From the misty peaks of Cape Reinga to the rain-soaked streets of Kawakawa, Aotearoa New Zealand’s national hīkoi mō Te Tiriti rolled through the north and arrived in Whangārei.
Since setting off this morning numbers have swelled from a couple of hundred to well over 1000 people, demonstrating their opposition to the coalition government’s controversial Treaty Principles Bill and other policies impacting on Māori.
Hundreds gathered for a misty covered dawn karakia at Te Rerenga Wairua, the very top of the North Island, after meeting at the nearby town of Te Kāo the night before.
Among them was veteran Māori rights activist and former MP Hone Harawira. He says the hīkoi is about protesting against a “blitzkreig of oppression” from the government and uplifting Māori.
Harawira praised organisers of the hīkoi and set out his own hopes for the march.
“It’s been a great start to the day . . . to come here to Te Rerenga Wairua with people from all around the country and just join together, have a karakia, have some waiata and start to move on. We’re ready to go and Wellington is waiting — we can’t keep them waiting.
“One of our kuia said it best last night. The last hīkoi built a party — the Māori Party — [but] let’s make this hīkoi build a nation. Let us focus on that,” Harawira said.
Margie Thomson and her partner James travelled from Auckland to join the hīkoi.
She said as a Pākeha, she was gutted by some of the government policies toward Māori and wanted to show support.
The national hīkoi passes through Kaitaia. Image: Peter de Graaf
“The spirit of the people here is really profound . . . if people could feel they would really see the reality of the kāupapa here — the togetherness. This is really something, there is a really strong Māori movement and you really feel it.”
By lunchtime the hīkoi had reached Kaiatia where numbers swelled to well over 1000 people. The main street had to be closed to traffic while supporters filled the streets with flags, waiata and haka.
Tahlia, 10, made sure she had the best view, as people lined the streets as Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti drew closer to Kawakawa, on the first day, 11 November, 2024. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf
The hīkoi arrived in Whangārei this evening after covering a distance of around 280 km.
Kākā Porowini marae in central Whangārei was hosting some of the supporters and its chair, Taipari Munro, said they were prepared to care for the masses
“Hapu are able to pull those sorts of things together. But of course it will build as the hīkoi travels south.
“The various marae and places where people will be hosted, will all be under preparation now.”
Hirini Tau, Hirini Henare and Mori Rapana lead the hīkoi through Kawakawa today. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf
Three marae have been made available for people to stay at in Whangārei and some kai will also be provided, he said.
Meanwhile, the Māori Law Society has set up a phone number to provide free legal assistance to marchers taking part in the hīkoi.
Spokesperson Echo Haronga said Māori lawyers wanted to support the hīkoi in their own way.
“This helpline is a demonstration of our manaakitanga as Māori legal professionals wanting to tautoko those people who are on the hīkoi. If a question arises for them, they’re not quite sure how handle it during the hīkoi then they know they can call this number they can speak to a Māori lawyer.”
Ngāti Hine Health Trust staff and others wait to welcome Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti, as it drew closer to Kawakawa today. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf
Haronga stressed that she did not anticipate any issues or disturbances with the police and the helpline was open to any questions or concerns not just police and criminal enquiries.
“It’s not actually limited to people causing a ruckus and being in trouble with the police, it also could be someone who has a question . . . and they wouldn’t know otherwise where to go to, you can also call us for that if it’s in relation to hīkoi business.”
Hīkoi supporters will stay in Whangārei for the night before travelling to Dargaville and Auckland’s North Shore tomorrow.
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.
Leaders of a hīkoi against David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill have rejected the ACT party leader’s offer of a meeting as they set off for Wellington.
A dawn karakia at Te Rerenga Wairua launched the national hīkoi today.
Hīkoi mō te Tiriti participants gathered for a dawn blessing ahead of a nine-day journey to Wellington. Police are preparing for 25,000 people to join, while organisers are hoping for as many as 40,000.
The NSW Supreme Court has issued orders prohibiting a major climate protest that would blockade ships entering the world’s largest coal port in Newcastle for 30 hours. Despite the court ruling, Wendy Bacon reports that the protest will still go ahead next week.
SPECIAL REPORT:By Wendy Bacon
In a decision delivered last Thursday, Justice Desmond Fagan in the NSW Supreme Court ruled in favour of state police who applied to have the Rising Tide ‘Protestival’ planned from November 22 to 24 declared an “unauthorised assembly”.
Rising Tide has vowed to continue its protest. The grassroots movement is calling for an end to new coal and gas approvals and imposing a 78 percent tax on coal and gas export profits to fund and support Australian workers during the energy transition.
The group had submitted what is known as a “Form 1” to the police for approval for a 30-hour blockade of the port and a four-day camp on the foreshore.
If approved, the protest could go ahead without police being able to use powers of arrest for offences such as “failure to move on” during the protest.
Rising Tide organisers expect thousands to attend of whom hundreds would enter the water in kayaks and other vessels to block the harbour.
Last year, a similar 24-hour blockade protest was conducted safely and in cooperation with police, after which 109 people refused to leave the water in an act of peaceful civil disobedience. They were then arrested without incident. Most were later given good behaviour bonds with no conviction recorded.
Following the judgment, Rising Tide organiser Zack Schofield said that although the group was disappointed, “the protestival will go ahead within our rights to peaceful assembly on land and water, which is legal in NSW with or without a Form 1.”
Main issue ‘climate pollution’
“The main public safety issue here is the climate pollution caused by the continued expansion of the coal and gas industries. That’s why we are protesting in our own backyard — the Newcastle coal port, scene of Australia’s single biggest contribution to climate change.”
In his judgment, Justice Desmond Fagan affirmed that protesting without a permit is lawful.
In refusing the application, he described the planned action as “excessive”.
“A 30-hour interruption to the operations of a busy port is an imposition on the lawful activities of others that goes far beyond what the people affected should be expected to tolerate in order to facilitate public expression of protest and opinion on the important issues with which the organisers are concerned,” he said.
During the case, Rising Tide’s barrister Neal Funnell argued that in weighing the impacts, the court should take into account “a vast body of evidence as to the cost of the economic impact of global warming and particularly the role the fossil fuel industry plays in that.“
But while agreeing that coal is “extremely detrimental to the atmosphere and biosphere and our future, Justice Fagan indicated that his decision would only take into account the immediate impacts of the protest, not “the economic effect of the activity of burning coal in power plants in whatever countries this coal is freighted to from the port of Newcastle”.
Protest organisers outside NSW Court last week. Image: Michael West Media
NSW Police argued that the risks to safety outweighed the right to protest.
Rising Tide barrister Neal Funnell told the court that the group did not deny that there were inherent risks in protests on water but pointed to evidence that showed police logs revealed no safety concerns or incidents during the 2023 protest.
Although he accepted the police argument about safety risks, Justice Fagan acknowledged that the “organisers of Rising Tide have taken a responsible approach to on-water safety by preparing very thorough plans and protocols, by engaging members of supportive organisations to attend with outboard motor driven rescue craft and by enlisting the assistance of trained lifeguards”.
The Court’s reasons are not to be understood as a direction to terminate the protest.
NSW government opposition
Overshadowing the case were statements by NSW Premier Chris Minns, who recently threatened to make costs of policing a reason why permits to protest could be refused.
Last week, Minns said the protest was opposed because it was dangerous and would impact the economy, suggesting further government action could follow to protect coal infrastructure.
“I think the government’s going to have to make some decisions in the next few weeks about protecting that coal line and ensuring the economy doesn’t close down as a result of this protest activity,” he said.
Greens MP and spokesperson for climate change and justice Sue Higginson, who attended last year’s Rising Tide protest, said, “ It’s the second time in the past few weeks that police have sought to use the court to prohibit a public protest event with the full support of the Premier of this State . . . ”
Higginson hit back at Premier Chris Minns: “Under the laws of NSW, it’s not the job of the Premier or the Police to say where, when and how people can protest. It is the job of the Police and the Premier to serve the people and work with organisers to facilitate a safe and effective event.
“Today, the Premier and the Police have thrown this obligation back in our faces. What we have seen are the tactics of authoritarian politics attempting to silence the people.
“It is telling that the NSW Government would rather seek to silence the community and protect their profits from exporting the climate crisis straight through the Port of Newcastle rather than support our grassroots communities, embrace the right to protest, take firm action to end coal exports and transition our economy.”
Limits of police authorised protests Hundreds of protests take place in NSW each year using Form 1s. Many other assemblies happen without a Form 1 application. But the process places the power over protests in the hands of police and the courts.
In a situation in which NSW has no charter of human rights that protects the right to protest, Justice Fagan’s decision exposes the limits of the Form 1 approach to protests.
NSW Council for Civil Liberties is one of more than 20 organisations that supported the Rising Tide case.
In response to the prohibition order, its Vice-President Lidia Shelly said, “Rising Tide submitted a Form 1 application so that NSW Police could work with the organisers to ensure the safety of the public.
“The organisers did everything right in accordance with the law. It’s responsible and peaceful protesting. Instead, the police dragged the organisers to Court and furthered the public’s perception that they’re acting under political pressure to protect the interests of the fossil fuel industry.”
Shelly said, “In denying the Form 1, NSW Police have created a perfect environment for mass arrests of peaceful protestors to occur . . .
“The right to peaceful assembly is a core human right protected under international law. NSW desperately needs a state-based charter of human rights that protects the right to protest.
“The current Form 1 regime in New South Wales is designed to repress the public from exercising their democratic rights to protest. We reiterate our call to the NSW Government to repeal the draconian anti-protest laws, abolish the Form 1 regime, protect independent legal observers, and introduce a Human Rights Act that enshrines the right to protest.”
Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was professor of journalism at University of Technology Sydney (UTS). She worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is a long-term supporter of a peaceful BDS movement and the Greens. Republished with the permission of the author.
With an estimated 41,000 people living in modern slavery in Australia, Chris Evans’ role to address exploitative practices such as forced marriage and deceptive recruiting
Former Labor minister Chris Evans will be Australia’s first anti-slavery commissioner, with the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, announcing the longtime senator will take up a five-year term in December.
Evans served as immigration and workplace relations minister under the Rudd and Gillard governments, and is a former chief executive of anti-slavery group Walk Free’s faith-based arm Global Freedom Network.
Toitū te Tiriti . . . the Māori activist group fighting for the treaty. Video: RNZ
On November 19, the hīkoi is planned to arrive on Parliament grounds, having gathered supporters from the very top and bottom of New Zealand through the nine-day journey.
Toitū te Tiriti organiser Eru Kapa-Kingi told RNZ the hīkoi was as much about Māori unity as it was opposition to government policy — in particular, the Treaty Principles Bill, which had been expected to be tabled at Parliament on November 18, the day before the hīkoi was set to arrive.
In a statement posted to the Toitū te Tiriti Instagram page, Kapa-Kingi said no changes would be made to the planned hīkoi.
“We always knew a shuffle like this would come along, this is not unexpected from this coalition, they have shown us who they are for the past year.
The hīkoi against the proposed Bill is going ahead as planned, despite the Bill’s earlier introduction to Parliament. Image: RNZ/Jessica Hopkins
“However this timing change does not matter, our kaupapa could never be, and will not be overshadowed. In fact, this just gives us more kaha (strength) to get on our whenua and march for our mokopuna.
“Bills come and go, but Te Tiriti is infinite, and so are we; our plans will not change. Kia kaha tātou.”
Disruptions likely on some roads – police Police have warned that some disruption is likely on roads and highways, as the hīkoi passes through.
Superintendent Kelly Ryan said police would keep Waka Kotahi and local councils updated about the roads, so drivers in each area could find updates. She recommended travellers “plan accordingly”.
Police have also been in contact with the hīkoi organisers, she said: “Our discussions with organisers to date have been positive and we expect the hīkoi to be conducted in a peaceful and lawful manner.
“We’ve planned for large numbers to join the hīkoi, with disruption likely to some roads, including highways and main streets along the route.”
NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi said it would also be monitoring the impact of the hīkoi on highways, and would provide real-time updates on any delays or disruptions.
A police Major Operations Centre has been set up at the Wellington national headquarters, to oversee the response to the hīkoi in each area, Ryan said.
“We will continue to co-ordinate with iwi leaders and our partners across government to ensure public safety and minimal disruption to people going about their daily routine.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Qatar’s Foreign Ministry has rejected media reports that it has pulled out of mediation efforts between Israel and Hamas but added that it has “stalled” its efforts until all parties show “willingness and seriousness” to end the war.
News of the suspension comes as Gaza marks 400 days of war with more than 43,000 Palestinians being killed, 102,000 wounded and 10,000 missing.
The death toll includes at least 17,385 children, including 825 children below the age of one, and nearly 12,000 women.
In a statement on X, the ministry spokesperson Majed al-Ansari said Qatar had informed the relevant mediation parties 10 days ago of its intentions.
Al-Ansari also said that reports regarding the Hamas political office in Doha were inaccurate, “stating that the main goal of the of the office in Qatar is to be a channel of communication between the concerned parties”.
— Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Qatar (@MofaQatar_EN) November 9, 2024
Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson also said that the country would not accept that its role as a mediator be used to “blackmail it”.
“Qatar will not accept that mediation be a reason for blackmailing it, as we have witnessed manipulation since the collapse of the first pause and the women and children exchange deal, especially in retreating from obligations agreed upon through mediation, and exploiting the continuation of negotiations to justify the continuation of the war to serve narrow political purposes,” he said in the statement posted on X.
Criticism aimed at Israel
Commentators on Al Jazeera pointed to the criticism being primarily aimed at Israel and the US.
Senior political analyst Marwan Bishara said Qatar had been spearheading the attempt at reaching a ceasefire “for so long now”.
“Clearly, there have been attempts by a number of parties, notably the Israelis, to undermine the process or abuse the process of diplomacy in order to continue the war.”
400 days of genocide in Gaza . . . reportage by Al Jazeera, banned in Israel. Image: AJ screenshot APR
Earlier, Cindy McCain, executive director of the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP), said immediate steps must be taken to prevent an “all-out catastrophe” in northern Gaza where Israeli forces have maintained a monthlong siege on as many as 95,000 civilian residents amid its brutal military offensive in the area.
‘Unacceptable’ famine crisis
“The unacceptable is confirmed: Famine is likely happening in north Gaza,” McCain wrote on social media.
Steps must be taken immediately, McCain said, to allow the “safe, rapid [and] unimpeded flow of humanitarian [and] commercial supplies” to reach the besieged population in the north of the war-torn territory.
A “Teachers for free Palestine” placard at Saturday’s solidarity rally for Palestine in Auckland. Image: David Robie/APR
World Health Organisation Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has added his voice to rising concerns, saying on social media it was: “Deeply alarming.”
A group of global food security experts has reported that famine is likely “imminent within the northern Gaza Strip”.
Meanwhile, more than 50 countries have signed a letter urging the UN Security Council and General Assembly to take immediate steps to halt arms sales to Israel.
The letter accuses the Israeli government of not doing enough to protect the lives of civilians during its assault on Gaza, reports Al Jazeera.
A protester with the Turkish flag at Saturday’s Palestine and Lebanon solidarity rally in Auckland as demonstrations continued around the world. Image: APR
On 17 October 2024, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor, presented her latest report in an interactive dialogue with United Nations member States during the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly in the Third Committee.
In an interactive dialogue presenting her report to the Third Committee of the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders Mary Lawlor urged States to acknowledge the crucial role of human rights defenders in achieving seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and advancing 2030 Agenda. During the interactive dialogue, Mary Lawlor highlighted human rights defenders’ contributions to various SDGs, including zero hunger (Goal 2), good health and well-being (Goal 3), quality education (Goal 4), gender equality (Goal 5), clean water and sanitation (Goal 6) as well as affordable and clean energy (Goal 7). The report illustrates specific examples of human rights defenders’ work and contributions to each of seventeen Sustainable Development Goals.
During the dialogue, the Special Rapporteur noted that ninety percent of SDG targets are linked to human rights obligations. Given that only seventeen percent of the goals are on track, she emphasised the need for human rights defenders to be supported in their work in making the SDGs a reality. She noted that despite this crucial work of defenders in advancing the SDGs, they face severe barriers and threats including stigmatisation, criminalisation and other violations of fundamental rights.
In her concluding remarks, the Special Rapporteur emphasised that amidst global disagreements, the SDGs represent a rare consensus and urged States to support, partner with and respect HRDs working to support 2030 Agenda. Mary Lawlor in her recommendations, urged States to publicly acknowledge the essential role human rights defenders play in advancing the 2030 Agenda and called for legal frameworks that protect rather than restrict defenders and civil society in their legitimate work in achieving SDGs.
“We will not sign our death certificate. We cannot sign on to text that does not have strong commitments on phasing out fossil fuels.”
These were the words of Samoa’s Minister of Natural Resources and Environment, Toeolesulusulu Cedric Schuster, speaking in his capacity as chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) at the UNFCCC COP28 in Dubai last year.
Outside, Pacific climate activists and allies, led by the Pacific Climate Warriors, were calling for a robust and comprehensive financial package that would see the full, fast, and fair transition away from fossil fuels and into renewable energy in the Global South.
This is our Pacific Way in action: state parties and civil society working together to remind the world as we approach a “finance COP” with the upcoming COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, from November 11-22 that we cannot be conveniently pigeonholed.
We are people who represent not only communities but landscapes and seascapes that are both vulnerable, and resilient, and should not be forced by polluting countries and the much subsidised and profit-focused fossil fuel industries that lobby them to choose between mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage.
Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS) are the uncomfortable reminder for those who want smooth sailing of their agenda at COP29, that while we are able to hold the tension of our vulnerability and resilience in the Pacific, this may make for choppy seas.
I recently had the privilege of joining the SPREP facilitated pre-COP29 gathering for PSIDS and the Climate Change Ministerial meeting in Nadi, Fiji, to provide spiritual guidance and pastoral support.
This gathering took place in a spiritually significant moment, the final week of the Season of Creation, ending, profoundly, on the Feast Day of St Francis of Assisi, patron saint of the environment. The theme for this year’s Season of Creation was, “to hope and act with Creation (the environment).
Encouraged to act in hope
I looked across the room at climate ministers, lead negotiators from the region and the regional organisations that support them and encouraged them to begin the preparatory meeting and to also enter COP29 with hope, to act in hope, because to hope is an act of faith, of vision, of determination and trust that our current situation will not remain the status quo.
Pacific church leaders have rejected this status quo by saying that finance for adaptation and loss and damage, without a significant commitment to a fossil fuel phase-out that is full, fast and fair, is the biblical equivalent to 30 pieces of silver — the bribe Judas was given to betray Jesus.
Pacific Council of Churches general secretary Reverend James Bhagwan . . . “We are people who represent not only communities but landscapes and seascapes that are both vulnerable, and resilient, and should not be forced by polluting countries.” Image: RNZ/Jamie Tahana
In endorsing the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty and leading the World Council of Churches to do the same, Pacific faith communities are joining their governments and civil societies to ensure the entire blue Pacific voice reverberates clearly into the spaces where the focus on finance is dominant.
As people with a deep connection to land and sea, whose identity does not separate itself from biodiversity, the understanding of the “groaning of Creation” (Romans 8:19-25) resonates with Pacific islanders.
We were reminded of the words of St. Saint Augustine that says: “Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are, and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are.”
As we witness the cries and sufferings of Earth and all creatures, let righteous anger move us toward the courage to be hopeful and active for justice.
Hope is not merely optimism. It is not a utopian illusion. It is not waiting for a magical miracle.
Hope is trust that our action makes sense, even if the results of this action are not immediately seen. This is the type of hope that our Pasifika households carry to COP29.
Reverend James Bhagwan is general secretary of the Pacific Conference of Churches. He holds a Bachelor of Divinity from the Pacific Theological College in Fiji and a Masters in Theology from the Methodist Theological University in Korea. He also serves as co-chair of the Fossil Fuel NonProliferation Treaty Campaign Global Steering Committee. This article was first published by RNZ Pacific.
The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) says Israel has stepped up systematic attacks on journalists and media infrastructure since the start of its northern Gaza campaign.
Israeli strikes killed at least five journalists in October and Israeli forces began a smear campaign against six Al Jazeera journalists reporting on the north, the global media watchdog said in a statement.
“There are now almost no professional journalists left in the north to document what several international institutions have described as an ethnic cleansing campaign. Israel has not allowed international media independent access to Gaza in the 13 months since the war began,” CPJ said.
“It seems clear that the systematic attacks on the media and campaign to discredit those few journalists who remain is a deliberate tactic to prevent the world from seeing what Israel is doing there,” said CPJ programme director Carlos Martinez de la Serna.
“Reporters are crucial in bearing witness during a war, without them the world won’t be able to write history.”
“The situation is catastrophic and beyond description,” a camera operator for the privately owned Al-Ghad TV, Abed AlKarim Al-Zwaidi, told CPJ.
“We do not know what our fate will be in light of these circumstances.”
Media watchdogs have varying figures on the death toll of Gazan journalists, but the Palestine Media Office reports at least 184 have been killed in the Israeli war on the enclave.
Could not answer questions
The IDF responded on October 31 to CPJ’s email requesting comment on these killings, repeating previous statements it could not fully address questions if sufficient details about individuals were not provided.
The statement reiterated previous comments that it “directs its strikes only towards military targets and military operatives, and does not target civilian objects and civilians, including media organisations and journalists.”
CPJ is also investigating reports that two other journalists were killed during this time in northern Gaza.
Al Jazeera report on the Amsterdam clashes. Video: AJ
Meanwhile, the UN Special Reporteur on the Occupied Palestine Territories, Francesca Albanese, has called for Western media to be investigated over their coverage of the clashes between Israeli football fans and locals in the Dutch city of Amsterdam.
The call came after some Western media outlets failed to report on or minimised the actions of the fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv ahead of and during the confrontations on Friday.
“Once again, Western media should be investigated for the role they are playing in obscuring Israel’s atrocities,” Albanese said in a post on X.
“In other contexts, international tribunals have found media figures responsible for complicity, incitement, and other international crimes.”
Once again. Western media should be investigated for the role they are playing in obscuring Israel’s atrocities. In other contexts, intl tribunals have found media figures responsible for complicity, incitement, and other intl crimes. https://t.co/YGBA9cpxNW
— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt (@FranceskAlbs) November 9, 2024
In one video from the clashes, Israeli fans were heard singing: “Let the [Israeli army] win, and f*** the Arabs!” while another showed them tearing down a Palestinian flag from a building.
A timeline distributed on social media clearly indicated how the Israeli fans provoked the attack by their own violence, but this was largely ignored by Western media.
We are witnessing the total collapse of journalism. Instead, cognitive dissonance and blatant falsehoods reign supreme. Did anyone expect anything different from Western and Zionist media? pic.twitter.com/7vPP4dnaxm
Ever since 2002, when I was 6 years old, I have been an orphan. But 20 years later, Israel’s war in Gaza made me an orphan for the second time. Before this war, my life was great and full of love. Even though I lost my mother when I was young, my grandmother raised my sister, my brother and me. I had a dream of working in diplomacy, to fight for the Palestinian cause. When the war began…
Tajik opposition activist Dilmurod Ergashev was reportedly taken into custody by authorities as he disembarked a plane in Dushanbe after being deported by Germany hours earlier. Sharofiddin Gadoev, leader of the opposition Movement for Reform and Development of Tajikistan, told RFE/RL that Ergashev was met by Tajik security officials, who declined to comment on the situation.
His case has raised concerns among human rights advocates and international observers, given the serious allegations of potential torture and the lack of transparency regarding Ergashev’s condition following his deportation.
Ergashev reportedly attempted to harm himself by slitting his wrists and legs as German police were preparing to escort him to the airport on November 6. The Insider investigative group reported that Ergashev was hospitalized after the incident, but that the deportation proceeded regardless.
Gadoev said Ergashev’s health condition during the deportation was poor, and that since his arrival in Tajikistan, no further information has been available about his whereabouts or well-being.
RFE/RL’s efforts to obtain an official statement from Tajik authorities have been unsuccessful with representatives of the Prosecutor-General’s Office and the Interior Ministry failing to respond to inquiries.
Leila Nazgul Seiitbek, head of the Vienna-based organization Freedom for Eurasia, informed RFE/RL on November 7 that her organization has appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, seeking intervention in Ergashev’s case and advocating for his safe return from Tajikistan.
Seiitbek noted that her organization had called on German authorities to halt the deportation, arguing that Ergashev faces a high risk of torture in Tajikistan. The deportation order was issued by the Administrative Court of the German town of Kleve on October 28, immediately following Ergashev’s detention.
His associates argued that the court disregarded Ergashev’s pending asylum application in another German court, which is still under consideration.
Ergashev is a prominent member of the Group 24 movement.
Group 24 was founded by businessman Umarali Quvatov, who was assassinated in Turkey in 2015. The group has been a vocal critic of the Tajik government and advocates for democratic reforms. Tajik authorities have labeled it “extremist.” In 2024, Ergashev joined the Movement for Reform and Development of Tajikistan movement.
Ergashev had been living in Germany for the past 13 years as his cases wound through German courts.
Anger and fear have greeted the return to power of former US strongman Donald Trump, a corrupt far-white extremist coup plotter who is also a convicted felon and rapist, following this week’s shock presidential election result.
Ethnic tensions have been on the rise with members of the historically oppressed minority Black ethnic group reporting receiving threatening text messages, warning of a return to an era of enslavement.
In a startling editorial, the tension-wracked country’s paper of record, The New York Times, declared that the country had made “a perilous choice” and that its fragile democracy was now on “a precarious course”.
President-elect Trump’s victory marks the second time in eight years the extremist leader, who is awaiting sentencing after being convicted of using campaign funds to pay off a porn star he had cheated on his wife with, has defeated a female opponent from the ruling Democratic Party.
Women continue to struggle to reach the highest office in the deeply conservative nation where their rights are increasingly under attack and child marriage is widespread.
This has prompted traumatised supporters of Vice-President Kamala Harris, who had been handpicked to replace the unpopular, ageing incumbent, Joe Biden, to accuse American voters of racism to sexism.
“It’s misogyny from Hispanic men, it’s misogyny from Black . . . who do not want a woman leading them,” insisted one TV anchor, adding that there “might be race issues with Hispanics that don’t want a Black woman as president of the United States.”
Hateful tribal rhetoric
The hateful tribal rhetoric has also included social media posts calling for any people of mixed race who failed to vote for Harris to be deported and for intensification of the genocide in Gaza due to Arab-American rejection of Harris over her support for the continued provision of weapons to the brutal apartheid state committing it.
“Victory has many fathers but defeat is an orphan,” goes the saying popularised by former US President John F Kennedy, who was shot 61 years ago this month.
The reluctance to attribute the loss to the grave and gratuitous missteps made by the Harris campaign has mystified America-watchers around the world.
Harris and her supporters had tried to counter that by claiming that Trump would also be genocidal and that she would ameliorate the pain of bereaved families in the US by lowering the price of groceries.
However, the election results showed that this was not a message voters appreciated. “Genocide is bad politics,” said one Arab-American activist.
Worried over democracy
As the scale of the extremists’ electoral win becomes increasingly clear, having taken control of not just the presidency but the upper house of Congress as well, many are worried about the prospects for democracy in the US which is still struggling to emerge from Trump’s first term.
Despite conceding defeat, Harris has pledged to continue to “wage this fight” even as pro-democracy protests have broken out in several cities, raising fears of violence and political uncertainty in the gun-strewn country.
This could imperil stability in North America and sub-Scandinavian Europe where a Caucasian Spring democratic revolution has failed to take hold, and a plethora of white-wing authoritarian populists have instead come to power across the region.
However, there is a silver lining. The elections themselves were a massive improvement over the chaotic and shambolic, disputed November 2020 presidential polls which paved the way for a failed putsch two months later.
This time, the voting was largely peaceful and there was relatively little delay in releasing results, a remarkable achievement for the numeracy-challenged nation where conspiracy theorists remain suspicious about the Islamic origins of mathematics, seeing it is as a ploy by the terror group “Al Jibra” to introduce Sharia Law to the US.
In the coming months and years, there will be a need for the international community to stay engaged with the US and assist the country to try and undertake much-needed reforms to its electoral and governance systems, including changes to its constitution.
During the campaigns, Harris loyalists warned that a win by Trump could lead to the complete gutting of its weak democratic systems, an outcome the world must work hard to avoid.
However, figuring out how to support reform in the US and engage with a Trump regime while not being seen to legitimise the election of a man convicted of serious crimes, will be a tricky challenge for the globe’s mature Third-World democracies.
Many may be forced to limit direct contact with him. “Choices have consequences,” as a US diplomat eloquently put it 11 years ago.
Patrick Gathara is a Kenyan journalist, cartoonist, blogger and author. He is also senior editor for inclusive storytelling at The New Humanitarian. This article was first published by Al Jazeera and is republished under Creative Commons.
The Enemy Within, by Maire Leadbeater is many things. It is:
• A family history
• A social history
• A history of the left-wing in Aotearoa
• A chilling reminder of the origin and continuation of the surveillance state in New Zealand, and
• A damn good read.
The book is a great example of citizen or activist authorship. The author, Maire Leadbeater, and her family are front and centre of the dark cloud of the surveillance state that has hung and still hangs over New Zealand’s “democracy”.
What better place to begin the book than the author noting that she had been spied on by the security services from the age of 10. What better place to begin than describing the role of the Locke family — Elsie, Jack, Maire, Keith and their siblings — have played in Aotearoa society over the last few decades.
And what a fitting way to end the book than with the final chapter entitled, “Person of Interest: Keith Locke”; Maire’s much-loved brother and our much-loved friend and comrade.
In between these pages is a treasure trove of commentary and stories of the development of the surveillance state in the settler colony of NZ and the impact that this has had on the lives of ordinary — no, extra-ordinary — people within this country.
The book could almost be described as a political romp from the settler colonisation of New Zealand through the growth of the workers movement and socialist and communist ideology from the late 1800s until today.
I have often deprecatingly called myself a mere footnote of history as that is all I seem to appear as in many books written about recent progressive history in New Zealand. But it was without false modesty that when Maire gave me a copy of the book a couple of weeks back, I immediately went to the index, looked up my name and found that this time I was a bit more than a footnote, but had a section of a chapter written on my interaction with the spooks.
But it was after reading this, dipping into a couple of other “person of interest” stories of people I knew such as Keith, Mike Treen, the Rosenbergs, Murray Horton and then starting the book again from the beginning did it become clear on what issues the state was paranoid about that led it to build an apparatus to spy on its own citizens.
These were issues of peace, anti-conscription, anti-nuclear, de-colonisation, unemployed workers and left trade unionism and socialist and communist thought. These are the issues that come up time and time again; essentially it was seditious or subversive to be part of any of these campaigns or ideologies.
Client state spying
The other common theme through the book is the role that the UK and more latterly the US has played in ensuring that their NZ client settler state plays by their rules, makes enemies of their enemies and spies on its own people for their “benefit”.
Trade unionist and activist Robert Reid . . . “The book could almost be described as a political romp from the settler colonisation of New Zealand through the growth of the workers movement and socialist and communist ideology from the late 1800s until today.” Image: David Robie/Asia Pacific Report
It was interesting to read how the “5 Eyes”, although not using that name, has been in operation as long as NZ has had a spying apparatus. In fact, the book shows that 3 of the 5 eyes forced NZ to establish its surveillance apparatus in the first place.
Maire, and her editor have arranged this book in a very reader friendly way. It is mostly chronological showing the rise of the surveillance state from the beginning of the 19th century, in dispersed with a series of vignettes of “Persons of Interest”.
Maire would probably acknowledge that this book could not have been written without the decision of the SIS to start releasing files (all beit they were heavily redacted with many missing parts) of many of us who have been spied on by the SIS over the years. So, on behalf of Maire, thank you SIS.
Maire has painstakingly gone through pages and pages of these primary source files and incorporated them into the historical narrative of the book showing what was happening in society while this surveillance was taking place.
I was especially delighted to read the history of the anti-war and conscientious objectors movement. Two years ago, almost to the day, we held the 50th anniversary of the Organisation to Halt Military Service (OHMS); an organisation that I founded and was under heavy surveillance in 1972.
We knew a bit about previous anti-conscription struggles but Maire has provided much more context and information that we knew. It was good to read about people like John Charters, Ormand Burton and Archie Barrington as well more known resisters such as my great uncle Archibald Baxter.
Within living memory
Many of the events covered take place within my living memory. But it was wonderful to be reminded of some things I had forgotten about or to find some new gems of information about our past.
Stories around Bill Sutch, Shirley Smith, Ann and Wolfgang Rosenberg, Jack and Mary Woodward, Gerald O’Brien, Allan Brash (yes, Don’s dad), Cecil Holmes, Jack Lewin are documented as well as my contemporaries such as Don Carson, David Small, Aziz Choudry, Trevor Richards, Jane Kelsey, Nicky Hager, Owen Wilkes, Tame Iti in addition to Maire, Keith and Mike Treen.
The book finishes with a more recent history of NZ again aping the US’s so-called war on terror with the introduction of an anti and counter-terrorism mandate for the SIS and its sister agencies
The book traverses events such as the detention of Ahmed Zaoui, the raid on the Kim Dotcom mansion, the privatisation of spying to firms such as Thomson and Clark, the Urewera raids, “Hit and Run” in Afghanistan. Missing the cut was the recent police raid and removal of the computer of octogenarian, Peter Wilson for holding money earmarked for a development project in DPRK (North Korea).
When we come to the end of the book we are reminded of the horrific Christchurch mosque attack and massacre and prior to that of the bombing of Wellington Trades Hall and the Rainbow Warrior. Also, the failure of the SIS to discover Mossad agents operating in NZ on fake passports.
We cannot but ask the question of why multi-millions of dollars have been spent spying on, surveilling and monitoring peace activists, trade unionists, communists, Māori and more latterly Muslims, when the terrorism that NZ has faced has been that perpetrated on these people not by these people.
Maire notes in the book that the SIS budget for 2021 was around $100 million with around 400 FTEs employed. This does not include GCSB or other parts of the security apparatus.
Seeking subversives in wrong places
This level of money has been spent for well over 100 years looking for subversives and terrorists in the wrong place!
Finally, although dealing with the human cost of the surveillance state, the book touches on some of the lighter sides of the SIS spying. Those of us under surveillance in the 1970s and 1980s remember the amateurish phone tapping that went on at that time.
Also, the men in cars with cameras sitting outside our flats for days on end. Not in the book, but I have one memory of such a man with a camera in a car outside our flat in Wallace Street, Wellington.
After a few days some of my flatmates took pity on him and made him a batch of scones which they passed through the window of his car. He stayed for a bit longer that day but we never saw him or an alternate again.
Another issue the book picks up is the obsession that the SIS and its foreign counterparts had with counting communists in NZ. I remember that the CIA used to put out a Communist Yearbook that described and attempted to count how many members were in each of the communist parties all around the world.
In NZ, my party, the Workers Communist League, was smaller than the SUP, CPNZ and SAL, but one year near the end of our existence we were pleasantly surprised to see that the CIA had almost to a person, doubled our membership.
We could not work out why, until we realised that we all had code names as well as real names and we were getting more and more slack at using the correct one in the correct place. Anyone surveilling us, counting names, would have counted double the names that we had as members! We took the compliment.
Thank you, Maire, for this great book. Thank you and your family for your great contribution to Aotearoa society.
Hopefully the hardships and human cost that you have shown in this book will commit or recommit the rest of us to struggle for a decolonised and socialist Aotearoa within a peaceful and multi-polar world.
And as one of Jack Locke’s political guides said: “the road may be long and torturous, but the future is bright.”
Robert Reid has more than 40 years’ experience in trade unions and in community employment development in Aotearoa New Zealand. He is a former general secretary the president of FIRST Union. Much of his work has been with disadvantaged groups and this has included work with Māori, Pacific peoples and migrant communities. This was his address tonight for the launch of The Enemy Within: The Human Cost of State Surveillance in Aotearoa New Zealand, by Maire Leadbeater.
A Kenyan newspaper reported on 8 November 2024 something unusual with regard to human rights awards: Police officer Jackson Kuria, aka Shakur the cop, was nominated for the african Human Rights Defenders Awards. The outspoken police officer is the first uniformed officer ever nominated for this prestigious award In an interview with TUKO.co.ke, Shakur emphasised that police officers are meant to protect civilians and their rights. Jackson Kuria Kihara, aka @Shakurthecop, publicly opposed the Finance Bill 2024 and protested against it. Cop Shakur is the first uniformed officer nominated for Human Rights Defenders Award.
The newspaper adds: Did Cop Shakur merit the award? This is a huge milestone for the police officer, as he has made history as the first uniformed officer to be considered for the award.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, “War, Peace and the Presidency.” I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: As we continue to look at Donald Trump’s return to the White House, we turn now to look at what it means for the world, from Israel’s war on Gaza to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. During his victory speech, Trump vowed that he was going to “stop wars”.
But what will Trump’s foreign policy actually look like?
AMY GOODMAN: We’re joined now by Fatima Bhutto, award-winning author of several works of fiction and nonfiction, including The Runaways, New Kings of the World. She is co-editing a book along with Sonia Faleiro titled Gaza: The Story of a Genocide, due out next year. She writes a monthly column for Zeteo.
Start off by just responding to Trump’s runaway victory across the United States, Fatima.
Fatima Bhutto on the Kamala Harris “support for genocide”. Video: Democracy Now!
FATIMA BHUTTO: Well, Amy, I don’t think it’s an aberration that he won. I think it’s an aberration that he lost in 2020. And I think anyone looking at the American elections for the last year, even longer, could see very clearly that the Democrats were speaking to — I’m not sure who, to a hall of mirrors.
They ran an incredibly weak and actually macabre campaign, to see Kamala Harris describe her politics as one of joy as she promised the most lethal military in the world, talking about women’s rights in America, essentially focusing those rights on the right to termination, while the rest of the world has watched women slaughtered in Gaza for 13 months straight.
You know, it’s very curious to think that they thought a winning strategy was Beyoncé and that Taylor Swift was somehow a political winning strategy that was going to defeat — who? — Trump, who was speaking to people, who was speaking against wars. You know, whether we believe him or not, it was a marked difference from what Kamala Harris was saying and was not saying.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Fatima, you wrote a piece for Zeteo earlier this year titled “Gaza Has Exposed the Shameful Hypocrisy of Western Feminism.” So, you just mentioned the irony of Kamala Harris as, you know, the second presidential candidate who is a woman, where so much of the campaign was about women, and the fact that — you know, of what’s been unfolding on women, against women and children in Gaza for the last year. If you could elaborate?
FATIMA BHUTTO: Yeah, we’ve seen, Nermeen, over the last year, you know, 70 percent of those slaughtered in Gaza by Israel and, let’s also be clear, by America, because it’s American bombs and American diplomatic cover that allows this slaughter to continue unabated — 70 percent of those victims are women and children.
We have watched children with their heads blown off. We have watched children with no surviving family members find themselves in hospital with limbs missing. Gaza has the largest cohort of child amputees in the world. And we have seen newborns left to die as Israel switches off electricity and fuel of hospitals.
So, for Kamala Harris to come out and talk repeatedly about abortion, and I say this as someone who is pro-choice, who has always been pro-choice, was not just macabre, but it’s obscene. It’s an absolute betrayal of feminism, because feminism is about liberation. It’s not about termination.
And it’s about protecting women at their most vulnerable and at their most frightened. And there was no sign of that. You know, we also saw Kamala Harris bring out celebrities. I mean, the utter vacuousness of bringing out Jennifer Lopez, Beyoncé and others to talk about being a mother, while mothers are being widowed, are being orphaned in Gaza, it was not just tone deaf, it seemed to have a certain hostility, a certain contempt for the suffering that the rest of us have been watching.
I’d also like to add a point about toxic masculinity. There was so much toxicity in Kamala Harris’s campaign. You know, I watched her laugh with Oprah as she spoke about shooting someone who might enter her house with a gun, and giggling and saying her PR team may not like that, but she would kill them.
You don’t need to be a man to practice toxic masculinity, and you don’t need to be white to practice white supremacy, as we’ve seen very clearly from this election cycle.
AMY GOODMAN: And yet, Fatima Bhutto, if you look at what Trump represented, and certainly the Muslim American community, the Arab American community, Jewish progressives, young people, African-Americans certainly understood what Trump’s policy was when he was president.
And it’s rare, you know, a president comes back to serve again after a term away. It’s only happened once before in history.
But you have, for example, Trump moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem. You have an illegal settlement named after Trump in the West Bank. The whole question of Netanyahu and his right-wing allies in Israel pushing for annexation of the West Bank, where Trump would stand on this.
And, of course, you have the Abraham Accords, which many Palestinians felt left them out completely. If you can talk about this? These were put forward by Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who, when the massive Gaza destruction was at its height, talked about Gaza as waterfront real estate.
FATIMA BHUTTO: Absolutely. There’s no question that Trump has been a malign force, not just when it concerns Palestinians, but, frankly, out in the world. But I would argue there’s not very much difference between what these two administrations or parties do. The difference is that Trump doesn’t have the gloss and the charisma of an Obama or — I mean, I can’t even say that Biden has charisma, but certainly the gloss.
Trump says it. They do it. The difference — I can’t really tell the difference anymore.
We saw the Biden administration send over 500 shipments of arms to Israel, betraying America’s own laws, the fact that they are not allowed to export weapons of war to a country committing gross violations of human rights. We saw Bill Clinton trotted out in Michigan to tell Muslims that, actually, they should stop killing Israelis and that Jews were there before them.
I mean, it was an utterly contemptuous speech. So, what is the difference exactly?
We saw Bernie Sanders, who was mentioned earlier, write an op-ed in The Guardian in the days before the election, warning people that if they were not to vote for Kamala Harris, if Donald Trump was to get in, think about the climate crisis. Well, we have watched Israel’s emissions in the first five months of their deadly attack on Gaza release more planet-warming gases into the atmosphere than 20 of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations release in a year.
So, I don’t quite see that there’s a difference between what Democrats allow and what Trump brags about. I think it’s just a question of crudeness and decorum and politeness. One has it, and one doesn’t. In a sense, Trump is much clearer for the rest of the world, because he says what he’s going to do, and, you know, you take him at his word, whereas we have been gaslit and lied to by Antony Blinken on a daily basis now since October 7th.
Every time that AOC or Kamala Harris spoke about fighting desperately for a ceasefire, we saw more carnage, more massacres and Israel committing crimes with total impunity. You know, it wasn’t under Trump that Israel has killed more journalists than have ever been killed in any recorded conflict. It’s under Biden that Israel has killed more UN workers than have ever been killed in the UN’s history. So, I’m not sure there’s a difference.
And, you know, we’ll have to wait to see in the months ahead. But I don’t think anyone is bracing for an upturn. Certainly, people didn’t vote for Kamala Harris. I’m not sure they voted for Trump. We know that she lost 14 million votes from Biden’s win in 2020. And we know that those votes just didn’t come out for the Democrats. Some may have migrated to Trump. Some may have gone to third parties. But 14 million just didn’t go anywhere.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Fatima, if you could, you know, tell us what do you think the reasons are for that? I mean, the kind of — as you said, because it is really horrifying, what has unfolded in Gaza in the last 13 months. You’ve written about this. You now have an edited anthology that you’re editing, co-editing. You know, what do you think accounts for this, the sheer disregard for the lives of tens of thousands of Palestinians who have been killed in Gaza?
FATIMA BHUTTO: It’s a total racism on the part not just of America, but I’m speaking of the West here. This has been betrayed over the last year, the fact that Ukraine is spoken about with an admiration, you know, Zelensky is spoken about with a sort of hero worship, Ukrainian resisters to Russia’s invasion are valorised.
You know, Nancy Pelosi wore a bracelet of bullets used by the Ukrainian resistance against Trump [sic]. But Palestinians are painted as terrorists, are dehumanised to such an extent. You know, we saw that dehumanisation from the mouths of Bill Clinton no less, from the mouths of Kamala Harris, who interrupted somebody speaking out against the genocide, and saying, “I am speaking.”
What is more toxically masculine than that?
We’ve also seen a concerted crackdown in universities across the United States on college students. I’m speaking also here of my own alma mater of Columbia University, of Barnard College, that called the NYPD, who fired live ammunition at the students. You know, this didn’t happen — this extreme response didn’t happen in protests against apartheid. It didn’t happen in protests against Vietnam in quite the same way.
And all I can think is, America and the West, who have been fighting Muslim countries for the last 25, 30 years, see that as acceptable to do so. Our deaths are acceptable to them, and genocide is not a red line.
And, you know, to go back to what what was mentioned earlier about the working class, that is absolutely ignored in America — and I would make the argument across the West, too — they have watched administration after, you know, president and congressmen give billions and billions of dollars to Ukraine, while they have no relief at home.
They have no relief from debt. They have no relief from student debt. They have no medical care, no coverage. They’re struggling to survive. And this is across the board. And after Ukraine, they saw billions go to Israel in the same way, while they get, frankly, nothing.
AMY GOODMAN: Fatima Bhutto, we want to thank you so much for being with us, award-winning author of a number of works of fiction and nonfiction, including The Runaways and New Kings of the World, co-editing a book called Gaza: The Story of a Genocide, due out next year, writes a monthly column for Zeteo.
Coming up, we look at Trump’s vow to deport as many as 20 million immigrants and JD Vance saying, yes, US children born of immigrant parents could also be deported.
Despite being appalled at my government, I winced as a New Zealander to hear my country described as part of the “Axis of Genocide”. With increasing frequency I hear commentators on West Asia/Middle East news sites hold the collective West responsible for the genocide.
It’s a big come-down from the Global Labrador Puppy status New Zealand enjoyed recently.
Australia too has a record of being viewed as a country with soft-power influence, albeit while a stalwart deputy to the US in this part of the world. That is over.
Professor Mohammad Seyed Marandi talks to Piers Morgan Uncensored. Video: Middle East Eye
Regrettably, Australia and New Zealand have sent troops to support US-Israel in the Red Sea (killing Yemeni people), failed to join the International Court of Justice (ICJ) case against Israel, shared intelligence with the Israelis, trained with their forces, provided R&R to soldiers fresh from the killing fields of Gaza while blocking Palestinian refugees, and extended valuable diplomatic support to Israel at the UN.
British planes overfly Gaza to provide data, a German freighter arrived in Alexandria this week laden with hundreds of thousands of kilograms of explosives to kill yet more Palestinian civilians.
Genocide is a collective effort of the Collective West.
Australia and New Zealand, along with the rest of the West, “will stand by the Israeli regime until they exterminate the last Palestinian”, says Professor Mohammad Seyed Marandi, an American-Iranian academic. What our governments do is at best “light condemnation” he says, but when it counts they will be silent.
‘They will allow extermination’
“They will allow the extermination of the people of Gaza. And then if the Israelis go after the West Bank, they will allow for that to happen as well. Under no circumstances do I see the West blocking extermination,” Marandi says.
Looking at our performance over the past seven decades and what is happening today, it is an assessment I would not argue against.
But why should we listen to someone from the Islamic Republic of Iran, you might ask. Who are they to preach at us?
I see things differently. In our dystopian, tightly-curated mainstream mediascape it is rare to hear an Iranian voice. We need to listen to more people, not fewer.
I’m definitely not a cheerleader for Iran or any state and I most certainly don’t agree with everything Professor Marandi says but he gives me richer insights than me just drowning in the endless propaganda of Tier One war criminals like Joe Biden, Benjamin Netanyahu, Antony Blinken and their spokespeople.
Dr Marandi, professor of English literature and orientalism at the University of Tehran, is a former member of Iran’s negotiating team that brokered the break-through JCPOA nuclear agreement (later reneged on by the Trump and Biden administrations).
He is no shrinking violet. He has that fierceness of someone who has been shot at multiple times. A veteran of the Iran-Iraq War, Marandi was wounded four times, including twice with chemical weapons, key components of which were likely supplied by the US to their erstwhile ally Saddam Hussein.
Killed people he knew
Dr Marandi was in South Beirut a few weeks ago when the US-Israelis dropped dozens of bombs on residential buildings killing hundreds of civilians to get at the leader of Hezbollah (a textbook war crime that will never be prosecuted). It killed people he knew. To a BBC reporter who said, yes, but they were targeting Hezbollah, he replied:
“That’s like saying of 7/7 [the terror bombings in London]: ‘They bombed a British regime stronghold.’ How would that sound to people in the UK?”
Part of what people find discomforting about Dr Marandi is that he tears down the thin curtain that separates the centres of power from the major news outlets that repeat their talking points (“Israel has a legitimate right to self-defence” etc).
The more our leaders and media prattle on about Israel’s right to defend itself, the more we sound like the Germany that terrorised Europe in the 1930s and 40s. And the rest of the world has noticed.
As TS Eliot said: “Nothing dies harder than the desire to think well of oneself.”
Not a man to mince words when it comes to war crimes.
Masterful over pointing out racism
Dr Marandi has been masterful at pointing out the racism inherent in the Western worldview, the chauvinism that allows Western minds to treasure white lives but discount as worthless hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives taken in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and elsewhere.
“There is no reason to expect that a declining and desperate empire will conduct itself in a civilised manner. Iran is prepared for the worst,” he says.
“In this great moral struggle, in the world that we live in today — meaning the holocaust in Gaza — who is defending the people of Gaza and who is supporting the holocaust? Iran with its small group of allies is alone against the West,” he told Nima Alkhorshid from Dialogue Works recently.
The Collective West shares collective responsibility.
Dr Marandi draws a sharp distinction between our governments and our populations. He is entirely right in pointing out that the younger people are, in countries like Australia and New Zealand, the more likely they are to oppose the genocide — as do growing numbers of young Jewish Americans who have rejected the Zionist project.
“All people within the whole of Palestine must be equal — Jews, Muslims and Christians. The Islamic Republic of Iran will not allow the US, EU, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the Zionist regime to exterminate the Palestinians of Gaza.”
I heard Mohammad Seyed Marandi extend an interesting invitation to us all in a recent interview. He said the “Axis of Resistance” should be thought of as open to all people who oppose the genocide in Gaza and who are opposed to continued Western militarism in West Asia.
I would never sign up to the policies of Iran, especially on issues like women’s rights, but I do find the invitation to a broad coalition clarifying: the Axis of Genocide versus The Axis of Resistance. Whose side are you on?
Eugene Doyle is a community organiser and activist in Wellington, New Zealand. He received an Absolutely Positively Wellingtonian award in 2023 for community service. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam War. This article was first published at his public policy website Solidarity and is republished here with permission.
Surveying the wreckage of the US elections, here are some observations that have emerged:
Campaigns based on hope do not always defeat campaigns based on fear.
Having dozens of retired high ranking military and diplomatic officials warn against the danger Donald Trump poses to democracy (including people who worked for him) did not matter to many voters.
Likewise, having former politicians and hundreds of academics, intellectuals, legal scholars, community leaders and social activists repudiate Trump’s policies of division mattered not an iota to the voting majority.
Nor did Kamala Harris’s endorsement by dozens of high profile celebrities make a difference to the MAGA mob.
Raising +US$ billion in political donations did not produce victory got Harris. It turns out outspending the opponent is not the key to electoral success.
Incoherent racist and xenophobic rants (“they are eating the dogs, they are eating the cats”) did not give the MAGA mob any pause when considering their choices. In fact, it appears that the resort to crude depictions of opponents (“stupid KaMAla”)and scapegoats (like Puerto Ricans) strengthened the bond between Trump and his supporters.
‘Garbage can’ narrative
Macroeconomic and social indicators such as higher employment and lower crime and undocumented immigrant numbers could not overcome the MAGA narrative that the US was “the garbage can of the world.”
Nor could Harris, despite her accomplished resume in all three government branches at the local, state and federal levels, overcome the narrative that she was “dumb” and a DEI hire who was promoted for reasons other than merit.
It did not matter to the MAGA mob that Trump threatened retribution against his opponents, real and imagined, using the Federal State as his instrument of revenge.
“Standing up to Trump the duty of every public servant” . . . A New York Times edirtorial reoublished today in the New Zealand Herald.
Age was not a factor even though Trump displays evident signs of cognitive decline.
Reproductive rights were not the watershed issue many thought that they would be, including for many female voters. Conversely, the MAGA efforts to court “bro” support via social media catering to younger men worked very well.
In a way, this is a double setback for women: as an issue of bodily autonomy and as an issue of gender equality given the attitudes of Trump endorsers like Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan and Andrew Tate. Those angry younger men interact with females, and their misogyny has now been reaffirmed as part of a political winning strategy.
Ukraine, Europe much to fear
Ukraine and Western Europe have much to fear.
So does the federal bureaucracy and regulatory system, which will now be subject to Project 2025, Elon Musk’s razor gang approach to public spending and RFK Jr’s public health edicts.
In fact, it looks like the Trump second term approach to governance will take a page out of Argentine president Javier Milei’s “chainsaw” approach, with results that will be similar but far broader in scope if implemented in the same way.
So all in all, from where I sit it looks like a bit of a calamity in the making. But then again, I am just another fool with a “woke” degree.
Dr Paul G Buchanan is the director of 36th-Parallel Assessments, a geopolitical and strategic analysis consultancy. This article is republished with the permission of the author.
Palestinians have endured decades of violence, oppression, and breaches of International Humanitarian Law at the hands of Israel. Even before 7 October, 2023 saw the highest number of Palestinians killed since the UN started keeping records.
For those in the Gaza Strip, 17 years of an ongoing illegal blockade, and four previous Israeli military offensives have made life extremely hard. But none of this compares to Israel’s latest assault on Gaza. More than 43,000 people, mainly women and children, have been killed, 90% of the population is internally displaced, 345,000 people are facing catastrophic levels of food insecurity, and more than 80% of Gaza is under Israeli-issued evacuation orders.
This has led to global condemnation, and accusations of war crimes from human rights advocates. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) found it ‘plausible that Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide’, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) is seeking arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials. But the world has failed to stop Israel’s genocide. On the contrary, most Western governments are supporting Israel’s actions, in one of the deadliest and most destructive military campaigns since the Second World War:
So what are Israel’s obligations to the people of Gaza, and how have these been violated?
Without International Humanitarian Law, war would become unrestrained violence
International Humanitarian Law (IHL) only applies during an armed conflict, or an occupation. It aims to protect civilians from the worst consequences of war, and is primarily based on the Geneva Conventions. These set of international treaties establish minimum protections, standards of humane treatment, and fundamental guarantees of respect for individuals affected by armed conflict, but who are non-combatants. They apply the moment an armed conflict has begun.
IHL seeks to reduce the suffering that is inevitably associated with war, by requiring the warring parties to abide by basic precepts of humanity, and by protecting those not, or no longer, participating in hostilities. Without IHL, and its related legal frameworks, war would become unrestrained violence.
The principles of International Humanitarian Law
There are three fundamental principles which govern International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and aim to limit the effects of armed conflict:
The principle of distinction prohibits indiscriminate attacks. Parties to an armed conflict must distinguish at all times between combatants and civilians, and military objectives and civilian objects. Civilian objects include houses, schools, hospitals, refugee shelters, markets, places of worship and cultural or historical monuments. Direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects are prohibited, as are those attacks which fail to discriminate between civilians and combatants.
Civilians only lose their protected status when, and only for such time as they are directly participating in hostilities. People who are no longer taking part in hostilities, such as captured combatants, and those who have been injured, or have surrendered, are protected, and violence, and degrading treatment of these people is prohibited. The use of weapons that do not distinguish between civilians and combatants, and civilian objects and military targets are also prohibited under IHL.
The principle of proportionality limits potential harm to civilians, by demanding that the least amount of harm is caused to them, and when harm cannot be avoided, it needs to be proportional to the military advantage. Attacks on legitimate military objectives are still prohibited if they are expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, civilian harm, or damage to civilian objects which would be excessive in comparison to the expected military advantage.
The principle of precaution requires that all feasible precautions are taken, to minimize incidental loss of civilian life, civilian injury and damage to civilian objects during armed conflict. Careful planning and execution of attacks is essential, to limit the risk of unintended civilian casualties and destruction of civilian infrastructure, and this includes verifying targets as military objectives, and giving effective warnings to the civilian population about safe and effective evacuation plans, before carrying out an attack.
It is also important to mention that violations of IHL, such as deliberately targeting civilians or imposing collective punishment, can never be justified by claiming another party has committed violations, or that there are power imbalances or other injustices.
‘Consistent violations’ of International Humanitarian Law
According to the UN, the Israeli military campaign in Gaza has ‘consistently violated’ International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
Not only does it fail to distinguish between civilians and combatants, dropping bombs on civilian objects such as residential buildings, refugee camps, schools and hospitals but it is also dropping bombs in one of the most crowded places on Earth. Under IHL, the means and methods of attack must be proportional to the threat, and must be chosen to avoid or minimise civilian deaths.
Oliver Sprague, Military, Security and Police Programme Director at Amnesty International UK, told the Canary:
In general, dropping high explosives in a densely populated area is very likely to cause unacceptable levels of civilian harm. So, even if super- precise bombs are used, it is inevitable a large number of civilians will be injured or killed. Even if bombs are used which do not have a wide area effect, and only a single building is the target, everyone in that building will be under the rubble, when the building comes down.
Several investigations into Israel’s use of US made MK-84 bombs have provided us with further evidence of Israel’s disregard for IHL. Weighing 2000lb (900kg), these bombs have a blast radius that can kill people 360m away from the point of detonation, and can cause severe injury. They damage building infrastructure up to 800m away, and can form craters 15m wide and more than 10m deep.
Since 7 October, last year, more than 14,000 of these have been sent by the US to Israel. One study reveals that during the first six weeks of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, the military air-dropped these bombs, which are one of their biggest and most destructive, almost 600 times.
One-third were within dangerous proximity of hospitals across the Gaza Strip. 85% of all hospitals were found to be within 800m – the ‘damage and injury’ range- of at least one M-84 bomb detonation, and 25% were within 360m – the ‘lethal’ range:
During this same time period, the New York Timesfound that more than 200 of the 600 air-dropped MK-84 bombs were launched in areas Israel had designated as ‘safe zones’, and ‘posed a pervasive threat’ to civilians seeking safety.
Weapons experts believe these bombs were used to target sleeping Palestinians in the al- Mawasi ’encampment, home to tens of thousands of displaced people. ‘Safe zones’, such as al-Mawasi, have been systematically targeted by Israeli forces.
According to Sprague, Israel has many types of weapon at its disposal, and has long been at the forefront of using drones to enhance its military capability, including drone-mounted missiles, known as assassination missiles, especially designed to kill an individual in a car.
He noted that:
It’s likely Israel is adapting some of its large fleet of surveillance and targeting drones to fire small deadly assassination missiles, or using them to provide targeting data to call in other air or missile strikes. It is almost certain that these deadly high tech drones were used to attack the aid convoy vehicles that saw the seven World Central Kitchen aid workers killed, in a likely serious violation of international humanitarian law.
An investigation by +972 and Local Call, revealed that Israel also uses artificial intelligence (AI) systems in Gaza. ‘Lavender’ develops target lists and target areas for bombing, and was heavily relied on by the military, especially during the early stages of Israel’s offensive, clocking as many as 37,000 Palestinians as suspected militants – and their homes – for possible air strikes. They were then tracked down and targeted at night, at home.
‘Where’s Daddy’, is another AI system used by Israel, to track individuals to their house, which is then bombed during the night. Although combatants can legally be killed any time, AI systems have inbuilt biases, and make ‘errors’, so the reliability of these target lists needs to be questioned. Also, by targeting these people in the middle of the night, in their homes, with no attempt to avoid civilian casualties, Israel is clearly violating International Humanitarian Law (IHL):
Parties to a conflict may order the displacement of civilians if they are exposed to danger as a result of fighting, but these evacuation orders must be minimized, must prioritise the protection of civilians, be effective and allow sufficient time for safety.
In Gaza, evacuation orders given by the Israeli forces have been a tool for forced displacement and are often accompanied by military attacks and siege. Nine out of every ten Palestinians have no home, and are struggling to find basic necessities. Evacuation orders given to hospitals, have severely threatened the lives of many sick and injured patients.
In Gaza, repeated evacuation orders — now affecting 84% of the territory — have left civilians vulnerable to ongoing hostilities and deprived of access to essential services. Displaced families are enduring abysmal conditions, with severe shortages of food, water, sanitation, hygiene, and other basic necessities. International humanitarian law requires that civilians be protected, whether they choose to move or remain, and that they have access to the humanitarian aid they need.
Those who flee must be allowed to return as soon as circumstances allow. The United Nations does not and will not engage in such non-voluntary, ordered evacuations. We also do not endorse or participate in any unilaterally declared so-called safe zones – any genuine safe zone, as a start, requires agreement from all parties to the conflict. Even within the Israeli-designated ‘humanitarian zones’, we have witnessed repeated Israeli bombardments resulting in people being killed.
Israel has extra obligations, as occupier, to protect the population
Israel, as an occupying power, has added obligations under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), not only of protecting the population – it must provide basic health and safety supplies necessary to survive, but also of protecting the critical infrastructure – such as water and sanitation facilities, power stations and reservoirs, unless there is evidence sites are being used for military reasons.
Israel’s restrictions on humanitarian aid are severe, and threaten the lives of the whole population, especially in the North where, for the last month, the Israeli military is carrying out a ground offensive and imposing a siege. The area is also suffering from severe communications and internet disruptions:
The UN warns us the entire population risks dying from starvation, and calls for the ‘blatant disregard for basic humanity’ to stop. The North is now also without life-saving civil defence services, including firefighting, search and rescue, and emergency medical assistance, as the Palestinian Civil Defence (PCD) has been forced to stop work there. PCD staff have been detained and injured, and the last firefighting vehicle in North Gaza was hit and destroyed.
Last month, the amount of food entering the strip was the lowest of any month this year. More than 80% of Gaza’s population did not receive their monthly food ration. At the same time, about 100,000 tonnes of food commodities, equivalent to over two months of food rations for the whole population, continue to await entry outside the Strip.
The UN World Food Programme’s (WFP) Martin Penner told the Canary this sharp fall of aid flowing into Gaza could have catastrophic consequences:
Food systems have collapsed and people are running out of ways to cope. The aid coming in is the only means of survival for thousands of families. It must be increased and sustained.
After a year of conflict and with winter approaching fast, the risk of famine is still looming in Gaza, according to the latest authoritative food security data. Experts point to ongoing fighting, high levels of displacement and low volumes of humanitarian aid entering the territory as the key factors.
Civilians intentionally deprived of essentials needed for survival
According to this latest data, over 1.8 million people across the Strip are experiencing high levels of acute food insecurity, including nearly 133,000 people facing catastrophic levels. Israel has intentionally impeded the delivery of humanitarian aid and relief supplies, and deprived civilians of essentials for life.
There is also a severe lack of medical supplies, fuel, and electricity, which has resulted from damage to critical infrastructure and the ongoing siege, and has severely affected those hospitals still able to function. Diseases is rife, and polio has reappeared in Gaza, after being eradicated 25 years ago. Civilians are paying an extremely high price for Israel’s military actions.
A doctor, who spoke to the Canary on condition of anonymity, summed up the situation for civilians in Gaza’s hospitals:
I have volunteered in several hospitals during the war, and I’ve seen things I can’t really describe- brain and spinal chord injuries, fractures, burns with all degrees, and a large number of amputations. From the beginning there has been an incredible lack of all types of resources, and I have had to stitch cut wounds without anaesthetic.
Lack of hygiene means a high risk of infections and disease, and there is a lot of gastroenteritis and bacterial skin infections. The hospitals aren’t large enough for the amount of patients coming in. We do CPR on the floor, patients receive aids on the floor, I have stitched wounds on the floor, and also people are sleeping there. Some families are fearful of many things, and also the bombing, and try to get protected by staying at the hospital, which they believe is a safe place. So there are also displaced people staying alongside the hospital as well as inside, who aren’t injured.
When a bombing or airstrike happens, the fear starts. A lot of patients are coming, so we have to be ready. For the chronically ill, and dehydrated and malnourished children, they are lost, literally lost in the hospital as all our focus is now on the injured. My message to the international community is that we need the borders to be opened, so the injured people, the children, the cancer patients can evacuate as soon as possible and get the right treatment. We need the war to end and peace in the whole world.
Israel flouting hospital protections under International Human Law
Medical personnel and facilities have special protection under International Humanitarian Law, whilst also having the general protections applied to civilians and civilian objects. Any targeted attack on healthcare facilities is a violation of international humanitarian law and if this is intentional, is undertaken without advance warning, is a disproportionate response to an identified military threat, or is due to negligence stemming from misidentifying the facility as a military target, this can then constitute a war crime.
Hospitals only lose protection from attack if used to commit ‘acts harmful to the enemy’ but, even then, a warning must be issued to cease this misuse, a reasonable time limit must be set for it to end, and only if the warning goes unheeded is an attack lawfully allowed.
Israel has sought to justify the killing of medical personnel and the destruction of Gaza’s health care system by claiming over 85% of major medical facilities in the Gaza Strip have been used by Hamas for ‘terror operations’, and claim Hamas tunnels, weapons stores and even command centres are to be found underneath hospitals.
Hamas denies these claims, and so do medical staff working in these facilities. Even though the burden of proof is on Israel, there has never been any credible evidence by the Israeli authorities to confirm this about the hospitals, or other civilian objects in the Gaza Strip:
UN: “‘Israel has perpetrated a concerted policy to destroy Gaza’s healthcare system”
Israel has carried out hundreds of attacks on Gaza’s health care system, the vast majority through military force. The attacks have been widespread and systematic, have killed many hundreds of people, and injured many hundreds more.
According to the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel, ‘Israel has perpetrated a concerted policy to destroy Gaza’s healthcare system as part of a broader assault on Gaza, committing war crimes and the crime against humanity of extermination’. It also says there are suggestions of the ‘existence of operational plans and procedures for attacking health- care facilities’ in Gaza’.
Medical personnel, patients and facilities have been deliberately targeted through sniper fire, raids and air strikes, which have caused widespread damage and multiple casualties, and hundreds of staff, including Palestinian Red Crescent volunteers have been arrested, detained or killed. Medical convoys have been attacked, and ambulances systematically denied access to those in need.
It is crucial, under IHL, to put all this into context. When this military operation started, Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant declared a total war on Gaza. A total siege- no water, no food, no fuel, no electricity. This is itself a violation of International Humanitarian Law, and it’s a war crime. That’s why the ICC prosecutor is asking for arrest warrants also for starvation and extermination, as a crime against humanity.
The destruction of infrastructure that is essential for the survival of the population, is one of the measures imposed by Israel to plausibly destroy Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. This destruction, together with the destruction of the health care system, together with the possible transfer of two million people, in a context where there is no safe area, these are exactly those plausibly genocidal acts put in place, not for military purposes but put in place to destroy Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
Generally it is very difficult to prove that a genocide has been committed, in particular to prove so called genocidal intent. In this case there has never been so much evidence, and this evidence has been provided by Israeli military and political leaders themselves. There are hundreds and hundreds of genocidal statements, provided by these people. This has been discussed in the Hague, at the International Court of Justice, and shows genocidal intent- which is crucial.
Ethnic cleansing and forced displacement is part of a wider plan by Israel
There are fears the ethnic cleansing and forced displacement in the North signals the beginning of implementation of the General’s Plan, and the rebuilding of Israeli settlements in Gaza. First proposed by former Israeli Defence force (IDF) General, Giora Eiland, this plan would force Palestinians to flee Northern Gaza.
Those who do not leave would be labelled as combatants, and killed. All humanitarian supplies would also be blocked from entering. This plan would lay the groundwork for the resettlement of Gaza, an idea gathering momentum in Israel.
Since its creation, in 1948, Israel has enjoyed a climate of impunity, provided by the international community, for its serious violations of IHL throughout Palestine. Only effective accountability can stop Israel acting as though it is above the law but, as yet, there has been none.
Palestinians have been seeking to hold Israel accountable for its crimes since 2009. But it was not until 2021 that the former International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor decided to open an investigation – into war crimes and crimes against humanity during Israel’s military action in the Gaza Strip in 2014, during the Great March of Return in 2018, and around its illegal settlement policy:
In May this year, ICC Chief Prosecutor, Karim Khan, requested arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, believing there is reasonable grounds they are responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
But, after 15 years, no effective measures have been taken by the court, and still no arrest warrants have been issued. This worries Mariniello. He told the Canary:
This delay is particularly concerning, not only because we are talking about a context characterised by impunity, but also because of the gravity of the situation in Gaza, and the unfolding genocide taking place. Since the prosecutor’s request, almost 7000 people have been killed, 100,000 people have been forcibly displaced.
There is an ongoing total siege in Gaza, particularly in the Northern part, where almost half a million people are now being subjected to forcible transfer- and forcible transfer is a war crime under the Rome Statute, and forced displacement is a crime against humanity.
So, with all the evidence concerning war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide – which are crimes within the jurisdiction of the ICC, it’s particularly concerning that the decision on the arrest warrants is delayed. As legal representatives of the victims, we have clearly told the chamber that justice delayed is justice denied, in a context in which there is no time. Every day means hundreds of people killed.
In January, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) warned of a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza, and issued provisional measures, which are binding under International Law. This means, in addition to action required from Israel, all states have a legal obligation, not political discretion, to adopt all possible measures to prevent the risk of genocide, starting with a comprehensive arms embargo.
Yet Israel continues violating these measures ordered by the court, and the US, the UK and other European states, continue exporting weapons to Israel, in clear violation of the ICJ decision- meaning they are complicit in facilitating acts of plausible genocide in the Gaza Strip. The political will of states to implement the court’s decision is missing, and this needs to change, for several reasons.
Credibility of International Humanitarian Law undermined by double standards
According to Mariniello, double standards mean that while states have shown urgency and mobilisation of resources towards Ukraine, to enable the court to act without delay, the same states – who say they support human rights, obstruct the investigation when it comes to Palestine. Mariniello argued that:
It’s an exceptionalism that arises because powerful countries are involved. It was the same exceptionalism when the court decided not to investigate-on two occasions, British alleged war crimes in Iraq, or US alleged widely documented war crimes in Aghanistan.
This is the most documented situation in the world for the Commission of International crimes, and Mariniello believes if the court surrenders to political pressures and threats by powerful countries, if justice is not provided, and arrest warrants not issued, it will have a huge impact on the legitimacy and credibility, not just of the ICC, but of the entire international legal system.
In addition, it will be a denial of justice, not just for legal representatives such as himself, but also for Palestinian civil society and the Palestinian victims whom he is representing. Israel’s justice system is not impartial or independent when it comes to crimes committed against Palestinians, so the ICC is their only hope of justice.
Featured image via the WFP/Ali Jadallah and additional images via the WFP/Ali Jadallah and OCHA
The Israeli army has distanced itself from comments made by a brigadier general that ground forces are getting closer to “the complete evacuation” of the northern Gaza Strip and residents will not be allowed to return home.
In a media briefing on Tuesday night, the Israel Defense Forces’ Brig Gen Itzik Cohen told Israeli reporters that “there is no intention of allowing the residents of the northern Gaza Strip to return”. He added that humanitarian aid would be allowed to “regularly” enter the south of the territory but there were “no more civilians left” in the north.
Press freedom is a pillar of American democracy. But political attacks on US-based journalists and news organisations pose an unprecedented threat to their safety and the integrity of information.
Less than 48 hours before election day, Donald Trump, now President-elect for a second term, told a rally of his supporters that he wouldn’t mind if someone shot the journalists in front of him.
“I have this piece of glass here, but all we have really over here is the fake news. And to get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news. And I don’t mind that so much,” he said.
A new survey from the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) highlights a disturbing tolerance for political bullying of the press in the land of the First Amendment. The findings show that this is especially true among white, male, Republican voters.
We commissioned this nationally representative survey of 1020 US adults, which was fielded between June 24 and July 5 2024, to assess Americans’ attitudes to the press ahead of the election. We are publishing the results here for the first time.
More than one-quarter (27 percent) of the Americans we polled said they had often seen or heard a journalist being threatened, harassed or abused online. And more than one-third (34 percent) said they thought it was appropriate for senior politicians and government officials to criticise journalists and news organisations.
Tolerance for political targeting of the press appears as polarised as American society. Nearly half (47 percent) of the Republicans surveyed approved of senior politicians critiquing the press, compared to less than one-quarter (22 percent) of Democrats.
Our analysis also revealed divisions according to gender and ethnicity. While 37 percent of white-identifying respondents thought it was appropriate for political leaders to target journalists and news organisations, only 27 percent of people of colour did. There was also a nine-point difference along gender lines, with 39 percent of men approving of this conduct, compared to 30 percent of women.
It appears intolerance towards the press has a face — a predominantly white, male and Republican-voting face.
Press freedom fears This election campaign, Trump has repeated his blatantly false claim that journalists are “enemies of the people”. He has suggested that reporters who cross him should be jailed, and signalled that he would like to revoke broadcast licences of networks.
Relevant, too, is the enabling environment for viral attacks on journalists created by unregulated social media companies which represent a clear threat to press freedom and the safety of journalists. Previous research produced by ICFJ for Unesco concluded that there was a causal relationship between online violence towards women journalists and physical attacks.
While political actors may be the perpetrators of abuse targeting journalists, social media companies have facilitated their viral spread, heightening the risk to journalists.
We’ve seen a potent example of this in the current campaign, when Haitian Times editor Macollvie J. Neel was “swatted” — meaning police were dispatched to her home after a fraudulent report of a murder at the address — during an episode of severely racist online violence.
Trajectory of Trump attacks Since the 2016 election, Trump has repeatedly discredited independent reporting on his campaign. He has weaponised the term “fake news” and accused the media of “rigging” elections.
“The election is being rigged by corrupt media pushing completely false allegations and outright lies in an effort to elect [Hillary Clinton] president,” he said in 2016. With hindsight, such accusations foreshadowed his false claims of election fraud in 2020, and similar preemptive claims in 2024.
His increasingly virulent attacks on journalists and news organisations are amplified by his supporters online and far-right media. Trump has effectively licensed attacks on American journalists through anti-press rhetoric and undermined respect for press freedom.
In 2019, the Committee to Protect Journalists found that more than 11 percent of 5400 tweets posted by Trump between the date of his 2016 candidacy and January 2019 “. . . insulted or criticised journalists and outlets, or condemned and denigrated the news media as a whole”.
After being temporarily deplatformed from Twitter for breaching community standards, Trump launched Truth Social, where he continues to abuse his critics uninterrupted. But he recently rejoined the platform (now X), and held a series of campaign events with X owner and Trump backer Elon Musk.
The failed insurrection on January 6, 2021, rammed home the scale of the escalating threats facing American journalists. During the riots at the Capitol, at least 18 journalists were assaulted and reporting equipment valued at tens of thousands of dollars was destroyed.
This election cycle, Reporters Without Borders logged 108 instances of Trump insulting, attacking or threatening the news media in public speeches or offline remarks over an eight-week period ending on October 24.
Meanwhile, the Freedom of the Press Foundation has recorded 75 assaults on journalists since January 1 this year. That’s a 70 percent increase on the number of assaults captured by their press freedom tracker in 2023.
A recent survey of hundreds of journalists undertaking safety training provided by the International Women’s Media Foundation found that 36 percent of respondents reported being threatened with or experiencing physical violence. One-third reported exposure to digital violence, and 28 percent reported legal threats or action against them.
US journalists involved in ongoing ICFJ research have told us that they have felt particularly at risk covering Trump rallies and reporting on the election from communities hostile towards the press. Some are wearing protective flak jackets to cover domestic politics. Others have removed labels identifying their outlets from their reporting equipment to reduce the risk of being physically attacked.
And yet, our survey reveals a distinct lack of public concern about the First Amendment implications of political leaders threatening, harassing, or abusing journalists. Nearly one-quarter (23 percent) of Americans surveyed did not regard political attacks on journalists or news organisations as a threat to press freedom. Among them, 38 percent identified as Republicans compared to just 9 percent* as Democrats.
The anti-press playbook Trump’s anti-press playbook appeals to a global audience of authoritarians. Other political strongmen, from Brazil to Hungary and the Philippines, have adopted similar tactics of deploying disinformation to smear and threaten journalists and news outlets.
Such an approach imperils journalists while undercutting trust in facts and critical independent journalism.
History shows that fascism thrives when journalists cannot safely and freely do the work of holding governments and political leaders to account. As our research findings show, the consequences are a society accepting lies and fiction as facts while turning a blind eye to attacks on the press.
*The people identifying as Democrats in this sub-group are too few to make this a reliable representative estimate.
Note: Nabeelah Shabbir (ICFJ deputy director of research) and Kaylee Williams (ICFJ research associate) also contributed to this article and the research underpinning it. The survey was conducted by Langer Research Associates in English and Spanish. ICFJ researchers co-developed the survey and conducted the analysis.
Actor and wife filmed promotional ad in UAE, a country which strives to present itself as tolerant ‘while carrying out repression against dissent’
Australian movie star Chris Hemsworth has been criticised for starring in a slick advertisement promoting Abu Dhabi as a tourism destination in partnership with the United Arab Emirates government, the latest celebrity to use their influence to promote the gulf state.
Hemsworth features in the minute-long ad with his actor and model wife, Elsa Pataky, which they posted on their Instagram accounts on Wednesday. The ad was also shared by the Experience Abu Dhabi Instagram account.
Over 30 years the French government tested 193 nuclear weapons in Māohi Nui and today Indigenous peoples still suffer the impacts through intergenerational cancers.
In 1975, France stopped atmospheric tests and moved to underground testing.
Hinamoeura Morgant-Cross was eight years old when the French nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa stopped in 1996.
“After poisoning us for 30 years, after using us as guinea pigs for 30 years, France condemned us to pay for all the cost of those cancers,” Morgant-Cross said.
She is a mother of two boys and married to another Māohi in Mataiea, Tahiti, and says her biggest worry is what will be left for the next generation.
As a politician in the French Polynesian Assembly she sponsored a unanimously supported resolution in September 2023 supporting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).
It called on France to join the treaty, as one of the original five global nuclear powers and one of the nuclear nine possessors of nuclear weapons today.
As a survivor of nuclear testing, Morgant-Cross has worked with hibakusha, which is the term used to describe the survivors of the US atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945.
Together, as living examples of the consequences, they are trying to push governments to demilitarise and end the possession of nuclear arsenals.
Connections from Māohi Nui to Aotearoa Morgant-Cross spoke to Te Ao Māori News from Whāingaroa where she, along with other manuhiri of Hui Oranga, planted kowhangatara (spinifex) in the sand dunes for coastal restoration to build resilience against storms or tsunamis at a time of increased climate crises.
In the 1970s and 1980s, many of the anti-nuclear protests were in response to the tests in Māohi Nui, French Polynesia.
The Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement began in Fiji in 1975 after the first Nuclear Free Pacific Conference, which was organised by Against French Testing in Moruroa (ATOM).
The Pacific Peoples’ Anti-Nuclear Action Committee was founded by Hilda Halkyard-Harawira and Grace Robertson, and in 1982 they hosted the first Hui Oranga which brought the movement for a nuclear-free and independent Pacific home to Aotearoa.
Hinamoeura Morgant-Cross as a baby with mother Valentina Cross, both of whom along with her great grandmother, grandmother, aunt and sister have been diagnosed with cancer. Image: HMC
Condemned to intergenerational cancer “We still have diseases from generation to generation,” she says.
Non-profit organisation Nuclear Information and Resources Services data shows radiation is more harmful to women with cancer rates and death 50 percent higher than among men.
In her family, Morgant-Cross’ great-grandmother, grandmother, aunt and sister have been diagnosed with thyroid or breast cancer.
A mother and lawyer at the time, Morgant-Cross was diagnosed with leukaemia at 25 years old.
Valentina Cross, her mother has continuing thyroid problems, needs to take pills for the rest of her life and, similarly, Hinamoeura has to take pills to keep the leukaemia dormant for the rest of her life.
Being told the nuclear tests were “clean”, Morgant-Cross didn’t learn about the legacy of the nuclear bombs until she was 30 years old when former French Polynesian President Oscar Temaru filed a complaint against France for alleged crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the the nuclear tests.
She then saw a list of radiation-induced diseases, which included thyroid cancer, breast cancer, and leukaemia and she realised it wasn’t that her family had “bad genes”.
Hinamoeura Morgant-Cross who was breastfeeding during her electoral campaign . . . balancing motherhood, nuclear fights and her career. Image: HMC
Known impacts ‘buried’ by the French state Morgant-Cross says her people were victims of French propaganda as they were told there were no effects from the nuclear tests.
In 2021, more than two decades later, Princeton University’s Science and Global Security programme, the multimedia newsroom Disclose and research collective INTERPT released an investigation — The Moruroa Files — using declassified French defence documents.
“The state has tried hard to bury the toxic heritage of these tests,” Geoffrey Livolsi, Disclose’s editor-in-chief told The Guardian.
The report concluded about 110,000 people were exposed to ionising radiation. That number was almost the entire Polynesian population at the time.
Hinamoeura Morgant-Cross speaking at NukeEXPO Oslo, Norway, in April 2024. Image: HMC
In Māohi Nui, much of the taxes go towards managing high cancer rates and Morgant-Cross said they were not given compensation to cover the medical assistance they deserved.
In 2010, a compensation law was passed and between then and 2020, RNZ Pacific reported France had compensated French Polynesia with US$30 million. And in 2021, it was reported to have paid US$16.6 million within the year but only 46 percent of the compensation claims were accepted.
“During July 2024 France spent billions of dollars to clean up the river Seine in Paris [for the [Olympic Games] and I was so shocked,” Morgant-Cross said.
“You can’t help us on medical care, you can’t help us on cleaning your nuclear rubbish in the South Pacific, but you can put billions of dollars to clean a river that is still disgusting?”
As a politician and anti-nuclear activist, Morgant-Cross hopes for nuclear justice and a world of peace.
She has started a movement named the Māohi Youth Resiliency in hopes to raise awareness of the nuclear legacy by telling her story and also learning how to help Māohi in this century.
Republished from Te Ao Māori News with permission.
Threats against investigative journalists are widely documented. According to UNESCO’s Observatory of Killed Journalists, 1,718 journalists have been killed since 1993. The Committee to Protect Journalists’ latest prison census found the number of jailed journalists hit a near-record high, with 320 reporters behind bars at the time of the count last December. Yet a lesser-known story is the increasing targeting of the lawyers representing them.
“Behind all those cases against journalists who have become household names — like Evan Gershkovich, Maria Ressa, and José Rubén Zamora — there are the often unseen lawyers representing them and taking remarkable risks to defend them,” Carolina Henriquez-Schmitz, director of TrustLaw, said at Trust Conference 2024. “[Lawyers] themselves are becoming the targets of a whole range of attacks.”
In recent years, threats have escalated. Azerbaijani lawyer Elchin Sadigov, and his client, journalist Avaz Zeynalli, were detained in 2022 while officers searched their homes and offices and seized confidential case files. Vo An Don, a Vietnamese human rights lawyer who represented a dissident blogger was disbarred in 2018 and subsequently sought political asylum in the US. Dmitry Talantov, a lawyer who represented Russian investigative journalist Ivan Safronov in 2021, now himself faces up to 15 years in prison on a number of charges.
“It sends an unequivocal message, not just to the individual lawyer, but to the entire legal profession,” Henriquez-Schmitz said. “If you pursue these cases, we will go after you. The potential chilling effect cannot be understated.”
Human rights lawyer Vo An Don was disbarred and forced to seek political asylum in the US after the Vietnamese government targeted him for representing a dissident blogger. Image: Screenshot, Facebook
The Thomson Reuters Foundation, in partnership with the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights and Media Defence, conducted a first-of-its-kind review of individual cases of harassment or persecution of lawyers defending journalists. The recently published preliminary findings identified over 40 cases of lawyers being targeted in four ways: criminal and other suits; interference with their ability to represent their clients; targeting their ability to practice the profession; and threatened killing, physical harm, forced flight, or exile, and other similar persecution.
“The research has identified cases in Vietnam, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Azerbaijan, Iran, Yemen, Tajikistan, Russia, China, and Hong Kong, to name a few. Unsurprisingly, many of these countries also happen to be among the world’s worst jailers of journalists,” Henriquez-Schmitz noted. “The damage greatly reverberates. Without lawyers, journalists are unable to adequately defend themselves against retaliatory charges, and citizens are likely left less informed on matters of public interest.”
José Carlos Zamora, chief communications and impact officer at Exile Content Studio and the son of Guatemalan investigative journalist José Rubén Zamora, joined the Trust Conference panel only a few days after his father’s release to house arrest. Previously, his father had spent more than 800 days in prison on charges of alleged money laundering. The elder Zamora founded elPeriódico, a now-defunct newspaper which specialized in government corruption investigations.
“It’s a great step forward, but it’s not the end of the process,” Zamora said of his father’s transition to house arrest. “These repressive regimes, everywhere from Russia, to the Philippines, to Hong Kong, to Venezuela and Nicaragua, use the same tactics. And you see them copy from each other’s punishments, and one of these tactics is attacking the legal defense. So they go after the lawyers, and the main goal is to leave the journalists defenseless.”
Guatemalan journalist José Rubén Zamora, who founded the elPeriódico site that dug into the country’s political corruption, recently spent more than 800 days in prison on alleged money laundering charges. Image: Shutterstock
In all, 10 lawyers represented Zamora, and all of them were persecuted and eventually forced to abandon the case. Many of them did not appear to have access to the case file, and one lawyer, Christian Ulate, had to leave Guatemala after ongoing harassment and intimidation. The lawyers that took over the case after Ulate, Romeo Montoya García and Mario Castañeda, were detained, and Castañeda was sent to a maximum security prison. Lawyers Juan Francisco Solórzano Foppa and Justino Brito Torres were also arrested.
“At that point, the only defense was the public legal defense. There were some great lawyers in the public legal defense, but unfortunately, they are also part of the system,” Zamora explained. “At one point, none of the lawyers could visit him in prison. So everything was done through us. They could rarely talk. The ones that could go did not want to visit him because it was dangerous for them.”In some countries, human rights attorney Caoilfhionn Gallagher said, even the act of talking to an international lawyer can put local lawyers at risk.
María Consuelo Porras has acted as Guatemala’s attorney general since 2018. In 2022, she was barred from entering the US due to involvement in significant corruption, and in 2023 she was named OCCRP’s Person of the Year in Organized Crime and Corruption, for “brutally persecuting honest prosecutors, journalists, and activists,” the group wrote. “Porras and her kind are the new banal faces of evil.”
“[Porras] became the best tool to persecute opposition, critical voices,” Zamora said. “Because they use this special prosecutor’s office that is focused on organized crime […] it allows them to have you in pre-trial detention. That prosecutor’s office was intended to investigate and prosecute the heads of drug cartels and mob bosses. And now they use it to go after journalists.”
Irish-born attorney Caoilfhionn Gallagher specializes in international human rights and civil liberties at Doughty Street Chambers in London. Her cases often involve working closely with domestic lawyers around the world, in order to hold the state to account on the global stage. In some countries, Gallagher said, even the act of talking to an international lawyer can put local lawyers at risk.
“When I deal with cases involving Iran, for example, or Egypt, even engaging with an international lawyer, being privy to a complaint going to the United Nations, could result in [local lawyers] themselves being charged with a whole range of things, including national security-type offenses,” she noted. One particular example she gives of lawyer oppression is the Philippines, where, in total, 63 lawyers were killed during President Rodrigo Duterte’s six-year term, and 22 journalists. “So this is completely a tactic,” Gallagher warned. “You try to leave nobody able to speak truth to power.”
One of Gallagher’s clients is 76-year-old publisher, writer, and prominent pro-democracy campaigner Jimmy Lai. A British national, Lai has been in solitary confinement in a maximum security Hong Kong prison for almost four years, on charges of breaching national security and colluding with foreign forces. His newspaper, Apple Daily — the most popular Chinese language paper in Hong Kong — supported pro-democracy protests in the region. He now faces life imprisonment.
“Being called an enemy of the people, hit pieces in Chinese state media, formal statements from the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities threatening to prosecute us,” Gallagher said, reflecting on the implications of representing Lai. “But as well as that, we get physical threats, rape threats, and dismemberment threats, and it’s targeted in a way which is designed to try to undermine you doing your job.”“We coordinate pro bono for human rights defenders, and what we realized was that standing next to every defender facing criminalization was a lawyer also at risk.” — Ginna Anderson, associate director of the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights
On a key day in Lai’s case, Gallagher will wake up to notifications that there has been an attempt to hack her bank account, as well as her personal and professional email addresses. “I will also wake up to a whole series of […] threats, including things relating to my kids,” she continued. “I had a really vile message last week about my teenage daughter, by name, and it’s unpleasant.”
Gallagher says that, despite attacks, she will continue to represent reporters. “You’re rattling the right cages,” she said. “It’s designed to try to stop you doing your job, and for me, it makes me think if they care this much about the lawyers for Jimmy Lai based in London, doing work in Geneva, New York, and Dublin, just think about how much they hate my clients. And to be honest, it makes me more determined to stick with it.”
Associate director of the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights, Ginna Anderson, emphasized the lack of current research into the growing threats against lawyers defending journalists, citing it as a driving force behind their work. “We realized no one was really talking about it, and the data wasn’t being collected,” she explained. “We coordinate pro bono for human rights defenders, and what we realized was that standing next to every defender facing criminalization was a lawyer also at risk and asking for none of those resources for themselves.”
While networks often operate to support journalists who are being subjected to physical threats, cyberattacks, and forced exile, Anderson emphasized the ad hoc nature of the support available to lawyers — in part due to the recent escalation in cases. “There’s not one place we go and coordinate,” she said. “It’s a lot of personal relationships and knowing who has capacity, and quite frankly there’s very little capacity in any of these places to really deal with the scale of the problem.”
“Just like journalists don’t want to be part of the story, lawyers don’t, and many other trends are mirrored,” she continued. “One thing that struck me […] was this perception that safety of journalist networks are so much better connected and resourced than anything to support lawyers. That terrified me because I think we all think that there’s not enough being done for the safety of journalists.”
“Lawyers are often trusted voices, just like some legacy media establishments,” Anderson said. “They’re trusted voices on the rule of law. They’re trusted voices on the Constitution. And when you disparage them and smear them, and in some cases make it criminal for them to talk about these issues, you have silenced one of the most important voices.”
Defending Lawyers Protecting Journalists
As attacks on lawyers rise, the panel reflected on the ways in which those representing journalists can defend themselves. Increasing knowledge of cybersecurity — which may not have previously been a priority for lawyers — is essential, Gallagher said. “In the last number of years working on cases against Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia, I’ve been very surprised by [top-ranked multinational law firms] trying to send you something on Google Docs,” she continued. “The media organization and the journalists will have really good protocols, but then when they get into some kind of difficulty, they may instruct an external lawyer who simply doesn’t.”
Law societies and governments also have a responsibility to take such threats more seriously, Gallagher says, reflecting on the case of Pat Finucane, a Northern Irish human rights lawyer who was murdered in his home in 1989. The UK government only announced a public inquiry into his death in 2024, 35 years later. “That is a home example of these issues simply not being taken seriously enough,” she said. “I can tell you basic preventative strategies were simply not implemented here in Britain.”
Another issue is a lack of psychological support for lawyers, Anderson says. “I’ve been surprised how often a conversation about digital security becomes the place where a lawyer may talk about what’s weighing on their mind,” she continued. “[They’re] not saying, ‘I would like to talk about my psychosocial needs’, but they start with a practical need around digital security, and it finds its way into the things that are weighing on them.”
As Zamora reflected on the future for his father, he seemed hopeful. “He’s excited. He’s very happy. He feels like he’s at a spa after spending those 813 days in an isolation cell,” he said. “We are going to continue fighting these processes. They are really spurious charges, and we are going to fight until the end to demonstrate that everything is false.”
While he says that his father’s trial has exposed the worst in humanity, through Guatemala’s political persecution of those standing up for democracy and freedom, Zamora also believes that it has brought out the best in humanity, too. “I feel that’s everybody in this room,” he concluded. “You care about these issues, you are doing the work, and you can continue to do the work to keep these cases alive.”
Emily O’Sullivanis an editorial assistant at GIJN. She has worked as an investigative researcher for BBC Panorama, and an assistant producer for BBC Newsnight. She has an MA in Investigative Journalism from City, University of London.
Since 2021, nominations are open to the public. As a result, not only organisations, but also individuals from all over the world may “nominate their heroes”. The deadline for nominations is 30 November, 2024.
The list of laureates includes famous names as well as relatively unknown individuals. Last year’s laureate is Abzaz Media, one of the last free media outlets in Azerbaijan.
‘Indigenous communities must have better political representations to ensure our rights are protected both constitutionally and in practice,‘ says Victoria Maladaeva, and Indigenous peoples’ rights defender from Russia. Victoria was also a participant in ISHR’s Women Rights Advocacy Week this year. She spoke to ISHR about her work and goals.
Hello Victoria, thanks for accepting to tell us your story. Can you briefly introduce yourself and your work?
Sure! I’m a Buryat anti-war decolonial activist, co-founder of the Indigenous of Russia Foundation.
What inspired you to become involved in the defence of human rights?
Since the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, Indigenous peoples, particularly Buryat, have been hit the hardest. I wanted to help my people, fight the Russian propaganda and raise awareness about systemic colonial oppression and discrimination faced by Indigenous people and ethnic minorities in the Russian Federation.
What would Russia and your community look like in the future if you achieved your goals, if the future you are fighting for became a reality?
The country needs a large-scale transformation— political, economic, and cultural. Indigenous communities must have better political representations to ensure our rights are protected both constitutionally and in practice. Genuine democratic reforms involve fundamental rights for self-determination and autonomy where Indigenous peoples gain control of their land and resources. Putin’s constitution’s amendments to national Republics must be reversed, our languages must be mandatory in all schools, universities, and institutions where Indigenous communities live.
How do you think your work is helping make that future come true?
I’m advocating for the rights of Indigenous peoples with international stakeholders and institutions to raise awareness about issues faced by our communities and spreading awareness, producing documentaries, and mobilising diasporas.
Have you been the target of threats or attempts at reprisals because of your work?
Unfortunately, yes. There have been threats because of my anti-war activism and for shedding light on the disproportionate mobilisation in the Republic of Buryatia. For some reason, my colleagues and I were denied participation in the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. I would like to believe this was a mistake and that there was no influence from the Russian delegation at the UN.
Do you have a message for the UN and the international community?
Russia needs decolonisation and de-imperialisation. Without revising the past and acknowledging colonial wars (not only in Ukraine) and discrimination, there can be no bright future for Russia—free and democratic. The international and anti-imperialist community should acknowledge that the Russian government is not for any anti-colonial movement. Stand in solidarity with independent Indigenous activists!
The leading Cook Islands environmental lobby group says that if Donald Trump wins the United States elections — and he seemed to be on target to succeed as results were rolling in tonight — he will push back on climate change negotiations made since he was last in office.
As voters in the US cast their votes on who would be the next president, Trump or US Vice-President Kamala Harris, the question for most Pacific Islands countries is what this will mean for them?
“If Trump wins, it will push back on any progress that has been made in the climate change negotiations since he was last in office,” said Te Ipukarea Society’s Kelvin Passfield.
“It won’t be good for the Pacific Islands in terms of US support for climate change. We have not heard too much on Kamala Harris’s climate policy, but she would have to be better than Trump.”
The current President Joe Biden and his administration made some efforts to connect with Pacific leaders.
Massey University’s Centre for Defence and Security Studies senior lecturer Dr Anna Powles said a potential win for Harris could be the fulfilment of the many “promises” made to the Pacific for climate financing, uplifting economies of the Pacific and bolstering defence security.
Dr Powles said Pacific leaders want Harris to deliver on the Pacific Partnership Strategy, the outcomes of the two Pacific Islands-US summits in 2022 and 2023, and the many diplomatic visits undertaken during President Biden’s presidency.
Diplomatic relationships
The Biden administration recognised Cook Islands and Niue as sovereign and independent states and established diplomatic relationships with them.
The Biden-Harris government had pledged to boost funding to the Green Climate Fund by US$3 billion at COP28 in the United Arab Emirates.
Harris has said in the past that climate change is an existential threat and has also promised to “tackle the climate crisis with bold action, build a clean energy economy, advance environmental justice, and increase resilience to climate disasters”.
Dr Powles said that delivery needed to be the focus.
She said the US Elections would no doubt have an impact on small island nations facing climate change and intensified geopolitics.
Dr Powles said it came as “no surprise” that countries such as New Zealand and Australia had increasingly aligned with the US, as the Biden administration had been leveraging strategic partnerships with Australia, New Zealand, and Japan since 2018.
She said a return to Trump’s leadership could derail ongoing efforts to build security architecture in the Pacific.
Pull back from Pacific
There are also views that Trump would pull back from the Pacific and focus on internal matters, directly impacting his nation.
For Trump, there is no mention of the climate crisis in his platform or Agenda47.
This is in line with the former president’s past actions, such as withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement in 2019, citing “unfair economic burdens” placed on American workers and businesses.
Trump has maintained his position that the climate crisis is “one of the great scams of all time”.
Republished with permission from the Cook Islands News and RNZ Pacific.
Top Iranian officials previously referred to an execution when reacting to Jamshid Sharmahd’s death on 28 October
Iran has claimed that an Iranian-German duel national who had been sentenced to death died last week before his execution could be carried out.
“Jamshid Sharmahd was sentenced to death, his execution was imminent, but he died before it could be carried out,” the judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir told reporters without elaborating. It is understood Tehran claims he suffered a stroke.
Thirty two years ago, I and some other good friends of Martin Ennals decided to create an award in the name of this human rights pioneer [see: https://youtu.be/tAhUi2gOHmU?si=6RxI5TduzLfLeJym]. I am very proud and happy that in two weeks time I wil be in Geneva to participate in the 30th edition of the award ceremony. I very much hope that many others wil be able to join, in person or via the live-stream.
The Award was given out for the first time in 1994 to recognize, promote and protect human rights defenders at risk or from under-reported contexts. It culminates every year in a public ceremony in Geneva, co-hosted with the City of Geneva. Over the years, the Award has offered defenders a platform to issues that are of global concern and the connections to steer the movement for human rights and larger freedoms.
The Jury has recognized 53 defenders in the past 30 years, from 37 countries and from all walks of life: lawyers, journalists, academics, medical practitioners, religious practitioners, housewives, students and grassroots activists. Their voices have illustrated some of the most important human rights demands of the past decades: free and fair justice for violations committed by security forces; access to information and freedom of expression to denounce repressive practices and authorities; the fight against gender discrimination and the importance of women’s full and equal participation in society; the essential role of civil society in conflict and post conflict resolution; the role of businesses in exploiting natural resources against the rights to land of indigenous people; or the role of global powers in the violations of the right to life of migrants.
The 2024 Martin Ennals Award continues the legacy and will honour two outstanding human rights defenders who have made it their life mission to protect human rights in their communities and countries despite evolving in deeply repressive environments.
A public discussion with Jury members later in the evening of ceremony will also be the opportunity to showcase the issues that will shape the future of the Award.
Get to know the 2024 Laureates by joining our traditional Award ceremony on Thursday 21 November at 18:30 CET, in Salle communale de Plainpalais, Rue de Carouge 52, Geneva.
The ceremony, co-hosted together with the City of Geneva, is the opportunity to learn about the two 2024 Laureates: who they are, their aspirations and what they have been doing to bring human rights at the forefront. Their inspiring stories illustrate key human rights struggles that the world needs to hear, for peace, dignity and equality of all. The Award ceremony will be followed by a cocktail offered by the City of Geneva.
You cannot join in person? We got you! The ceremony and the debate will be livestreamed on our media platforms.
JURY INSIGHTS
A public discussion on current global issues
Festivities will continue on Thursday 21 November with a late-night discussion to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Martin Ennals Award. Since 1994, it is the careful deliberations of the Jury that have led to the recognition of some of the most outstanding human rights defenders and organisations. The Foundation is pleased to offer a special opportunity to listen in the inner thoughts of leading organisations on the state of human rights in the world and how to reclaim them.
The one-hour discussion will start at 21:15 CET in Salle communale de Plainpalais, after the cocktail, and will be the occasion for a young human rights defender to ask everyone’s most burning questions!
Just one day after President Prabowo Subianto’s inauguration, a minister announced plans to resume the transmigration programme in eastern Indonesia, particularly in Papua, saying it was needed for enhancing unity and providing locals with welfare.
Transmigration is the process of moving people from densely populated regions to less densely populated ones in Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s most populous country with 285 million people.
The ministry intends to revitalise 10 zones in Papua, potentially using local relocation rather than bringing in outsiders.
The programme will resume after it was officially paused in Papua 23 years ago.
“We want Papua to be fully united as part of Indonesia in terms of welfare, national unity and beyond,” Muhammad Iftitah Sulaiman Suryanagara, the Minister of Transmigration, said during a handover ceremony on October 21.
Iftitah promised strict evaluations focusing on community welfare rather than on relocation numbers. Despite the minister’s promises, the plan drew an outcry from indigenous Papuans who cited social and economic concerns.
Papua, a remote and resource-rich region, has long been a flashpoint for conflict, with its people enduring decades of military abuse and human rights violations under Indonesian rule.
Human rights abuses
Prabowo, a former army general, was accused of human rights abuses in his military career, including in East Timor (Timor-Leste) during a pro-independence insurgency against Jakarta rule.
Simon Balagaize, a young Papuan leader from Merauke, highlighted the negative impacts of transmigration efforts in Papua under dictator Suharto’s New Order during the 1960s.
“Customary land was taken, forests were cut down, and the indigenous Malind people now speak Javanese better than their native language,” he told BenarNews.
The Papuan Church Council stressed that locals desperately needed services, but could do without more transmigration.
“Papuans need education, health services and welfare – not transmigration that only further marginalises landowners,” Reverend Dorman Wandikbo, a member of the council, told BenarNews.
Transmigration into Papua has sparked protests over concerns about reduced job opportunities for indigenous people, along with broader political and economic impacts.
Apei Tarami, who joined a recent demonstration in South Sorong, Southwest Papua province, warned of consequences, stating that “this policy affects both political and economic aspects of Papua.”
We firmly reject Indonesia’s new transmigration policy to relocate Indonesians to West Papua, along with the world’s biggest deforestation project in Merauke, as it threatens the survival of West Papuans.
— Free West Papua Campaign (Nederland) (@FreeWestPapuaNL) November 4, 2024
Human rights ignored
Meanwhile, human rights advocate Theo Hasegem criticised the government’s plans, arguing that human rights issues are ignored and non-Papuans could be endangered because pro-independence groups often target newcomers.
“Do the president and vice-president guarantee the safety of those relocated from Java,” Hasegem told BenarNews.
The programme, which dates to 1905, has continued through various administrations under the guise of promoting development and unity.
Indonesia’s policy resumed post-independence on December 12, 1950, under President Sukarno, who sought to foster prosperity and equitable development.
It also aimed to promote social unity by relocating citizens across regions.
Transmigration involving 78,000 families occurred in Papua from 1964 to 1999, according to statistics from the Papua provincial government. That would equal between 312,000 and 390,000 people settling in Papua from other parts of the country, assuming the average Indonesian family has 4 to 5 people.
The programme paused in 2001 after a Special Autonomy Law required regional regulations to be followed.
Students hold a rally at Abepura Circle in Jayapura, the capital of Indonesia’s Papua Province, yesterday to protest against Indonesia’s plan to resume a transmigration programme, Image: Victor Mambor/BenarNews
Legality questioned
Papuan legislator John N.R. Gobay questioned the role of Papua’s six new autonomous regional governments in the transmigration process. He cited Article 61 of the law, which mandates that transmigration proceed only with gubernatorial consent and regulatory backing.
Without these clear regional regulations, he warned, transmigration lacks a strong legal foundation and could conflict with special autonomy rules.
He also pointed to a 2008 Papuan regulation stating that transmigration should proceed only after the Indigenous Papuan population reaches 20 million. In 2023, the population across six provinces of Papua was about 6.25 million, according to Indonesia’s Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS).
Gobay suggested prioritising local transmigration to better support indigenous development in their own region.
‘Entrenched inequality’ British MP Alex Sobel, chair of the International Parliamentarians for West Papua, expressed concern over the programme, noting its role in drastic demographic shifts and structural discrimination in education, land rights and employment.
“Transmigration has entrenched inequality rather than promoting prosperity,” Sobel told BenarNews, adding that it had contributed to Papua remaining Indonesia’s poorest regions.
Pramono Suharjono, who transmigrated to Papua, Indonesia, in 1986, harvests oranges on his land in Arso II in Keerom regency last week. Image: Victor Mambor/BenarNews]
Pramono Suharjono, a resident of Arso II in Keerom, Papua, welcomed the idea of restarting the programme, viewing it as positive for the region’s growth.
“This supports national development, not colonisation,” he told BenarNews.
A former transmigrant who has served as a local representative, Pramono said transmigration had increased local knowledge in agriculture, craftsmanship and trade.
However, research has shown that longstanding social issues, including tensions from cultural differences, have marginalised indigenous Papuans and fostered resentment toward non-locals, said La Pona, a lecturer at Cenderawasih University.
Papua also faces a humanitarian crisis because of conflicts between Indonesian forces and pro-independence groups. United Nations data shows between 60,000 and 100,000 Papuans were displaced between and 2022.
As of September 2024, human rights advocates estimate 79,000 Papuans remain displaced even as Indonesia denies UN officials access to the region.
Pizaro Gozali Idrus in Jakarta contributed to this report. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.
