Category: Human Rights

  • SPECIAL REPORT: By David Robie

    Protesters in their thousands have been taking to the streets in Aotearoa New Zealand demonstrating in solidarity with Palestine and against genocide for the past 97 weeks.

    Yet rarely have the protests across the motu made headlines — or even the news for that matter — unlike the larger demonstrations in many countries around the world.

    At times the New Zealand news media themselves have been the target over what is often claimed to be “biased reportage lacking context”. Yet even protests against media, especially public broadcasters, on their doorstep have been ignored.

    Reporters have not even engaged, let alone reported the protests.

    Last weekend, this abruptly changed with two television crews on hand in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland days after six Palestinian journalists — four Al Jazeera correspondents and cameramen, including the celebrated Anas al-Shifa, plus two other reporters were assassinated by the Israeli military in targeted killings.

    With the Gaza Media Office confirming a death toll of almost 270 journalists since October 2023 — more than the combined killings of journalists in both World Wars, and the Korean, Vietnam, and Afghan wars — a growing awareness of the war was hitting home.

    After silence about the killing of journalists for the past 22 months, New Zealand this week signed a joint statement by 27 nations for the Media Freedom Coalition belatedly calling on Israel to open up access to foreign media and to offer protection for journalists in Gaza “in light of the unfolding catastrophe”.

    Sydney Harbour Bridge factor
    Another factor in renewed media interest has probably been the massive March for Humanity on Sydney Harbour Bridge with about 300,000 people taking part on August 3.

    Most New Zealand media has had slanted coverage privileging the Tel Aviv narrative in spite of the fact that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to answer charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and the country is on trial for “plausible genocide” in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Both UN courts are in The Hague.

    One independent New Zealand journalist who has been based in the West Bank for two periods during the Israeli war on Gaza – last year for two months and again this year – is unimpressed with the reportage.

    Why? Video and photojournalist Cole Martin from Ōtautahi Christchurch believes there is a serious lack of understanding in New Zealand media of the context of the structural and institutional violence towards the Palestinians.

    “It is a media scene in Aotearoa that repeats very harmful and inaccurate narratives,” Martin says.

    “Also, there is this idea to be unbiased and neutral in a conflict, both perspectives must have equal legitimacy.”

    As a 26-year-old photojournalist, Cole has packed in a lot of experience in his early career, having worked two years for World Vision, meeting South Sudanese refugees in Uganda who had fled civil war. He shared their stories in Aotearoa.

    "New Zealand must move beyond empty statements on Gaza"
    “New Zealand must move beyond empty statements on Gaza” . . . says Cole Martin. Image: The Spinoff screenshot

    ‘Struggle of the oppressed’
    This taught him to put “the struggle of the oppressed and marginalised” at the heart of his storytelling.

    Cole studied for a screen and television degree at NZ Broadcasting School, which led to employment with the news team at Whakaata Māori, then a video journalist role with the Otago Daily Times.

    He first visited Palestine in early 2019, “seeing the occupation and injustice with my own eyes”. After the struggle re-entered the news cycle in October 2023, he recognised that as a journalist with first-hand contextual knowledge and connections on the ground he was in a unique position to ensure Palestinian voices were heard.

    Cole spent two months in the West Bank last year and then gained a grant to study Arabic “which allowed me to return longer-term as New Zealand’s only journalist on the ground”.

    “Yes, there are competing narratives,’ he admits, “but the reality on the ground is that if you engage with this in good faith and truth, one of those narratives has a lot more legitimacy than the other.”

    Martin says that New Zealand media have failed to recognise this reality through a “mix of ignorance and bias”.

    “They haven’t been fair and honest, but they think they have,” he says.

    Hesitancy to engage
    He argues that the hesitancy to engage with the Palestinian media, Palestinian journalists and Palestinian sources on the ground “springs from the idea that to be Palestinian you are inherently biased”.

    “In the same way that being Māori means you are biased,” he says.

    “Your world view shapes your experiences. If you are living under a system of occupation and domination, or seeing that first hand, it would be wrong and immoral to talk about it in a way that is misleading, the same way that I cannot water down what I am reporting from here.

    “It’s the reality of what I see here, I am not going to water it down with a sort of ‘bothsideism’.”

    Martin says the media in New Zealand tend to cover the tragic war which has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians so far — most of them women and children — “like we would cover an everyday story of Miss Jones fetching a cat from the tree.”

    “This war is treated as a one-off event without putting it in the context of 76 years of occupation and domination by Israel and without actually challenging some of these narratives, without providing the context of why, and centring it on the violations of international law.”

    It is a very serious failure and not just in the way things have been reported, but in the way editors source stories given the heavy dependency in New Zealand media on international media that themselves have been persistently and strongly criticised for institutional bias — such as the BBC, CNN, The New York Times and the Associated Press news agency, which all operate from news bureaux inside Israel.

    "Firsthand view of peacemaking challenge in the 'Holy Land'."
    “Firsthand view of peacemaking challenge in the ‘Holy Land’.” Image: Asia Pacific Report screenshot

    ‘No independent journalism’
    “I have heard from editors that I have reached out to who have basically said, ‘No, we’re not going to publish any independent or freelance work because we depend on syndicated sources like BBC, CNN and Associated Press’.

    “Which means that they are publishing news that doesn’t have a relevant New Zealand connection. Usually this is what local media need, a NZ connection, yet they will publish work from the BBC, CNN and Associated Press that has no relevance to New Zealand, or doesn’t highlight what is relevant to NZ so far as our government in action.

    “And I think that is our big failure, our media has not held our government to account by asking the questions that need to be asked, in spite of the fact that those questions are easily accessed.”

    Expanding on this, Martin suggests talking to people in the community that are taking part in the large protests weekly, consistently.

    “Why are they doing this? Why are they giving so much of their time to protest against what Israel is doing, highlighting these justices? And yet the media has failed to engage with them in good faith,” he says.

    “The media has demonised them in many ways and they kind of create gestures like what Stuff have done, like asking them to write in their opinions.

    “Maybe it is well intentioned, maybe it isn’t. It opens the space to kind of more ‘equal platforming’ of very unequal narratives.

    “Like we give the same airtime to the spokespeople of an army that is carrying out genocide as we are giving to the people who are facing the genocide.”


    Robert Fisk on media balance and the Middle East.    Video: Pacific Media Centre

    ’50/50 journalism’
    The late journalist Robert Fisk, the Beirut-based expert on the Middle East writing for The Independent and the prolific author of many books including The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East, described this phenomena as “50/50 journalism” and warned how damaging it could be.

    Among many examples he gave in a 2008 visit to New Zealand, Fisk said journalists should not give “equal time” to the SS guards at the concentration camp, they should be talking to the survivors. Journalists ought to be objective and unbiased — “on the side of those who suffer”.

    “They always publish Israel says, ‘dee-dah-de-dah’. That’s not reporting, reporting is finding out what is actually going on on the ground. That’s what BBC and CNN do. Report what they say, not what’s going on. I think they are very limited in terms of how they report the structural stuff,” says Martin.

    “CNN, BBC and Associated Press have their place for getting immediate, urgent news out, but I am quite frustrated as the only New Zealand journalist based in the occupied West Bank or on the ground here.

    “How little interest media have shown in pieces from here. Even with a full piece, free of charge, they will still find excuses not to publish, which is hard to push back on as a freelancer because ultimately it is their choice, they are the editors.

    “I cannot demand that they publish my work, but it begs the question if I was a New Zealand journalist on the ground reporting from Ukraine, there would be a very different response in their eagerness to publish, or platform, what I am sharing.

    “Particularly as a video and photojournalist, it is very frustrating because everything I write about is documented, I am showing it.

    NZ journalist documents Palestinian life in the West Bank
    NZ journalist documents Palestinian life in the West Bank. Image: NZH screenshot

    ‘Showing with photos’
    “It’s not stuff that is hearsay. I am showing them with all these photos and yet still they are reluctant to publish my work. And I think that translates into reluctance to publish anything with a Palestinian perspective. They think it is very complex and difficult to get in touch with Palestinians.

    “They don’t know whether they can really trust their voices. The reality is, of course they can trust their voices. Palestinian journalists are the only journalists able to get into Gaza [and on the West Bank on the ground here].

    “If people have a problem with that, if Israel has a problem with that, then they should let the international press in.”

    Pointing the finger at the failure of Middle East coverage isn’t easy, Martin says. But one factor is that the generations who make the editorial decisions have a “biased view”.

    “Journalists who have been here have not been independent, they have been taken here, accompanied by soldiers, on a tailored tour. This is instead of going off the tourist trail, off the media trail, seeing the realities that communities are facing here, engaging in good faith with Palestinian communities here, seeing the structural violence, drawing the connections between what is happening in Gaza and what is happening in the West Bank — and not just the Israeli sources,” Martin says.

    “And listening to the human rights organisations, the academics and the experts, and the humanitarian organisations who are all saying that this is a genocide, structural violence . . . the media still fails to frame it in that way.

    ‘Complete failure’
    “It still fails to provide adequate context that this is very structural, very institutional — and it’s wrong.

    “It’s a complete failure and it is very frustrating to be here as a journalist on the ground trying to do a good job, trying to redeem this failure in journalism.”

    “Having the cover on the ground here and yet there is no interest. Editors have come back to me and said, ‘we can’t publish this piece because the subject matter is “too controversial”. It’s unbelievable that we are explicitly ignoring stories that are relevant because it is ‘controversial’. It’s just an utter failure of journalism.

    “As the Fourth Estate, they have utterly failed to hold the government to account for inaction. They are not asking the right questions.

    “I have had other editors who have said, ‘Oh, we’re relying on syndicated sources’. That’s our position. Or, we don’t have enough money.

    That’s true, New Zealand media has a funding shortage, and journalists have been let go.

    “But the truth is if they really want the story, they would find the funding.

    Reach out to Palestinians
    “If they actually cared, they would reach out to the journalists on the ground, reach out to the Palestinians. The reality is that they don’t care enough to be actually doing those things.

    “I think that there is a shift, that they are beginning to respond more and more. But they are well behind the game, they have been complicit in anti-Arab narratives, and giving a platform to genocidal narratives from the Israeli government and government leaders without questioning, without challenging and without holding our government to account.

    “The New Zealand government has been very pro-Israel, driven to side with America.

    “They need to do better urgently, before somebody takes them to the International Criminal Court for complicity.”


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • By ‘Alakihihifo Vailala of Pacific Media Network

    As Israel expands its relationships with Pacific Island nations, an activist is criticising the region for its “dreadful response” to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

    The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rooted in the 1948 Nakba and decades of seized land and expelled indigenous people, escalated after Hamas’ attacks on 7 October 2023.

    Since then, Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians, according to Gaza health officials.

    John Minto, co-chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA). says the Pacific has failed to show adequate support to Palestine and should be “ashamed”.

    In an interview with William Terite on Radio 531pi Pacific Mornings, Minto said the Pacific was one of the few areas in the world where support for the Palestinians was diminishing.

    “I think this is a real tragedy,” he said.

    “They are coming under pressure from the US and from Israel to try and bolster support for Israel at the United Nations. For this part of the world, that’s something we should be ashamed of.”

    Minto said several island countries, including Fiji, Nauru, Palau, and Tonga, had refused to recognise Palestinian statehood. But bigger Pacific nations like Papua New Guinea — and Fiji — had recently established an embassy in Jerusalem.

    Fiji and Israel established diplomatic relations in 1970 and have developed partnerships in security, peacekeeping, agriculture, and climate change.


    Watch John Minto’s full interview

    In a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter, Israel’s Foreign Ministry announced its commitment to diplomacy in the Pacific.

    Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel will lead a delegation to the Pacific to discuss strengthening Israel-Pacific relations.

    PNG Prime Minister James Marape (left) and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu
    PNG Prime Minister James Marape (left) and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem on 6 September 2023. Image: Israeli Prime Minister’s Office

    In a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter, Israel’s Foreign Ministry announced its commitment to diplomacy in the Pacific.

    Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel will lead a delegation to the Pacific to discuss strengthening Israel-Pacific relations.

    The Pacific region has been one of Israel’s strategic development partners, through numerous projects and training programmes led by MASHAV, Israel’s International Development Agency,” the statement read.

    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka (left) and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu
    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka (left) and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu met in 2023. Image: Fiji Government

    “This forthcoming visit, and the broader diplomatic effort accompanying it, reflects Israel’s profound appreciation for the Pacific Island states and underscores Israel’s commitment to strengthening cooperation with them.”

    Minto highlighted the irony in the support for Israel from small Pacific nations, given their reliance on principles of international law in view of their own vulnerability.

    “I’m sure there’s a lot of things that happen behind closed doors that should be happening out in the public,” he told Terite.

    “The people of Sāmoa, Tonga, Fiji should be involved in developing their foreign policy. I think if they were, then we would have much stronger support for Palestine.”

    Republished from Pacific Media Network (PMN) with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Andrew Mathieson

    Exiled West Papuan media are calling for Fiji — in a reflection of Melanesian solidarity — to hold the greater Pacific region to account and stand against Indonesia’s ongoing media blackout in addition to its human rights abuses.

    The leaders in their field which include two Papuans from Indonesia’s occupied provinces have visited the Pacific country to forge media partnerships, university collaboration and joint advocacy for West Papua self-determination.

    They were speaking after the screening of a new documentary film, Pepera 1969: A Democratic Integration, was screened at The University of the South Pacific in Fiji.

    The documentary is based on the controversial plebiscite 56 years ago when 1025 handpicked Papuan electors, which were directly chosen by the Indonesian military out of its 800,000 citizens, were claimed to have voted unanimously in favour of Indonesian control of Western New Guinea.

    Victor Mambor — a co-founder of Jubi Media Papua — in West Papua; Yuliana Lantipo, one of its senior journalists and editor; and Dandhy Laksono, a Jakarta-based investigative filmmaker; shared their personal experiences of reporting from inside arguably the most heavily militarised and censored region in the Pacific.

    “We are here to build bridges with our brothers and sisters in the Pacific,” Mambor told the USP media audience.

    Their story of the Papuan territory comes after Dutch colonialists who had seized Western New Guinea, handed control of the East Indies back to the Indonesians in 1949 before The Netherlands eventually withdrew from Papuan territory in 1963.

    ‘Fraudulent’ UN vote
    The unrepresentative plebiscite which followed a fraudulent United Nations-supervised “Act of Free Choice” in 1969 allowed the Indonesian Parliament to grant its legitimacy to reign sovereignty over the West Papuans.

    That Indonesian authority has been heavily questioned and criticised over extinguishing independence movements and possible negotiations between both sides.

    Indonesia has silenced Papuan voices in the formerly-named Irian Jaya province through control and restrictions of the media.

    Mambor described the continued targeting of his Jubi Media staff, including attacks on its office and vehicles, as part of an escalating crackdown under Indonesia’s current President Prabowo Subianto, who took office less than 12 months ago.

    “If you report on deforestation [of West Papua] or our culture, maybe it’s allowed,” he said.

    “But if you report on human rights or the [Indonesian] military, there is no tolerance.”

    An Indonesian MP, Oleh Soleh, warned publicly this month that the state would push for a “new wave of repression” targeting West Papuan activists while also calling the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) – the West Papuan territory’s peak independence movement – as a “political criminal group”.

    ‘Don’t just listen to Jakarta’
    “Don’t just listen to what Jakarta says,” Mambor said.

    “Speak to Papuans, listen to our stories, raise our voices.

    “We want to bring West Papua back to the Pacific — not just geographically, but politically, culturally, and emotionally.”

    Press freedom in West Papua has become most dire more over the past 25 years, West Papuan journalists have said.

    Foreign journalists are barred entry into the territory and internet access for locals is often restricted, especially during periods of civil unrest.

    Indigenous reporters also risk arrest and/or violence for filing politically sensitive stories.

    Most trusted media
    Founded in 2001 by West Papuan civil society, Jubi Media Papua’s English-language publication, the West Papua Daily, has become arguably the most trusted, independent source of news in the territory that has survived over its fearless approach to journalism.

    “Our journalists are constantly intimidated,” Mambor said, “yet we continue to report the truth”.

    The word Jubi in one of the most popular Indigenous Papuan languages means to speak the truth.

    Mambor explained that the West Papua Daily remained a pillar of a vocal media movement to represent the wishes of the West Papuan people.

    The stories published are without journalists’ bylines (names on articles) out of fear against retribution from the Indonesian military.

    “We created a special section just to tell Pacific stories — to remind our people that we are not alone, and to reconnect West Papua with our Pacific identity,” Mambor said.

    Lantipo spoke about the daily trauma faced by the Papuan communities which are caught in between the Indonesian military and the West Papua national liberation army who act on behalf of the ULMWP to defend its ancestral homeland.

    ‘Reports of killings, displacement’
    “Every day, we receive reports: killings, displacement, families fleeing villages, children out of school, no access to healthcare,” Lantipo said.

    “Women and children are the most affected.”

    The journalists attending the seminar urged the Fijian, Melanesian and Pacific people to push for a greater awareness of the West Papuan conflict and its current situation, and to challenge dominant narratives propagated by the Indonesian government.

    Laksono, who is ethnically Indonesian but entrenched in ongoing Papuan independence struggles, has long worked to expose injustices in the region.

    “There is no hope from the Asian side,” Laksono said.

    “That’s why we are here, to reach out to the Pacific.

    “We need new audiences, new support, and new understanding.”

    Arrested over tweets
    Laksono was once arrested in September 2019 for publishing tweets about the violence from government forces against West Papua pro-independence activists.

    Despite the personal risks, the “enemy of the state” remains committed to highlighting the stories of the West Papuan people.

    “Much of Indonesia has been indoctrinated through school textbooks and [its] media into believing a false history,” he said.

    “Our film tries to change that by offering the truth, especially about the so-called Act of Free Choice in 1969, which was neither free nor a genuine act of self-determination.”

    Andrew Mathieson writes for the National Indigenous Times.

    Melanesian supporters for West Papuan self-determination at USP
    Melanesian supporters for West Papuan self-determination at The University of the South Pacific. Image: USP/NIT

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ News

    New Zealand has joined more than two dozen other countries to call for “immediate and independent” foreign media access to Gaza.

    Earlier this month, an Israeli strike in the city killed six journalists — four Al Jazeera correspondents and cameramen, and two other media workers.

    The Israeli military admitted in a statement to targeting well-known Al Jazeera Arabic reporter Anas al-Sharif.

    A joint statement by the Media Freedom Coalition — signed by 27 countries, including New Zealand — urged Israel to offer protection for journalists in Gaza “in light of the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe”.

    “Journalists and media workers play an essential role in putting the spotlight on the devastating reality of war. Access to conflict zones is vital to carrying out this role effectively,” the statement said.

    “We oppose all attempts to restrict press freedom and block entry to journalists during conflicts.

    “We also strongly condemn all violence directed against journalists and media workers, especially the extremely high number of fatalities, arrests and detentions.

    “We call on the Israeli authorities and all other parties to make every effort to ensure that media workers in Gaza, Israel, the West Bank and East Jerusalem — local and foreign alike — can conduct their work freely and safely.

    “Deliberate targeting of journalists is unacceptable. International humanitarian law offers protection to civilian journalists during armed conflict. We call for all attacks against media workers to be investigated and for those responsible to be prosecuted in compliance with national and international law.”

    It reiterated calls for an immediate ceasefire, and the unconditional release of remaining hostages, unhindered flow of humanitarian aid.

    The statement also called for “a path towards a two-state solution, long-term peace and security”.

    Other countries to sign the statement included: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Chile, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Ukraine.

    The Media Freedom Coalition is a partnership of countries that advocates for media freedom around the world. New Zealand joined the coalition in March 2021.

    NZ silent on West Bank
    Meanwhile, in another joint statement released overnight, about two dozen countries condemned Israel’s plan to expand its presence in the West Bank.

    New Zealand was not among the signatories of this statement, which was signed by the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom and 22 of its international partners — including Australia and Canada.

    The statement called on Israel to reverse its decision.

    “The decision by the Israeli Higher Planning Committee to approve plans for settlement construction in the E1 area, East of Jerusalem, is unacceptable and a violation of international law,” it said.

    “Minister [Bezalel] Smotrich says this plan will make a two-state solution impossible by dividing any Palestinian state and restricting Palestinian access to Jerusalem. This brings no benefits to the Israeli people.

    “Instead, it risks undermining security and fuels further violence and instability, taking us further away from peace.

    “The government of Israel still has an opportunity to stop the E1 plan going any further. We encourage them to urgently retract this plan.”

    The statement said “unilateral action” by the Israeli government undermined collective desire for security and prosperity in the Middle East.

    “The Israeli government must stop settlement construction in line with UNSC Resolution 2334 and remove their restrictions on the finances of the Palestinian Authority.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Project Galileo celebrated its 10th anniversary with two distinguished panels hosted by the NED (National Endowment for Democracy).

    These conversations highlight the future of the Internet and Internet freedom. The panels explored recent U.S. State Department efforts on Internet freedom; the role the private sector plays in helping effectuate the U.S. vision of Internet freedom with efforts like Project Galileo; the current challenges associated with authoritarian government’s influence on Internet standards, governance, and international development.

    The discussions also touched on the role policy plays, both in the United States and globally, in efforts to protect the Internet; what the U.S. and other rights-respecting nations stand to lose if the open Internet is diminished; and how all stakeholders (private sector, civil society, governments) can work together to protect and advance the free and open Internet.

    Moderator

    • Alissa Starzak, Head of Policy, Cloudflare

    Panelists

    • Jennifer Brody, Deputy Director of Policy and Advocacy for Technology and Democracy, Freedom House
    • Emily Skahill, Cyber Operations Planner, Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative (JCDC), Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
    • Adrien Ogée, Chief Operations Officer, CyberPeace Institute

    https://cloudflare.tv/event/project-galileo-presents-protecting-human-rights-defenders-online/Ya01peZn

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

  • Lemi Limbu, who was convicted of murdering her daughter, has severe intellectual disabilities and ‘absolutely should not be in prison’, say campaigners

    Pressure is mounting on the Tanzanian government to release a woman with severe intellectual disabilities who has been in prison awaiting execution for 13 years.

    Lemi Limbu, who is now in her early 30s, was convicted of the murder of her daughter in 2015. A survivor of brutal and repeated sexual and domestic violence, she has the developmental age of a child.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Pacific Media Watch

    “Speak Up Kōrerotia” — a radio show centred on human rights issues — has featured a nuclear-free Pacific and other issues in this week’s show.

    Encouraging discussion on human rights issues in both Canterbury and New Zealand, Speak Up Kōrerotia offers a forum to provide a voice for affected communities.

    Engaging in conversations around human rights issues in the country, each show covers a different human rights issue with guests from or working with the communities.

    Analysing and asking questions of the realities of life allows Speak Up Kōrerotia to cover the issues that often go untouched.

    Discussing the hard-hitting topics, Speak Up Kōrerotia encourages listeners to reflect on the issues covered.

    Hosted by Dr Sally Carlton, the show brings key issues to the fore and provides space for guests to “Speak Up” and share their thoughts and experiences.

    The latest episode today highlights the July/August 2025 marking of two major anniversaries — 80 years since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, and 40 years since the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior here in Aotearoa.

    What do these anniversaries mean in the context of 2025, with the ever-greater escalation of global tension and a new nuclear arms race occurring alongside the seeming impotence of the UN and other international bodies?


    Anti-nuclear advocacy in 2025           Video/audio podcast: Speak Up Kōrerotia

    Speak Up Kōrerotia
    Speak Up Kōrerotia . . . human rights at Plains FM Image: Screenshot

    Guests: Disarmament advocate Dr Kate Dewes, journalist and author Dr David Robie, critical nuclear studies academic Dr Karly Burch and Japanese gender literature professor Dr Susan Bouterey bring passion, a wealth of knowledge and decades of anti-nuclear advocacy to this discussion.

    Dr Robie’s new book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior was launched on the anniversary of the ship’s bombing. This revised edition has extensive new and updated material, images, and a prologue by former NZ prime minister Helen Clark.

    The Speak Up Kōrerotia panel in today's show, "Anti-Nuclear Advocacy in 2025"
    The Speak Up Kōrerotia panel in today’s show, “Anti-Nuclear Advocacy in 2025”, Dr Kate Dewes (from left), Sally Carlton, Dr David Robie, Dr Karly Burch and Susan Bouterey. Image: Screenshot

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • 2024, as an election year in the United States, was a year of special concern that featured aggravating political strife and social division. Such a landscape offers an opportunity to review the state of human rights in the country in an intensive manner.

    Money controls U.S. politics, with partisan interests above voter rights. The total spending for the 2024 U.S. election cycle exceeded 15.9 billion U.S. dollars, once again setting a new record for the high cost of American political campaigns. Interest groups, operating in the “gray areas” beyond the effective reach of current U.S. campaign laws, used money to wantonly manipulate the fundamental logic and actual functioning of U.S. politics.

    The post The Report On Human Rights Violations In The United States In 2024 appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • RNZ Pacific

    New Zealand’s police commissioner says he understands the potential impact the country’s criminal deportees have on smaller Pacific Island nations.

    Commissioner Richard Chambers’ comments on RNZ Pacific Waves come as the region’s police bosses gathered for the annual Pacific Islands Chiefs of Police conference in Waitangi.

    The meeting, which is closed to media, began yesterday.

    Chambers said a range of issues were on the agenda, including transnational organised crime and the training of police forces.

    Inspector Riki Whiu, of Northland police, leads, from right, Secretary General of Interpol Valdecy Urquiza, Vanuatu Police Commissioner Kalshem Bongran and Northern Mariana Islands Police Commissioner Anthony Macaranas during the pōwhiri.
    Inspector Riki Whiu, of Northland police, leads (from right), Secretary-General of Interpol Valdecy Urquiza, Vanuatu Police Commissioner Kalshem Bongran and Northern Mariana Islands Police Commissioner Anthony Macaranas during the pōwhiri. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf

    Across the Pacific, the prevalence of methamphetamine and its role in driving social, criminal and health crises have thrust the problem of organised crime into the spotlight.

    Commissioner Chambers said New Zealand had offered support to its fellow Pacific nations to combat transnational organised crime, in particular around the narcotics trade.

    Deportation policies
    However, the country’s own transnational crime advisory group also identified the country’s deportation policies as a “significant contributor to the rise of organised crime in the Pacific”.

    In 2022, a research report showed that New Zealand returned 400 criminal deportees to Pacific nations between 2013 and 2018.

    The report from the Lowy Institute also said criminal deportees from New Zealand, as well as Australia and the US, were a significant contributor to transnational crime in the Pacific.

    Te Waaka Popata-Henare, of the Treaty Grounds cultural group Te Pito Whenua, leads the Pacific Islands Chiefs of Police to Te Whare Rūnanga for a formal welcome.
    Te Waaka Popata-Henare, of the Treaty Grounds cultural group Te Pito Whenua, leads the Pacific Islands Chiefs of Police to Te Whare Rūnanga for a formal welcome. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf

    When Chambers was asked about the issue and whether New Zealand’s criminal deportation policy undermined work against organised crime across the region, he said it had not been raised with him directly.

    “The criminal networks that we are dealing with, in particular those such as the cartels out of South America, the CJNG [cartels] and Sinaloa cartels, who really do control a lot of the cocaine and also methamphetamine trades, also parts of Asia with the Triads,” Commissioner Chambers said.

    “I know that the Pacific commissioners that I work with are very, very focused on what we can do to combat and disrupt a lot of that activity at source, in both Asia and South America.

    “So that’s where our focus has been, and that’s what the commissioners have been asking me for in terms of support.”

    Pacific nation difficulties
    He said he understood the difficulties law enforcement in Pacific nations faced regarding criminal deportees, as New Zealand faced similar challenges under Australia’s deportation policy.

    In New Zealand, the country’s returned nationals from Australia are known as 501 deportations, named after the section of the Australian Migration Act which permits their deportation due to criminal convictions.

    These individuals have often spent the majority of their lives in Australia and have no family or ties to New Zealand but are forced to return due to Australia’s immigration laws.

    New Zealand’s authorities have tracked how these deportees — who number in the hundreds — have contributed significantly to the country’s increasingly sophisticated and established organised crime networks over the past decade.

    Chambers said that because police dealt with the real impacts of Australia’s 501 law, he could relate to what his Pacific counterparts faced.

    “I understand from the New Zealand perspective [which is] the impact that New Zealand nationals returning to our country have on New Zealand, and the reality is, they’re offending, they’re re-offending.

    “I suspect it’s no different from our Pacific colleagues in their own countries. And it may be something that we can talk about.”

    This week’s conference was scheduled to finish tomorrow. Speakers due to appear included Interpol Secretary-General Valdecy Urquiza and Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Baron Waqa.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    The advocacy and protest group Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa has condemned New Zealand’s “deliberate distraction” over sanctions against Israel and has vowed more protests against Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ “failed policy” on Gaza.

    After the huge turnout of thousands in Palestine solidarity rallies across more than 20 locations in New Zealand last weekend, PSNA has announced it is joining an International Day of Action on September 6.

    Rallies next weekend will have a focus on Israel’s targeted killing of journalists in Gaza.

    PSNA co-chair John Minto said in a statement there was “an incredible show of marches and rallies throughout Aotearoa New Zealand for sanctions against Israel during the past weekend.”.

    “But with [Foreign Minister] Peters obstinately running the Foreign Ministry, the government will ignore all expressions of public support for Palestinian rights.

    “We’ll be back with even more people on the streets on the 6th.”

    “An opinion poll released by PSNA last week showed that of people who gave an opinion, 60 percent supported sanctions against Israel.”

    Shocking images
    Minto said that number would have risen significantly in the past few weeks as people were seeing the shocking images of Israel’s widespread use of starvation as a weapon of war, especially against the children of Gaza.

    “Around the world, governments are starting to respond to their people demanding sanctions on Israel to end the genocide.

    A family rugged up against the rain and cold expressing their disappointment with New Zealand's "weak" policy over the Gaza genocide
    A family rugged up against the rain and cold expressing their disappointment with New Zealand’s “weak” policy over the Gaza genocide last weekend. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    “Yet, Winston Peters is most reluctant to even criticise Israel, let alone take any action.”

    Minto said actions were vital otherwise Israel took no notice.

    “We’ve seen Israel’s arrogant impunity in increasingly violent action and showing off its military capacity and intentions,” he said.

    “Not a peep from our ministers over anything.

    “Just on the Occupied West Bank, there are settlers freely shooting and lynching Palestinians.

    New illegal settlement plans
    “Israel’s Parliament has just voted to annex the West Bank, as plans are also announced for [an illegal] new settlement strategically designed to sever it irreparably into two parts.

    “In Gaza, Israeli troops are reinvading Gaza City to ethnically cleanse a million people to the south and Israeli aircraft are still terror bombing a famine-devastated community.”

    Minto said Netanyahu had started talking about a Greater Israel again.

    “That would mean an invasion of all of its neighbours and the extinction of at least Lebanon and Jordan, which in Israeli government eyes have no right to exist.”

    The New Zealand government thought that it was “responding appropriately” by going through a process of considering recognition of a Palestinian state.

    “That can only be seen as a deliberate distraction from a focus on sanctions,” Minto said.

    “Back in 1947, New Zealand voted in the UN for a Palestinian state in part of Palestine.

    “Recognition is token now, and it was token then, because the world stood aside and let Israel conquer all of Palestine, expel most of its people and impose an apartheid regime on those who managed to stay.”

    Minto said the global movement in support of Palestinian rights would not be distracted.

    Comprehensive sanctions were the only way to force an end to Israel’s genocide.

    Australia slams Israeli PM
    Meanwhile, Al Jazeera reports that Australia has hit back at Netanyahu after the Israeli leader branded the country’s prime minister “weak”, with an Australian minister accusing the Israeli leader of conflating strength with killing people.

    In an interview with Australia’s national broadcaster ABC, Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke said that strength was not measured “by how many people you can blow up or how many children you can leave hungry”.

    Burke’s comments came after Netanyahu on Tuesday launched a blistering attack on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on social media, claiming he would be remembered by history as a “weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia’s Jews”.

    Speaking on the ABC’s Radio National Breakfast programme, Burke characterised Netanyahu’s broadside as part of Israel’s “lashing out” at countries that have moved to recognise a Palestinian state.


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

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • ANALYSIS: By Treasa Dunworth, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    It’s now more than a week since Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced his government had begun to formally consider New Zealand’s position on the recognition of a Palestinian state.

    That leaves two weeks until the UN General Assembly convenes on September 9, where it is expected several key allies will change position and recognise Palestinian statehood.

    Already in a minority of UN member states which don’t recognise a Palestinian state, New Zealand risks becoming more of an outlier if and when Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom make good on their recent pledges.

    Luxon has said the decision is “complex”, but opposition parties certainly don’t see it that way. Labour leader Chris Hipkins says it’s “the right thing to do”, and Greens co-leader Chloë Swarbrick has called on government MPs to “grow a spine” (for which she was controversially ejected from the debating chamber).

    Former Labour prime minister Helen Clark has also criticised the government for trailing behind its allies, and for appearing to put trade relations with the United States ahead of taking a moral stand over Israel’s actions in Gaza.

    Certainly, those critics — including the many around the country who marched last weekend — are correct in implying New Zealand has missed several opportunities to show independent leadership on the issue.

    The distraction factor
    While it has been open to New Zealand to recognise it as a state since Palestine declared its independence in 1988, there was an opportunity available in May last year when the Irish, Spanish and Norwegian governments took the step.

    That month, New Zealand also joined 142 other states calling on the Security Council to admit Palestine as a full member of the UN. But in a subsequent statement, New Zealand said its vote should not be implied as recognising Palestinian statehood, a position I called “a kind of muddled, awkward fence-sitting”.

    It is still not too late, however, for New Zealand to take a lead. In particular, the government could make a more straightforward statement on Palestinian statehood than its close allies.

    The statements from Australia, Canada and the UK are filled with caveats, conditions and contingencies. None are straightforward expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian right of self-determination under international law.

    As such, they present political and legal problems New Zealand could avoid.

    Politically, this late wave of recognition by other countries risks becoming a distraction from the immediate starvation crisis in Gaza. As the independent Israeli journalist Gideon Levy and UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese have noted, these considered and careful diplomatic responses distract from the brutal truth on the ground.

    This was also Chloë Swarbrick’s point during the snap debate in Parliament last week. Her private members bill, she noted, offers a more concrete alternative, by imposing sanctions and a trade embargo on Israel. (At present, it seems unlikely the government would support this.)

    Beyond traditional allies
    Legally, the proposed recognitions of statehood are far from ideal because they place conditions on that recognition, including how a Palestinian state should be governed.

    The UK has made recognition conditional on Israel not agreeing to a ceasefire and continuing to block humanitarian aid into Gaza. That is extremely problematic, given recognition could presumably be withdrawn if Israel agreed to those demands.

    Such statements are not exercises in genuine solidarity with Palestinian self-determination, which is defined in UN Resolution 1514 (1960) as the right of peoples “to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”.

    Having taken more time to consider its position, New Zealand could now articulate a more genuine statement of recognition that fulfils the legal obligation to respect and promote self-determination under international law.

    A starting point would be to look beyond the small group of “traditional allies” to countries such as Ireland that have already formally recognised the State of Palestine. Importantly, Ireland acknowledged Palestinian “peaceful self-determination” (along with Israel’s), but did not express any other conditions or caveats.

    New Zealand could also show leadership by joining with that wider group of allies to shape the coming General Assembly debate. The aim would be to shift the language from conditional recognition of Palestine toward a politically and legally more tenable position.

    That would also sit comfortably with the country’s track record in other areas of international diplomacy — most notably the campaign to abolish nuclear weapons, where New Zealand has also taken a different approach to its traditional allies.The Conversation

    Dr Treasa Dunworth is professor of law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Use of cameras at Notting Hill carnival could have ‘chilling effect’ on people’s rights, says equality regulator

    Scotland Yard’s plan to widen the use of live facial recognition technology is unlawful because it is incompatible with European laws, the equalities regulator has claimed.

    As the UK’s biggest force prepares to use instant face-matching cameras at this weekend’s Notting Hill carnival, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said its use was intrusive and could have a “chilling effect” on individuals’ rights.

    Continue reading…

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

  • The court ruling on the Bell hotel does not just legitimise anti-immigrant sentiment; it also risks erasing a whole category of people

    When the high court ruled this week that the Bell hotel in Epping could no longer be used to house asylum seekers, the triumph of anti-migrant zealots looked a little unwarranted, or at least premature. Nigel Farage hoped loudly that the ruling would provide “inspiration to others across the country”. Tabloids and GB News called it an all-caps VICTORY, while Epping locals popped champagne on the hotel’s doorstep.

    Meanwhile, the ruling itself felt impermanent and technical more than principled. The judge ruled that Somani, the company that owns the Bell, had not notified the council of its intended use; it was hardly an endorsement of the general proposition, memorably spelled out by Robert Jenrick recently, that “men from backward countries who broke into Britain illegally” pose an active threat to his daughters. And while the victory calls were resounding, there was no answering message of defeat from those who support asylum seekers – nobody thinks hotels are a sound and humane way to accommodate refugees. Liminal, often squalid, eye-wateringly expensive for the Home Office, they hardly scream “welcome”.

    Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist

    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

    Continue reading…

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

  • A group of people gather around a statue.

    “Today, I want to recognise the many human rights defenders who risk their lives around the world, and the courage and dedication of all my UN Human Rights staff,” said UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk in his video message for World Humanitarian Day. “The sacrifice of our colleagues strengthens our resolve to continue their essential work.”

    Twenty-two years ago, a devastating attack struck the United Nations headquarters at the Canal Hotel in Baghdad, Iraq. The bombing claimed the lives of 22 UN staff members and left more than a hundred others injured. It was a day that profoundly shook the humanitarian community and continues to resonate decades later.

    In Geneva, Switzerland, colleagues, families, and friends gathered at the UN Human Rights headquarters to pay tribute — not only to those killed in Baghdad but to all humanitarian workers who have lost their lives in service across the globe.

    Each year, 19 August is observed as World Humanitarian Day, a moment to recognize those who dedicate themselves to alleviating human suffering, and to remember the victims of humanitarian crises worldwide.

    This year’s ceremony included a reading of the names of the 22 UN staff members who perished in the 2003 Baghdad attack, along with colleagues killed in Afghanistan, Haiti, and Rwanda, followed by a minute of silence. Flowers were later placed at the memorial to Sergio Vieira de Mello, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Iraq at the time, who also died in the bombing.

    Nada Al-Nashif, the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights and a survivor of the Canal Hotel bombing, reflected on her experience when she was UNDP Country Director in Iraq during the commemoration in Geneva.

    We were caught up in a feverish excitement at the thought of what could be achieved, the endless possibilities of support, advice, assistance,” she said. “Even as we took daily risks and coped with the unrelenting pressure of delivering, we were sustained by a certain innocence the belief that the big blue UN flag was our protection, its folds sufficiently strong to make us untouchable.”…

    “Over two decades later, it is a humbling story of recovery that I am proud to tell; a journey of individual and collective resilience, a re-dedication to our cause, the cause of global justice and dignity, guided by an extraordinary commitment to service and the deep awareness that as humans, we are one.”

    The event also highlighted the grave risks humanitarian workers face today, including targeted attacks that have led to deaths, injuries, abductions, and detentions. With 2024 marking the deadliest year on record for humanitarian personnel, concerns are growing that 2025 could prove even worse.

    From Afghanistan to Sudan, from Gaza to Venezuela, humanitarian and human rights workers continue their missions under severe risks and limited access. With nearly 60 armed conflicts ongoing around the globe, the scale and complexity of crises are growing, and so are their human rights implications.

    At the ceremony through prerecorded videos, staff from Haiti and Sudan remarked on the importance of humanitarian work.

    Abdelgadir Mohammed, a Human Rights Analyst with UN Human Rights in Sudan, highlighted that the escalation of conflict in March and April 2025 has triggered a sharp rise in human rights violations, including ethnically targeted attacks and widespread sexual and gender-based violence, particularly in Darfur.

    “I believe that human rights save lives,” he said. “I believe that human rights monitoring and reporting plays a critical role in protecting affected populations.”

    Marie Sancia Dossier, a Protection Officer for UN Human Rights in Haiti, noted that as of 2025, nearly 85 percent of the capital’s metropolitan area is under the control of armed gangs, whose influence continues to expand across the country.

    “Our motivation is an act of rebuilding and strengthening social cohesion, the rule of law and respect for human rights,” she said. “We are not only implementers. Together with institutions and civil society, we are co-builders of resilience, justice and social transformation. Our aim is to see a country where rights are respected, where institutions serve citizens, and where every person, regardless of their situation, can live in safety and dignity.” 

    https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2025/08/honouring-lives-lost-service-humanity

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

  • The Trump administration’s omission of key sections and manipulation of certain countries’ rights abuses degrade and politicize the 2025 US State Department human rights report, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Human Rights First and many other NGOs concluded .

    On August 12, 2025, the State Department released its “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices” covering the year 2024. The report omits several categories of rights violations that were standard in past editions, including women, LGBT people, persons with disabilities, corruption in government, and freedom of peaceful assembly. The administration has also grossly mischaracterized the human rights records of abusive governments with which it has or is currently seeking friendly relations.

    By undermining the credibility of the report, the administration puts human rights defenders at risk, weakens protections for asylum seekers, and undercuts the global fight against authoritarianism. 

    This year’s human rights report may strictly keep with the minimum statutory requirements but does not acknowledge the reality of widespread human rights violations against whole groups of people in many locations.  As a result, Congress now lacks a widely trusted, comprehensive tool from its own government to appropriately oversee US foreign policy and commit resources. Many of the sections and rights abuses that the report omits are extremely important to understanding the trends and developments of human rights globally, Human Rights Watch said.

    On Israel, the State Department disregards the Israeli authorities’ mass forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza, their use of starvation as a weapon of war, and their deliberate deprivation of water, electricity, medical aid, and other goods necessary for civilians’ survival, actions that amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide. The State Department also fails to mention vast damage and destruction to Gaza’s essential infrastructure and the majority of homes, schools, universities, and hospitals.

    The report is dishonest about abuses in some third countries to which the US is deporting people, stating that the US found “no credible reports of significant human rights abuses” in El Salvador, although they cite “reports” of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearance, and mistreatment by police. The administration has transferred to El Salvador’s prisons, despite evidence of torture and other abuses. 

    The State Department glosses over the Hungarian government’s escalating efforts to undermine democratic institutions and the rule of law, including severe curbs on civil society and independent media, and abuses against LGBT people and migrants. It also fails to acknowledge that Russian authorities have widely used politically motivated imprisonment as a tool in their crackdown on dissent, and its prosecutions of individuals for “extremism” for their alleged affiliation with the LGBT movement. 

    Compare: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/05/04/us-state-department-2023-country-reports/

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/08/12/us-rights-report-mixes-facts-deception-political-spin

    https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-state-departments-human-rights-report-puts-politics-above-human-rights/

    https://www.state.gov/reports/2024-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/

    https://theweek.com/politics/state-department-stance-human-rights

    https://www.bushcenter.org/publications/what-to-know-about-the-state-departments-new-human-rights-reports

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

  • By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk

    French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls is once again in New Caledonia for a four-day visit aimed at maintaining dialogue, despite a strong rejection from a significant part of the pro-independence camp.

    He touched down at the Nouméa-La Tontouta Airport last night on his fourth trip to New Caledonia since he took office in late 2024.

    For the past eight months, he has made significant headway by managing to get all political parties to sit together again around the same table and discuss an inclusive, consensual way forward for the French Pacific territory, where deadly riots have erupted in May 2024, causing 14 deaths and more than 2 billion euros (NZ$3.8 billion) in material damage.

    On July 12, during a meeting in Bougival (west of Paris), some 19 delegates from parties across the political spectrum signed a 13-page document, the Bougival Accord, sketching what is supposed to pave the way for New Caledonia’s political future.

    The document, labelled a “project” and described as “historic”, envisages the creation of a “State” of New Caledonia, a dual New Caledonia-French citizenship and the transfer of key powers such as foreign affairs from France to New Caledonia.

    The document also envisions a wide range of political reforms, more powers for each of the three provinces and enlarging the controversial list of eligible citizens allowed to vote at the crucial local provincial elections.

    When they signed the text in mid-July, all parties (represented by 18 politicians) at the time pledged to go along the new lines and defend the contents, based on the notion of a “bet on trust”.

    But since the deal was signed at the 11th hour in Bougival, after a solid 10 days of tense negotiations, one of the main components of the pro-independence camp, the FLNKS, has pronounced a “block rejection” of the deal.

    FLNKS said their delegates and negotiators (five politicians), even though they had signed the document, had no mandate to do so because it was incompatible with the pro-independence movement’s aims and struggle.

    Signatures on the last page of New Caledonia's new agreement
    Signatures on the last page of New Caledonia’s new agreement. Image: Philippe Dunoyer/RNZ Pacific

    FLNKS rejection of Bougival
    The FLNKS and its majority component, Union Calédonienne, said that from now on, while maintaining dialogue with France, they would refuse to talk further about the Bougival text or any related subject.

    They also claim they are the only pro-independence legitimate representative of the indigenous Kanak people.

    They maintain they will only accept their own timetable of negotiation, with France only (no longer including the pro-France parties) in “bilateral” mode to conclude before 24 September 2025.

    French Overseas Minister Manuel Valls
    French Overseas Minister Manuel Valls . . . not giving up on the Bougival project and his door remains open. Image: Outre-mer la Première

    Later on, the negotiations for a final independence should conclude before the next French Presidential elections (April-May 2027) with the transfer of all remaining powers back to New Caledonia.

    The FLNKS also demands that any further talks with France should take place in New Caledonia and under the supervision of its President.

    It warns against any move to try and force the implementation of the Bougival text, including planned reforms of the conditions of voter eligibility for local elections (since 2007, the local “special” electoral roll has been restricted to people living in New Caledonia before 1998).

    During his four-day visit this week (20-24 August), Valls said he would focus on pursuing talks, sometimes in bilateral mode with FLNKS.

    The minister, reacting to FLNKS’s move to reject the Accord, said several times since that he did not intend to give up and that his door remained open.

    ‘Explain and convince’
    He would also meet “as many New Caledonians as possible” to “explain and convince”.

    Apart from party officials, Valls also plans to meet New Caledonia’s “Customary (chiefly) Senate”, the mayors of New Caledonia, the presidents of New Caledonia’s three provinces and representatives of the economic and civil society.

    The May-July 2024 riots have strongly impacted on New Caledonia’s standard of living, with thousands of jobless people because of the destruction of hundreds of businesses.

    Health sector in crisis
    Valls also intends to devote a large part of his visit to meetings with public and private health workers, who also remain significantly affected by an acute shortage of staff, both in the capital Nouméa and rural areas.

    Tomorrow, Valls plans to implement one of the later stages of the Bougival signing — the inaugural session of a “drafting committee”, aimed at agreeing on how necessary documents for the implementation of the Bougival commitments should be formulated.

    These include working on writing a “fundamental law” for New Caledonia (a de facto constitution) and constitutional documents to make necessary amendments to the French Constitution.

    Elections again postponed to June 2026
    Steps to defer once again the provincial elections from November 2025 to May-June 2026 were also recently taken in Paris, at the Senate, Valls said earlier this week.

    A Bill has been tabled for debates in the Senate on 23 September 2025. In keeping with the Bougival commitments and timeline, it proposes a new deadline for provincial elections: no later than 28 June 2026.

    But FLNKS now demands that those elections be maintained for this year.

    On a tightrope again
    This week’s visit is perceived as particularly sensitive: as Valls’s trip is regarded as focusing on saving his Bougival deal, he is also walking on a tightrope.

    On one side, he wants to maintain contact and an “open-door” policy with the hard-line group of the FLNKS, even though they have now denounced his Bougival deal.

    On the other side, he has to pursue talks with all the other parties who have, since July 12, kept their word and upheld the document.

    If Valls was perceived to concede more ground to the FLNKS, following its recent claims and rejections, parts of the pro-Bougival leaders who have signed and kept their word and commitment could well, in turn, denounce some kind of betrayal, thus jeopardising the precarious equilibrium.

    The “pro-Bougival” signatories held numerous public meetings with their respective militant bases to explain the agreement and the “Bougival spirit”, as well as the reasons for why they had signed.

    This not only includes pro-France parties who oppose independence, but also two moderate pro-independence parties, the PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party) and the UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie), formed into a “UNI” platform (Union Nationale pour l’Indépendance), who have, since August 2024, distanced themselves from the FLNKS.

    At the same time, FLNKS took into its fold a whole new group of smaller parties, unions and pressure groups (including the Union Calédonienne-created CCAT –a  field action coordination group dedicated to organising political campaigns on the ground) and has since taken a more radical turn.

    Simultaneously, Christian Téin, head of CCAT, was also elected FLNKS president in absentia, while serving a pre-trial jail term in mainland France.

    His pre-trial judicial control conditions were loosened in June 2025 by a panel of three judges, but he is still not allowed to return to New Caledonia.

    One of the moderate UNI leaders, Jean-Pierre Djaïwé (PALIKA) told his supporters and local media last week that he believed through the Bougival way, it would remain possible for New Caledonia to eventually achieve full sovereignty, but not immediately.

    Ruffenach: No intention to ‘undo’ Bougival
    Several pro-France components have also reacted to the FLNKS rejection by saying they did not intend to “undo” the Bougival text, simply because it was the result of months of negotiations and concessions to reach a balance between opposing aspirations from the pro-independence and pro-France camps.

    “Let’s be reasonable. Let’s get real. Let’s come back to reality. Has this country ever built itself without compromise?,” pro-France Le Rassemblement-LR party leader Virginie Ruffenach told Radio Rythme Bleu yesterday.

    “We have made this effort at Bougival, to find a middle way which is installing concord between those two aspirations. We have made steps, the pro-independence have made steps. And this is what allowed this agreement to be struck with its signatures”.

    She said the FLNKS, in its “new” version, was “held hostage by . . .  radicalism”.

    “Violence will not take the future of New Caledonia and we will not give into this violence”.

    She said all parties should now take their responsibilities and live up to their commitment, instead of applying an “empty chair” policy.

    No credible alternative: Valls
    Earlier this week, Valls repeated that he did not wish to “force” the agreement but that, in his view, “there is no credible alternative. The Bougival agreement is an extraordinary and historic opportunity”.

    “I will not fall into the trap of words that hurt and lead to confrontation. I won’t give in to threats of violence or blockades,” he wrote on social networks.

    Last night, as Valls was already on his way to the Pacific, FLNKS political bureau and its president, Christian Téin, criticised the “rapport de force” seemingly established by France.

    He also deplored that, in the view of numerous reactions following the FLNKS rejection of the Bougival text, his political group was now being “stigmatised”.

    Ahead of the French minister’s visit, the FLNKS has launched a “peaceful” campaign revolving around the slogan “No to Bougival”.

    The FLNKS is scheduled to meet Valls today.

    The inaugural session of the “drafting committee” is supposed to take place the following day on Thursday.

    He is scheduled to leave New Caledonia on Saturday.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Advocates Beatrice Adler-Bolton and Artie Vierkant say health communism isn’t about tweaking the current healthcare system but ending a system in which only those deemed ​“productive” or ​“deserving” are allowed to live well. Instead, care should be guaranteed to all — because we exist, not because we work. 

    Under capitalism, care is often tied to productivity. But as Adler-Bolton and Vierkant argue in their book, Health Communism, that logic is the problem. Sickness, disability and aging aren’t anomalies; they’re part of being human. A truly humane health system, then, would not treat nonproductivity as a defect. 

    Under the current system, many people — especially the chronically ill, disabled, elderly and institutionalized — are treated as ​“surplus populations,” expensive burdens to be managed. Health communism sees their liberation as central to the fight for justice.

    The post Under Health Communism, Care Is A Human Right appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • COMMENTARY: By Saige England

    I unequivocally support Irish author Sally Rooney with all my heart and soul. The author risks imprisonment for donating funds from her books and the TV series based on Normal People to a Palestinian group.

    Once again the United Kingdom tells Palestinians who they should support. Go figure.
    In her opinion piece in The Irish Times last Saturday she said that:

    “Activists who disrupt the flow of weapons to a genocidal regime may violate petty criminal statutes, but they uphold a far greater law and a more profound human imperative: to protect a people and culture from annihilation.”

    Whenever the people resist or rebel they are deemed terrorists. That has been the case for indigenous people around the world from indigenous Americans to Indians in India to Aborigine and Māori, the Irish and the Scots, and the Welsh.

    I went from being a “born-again” starry-eyed kibbutznik who believed in Zionism to a journalist who researched the facts and the hidden truths.

    Those facts are revolting. Settler colonialism is revolting. Stealing homes is theft.

    I kept in touch with some of my US-based Zionist kibbutznik mates. When I asked them to stop calling Palestinians animals, when I asked them not to say they had tails, when I asked them to stop the de-humanisation — the same de-humanisation that happened during the Nazi regime, they dumped me.

    Zionism based on a myth
    Jews who support genocide are antisemitic. They are also selfish and greedy. Zionists are the bully kids at school who take other kids toys and don’t want to share. They don’t play fair.

    The notion of Zionism is based on a myth of the superiority of one group over another. It is religious nutterism and it is racism.

    Empire is greed. Capitalism is greed. Settler colonialism involves extermination for those who resist giving up their land. Would you or I accept someone taking our homes, forcing us to leave our uneaten dinner on the table? Would you or I accept our kids being stolen, put in jail, raped, tortured.

    Irish author Sally Rooney on why she supports Palestine
    Irish author Sally Rooney on why she supports Palestine Action and rejects the UK law banning this, and she argues that nation states have a duty not only to punish but also to prevent the commission of this “incomparably horrifying crime of genocide”. Image: Irish Times screenshot APR

    The country was weird when I visited in 1982. It had just invaded Lebanon. Later that year it committed a genocide.

    The Sabra and Shatila massacre was a mass murder of up to 3500 Palestinian refugees by Israel’s proxy militia, the Phalange, during Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. The horrific slaughter prompted outrage and condemnation around the world, with the UN General Assembly condemning it as “an act of genocide”.

    I had been primed for sunshine and olives, but the country gave me a chill. The toymaker I worked with was a socialist and he told me I should feel sorry for the Palestinians.

    It isn’t normal for a country to be ruled by the militia. Gun-toting soldiers roamed the streets. But you need to defend yourself when you steal.

    Paranoia from guilt
    Paranoia is a consequence of a persecutor who fails to recognise their guilt. It happens when you steal. The paranoia happens when you close doors. When you don’t welcome the other — whose home you stole.

    In 2014, soldiers of the IDF — a mercenary macho army — were charged with raping their own colleagues. Now footage of the rape of Palestinian men are celebrated on national television in Israel in front of live audiences. Any decent person would be disgusted by this.

    The army under this Zionist madness has committed — and continues to commit — the crimes it lied about Palestinians committing. And yes, the big fat liar has even admitted its own lies. The bully in the playground really doesn’t care now, it does not have to persuade the world it is right, because it is supported, it has the power.

    This isn’t the warped Wild West where puritans invented the scalping of women and children — the sins of colonisers are many — this is happening now. We can stand for the might of racism or we can stand against racist policies and regimes. We can stand against apartheid and genocide.

    Indigenous people must have the right to live in their homeland. Casting them onto designated land then invading that land is wrong.

    When Israelis are kidnapped they are called hostages. When Palestinians are kidnapped they are called prisoners. It’s racist. It’s cruel. It’s revolting that anyone would support this travesty.

    Far far more Palestinians were killed in the year leading up to October 7, 2023, than Israelis killed that day (and we know now that some of those Israelis were killed by their own army, Israel has admitted it lied over and again about the murder of babies and rapes).

    Ōtautahi author and journalist Saige England
    Ōtautahi author and journalist Saige England . . . “It isn’t normal for a country to be ruled by the militia. Gun-toting soldiers roamed the streets.” Image: Saige England

    Mercenary macho army
    So who does murder and rape? The IDF. The proud mercenary macho army.

    Once upon a time, a Palestinian kid who threw a stone got a bullet between the eyes. Now they get a bullet for carrying water, for going back to the homeground that has been bombed to smithereens. Snipers enjoy taking them down.

    Drones operated by human beings who have no conscience follow children, follow journalists, follow nurses, follow someone in a wheelchair, and blow them to dust.

    This is a game for the IDF. I’m sure some feel bad about it but they have to go along with it because they lose privileges if they do not. This sick army run by a sick state includes soldiers who hold dual US and Israeli citizenship.

    Earlier this year I met a couple of IDF soldiers on holidays from genocide, breezily ordering their lattes in a local cafe. I tried to engage with them, to garner some sense of compassion but they used “them” and “they” to talk about Palestinians.

    They lumped all Palestinians into a de-humanised mass worth killing. They blamed indigenous people who lived under a regime of apartheid and who are now being exterminated, for the genocide.

    The woman was even worse than the man. She loathed me the minute she saw my badge supporting the Palestinian Solidarity Network of Aoteara. Hate spat from her eyes.

    Madness.

    De-brainwashing
    I saw that the only prospect for them to change might be a de-brainwashing programme. Show them the real facts they were never given, show them real Palestinians instead of figments of their imagination.

    It occurred to me that it really was very tempting to take them home and offer them a different narrative. I asked them if they would listen, and they said no. If I had forced them to come with me I would have been, you know, a hostage-taker.

    Israel is evidence that the victim can become the persecutor when they scapegoat indigenous people as the villain, when they hound them for crime of a holocaust they did not commit.

    And I get it, a little. My Irish and French Huguenot ancestors were persecuted. I have to face the sad horrid fact that those persecuted people took other people’s land in New Zealand. The victims became the persecutor.

    Oh they can say they did not know but they did know. They just did not look too hard at the dispossession of indigenous people.

    I wrote my book The Seasonwife at the ripe young age of 63 to reveal some of the suppressed truths about colonisation and about the greed of Empire — a system where the rich exploit the poor to help themselves. I will continue to write novels about suppressed truths.

    And I call down my Jewish ancestors who hid their Jewishness to avoid persecution. I have experienced antisemitism.

    Experienced cancelling
    But I have experienced cancelling, not by my publisher I hasten to add, but I know agencies and publishers in my country who tell authors to shut up about this genocide, who call those who speak up anti-semitic.

    I have been cancelled by Zionist authors. I don’t have a publisher like that but I know those who do, I know agencies who pressure authors to be silent.

    I call on other authors to follow Rooney’s example and for pity’s sake stop referencing Hamas. Learn the truth.

    Benjamin Netanyahu refused to deal with any other Palestinian representative. Palestinians have the right to choose their own representatives but they were denied that right.

    What is a terrorist army? The IDF which has created killing field after killing field. Not just this genocide, but the genocide in Lebanon in 1982.

    I have been protesting against the massacre of Palestinians since 2014 and I wish I had been more vocal earlier. I wish I had left the country when the Phalangists were killed. I did go back and report from the West Bank but I feel now, that I did not do enough. I was pressured — as Western writers are — to support the wrongdoer, the persecutor, not the victim.

    I will never do that again.

    Change with learning
    I do believe that with learning we can change, we can work towards a different, fairer system — a system based on fairness not exploitation.

    I stand alongside indigenous people everywhere.

    So I say again, that I support Sally Rooney and any author who has the guts to stand up to the pressure of oppressive regimes that deny the rights of people to resist oppression.

    I have spent a decade proudly standing with Palestinians and I will never stop. I believe they will be granted the right to return to their land. It is not anyone else’s right to grant that, really, the right of return for those who were forced out, and their descendants, is long overdue.

    And their forced exile is recent. Biblical myths don’t stack up. Far too often they are stacked to make other people fall down.

    Perhaps if we had all stood up more than 100,000 Palestinians would still be alive, a third of those children, would still be running around, their voices like bells instead of death calls.

    I support Palestinians with all my heart and soul.

    Saige England is an award-winning journalist and author of The Seasonwife, a novel exploring the brutal impacts of colonisation. She is also a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Journalists like Anas al-Sharif who report the truth in Gaza to the world and are targeted by Israel deserve protection, not just sympathy.

    COMMENTARY: By Sara Qudah

    During the past 22 months in Gaza, the pattern has become unbearable yet tragically predictable: A journalist reports about civilians; killed or starved, shares footage of a hospital corridor, shelters bombed out, schools and homes destroyed, and then they are silenced.

    Killed.

    At the Committee to Protect Journalists we documented that 2024 was the deadliest year for journalists, with an unprecedented number of those killed by Israel reporting from Gaza while covering Israel’s military operations.

    That trend did not end; it continued instead in 2025, making this war by far the deadliest for the press in history.

    When a journalist is killed in a besieged war city, the loss is no longer personal. It is institutional, it is the loss of eyes and ears on the ground: a loss of verification, context, and witness.

    Journalists are the ones who turn statistics into stories. They give names to numbers and faces to headlines. They make distant realities real for the rest of the world, and provide windows into the truth and doors into other worlds.

    That is why the killing of Anas al-Sharif last week reverberates so loudly, not just as a tragic loss of one life, but as a silencing of many stories that will now never be told.

    Not just reporting
    Anas al-Sharif was not just reporting from Gaza, he was filling a vital void. When international journalists couldn’t access the Strip, his work for Al Jazeera helped the world understand what was happening.

    On August 10, 2025, an airstrike hit a tent near al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City where journalists had gathered. Al-Sharif and several of his colleagues were killed.

    The strike — its method, its targets, and its aftermath – wasn’t isolated. It fits a pattern CPJ and other press freedom organisations have tracked for months: in Gaza, journalists are facing not just the incidental risks of war, but repeated, targeted threats.

    And so far, there has been no accountability.

    The Israeli military framed its action differently: officials alleged that al-Sharif was affiliated with Hamas and that the attack was aimed at a legitimate threat. But so far, the evidence presented publicly failed to meet the test of independent witnesses; no public evidence has met the basic standard of independent verification.

    UN experts and press freedom groups have called for transparent investigations, warning of the danger in labelling journalists as combatants without clear, verifiable proof.

    In the turmoil of war, there’s a dangerous tendency to accept official narratives too quickly, too uncritically. That’s exactly how truth gets lost.

    Immediate chilling effect
    The repercussions of silencing reporters in a besieged territory are far-reaching. There is the immediate chilling effect: journalists who stay risk death; those who leave — if they even can — leave behind untold stories.

    Second, when local journalists are killed, international media have no choice but to rely increasingly on official statements or third-party briefings for coverage, many with obvious biases and blind spots.

    And third, the families of victims and the communities they represented are denied both justice and memory.

    Al-Sharif’s camera recorded funerals and destroyed homes, bore witness to lives cut short. His death leaves those images without a voice, pointing now only into silence.

    We also need to name the power dynamics at play. When an enormously powerful state with overwhelming military capability acts inside a densely populated area, the vast majority of casualties will be civilians — those who cannot leave — and local reporters, who cannot shelter.

    This is not a neutral law of physics; it is the to-be-anticipated result of how this war waged in a space where journalists will not be able to go into shelter.

    We have repeatedly documented that journalists killed in this war are Palestinian — not international correspondents. The most vulnerable witnesses, those most essential to documenting it, are also the most vulnerable to being killed.

    So what should the international community and the world leaders do beyond offering condolences?

    Demand independent investigation
    For starters, they must demand an immediate, independent investigation. Not just routine military reviews, but real accountability — gathering evidence, preserving witness testimony, and treating each death with the seriousness it deserves.

    Accountability cannot be a diplomatic nicety; it must be a forensic process with witnesses and evidence.

    Additionally, journalists must be protected as civilians. That’s not optional. Under international law, reporters who aren’t taking part in the fighting are civilians — period.

    That is an obligation not a choice. And when safety isn’t possible, we must get them out. Evacuate them. Save their lives. And in doing so, allow others in — international reporters who can continue telling the story.

    We are past the time for neutrality. The use of language like “conflict”, “collateral damage”, or “civilian casualties” cannot be used to deflect responsibility, especially when the victims are people whose only “crime” was documenting human suffering.

    When the world loses journalists like Anas al-Sharif, it loses more than just one voice. We lose a crucial balance of power and access to truth; it fails to maintain the ability to understand what’s happening on the ground. And future generations lose the memory — the record — of what took place here.

    Stand up for facts
    The international press community, human rights organisations, and diplomatic actors need to stand up. Not just for investigations, but for facts. Families in Gaza deserve more than empty statements. They deserve the truth about who was killed, and why. So does every person reading this from afar.

    And the journalists still risking everything to report from inside Gaza deserve more than sympathy. They deserve protection.

    The killing of journalists — like those from Al Jazeera — isn’t just devastating on a human level. It’s a direct attack on journalism itself. When a state can murder reporters without consequence, it sends a message to the entire world: telling the truth might cost you your life.

    I write this as someone who believes that journalism is, above all, a moral act. It’s about bearing witness. It’s about insisting that lives under siege are still lives that matter, still worth seeing.

    Silencing a journalist doesn’t just stop a story — it erases a lifetime of effort to bring others into view.

    The murder of al-Sharif isn’t just another tragedy. It’s an assault on truth itself, in a place where truth is desperately needed. If we let this keep happening, we’re not just losing lives — we’re losing the last honest witnesses in a world ruled by force.

    And that’s something we can’t afford to give up.

    Sara Qudah is the regional director for Middle East and North Africa of the Committee to Protect Journalists. Sara on LinkedIn: Sara Qudah

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The US State Department’s latest Human Rights Report condemns Venezuela for serious abuses. Weaponizing human rights, accusations are selectively applied to serve a destabilization campaign. In this article, a mirror is held up to Uncle Sam to see how well “America the beautiful” holds up to the same charges, while also exposing the role of sanctions, compliant NGOs, and military threats in Washington’s hybrid war on Venezuela.

    The US report indicts Venezuela for “arbitrary or unlawful killings.” Meanwhile, in the land of the free, police killings hit a record high in in 2024. Impunity is high with charges brought against offending officers in fewer than 3% of cases. The FBI itself admits that transparency is hampered.

    The post US Human Rights Report On Venezuela Doesn’t Pass The Mirror Test appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Despite local opposition, the Trump administration has opened what’s expected to be the largest immigration jail in the country, on the grounds of the Fort Bliss military base in El Paso, Texas. In addition to Fort Bliss, the Trump administration also plans to detain immigrants on military bases in New Jersey and Indiana. On August 18, Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas)…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The post The U.S.-Israeli Guide to Deprivation By Design first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Visualizing Palestine.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The US State Department’s latest Human Rights Report condemns Venezuela for serious abuses. Weaponizing human rights, accusations are selectively applied to serve a destabilization campaign. In this article, a mirror is held up to Uncle Sam to see how well “America the beautiful” holds up to the same charges, while also exposing the role of sanctions, compliant NGOs, and military threats in Washington’s hybrid war on Venezuela.

    The carceral state

    The US report indicts Venezuela for “arbitrary or unlawful killings.” Meanwhile, in the land of the free, police killings hit a record high in 2024. Impunity is high with charges brought against offending officers in fewer than 3% of cases. The FBI itself admits that transparency is hampered.

    Prolonged solitary confinement, recognized as torturous, is widespread in US prisons and ICE detention centers, affecting over 122,000 people daily. A US Senate report on torture documented CIA abuses, yet meaningful accountability has failed. Hundreds of political prisoners languish in penitentiaries in the US and in Guantánamo, the majority of whom are people of color. Roughly 70% of local jail inmates are held in pretrial detention, often pressured with coercive plea deals, undermining equality before the law.

    The US has the largest prison population in the world (about 1.8 to 2 million) and an incarceration rate over 2.5 times greater than Venezuela’s. Even after release, about four million citizens remain disenfranchised due to felony convictions, disproportionately affecting Black communities.

    Freedom to protest

    Washington faults Venezuela for limiting freedom of expression. Yet, numerous US states have passed or considered anti-protest laws (e.g., “critical infrastructure” bills) that civil-liberties groups warn chill peaceful assembly.

    Reporters without Borders (RSF) observes, “the country is experiencing its first significant and prolonged decline in press freedom in modern history.” This accusation is particularly notable because RSF is strongly biased in support of the US and receives funding from the State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy. Arrests and detentions of journalists surged in 2024; schoolbook bans spiked across 29 states. In April 2024, Congress reauthorized and expanded FISA §702, enabling warrantless surveillance according to legal scholars.

    As the US-based Black Alliance for Peace observes, “domestic repression in the US colonial/capitalist core is imperative to support the aggressive militarism abroad.”

    This coupling of domestic subjugation with the international is painfully evident with the US imperialist/Israeli zionist aggression abroad in Gaza, while pro-Palestine advocates are suppressed at home. Zionist curricula are being imposed at all levels of education; at least half of the US states now require so-called “Holocaust education.” Pro-Palestine faculty, students, and staff are being purged.

    Washington’s accusation of Venezuelan antisemitism cites President Nicolás Maduro calling Israel’s assault on Gaza “the most brutal genocide” since Hitler. Its charge of antisemitism conflates Venezuela’s political criticism of the zionist state with hatred of the Jewish religion. If “antisemitism” includes Muslim Arabs, US culpability is so blatant that it requires no additional documentation.

    Meanwhile, the US accuses Venezuela of failing to protect refugees and asylum seekers. This projection does not deserve any rebuttal other than to mention that the US has a documented history of family separation of migrants and deaths in custody.

    Likewise, the world’s rogue nation does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and similar institutions, while reproaching Caracas for attempting to “misuse international law.” If anything, the Maduro government has gone out of its way to defend international law with initiatives upholding the UN Charter.

    Social welfare

    The US report scolds Venezuela for a minimum wage “under the poverty line.” Yet, its own federal minimum wage has been $7.25/hour since 2009; insufficient to lift a full-time worker out of poverty.

    A UN special rapporteur for human rights estimated that sanctions – more properly “unilateral coercive measures” – by the US and allies have caused over 100,000 excess deaths in Venezuela. Yet purported human rights NGOs Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRC), and the Washington Office on Latin American (WOLA) omit this glaring human toll in their reports on human rights in Venezuela.

    Predictably, they make nearly identical evaluations of the Venezuelan human rights situation as does the US-dominated Organization of American States (OAS) and the US State Department itself.  Their reports (AIHRWWOLA, US, OAS) either ignore or, at best, make passing references to the sanctions. No mention is made of the illegality of sanctions under international law – they are a form of collective punishment.

    In other contexts, the NGOs have acknowledged the horrific human impact of sanctions. Regardless, they were in a panic that the Trump administration might ease sanctions over the Chevron license, thus rewarding bad behavior. For these soft power apparatchiks of the US imperial project, the pain endured by the Venezuelans is worth it. WOLA has been particularly vocal about counseling against direct US military intervention, when sanctions afford an equally lethal but less obvious form of coercion.

    Hybrid war on Venezuela

    In his first term, Donald Trump levied a $15m bounty on Maduro, framing the Venezuela government as a transnational criminal enterprise tied to terrorism. This lowered the potential threshold for extraordinary US measures. Joe Biden seamlessly upped the bounty to $25m, which Trump then doubled on August 7.

    Evidence-free allegations linking the Venezuelan president to the dismantled Tren de Aragua drug cartel, the fictitious Cartel of the Suns criminal organization, and the actual Sinaloa Cartel (which is in Mexico) were conveniently used to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which is supposed to be a wartime measure. This is coupled with the designation of drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) and periodic threats of US military intervention.

    This is from the country that is the world’s biggest launderer of illicit drug money and the largest consumer of illicit drugs. Even US agencies recognize that very few of these US-bound drugs move through Venezuela.

    Most recently, the US deployed an additional 4,000 troops and warships to the Caribbean and around Latin America. Venezuela responded by mobilizing its navy in its territorial waters.

    Leading Venezuelan opposition politician María Corina Machado expressed her “immense gratitude” for the imperialist measures against her country. In contrast, thousands of her compatriots took the opposite stance and marched in protest. Venezuela-American Michelle Ellner calls the US policy “a green light for open-ended US military action abroad, bypassing congressional approval, sidestepping international law.”

    Weaponizing human rights for regime change

    Venezuela is caught in a hybrid war that is as deadly as if it were being bombed. Washington’s strangling of its economy, making wild accusations against its leaders, sponsoring opponents, and threatening armed interventions are all designed to provoke and destabilize. Venezuela’s response is best seen as self-defense against an immensely powerful foreign bully that exploits any weakness, imperfection, or lapse in vigilance.

    The US weaponizes human rights to overthrow Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution. Its exaggerated or outright fabricated allegations are echoed by the “human rights industry.” Where problems exist, they must be viewed in the context of US economic warfare, which has strained Venezuelan institutions. North Americans genuinely concerned about Venezuelan human rights should be highly skeptical of corporate media reports and recognize the need to end US interference. Escalating provocations will only necessitate Venezuela’s greater defensiveness.

    The post US Human Rights Report on Venezuela Doesn’t Pass the Mirror Test first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The US State Department’s latest Human Rights Report condemns Venezuela for serious abuses. Weaponizing human rights, accusations are selectively applied to serve a destabilization campaign. In this article, a mirror is held up to Uncle Sam to see how well “America the beautiful” holds up to the same charges, while also exposing the role of sanctions, compliant NGOs, and military threats in Washington’s hybrid war on Venezuela.

    The carceral state

    The US report indicts Venezuela for “arbitrary or unlawful killings.” Meanwhile, in the land of the free, police killings hit a record high in 2024. Impunity is high with charges brought against offending officers in fewer than 3% of cases. The FBI itself admits that transparency is hampered.

    Prolonged solitary confinement, recognized as torturous, is widespread in US prisons and ICE detention centers, affecting over 122,000 people daily. A US Senate report on torture documented CIA abuses, yet meaningful accountability has failed. Hundreds of political prisoners languish in penitentiaries in the US and in Guantánamo, the majority of whom are people of color. Roughly 70% of local jail inmates are held in pretrial detention, often pressured with coercive plea deals, undermining equality before the law.

    The US has the largest prison population in the world (about 1.8 to 2 million) and an incarceration rate over 2.5 times greater than Venezuela’s. Even after release, about four million citizens remain disenfranchised due to felony convictions, disproportionately affecting Black communities.

    Freedom to protest

    Washington faults Venezuela for limiting freedom of expression. Yet, numerous US states have passed or considered anti-protest laws (e.g., “critical infrastructure” bills) that civil-liberties groups warn chill peaceful assembly.

    Reporters without Borders (RSF) observes, “the country is experiencing its first significant and prolonged decline in press freedom in modern history.” This accusation is particularly notable because RSF is strongly biased in support of the US and receives funding from the State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy. Arrests and detentions of journalists surged in 2024; schoolbook bans spiked across 29 states. In April 2024, Congress reauthorized and expanded FISA §702, enabling warrantless surveillance according to legal scholars.

    As the US-based Black Alliance for Peace observes, “domestic repression in the US colonial/capitalist core is imperative to support the aggressive militarism abroad.”

    This coupling of domestic subjugation with the international is painfully evident with the US imperialist/Israeli zionist aggression abroad in Gaza, while pro-Palestine advocates are suppressed at home. Zionist curricula are being imposed at all levels of education; at least half of the US states now require so-called “Holocaust education.” Pro-Palestine faculty, students, and staff are being purged.

    Washington’s accusation of Venezuelan antisemitism cites President Nicolás Maduro calling Israel’s assault on Gaza “the most brutal genocide” since Hitler. Its charge of antisemitism conflates Venezuela’s political criticism of the zionist state with hatred of the Jewish religion. If “antisemitism” includes Muslim Arabs, US culpability is so blatant that it requires no additional documentation.

    Meanwhile, the US accuses Venezuela of failing to protect refugees and asylum seekers. This projection does not deserve any rebuttal other than to mention that the US has a documented history of family separation of migrants and deaths in custody.

    Likewise, the world’s rogue nation does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and similar institutions, while reproaching Caracas for attempting to “misuse international law.” If anything, the Maduro government has gone out of its way to defend international law with initiatives upholding the UN Charter.

    Social welfare

    The US report scolds Venezuela for a minimum wage “under the poverty line.” Yet, its own federal minimum wage has been $7.25/hour since 2009; insufficient to lift a full-time worker out of poverty.

    A UN special rapporteur for human rights estimated that sanctions – more properly “unilateral coercive measures” – by the US and allies have caused over 100,000 excess deaths in Venezuela. Yet purported human rights NGOs Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRC), and the Washington Office on Latin American (WOLA) omit this glaring human toll in their reports on human rights in Venezuela.

    Predictably, they make nearly identical evaluations of the Venezuelan human rights situation as does the US-dominated Organization of American States (OAS) and the US State Department itself.  Their reports (AIHRWWOLA, US, OAS) either ignore or, at best, make passing references to the sanctions. No mention is made of the illegality of sanctions under international law – they are a form of collective punishment.

    In other contexts, the NGOs have acknowledged the horrific human impact of sanctions. Regardless, they were in a panic that the Trump administration might ease sanctions over the Chevron license, thus rewarding bad behavior. For these soft power apparatchiks of the US imperial project, the pain endured by the Venezuelans is worth it. WOLA has been particularly vocal about counseling against direct US military intervention, when sanctions afford an equally lethal but less obvious form of coercion.

    Hybrid war on Venezuela

    In his first term, Donald Trump levied a $15m bounty on Maduro, framing the Venezuela government as a transnational criminal enterprise tied to terrorism. This lowered the potential threshold for extraordinary US measures. Joe Biden seamlessly upped the bounty to $25m, which Trump then doubled on August 7.

    Evidence-free allegations linking the Venezuelan president to the dismantled Tren de Aragua drug cartel, the fictitious Cartel of the Suns criminal organization, and the actual Sinaloa Cartel (which is in Mexico) were conveniently used to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which is supposed to be a wartime measure. This is coupled with the designation of drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) and periodic threats of US military intervention.

    This is from the country that is the world’s biggest launderer of illicit drug money and the largest consumer of illicit drugs. Even US agencies recognize that very few of these US-bound drugs move through Venezuela.

    Most recently, the US deployed an additional 4,000 troops and warships to the Caribbean and around Latin America. Venezuela responded by mobilizing its navy in its territorial waters.

    Leading Venezuelan opposition politician María Corina Machado expressed her “immense gratitude” for the imperialist measures against her country. In contrast, thousands of her compatriots took the opposite stance and marched in protest. Venezuela-American Michelle Ellner calls the US policy “a green light for open-ended US military action abroad, bypassing congressional approval, sidestepping international law.”

    Weaponizing human rights for regime change

    Venezuela is caught in a hybrid war that is as deadly as if it were being bombed. Washington’s strangling of its economy, making wild accusations against its leaders, sponsoring opponents, and threatening armed interventions are all designed to provoke and destabilize. Venezuela’s response is best seen as self-defense against an immensely powerful foreign bully that exploits any weakness, imperfection, or lapse in vigilance.

    The US weaponizes human rights to overthrow Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution. Its exaggerated or outright fabricated allegations are echoed by the “human rights industry.” Where problems exist, they must be viewed in the context of US economic warfare, which has strained Venezuelan institutions. North Americans genuinely concerned about Venezuelan human rights should be highly skeptical of corporate media reports and recognize the need to end US interference. Escalating provocations will only necessitate Venezuela’s greater defensiveness.

    The post US Human Rights Report on Venezuela Doesn’t Pass the Mirror Test first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Why the recognition of the State of Palestine by Australia is an important development. Meanwhile, New Zealand still dithers. This article unpacks the hypocrisy in the debate.

    ANALYSIS: By Paul Heywood-Smith

    The recognition of the State of Palestine by Australia, leading, it is hoped, to full UN member state status, is an important development.

    What has followed is a remarkable demonstration of ignorance and/or submission to the Zionist lobby.

    Rewarding Hamas
    Let us consider aspects of the response. One aspect is that recognising Palestine is rewarding the resistance organisation Hamas.

    There are a number of issues involved here. The first issue is that Hamas is branded as a “terrorist organisation”. So much is said, apparently, by eight nations compared to the overwhelming majority of UN recognised states which do not so regard it.

    May I suggest that Hamas is not a terrorist organisation: refer P&I, October 23, 2022, Australia must overturn its listing of Hamas as a terrorist organisation. Hamas is a Palestinian Islamist political party which chose to fight apartheid by calling for one state.

    That was Hamas’s objective when it fought the election against Fatah in 2006.

    As an aside, it now results in the lie that it is ridiculous that the Albanese government would recognise Palestine as part of a two-state solution when Hamas rejects a two-state solution. This is just yet another attempt to demonise Hamas.

    Hamas leaders have repeatedly said they would accept a two-state solution. It has only recently done so again.

    On 23 July last, when Hamas responded to a US draft ceasefire framework the Hamas official, Basem Naim, affirmed Hamas’s publicly stated pledge that it would give up power in Gaza and support a two-state solution on the pre-1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of an independent Palestine.

    These are the very borders stipulated by international law — see hereunder.

    The Palestinians constituting Hamas are residents of an illegally occupied territory. International law affords to them the right to resist: Geneva Conventions I-IV, 1949.

    The hypocrisy associated with the demonisation of Hamas is massive. Much is made of hostages having been taken on 7 October 2023 — a war crime according to international law. Those militants who took the hostages might be forgiven for thinking that it was minimal compared with the seven years of non-compliance with Security Council Resolution (SCR) 2334 calling for the end of occupation and removal of settlements.

    The second issue is that Hamas commenced the events in Gaza by its horrific, unprovoked, attack on 7 October 2023. As to October 7 being unprovoked, see P&I, October 9, 2023 Palestinians, pushed beyond endurance, defend their homeland against violent apartheid.

    The events of October 7 are, in any event, shrouded in doubt. This follows from Israel’s suppression of evidence concerning what happened. What we do know is that the Israel Defence Force (IDF) received orders to shell Israeli homes and even their own bases on October 7.

    In addition, the Hannibal Directive justified IDF slaughter of Israelis potentially being taken as hostages. It is also accepted that allegations of rape and beheading of babies by Hamas militants were false. The disinformation put out by Israel, and Israel’s refusal to allow journalists on site, or to interview participants, make it impossible to form any clear or credible understanding of what happened on October 7.

    It is accepted that Hamas militants attacked three Israeli military bases, no doubt with the intention that those bases should withdraw from their positions relative to Gazan territory. Such action can be understood as consistent with an occupied citizenry resisting such illegal occupation.

    Compounding the uncertainty over October 7 is the continuing conjecture, leakage, of information suggesting that the IDF had advance warning of the proposed Hamas attack but chose, for other purposes, to take no action. These uncertainties are never adverted to by our press which repeatedly attributes responsibility for all Israeli deaths on the day to the actions of Hamas militants, which actions are presented as an “abomination, barbarity”. Refer generally to P&I, November 5, 2023 (Stuart Rees) Expose and dismiss the domination Israeli narrative; P&I, January 4, 2024 Israeli general killed Israelis on 7 October and then lied about it.

    The third issue, the major hypocrisy, is that Hamas is being rewarded. Consider the position of Israel. Israel is, and has been, illegally occupying Palestinian territory since 1967. This is undisputed according to international law as articulated in the following instruments:

    • 1967 – SCR 242;
    • 2004 – the ICJ decision concerning The Wall;
    • Dec. 2016 – SCR 2334, not vetoed by Obama, recognising the illegal occupation and calling for its end; and
    • 2024 – the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ of 19 July.

    Israel has done nothing to comply with any of these instruments. It is set on a programme of gradual acquisition.

    The result is that now there are illegal settlements all over the West Bank and East Jerusalem. When Israel is told: the West Bank and East Jerusalem are to be part of a Palestinian state, it will scream, “But large parts are occupied by Jewish Israelis!” These are “facts on the ground”.

    Supporters of Israel ignore the fact that occupation by settlers occurred in the full knowledge that international law branded such occupation as illegal. If the settlements are considered as a “done deal”, that would be rewarding knowingly illegal conduct — some might say, Israeli terrorism.

    So that there can be no doubt about the import of the position it is appropriate to specify the critical parts of SCR 2334:

    The Security Council

    1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;
    2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;
    3. Underlines that it will not recognise any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;
    4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;.

    Following the ICJ Advisory Opinion of July 19, the UN General Assembly in adopting the same set 17 September 2025 as the deadline for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territory.

    Negotiated settlement
    And when Israel now says, “Recognition now is going to prevent a negotiated settlement”, it is ignoring the fact that in the six, 12, 20 months, two, three, four years until such negotiated settlement occurs, many more settlements would have been commenced, which of course, are more “facts on the ground”.

    Then we have the response of the Coalition, which demonstrates how irrelevant the Opposition is in today’s Australia. That response is that the recognition will inhibit a negotiated settlement between Israel and Palestinians.

    The Coalition, however, says nothing about the fact that the Israeli government has repeatedly stated that there will never be a Palestinian State. Indeed, Israel has legislated to that effect and is moreover periodically purporting to annex Palestinian land.

    So how does the Coalition believe that a negotiated settlement will come about? Well, one way, over which Israel may have no say, is for Palestine to become a full member State of the UN. One UN member state cannot occupy the land of another.

    Failure of our press to ask any question of pro-Israel interviewees about the end of occupation is a disgrace.

    Next challenge
    Now for the next challenge — to bring about the end of occupation. Israel will not accede readily. Sanctions must be the first step. Such sanctions must be immediate, concrete and crippling.

    They must result in the immediate suspension of trade. That can be the first step.

    Watch this space.

    Paul Heywood-Smith is an Adelaide SC (senior counsel) of some 20 years. He was the initial chairperson of the Australian Friends of Palestine Association, an incorporated association registered in South Australia in 2004. He is the author of The Case for Palestine, The Perspective of an Australian Observer (Wakefield Press, 2014). This article was first published by Pearls & Irritations and is republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    The New Zealand Green Party co-leader suspended over criticising government MPs over a “spineless” stance over Gaza has called for action.

    Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said in an interview with Al Jazeera that public pressure was mounting on governments to end the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

    The politician continues to push for recognition of Palestinian statehood and sanctions on Israel, despite being ejected from New Zealand’s Parliament for a week for her remarks.

    She refused to apologise in the House last week, telling Al Jazeera that New Zealand must “stand on the right side of history”.

    “We in Aotearoa New Zealand have a long proud history of standing typically on the right side of things, whether that be our anti-nuclear stance or our stance against apartheid in South Africa,” she said.

    “So it really is a question for this current government whether they are now willing to do the right thing and stand on the right side of history, and that was precisely the point that we were making last week in Parliament.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr says it is “a missed opportunity” not to include partners at next mont’s Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ summit.

    However, Whipps said he respects the position of the Solomon Islands, as hosts, to exclude more than 20 countries that are not members the regional organisation.

    The Solomon Islands is blocking all external partners from attending the PIF leaders’ week in Honiara from September 8-12.

    The decision means that nations such as the United States and China (dialogue partners), and Taiwan (a development partner), will be shut out of the regional gathering.

    Whipps Jr told RNZ Pacific that although he has accepted the decision, he was not happy about it.

    “These are Forum events; they need to be treated as Forum events. They are not Solomon Islands events, [nor] are Palau events,” Whipps said.

    “It is so important for any Pacific [Islands] Forum meeting that we have all our partners there. It is a missed opportunity not to have our partners attending the meeting in the Solomon Islands, but they are the host.”

    Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele (right) at the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting in Nuku'alofa, Tonga. August 2024
    Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele with PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa (left) at the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting in Nuku’alofa, Tonga, last year. Image: Lydia Lewis/RNZ Pacific

    ‘Space’ for leaders
    Last week, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele said the decision gave leaders space to focus on a review of how the PIF engaged with diplomatic partners, through reforms under PIF’s Partnership and Engagement Mechanism.

    Solomon Islands opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr said that the move was about disguising the fact that the Manele administration was planning on blocking Taiwan from entering the country.

    “The way I see it is definitely, 100 percent, to do with China and Taiwan,” he said.

    Kenilorea said he was concerned there would still be bilateral meetings on the margins, which would be easy for countries with diplomatic missions in Solomon Islands, like China and the US, but not for Taiwan.

    “There might be delegations coming through that might have bilaterials that make a big deal out of it, the optics and the narratives that will be coming out of those, if they do happen [they] are out of the control of the Pacific Islands Forum architecture, which is another hit to regionalism.”

    Palau, Tuvalu and Marshall Islands are the remaining Pacific countries that have ties with Taiwan.

    The Guardian reported that Tuvalu was now considering not attending the leaders’ summit.

    Tuvalu disappointed
    Tuvalu Prime Minister Feleti Teo said he would wait to see how other Pacific leaders responded before deciding whether to attend. He was disappointed at the exclusion.

    New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he was concerned.

    “We have advocated very strongly for the status quo. That actually the Pacific Islands Forum family countries come together, and then the dialogue partners, who are from all over the world can be present as well.”

    President Whipps said all would be welcome, including China, at the Pacific Islands Forum next year hosted in Palau.

    He said it was important for Pacific nations to work together despite differences.

    “Everybody has their own sovereignty, they have their own partners and they have their reasons for what they do. We respect that,” he said.

    “What’s most important is we find ways to come together.”

    Know the reason
    Kenilorea said other Solomon Islands MPs knew the deferral was about China and Taiwan but he was the only one willing to mention it.

    Solomon Islands switched diplomatic ties from Taiwan to China in 2019. In 2022 the island nation signed a security pact with China.

    “If [the deferral] had happened earlier in our [China and Solomon Islands] relationship, I would have thought you would have heard more leaders saying how it is.

    “But we are now six years down the track of our switch and leaders are not as vocal as they used to be anymore.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • It is hard to keep the mind sharp when the body is thin and dehydrated, but solidarity is teaching starving students their thoughts still matter

    I must admit: I write this piece while starving – too hungry to think clearly, too weak to sit upright for long. I do not feel ashamed because my starvation is deliberate. I refuse my hunger even as it decays me. I can survive no other way.

    Since 2 March 2025, Israel has imposed a full blockade on Gaza. Little aid – food, medicine, fuel – is getting in or being distributed. The markets are empty and bakeries, community kitchens and fuel stations are shuttered.

    Continue reading…

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

  • In a major victory, on Friday 15 August a US federal court struck down the US federal government’s – via Donald Trump – latest bid to attack migrant children’s rights.

    The court win centred round a foundational legal safeguard called the Flores Settlement Agreement that ensures the government respects their basic rights and dignity. Notably, it requires the federal government to treat children in immigration custody humanely, hold them in the least restrictive settings, prioritise release to family, and provide access to basic necessities such as clean water, food, medical care, and safe, sanitary living conditions.

    US court reaffirms migrant children’s rights – despite what Trump wants

    Friday’s ruling reaffirmed that children – whether accompanied by their families or arriving alone – remain entitled to these basic human rights. The court’s decision preserves critical court oversight. It blocks the government from detaining children indefinitely in inhumane, unlicensed, or dangerous facilities.

    US district judge Dolly Gee issued her ruling, finding that:

    The Court remains unconvinced. There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law.

    Thus, it is the government that continues to bind itself to the Flores Settlement Agreement by failing to fulfill its side of the Parties’ bargain. In light of the foregoing, the Court again DENIES Defendants’ MTT.

    The Flores co-counsel team – including the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law (CHRCL), National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), and Children’s Rights – applauded the ruling.

    Executive director of the CHRCL Sergio Perez said:

    The court’s vindication of Flores is a victory that belongs to each and every immigrant child currently detained by our government.

    Children should be free and, barring that, they should be cared for in environments that respect their basic human rights and essential needs. So long as that is not the case, Flores provides an essential avenue for transparency and accountability.

    No to indefinite detention and violation of migrant children’s right

    This decision comes at a critical moment. Trump and the US are increasingly subjecting migrant children and families to prolonged detention in isolated, prison-like conditions. The government’s attempt to dismantle the Flores Agreement – which it has repeatedly violated – would have thrown the door open to mass, indefinite detention of children without any enforceable standards for their care.

    Directing Attorney at the NCYL Mishan Wroe said:

    I will never forget meeting with a mother and her two young daughters who described being detained in a cell with over 40 people that was littered with trash and an overflowing toilet. They could not use the bathroom privately, and the girls were struggling to sleep in a crowded cell on the floor with nothing more than a mat and a mylar blanket. These young girls, like all children, deserve safety and dignity.

    We are pleased the court understands the value of the Settlement in protecting the rights of children and refuses to allow the government to shirk its basic responsibilities.

    Friday’s ruling sends a clear message: migrant children are not invisible. They deserve care, dignity, and full recognition of their human rights.. Strong, enforceable protections under the Flores Agreement remain essential to shield children from the deprivation and distress of immigration detention. These are harms that children themselves have made heartbreakingly clear.

    A 16-year-old child ICE detained in a family detention center confided how:

    Some things here are really bad – really scary. This place is full of little kids . . . I don’t want any more kids to come here. I don’t like seeing all the kids crying.

    Trump cannot be allowed free rein to rip children from their communities

    Deputy litigation director at Children’s Rights Leecia Welch said:

    At a time when the government seeks free rein to rip children from their communities and detain them for as long as it wishes, I am grateful for the court’s well-reasoned decision to protect the Flores Settlement Agreement from the Trump Administration’s most recent attack.

    My colleagues and I have seen the looks of desperation and fear on the faces of children as they describe their captivity in brutal, prison-like settings. Flores is the only thing standing between them and their indefinite detention in ever harsher conditions.

    For nearly 30 years, the Flores Settlement Agreement has stood as a cornerstone of legal protections for migrant children. It has ensured state authorities treat them with basic care and dignity.

    However, repeated violations underscore the continued need for Flores court oversight. Violations included unlicensed family detention, forced medication of children, and the use of open-air detention sites at the border. Now more than ever, these protections must be defended and strengthened. Without Flores, children would be left entirely at the mercy of a system that has consistently failed them.

    As long immigration detention continues to mete out profound harms, Flores co-counsel has said it will remain steadfast in defending their rights. It will continue to hold the government accountable for how it treats children in its custody. It argued that:

    this fight to preserve the Flores Agreement is not only about legal protections – it’s about the kind of country we choose to be for the most vulnerable in our care.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • ZACHARY STOCKS: Executive Director of Oregon Black Pioneers

    I had Zachary Stocks on my radio show, which will air Sept. 17. He’s a busy man, working as ED of this non-profit, covering the state of Oregon discussing Oregon Black Pioneers’ history outreach. Listen HERE.

    Oregon Black Pioneers is Oregon’s only historical society dedicated to preserving and presenting the experiences of African Americans statewide. For more than 30 years, we’ve illuminated the seldom-told stories of people of African descent in Oregon through our engaging exhibits, public programs, publications, and historical research. Additionally, we partner with local organizations to identify, interpret, and preserve sites with African American historical significance.

    Our Mission is to research, recognize, and commemorate the history and heritage of African Americans in Oregon.

    Below is a piece in Dissident Voice covering some of Stocks’ work here in Waldport, Oregon, population 2,300 of all places where a Black slave came after spending a thousand dollars to pay for his freedom.

    I’m going to go off a bit (not really) with inserting Gerald Horne, who does see the settlers in Jewish Israel now calling for the IDF to push the natives off the land as akin to the settlers in the Oregon and Washington Territories demanding the army to kill the Indians. And, so they, the government, didn’t come through so these pioneers and settlers went after the native tribes.

    undefined

    On December 7, 1855, a four-day battle begins between Oregon volunteers and the Walla Wallas and other tribes. Tensions have been growing that year between many of the Native American tribes of the interior Pacific Northwest and the increasing numbers of newly arriving settlers. Some tribes have been coerced into signing treaties that grant most of their ancestral lands to the United States, whose citizens are beginning to crowd into the area. The Yakamas, under the leadership of Kamiakin (ca. 1800-1877) and others of his family, were in open defiance of encroaching non-Native settlers and battled with volunteer territorial militias. With their resistance reduced, the territorial volunteers turn to other tribes that have been asserting themselves, including the Walla Wallas under their chief, Peo-Peo-Mox-Mox. Marching into their stronghold in the Walla Walla River valley, the First Oregon Mounted Volunteers defeat the Walla Wallas and their allies in a four-day running battle. Before the fight, chief Peo-Peo-Mox-Mox had been taken hostage and, during the first day of the battle, he and other hostages are killed. The Walla Wallas will never fully recover from the campaign. The next year, federal troops will take over the fighting and, following a series of battles during 1858, most Indian military resistance in the interior Pacific Northwest will be defeated.

    (source)

    My old stomping grounds, Spokane, the Spokane Falls Community College, where I taught, on Fort George Wright Boulevard, near Hang Man or Latah Ccreek. I lobbied to have that fucking road name changed, but to no avail.

    Upon his arrest, Qualchan noticed his imprisoned father and wept. As soldiers attempted to hang Qualchan it was said by his companion Seven Mountains that “Qualchan twice summoned the power of the mist and twice the rope broke”. Qualchan’s executioners bound his arms and legs and he was slowly strangled to death. With his words almost as cold as his actions, Wright’s only mention of the event in his journal read: “Qualchan came to see me at 9 o’clock, at 9:15 he was hanged.” One day after helplessly witnessing his son’s murder, Chief Owhi was shot dead as he attempted an escape. Over three days another dozen or so Indians were hanged as well, all without a trial.

    Qualchan’s death was only the beginning of what could be considered a hanging spree by Wright. Only one day after the killings, Wright had six members of the Palus tribe hanged, including a chief. Similar to Qualchan, they were hanged after approaching Wright’s camp with a white flag attempting to negotiate peace. Wright was a busy man for the month of September as he had almost 1,000 horses and at least seven men murdered for the cause of westward expansion.

    September 24, 1858:

    “There was no timber close to where they camped, but they planted a large stick in the ground and nailed a cross stick on it; tied my husband’s legs together, his hands behind his back, put a rope around his neck and strangled him to death…they must have seen from the expression of my face that I anguished, but they heeded not”. These are the words of Whist-alks, wife of Yakama leader Qualchan who witnessed her husband’s death under orders of Col. George Wright.

    As Qualchan’s wife Whist-alks rode into Col. Wright’s encampment, she plunged a spear into the ground near Wright’s tent. The spear was an entrance for Qualchan and a symbol of his intent to negotiate peace with Wright. The “lance” was covered with “solid beadwork”, noted one soldier in the camp.

    Western history is rife with epic clashes between well-armed Indian tribes and masses of United States soldiers: the Plains Indian Wars including Red Cloud’s War and the Great Sioux Wars, and the subjugation of the Kiowa, Comanche, Cheyenne, and Apache in the Southwest. But for all their open confrontations, federal commanders backed by military force also engaged in campaign after campaign of fear and terror—usually sparked by greed for Indian lands. Frequently, they were carried out with a blend of self-righteousness, prevarication, and unwarranted and unjust brutality. Col. George Wright’s foray against the tribes of the Upper Columbia Plateau in Washington in the summer and fall of 1858 was just such an ignominious campaign. Sparked by a need to show force and strengthen or create treaties, Wright’s advance devolved into a bloody and vindictive march featuring hangings, burned villages, lies and coercion, and the slaughter of nearly 700 Indian horses.

    The two-month-long sortie did permanently suppress the region’s native people, and settlers appreciated his effectiveness. Some 44 years later, the New York Times referred to it as “one of the most brilliant campaigns in the history of Indian warfare.” But Colonel Wright’s own words at the time were more to the point:

    “For the last eighty miles our route has been marked by slaughter and devastation.”

    This disgusting “religion,” that Mitt Romney vulture religion:

    “I feel it best to kill the Indians” “My voice is for war, exterminate them.” “I say go kill them!” “We shall have no peace until the men are killed off - Never treat an Indian as your equal.” - Parley P. Pratt, Willard Richards, and Brigham Young Extermination Order - Timpanogos, January 31, 1850 | wasmormon.org

    Back to Zachary. The Oregon Black Pioneers is kicking off a new traveling display, presentation on York. York’s Early Life: Before the Lewis and Clark Expedition

    Sculptre: York by Margaret Laccarino

    York’s parents, known as Old York and Rose were enslaved by John Clark. York, who was about the same age as John Clark’s son William, became a body servant to young William.

    James P. Beckwourth circa 1860

    “York was connected to Clark from very early on in his life,” says Hasan Davis, who has been researching and portraying York for more than two decades. “York was going to be William’s first slave, his gift as a young man, his companion.”

    York and Clark grew up together, the enslaved and the enslaver, and formed a close and complicated bond.

    “What that looks like—from accounts of enslaved hand servants, personal valet slaves at that time—was that York would have been acculturated with Clark, so much so that York would be able to be in alignment with Clark as far as how they feel and how they experience the world,” says Davis.

    Growing up enslaved by the Clarks, York accompanied William Clark nearly everywhere and gained skills on the frontier at his side. York would eventually use these skills when he went West with the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

    “When Lewis and Clark had their list of the qualities they needed, York would have nearly checked all of those off,” says Davis. “He was a trained frontiersman because he grew up with a family that was on the frontier. He understood how to navigate the rivers because that was a thing that they did. Clark talks about York in his letters, saying he was setting the boat up the river and doing his work. So York was important to Clark because he was the holder of Clark’s memory and work on a daily basis. I think as they grew up, that would have been a very powerful part of what made York useful to Clark.”

    When Clark was called by Meriwether Lewis to co-lead the Corps of Discovery west to the Pacific Ocean, Clark was in his early thirties. Davis imagines the decision to bring York was an easy one. Not only did York possess useful skills, a large build, and strength, he was also a constant in Clark’s life that he could bring with him on the journey into the unfamiliar.

    "in a system where one person is automatically given control and power over another"

    Quote by Hasan Davis.

    “On the expedition into the unknown, there are a lot of things that you can’t account for, and if something went wrong and there was a mutiny, Clark wanted to have the biggest, strongest guy behind him, without any question that he would be there to back him up,” Davis says. “Clark knew that he always had someone with him who was always going to be his protector, his provider, his support system. If all things in the world failed Clark, I believe, could believe and imagine that York was going to be the most constant thing in his life.”

    You Can’t Have Your Mule and Forty Acres, Too!

    by Paul Haeder / November 22, 2022

    The celebration was lively: in the small town of Waldport, Oregon, a few hundred finally gathered to see the statue’s unveiling. We heard a Gulf Coast guy, Truman Price, a violinist, play music on his fiddle reminiscent of the tunes of 1880s which would have been played by the historical person cast in bronze. A sculptor showed up, Peter Helzer, and his daughter, too, who was on the banjo with Truman and another fellow playing guitar. The story is of a slave, brought to Oregon by his “owner,” James Southworth. Oh, those Oregon Black Exclusion laws initiated in 1844, stating that any Black individuals or families attempting to settle here would be whipped 39 times, and repeated until they left. The Oregon Constitution in 1859 made it illegal for African Americans to live in Oregon. That law was repeated in 1926.

    The state of Oregon, man, whew. When I was working in downtown Portland, two of my social services colleagues, both Black, said they had not seen the amount of racism in Portland compared to Texas and Georgia where they had came from. “It’s not overt, more like sort of hidden, but these white colleagues, liberals, they say some pretty racist stuff to say, profess. They might think it’s passive bigotry, but the state’s history, the sundown laws, and the racist cops and sheriff departments all speak to me as a black man who is definitely feeling the racism.”

    So, Louis Southworth was sent to the Nevada and California gold fields in the 1870s by his enslaver, and he came back with money he saved from work, but mostly from entertaining camps with his fiddle. He bought his freedom at age 28, lived in Buena Vista, did blacksmith work while learning how to read and write.

    He came out to this area, Oregon, on the Pacific, Alsea, homesteading with his wife; about five miles up the river from Waldport.

    He ran a ferry, moving people, hay and other cargo. He ended up chair of the school board, and donated land for the schoolhouse and still played his fiddle.

    So, 2022, November 19, the fun was had by all, and there is land dedicated to a Southworth Park, and the statue will be placed there, and there will be more ceremonies. The donated land Southworth gave for the first schoolhouse is now a field where the park will be built, named after him, with the statue.

    I have the text of the dedicatory remarks made by an African American, Zachary Stocks, who is executive director of Oregon Black Pioneers. He set the record straight on the life and times of not only Southworth, but how his story is that of all Blacks, then, and now. It is an odd thing that this town, which is partially built on burial grounds of the first people, Alsi (Salish folk), is putting up a statue of a Black American, who bought his freedom using the fiddle as his conduit to freedom.

    There are no dedicatory memorials to the Siletz and Alsi. I’ve written about that before, and down at Devil’s Churn, there is a cemented-and-walled-in cave with a really hard-to-read sign telling the odd visitor who might stray off the path and go over rocks to see the sign mostly covered by bushes. Traditional clamming grounds of tribes. I’ve talked to people who have lived here 50 years and they never ventured off the paved path at Devil’s Churn and seen the sign. Here’s my poem about Amanda, an Indigenous Woman forcefully marched to Yachats, barefoot and blind. “Not Just One of those Tales of Another Dead Indian

    Again, these stories, these events, since I’ve been around the world, embroiled in social justice movements, anti-racism movements, and, well, I have my take on the history of the USA and the world. Here, Peter and Zach, taking off the cover to give the crowd the Louis statue of him fiddling.

    Here, Alison plays the banjo as her father walks the crowd as a sort of dignitary. He’s got over a 100 public sculptures around the state and Pacific Northwest.

    Here, Carol Van Strum, next to Louis. She’s been featured in several stories I’ve written, and her fiction novel, The Oreo File, has a mixed race protagonist and lots about Louis Southworth. Read my piece on Carol and her fight against the forest service and state with their sprays (pesticides) that have caused genetic damage and other chronic illnesses: “A real-life Toxic Avenger“.

    She also has her own story of a Black son, Jordan, who was put in jail for a murder he did not commit: Read my piece on his story, and Carol’s here: “A letter a day for 15 years and 9 months.” She came down from her Five Rivers house, 30 minutes away, to meet the artist and to give him a copy of her book, signed. I was there taking 100 photos, talking to various people I knew and those I just met.

    Here, Peter is messing with a 110 year old violin an elderly lady from Waldport (she actually is from all over, and said this violin was made in Iowa, and she was a concert violinist until she broke her neck and could no longer play).

    Here’s Zach’s organization website, Oregon Black Pioneers. Here’s just some of what he said at the ceremony:

    Just before his death in 1917, it was reported that Louis Southworth was denied a military pension because his name wasn’t recorded in the volunteer lists. And this, despite a testimonial written on his behalf by his former commanding officer. In response, 218 Oregonians sent in donations totaling $243 to help cover Louis’ living expenses in his final days. Some of those people might be relatives of folks in this room. But it saddens me, that someone who had achieved so much would be forced to live on the charity of others.

    All of this demonstrates how Louis Southworth seemed to live multiple lives. Slave and freeman; laborer and entrepreneur; squatter and homesteader; soldier and pauper; excluded and included. Louis was not just a jolly old man living quietly in the background. He actively participated in some of the most significant events in the history of Oregon.

    And more than perhaps any other person, Louis’s time in Oregon spans the most transformational moments for Black Americans in the state. Consider this– around the year Louis Southworth was born, York, the first Black person to reach Oregon by land, died, likely less than 200 miles away. The year Louis Southworth died, Mercedes Diez, who would go on to become Oregon’s first Black judge in the 1970s, was born. Louis is a link in the chain of historic Black individuals that stretches from 1770 to 2005!

    That is how close we are to the past. A great colleague of mine named Richard Josey once posed an amazing question at a museum conference. He asked, “What kind of ancestor will you be?”. Let’s look to the example of Louis Southworth, whose story and accomplishments have inspired people, then and now. And whose resiliency was matched only by his generosity. A truly historic person.

    I did stories on Hanford, the Washington nuclear facility. Won a couple of awards for magazine articles. “Nearly nature, nearly perfect But, near Hanford (part 1)” and “Nuclear Narratives – When Cold War Starts, the Hot Milk Gets Poured (part 2)“.

    I did learn from several farmers, including Tom Bailey, that when the facility was being built, many African Americans were brought into this dryland of Washington on the Columbia River. The Tri-Cities of Richland-Kennewick-Pasco. There was a part of town where the blacks lived, there were a few black establishments including bars and stores, and black churches. The justice for these workers was harsh, or should I say, the injustice. That facility was being built in the 1940s. I was shown some of the places, both still standing and others decrepit and falling apart.

    Then, in Portland, Vanport, I got my education on that racist history. Here, a website, Hidden History:

    Race is not a topic we often discuss in public settings, at least not explicitly. We are told we are in a “postracial” landscape, yet race is the number one determinant of access to health care, home ownership, graduation rates, and income, as the data from the Urban League of Portland below show.

    We can’t understand these disparities without understanding history. I didn’t grow up in Oregon; I moved here to attend high school. It wasn’t until I had the privilege of attending a presentation by Darrell Millner, founder of Portland State University’s Black Studies Department, that I learned Oregon was created as a white utopian homeland. That Oregon was the only state that entered the Union with a clause in its constitution forbidding Black people to live here. That the punishment originally meted out for violating this exclusionary law was the “Lash Law”: public whipping every six months until the Black person left the state. That this ideology shaped Oregon’s entire history and was reflected in the larger history of this nation. — Walidah Imarisha

    Again, laborers, workers, coming to Portland in the 1940s to help sustain the construction of homes, warehouses, other buildings for its rapid growth. Vanport was built as a temporary housing solution to Portland’s rapidly growing population. At its peak it housed nearly 40,000 residents, close to 40 percent were African-American. But an unusually wet spring in 1948 created a hole in the railroad dike blocking the Columbia River, and it erupted into massive flooding. City officials didn’t warn residents of the dangerously high water levels and opted not to evacuate. The town was wiped out within a day and 18,500 families were displaced, more than a third African-American.

    So, the Albina section of Portland was the only place for Blacks, but with these displaced folk, some of which were taken in by other families, black and white, they had not other place in Portland to live. Many left the area. Now? Gentrification, racist policing, and, yep, with my Masters in Urban Planning, lots of redlining and zoning issues tied to making African Americans personas non grata. It’s disgusting.

    The great Southern Migration, years after Southworth passed on in 1919. Many now living in Stumptown know nothing about that migration of Black men and women arriving to Portland by the many thousands, increasing Portland’s black population tenfold in a few years. Between 1940 and 1950, the city’s black population increased more than any West Coast city other than Oakland and San Francisco.

    It was part of a demographic change seen in cities across America, as blacks left the South for the North and West in what became known as the Great Migration, or what Isabel Wilkerson, in her acclaimed history of the period, The Warmth of Other Suns, calls “the biggest underreported story of the 20th century.” From 1915 to 1960, nearly six million blacks left their Southern homes, seeking work and better opportunities in Northern cities, with nearly 1.5 million leaving in the 1940s, seduced by the call of WWII industries and jobs. Many seeking employment headed West, lured by the massive shipyards of the Pacific coast. (Source)

    Here we are in this complicated story, 2022, where Native Americans have been pushed out by the Old World coming into this continent for making money, exploiting land, moving immigrants to lay claim on land for farming and settlements with no regard to the hundreds of American Indian tribes. The Indian war lasted over three hundred years, from 1602 to 1926. Almost every buffalo in the 60 million population was exterminated, as a way to kill American Indian culture.

    I’ve got some time at Fort Huachuca, the home of the Buffalo Soldier, the African American union soldiers who also did their duty to help pacify and exterminate the Indians. The First African American troops to arrive in Arizona at Fort Huachuca were the Buffalo Soldiers in the 1890s — the 9th and 10th Cavalries. The Fort Huachuca Buffalo Soldiers distinguished themselves in the Spanish American War and the charge up San Juan Hill.

    The African American Soldier At Fort Huachuca, Arizona, 1892-1946 American Plains Indians who fought against these soldiers referred to the black cavalry troops as “buffalo soldiers” because of their dark, curly hair, which resembled a buffalo’s coat and because of their fierce nature of fighting. The nickname soon became synonymous with all African-American regiments formed in 1866.

    You can read my piece coming out November 23 here at Dissident Voice, you know, for National Day of Mourning. The so-called Thanksgiving (for whom?). Again, the Southworth story is amazing, but it conjures up many issues tied to the Indian Removal actions of the many who came into their lands and stole. Sure, the series, The English, is just one aspect of those dirty Anglo Saxons coming out here to kill Indians: Yeah, it is a six part romance thing:

    Or Terrance Malick’s, The New World:

    Or the Redford produced, The American West.

    Complicated feelings for me living on burial ground, by the Alsea River, in the old part of Waldport, and I can almost see that field, that soon-to-be Southworth Park. So many homeless, so many domestic violence cases, so many Native youth in schools here doing not so well. So many backward thinkers, and then all the transplants, who, well, they go to the Southworth show, but would they come to a lecture and viewing on Black Panthers’s struggles, or for on “In Prison My Whole Life – Mumia Abu-Jamal (Documentary)”

    I am Not your Negro and Exterminate all the beasts:

    Here, I’ll let Zach have the last word:

    All of the images feature a seated Louis Southworth wearing a shabby coat and holding his fiddle. In one, he is facing away from the camera in his living room, and in the other where he is looking directly into the camera with a smile. The former was used on the cover of Elizabeth McLagan’s landmark 1980 book, A Peculiar Paradise: A History of Blacks in Oregon, 1788-1940; the latter is featured on Louis’ headstone in Crystal Lake Cemetery in Corvallis. The epitaph reads “A bit of heaven’s music here below”.

    Louis’ smile is infectious, and when you look at him, it almost feels as if you know him personally. No doubt, these photos continue to inspire appreciation for Louis. But unfortunately, we should question why these photos were made, and what they were meant to represent to viewers in 1915.

    John Horner was not a journalist, but an anthropologist at Oregon State University, and the founder of the city’s first museum. He was a proponent of phrenology, and in his lab, he studied human skulls which he had stolen from Native graves to try and find proof of racial hierarchies. In 1931, he was hired to investigate a grave site at Three Rocks –not far from here—and determined that one of these skulls had [quote] “an extremely thick skull, indicative of negroid characteristics”. This skull too, was taken back to Horner’s lab for study.

    Why would this anthropologist take photos and write an article about Louis Southworth? I can’t help but think of the staged images of Indigenous peoples that anthropologists and photographers used to document the tragedy of the supposedly-“vanishing” Indians. Edward Curtis’ “The North American Indian” had been first exhibited only eight years earlier. It seems to me that Horner was making a similar documentation of Louis. No one was suggesting that Black Americans were disappearing from Oregon in the 1910s –in fact, Oregon’s Black population was the highest it had ever been—but Louis represented something different. He too, was the last of his kind. The last of the enslaved Oregonians; the last trace of the “Old South” which had emigrated west during the pioneer days.

    White Oregonians could be pleased by the “Uncle Lou” they saw in the newspaper, while at the same time, be virulently opposed to the growing Black progressive class in Portland. The same year this article was printed, Oregon voters rejected a ballot measure to repeal the state’s ban on interracial marriage, and rejected a measure to remove the Black exclusion language from the Oregon Constitution, even though it was no longer legally enforceable.

    It still was a moving day for me, for sure, in its own way. I also told Zach and a few others I’d be writing something about the event, but to not expect some inverted Triangle News Piece. I can never take away the genuine feelings people yesterday expressed for this history, this man, and the park.

    The post Oregon Black Pioneers: Exclusion Laws, Sundown Provisos, Racism in the Oregon Trail State first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.