve it, with the overall goal of increasing its capacity to enforce armed neutrality in Southeast Asia. The upcoming ASEAN Summit, scheduled for October 2021, is an opportunity for the organisation to finally introduce a turning point in its commitment to neutrality. ASEAN should make it clear that it will not be lenient in the face of any neutrality violation. Thus, reforms in regards to dispute settlement mechanisms are needed for ASEAN to become more regionally integrated, and after that, a strong and cohesive regional neutrality could be implemented successfully.

    The post The price for neutrality is reform and preparedness appeared first on New Mandala.

    This post was originally published on New Mandala.

  • To what extent has the Chinese Navy (PLAN) extended its capacity to conduct offensive amphibious operations? Once largely aimed at constraining an adversary’s ability to approach and operate off the Chinese mainland’s coastal waters, the modernisation priorities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have evidently shifted to power projection in recent years. This intent has […]

    The post China’s Amphibious Assault appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • To float over such an aqueous body is to find a majestic creature unparalleled in beauty and expanse, stretching at 2,300km.  There are other stunning formations on the planet, but the Great Barrier Reef has such dimension, form and cocksure brilliance as to make others shrink, not so much because of beauty as due to sheer scale and ecological variety.

    But the Reef’s health record has been patchy.  Each year brings a series of negative assessments about the patient. Its ticker is having palpitations; its central mineral supports in the form of coral life is being bleached.  Water quality is being affected.  The crown-of-thorns starfish, richly stimulated by nutrients from runoffs, has grown in number to savage the unmoving coral with relish.

    With such activity, it was little wonder that the World Heritage Committee, under the umbrella of UNESCO, has suggested placing the Reef on the endangered list.  While taking note of “many positive achievements by the State Party [Australia], progress has been insufficient in meeting key targets of the Reef 2050 Plan.  The Plan requires stronger and clearer commitments, in particular towards urgently countering the effects of climate change, but also towards accelerating water quality improvement and land management measures.”

    Despite the money committed by the Commonwealth government to protect the Reef, along with cross-institutional collaboration, “the long-term outlook of the ecosystem of the property has deteriorated from poor to very poor, and that the deterioration has been more rapid and widespread than was evident during the period 2009-2014.”  Bleaching events from 2016, 2017 and 2020 “as a result of global warming”, are also noted in the agenda.

    Given such considerations, the World Heritage Centre and the International Union for Conservation of Nature recommended “that the property is facing ascertained danger” and should be placed upon “the List of World Heritage in Danger.”  Australia would be invited to collaborate with the World Heritage/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission “to develop a set of corrective measures” to enable the Reef to be removed from the list of world heritage in danger.

    Richard Leck, Head of Oceans for the World Wide Fund for Nature-Australia summed it up thus: “The recommendation from UNESCO is clear and unequivocal that the Australian government is not doing enough to protect our greatest natural asset, especially on climate change”.  Imogen Zethoven, consultant for the Australian Marine Conservation Society, saw the UNESCO recommendation as a chance to draw attention to Australia’s lethargic climate change policies.  “Australia’s climate record is more consistent with a 2.5 to 3 Celsius rise in global average temperature – a level that would destroy the Great Barrier Reef and all the world’s coral reefs.”

    Members of Scott Morrison’s government violently disagreed.  Ministers claim, in outrage, that such moves to deem the sacred reef endangered is a profanity and in the spirit of diplomatic duplicity.  This is all the more tickling for the fact that Australia has one of the weaker environmental portfolios: Environment Ministers usually find themselves as fossil fuel cross dressers and apologists for mining.  “Australia believes,” claimed the startled Environment Minister Sussan Ley, “it is wrong to single out the best managed reef in the world for this potential ‘in danger’ listing.”  Ley also claimed to have been “blindsided by a sudden late decision.”  It was “unheard of for a site to be added to an endangered list, or recommended … without the necessary consultation leading up to it.”

    In a press release, Ley claimed that “UN officials” had assured Australia that no such recommendation would be made prior to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee meeting to be hosted by China in July.  The draft decision had been a mere “desk top review with insufficient first-hand appreciation of the outstanding science-based strategies being funded by the Commonwealth and Queensland Governments.”

    For a government that has politicised everything from renewable energy to the granting of mining permits, such anger was mildly amusing. In Ley’s barely credible words, “When procedures are not followed, when the process is turned on its head five minutes before the draft decision is due to be published, when the assurances my officials received and indeed I did have been upended.  What else can you conclude but that it is politics?”

    The allusion lurking in such views was that the decision had been massaged.  In what is fast becoming a boring tic, Australian government sources pointed the eager finger at China.  One, who remained unnamed, told the South China Morning Post that Australia would “appeal but China is in control.”

    Rupert Murdoch’s press outlets, showing how quickly they can change from ingratiating themselves with Chinese Communist officials to condemning them (the mogul’s failed dream to penetrate the Chinese market continues to rankle), is running the Yellow Devil story.  China, raged Sky News host Chris Kenny, was being aggressive towards Australia “under the guise of climate activism.”  The UN was being used as a vehicle for “environmental emotional blackmail”.  Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell was most pleased to reveal that the environment minister had “specifically mentioned China in the Coalition party room with the hint being this was another example of the coercion tactics that China has been using against Australia.”

    The view from the other side was rather different.  Dr Fanny Douvere of the World Heritage Centre attempted to correct the record.  “We don’t share [decisions] before they are finalised,” she told Guardian Australia.  “That’s the simple truth.”  Nor was it credible to assume that China had been a factor.  “There is absolutely zero influence.  This is simply not the truth.  There is no interference at all.”  Beijing was not even aware of the recommendations being made.

    Some of Ley’s angst may well be due to the return of the deputy prime minister, who hails from the junior partner, the National Party.  Barnaby Joyce remains wedded to the idea of nuclear energy and snorts at investing in renewables.  “What this insane lemming-like desire to go to renewables going to do to our economy?” he asked in 2013.  Having languished in backbench exile for alleged sexual harassment, exiting a long marriage and scooting off with his mistress, he has stormed back to the front of the Morrison cabinet, decapitating (politically speaking) the now former leader, Michael McCormack.  In doing so, he resumes a position he left in disgrace three years ago.  More to the point, the fossil fuel fanatics are now breathing more furiously than ever, being the types who think that the Great Barrier Reef is the sort of thing you see in specimen drawers and Madame Tussauds.

    South Australia’s Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young saw the problem closer to home and rather damning. “You weren’t ‘blindsided’,” she scornfully tweeted about Ley, “you had your eyes closed [and] ignored the science and kept taking donations from the fossil fuel industry.”  The Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, had her own barb with the federal government, telling a press gathering on June 23 that the greatest threat to the Great Barrier Reef was none other than the National Party.

    The one true victim in this international brawl is the Reef itself.  Bureaucrats will be haggling and disagreeing over data, labels and outcomes as the degradation continues.  And Australia, for its incessant resort to that fiction called the “rules-based international order” will seedily attack international institutions if it serves to placate domestic interests.

    The post The Great Barrier Reef Wars first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Rights activists say country has built one of world’s most far-ranging systems of forced disappearance

    China has ramped up its use of secret detention without trial, creating one of the most far-ranging systems of forced disappearance in the world, human rights activists warn in a report.

    Tens of thousands of people have been subjected to “residential surveillance at a designated location” (RSDL), an anodyne, bureaucratic name for an Orwellian system, the group Safeguard Defenders said in the report, Locked Up.

    Continue reading…

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

  • The 47th session of the UN Human Rights Council will take place from 21 June to 15 July 2021. The ISHR has again issued its very helpful overview of key issues and below is an extract of those affecting human rights defenders most directly. For a wrap-up of the previous session, see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/03/29/wrap-up-46th-session-of-un-human-rights-council-with-key-resolutions-on-belarus-and-myanmar-and-more/

    Modalities of participation in HRC47

    According to the Bureau minutes of 2 and 4 June 2021, the extraordinary modalities for the 47th session should be similar to the modalities applied during the 46th session.

    Thematic areas of interest:

    Sexual orientation and gender identity

    The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity will present his report, followed by an interactive dialogue on 24 June. The report seeks to document how particular narratives on gender are being used to fuel violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In the report, the Expert examines how the incorporation of comprehensive gender theory enables more accurate and appropriate consideration of dynamics of negation and stigma, and the key role of law, public policy and access to justice in promoting either continuity of injustice or social change.

    The report highlights the mandate’s position in relation to current narratives and constructions through which the application of gender frameworks, especially its promise for gender equality across diverse persons, is challenged; and build on gender concepts and feminist analysis to further substantiate the mandate’s understanding of root causes and dynamics of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

    This report will be presented in the context of high levels of violence against trans and gender nonconforming people and those defending their rights. Beyond this, the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted trans and gender nonconforming people and those defending their rights worldwide, especially those most marginalised.

    Systemic racism, police brutality and violence against peaceful protests in the United States and globally

    The High Commissioner will present the comprehensive report of Resolution 43/1 to the Council on 12 July followed by an interactive dialogue. ISHR previously joined 171 families of victims of police violence in the United States and over 270 civil society organisations from more than 40 countries in calling on the Council to establish an independent commission of inquiry into police killings of Black men and women, as well as violent law enforcement responses to protests in the United States….

    The Council should ensure the establishment of robust international accountability mechanisms which would further support and complement, not undermine, efforts to dismantle systemic racism in the United States and globally, especially in the context of police violence against Black people.

    Business and human rights

    June 2021 marks the tenth anniversary of the unanimous endorsement by the Council of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). The Guiding Principles have become one of the key frameworks for private business to carry out their responsibility to respect human rights, for States to discharge their obligations under international law in relation to business activities, and for civil society and human rights defenders to utilise the UNGPs to demand structural changes in the way companies operate internationally. Human rights need to be an essential element of how businesses design their operations. After 10 years, we have the chance to look back and into the future with a critical eye. In that regard, a ‘Roadmap for the Next Decade’ will be presented by the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights this month. ISHR continues to work with the UN, civil society and progressive companies to protect and promote the work of human rights defenders.

    In tandem with its annual report, the UN Working Group will also present in June a long-awaited guidance document on business and human rights defenders based on the UNGPs. The ‘United Nations Guidance on the role of the Guiding Principles for engaging with, safeguarding and ensuring respect for the rights of human rights defenders’ was supported and informed by ISHR and partners, and builds on the experiences gathered through the Business Network on Civic Freedoms and Human Rights Defenders, an initiative ISHR co-founded with the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. This document will become a key instrument for civil society, businesses and States in ensuring that human rights defenders are protected and recognised as essential actors in maintaining rule of law and a functioning shared civic space. 

    The Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises will present its reports, followed by an interactive dialogue, on 29 June. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/09/30/business-and-human-rights-updated-list-of-companies-supporting-hrds/]

    Reprisals

    On this topic see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/05/06/un-action-on-reprisals-towards-greater-impact/

    During the 42nd session, the Council adopted a resolution which listed key trends such as the patterns of reprisals, increasing self-censorship, the use of national security arguments and counter-terrorism strategies by States as justification for blocking access to the UN. The resolution also acknowledged the specific risks to individuals in vulnerable situations or belonging to marginalised groups, and called on the UN to implement gender-responsive policies to end reprisals. The Council called on States to combat impunity and to report back to it on how they are preventing reprisals, both online and offline.

    Item 5 of the Human Rights Council’s agenda provides a key opportunity for States to raise concerns about reprisals, and for governments involved in existing cases to provide an update to the Council on any investigation or action taken toward accountability to be carried out.

    During the organisational meeting held on 7 June, the President of the Council stressed the importance of ensuring the safety of those participating in the Council’s work, and the obligation of States to prevent intimidation or reprisals.

    ISHR recently launched a study analysing 709 reprisals cases and situations documented by the UN Secretary-General between 2010 and 2020 and looked at trends and patterns in the kinds of cases documented by the UNSG, how these cases have been followed up on over time, and whether reprisal victims consider the UN’s response effective. Among other things, the study found that nearly half the countries serving on the Council have been cited for perpetrating reprisals. The study also found that the HRC Presidency appears to have been conspicuously inactive on intimidation and reprisals, despite the overall growing numbers of cases that are reported by the UNSG – including on individuals’ or groups’ engagement with the HRC – and despite the Presidency’s legal obligation to address such violations. The study found that the HRC Presidency took publicly reported action in only 6 percent of cases or situations where individuals or organisations had engaged with the HRC. Not only is this a particularly poor record in its own right, it also compares badly with other UN actors.

    In line with previous calls, ISHR expects the President of the Human Rights Council to publicly identify and denounce specific instances of reprisals by issuing formal statements, conducting press-briefings, corresponding directly with the State concerned, publicly releasing such correspondence, and insisting on undertakings from the State concerned to investigate, hold the perpetrators accountable and report back to the Council on action taken.

    Other thematic reports

    At this 47th session, the Council will have dedicated debates with the mandate holders and the High Commissioner, including interactive dialogues with:

    • The High Commissioner on State response to pandemics 
    • The Special Rapporteur on the right to housing
    • The Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health 
    • The Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity
    • The Special Rapporteur on the right to education 
    • The Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights 
    • The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions 
    • The Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 
    • The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression 
    • The Working Group on arbitrary detention on its study on drug policies
    • The Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy 

    In addition, the Council will hold dedicated debates on the rights of specific groups including:

    • The Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants 
    • The Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons 
    • The Special Adviser on Prevention of Genocide 
    • The Working Group on discrimination against women and girls 
    • The Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences 
    • The Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially women and children
    • The Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers 
    • The Special Rapporetur on the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members 

    Country-specific developments

    China 

    One year after the UN Special Procedures issued a sweeping statement  calling for the international community to take ‘decisive action’ on the human rights situation in China, much more remains to be done. Calls are growing for more clear and timely reporting from the UN, including the High Commissioner for Human Rights and her Office, on the repressive policies and practices targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims. At the same time, worrying news continues about violations of cultural rights of Tibetans, while Hong Kong’s democratic institutions – and its people – have suffered a series of blows from legislative, policy and legal decision targeting pro-democracy leaders. For the first time since 1989, peaceful public demonstrations to commemorate the massacre on Tiananmen Square were prohibited. 

    Against this context, ISHR urges States to speak out firmly against the lack of accountability for the Chinese government in light of substantial evidence of violations, including crimes against humanity. In so doing, it is essential to recognise the systemic and structural nature of these violations: to highlight the dire situation for Uyghurs, Tibetans and other minority groups; pro-democracy civil society leaders, lawyers and legislators in Hong Kong; and human rights defenders like lawyer and Martin Ennals Award winner Yu Wensheng [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/69fc7057-b583-40c3-b6fa-b8603531248e] and anti-discrimination activists like the Changsha 3. No matter its position or influence, China must be held to the same high standards as any other Council member. See also; https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/12/18/chinas-continuing-crackdown-on-human-rights-lawyers-shocking-say-un-experts/

    Egypt

    At the 46th session of the Council, over 30 States led by Finland urged Egypt to end its repression of human rights defenders, LGBTI persons, journalists, politicians and lawyers under the guise of countering-terrorism. The joint State statement ended years of a lack of collective action at the Council on Egypt, despite the sharply deteriorating human rights situation in the country. Egypt must answers these calls, starting by releasing the thousands arbitrarily detained, protecting those in custody from torture and other ill-treatment, and ending the crackdown on peaceful activists. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has previously concluded that arbitrary detention is a systematic problem in Egypt and the Committee against Torture has concluded that torture is a systematic practice in Egypt. To date, Egypt has failed to address all the concerns expressed by States, the High Commissioner and Special Procedures, despite repeated calls on the government, including most recently by over 60 NGOs. ISHR joined over 100 NGOs from across the world in urging the Council to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on Egypt and will continue to do so until there is meaningful and sustained improvement in the country’s human rights situation.

    Saudi Arabia

    This session will mark two years since the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions presented to the Council the investigation into the unlawful death of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and yet no meaningful steps towards accountability have been taken by the Saudi authorities. The Special Rapporteur called on Saudi Arabia to “demonstrate non-repetition by: releasing all individuals imprisoned for the peaceful expression of their opinion and belief; independently investigating all allegations of torture and lethal use of force in formal and informal places of detention; and independently investigating all allegations of enforced disappearances and making public the whereabouts of individuals disappeared”. To date, Saudi Arabia has refused to address these key concerns, which were also raised by over 40 States at the Council in March 2019, September 2019 and September 2020, further demonstrating its lack of political will to genuinely improve the human rights situation and to engage constructively with the Council. The sentencing and subsequent release of several women’s rights activists highlights the importance of the Council’s scrutiny which must be sustained in order to secure meaningful, concrete, and systematic gains. We recall that the Special Rapporteur also called on Member States to support resolutions that seek to ensure or strengthen accountability for the execution of Khashoggi. ISHR reiterates its call on the Council to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia.

    Colombia  

    After more than a month of strikes and street protests in Colombia, which have seen protestors killed at the hands of law enforcement officers and civilians, and human rights defenders covering the events threatened and attacked, the Council session provides States with the opportunity to take action. States must call on Colombia to respect the human rights of its people – including the right to freedom of peaceful assembly – and address the underlying causes of the protests, including violations of economic, social and cultural rights, inequality and racial discrimination. This situation of violence and non-compliance with all standards of the use of force has had a particular impact on the Afro-descendant population. Specific calls from Colombian civil society include for OHCHR to investigate and report on the protests in the country including gather statistical data on the facts that threaten the human rights of Afro-Colombian people; for the High Commissioner to visit Colombia when possible; and for Colombia to open its doors to a range of Special Rapporteurs to allow for ongoing monitoring and reporting. The High Commissioner, who has made a statement on the situation in the country, will present her annual report at the start of the session and it is hoped and expected that Colombia will feature as a country of concern. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/01/20/colombia-21-january-2020-civil-society-begins-a-much-needed-patriotic-march/]

    Nicaragua 

    Last March, the Council renewed its resolution on the human rights situation in Nicaragua, which strengthened the High Commissioner’s office monitoring and reporting mandate, by including an interim oral update with recommendations in the context of upcoming national elections. Despite the resolution’s clear calls on the Government to repeal recently adopted laws that harshly restrict civic space, stop targeting human rights defenders and journalists, and urgently implement reforms to ensure free and credible elections, the Nicaraguan authorities have acted in the opposite direction. While UN experts ‘deplore spate of attacks and arrests of human rights defenders’, the OHCHR publicly expressed their deep concern that ‘Nicaragua’s chances of holding free and genuine elections on 7 November are diminishing as a result of measures taken by authorities against political parties, candidates and independent journalists, which further restrict the civic and democratic space’. As the High Commissioner will present her oral update on Nicaragua on 22 June, States should call on Nicaragua to urgently reverse course and implement the recommendations from resolution 46/2, in particular to guarantee the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of information, expression, association and assembly, and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs; and to swiftly put an end to the harassment (including the judicial harassment) and detention of journalists and ex-members of the Violeta Chamorro Foundation and Confidencial media outlet. 

    Venezuela

    Venezuela will be back on the Council’s agenda with OHCHR providing an update on the situation of human rights in the country, including in regard to UN recommendations (5 July).  Recent positive developments in the country, including the nomination to the National Electoral Council of individuals supported by a broad swathe of civil society, are offset by continuing human rights and humanitarian crises. The UN’s recommendations to Venezuela are numerous, wide-ranging and largely ignored. States must use opportunities at the Council to press home the importance of those recommendations being heeded. ISHR looks forward to making a statement during the dialogue, focusing in on levels of implementation of recommendations. Given that reprisals against Venezuelan defenders have been common over recent years – with cases cited in eight of the Secretary General’s reports on cooperation with the UN since 2010 – it is essential that States speak out in support of civil society engagement and that the UN define a preventative strategy to ensure defenders’ protection. 

    Burundi

    On 30 June 2020, the Supreme Court of Burundi set aside the ruling by the Appeals Court to uphold the 32-year sentence in Rukuki’s case and ordered a second appeal hearing, citing violations to his right to a fair trial. This second appeal hearing took place 8 months later on 24 March 2021 in Ngozi prison, where he is currently detained. According to the Burundian Code of Criminal Procedure, following the hearing the Court has 30 days to return a verdict on the case, but this verdict is still pending nearly 60 days later. This delay clearly demonstrates a lack of due process in the case of the internationally recognised human rights defender and political prisoner. In an open letter, a group of civil society organisations denounced the dysfunctioning of judicial proceedings in the country. After confirming the 32 years sentence of defender Germain Rukuki, Burundi continues its crackdown against civil society. Germain Rukuki has now spent nearly 4 years in prison. He has already waited an additional 30 days for this final verdict to be announced without any legal reason; he should not have to wait any longer. In addition to ensuring the continued work of the Commission of Inquiry on Burundi, members of the Council need to call on Burundi to demonstrate their commitment to respect the independence of the judiciary and comply fully with the fair trial obligations of Burundi under international law and announce the verdict in this case without any further delay.  [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/03/29/ngo-statement-condemns-new-irregularities-in-the-case-of-germain-rukuki-burundi/]

    The Council will consider 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 Dialogue with the SR on the situation of human rights in Eritrea
    • Oral update by the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Nicaragua
    • Interactive Dialogue with the SR on the situation of human rights in Belarus 
    • Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic 
    • Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on the human rights situation of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar and Interactive Dialogue with the SR on the situation of human rights in Myanmar 
    • Interactive Dialogue with the SR on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territories occupied since 1967 
    • Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Ukraine  and interim report of the Secretary-General on human rights in Crimea 
    • Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Central African Republic

    Council programme, appointments and resolutions

    During the organisational meeting for the 47th session held on 7 June the President of the Human Rights Council presented the programme of work. It includes seven panel discussions. States also announced at least 22 proposed resolutions. Read here the reports presented this session. 

    The President of the Human Rights Council will propose seven candidates for the following sevent mandates: 

    1. The Independent Expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with albinism; 
    2. The Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy;
    3. The Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences; 
    4. Two members of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent (one from Asia-Pacific States and one from Eastern European States); 
    5. A member of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, from Western European and other States; 
    6. The Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights 

    As of 8 June, however, the recommended candidates list was only available for four of the above positions, due to challenges among the Consultative Group, the five individuals appointed from each UN region to interview and shortlist candidates. It is critical that the process overcome such delays, so as to avoid any protection gaps arising from a failure to appoint a new mandate holder.

    Resolutions to be presented to the Council’s 47th session

    The following resolutions were announced (States leading the resolution in brackets):

    1. Menstrual hygiene, human rights and gender equality (Africa Group)
    2. Elimination of harmful practices (Africa Group)
    3. Cooperation with and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights (Ukraine) 
    4. Situation of human rights of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar (OIC) 
    5. The protection of human rights in the context of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) (Brazil, Colombia, Mozambique, Portugal, Thailand)
    6. The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, on missing persons and enforced disappearances (France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Netherlands, Qatar, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America)
    7. The human rights situation in Belarus, mandate renewal (EU)
    8. The human rights situation in Eritrea, mandate renewal (EU) 
    9. Negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights ( Austria, Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Morocco, Poland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
    10. Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights (Azerbaijan on behalf of NAM)
    11. New and emerging digital technologies and human rights (Austria, Brazil, Denmark, Morocco, Republic of Korea, Singapore)
    12. Human rights of migrants (Mexico)
    13. Impact of arms transfers on human rights (Ecuador, Peru)
    14. Civil society space (Chile, Ireland, Japan, Sierra Leone, Tunisia)
    15. Realizing the equal enjoyment of the right to education by every girl (UAE, UK)
    16. Preventable maternal mortality and morbidity (Colombia, New Zealand, Estonia) 
    17. The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet (Brazil, Nigeria, Sweden, Tunisia, United States of America)
    18. Accelerating efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women (Canada)
    19. Right to education (Portugal)

    Adoption of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reports

    During this session, the Council will adopt the UPR working group reports on Federated States of Micronesia, Lebanon, Mauritania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Australia, Saint Lucia, Nepal, Oman, Austria, Myanmar, Rwanda, Georgia, Sao Tome and Principe and Nauru.

    ISHR supports human rights defenders in their interaction with the UPR. We publish and submit briefing papers regarding the situation facing human rights defenders in some States under review and advocate for the UPR to be used as a mechanism to support and protect human rights defenders on the ground. 

    Panel discussions

    During each Council session, panel discussions are held to provide member States and NGOs with opportunities to hear from subject-matter experts and raise questions. Seven panel discussions are scheduled for this upcoming session:

    1. High-level panel discussion on the multisectoral prevention of and response to female genital mutilation
    2. Panel discussion on the tenth anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
    3. Panel discussion on the human rights of older persons in the context of climate change [accessible panel]
    4. Annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women, one on violence against women and girls with disabilities, and another on gender-equal socioeconomic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic
    5. Quadrennial panel discussion on promoting human rights through sport and the Olympic ideal [accessible panel]. Theme: The potential of leveraging sport and the Olympic ideal for promoting human rights for young people
    6. ​Annual thematic panel discussion on technical cooperation and capacity-building. Theme: Technical cooperation to advance the right to education and ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all

    Read here the three year programme of work of the Council with supplementary information.

    Read here ISHR’s recommendations on the key issues that are or should be on the agenda of the UN Human Rights Council in 2021.

    Stay up-to-date: Follow @ISHRglobal and #HRC47 on Twitter, and look out for the Human Rights Council Monitor.

    During the session, follow the live-updated programme of work on Sched

    https://www.ishr.ch/news/hrc47-key-issues-agenda-june-2021-session

    https://genevasolutions.news/peace-humanitarian/myanmar-debate-dominates-human-rights-council-opening-session

    https://observatoryihr.org/news/47th-session-of-the-human-rights-council-opens-on-the-longest-day/

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

  • Rights chief calls for concerted global action, citing recent violations in China, Russia and Ethiopia

    The UN rights chief has called for concerted action to recover from the worst global deterioration of rights she had seen, highlighting the situation in China, Russia and Ethiopia among others.

    “To recover from the most wide-reaching and severe cascade of human rights setbacks in our lifetimes, we need a life-changing vision, and concerted action,” Michelle Bachelet told the opening of the UN Human Rights Council’s 47th session.

    Related: ‘Bodies are being eaten by hyenas; girls of eight raped’: inside the Tigray conflict

    Related: China’s Uyghurs living in a ‘dystopian hellscape’, says Amnesty report

    Continue reading…

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

  • A roundup of the coverage on struggles for human rights and freedoms from China to Colombia

    Continue reading…

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

  • The Biden Administration has chosen to echo the same propaganda claims against China that were made by Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Both the Trump & Biden administration are charging the Chinese government with the crime of genocide against a minority people, the Uighurs, in Xinjiang Autonomous Region in western China. This campaign coincides with an economic war with China, which includes tariffs and sanctions. It also comes as the Pentagon has announced a new military doctrine which prioritizes and prepares the United States with a war on China.

    The post Myths & Facts about genocide: What’s happening in Xinjiang, China appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.