Bureau of Prisons closes California facility and suspends operations at six others as rights activists call for clemency
The US Bureau of Prisons (BoP) announced on Thursday it was permanently closing a California women’s prison plagued by staff sexual misconduct scandals, and suspending operations at six other federal institutions.
But local branch of rights group says ‘serious crimes’ were potentially taking place that needed investigation
Amnesty International’s Israel branch has distanced itself from the rights group’s allegation that Israel was committing “genocide” in Gaza, but said “serious crimes” were potentially taking place that needed investigation.
“While the Israeli section of Amnesty International does not accept the accusation that Israel is committing genocide, based on the information available to us, we are concerned that serious crimes are being committed in Gaza, that must be investigated,” it said in a statement.
Daniil Brodsky and the board members stepped down on Thursday, after the group said in a statement the report had “not proved genocidal intent beyond a reasonable doubt”.
On 4 December 2024, Aytan Farhadova in OC media reported that human rights defender Rufat Safarov was detained in Azerbaijan a week before he was set to be awarded the Human Rights Defender of the Year award by US State Secretary Antony Blinken. That day, Safarov’s lawyer, Elchin Sadigov, posted on Facebook that Safarov was accused of hooliganism and fraud resulting in major damage.
Sadigov later posted a message written by Safarov, in which he explained that he was planning to visit the US two days after receiving his visa in order to accept the Global Human Rights Defender Award from Blinken. [not totally clear which award is referred to – ed]
‘So I was awarded as a strong human rights defender of the year. Because the United States initially nominated me, I express my deep gratitude to [Mark] Libby, the US Ambassador in Azerbaijan, and Mr Blinken, US Secretary of State, who supported my candidacy.’
State Department’s Deputy Spokesperson, Vedant Patel, during a press briefing on Tuesday, said: We’re deeply concerned by reports that human rights defender Rufat Safarov has been detained in Azerbaijan’, Patel said, adding that they were ‘closely monitoring the case.’
Frank Schwabe, the head of the German delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), criticised Safaravo’s arrest, saying that PACE will ‘respond to this in January’.
Safarov, a former prosecutor’s office official who spoke out against human rights abuses by the government, was sentenced to nine years in prison on charges of bribery, fraud, and human rights violations in 2016. He was released from prison alongside almost 400 others after Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev issued an amnesty to mark Novruz in 2019.
Amnesty International’s research has found sufficient basis to conclude that Israel has committed and is continuing to commit genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip, the organisation has revealed in a landmark new investigative report.
The 294-page report documents how, during its military offensive launched in the wake of the deadly Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on 7 October 2023, Israel has “unleashed hell and destruction on Palestinians in Gaza brazenly, continuously and with total impunity”.
An Amnesty International statement made along with releasing the investigation says that the Aotearoa New Zealand government “can and should take action”, for example:
Publicly recognise that Israeli authorities are committing the crime of genocide and commit to strong and sustained international action;
Ban imports from illegal settlements as well as investment in companies connected to maintaining the occupation; and
Do everything possible to facilitate Palestinian people seeking refuge to come to Aotearoa New Zealand and receive support.
Lisa Woods, advocacy and movement building director at Amnesty International Aotearoa New Zealand, said: “This research and report demonstrate that Israel has carried out acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza.
“It’s not enough to say ‘never again’. The New Zealand government has to publicly call this what it is — genocide.
“We’re asking the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister to show leadership. New Zealand has a responsibility to act.”
Ban illegal settlement products
Woods said that in addition to acknowledging that this was genocide, the New Zealand government must ban products from the illegal Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory — “and open the doors to Palestinians who are desperately seeking refuge.”
Agnès Callamard, secretary-general of Amnesty International, said about the new report:
“These acts include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.
“Month after month, Israel has treated Palestinians in Gaza as a subhuman group unworthy of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them.
“Our damning findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: this is genocide. It must stop now.”
Callamard said that states that continued to transfer arms to Israel at this time must know they are “violating their obligation to prevent genocide and are at risk of becoming complicit in genocide”.
She said that all states with influence over Israel, particularly key arms suppliers like the US and Germany — but also other EU member states, the UK and others — must act now to bring Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians in Gaza to an immediate end.
Population facing starvation
Over the past two months the crisis has grown particularly acute in the North Gaza governorate, where a besieged population is facing starvation, displacement and annihilation amid relentless bombardment and suffocating restrictions on life-saving humanitarian aid, Callamard said.
“Our research reveals that, for months, Israel has persisted in committing genocidal acts, fully aware of the irreparable harm it was inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza,” she said.
“It continued to do so in defiance of countless warnings about the catastrophic humanitarian situation and of legally binding decisions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordering Israel to take immediate measures to enable the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza.
“Israel has repeatedly argued that its actions in Gaza are lawful and can be justified by its military goal to eradicate Hamas. But genocidal intent can co-exist alongside military goals and does not need to be Israel’s sole intent.”
Amnesty International said in its statement that it had examined Israel’s acts in Gaza closely and in their totality, taking into account their recurrence and simultaneous occurrence, and both their immediate impact and their cumulative and mutually reinforcing consequences.
The organisation considered the scale and severity of the casualties and destruction over time. It also analysed public statements by officials, finding that prohibited acts were often announced or called for in the first place by high-level officials in charge of the war efforts.
“Taking into account the pre-existing context of dispossession, apartheid and unlawful military occupation in which these acts have been committed, we could find only one reasonable conclusion: Israel’s intent is the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza, whether in parallel with, or as a means to achieve, its military goal of destroying Hamas,” Callamard said.
Atrocities ‘can never justify Israel’s genocide’
“The atrocity crimes committed on 7 October 2023 by Hamas and other armed groups against Israelis and victims of other nationalities, including deliberate mass killings and hostage-taking, can never justify Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.”
According to the statement, international jurisprudence recognises that the perpetrator does not need to succeed in their attempts to destroy the protected group, either in whole or in part, for genocide to have been committed.
The commission of prohibited acts with the intent to destroy the group, as such, was sufficient.
The report examines in detail Israel’s violations in Gaza over nine months between 7 October 2023 and early July 2024.
Amnesty International interviewed 212 people, including Palestinian victims and witnesses, local authorities in Gaza, healthcare workers, conducted fieldwork and analysed an extensive range of visual and digital evidence, including satellite imagery.
It also analysed statements by senior Israeli government and military officials, and official Israeli bodies.
On multiple occasions, the organisation shared its findings with the Israeli authorities but had received no substantive response at the time of publication.
Unprecedented scale and magnitude The organisation said Israel’s actions following Hamas’s deadly attacks on 7 October 2023 had brought Gaza’s population to the brink of collapse.
Its brutal military offensive had killed more than [44,000] Palestinians, including more than 13,300 children, and wounded or injured more than 97,000 others by 7 October 2024, many of them in direct or deliberately indiscriminate attacks, often wiping out entire multigenerational families.
Israel had caused unprecedented destruction, which experts say occurred at a level and speed not seen in any other conflict in the 21st century, levelling entire cities and destroying critical infrastructure, agricultural land and cultural and religious sites, Amnesty International said.
It thereby rendered large swathes of Gaza uninhabitable.
As a prelude to the 40th anniversary of the evacuation of Rongelap Islanders to Mejatto Island in Kwajalein in 1985, Radio New Zealand and ABC Radio Australia have produced a six-part podcast series that details the Rongelap story — in the context of The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior, the name of the series.
It is narrated by journalist James Nokise, and includes story telling from Rongelap Islanders as well as those who know about what became the last voyage of Greenpeace’s flagship.
It features a good deal of narrative around the late Rongelap Nitijela Member Jeton Anjain, the architect of the evacuation in 1985. For those who know the story of the 1954 Bravo hydrogen bomb test at Bikini, some of the narrative will be repetitive.
The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior podcast series logo. Image: ABC/RNZ
But the podcast offers some insight that may well be unknown to many. For example, the podcast lays to rest the unfounded US government criticism at the time that Greenpeace engineered the evacuation, manipulating unsuspecting islanders to leave Rongelap.
Through commentary of those in the room when the idea was hatched, this was Jeton’s vision and plan — the Rainbow Warrior was a vehicle that could assist in making it happen.
The narrator describes Jeton’s ongoing disbelief over repeated US government assurances of Rongelap’s safety. Indeed, though not a focus of the RNZ/ABC podcast, it was Rongelap’s self-evacuation that forced the US Congress to fund independent radiological studies of Rongelap Atoll that showed — surprise, surprise — that living on the atoll posed health risks and led to the US Congress establishing a $45 million Rongelap Resettlement Trust Fund.
Questions about the safety of the entirety of Rongelap Atoll linger today, bolstered by non-US government studies that have, over the past several years, pointed out a range of ongoing radiation contamination concerns.
The RNZ/ABC podcast dives into the 1954 Bravo hydrogen bomb test fallout exposure on Rongelap, their subsequent evacuation to Kwajalein, and later to Ejit Island for three years. It details their US-sponsored return in 1957 to Rongelap, one of the most radioactive locations in the world — by US government scientists’ own admission.
The narrative, that includes multiple interviews with people in the Marshall Islands, takes the listener through the experience Rongelap people have had since Bravo, including health problems and life in exile. It narrates possibly the first detailed piece of history about Jeton Anjain, the Rongelap leader who died of cancer in 1993, eight years after Rongelap people left their home atoll.
The podcast takes the listener into a room in Seattle, Washington, in 1984, where Greenpeace International leader Steve Sawyer met for the first time with Jeton and heard his plea for help to relocate Rongelap people using the Rainbow Warrior. The actual move from Rongelap to Mejatto in May 1985 — described in David Robie’s 1986 book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior — is narrated through interviews and historical research.
The final episode of the podcast is heavily focused on the final leg of the Rainbow Warrior’s Pacific tour — a voyage cut short by French secret agents who bombed the Warrior while it was tied to the wharf in Auckland harbor, killing one crew member, Fernando Pereira.
It was Fernando’s photographs of the Rongelap evacuation that brought that chapter in the history of the Marshall Islands to life.
The Warrior was stopping to refuel and re-provision in Auckland prior to heading to the French nuclear testing zone in Moruroa Atoll. But that plan was quite literally bombed by the French government in one of the darkest moments of Pacific colonial history.
The six-part series is on YouTube and can be found by searching The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior.
Scientists conduct radiological surveys of nuclear test fallout A related story in this week’s edition of the Marshall Islands Journal.
“Considerable contamination remains,” wrote scientists Hart Rapaport and Ivana Nikolić Hughes in the Scientific American in 2022. “On islands such as Bikini, the average background gamma radiation is double the maximum value stipulated by an agreement between the governments of the Marshall Islands and the US, even without taking into account other exposure pathways.
“Our findings, based on gathered data, run contrary to the Department of Energy’s. One conclusion is clear: absent a renewed effort to clean radiation from Bikini, families forced from their homes may not be able to safely return until the radiation naturally diminishes over decades and centuries.”
They also raised concern about the level of strontium-90 present in various islands from which they have taken soil and other samples. They point out that US government studies do not address strontium-90.
This radionuclide “can cause leukemia and bone and bone marrow cancer and has long been a source of health concerns at nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima,” Rapaport and Hughes said.
“Despite this, the US government’s published data don’t speak to the presence of this dangerous nuclear isotope.”
Their studies have found “consistently high values” of strontium-90 in northern atolls.
“Although detecting this radioisotope in sediment does not neatly translate into contamination in soil or food, the finding suggests the possibility of danger to ecosystems and people,” they state. “More than that, cleaning up strontium 90 and other contaminants in the Marshall Islands is possible.”
The Columbia scientists’ recommendations for action are straightforward: “Congress should appropriate funds, and a research agency, such as the National Science Foundation, should initiate a call for proposals to fund independent research with three aims.
“We must first further understand the current radiological conditions across the Marshall Islands; second, explore new technologies and methods already in use for future cleanup activity; and, third, train Marshallese scientists, such as those working with the nation’s National Nuclear Commission, to rebuild trust on this issue.”
Giff Johnson is editor of the Marshall Islands Journal. His review of the Rainbow Warrior podcast series was first published by the Journal and is republished here with permission.
Northern Marianas Governor Arnold Palacios and Senator Celina Babauta have travelled to Guam to attend a luncheon with Taiwan President Lai Ching-te.
Taiwan is officially known as the Republic of China (Taiwan). China claims Taiwan as its own territory, with no right to state-to-state ties, a position Taiwan strongly disputes.
Palacios welcomed the opportunity to meet Lai and said this could pave the way for improved relations with the East Asian country.
“This meeting is an opportunity for the CNMI to foster relations with allies in the region.”
When asked if meeting the President would upset the People’s Republic of China, which considers Taiwan a rogue state and part of its territory, Palacios said: “As far as being in the crosshairs of China, we already are in many ways.”
Worldwide, a dozen countries maintain formal diplomatic ties with Taipei.
In January, Nauru cut ties with Taiwan and shifted its diplomatic allegiance to Beijing.
Reconnecting bonds
Babauta, meanwhile, said she was deeply humbled and honoured to be invited to have lunch with Lai and Chia-Ching Hsu, Lai’s Minister of the Overseas Community Affairs Council.
“I am looking forward to connecting and discussing opportunities to strengthen the bond between our two regions and explore how we can create new avenues for our mutual benefit and prosperity, particularly by leveraging our Jones Act waiver,” she said.
“We must turn our economy around. This is an opportunity I could not pass up on.”
Babauta said she asked Lai if she could also make a stopover to the CNMI, but his busy schedule precluded that.
“I am assured that he will plan a visit to the CNMI in the near future.”
The luncheon, which is part of Taiwan’s “Smart and Sustainable Development for a Prosperous Austronesian Region” program, will be held at the Grand Ballroom, Hyatt Regency Guam at noon Thursday and is expected to also have Guam Governor Lou Leon Guerrero and other island leaders.
Lai has previously visited Hawai’i as part of his US tour, one that has elicited the ire of the government of the People’s Republic of China.
Summit ends dramatically
Earlier this year, the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ summit ended dramatically when China demanded the conference communiqué be changed to eliminate a reference to Taiwan.
The document had made a reference to the Forum reaffirming its relations to Taiwan, which has been a development partner since 1992.
But the Chinese Ambassador to the Pacific Qian Bo was furious and the document was rewritten.
Reports say China’s Foreign Ministry has “strongly condemned” US support for Lai’s visit to the US, and had lodged a complaint with the United States.
It earlier also denounced a newly announced US weapons sale to Taiwan.
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.
Human rights group says Israel ‘brazenly, continuously and with total impunity … unleashed hell’ on strip’s 2.3m population
A report from Amnesty International alleges that Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip constitutes the crime of genocide under international law, the first such determination by a major human rights organisation in the 14-month-old conflict.
The 32-page report examining events in Gaza between October 2023 to July 2024, published on Thursday, found that Israel had “brazenly, continuously and with total impunity … unleashed hell” on the strip’s 2.3 million population, noting that the “atrocity crimes” against Israelis by Hamas on 7 October 2023, which triggered the war, “do not justify genocide”.
The unprecedented scale and magnitude of the military offensive, which has caused death and destruction at a speed and level unmatched in any other 21st-century conflict;
Intent to destroy, after considering and discounting arguments such as Israeli recklessness and callous disregard for civilian life in the pursuit of Hamas;
Killing and causing serious bodily or mental harm in repeated direct attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, or deliberately indiscriminate attacks; and
Inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction, such as destroying medical infrastructure, the obstruction of aid, and repeated use of arbitrary and sweeping “evacuation orders” for 90% of the population to unsuitable areas.
As French Prime Minister Michel Barnier’s government has fallen to a motion of no confidence just three months after coming to office, New Caledonia is among the major casualties of France’s ongoing political instability.
New Caledonia’s post-riots situation was already difficult, with an economy on its knees and an estimated €2.2 billion (NZ$3.9 billion) in damage because of the burning and looting that erupted on May 13.
More than 600 businesses have been destroyed, making thousands of people jobless, and forcing companies to shut down.
Last week, several business leaders groups were complaining that even the packages promised by Paris were slow to arrive and that they needed “visibility” to start re-investing and rebuilding.
The recovery process had been difficult to kick-start with much-needed financial assistance from France.
One month after the riots, French President Macron decided to dissolve the National Assembly and call for snap elections.
Until September, New Caledonia’s political leaders found it difficult to negotiate with a caretaker government, until Macron appointed Barnier as Prime Minister, on 5 September 2024.
Barnier appointed PM on September 5 From day one, Barnier announced that a controversial constitutional amendment to modify eligibility conditions at New Caledonia’s local elections was not to be pursued.
He also appointed François-Noël Buffet as his Overseas Minister, particularly in charge of New Caledonia, announced a “dialogue and concertation [cooperation]” mission led by both presidents of France’s Houses of Parliament, Gérard Larcher (Senate) and Yaël Braun-Pivet (National Assembly).
Larcher and Braun-Pivet both visited New Caledonia in November to pave the ground for a resumption of political dialogue regarding New Caledonia’s future status, strongly hinting on a notion of “shared sovereignty” while at the same time assuring of their support to New Caledonia.
Over the past few months, France’s financial assistance to help New Caledonia recover and rebuild has been slowly taking shape.
The long-term financial package, among other measures, included a credit line of up to €1 billion (NZ$1.8 billion), with a guarantee from the French State, to be mainly activated through the French Development Agency (Agence Française de Développement, AFD).
New Caledonia’s ‘PS2R’ plan On New Caledonia’s side, the government and its President Louis Mapou have been working on a “PS2R” (Plan de Sauvegarde, de Refondation et de Reconstruction [Salvage, Refoundation and Reconstruction Plan]), which intends to rebuild and reform New Caledonia’s economic fabric, making it leaner and more flexible.
Another mechanism, made up of a cross-partisan group of local parliamentarians, was also seeking French finance, but with a different approach than that of Mapou — it intends to mainly obtain not loans, but grants, based on the idea that the French loans would bring New Caledonia to an unsustainable level of debt.
As Mapou returned from Paris last week with a French reaffirmation of its assistance and loan package, the “pro-grants” bipartisan group was still there this week to ensure that France’s 2025 Appropriation Bill (budget) effectively contains amendments specifically related to New Caledonia.
Now that this Bill is effectively no more, due to Barnier and his government’s downfall, New Caledonia’s political and business leaders feel the whole work has to be started all over again.
“Our overseas territories will pay the hard price. This will pause many crucial measures with a direct impact on their economic, social and environmental development”, Buffet anticipated in a release on Tuesday, ahead of the no-confidence vote.
He said the repercussions were going to be “very serious”.
A last-minute Bill for emergency expenses The only short-term hope would be that the French National Assembly passes an “end of management” Bill 2024 that would, at least, allow extremely urgent finances to be made available for New Caledonia, including French assistance mobilised until the end of this year.
“Without this, as soon as mid-December 2024, New Caledonia would be faced with dramatic consequences such as the inability to pay public servants’ salaries, including health doctors, or to pay unemployment benefits or to fund the production of energy”, New Caledonian representative MP in the National Assembly Nicolas Metzdorf explained on Tuesday.
The crucial “end of management” 2024 Bill, which is worth some US$237.6 million, is expected to be put to the vote and hopefully endorsed before the no confidence vote and before the current session goes into recess.
On Tuesday, Metzdorf and his colleague, Senator Georges Naturel, also jointly warned on the very real risks associated with the downfall of the present French government.
“Over the last few weeks, the Barnier government has demonstrated it had the capacity to listen and act for New Caledonia”, they jointly stated.
“Now if his government is unseated, for us, this will mean more business will shut down, thousands of New Caledonian employees who will no longer receive their partial or total unemployment benefits, families to jump into despair and an extremely precarious situation”.
Fears for ‘hunger riots’ Over the past few weeks, several New Caledonian politicians have warned of a serious risk for what they term “hunger riots” in the French Pacific archipelago, following the economic situation caused by the May 13 insurrection and destruction.
New Caledonia’s parliamentarians, both pro-France and pro-independence, were all saying they did not support the no-confidence motion against Barnier.
“We’ve already seen what impact the [June] dissolution has caused and how difficult it was to engage in talks [with France]”, pro-independence MP for New Caledonia at the National Assembly Emmanuel Tjibaou said in Paris.
“With this 2024 Appropriation Bill, at least we had something, even if it was not perfect. Now here we no longer have anything”, said New Caledonian politician Philippe Dunoyer (from the moderate pro-French Calédonie Ensemble party).
Impact on political talks
Dunoyer also pointed out this is not only about financial assistance, but about politics, as local parties were preparing to resume crucial talks regarding New Caledonia’s long-term political future status.
“We are engaged in an approach to go back to talks. And we don’t have much time to reach an agreement”.
He and others are pointing the finger at a necessary “stability” for talks to resume.
New Caledonia’s Congress is also working on endorsing, as fast as possible, as many resolutions that would allow to “seal” as many French financial commitments as possible so it would maximise as many sources of income as possible.
“We really didn’t need this, nothing has been spared to us during this mandate,” Metzdorf said earlier this week.
“But we’ll keep doing as we always do — we’ll fight,” he said in Paris.
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.
The Peter Tatchell Foundation staged a peaceful protest on Tuesday 3 December against the state visit to Britain by the emir of Qatar, citing the Gulf nation’s appalling abuse of the human rights of women, LGBTQ+ people, and migrant workers.
The emir of Qatar should NOT be having a state visit
Thirty protestors chanted “Qatar is anti-gay. SHAME!,” as king Charles and the emir travelled down the Mall in the Irish State Coach:
Pliny Soocoormanee, executive officer at the Peter Tatchell Foundation, said:
The King and Emir looked right at our protest and clearly took in the messages on our placards. Qatar is a homophobic sexist dictatorship and should not have the red carpet rolled out for its tyrant.
Pliny added that “the Princess of Wales also looked directly at us and smiled”.
Peter Tatchell, director of the Peter Tatchell Foundation, said:
Keir Starmer and King Charles should not have rewarded the Emir with the honour of a State Visit while his regime continues to victimise women, LGBTs and migrant workers. Feting the Emir is collusion with tyranny.
The Qatar government is a police state dictatorship. It’s guilty of systemic homophobia, sexism and the suppression of workers’ rights and basic freedoms like free speech and the right to protest.
This State Visit sends the wrong message – that the UK prioritises trade and investment over human rights. The UK should be challenging Qatar’s human rights record and seeking the release of political prisoners, not rewarding its ruler with royal pageantry and red carpets.
Ongoing and extensive human rights abuses
LGBTQ+ Qataris face harassment on the street, online entrapment by the police, arrest, three years jail and potentially the death penalty. Qatar has secret gay conversion centres where they can be detained and subjected to abusive attempts to turn them straight.
Women have to get the permission of a male guardian to marry, study, travel abroad, work in many government jobs and access reproductive health care.
Over 6,500 migrant workers have died since Qatar was given the right to host the World Cup in 2010. Many families are still waiting for compensation. Migrant workers complain of unpaid wages, overcrowded slum hostels and being refused permission to change jobs. Those who protest against these abuses have been arrested and deported.
Tatchell said:
These human rights abuses are incompatible with the values of equality and dignity that the UK claims to uphold.
Qatar is not an ally
Peter Tatchell has a long history of challenging Qatar’s human rights abuses.
Two weeks before the 2022 FIFA World Cup, he became the first person to stage a LGBT+ rights protest in Qatar, holding a placard outside Doha’s National Museum that read: “Qatar arrests, jails & subjects LGBTs to ‘conversion’.” He was detained and interrogated by the authorities before being ordered to the airport to depart Qatar.
“That protest was in solidarity with LGBTQ+ Qataris and all those who are persecuted by the regime,” Mr Tatchell said. “This London protest is about continuing to expose the brutal reality behind Qatar’s carefully crafted public image”:
The Emir’s visit is an opportunity to shine a global spotlight on Qatar’s human rights abuses,” Mr Tatchell concluded. “We urge everyone who values equality and freedom to join our peaceful protest.
The National Centre for Accessible Transport (NCAT) has found that 92% of disabled people they spoke with face barriers when using at least one mode of transport, with inaccessible streets and pavements being the biggest obstacles in public spaces.
Additionally, 77% of respondents said these barriers negatively affect their physical or mental well-being, and 75% reported feeling stressed when travelling.
The data comes from NCAT’s Transport Barriers Database, an innovative open-source dashboard designed to inform industry professionals and policymakers. This searchable tool provides crucial evidence of the transport challenges disabled people face across the UK.
Accessible transport: not accessible at all
The interactive dashboard showcases the transport experiences of 1,195 disabled people from the Community of Accessible Transport (CAT) panel. Users can search by categories such as access needs, impairment, transport modes, region, gender, and age. The database also includes 1,274 searchable comments from participants about their experiences.
Key findings already include:
Disabled people do not think transport is accessible. Most do not think this will change in the next 10 years.
Disabled people experience barriers when travelling. 92% face barrier(s) on at least one mode of transport.
Inaccessible transport makes disabled people travel less, and it makes journeys take longer.
Disabled people face many barriers when they travel. These include badly designed and cluttered streets, unreliable step-free access, and poor staff assistance.
NCAT’s recent Accessible Transport Summit emphasised that the voices and experiences of disabled people must be central to any meaningful research and improvements in transport accessibility. The database aims to amplify the experiences of disabled people to guide policy, funding decisions, and research priorities.
The Commission consists of a cross-party group from both Houses of Parliament. They are committed to eliminating transport barriers for disabled people across the UK.
Over the past year, the Commission has engaged with national policymakers, including the former secretary of state for transport, Louise Haigh, and united local government leaders, around the Accessible Transport Charter. They have also highlighted good practices in co-production.
Clive Gilbert from the Accessible Transport Policy Commission says:
2025 promises to be an important year for transport policy across the UK. The Accessible Transport Policy Commission looks forward to using the evidence gathered by NCAT to ensure disabled people’s voices are heard in city halls, legislatures, and government offices across the country.
If you are a disabled person or a transport professional, you can sign up here for our CAT Panel to participate in our research and help shape the future work of NCAT.
One of the major political developments in the United States that has got little attention in the wake of the Democrats’ astounding loss in the November 5 elections is the success of Arab American political organising.
A new generation of political activists has emerged that has earned representation in unprecedented numbers and impact for the 3.5-million-strong Arab-American community in elected and appointed political offices.
It also put Arab Americans on the electoral map for the first time by launching the Uncommitted movement during the Democratic primaries and making a foreign policy issue — Israel’s genocide in Gaza — a national moral issue.
The Democratic Party underestimated the power of this new generation and the intensity of citizen anger, which cost it dearly in the election.
What happened in the Arab American community is a vintage all-American tale. They, like other communities, started their pursuit of political impact as a low-profile immigrant group who became dynamic citizens after political developments threatened their wellbeing and motivated them to take action.
Arab American mobilisation traces its beginnings to small-scale participation in Jesse Jackson’s 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns for the Democratic Party. Jackson was the first serious presidential candidate to include Arab Americans as Democratic Party convention delegates, part of his Rainbow Coalition of:
“the white, the Hispanic, the Black, the Arab, the Jew, the woman, the Native American, the small farmer, the businessperson, the environmentalist, the peace activist, the young, the old, the lesbian, the gay, and the disabled [who] make up the American quilt”.
His campaign gave momentum to voter registration drives within the Arab American community, which continued in the following three decades.
Impact on outcomes
By 2020, nearly 90 percent of Arab Americans were registered to vote. By 2024, the Arab American voter block — in its expansive coalition with other groups — had grown large enough to impact on outcomes in critical swing states, especially Michigan and Pennsylvania.
The attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent backlash motivated Arab Americans even more to engage in meaningful politics. Many members of the community refused to live in fear, trying to avoid the intimidation and smears that had long kept their parents and grandparents subdued and quiescent politically.
As Omar Kurdi, founder of Arab Americans of Cleveland, told me, “We were no longer silent because we saw the dangers to us of being quiet and politically inactive. We refused to live in fear of politics.
“Since then, we have been proud, confident, and active in public. We no longer accept crumbs, but want our share of the pie, and we understand now how we can work for that.”
As a result, over the past two decades, Arab Americans have entered the public sphere and politics at all levels: from local, city, and county positions to state and federal ones.
Elected officials say they succeeded because their constituents knew and trusted them. Candidates who won state and national congressional seats — like Rashida Tlaib in Michigan — inspired hundreds of younger Arab Americans to enter the political fray.
Successful experiences in city politics educated newcomers on how they could impact decision-making, improve their own lives, and serve the entire community. They mastered locally the basics of politics, one Ohio activist told me, “like lobbying, bringing pressure, protesting, educating the public, achieving consensus, and creating coalitions based on shared values, problems, and goals”.
Coalesced into Uncommitted movement
All of this momentum, built up over the years, coalesced into the Uncommitted movement in 2024. As the Biden administration unconditionally supported Israel to carry out genocidal violence in Palestine and Lebanon, Arab-American activists moved to use their newfound leverage as voters in electoral politics.
They joined like-minded social justice activists from other groups that mainstream political parties had long taken for granted — including Muslim Americans, Blacks, Hispanics, youth, progressive Jews, churches, and unions — and sent a strong message during the primaries that they would not support Biden’s re-election bid unless he changed his position on Gaza.
The campaign hoped that tens of thousands of voters in the primaries would send the Democrats a big message by voting “uncommitted”, but in fact, hundreds of thousands of Democrats did so across half a dozen critical states.
These numbers were enough to send 30 Uncommitted delegates to the Democratic National Convention in August, where they could lobby their colleagues to shape the party’s national platform.
One activist involved in the process told me they convinced 320 of the other 5,000 delegates to support their demand for a party commitment to a Gaza ceasefire and arms embargo on Israel — not enough to change the party position, but enough to prove that working from inside the political system over time could move things in a better direction.
Intergenerational support and motivation were big factors in the success of the Uncommitted movement. Arab American Institute Executive Director Maya Berry, who has been involved in such activities for three decades, told me that Arab Americans were always in political positions, but in small numbers, so they had little impact.
However, they learned how the system works and provided valuable insights when the time came this year to act. She mentioned Abbas Alawiyeh as an example, who co-chairs the Uncommitted National Movement and worked as a congressional staffer for many years.
Defeat hotly debated
The Uncommitted movement’s precise contribution to the Democratic Party’s defeat is hotly debated right now. One activist told me the movement “placed Arab Americans at the centre of Democratic Party politics, led the progressives, helped Harris lose in swing states, and nationally brought attention to Gaza, divestment, and moral issues in ways we had never been able to do previously.”
All this occurs in uncharted territory, with no clarity if Arab Americans can influence both the Democratic and Republican parties who might now compete for their vote.
One Arab-American activist in his 30s added, “We are liberated from the Democrats who took us for granted, and we Arab Americans are now a swing vote officially.”
Other activists I spoke to thought the election experience could set the stage for a larger movement to counter the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, though that would require conquering the next hurdle of establishing Political Action Committees (PACs) and raising substantial funds.
That is a future possibility.
For now, it is important to recognise that a national-level Arab-American political effort has been born from the fires and devastation of the US-Israeli genocide in Palestine and Lebanon. Whether it can improve the wellbeing of Arab Americans and all Americans will be revealed in the years ahead.
Dr Rami G Khouri is a distinguished fellow at the American University of Beirut and a nonresident senior fellow at the Arab Center Washington. He is a journalist and book author with 50 years of experience covering the Middle East. This article was first published by Al Jazeera.
Australia’s government is being condemned by climate action groups for discouraging the International Court of Justice (ICJ) from ruling in favour of a court action brought by Vanuatu to determine legal consequences for states that fail to meet fossil reduction commitments.
In its submission before the ICJ at The Hague yesterday, Australia argued that climate action obligations under any legal framework should not extend beyond the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement.
It has prompted a backlash, with Greenpeace accusing Australia’s government of undermining the court case.
“I’m very disappointed,” said Vepaiamele Trief, a Ni-Van Save the Children Next Generation Youth Ambassador, who is present at The Hague.
“To go to the ICJ and completely go against what we are striving for, is very sad to see.
“As a close neighbour of the Pacific Islands, Australia has a duty to support us.”
RNZ Pacific reports Vanuatu’s special envoy to climate change says their case to the ICJ is based on the argument that those harming the climate are breaking international law.
Special Envoy Ralph Regenvanu told RNZ Morning Report they are not just talking about countries breaking climate law.
Republished from ABC Pacific Beat with permission.
Climate @CIJ_ICJ hearings day 1 recap: called for climate justice, self-determination & accountability talks of climate leadership but argues against binding human rights exposed polluters hiding behind the #ParisAgreement to dodge accountability.https://t.co/PB86XFpwzApic.twitter.com/KI1hOKAM0G
— Center for International Environmental Law (@ciel_tweets) December 3, 2024
Vanuatu’s special envoy to climate change says their case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is based on the argument that those harming the climate are breaking international law.
The case seeks an advisory opinion from the court on the legal responsibilities of countries in relation to climate change, and dozens of countries are making oral submissions.
Hearings started in The Hague with Vanuatu — the Pacific island nation that initiated the effort to obtain a legal opinion — yesterday.
Vanuatu’s Special Envoy for Climate Change and Environment Ralph Regenvanu told RNZ Morning Report they are not just talking about countries breaking climate law.
He outlined their argument as: “This conduct — to do emissions which cause harm to the climate system, which harms other countries — is in fact a breach of international law, is unlawful, and the countries who do that should face legal consequences.”
He said they were wanting a line in the sand, even though any ruling from the court will be non-binding.
“We’re hoping for a new benchmark in international law which basically says if you pollute with cumulative global greenhouse gas emissions, you cause climate change, then you are in breach of international law,” he said.
“I think it will help clarify, for us, the UNFCCC (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) process negotiations for example.”
Regenvanu said COP29 in Baku was frustrating, with high-emitting states still doing fossil fuel production and the development of new oil and coal fields.
He said a ruling from the ICJ, though non-binding, will clearly say that “international law says you cannot do this”.
“So at least we’ll have something, sort of a line in the sand.”
Oral submissions to the court are expected to take two weeks.
Another Pacific climate change activist says at the moment there are no consequences for countries failing to meet their climate goals.
Pacific Community (SPC) director of climate change Coral Pasisi said a strong legal opinion from the ICJ might be able to hold polluting countries accountable for failing to reach their targets.
The court will decide on two questions:
What are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions?
What are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate and environment?
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
New Zealand’s Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters was expected to arrive in New Caledonia today for a three-day visit.
His schedule in New Caledonia will include meetings with “a wide range of government, political, business and civil society leaders” from December 3-5, Peters’ office confirmed through a spokesperson.
It includes French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc, who has just lifted the curfew in the French territory from yesterday, French Ambassador for the Pacific Véronique Roger-Lacan, New Caledonia’s President Louis Mapou, New Caledonia’s Congress President Veylma Falaéo — who was in New Zealand last week — as well as prominent political leaders such as Emmanuel Tjibaou, newly elected leader of the major pro-independence Union Calédonienne party, and Sonia Backès, leader of Les Loyalistes [pro-France] party and President of New Caledonia’s Southern Province.
Peters is to be hosted at a special meeting of the Congress.
He will also meet leaders of NZ-supported projects in New Caledonia and attend a ceremony to pay homage to New Zealand soldiers who were laid to rest at the NZ World War military cemetery in Bourail, on the west coast of the main island.
Peters’ visit to New Caledonia was initially scheduled in May 2024, but had to be cancelled due to the riots that broke out.
Late in October, a Pacific Islands Forum leaders delegation, consisting of three serving Prime Ministers (Tonga, Cook Island and Fiji) and a minister of foreign affairs (Solomon Islands) travelled to New Caledonia on a fact-finding mission, five months after the riots that caused 13 deaths, injured hundreds, and left damage estimated at up to €2.2 billion (NZ$3.9 billon), leaving the economy on its knees.
High-level talks in Paris Peters’ visit comes in the immediate footsteps of high-level talks he held last week in Paris with his French counterpart Jean-Noël Barrot and other ministers, including Minister for Overseas François-Noël Buffet.
During a speech delivered at the French Institute for International Relations (IFRI) on November 27, Peters stressed the importance of French-New Zealand relations, especially as “close neighbours” and encouraged France and New Caledonia to “walk the less travelled path” for New Caledonia’s political future.
“What happens in New Caledonia matters to New Zealand,” he said.
“New Caledonia is New Zealand’s closest neighbour. What happens there matters to New Zealand. They are part of our Pacific family. So, we have fraternal bonds with New Caledonia. As we do with France.”
On November 22, Peters also appointed New Zealand’s new Consul-General based in Nouméa with a jurisdiction for the whole of the French Pacific (New Caledonia, French Polynesia, and Wallis and Futuna).
Based in Nouméa, she is career diplomat Mary Thurston.
New Caledonia mobility scheme
Last week also, a group of 30 young New Caledonians flew to New Zealand as part of a working holiday regional mobility scheme involving employment in the agricultural sector.
The programme, funded by New Caledonia’s government, is based on the notions of “regional integration” and “Pacific cultural insertion”.
It also aims at fostering increased exchanges between New Caledonia and its regional neighbours.
The group of young professionals is this year once again working in the Otago region at a cherry orchard.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
An Aotearoa New Zealand-based community education provider is preparing a new course aimed to help media professionals in the Pacific region understand and respond to the complex issue of disinformation.
The eight-week course “A Bit Sus (Pacific)”, developed by the Dark Times Academy, will be offered free to journalists, editors, programme directors and others involved in running media organisations across the Pacific, beginning in February 2025.
“Our course will help participants recognise common tactics used by disinformation agents and support them to deploy proven educational and communications techniques including lateral reading and ‘pre-bunking’,” says Dark Times Academy co-founder Mandy Henk.
As well as teaching participants how to recognise and respond to disinformation, the course offers an understanding of how technology, including generative AI, influences the spread of disinformation.
The course is an expanded and regionalised adaption of the “A Bit Sus” education programme which was developed by Henk in her former role as CEO of Tohatoha Aotearoa Commons.
“As the Pacific Islands have experienced accelerated growth in digital connectivity over the past few years — thanks to new submarine cable networks and satellite technology — the region has also seen a surge in harmful rumours and disinformation that is increasingly disrupting the ability to share accurate and truthful information across Pacific communities,” Henk says.
“By taking a skills-based approach to countering disinformation, our programme can help to spread the techniques needed to mitigate the risks posed by digital technologies.”
Evidence-based counter disinformation
Henk says delivering evidence-based counter disinformation education to Pacific Island media professionals requires a depth of expertise in both counter-disinformation programming and the range of Pacific cultures and political contexts.
“We are delighted to have several renowned academics advising the programme, including Asia Pacific Media Network’s Dr David Robie, editor of Asia Pacific Report and founder of the Pacific Media Centre, and Professor Chad Briggs from the Asian Institute of Management.
“Their expertise will help us to deliver a world class programme informed by the best evidence available.”
Dark Times Academy’s Mandy Henk . . . “The region has seen a surge in harmful rumours and disinformation that is increasingly disrupting the ability to share accurate and truthful information across Pacific communities.” Image: Newsroom
The programme will be co-taught by Henk, as well as American journalist and counter disinformation expert Brooke Binkowski, and New Zealand-based extremism expert Byron Clark, who is also a co-founder of the Dark Times Academy.
“Countering disinformation and preventing the harm it causes in the Pacific Islands is crucially important to communities who wish to maintain and strengthen existing democratic institutions and expand their reach,” says Clark.
Binkowski says: “With disinformation narratives on the rise globally, this course is a timely and eye-opening look at its existence, its purveyors and their goals, and how to effectively combat it.
“I look forward to sharing what I have learned in my years in the field during this course.”
The course is being offered by Dark Times Academy using funds awarded in a public competitive grant offered by the US Embassy in New Zealand.
While it is funded by the US, it is a completely independent programme overseen by Dark Times Academy and its academic consultants.
Joan Busquets, 96, suffered torture, forced labour and 20 years in prison under the Franco regime and seeks reparations
One of the last surviving fighters from the guerrilla war waged against the Franco dictatorship in the 1940s is suing the Spanish government for €1m in reparations.
Barcelona-born Joan Busquets, 96, suffered torture, forced labour and 20 years in prison at the hands of the Franco regime. The case comes in response to Spain’s Democratic Memory law, passed in 2022, which offers “moral reparations” to the regime’s victims.
The NZ prime minister’s comments followed the ICC announcing arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israel’s former defence minister Yoav Gallant on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the 13-month war on the besieged Gaza Strip that has killed more than 44,000 people — mostly women and children.
Netanyahu and Gallant are now fugitives from global justice after the ICC issued the arrest warrants against them.
Although Israel — and the US — does not recognise the authority of the ICC, the highest international criminal court, and Netanyahu and Gallant will not turn themselves in, the pair’s world has got a lot smaller.
The Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, includes 124 state parties across six continents.
“The law operates on the basis of a presumption that people will obey it. That’s how all laws are created,” Kuttab told Al Jazeera.
“You expect everybody to respect the law. Those who don’t respect the law are themselves violating the law.”
He added that there were early signs that countries would not ignore the court’s decision.
Many of Israel’s allies — including several European Union countries — have committed to enforcing the arrest warrants.
The ICC was set up in 2002 to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression when member states are unwilling or unable to do so themselves. It is based in The Hague in the Netherlands.
The case at the ICC is separate from another legal battle Israel is waging at the top UN court, the International Court of Justice, in which South Africa accuses Israel of genocide, an allegation Israeli leaders deny.
A total of 124 countries are state parties to the Rome Statute, which founded the International Criminal Court. They include 29 nations from the Americas: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Map: CC AJ Lab
Israel killed more than 200 Palestinians in Gaza on Saturday, including 40 members of a single family. The official death toll in Gaza is now over 44,000, although experts believe that is a vast undercount of the true figure. Israel’s onslaught has continued to kill medical and aid workers in recent days, including three people with World Central Kitchen, the head of the intensive care unit at…
The UN’s top court will today begin historic hearings on countries’ legal obligations to combat climate change and the consequences of their inaction.
A week after countries at COP29 agreed to a climate finance deal that left vulnerable nations furious, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is beginning hearings for a landmark climate change opinion that could be politically and legally significant for international environmental action.
It is the largest case in the history of the United Nations court, and will cover the legal obligations of countries to protect their people and ecosystems from climate change, and the repercussions for nations contributing to the crisis.
It comes a week after the agreement at COP29, the UN’s annual climate summit, for wealthy states to provide $300B in annual climate finance by 2035 to help poor and developing nations, which face the worst impacts of climate change. But these vulnerable countries called the deal unacceptable and woefully inadequate, with the total being well short of the $1.3T experts say is required every year.
The ICJ case, born out of student-led efforts from Pacific Island nation of Vanuatu, will see arguments presented by 98 countries and a dozen international organisations, including Small Island Developing States, the US, China, oil coalition OPEC, and the WWF.
Court to decide if Paris Agreement is legally binding
Courtesy: Jeroen Bouman/UN Photo via Flickr/CC
The case first came on the map in March 2023, when the UN General Assembly – at the request of Vanuatu – asked the ICJ to issue an advisory opinion on the legal obligations of states to prevent climate change, in what was a historic first for the policymaking organ.
Vanuatu, which will open the arguments at the ICJ, is among the countries most vulnerable to climate change, and has had to deal with increased flooding and typhoons, intense storms, and rising sea levels.
“We live on the front lines of climate change impact. We are witnesses to the destruction of our lands, our livelihoods, our culture and our human rights,” Ralph Regenvanu, the island nation’s climate change envoy, told reporters ahead of the hearing.
Global sea levels have risen by 21-24cm since 1880, but this has accelerated in the decade leading to 2023, when levels rose by an average of 4.3cm. Parts of the Pacific experienced even higher hikes. At the same, time the world has warmed by 1.3°C since preindustrial times, and even breached the 1.5°C target countries agreed to at COP21 in Paris.
The 2015 Paris Agreement, in fact, will be central to the proceedings at the ICJ over the next two weeks, which will determine whether the pact is legally binding, as climate activists have referred to it. If the court does adjudge it as legally binding, it’s likely to draw a challenge from the US, which joined the agreement without the Senate’s review, and could once again leave the agreement altogether under Donald Trump’s second term as president.
And even if it doesn’t find the Paris Agreement to be legally binding, the ICJ could look to other documents to find an obligation, as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) did in April, when it issued an opinion stating that protection from climate change was a human right.
The ICJ’s advisory opinions assess legal questions and provide guidance for the court to interpret the existing law, helping inform how it would handle similar cases in the future. While its advice is non-binding and unable to force affluent countries into action, it is likely to drive legislative development and serve as the basis for other climate lawsuits, both on an international and domestic level.
Climate change litigation on the up
Courtesy: Greenpeace Australia Pacific
At the hearings, 15 international judges will answer two questions: what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, and what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the environment from their actions (or lack thereof)?
The second question particularly references Small Island Developing States, which bear the brunt of the climate crisis, as well as present and future generations affected by its adverse effects.
Ahead of the hearings, the ICJ – also known as World Court – met scientists from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who briefed the judges on the science behind the impacts and future risks of climate change, and the solutions for adaptation and mitigation.
“With most countries falling far short of their obligations to reduce emissions and protect and restore nature, this advisory opinion has the potential to send a powerful legal signal that states cannot ignore their legal duties to act,” said Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, global climate and energy lead at the WWF, and former environment minister of Peru, when he served as the president of COP20.
The ICJ will deliver a decision in 2025, but the proceedings follow an uptick in climate change litigation in recent years. A ruling by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea last year stated that countries are legally obliged to fight climate change to preserve the marine ecosystem, for example, while the ECHR’s aforementioned human rights decision was based on a Swiss case, but has implications for the entire continent.
The Netherlands, the site of the ICJ, had a similar human rights ruling by a court in 2015, which was upheld by the Supreme Court four years later. And more recently, South Korea’s top court ruled that the country’s climate law failed to protect basic human rights and ordered lawmakers to strengthen its emission reduction targets. The governments of India, Pakistan, the UK, the Netherlands, Australia, and Germany (among others) too have been forced into climate action by the courts.
“For our generation and for the Pacific Islands, the climate crisis is an existential threat. It is a matter of survival, and the world’s biggest economies are not taking this crisis seriously,” said Vishal Prasad, director of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change. “We need the ICJ to protect the rights of people at the front lines.”
Activists targeted as US-linked hard-right campaigns sow disinformation ahead of inter-American court of human rights ruling on case of woman who was denied abortion in 2013
Earlier this year, Morena Herrera woke up to find that a video about her had been posted on social media. It claimed that the 64-year-old campaigner for abortion rights in El Salvador had “chased down” a young woman in hospital and “terrorised” her into seeking an abortion.
The young woman was Beatriz, who had been denied an abortion in 2013, even though she was seriously ill and the foetus would not have survived outside the uterus.
An exiled West Papuan leader has called for unity among his people in the face of a renewed “colonial grip” of Indonesia’s new president.
President Prabowo Subianto, who took office last month, “is a deep concern for all West Papuans”, said Benny Wenda of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP).
Speaking at the Oxford Green Fair yesterday — Morning Star flag-raising day — ULMWP’s interim president said Prabowo had already “sent thousands of additional troops to West Papua” and restarted the illegal settlement programme that had marginalised Papuans and made them a minority in their own land.
“He is continuing to destroy our land to create the biggest deforestation project in the history of the world. This network of sugarcane and rice plantations is as big as Wales.
“But we cannot panic. The threat from [President] Prabowo shows that unity and direction is more important than ever.
Indonesia doesn’t fear a divided movement. They do fear the ULMWP, because they know we are the most serious and direct challenge to their colonial grip.”
Here is the text of the speech that Wenda gave while opening the Oxford Green Fair at Oxford Town Hall:
Wenda’s speech
December 1st is the day the West Papuan nation was born.
On this day 63 years ago, the New Guinea Council raised the Morning Star across West Papua for the first time.
We sang our national anthem and announced our Parliament, in a ceremony recognised by Australia, the UK, France, and the Netherlands, our former coloniser. But our new state was quickly stolen from us by Indonesian colonialism.
ULMWP’s Benny Wenda speaking on West Papua while opening the Oxford Green Fair on flag-raising day in the United Kingdom. Image: ULMWP
This day is important to all West Papuans. While we remember all those we have lost in the struggle, we also celebrate our continued resistance to Indonesian colonialism.
On this day in 2020, we announced the formation of the Provisional Government of West Papua. Since then, we have built up our strength on the ground. We now have a constitution, a cabinet, a Green State Vision, and seven executives representing the seven customary regions of West Papua.
Most importantly, we have a people’s mandate. The 2023 ULMWP Congress was first ever democratic election in the history. Over 5000 West Papuans gathered in Jayapura to choose their leaders and take ownership of their movement. This was a huge sacrifice for those on the ground. But it was necessary to show that we are implementing democracy before we have achieved independence.
The outcome of this historic event was the clarification and confirmation of our roadmap by the people. Our three agendas have been endorsed by Congress: full membership of the MSG [Melanesian Spearhead Group], a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights visit to West Papua, and a resolution at the UN General Assembly. Through our Congress, we place the West Papuan struggle directly in the hands of the people. Whenever our moment comes, the ULMWP will be ready to seize it.
Differing views
I want to remind the world that internal division is an inevitable part of any revolution. No national struggle has avoided it. In any democratic country or movement, there will be differing views and approaches.
But the ULMWP and our constitution is the only way to achieve our goal of liberation. We are demonstrating to Indonesia that we are not separatists, bending this way and that way: we are a government-in-waiting representing the unified will of our people. Through the provisional government we are reclaiming our sovereignty. And as a government, we are ready to engage with the world. We are ready to engage with Indonesia as full members of the Melanesian Spearhead Group, and we believe we will achieve this crucial goal in 2024.
The importance of unity is also reflected in the ULMWP’s approach to West Papuan history. As enshrined in our constitution, the ULMWP recognises all previous declarations as legitimate and historic moments in our struggle. This does not just include 1961, but also the OPM Independence Declaration 1971, the 14-star declaration of West Melanesia in 1988, the Papuan People’s Congress in 2000, and the Third West Papuan Congress in 2011.
All these announcements represent an absolute rejection of Indonesian colonialism. The spirit of Merdeka is in all of them.
The new Indonesian President, Prabowo Subianto, is a deep concern for all West Papuans. He has already sent thousands of additional troops to West Papua and restarted the illegal settlement programme that has marginalised us and made us a minority in our own land. He is continuing to destroy our land to create the biggest deforestation project in the history of the world. This network of sugarcane and rice plantations is as big as Wales.
But we cannot panic. The threat from Prabowo shows that unity and direction is more important than ever. Indonesia doesn’t fear a divided movement. They do fear the ULMWP, because they know we are the most serious and direct challenge to their colonial grip.
I therefore call on all West Papuans, whether in the cities, the bush, the refugee camps or in exile, to unite behind the ULMWP Provisional Government. We work towards this agenda at every opportunity. We continue to pressure on United Nations and the international community to review the fraudulent ‘Act of No Choice’, and to uphold my people’s legal and moral right to choose our own destiny.
I also call on all our solidarity groups to respect our Congress and our people’s mandate. The democratic right of the people of West Papua needs to be acknowledged.
What does amnesty mean?
Prabowo has also mentioned an amnesty for West Papuan political prisoners. What does this amnesty mean? Does amnesty mean I can return to West Papua and lead the struggle from inside? All West Papuans support independence; all West Papuans want to raise the Morning Star; all West Papuans want to be free from colonial rule.
But pro-independence actions of any kind are illegal in West Papua. If we raise our flag or talk about self-determination, we are beaten, arrested or jailed. The whole world saw what happened to Defianus Kogoya in April. He was tortured, stabbed, and kicked in a barrel full of bloody water. If the offer of amnesty is real, it must involve releasing all West Papuan political prisoners. It must involve allowing us to peacefully struggle for our freedom without the threat of imprisonment.
Despite Prabowo’s election, this has been a year of progress for our struggle. The Pacific Islands Forum reaffirmed their call for a UN Human Rights Visit to West Papua. This is not just our demand – more than 100 nations have now insisted on this important visit. We have built vital new links across the world, including through our ULMWP delegation at the UN General Assembly.
Through the creation of the West Papua People’s Liberation Front (GR-PWP), our struggle on the ground has reached new heights. Thank you and congratulations to the GR-PWP Administration for your work.
Thank you also to the KNPB and the Alliance of Papuan Students, you are vital elements in our fight for self-determination and are acknowledged in our Congress resolutions. You carry the spirit of Merdeka with you.
I invite all solidarity organisations, including Indonesian solidarity, around the world to preserve our unity by respecting our constitution and Congress. To Indonesian settlers living in our ancestral land, please respect our struggle for self-determination. I also ask that all our military wings unite under the constitution and respect the democratic Congress resolutions.
I invite all West Papuans – living in the bush, in exile, in refugee camps, in the cities or villages – to unite behind your constitution. We are stronger together.
Thank you to Vanuatu
A special thank you to Vanuatu government and people, who are our most consistent and strongest supporters. Thank you to Fiji, Kanaky, PNG, Solomon Islands, and to Pacific Islands Forum and MSG for reaffirming your support for a UN visit. Thank you to the International Lawyers for West Papua and the International Parliamentarians for West Papua.
I hope you will continue to support the West Papuan struggle for self-determination. This is a moral obligation for all Pacific people. Thank you to all religious leaders, and particularly the Pacific Council of Churches and the West Papua Council of Churches, for your consistent support and prayers.
Thank you to all the solidarity groups in the Pacific who are tirelessly supporting the campaign, and in Europe, Australia, Africa, and the Caribbean.
I also give thanks to the West Papua Legislative Council, Buchtar Tabuni and Bazoka Logo, to the Judicative Council and to Prime Minister Edison Waromi. Your work to build our capacity on the ground is incredible and essential to all our achievements. You have pushed forwards all our recent milestones, our Congress, our constitution, government, cabinet, and vision.
Together, we are proving to the world and to Indonesia that we are ready to govern our own affairs.
To the people of West Papua, stay strong and determined. Independence is coming. One day soon we will walk our mountains and rivers without fear of Indonesian soldiers. The Morning Star will fly freely alongside other independent countries of the Pacific.
Until then, stay focused and have courage. The struggle is long but we will win. Your ancestors are with you.
On 27 November, 2024 Amelia Shindelar (managing director of the Human Rights Initiative at the University of Minnesota) published in Open Global Rights an assessment of the situation of n HRDs in the USA: From grief to activism: The dangers confronting human rights defenders in the United States
Human rights defenders who have lost loved ones to law enforcement violence face additional traumas and risks. These activists need safety and support for their mental and physical well-being.
…HRDs are at high risk of adverse health and safety outcomes. They face significant mental health challenges, particularly when the defenders are from a marginalized community and work on issues related to their identities and their communities. Through a series of interviews with HRDs involved in the anti-law enforcement violence movement, my research team learned about the particular risks faced by HRDs in the United States who have lost a loved one to law enforcement violence.
The most recognised risk to HRDs is the threat to their physical safety. This danger can take various forms, including direct violence and assault, ranging from beatings to torture and abduction at the hands of both state and non-state actors. Tragically, hundreds of HRDs are killed each year. Front Line Defenders reported over 300 killings in 2023 alone, and this figure likely underestimates the true toll.
The unique struggles of defenders who have lost loved ones to law enforcement violence
In the United States, HRDs who have lost family members or loved ones to law enforcement violence face an exceptional set of traumatizing experiences that go beyond the already significant challenges associated with the loss of a loved one to violence. We identified four common risk factors that contribute to this:
1. Dehumanization and criminalization by the media
Traditional media often relies on official statements from law enforcement, which emphasize perceived threats and reinforce that the officer is justified in their use of force. Victims of law enforcement violence are regularly portrayed as criminals in an effort to justify their deaths and shift the focus elsewhere.
Shortly after the death of her son in 2022, Monique Johnson shared with us her experience of how the media portrayed the situation, saying, “They always put their own narrative out there so that people think that he’s the bad guy.” Monique’s experience mirrors that of all the other activists that we interviewed. This negative portrayal can have severe consequences, including exacerbating grief, traumatization, and a loss of social support, as community members withdraw their assistance based on these representations.
2. Recurring exposure to law enforcement violence
Each new incident of violence reopens the wounds. With over 1,000 people killed by law enforcement in the United States each year, the reminders are frequent and painful. Cindy Sundberg, whose son Tekle was killed in 2022, vividly described her experience: “Each event and each killing is like you just open up the wound, and they take a knife and stir it up. And you are just oozing pain.”
In the cases that receive substantial media attention, there’s an added layer of daily trauma. Courteney Ross, George Floyd’s fiance, described this experience: “It never stops. I know loss and grief don’t stop, but when you are faced with literally a symbol of your loved one’s murder every single day, it’s exhausting. It’s just—it’s fearful; it’s anxiety ridden.”
This recurring exposure leads to chronic stress, keeping defenders in a state of heightened alertness that can have severe physical and mental health consequences and affect their ability to process their grief and trauma.
3. Surveillance and harassment by law enforcement
Many HRDs report surveillance or harassment by law enforcement following the death of their loved ones, ranging from increased police presence in their neighborhoods to overt acts of intimidation. Such experiences contribute to a pervasive sense of fear and insecurity.
Matilda Smith shared her experience of constant fear after the officer who killed her son moved into her apartment building: “I was afraid for my life, and my daughter was, and my son as well.” This anxiety led her to move to a different part of town, but the feeling of being watched persisted. The psychological impact of surveillance can be severe, leading to a constant state of alertness and paranoid thoughts and behaviors.
4. Negative consequences of activism
All of the affected individuals with whom we spoke turned to activism to find purpose and healing after the death of their loved ones. As demonstrated by the examples above, among others, activists face multifaceted risks. “I’ve known people in this work that have died of a broken heart,” said Jeralynn Brown-Blueford, co-founder of the Alan Blueford Foundation. Other interviewees also described the emotional, physical, financial, and social toll of their work.
Activism can involve difficult physical labor; carrying protest materials for long distances, building temporary blockades, setting up and taking down sound systems and event spaces, and distributing supplies and resources are just a few examples. Marilyn Hill, whose son was killed in 1997 and has since been active in the anti-law enforcement violence movement, talked about the physical toll the work takes: “I had to load and unload and pick up heavy things…I ended up with a hole in my stomach, and it got bigger and bigger. I ended up having the most excruciating surgery that left me in a nursing home for a month after the surgery.”
The intense focus on activism can strain family relationships. According to Colette Flanagan, founder of Mothers Against Police Brutality, “People get confused; they don’t know what to do when you fight against the policeman. It has damaged our family. I basically lost my daughter. We’re estranged—we haven’t spoken in ten years.” Family estrangement can lead to a loss of crucial support systems, leaving defenders more vulnerable to burnout and emotional exhaustion.
Conclusion
Understanding the risks faced by HRDs in the United States is crucial not only for supporting individual defenders but also for ensuring the sustainability of human rights movements. As the rights community continues to grapple with issues of systemic injustice and human rights violations, we must recognize the human cost borne by those on the front lines of these battles and work towards creating safer, more supportive environments.
Her research focuses on the protection, security, and well-being of human rights defenders.
The jailing of pro-democracy activists, omnipresent surveillance and a distrust of the police have driven people into a fearful silence
Growing up, I had always dreamed of becoming a police officer like my uncle. In my childhood in the 1980s and 90s, the police had a positive and brave image. I remember when I was in first or second grade, struggling with English, my uncle would tutor me. After our lessons, I would stay at his house to play. Next to his bed was a punching bag, and he would teach me how to throw punches and do one-handed push-ups.
My uncle would show off the muscles on his arms, telling me his dream was to become a police officer who fights crime and protects the innocent. He eventually did. And in his police uniform graduation photo, he stood tall and proud – a hero in my eyes.
A landmark case that began in a Pacific classroom and could change the course of future climate talks is about to be heard in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The court will begin hearings involving a record number of countries in The Hague, in the Netherlands, today.
Its 15 judges have been asked, for the first time, to give an opinion about the obligations of nations to prevent climate change — and the consequences for them if they fail.
The court’s findings could bolster the cases of nations taking legal action against big polluters failing to reduce emissions, experts say.
They could also strengthen the hand of Pacific Island nations in future climate change negotiations like COP.
Vanuatu, one of the world’s most natural disaster-prone nations, is leading the charge in the international court.
The road to the ICJ — nicknamed the “World Court” — started five years ago when a group of University of the South Pacific law students studying in Vanuatu began discussing how they could help bring about climate action.
“This case is really another example of Pacific Island countries being global leaders on the climate crisis,” Dr Wesley Morgan, a research associate with UNSW’s Institute for Climate Risk and Response, said.
“It’s an amazing David and Goliath moment.”
Environmental advocates and lawyers from around the world will come to the International Court of Justice for the court case. Image: CC BY-SA 4.0/ Velvet
Meanwhile, experts say the Pacific will be watching Australia’s testimony today closely.
So what is the court case about exactly, and how did it get to this point?
From classroom to World Court Cynthia Houniuhi, from Solomon Islands, remembers clearly the class discussion where it all began.
Students at the University of the South Pacific’s campus in Vanuatu’s capital, Port Vila, turned their minds to the biggest issue faced by their home countries.
While their communities were dealing with sea level rise and intense cyclones, there was an apparent international “deadlock” on climate change action, Houniuhi said.
And each new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change painted a bleak picture of their futures.
“These things are real to us,” Hounhiuhi said. “And we cannot accept that . . . fate in the IPCC report.
“[We’re] not accepting that there’s nothing we can do.”
Their lecturer tasked them with finding a legal avenue for action. He challenged them to be ambitious. And he told them to take it out of their classroom to their national leaders.
So the students settled on an idea: Ask the World Court to issue an advisory opinion on the obligations of states to protect the climate against greenhouse gas emissions.
“That’s what resonated to us,” Houniuhi, now president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, said.
Students were motivated to take action after seeing how sea level rise had affected communities across the Pacific. Image: Britt Basel/RNZ Pacific
They sent out letters to Pacific Island governments asking for support and Vanuatu’s then-Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu agreed to meet with the students.
Vanuatu took up the cause and built a coalition of countries pushing the UN General Assembly to send the matter to its main judicial body, the International Court of Justice, for an advisory opinion.
In March last year, they succeeded when the UN nations unanimously adopted the resolution to refer the case — a historic first for the UN General Assembly.
Speakers at the UN General Assembly hailed the decision to send the case to the International Court of Justice as a milestone in a decades-long struggle for climate justice. Image: X/@UN
It was a decision celebrated with a parade on the streets of Port Vila.
Australian National University professor in international law Dr Donald Rothwell said Pacific nations had already overcome their biggest challenge in building enough support for the case to be heard.
“From the perspective of Vanuatu and the small island and other states who brought these proceedings, this is quite a momentous occasion, if only because these states rarely have appeared before the International Court of Justice,” he said.
“This is the first occasion where they’ve really had the ability to raise these issues in the World Court, and that in itself will attract an enormous amount of global attention and raise awareness.”
Dr Sue Farran, a professor of comparative law at Newcastle University in the United Kingdom, said getting the case before the ICJ was also part of achieving climate justice.
“It’s recognition that certain peoples have suffered more than others as a result of climate change,” she said.
“And justice means addressing wrongs where people have been harmed.”
A game changer on climate? Nearly 100 countries will speak over two weeks of hearings — an unprecedented number, Professor Rothwell said.
Each has only a short, 30-minute slot to make their argument.
The court will decide on two questions: What are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions?
And, what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate and environment?
Vanuatu will open the hearings with its testimony.
Regenvanu, now Vanuatu’s special envoy on climate change, said the case was timely in light of the last COP meeting, where financial commitments from rich, polluting nations fell short of the mark for Pacific Islands that needed funding to deal with climate change.
Vanuatu’s climate change envoy Ralph Regenvanu said the ICJ case was about climate justice. Image: Hilaire Bule/RNZ Pacific
For a nation hit with three cyclones last year — and where natural disaster-struck schools have spent months teaching primary students in hot UNICEF tents – the stakes are high in climate negotiations.
“We just graduated from being a least-developed country a few years ago,” Regenvanu said.
“We don’t have the financial capacity to build back better, build back quicker, respond and recover quicker.
“We need the resources that other countries were able to attain and become rich through fossil fuel development that caused this crisis we are now facing.
“That’s why we’re appearing before the ICJ. We want justice in terms of allowing us to have the same capacity to respond quickly after catastrophic events.”
He said the advisory opinion would stop unnecessary debates that bog down climate negotiations, by offering legal clarity on the obligations of states on climate change.
Three cyclones struck Vanuatu in 2023, including Tropical Cyclone Lola, which damaged buildings on Ambrym Island. Image: Sam Tasso/RNZ Pacific
It will also help define controversial terms, such as “climate finance” — which developing nations argue should not include loans.
And while the court’s advisory opinion will be non-binding, it also has the potential to influence climate change litigation around the world.
Dr Rothwell said much would depend on how the court answered the case’s second question – on the consequences for states that failed to take climate action.
He said an opinion that favoured small island nations, like in the Pacific Islands, would let them pursue legal action with more certainty.
“That could possibly open up a battleground for major international litigation into the future, subject to how the [International Court of Justice] answers that question,” he said.
Regenvanu said Vanuatu was already looking at options it could take once the court issues its advisory opinion.
“Basically all options are on the table from litigation on one extreme, to much clearer negotiation tactics, based on what the advisory opinion says, at the forthcoming couple of COPs.”
‘This is hope’ Vanuatu brought the case to the ICJ with the support of a core group of 18 countries, including New Zealand, Germany, Bangladesh and Singapore.
Australia, which co-sponsored the UN resolution sending the case to the ICJ, will also speak at today’s hearings.
“Many will be watching closely, but Vanuatu will be watching more closely than anyone, having led this process,” Dr Morgan said.
A Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokesperson said Australia had engaged consistently with the court proceedings, reflecting its support for the Pacific’s commitment to strengthening global climate action.
Some countries have expressed misgivings about taking the case to the ICJ.
The United States’ representative at the General Assembly last year argued diplomacy was a better way to address climate change.
And over the two weeks of court hearings this month, it’s expected nations contributing most to greenhouse gases will argue for a narrow reading of their responsibilities to address climate change under international law — one that minimises their obligations.
Other nations will argue that human rights laws and other international agreements — like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — give these nations larger obligations to prevent climate change.
Professor Rothwell said it was hard to predict what conclusion the World Court would reach — and he expected the advisory opinion would not arrive until as late as October next year.
“When we’re looking at 15 judges, when we’re looking at a wide range of legal treaties and conventions upon which the court is being asked to address these questions, it’s really difficult to speculate at this point,” he said.
“We’ll very much just have to wait and see what the outcome is.”
There’s the chance the judges will be split, or they will not issue a strong advisory opinion.
But Regenvanu is drawing hope from a recent finding in a similar case at the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea, which found countries are obliged to protect the oceans from climate change impacts.
“It’s given us a great deal of validation that what we will get out of the ICJ will be favourable,” he said.
For Houniuhi, the long journey from the Port Vila classroom five years ago is about to lead finally to the Peace Palace in The Hague, where the ICJ will have its hearings.
Houniuhi said the case would let her and her fellow students have their experiences of climate change reflected at the highest level.
But for her, the court case has another important role.
In what could be the biggest protest march in New Zealand’s history, 42,000 people took to the roads over fears Māori rights are being dismantled. Eva Corlett reports
It started at the northern tip of the North Island, gathering momentum as it moved its way down the country. By the time the march – or hikoi – reached its conclusion nine days later outside parliament in Wellington it was thought to be one of the biggest New Zealand has ever seen, with 42,000 people taking part. The demonstration was sparked by what critics say is the rightwing government’s attempt to fundamentally redraw the relationship between the Māori people and the state.
A lawyer and activist Annette Sykes, who was on the march, says it was a unifying moment for Māori people, but also showed the strength of public feeling against a potential rollback of hard-won rights. She says she feels the new ruling coalition is coming up with divisive policies that “are actually trying to demolish that sense of unity that we have forged as a nation, that mutual respect”.
Pro-independence Kanak leader Christian Téin will remain in a mainland French jail for the time being, a Court of Appeal has ruled in Nouméa.
This followed an earlier ruling on October 22 from the Court of Cassation, which is tasked to rule on possible procedural mistakes in earlier judgments.
The Court of Cassation found some flaws in the procedure that justified the case being heard again by a Court of Appeal.
Téin’s lawyer, Pierre Ortet, confirmed his client’s detention in a mainland prison (Mulhouse jail, north-eastern France) has been maintained as a result of the latest Court of Appeal hearing behind closed doors in Nouméa on Friday.
But he also told local media he now intends to bring the case to the European Court of Human Rights, as well as United Nations’ human rights mechanisms — especially on the circumstances that surrounded Téin’s transfer to France on 23 June 2024 on board a specially-chartered plane four days after his arrest in Nouméa on June 19.
Nouméa Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas told local media in an interview on Friday that in this case the next step should happen “some time in January”, when a criminal chamber of the Court of Cassation is expected to deliver another ruling.
Reacting to recent comments made by pro-independence party Union Calédonienne, which maintains Téin is a political prisoner, Dupas said Téin and others facing similar charges “are still presumed innocent”, but “are not political prisoners, they have not been held in relation to a political motive”.
Alleged crimes
The alleged crimes, he said, were “crimes and delicts related to organised crime”.
The seven charges include complicity as part of murder attempts, theft involving the use of weapons and conspiracy in view of the preparation of acts of organised crimes.
Téin’s defence maintains it was never his client’s intention to commit such crimes.
Christian Téin is the head of a “Field Action Coordinating Cell” (CCAT), a group created late in 2023 by the largest and oldest pro-independence party Union Calédonienne.
From October 2023 onward, the CCAT organised marches and demonstrations that later degenerated — starting May 13 — into insurrectional riots, arson and looting, causing 13 deaths and an estimated 2.2 billion euros (NZ$3.9 billion) in material damage, mainly in the Greater Nouméa area.
“The judicial inquiry aims at establishing every responsibility, especially at the level of ‘order givers’,” Dupas told local Radio Rythme Bleu on Friday.
He confirmed six persons were still being detained in several jails of mainland France, including Téin.
3 released under ‘judicial control’
Three others have been released under judiciary control with an obligation to remain in mainland France.
“You see, the manifestation of truth requires time. Justice requires serenity, it’s very important”, he commented.
Late August, Téin was also chosen as president of the pro-independence umbrella FLNKS at its congress.
The August 2024 Congress was also marked by the non-attendance of two other main pillars of the movement, UPM and PALIKA, which have since confirmed their intention to distance themselves from FLNKS.
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.
Despite it being illegal in Australia to recruit soldiers for foreign armies, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) recruiters are hard at work enticing young Australians to join Israel’s army. Michael West Media investigates.
INVESTIGATION:By Yaakov Aharon
The Israeli war machine is in hyperdrive, and it needs new bodies to throw into the fire. In July, The Department of Home Affairs stated that there were only four Australians who had booked flights to Israel and whom it suspected of intending to join the Israel Defence Forces (IDF).
The Australian Border Force intervened with three of the four but clarified that they did not “necessarily prevent them from leaving”.
MWM understands a batch of Australian recruits is due to arrive in Israel in January, and this is not the first batch of recruits to receive assistance as IDF soldiers through this Australian programme.
Many countries encourage certain categories of immigrants and discourage others. However, Israel doesn’t just want Palestinians out and Jews in — they want Jews of fighting age, who will be conscripted shortly after arrival.
The IDF’s “Lone Soldiers” are soldiers who do not have parents living in Israel. Usually, this means 18-year-old immigrants with basic Hebrew who may never have spent longer than a school camp away from home.
There are a range of Israeli government programmes, charities, and community centres that support the Lone Soldiers’ integration into society prior to basic training.
The most robust of these programs is Garin Tzabar, where there are only 90 days between hugging mum and dad goodbye at Sydney Airport and the drill sergeant belting orders in a foreign language.
The Garin Tzabar website. Image: MWM
Garin Tzabar
In 2004, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asked Minister for Aliyah [Immigration] and Integration, Tzipi Livni, to significantly increase the number of people in the Garin Tzabar programme.
The IDF website states that Garin Tzabar “is a unique project, a collaborative venture of the Meitav Unit in the IDF, the Scout movement, the security-social wing of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Immigration and Absorption, which began in 1991”. (Translated from Hebrew via Google Translate.)
The Meitav Unit is divided into many different branches, most of which are responsible for overseeing new recruits.
Powerful and unique journalism by @yaakov_aharon on a story that receives shamefully little coverage in Australia; the recruitment of Australians to serve in the Israeli military: https://t.co/OdNVzzMEbx
However, the pride of the Meitav Unit is the branch dedicated to recruiting all the unique population groups that are not subject to the draft (eg. Ultra-Orthodox Jews). This branch is then divided into three further Departments.
In a 2020 interview, the Head of Meitav’s Tzabar Department, Lieutenant Noam Delgo, referred to herself as someone who “recruits olim chadishim (new immigrants).” She stated:
“Our main job in the army is to help Garin Tzabar members to recruit . . . The best thing about Garin Tzabar is the mashakyot (commanders). Every time you wake up in the morning you have two amazing soldiers — really intelligent — with pretty high skills, just managing your whole life, teaching you Hebrew, helping you with all the bureaucratic systems in Israel, getting profiles, seeing doctors and getting those documents, and finishing the whole process.”
The contact point for Australian recruits is Shoval Magal, the executive director of Garin Tzabar Australia. The registered address is a building shared by the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Zionist Council of NSW, the community’s peak bodies in the state.
“Until three months ago, Tali [REDACTED], from Sydney, Australia, and Moises [REDACTED], from Mexico City, were ordinary teenagers. But on December 25, they arrived at their new family here in Israel — the “Garin Tzabar” family, and in a moment, they will become soldiers. In a special project, we accompanied them from the day of admission (to the program) until just before the recruitment.“ (Translated from Hebrew via Google Translate).
Michael Manhaim was the executive director of Garin Tzabar Australia from 2018 to 2023. He wrote an article, “Becoming a Lone Soldier”,’ for the 2021 annual newsletter of Betar Australia, a Zionist youth group for children. In the article, Manhaim writes:
“The programme starts with the unique preparation process in Australia.
. . . It only takes one step; you just need to choose which foot will lead the way. We will be there for the rest.”
A criminal activity MWM is not alleging that any of the parties mentioned in this article have broken the law. It is not a crime if a person chooses to join a foreign army.
A person commits an offence if the person recruits, in Australia, another person to serve in any capacity in or with an armed force in a foreign country.
It is a further offence to facilitate or promote recruitment for a foreign army and to publish recruitment materials. This includes advertising information relating to how a person may serve in a foreign army.
The maximum penalty for each offence is 10 years.
Rawan Arraf, executive director of the Australian Centre for International Justice, said:
“Unless there has been a specific declaration stating it is not an offence to recruit for the Israel Defence Force, recruitment to a foreign armed force is a criminal offence under Australian law, and the Australian Federal Police should be investigating anyone allegedly involved in recruitment for a foreign armed force.”
Army needing ‘new flesh’ If the IDF are to keep the war on Gaza going, they need to fill old suits of body armour with new grunts.
Reports indicate the death toll within IDF’s ranks is unprecedented — a suicide epidemic is claiming further lives on the home front, and reservists are refusing in droves to return to active duty.
In October, Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid accused Bibi Netanyahu of obscuring the facts of Israel’s casualty rate. Any national security story published in Israel must first be approved by the intelligence unit at the Military Censor.
“11,000 soldiers were injured and 890 others killed,” Lapid said, without warning and live on air. There are limits to how much we accept the alternative facts”.
In November 2023, Shoval Magal shared a photo in which she is posing alongside six young Australians, saying, “The participants are eager to have Aliya (immigrate) to Israel, start the programme and join the army”.
These six recruits are the attendees of just one of several seminars that Magal has organised in Melbourne for the summer 2023 cycle, having also organised separate events across cities in Australia.
Magal’s June 2024 newsletter said she was “in the advanced stages of the preparation phase in Australia for the August 2024 Garin”. Most recently, in October 2024, she was “getting ready for Garin Tzabar’s 2024 December cycle.”
Magal’s newsletter for Israeli Scouts in Australia ‘Aliyah Events – November 2024’. Image: MWM
There are five “Aliyah (Immigration) Events” in Sydney, Melbourne and Perth. The sponsoring organisations are Garin Tzabar, the Israeli Ministry for Aliyah (Immigration) and Integration, and a who’s who of the Jewish-Australian community.
The star speaker at each event is Alon Katz, an Australian who joined Garin Tzabar in 2018 and is today a reserve IDF soldier. The second speaker, Colonel Golan Vach, was the subject of two Electronic Intifadainvestigations alleging that he had invented the 40 burned babies lie on October 7 to create a motive for Israel’s onslaught in Gaza.
If any Australian signed the papers to become an IDF recruit at these events, is someone liable for the offence of recruiting them to a foreign army?
MWM reached out for comment to Garin Tzabar Australia and the Zionist Federation of Australia to clarify whether the IDF is recruiting in Australia but did not receive a reply.
Yaakov Aharon is a Jewish-Australian journalist living in Wollongong. He enjoys long walks on Wollongong Beach, unimpeded by Port Kembla smoke fumes and AUKUS submarines. First published by Michael West Media and republished with permission.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
Twenty five Pacific civil society organisations and solidarity movements have called on Pacific leaders of their “longstanding responsibility” to West Papua, and to urgently address the “ongoing gross human rights abuses” by Indonesia.
The organisations — including the Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC), Fiji Council of Social Services (FCOSS). Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG), Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) and Vanuatu Human Rights Coalition — issued a statement marking 1 December 2024.
This date commemorates 63 years since the Morning Star flag was first
raised in West Papua to signify the territory’s sovereignty.
The organisations condemned the “false narrative Indonesia has peddled of itself as a morally upright, peace-loving, and benevolent friend of the Melanesian people and of the Pacific”.
Jakarta had “infiltrated our governments and institutional perceptions”.
The statement also said:
Yet Indonesia’s annexation of the territory, military occupation, and violent oppression, gross human rights violations on West Papuans continue to be ignored internationally and unfortunately by most Pacific leaders.
The deepening relations between Pacific states and Jakarta reflect how far the false narrative Indonesia has peddled of itself as a morally upright, peace-loving, and benevolent friend of the Melanesian people and of the Pacific, has infiltrated our governments and institutional perceptions.
The corresponding dilution of our leaders’ voice, individually and collectively, is indicative of political and economic complicity, staining the Pacific’s anti-colonial legacy, and is an attack on the core values of our regional solidarity.
The Pacific has a legacy of holding colonial powers in our region to account. The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Leaders communiques in 2015, 2017, and 2019 are reflective of this, deploring the violence and human rights violations in West Papua, calling on Indonesia to allow independent human rights assessment in the territory, and to address the root causes of conflict through peaceful means.
In 2023, PIF Leaders appointed Fiji and Papua New Guinea (PNG) Prime Ministers, [Sitiveni] Rabuka and [James] Marape respectively to facilitate such constructive engagement with Indonesia.
As PIF envoys, both Prime Ministers visited Indonesia in 2023 on separate occasions, yet they have failed to address these concerns. Is this to be interpreted as regional political expediency or economic self-interest?
Today, torture, discrimination, extrajudicial killings, unlawful arrests, and detention of West Papuans continue to be rife. Approximately 70,000 Papuans remain displaced due to military operations.
Between January and September this year, human rights violations resulted in a total of over 1300 victims across various categories. The most significant violations were arbitrary detention, with 331 victims in 20 cases, and freedom of assembly, which affected at least 388 victims in 21 cases. Other violations included ill-treatment (98 victims), torture (23 victims), and killings (15 victims), along with freedom of expression violations impacting 31 victims.
Additionally, cultural rights violations affected dozens of individuals, while intimidation cases resulted in 15 victims. Disappearances accounted for 2 victims, and right to health violations impacted dozens.
This surge in human rights abuses highlights a concerning trend, with arbitrary detention and freedom of assembly violations standing out as the most widespread and devastating.
The commemoration of the Morning Star flag-raising this 1st of December is a solemn reminder of the region’s unfinished duty of care to the West Papuan people and their struggle for human rights, including the right to self-determination.
Clearly, Pacific leaders, including the Special Envoys, must fulfill their responsibility to a region of genuine peace and solidarity, and thereby rectify their unconscionable response thus far.
They must do justice to the 63 years of resilient resistance by the West Papuan people under violent, even deadly repression.
We call on leaders, especially the Prime Ministers of Fiji and PNG, not to succumb to Indonesia’s chequebook diplomacy and other soft-power overtures now evident in education, the arts, culture, food and agriculture, security, and even health sectors.
We remind our Pacific leaders of their responsibility to 63 years of injustice by Indonesia, and the resilience of the West Papuan people against this oppression to this day.
In solidarity with the people of West Papua, we demand that our leaders:
Honour the resolutions of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) and PIF, which call for a peaceful resolution to the West Papua conflict and the recognition of the rights of West Papuans;
Take immediate and concrete action to review, and if necessary, sanction Indonesia’s status as a dialogue partner in the PIF, associate member of the MSG, and as a party to other privileged bilateral and multilateral arrangements in our Pacific region on the basis of its human rights record in West Papua;
Stand firm against Indonesia’s colonial intrusion into the Pacific through its cheque-book and other diplomatic overtures, ensuring that the sovereignty and rights of the people of West Papua are not sacrificed for political or economic gain; and
PIF must take immediate action to establish a Regional Human Rights Commission or task force, support independent investigations into human rights violations in West Papua, and ensure accountability for all abuses.
Campaigners say problems with digital transfer could affect hundreds of thousands of people on ‘10-year route’ visas
The Home Office has admitted that many people who have the right to live and work in the UK cannot access their eVisas and provide proof that they are allowed to be in the country.
Human rights campaigners have said problems with accessing eVisas could lead to a scandal involving hundreds of thousands of people. Those affected are allowed to be in the UK but cannot show their right to work or rent a home.
called for climate justice, self-determination & accountability
talks of climate leadership but argues against binding human rights
exposed polluters hiding behind the 
