The Biden administration is reportedly drafting plans to bomb Houthi targets in Yemen amid escalating fears of a wider war in the Middle East, where the U.S. is inflaming regional tensions by heavily arming Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip. Politico reported Thursday that U.S. officials are “increasingly concerned” that Israel’s devastating war on Gaza “could expand… to a wider…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Twin explosions in the Iranian province of Kerman killed dozens and injured hundreds Wednesday at a memorial for top Revolutionary Guards general Qassem Soleimani, who was assassinated in a U.S. drone strike four years ago in Iraq. No one has yet claimed responsibility for the attack, but Iran has placed blame on Israel and the U.S, while U.S. officials and regional experts have suggested ISIS as…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
It sounded familiar hearing the BBC News that the family of Mahsa Amini have been banned from flying to France to collect the 2023 EU’s Sakharov Prize [see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/10/19/mahsa-amini-and-woman-life-and-freedom-movement-in-iran-awarded-eus-sakharov-prize/]. In 2009, as chairman of the MEA, I had to deal with the Martin Ennals Award laureate, Emad Baghi, who could not accept the prize in person due to travel restrictions. The same happened to other awards, including: the Civil Courage Prize (2004), the human rights award from France (2005), and the British Press Award (2008). https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/EA0410ED-BC5A-4436-A3D7-012EF3232C55
Ms Amini’s parents and brother were stopped from boarding their flight and had their passports confiscated, their lawyer said. They were banned from leaving despite having valid visas.
Speaking to the AFP news agency, the family’s lawyer, Chirinne Ardakani, said Ms Amini’s mother, father and brother had been “prohibited from boarding the flight that was to take them to France for the presentation of the Sakharov Prize”.
The president of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, called on Iran to “retract the decision” to ban the family from travelling. “Their place next Tuesday is at the European Parliament in Strasbourg to receive the Sakharov Prize, with the brave women of Iran,” she said on social media. “The truth cannot be silenced.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-67672565
This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.
Ban comes as jailed Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi begins new hunger strike before award ceremony
Iran has banned Mahsa Amini’s family from travelling to France to receive the EU’s top human rights prize on her behalf, as the family of the imprisoned Nobel peace prize winner Narges Mohammadi said she had begun a new hunger strike before Sunday’s award ceremony in Oslo.
In Mohammadi’s absence, her 17-year-old twin children Ali and Kiani, will instead collect the award on her behalf, reading out a speech their mother smuggled out of her cell.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
The UK, US and Canada are announcing a sweeping package of sanctions targeting individuals linked to human rights abuses around the world, ahead of the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December.
UK targets forced labour operations in Southeast Asia, and government-linked officials in Belarus, Haiti, Iran, and Syria complicit in repressing individual freedoms.
The first set targets 9 individuals and 5 entities for their involvement in trafficking people in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, forcing them to work for online ‘scam farms’ which enable large-scale fraud. Victims are promised well-paid jobs but are subject to torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment…
The second is aimed at a number of individuals linked to the governments, judiciaries and prosecuting authorities of Belarus, Haiti, Iran, and Syria, for their involvement in the repression of citizens solely for exercising fundamental freedoms in those countries.
Included in the USA sanctions are two Afghanistan government ministers accused of repressing women and girls, by restricting access to secondary education; two Iranian intelligence officers who the Treasury says plot violence against Iranian regime opponents beyond the nation’s borders and two Chinese officials accused of torturing Uyghur ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang region of China.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-allies-sanction-human-rights-abusers
This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.
At Westminster the other day the UK Secretary of State for Defence (Grant Shapps) made a statement on military deployments to the Middle East which included questions and answers about the situation in Gaza. It was an opportunity for Shapps with help of pro-Zionist MPs to distort the facts to ‘justify’ Israel’s appalling crimes.
The following exchanges are taken from Hansard which, for those who don’t know, is the official and “substantially verbatim” report of what is said in the UK Parliament.
Martin Docherty-Hughes (West Dunbartonshire) (SNP) commented: “It is important to repeat the denunciation of the death cult known as Hamas.”
Shapps replied: “The hon. Gentleman is right to stress the abominable, disgraceful, disgusting behaviour of Hamas.” [Shapps is Jewish]
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con): “Those on both Front Benches seem to agree that Hamas must not remain in control in Gaza. Is any thought being given to how, once they have been removed, they can be prevented from coming back?” [Lewis is also Jewish]
Shapps: The easiest way to bring this to an end, as I hinted earlier, would be for Hamas, a terrorist organisation, to release the hostages that they have, to stop firing rockets into Israel in a completely indiscriminate way, which I think the whole House should condemn.”
Sir Michael Ellis (Northampton North) (Con): “The Houthis, who are attacking British and American cargo ships, and Hamas are basically two sides of the same coin. They are Iranian-funded, Iranian-trained and, of course, Iranian-guided terrorist groups that are publicly committed to the destruction of Israel…. I particularly welcome the UK’s deployment of drones to help locate hostages, including British hostages. In the days after 7 October, the Defence Secretary said: ‘No nation should stand alone in the face of such evil.’ Will he repeat that crucial support today and in the difficult days ahead? I thank him for his support. [Ellis is Jewish and also a member of Conservative Friends of Israel].
Shapps: My right hon. and learned Friend is absolutely right that no nation should stand alone. It is easy to forget how this all began, when the Hamas terrorist group thought it was a plan to go into Israel to butcher men, women and children, cut off heads and rape people.
Greg Smith (Buckingham) (Con): “I applaud the decisive actions of my right hon. Friend and the Government to defend our strategic ally, Israel, against Hamas, but the grim reality on the ground right now is that Hamas continue to fire dozens of rockets at Israeli towns and cities. The Iran-backed terror group have fired more than 10,000 rockets since 7 October and show no sign of stopping their violent attacks against Israel. Will my right hon. Friend not only commit to continuing his support for Israel in defending itself against Hamas, but reassure the House that every possible step is being taken to counter Iran’s links across the region, which are causing instability?”
Shapps: “My hon. Friend makes an excellent point that the conflict would be over immediately if hostages were released and Hamas stopped firing rockets into Israel—there would not be a cause for conflict. Indeed, that is the policy Israel followed for many years, hoping that, even though rocket attacks continued, Hamas would not take advantage of their own population by using them as human shields and building infrastructure under hospitals, schools and homes…. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to identify Iran as being behind this whole evil business.”
Richard Foord (Tiverton and Honiton) (LD): “It was reassuring last week, in answer to my question, to hear the Minister for Armed Forces, the right hon. Member for Wells (James Heappey) telling us that UK surveillance flights would not involve the use of intelligence for target acquisition. I also welcome the Secretary of State talking today about how information that would be helpful to hostage recovery will be passed to the so-called appropriate authorities. We have now heard two questions about the International Criminal Court. Will the UK pass any evidence that it gathers of any breaches of international humanitarian law by combatants in Gaza to the ICC?“
Shapps: “As the hon. Gentleman says, that question has been asked, and I have answered it a couple of times. The intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance – ISR – flights are to look for British hostages and indeed other hostages. That is the information that will be gathered from those flights. Of course, if we saw anything else, we would most certainly alert our partners“. [But do they include the ICC? I think not.]
Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP): “Yesterday I asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Aldershot (Leo Docherty), whether the UK Government were in a position to contribute to the International Criminal Court’s call for evidence in its investigation of potential breaches of international humanitarian law. He said: ‘Not at this stage, but we will continue to take note.’ Surely, if the UK Government are actively collecting drone and surveillance images of the war zone, the answer to that question should have been yes?”
Shapps: “I would have thought that the No. 1 concern would be to locate the British hostages, and that is where the surveillance work will focus.”
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind): “The Secretary of State needs to be very clear with the House: 15,000 people have already died in Gaza, and 1,200 have died in Israel. Israel is clearly pushing the entire population southwards, if not out of the Gaza strip altogether. Is Britain involved in the military actions that Israel has taken, either physically or by providing information in support of those military activities? I think the House needs to be told. What is the long-term aim of British military involvement in Gaza?”
Shapps: “The simple answer is no, and I hope that clears it up. I am surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman talk just about people being killed. They were murdered. They were slaughtered. It was not just some coincidental thing. I understand and share the concerns about the requirement on Israel, on us and on everyone else to follow international humanitarian law. When Israel drops leaflets, when it drops what it calls a “knock” or a “tap” and does not bomb until afterwards, when it calls people to ask them to move, when it issues maps showing where Hamas have their tunnels and asks people to move away from them, that is a far cry from what Hamas did on 7 October, when they went after men, women and children.”
Kim Johnson (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab): “We have seen increased bombardment in southern Gaza after the pause. We are also seeing increased violence in the West Bank, supported by extremist settler Ministers. What talks is the Secretary of State having with Israel to stop the increase in settler violence in the West Bank?“
Grant Shapps: “I certainly will not be pulling my punches when I speak to my Israeli counterparts. The violence in the West Bank is unacceptable and it must be controlled—stopped, in fact. None of that, in any way, shape or form, separates us from our utter condemnation of how this whole thing was started in the first place with Hamas, but the hon. Lady is right about that settler violence.”
Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP): “Medical Aid for Palestinians has warned that Israel’s indiscriminate bombing and siege is making it impossible to sustain human life in Gaza. With 1.8 million civilians displaced and a lack of clean water and sanitation, it is just a matter of time before a cholera outbreak kills many thousands more. The Secretary of State has been unequivocal that the main purpose of surveillance is to help find hostages, which is fine, but for the fifth time of asking: if clear evidence is found of breaches of humanitarian law, will the UK Government share that evidence with the International Criminal Court?
Shapps: “The simple answer is that we will always follow international humanitarian law and its requirements.”
Peter Grant (Glenrothes) (SNP): “It is absolutely right that those responsible for the crimes of Hamas are held to account in international law. But why is the Secretary of State so reluctant to give a clear, simple “yes” to the question whether the Government will provide any evidence of war crimes to the International Criminal Court? Is it because he has already seen such evidence? Is it because Israel has asked him to promise not to share such evidence? What is the reason?”
Grant Shapps: “I have already said that the United Kingdom is bound by, and would always observe, international humanitarian law.
The message we are supposed to swallow from this pantomime is that it’s all the fault of Hamas and Iran who “started the whole thing” on 7 October, and that Israel’s massacres, brutal occupation using military force, cruel blockade and clear intention of establishing Jewish sovereignty “from the river to the sea” over the last 75 years have nothing to do with it. It is clear that the UK will do everything to avoid upsetting Israel’s evil plan and calling the regime’s war criminals to account despite our solemn obligations under international law to do so.
And it is pointless for the likes of Shapps to keep repeating that Israel “has to follow international humanitarian law” when Israel has been in permanent breach of nearly all aspects of law for decades and treats international norms with utter contempt. Only today the regime announced approval of 1700 more ‘settlement’ homes in East Jerusalem which is Palestinian territory. And it continues to defy international law, escalating its crimes to the most abhorrent of all – genocide – because it is given cover by the US and UK. Perhaps the rest of us should properly label Israel’s genocide in Gaza as ‘US and UK-backed’. And the UK itself ignores international law if it happens to be ‘inconvenient’.
As for the constantly repeated claim the Israel has a right to defend itself, this is blatant misinformation. Israel is an illegal military occupier and aggressor committing never-ending war crimes on someone else’s sovereign territory. Its right to self-defence is practically zero in these circumstances. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has stated that “Israel cannot claim self-defence against a threat that emanates from the territory it occupies – from a territory that is kept under belligerent occupation”.
And notice how everything the Israelis dislike, and everything that thwarts their lust for domination, is now labeled “Iranian-backed” or “Hamas controlled”. Shapps is evidently well versed in the 116-page propaganda manual produced by The Israel Project (TIP) and written specially for those “on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel”. Its purpose is to help the worldwide Zionist movement win the propaganda war by persuading international audiences to accept the Israeli narrative and agree that the regime’s crimes are necessary for Israel’s security and in line with “shared values” between Israel and the West.
This masterwork on deception attempts to justify Israel’s slaughter, ethnic cleansing, land-grabbing, cruelty and blatant disregard for international law and United Nations resolutions, and make it all smell sweeter with a liberal squirt of persuasive language. It also incites hatred, particularly towards Hamas and Iran, and is designed to hoodwink Americans and Europeans into believing we actually share values with the racist regime, and therefore ought to support and forgive its abominable behaviour.
Readers are instructed to “clearly differentiate between the Palestinian people and Hamas” and to drive a wedge between them. The manual features “words that work” – i.e. carefully constructed language to deflect criticism and reframe all issues and arguments in Israel’s favour. We are seeing it at work here with great success.
MPs who are Jewish are identified as such when it seems appropriate. Those, like Sir Michael Lewis mentioned above, who are signed-up Friends of Israel should, in my opinion, declare that interest in any debate on the subject. But I must emphasise that not all Jewish MPs are tools of the apartheid regime. We remember with admiration Sir Gerald Kaufman who was arguing for economic sanctions against Israel back in 2004. And during a debate on the Gaza war of 2008/9, he told the Commons: “The present Israeli government ruthlessly and cynically exploits the continuing guilt from Gentiles over the slaughter of Jews in the Holocaust as justification for their murder of Palestinians… My grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town of Staszow. A German soldier shot her dead in her bed. My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza”.
He described Hamas as a “deeply nasty organisation” but said the UK Government’s boycott of Hamas had “dreadful consequences”, and he reminded the Commons that Israel had been created following acts of terrorism by the Irgun. He considered Iran a loathsome regime but, unlike Israel, “at least it keeps its totalitarian theocracy to within its own borders”.
As to why there are so many Israel lackeys in Westminster Kaufman said: “It’s Jewish money, Jewish donations to the Conservative Party. There is now a big group of Conservative members of parliament who are pro-Israel…. whatever the Israeli government does.”
Of course, it’s not just the Conservative Party. The corrupting influence of dodgy funding is also affecting Labour and the LibDems.
Remembering the victims of genocide
This week marks the 75th anniversary of the 1948 Genocide Convention. As explained on the United Nations website:
Every 9 December the Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide marks the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide – a crucial global commitment that was made at the founding of the United Nations, immediately preceding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. By General Assembly Resolution A/RES/69/323 of 29 September 2015, that day also became the International Day of Commemoration and Dignity of the Victims of the Crime of Genocide and of the Prevention of this Crime.
At its landmark 75th anniversary this year, the Genocide Convention remains highly relevant. The 1948 Genocide Convention codified for the first time the crime of genocide in international law. Its preamble recognizes that “at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity” and that international cooperation is required to “liberate humankind from such an odious scourge”. To date, 153 States have ratified the Convention. Achieving universal ratification of the Convention, as well as ensuring its full implementation, remain essential for effectively advancing genocide prevention. The Genocide Convention includes the obligation not only to punish the crime of genocide but, crucially, to prevent it. In the 75 years since its adoption, the Genocide Convention has played an important role in the development of international criminal law, in holding perpetrators of this crime accountable, galvanizing prevention efforts, and in giving a voice to the victims of genocide.
How many parliamentarians in Westminster and Washington who blindly support Israel’s attempts to exterminate the Palestinians in Gaza and turn their homeland into rubble will publicly show respect for those victims of the apartheid regime’s genocide?
The post Panic-stricken Israel Lobby Shifts into Overdrive first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
As part of a fact-finding mission to the Middle East in late 2007, one year after Hezbollah concluded a war with Israel, we spent a few days with Hezbollah. I knew that Hezbollah carried heavy baggage, could be threatening, and operated as a state within a state, but it never seemed, as bludgeoning reports insisted, an international terrorist organization. All of the few horrific actions involving Hezbollah have been tit-for-tat revenge attacks for Israeli murder of its cadres, such as the February 16, 1992, Israeli Apache AH64 helicopter missile attack on an automobile that killed Sheikh Abbas Musawi, the then secretary-general of Hezbollah, his wife, and five-year-old son.
Face-to-face in November 2007 revealed an organized and thoughtful Hezbollah without traces of being fanatical.
They speak English, carry I-pods, and listen to Santana and Guns and Roses. They don’t approach with anger and don’t behave overbearing. They are well-educated, mostly from Beirut’s American University, relaxed and alert to world happenings. They impress as being more secular than pious. They are spokespersons for Hezbollah – the Party of God.
 |
Maybe they are a selected group of well-trained talkers for foreigners; a subtle means to convince the unwary that Hezbollah’s followers are just everyday guys and gals. Maybe, but observations and events were inconsistent with the media’s drastic descriptions of the militant Lebanese Shiite movement.
The Party of God has insufficient support for exercising political control of Lebanon and knows it doesn’t have the numbers or the strength to turn the Levant into an Islamic Republic. Hezbollah’s clerics don’t indicate they intend to force Shari’a upon their constituencies. More an amalgam of differing viewpoints – religious, social, political, and militant – Hezbollah is solidified by a common struggle for the dispossessed and a battle against corruption. Meetings with Hezbollah and Lebanese officials together with a trip to southern Lebanon, as a member of a Council for National Interest peace delegation, revealed much about the nature of the Party of God.
The voyage started in Beirut, at a tenement building that is indistinguishable from the adjoining buildings in the Shiite district. Hezbollah followers crowd the sidewalk to greet and lead to a simple apartment on an upper floor. Sayyid Nawaf Al-Musawi, the head of Hezbollah’s International Relations, is dressed in conventional clothes.
 |
The only indication of religious fervor is the beads he rotates in his right hand. He sits relaxed but talks seriously and with conviction. The female translator’s minor errors and dubious translations of colloquial expressions are politely excused. The head of Hezbollah’s International Relations has a lot to say – about everything.
Region
In Iraq there is a severe humane problem – same as in Palestine. The West Bank is now a prison. The US gives no importance to the Iraqi people. US policy is based on Israeli safety and Middle East oil. America is creating chaos and the region is under its hegemony. The regime is increasing the problems rather than resolving them. Now they are talking about a new war in Iran. Iraq was weak, but Iran is strong and it will be a much harder war. A barrel of oil and a barrel of gunfire will create a catastrophe that is beyond comprehension. A disaster is happening and Americans are giving a story that is false. They were lying about WMDs in Iraq and now they are lying about nuclear issues in Iran. They told the people that the Iraqis would welcome them as liberators. This is an example of a delusion to the citizens of the US. American citizens deserve to know the truth. Colin Powell gave false information to the UN but he thought it was the truth. When someone tries to find the truth he is called a terrorist. America operates on misleading evidence.
Governing Lebanon
The one who rules must be accepted by all the others. Now the minority is ruling, but this is supported by the U.S. Why does the U.S. want this? For the benefit of the Israelis. We are a movement only against Israeli attack and Israeli occupation. We support unity. We encourage consensus. The Vatican, the Arabs want unity in Lebanon, but the American influences in Lebanon do not want this. We want a multi-ethnic nation and not as in Israel, which calls itself a Jewish country even though ¼ of its citizens are Christians and Muslims. We cannot have an election with 50% plus one because the text of the constitution is clear – there has to be a 2/3 majority. A person elected by 50% plus one is not the President and only an impostor.
Israel
Hezbollah will never recognize Israel. Israel (Palestine?) should be a democratic nation where all religions exist together and have equal freedom. In the 1919 Paris meeting, the Zionists presented a document which coveted South Lebanon and delineated four river basins they wanted to own.
Sayyid Nawaf Al-Musawi ended his conversation with prophetic expressions.
We don’t judge you on the basis of your stand on Israel. Do not judge us on that issue. There are natural ties between Shia Lebanon and Iran. They have the same source. The fifteenth century Iranian studies came from Lebanon. The geography of Lebanon enabled the Shia to stay. It is tough to conquer Southern Lebanon because of its geography.
Leaving Beirut for the South of Lebanon is similar to leaving any metropolis – traffic jams, new expressways, and roadways that cut through residential areas. The Paris of the Middle East has lost much of its charm. It is heavy until the view of the blue-green Mediterranean waters calm the atmosphere. Banana groves, similar to those that camouflaged the Hezbollah rocket carriers during the 2006 summer war, are prominent. Also prominent are posters of Rafiq Hariri, the assassinated and previous Prime Minister. After the Sunni city of Sidon, the peaceful countryside of groves and orchards is marked with newly repaired bridges that cross ready-to-be-paved roads. The war-damaged roads lead to Tyre.
The Shiite city has freshly sanded beaches and a picturesque seaside promenade. The posters have changed – they now feature Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s political leader, Tyre is the home of Sheik Nabil Kaook, Hezbollah commander of South Lebanon, who narrowly escaped death when Israeli warplanes bombed his home in the 2006 war.
 |
In his presence, women are not greeted with handshakes, but with hands respectfully placed over the heart. The women sit veiled and separate from the men. The cleric is well-groomed and well-tailored – his white turban shows his status and his brown cloak matches the brown chair on which he sits.
Harsh and accusatory, interspersed with feelings for the dispossessed, the Hezbollah Sheik has one succinct message: “The United States took the decision to go to war and to continue the war. It treats Lebanon as just another occupation.”
Tyre is also identified with the Al-Sadr Foundation, which manages an orphanage under the control of Rabab al-Sadr, sister of disappeared Shiite cleric Sayyid Musa al-Sadr. Shi’a clerics who have the title of Sayyid claim descent from Muhammad. Sayyid Musa al-Sadr is more famous than his designation. His life, a story of dedication, success, and an eventual mystery reveal strong links between Shiites from Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon.
Born in Qom, Iran in 1928 to a Lebanese family of theologians, Musa al-Sadr studied theology in Najaf, Iraq. Being related to the father of Iraq’s Muqtada al-Sadr, Iraq was another home for him. In 1960 Musa al-Sadr moved to Tyre, his father’s birthplace. He soon became recognized as a strong advocate for the economically and politically disadvantaged Shi’ite population. His role in establishing schools and medical clinics throughout southern Lebanon led to the 1974 founding of the Movement of the Disinherited, whose armed wing became Amal, the other Shiite party in Lebanon.
While successfully improving economic and social conditions for a disenfranchised Shiite population, Sayyid Musa al-Sadr made enemies of landlords, corrupt officials, political establishment, and members of the Palestinian Liberation Organization. His eventual disassociation with, what was then, a corrupt Amal, created other groups, some of whom later coalesced into Hezbollah. On February 16, 1985, an “Open Letter to the Downtrodden in Lebanon and the World,” alerted the world to Hezbollah’s formal existence. Musa al-Sadr was not present. In 1978, when attending a conference in Libya, Musa al-Sadr mysteriously vanished. No clue to his disappearance has surfaced.
Elegant chalets grace the barren hills of southern Lebanon. Many of them are homes of expatriate Lebanese, who have always been principal contributors to Lebanon’s economy. Expatriates from Sierra Leone, the Gulf States, Dearborn, Michigan, and other U.S. cities send funds to their Lebanese relatives who purchase properties throughout Lebanon. Southern Lebanon has many retired Dearborns who have returned to their families and to a land they always cherished. But that’s not all, informed persons claim Southern Lebanon has diamond and drug smuggling that help finance Hezbollah and local communities.
The elegant chalets emphasize the destruction of villages during the 2006 summer war. Bint Jbiel, “the daughter of the mountain,” rested in the path of the invading Israeli army. Israel’s military dropped leaflets that ordered the population to leave the village. The inhabitants obeyed the order and now the old city, not the new part, is 70% destroyed; a mound of rubble that includes the 600-year-old mosque.
 |
Homes along a nearby dirt road are pocked with shell and bullet holes, evidence of tanks having discharged random fire at empty houses for no apparent reason except they were close to the path of the tank. A total of eighteen Israeli tanks broke down, crashed, or were destroyed by Hezbollah ambushes during the Israeli invasion.
From a hill close to the mined border with Israel, the deputy mayor of Marjayoun pointed to the verdant fields of Northern Israel. He claimed that in 1948 Israel seized one kilometer of Lebanese territory and that the houses in the distance are mainly empty.
Damage-weary Lebanon is not confined to the border area. Timur Goksel, former senior advisor to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), who has been in Lebanon for twenty years, noted he had never witnessed so much wanton destruction. He said that Iran funds an Iranian Hezbollah that has no connections with Lebanese Hezbollah. Five hundred million dollars of these funds are being used to repair war-damaged southern Lebanon. In contrast, the U.S. is contributing 34 million dollars to repair a large bridge.
Timor Goksel refutes the March 14 majority party charge that Hezbollah is obstructionist: “The Shiites (not all Hezbollah) are 30% of the country and cannot rule on their own. They want to have a role in the government and they want to be a mainstream party.” Principal leaders in the Lebanese government support Goksel’s evaluation. Former general Michel Aoun, Christian head of the Change and Reform parliamentary bloc, wants what Hezbollah wants; a new parliament where the new majority will be accepted. Aoun’s bloc has a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Hezbollah. He insisted the MOU is not an alliance but a strategy for integrating Hezbollah into a mutual defense of Lebanon. Former General and then Maronite President of Lebanon, Emil Lahoud, agreed with Hezbollah’s determination to follow constitutional law and only elect a president with a 2/3 quorum.
The Lebanese president describes Hezbollah as “one hundred percent Lebanese. Hezbollah takes material assistance from Iran and would take it from the devil if necessary to protect their country. They are not terrorists.” Fawsi Salloukh, Lebanon’s Minister of Foreign Affairs talked from a prepared
 |
document that severely criticized Israel and the United States. He also wants a new election and not a litigious issue. He doesn’t believe Iran wants to dominate Hezbollah and stressed its natural for Shiites in Lebanon and Iran to establish good relations.
Forgotten amidst the rhetoric, but mentioned by Michel Aoun and Emil Lahoud are simple facts: Hezbollah has had electoral alliances with Saad Hariri’s Future Movement, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, and Noah Berri’s Amal. In 1999, Hezbollah members of Lebanon’s engineering syndicate formed a coalition with the Phalange Party, a rightist Christian group, and the National Liberal Party, both allies of Israel during the civil war.
 |
The Halifee restaurant in the Dahieh neighborhood is considered a popular dining place for Hezbollah followers; only two blocks from the Haret Hreil Hussineyeh mosque, whose senior cleric is Hezbollah religious leader Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah. Israeli bombers, during the July 2006 war, leveled the cleric’s home, as well as part of the surrounding area. The restaurant crowds with people enjoying the food, enjoying the elegant surroundings, enjoying the evening. There is no indication of a particular type of person; no sign of a distinctive Hezbollah character.
La Terrase is a restaurant located on Hadi Nasrallah, a street, named after leader Hasan Nassrallah’s deceased son. Huge craters from Israeli bombing remain in the adjacent neighborhood. Enter la Terrase and first have a choice of a coffee bar. Go deeper and there is a cafeteria. Further in is a small restaurant. Climb the stairs and enter a huge restaurant surrounded by couches on which linger multitudes of young couples; drinking coffee, engaged in conversations and quiet embraces – not the ordinary media images of Hezbollah life.
Innocent Americans were killed on September 11, 2001, by Al-Qaeda terrorists who considered the World Trade Center to be imperialist land – the center of the U.S. establishment. Innocent Lebanese were killed on July 15, 2006, one day of many bombardments that contributed to the vast destruction of the Dahieh district by Israeli military who considered Dahieh to be Hezbollah land – the center of the Hezbollah establishment.
The U.S. and Hezbollah establishments still exist. Many innocents died in both places. The U.S. remembers the day 9/11 as a bitter memory. Lebanon had a mid-summer nightmare of smaller 9/11’s; angry memories the residents of Dahieh will forever retain. The Western world rightfully memorializes America’s tragedy but neglects Lebanon’s equal tragedies.
It is that neglect which created Hezbollah, sustained Hezbollah, and made Hezbollah popular throughout the Arab world. Years of punishing emergencies in Lebanon — refugees from the Syrian civil war, Hezbollah’s attachment to the Syrian strife, the 4 August 2020 explosion of ammonium nitrate stored at the Port of Beirut that caused at least 218 deaths, 7,000 injuries, $15 billion in property damage, and left an estimated 300,000 people homeless, followed by economic collapse have polarized the Lebanese and may have affected contemporary Hezbollah’s operations and its acceptance by the Lebanese population.
The post Face to Face With Hezbollah first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Narges Mohammadi, who won peace prize for her activism against oppression of women in Iran, is in prison in Tehran
The family of Narges Mohammadi has said the imprisonment of the Iranian women’s rights activist is a “constant and daily struggle” as they prepare to receive the Nobel peace prize in Oslo on her behalf.
Her husband, Taghi Rahmani, who lives in exile in Paris with their two teenage children, said the only help comes from seeing her work internationally recognised and the solidarity she receives from around the world.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
Amnesty International report details ‘harrowing’ testimonies of survivors at hands of security forces following nationwide protests
Iranian security forces used rape and sexual violence to torture, punish and inflict lasting physical and psychological damage on protesters as young as 12 during the country’s nationwide protests last year, a report says.
The report by Amnesty International is based on the testimonies of 12 women, 26 men, one girl and six boys who survived rape or other forms of sexual violence. Six survivors of rape were subjected to gang rapes by up to 10 male state agents, according to Amnesty.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
For those interested, here is a previous article on a significant past event that gives a background to contemporary events. George W. Bush organized the Annapolis peace conference; predictions had it going nowhere and the last ”peace conference” went nowhere. While U.S. administrations warned Israel not to expand settlements, claimed they favored a two-state solution, and acted as the principal mediator in the crisis, Israel continued to expand settlements, made certain the Palestinians could never have a viable state, and eschewed all mediations. The day that the Annapolis conference failed is the day the Western world failed the Palestinians and the moment that inexorably led to the present destruction of the Palestinian people.
Discussing the 2008 Annapolis Conference, in face-to-face talks with the prime ministers, foreign ministers, and non-government officials (NGOs) of Israel, Palestinian Authority, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, revealed how far we are from achieving peace in the Middle East, and how far Annapolis is from the Earth that others walk upon. As part of a delegation of six intrepid fact finders, supported by the Council for the National Interest (CNI), a Washington-based NGO that labors intensively to determine paths towards Middle East peace, I found a hopeful wind that moved Israelis and Palestinians to portray optimism. This hopeful wind slowly reduced in force in Jordan, quickly diminished when meeting Syrian vice-presidents, and turned to an ill wind in meetings with the then Lebanese president, prime minister, and foreign minister.
The search for Middle East peace started on a discordant note at a meeting with Gush Shalom (peace bloc) spokesperson Uri Avnery, the most notable advocate for a just peace with the Palestinians. Uri used the words “unsure” and “window dressing” to describe the conference. He didn’t sense that Hamas, with whom he has close contacts, would agree to a piece of paper and voiced the opinion that Hamas would “only make a truce and not a peace pact.”
Kadima’s Knesset member Amira Dotan spoke of “Annapolis as a symbol,” with its “success defined as starting a process.” Deputy Speaker Dr. Ahmed Tibi said: “The U.S. should create the conditions for making it a success. Its failure will strengthen Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian/Syrian axis.” Other official sources were more open; expressing views that Israel is an army that has a state and Defense Minister Barak is the major culprit in preventing any peace initiative.
The Ramallah landscape of enormous white brick housing developments against the brown dirt background disguises the actual despondency and poverty of the Palestinian people. Palestinian Authority (PA) officials, especially Foreign Minister Riad al-Maliki, tried to be optimistic about the Annapolis conference. Prime Minister Salam Fayed’s words were more cautious. “We want a complete agenda with final talks, but have become more motivated by fear of failure than promises of success, and are being forced into unwanted compromises just to justify a meeting.” President Abbas’ Chief of Staff Rafiq Husseini insisted that Israel must move the separation wall to the Green Line. Interior Minister Abdel Razzah al-Yahya reiterated that “there will be no two-state solution if Israel does not withdraw to the 1967 boundaries and does not give the Palestinians oxygen to breathe.”
The lack of oxygen stifles the Palestinians, who are already torn by internecine warfare between Fatah and Hamas and by conflict with organizations in Nablus that are a combination of criminals, protesters against social and economic negligence, and militants against Israel’s occupation. The Palestinian Authority is powerless and it is not obvious how it can negotiate anything and receive approval from a majority of Palestinians, especially when they continue to experience Israel’s brutal occupation of the West Bank.
Illegal settlements have destroyed Palestinian life in central Hebron. When the Israeli military attempted to evict the settlers, the settlers broke windows and ruined the Palestinian shops. For an incomprehensible reason, the settlers have returned to their illegal positions and Palestinian shops and houses are now empty. To enforce the settler presence, Israeli security checkpoints have been installed at all former entrances to the market.
These settlers claim properties “taken” from Jews during riots against Hebron Jews back in 1929,” with a sign over emptied Palestinian shops, but do not display any rights of inheritance or deeds to any of the properties. Can this claim of a ‘collective right’ have a legal basis? Contrast the Hebron settlers’ illegal positions and false claims with Palestinians, who have legal deeds to properties in Israel, and are prevented from recovering their properties.
A separation wall winds through West Bank territory and completely encircles West Bank cities, such as Qualqilya and Abu Dis. Residents are hindered from leaving these cities, going to schools, and cultivating lands. The wall has also caused accumulations of water and created puddles in Palestinian neighborhoods. The obstructive wall includes 580 fortified checkpoints, one occurring, on average, every five miles. There are also flying checkpoints, settler bypass roads, a planned super highway for Israelis only, blocked Palestinian village roads, and travel restrictions to Jerusalem. These restrictive conditions have separated Palestinian communities and families, choked the Palestinian economy, and obstructed daily exchanges between peoples. Highways slice through Palestinian lands and completely separate farm homes from agriculture. The inhumanity of all these installations and regulations is beyond belief. Chief of Staff, Rafiq Husseini, summed the PA attitude with a sigh and said, “Don’t worry, this is the land of miracles. What we need is a prayer meeting.”
Jordan is also a land of miracles, its capital city Amman spanning hills with an advanced network of bridges, tunnels, and super highways. Traffic is horrific and only moves because there are few traffic lights in the entire city. Jordan’s increasing prosperity and touchy stability depends upon Western investment, special export privileges, and friendly relations with neighbors, especially Israel.
Dependence upon foreign investment, coping with the 500,000 – 700,000 Iraq displaced persons, still contending with the integration of the massive Palestinian population within, and maintaining friendly relations with Israel guide Jordan’s foreign policies. Foreign Minister Abdelelah al-Khatib, similar in outlook to most Middle East leaders, considered the Israel/Palestinian conflict as the core issue to be resolved before peace and stability can arrive in the Middle East. He volunteered that Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s’ Russian immigrant hardliner, has become most influential in the “peace process.” A highly important Jordanian official was blunt. He was not positive on Annapolis, believes Israel does not want peace, does not have the political will to seek peace, and wants to shift the burden of more displaced Palestinians to Jordan. Minister of Planning Suhair al-Ali, as gracious as a woman can be, noted that deceased “King Hussein was into politics,” but the new King Abdullah “is more into development.” She had one plea: “No matter the results of Annapolis, don’t demonize Islam.”
Damascus is a surprise. Expect a faded gray and ancient city, still struggling with the 20th century, and find a lively, advanced city with some sparkling new neighborhoods, highways that don’t interfere with the city’s appearance, and a population that is amicable and sympathetic; never a harsh look, never a bitter word, although Syria remains a totalitarian government that does not allow much free expression. To its credit, Syria has succored Palestinians forced from Israel, who have established their own neighborhoods, but still remain committed to return to their homeland. Added to its credit is the recent sacrifice in allowing an estimated 1.2 million Iraqi displaced persons (similar to Jordan, Syria refuses to call them refugees) to move among its population and secure housing, free education, and entry to the health system. Syria deserves commendation for acting as a safety valve to the calamities resulting from displaced Palestinians and Iraqis, innocent casualties from several wars.
Not surprisingly, Syrian vice-president of Foreign Relations, Farouk Sharaa, didn’t have much expectation for the Annapolis conference, believes all Israel’s political parties fear peace, and senses that U.S. policies encouraged Israel to attack Lebanon and continue the conflict. “Israel is on a suicide path, and, if Israel is a decision-maker in the U.S. then the U.S. loses.” The vice president contradicted an accepted belief that Syria will not accept direct assistance for the Iraqi displaced persons. NGOs and the U.S. government are welcome to contribute their assistance. CNI made news by revealing to the U.S. Press a Syrian commitment to screen Iraqi displaced persons for entry into the U.S.
The Vice president of Cultural Affairs, Najah al-Attar, exhibited welcoming smiles, and sensitivity and empathy for oppressed peoples. She spoke of “there not being peace without justice,” made references to the destruction of the Palestinians, and noted that Jews lived in peace in Syria, where they were prosperous and accepted members of the parliament. A small Jewish community survives in Northern Syria, and a Rabbi is flown in each week from Turkey to perform the rabbinical rites and assure the food is kosher.
Not kosher was a clandestine trip to meet a “minor” Hamas official, who turned out to be Khalid Meshal, an official leader of Hamas, exiled in Damascus. The world became more aware of Meshal when Israel’s Mossad tried to assassinate him in Amman. Jordan’s King Abdullah forced Israel to immediately supply an antidote to the poison given to Meshal by threatening to publicly hang the Mossad agents who tried to kill the Hamas leader. Meshal does not fill the Western media description of a wild-eyed fanatic. On the contrary, he is a friendly, deliberate, and well-spoken person who makes sense to those who subscribe to similar positions.
He said that Israel does not want peace and both negotiating parties aren’t strong enough to market their results to their people. Meshal doesn’t delineate Hamas’ position, but defers to a Palestinian position that accepts 1967 borders and an Arab position that has accepted the two-state solution. Since 2002, Bush has repeatedly spoken of support for a two-state solution, but where is it? The Hamas leader expects the region to be more explosive. Nevertheless, if the PA feels the Palestinian rights have been fulfilled, Hamas will welcome that. He has proposed a Hudna (truce), and if Israel responds positively, Hamas will not be an obstacle to peace. If the Right of Return is the only remaining problem, Hamas will compromise, and accept the will of the people. He claims Hamas does not encourage militancy, does not desire a theocratic state, is a national liberation movement, and will let the Palestinian people decide their own government.
Lebanon greets the visitor with an ominous view of the famous Mdairej Bridge, the highest bridge in the Middle East, and the pride of Lebanon. The mid-section of its elegant span remains gone, destroyed by Israeli jets on the first day of the war.
Beirut and Southern Lebanon still show scars of the war; destroyed bridges, damaged roads, and huge holes in Beirut sections. The old section of Bent Jabal (daughter of the mountain), which was invaded by Israeli troop, is completely damaged. It is now a rubble of ancient rocks.
Lebanon was again in one of its perpetual crises; an inability to reach a parliamentary consensus and elect a new president. Although some are quick to blame Syria and Hezbollah for creating a climate of fear and for the lack of consensus, major Lebanese officials don’t agree that Hezbollah is the culprit for the impasse, just the opposite, the majority holds power by an archaic law and fears becoming a minority
The majority is most represented by billionaire Member of Parliament (MP), Saad Hariri, son of assassinated former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri. Saad Hariri senses a significant negative shift in Israel’s attitude towards wanting peace after Rabin’s assassination. Nevertheless, he feels Abu Mazen wants peace and Annapolis, even if delayed, must still happen. “The two sides can reach an agreement.” He is less optimistic concerning his nation: “Money and arms are pouring into the arms of the allies of Syria.” Hariri had not moved about Beirut for 2 ½ years and had received death threats. Fifty of his fellow MPs were barricaded in the Phoenician hotel, fearful of their lives. Except for Prime Minister Siniora, who accuses Syria and Hezbollah of creating this fear, of being uncooperative and wanting to keep situations unresolved so that Hezbollah can maintain its arms, the other principal government officials support Hezbollah’s position.
Former General and MP, Michael Aoun, described the year 2000 law that gerrymandered the nation so that the March 14 Party and its allies acquired a majority of 72 parliament seats, although receiving only 1/3 of the vote. This makes the 2007 government illegitimate and favors Hezbollah’s proposition that the only fair solution to the impasse is a new election law, followed by a new election that will award seats in proportion to yhe popular vote. President Emil Lahoud claims the present parliament majority has the backing of the major Western powers and is working against the constitution. For this reason, the opposition, meaning Hezbollah, has the right to avoid reaching consensus. Foreign Minister Fawzi Sallougkh read carefully from a prepared document. He doesn’t believe Iran wants to dominate Lebanon and believes the U.S. should establish good relations with Iran.
Lebanese leaders were particularly angered with Israel’s aggressive attitude towards the Arab world and what they perceived as U.S. support for this attitude. They are most concerned with the negotiations that will decide the fate of the Palestinian refugees, the reason being that the refugees cannot receive citizenship in Lebanon and have created social and economic havoc for decades. Prime Minister Fouad Siniora was more sanguine and more universal in his characterization of what he termed to be an Arab/Israeli conflict. He considered Israel to be guilty of the situation and leading the world into a catastrophe that will affect all peoples. He allowed permission to quote him, and my notes show these remarks:
“The Arab/Israel conflict is the maker of most problems and control of Jerusalem is a paramount issue. The conflict consumes most efforts in the region, is not restricted to the Middle East, and diverts attention from other meaningful issues in all regions. The conflict started from the Balfour Declaration, arose from the extent of injustice inflicted upon the Palestinian people, is leading to further frustration in the Arab world, and is generating extremism. The Israeli 1980 invasion created Hezbollah and a new set of problems. Now, Syria, and other parties (meaning Hezbollah), are not showing cooperation and want to keep issues unresolved. Nevertheless, President Bush has been unfair to Lebanon, Arab nations, and also to his own United States. The U.S. keeps preaching democracy but defends dictatorships.”
Hezbollah, the Party of God, remains the contentious focus of Lebanon politics. Nevertheless, the Lebanese government has denominated Hezbollah as a resistance movement rather than a militia so that they can keep their arms, despite the truce agreement that banned militias. Hezbollah leaders are firm that they will never recognize Israel. Surprisingly, they favor a single democratic state where all peoples are equal and all religions can be practiced without interference. They claim to be politically secular and their government operations don’t contradict that thesis.
Annapolis is 50 miles from the nation’s capital, but it is light years away from the hearts and minds of Arab peoples who want assurance of peace and stability in the Middle East. That is one observer’s conclusion from travels through the Middle East capitals.
The post Turbulent Winds of the Last Peace Conference: Annapolis first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Protesters wave Palestinian, Lebanese, and Hezbollah flags and hold a picture of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah during a Palestine solidarity rally in Lebanon. (Credit: GETTY IMAGES)
While Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has been frantically shuttling around the Middle East trying to stop the Israeli conflict in Gaza from exploding into a regional war, the United States has also sent two aircraft carrier strike groups, a Marine Expeditionary Unit and 1,200 extra troops to the Middle East as a “deterrent.” In plain language, the United States is threatening to attack any forces that come to the defense of the Palestinians from other countries in the region, reassuring Israel that it can keep killing with impunity in Gaza.
But if Israel persists in this genocidal war, U.S. threats may be impotent to prevent others from intervening. From Lebanon to Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Iran, the possibilities of the conflict spreading are enormous. Even Algeria says it is ready to fight for a free Palestine, based on a unanimous vote in its parliament on November 1st.
Middle Eastern governments and their people already see the United States as a party to Israel’s massacre in Gaza. So any direct U.S. military action will be seen as an escalation on the side of Israel and is more likely to provoke further escalation than to deter it.
The United States already faces this predicament in Iraq. Despite years of Iraqi demands for the removal of U.S. forces, at least 2,500 U.S. troops remain at Al-Asad Airbase in western Anbar province, Al-Harir Airbase, north of Erbil in Iraqi Kurdistan, and another small base at the airport in Erbil. There are also “several hundred” NATO troops, including Americans, advising Iraqi forces in NATO Mission Iraq (NMI), based near Baghdad.
For many years, U.S. forces in Iraq have been mired in a low-grade war against the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) that Iraq formed to fight ISIS, mainly from Shia militias. Despite their links to Iran, the armed groups Kata’ib Hezbollah, Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq and other PMFs have often ignored Iranian calls to de-escalate attacks on U.S. forces. These Iraqi groups do not respect Iran Quds Force leader General Esmail Qaani as highly as they did General Soleimani, so Soleimani’s assassination by the United States in 2020 has further reduced Iran’s ability to restrain the militias in Iraq.
After a year-long truce between U.S. and Iraqi forces, the Israeli war on Gaza has triggered a new escalation of this conflict in both Iraq and Syria. Some militias rebranded themselves as the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, and began attacking U.S. bases on October 17. After 32 attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq, 34 more in Syria and 3 U.S. airstrikes in Syria, U.S. forces conducted airstrikes against two Kata’ib Hezbollah bases in Iraq, one in Anbar province and one in Jurf Al-Nasr, south of Baghdad, on November 21, killing at least nine militiamen.
The U.S. airstrikes prompted a furious response from the Iraqi government spokesman Bassam al-Awadi. “We vehemently condemn the attack on Jurf Al-Nasr, executed without the knowledge of government agencies,” al-Awadi said. “This action is a blatant violation of sovereignty and an attempt to destabilize the security situation… The recent incident represents a clear violation of the coalition’s mission to combat Daesh (ISIS) on Iraqi soil. We call on all parties to avoid unilateral actions and to respect Iraq’s sovereignty…”
As the Iraqi government feared, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq responded to the U.S. airstrikes with two attacks on Al-Harir airbase on November 22 and several more on November 23rd. They attacked Al-Asad airbase with several drones, launched another drone attack on the U.S. base at Erbil airport, and their allies in Syria attacked two U.S. bases across the border in northeastern Syria.
Short of a ceasefire in Gaza or a full U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Syria, there is no decisive action the U.S. can take that would put a stop to these attacks. So the level of violence in Iraq and Syria is likely to keep rising as long as the war on Gaza continues.
Another formidable and experienced military force opposing Israel and the United States is the Houthi army in Yemen. On November 14, Abdul-Malek al-Houthi, the leader of the Houthi government in Yemen, asked neighboring countries to open a corridor through their territory for his army to go and fight Israel in Gaza.
The Houthi Deputy Information Secretary Nasreddin Amer told Newsweek that if they had a way to enter Palestine, they would not hesitate to join the fight against Israel, ”We have fighters numbering hundreds of thousands who are brave, tough, trained and experienced in fighting,” Amer said. “They have a very strong belief, and their dream in life is to fight the Zionists and the Americans.”
Transporting hundreds of thousands of Yemeni soldiers to fight in Gaza would be nearly impossible unless Saudi Arabia opened the way. That seems highly unlikely, but Iran or another ally could help to transport a smaller number by air or sea to join the fight.
The Houthis have been waging an asymmetric war against Saudi-led invaders for many years, and they have developed weapons and tactics that they could bring to bear against Israel. Soon after al-Houthi’s statement, Yemeni forces in the Red Sea boarded a ship owned, via shell companies, by Israeli billionaire Abraham Ungar. The ship, which was on its way from Istanbul to India, was detained in a Yemeni port.
The Houthis have also launched a series of drones and missiles towards Israel. While many members of Congress try to portray the Houthis as simply puppets of Iran, the Houthis are actually an independent, unpredictable force that other actors in the region cannot control.
Even NATO ally Türkiye is finding it difficult to remain a bystander, given the widespread public support for Palestine. President Erdogan of Türkiye was among the first international leaders to speak out strongly against the Israeli war on Gaza, explicitly calling it a massacre and saying that it amounted to genocide.
Turkish civil society groups are spearheading a campaign to send humanitarian aid to Gaza on cargo ships, braving a possible confrontation like the one that occurred in 2010 when the Israelis attacked the Freedom Flotilla, killing 10 people aboard the Mavi Marmara.
On the Lebanese border, Israel and Hezbollah have conducted daily exchanges of fire since October 7, killing 97 combatants and 15 civilians in Lebanon and 9 soldiers and 3 civilians in Israel. Some 46,000 Lebanese civilians and 65,000 Israelis have been displaced from the border area. Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant warned on November 11, “What we’re doing in Gaza, we can also do in Beirut.”
How will Hezbollah react if Israel resumes its brutal massacre in Gaza after the brief pause is over or if Israel expands the massacre to the West Bank, where it has already killed at least 237 more Palestinians since October 7?
In a speech on November 3, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah held back from declaring a new war on Israel, but warned that “all options are on the table” if Israel does not end its war on Gaza.
As Israel prepared to pause its bombing on November 23, Iranian foreign minister Hossein Amirabdollahian held meetings in Qatar, first with Nasrallah and Lebanese officials, and then with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
In a public statement, Amirabdollahian said, “the continuation of the ceasefire can prevent further expansion of the scope of the war. In the meeting with the leaders of the resistance, I found out that if Israel’s war crimes and genocide continue, a tougher and more complicated scenario of the resistance will be implemented.”
Amirabdollahian already warned on October 16 that, “The leaders of the resistance will not allow the Zionist regime to do whatever it wants in Gaza and then go to other fronts of the resistance.”
In other words, if Iran and its allies believe that Israel really intends to continue its war on Gaza until it has removed Hamas from power, and then to turn its war machine loose on Lebanon or its other neighbors, they would prefer to fight a wider war now, forcing Israel to fight the Palestinians, Hezbollah and their allies at the same time, rather than waiting for Israel to attack them one by one.
Tragically, the White House is not listening. The next day, President Biden continued to back Israel’s vow to resume the destruction of Gaza after its “humanitarian pause,” saying that attempting to eliminate Hamas is “a legitimate objective.”
America’s unconditional support for Israel and endless supply of weapons have succeeded only in turning Israel into an out-of-control, genocidal, destabilizing force at the heart of a fragile region already shattered and traumatized by decades of U.S. war-making. The result is a country that refuses to recognize its own borders or those of its neighbors, and rejects any and all limits on its territorial ambitions and war crimes.
If Israel’s actions lead to a wider war, the U.S. will find itself with few allies ready to jump into the fray. Even if a regional conflict is avoided, the U.S. support for Israel has already created tremendous damage to the U.S. reputation in the region and beyond, and direct U.S. involvement in the war would leave it more isolated and impotent than its previous misadventures in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.
The United States can still avoid this fate by insisting on an immediate and permanent ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. If Israel will not agree to that, the U.S. must back up this position with an immediate suspension of arms deliveries, military aid, Israeli access to U.S. weapons stockpiles in Israel and diplomatic support for Israel’s war on Palestine.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
ISLAMABAD: The Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) has announced the ECO Youth Award in the fields of research projects including arts – preferably regional – culture and sports fields for the member states.
The youths from the 10 member states will be eligible for the award including Iran, Pakistan, Turkiye, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, according to a message received from Pakistan Embassy in Tehran, where the ECO headquarters is also located, APP reported.
A total ten awards, one from each member state will be announced every year with a cash award of USD1,000 amongst the youth of 18-30 years of age, selected from the nominations made by each member state.
The need for the expansion of relations among the peoples in the ECO region, along with the significant role of youth as a major driving force for the ECO countries development, has increased the importance of planning to maximize their optimal participation in the activities implemented by the ECO Cultural Institute (ECOCI).
The Youth Award initiative has been proposed with the aim to discover young talent and to pave the way to further popularize ECO Cultural Institute.
As there will be one winner from each member country, there will be no competition between countries.
The award is presented annually to the winners selected from the nominations made by the ECO member countries on occasions such as the ECO Day.
In order to identify the ECO top youth, call for nominations will be published on ECOCI website and the Ministry of Culture of each ECO member state will nominate up to a maximum of three persons.
The Award Committee, comprising the Cultural Attachés of ECO member states in Tehran will judge and select one winner from each country.
The ECO Award will be presented during a ceremony on the occasion of ECOCI Day/ECO Day.
The post ECO announces Youth Award in art, culture, sports fields for member countries first appeared on VOSA.
This post was originally published on VOSA.
14 NGOs that closely follow and engage with the General Assembly Third Committee have published a joint statement on outcomes of this 78th sessionp
The undersigned civil society organisations mark the conclusion of the UN General Assembly’s (GA) 78th Third Committee session with the following observations on both thematic and country-specific outcomes. We urge all States to implement the commitments they have made during this session to their full extent.
We welcome the joint statement on reprisals, led by Ireland and Uruguay and joined by a cross-regional group of countries. The statement called on all States and the UN to prevent, respond to, and ensure accountability for cases of intimidation and reprisals against those who engage or seek to engage with the UN. Once again, 80 States signed on to the statement, and affirmed their commitment to freedom of expression and association; solidarity with defenders, civil society and victims of violations; and contributed to ensuring that UN bodies and processes are informed by, and respond effectively to, the needs of communities on the ground. We urge more States to sign on to future such statements.
We welcome the adoption of the biennial resolution on human rights defenders focusing on the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. The resolution included strengthened language on women human rights defenders, defenders in conflict and post conflict situations and children defending human rights; as well as multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and defenders’ work to develop new human rights ideas. We welcome calls on States to refrain from internet shutdowns and restrictions including digital technologies, as well as on OHCHR to collect information on threats, attacks and cases of arbitrary detention. We now look to all States to implement these commitments and meaningfully progress the protection of human rights defenders.
We welcome the adoption of a strong resolution on the safety of journalists. This resolution adds new commitments for States on a wide range of issues, including on strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), journalists covering protests, and gender-based harassment and abuse. The resolution also recognised the growing threat of generative artificial intelligence to the safety of journalists. We urge all States to translate these renewed international commitments into allocation of resources and political will at the national level to prevent, protect and remedy all human rights violations against journalists.
A new resolution on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of digital technologies was adopted, advancing discussion on artificial intelligence at a critical time as the Global Digital Compact attempts a similarly comprehensive exercise. The text brings the omnibus coverage of the various Human Rights Council resolutions to the Third Committee, highlighting intersections of digital technologies, human rights, security and sustainable development, and crucially recognising that certain applications of digital technologies are incompatible with international human rights law. The text included language on racial and gender-based discrimination, business and human rights, privacy, targeted surveillance, data protection, freedom of expression, censorship and internet shutdowns. We hope to build on this broad foundation and strengthen elements on targeted surveillance, commercial spyware, biometric data in digital public infrastructure, and applications of artificial intelligence in future resolutions.
The resolution on terrorism and human rights adopted by consensus underscores the importance of the promotion of human rights and meaningful participation of all of society in counter-terrorism efforts nationally and globally. This resolution offered an opportunity to reflect on changes in State violations in the name of counter-terrorism or national security, and to build on language on gender inclusivity, civil society engagement and the importance of international humanitarian law and humanitarian access included in the recent UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and report by the Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter terrorism. However, as the resolution was a technical rollover from GA76, we regret that this opportunity was not seized this session and hope that future resolutions will build upon these advancements.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on strengthening the role of the UN in the promotion of democratization and enhancing periodic and genuine elections, focusing on media freedom and freedom of expression, presented by the US. The role of human rights defenders, as well as States’ obligation to ensure the right of all to participate in elections and to take steps to eliminate policies and practices discriminating on various grounds was maintained in the text. Critically, for the second time, the text recognised women and girls in all their diversity, and listed sexual orientation and gender identity as prohibited grounds of discrimination; despite votes being called to amend those references. Consensus was broken on the resolution for the first time, but was ultimately adopted by an overwhelming majority.
We welcome the adoption by consensus of the resolution on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. We specifically welcome calls on States to ensure the protection and safety of indigenous human rights defenders, and to prevent and investigate human rights violations, killings, reprisals and abuses against them.
The rights of the Child resolution, focusing on the digital environment, was adopted by consensus. Despite the timeline precluding a full consideration of the lengthy text and risking an imbalanced update, we welcome the co-facilitators’ decision to open the full text for negotiation, to include updates related to the theme and references to General Comments 25 and 26 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. We welcome retention of agreed language, and updates, including: bridging digital divides; protection from violence, harassment and abuse in the digital environment; access to information and impacts of digital acceleration on education access; sexual and reproductive health; multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination; and private sector responsibilities. We are disappointed however by decisions to delete agreed language on the full, equal and meaningful participation of girls, delete paragraphs on COVID-19 that resulted in lost language on children’s rights, to remove language on specific challenges facing girls, and to include new non-agreed language on the common responsibilities of parents.
Gender related resolutions
The resolution on policies and Programmes Involving Youth presented by Cabo Verde, Kazakhstan and Portugal, was adopted by consensus. The zero-draft was slimmed down in a streamlining exercise, leading to the exclusion of human rights frameworks and a focus on reinserting previously agreed language. We are pleased that references to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, sexual and gender based violence, sexual and reproductive health services, menstrual health, comprehensive education and human rights frameworks were retained. However we regret that despite significant support from Member States, agreed language from the previous resolution on sexual and reproductive health and rights, menstrual hygiene management, marginalised persons and situations, comprehensive sexuality education, as well as references to adolescents were not included in the final text.
We welcome the adoption by consensus of the resolution on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation (WASH), presented by Germany and Spain, that included new references to menstrual health and hygiene management, sexual and reproductive health-care services, and sexual and gender-based violence. Language was maintained on the stigmatising effect of lack of menstrual health and hygiene management on young women and girls; as well as inequalities caused by COVID-19 in accessing adequate WASH services especially for women, girls and persons in vulnerable situations, adversely impacting gender equality and women’s empowerment. We regret that, despite significant support, references to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and sexual and gender-based violence were either omitted or diluted in the final text, neglecting the need to comprehensively address various forms of violence and discrimination women and girls face when accessing water and sanitation.
We welcome the adoption by consensus of the violence against women migrant workers resolution presented by Indonesia and the Philippines. The resolution includes new references to gender-based violence through digital technologies, particularly impacting women migrant workers in transit and in destination countries; as well as root causes of migration, including climate change, the availability of equitable work and inequitable ownership of local resources, which undermine women’s empowerment. Strengthened recognition of domestic and care migrant workers as a particularly vulnerable group who can face exploitation, violence, and abuse due to the informal nature of their employment was included. We regret that despite significant support, additional references to sexual and reproductive health, intimate partner violence, and multiple and intersection forms of discrimination were omitted in the final text. We echo the resolution’s call to all Member States to protect all migrant women from harassment and violence, regardless of migration status.
The resolution on the Girl Child, presented by the Southern African Development Community (SADC), was adopted by consensus. We welcome the retention of agreed language, as well as the theme proposed for the Secretary General’s Report to the eightieth GA session on the impact of digital technologies on girls, and related language updates. However, we deeply regret that the circulation of the text did not allow sufficient time for a comprehensive and substantive update. We are disappointed that the only other update to the text was the unprecedented inclusion of language on family-oriented and family-policies. In the absence of references to other policies that aim to realise the rights of girls in all their diversity, this new inclusion results in an imbalanced text that fails to fully recognize and address the challenges they face. Given the rapidly changing global landscape for girls and that last substantive revision of this text was in 2017, a comprehensive update to this resolution remains crucial.
The resolution on rural women was adopted by consensus and co-sponsored by more than 60 Member States. We welcome the retention of agreed language that recognizes the impact of historical and structural power relations, gender stereotypes and negative social norms on the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, particularly those living in rural areas. We also welcome that the resolution urges Member States to implement policies and programs that promote and protect the human rights of women and girls, address sexual and gender-based violence and multiple intersecting forms of discrimination, and strengthen measures to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. We, however, deeply regret that several proposals to further strengthen the resolution that were supported by many Member States were not retained in the final draft including on the particular challenges women and girls living in rural areas face in accessing sexual and reproductive health services, and references to women and girls in all their diversity.
The resolution on follow up to the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action presented by Bangladesh was adopted by consensus. We welcome the text, which includes new references to the high-level meeting on universal health coverage, the universality of the 2030 agenda and their role in achieving gender equality, and to the UN system-wide Knowledge Hub on addressing sexual harassment. It also calls for a high-level meeting at the 80th General Assembly to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Fourth World Conference on Women, and to accelerate the realisation of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. We regret that proposed text on multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and on the importance of the realisation of sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights was not included in the final document.
COUNTRY SITUATIONS
The joint statement on the human rights situation in Xinjiang, China delivered by the UK on behalf of a cross-regional group of 51 countries is a strong message to Chinese authorities regarding growing concerns about abuses against Turkic Muslim communities. This year, there are new signatories from several regional groups. The statement emphasises the serious human rights violations Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim communities continue to suffer in Xinjiang, and echoes the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ August 2022 report, which concluded that the abuses ‘may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.’ The statement notes that a year has passed since the release of the OHCHR report, and China has yet to engage constructively with its findings. It urges China to end its human rights violations, engage constructively with the OHCHR, and fully implement the reports’ recommendations. With only one more State signature than the 2022 joint statement, work remains to be done to ensure broader support from Member States to hold China accountable for its human rights violations including from Muslim-majority countries.
Resolutions
While we support the below resolutions that highlight violations of human rights in specific countries, we acknowledge the existence of human rights violations in many other countries that also merit the attention of the UN General Assembly and look forward to a time when they are also considered in the Third Committee.
The resolution on the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran was adopted following a vote (80 in favour; 65 against; 29 abstentions). Initiated by Canada and a core group and cosponsored by 50 countries, this comprehensive resolution calls on Iran to uphold the rights of all citizens. It specifically calls on Iran to prohibit child, early and forced marriage, female genital mutilation, children being subject to the death penalty, torture and other inhuman treatment. It condemns fundamental rights violations, the frequent imposition of the death penalty, intensified and targeted repression of women and girls, the use of surveillance and force against non violent protesters, and poor prison conditions. It also calls for an end to all discrimination and violations against ethnic, linguistic and other minorities as well as recognized and unrecognised religious minorities, including Baha’is who continue to suffer various violations including persecution, mass arrests, lengthy prison sentences.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic. We particularly welcome new references to the victim- and survivor-centric Independent Institution on Missing Persons, a mechanism established by the UN General Assembly this June, to help clarify the fate and whereabouts of all missing persons in Syria. However, we are disappointed that the resolutions’ co-sponsors orally amended the text to remove a critical paragraph that would have mandated a regular report on humanitarian access in the country. Not only would this report have specifically highlighted instances where humanitarian access was not full, timely, unrestricted or sustained; it would have filled a gap left by the failure to renew the Security Council-mandated cross-border humanitarian mechanism earlier this year.
The consensus adoption of the resolution on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) demonstrates that Member States remain deeply concerned about the appalling abuses committed by the DPRK authorities. We welcome in particular the inclusion of language on accountability. We also welcome language stressing the linkages between the human rights situation in the country, including with respect to the rights of women and girls, and the continuing diversion of DPRK’s resources to pursuing nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes over the welfare of its people.
The resolution on the situation of human rights of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar, which was adopted by consensus, once again does not reiterate key elements of the 2021 UNGA resolution which followed the military coup in February 2021. The resolution fails to comprehensively address ongoing and escalating human rights violations by the military, despite the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar’s warning that a ‘raging fire of brutality’ is engulfing the country. The resolution however recognizes the impacts of militarization aggravated by the continued access to arms from abroad, reiterates protection needs of the Rohingya and calls for all necessary measures to be taken to provide justice to victims and ensure accountability.
The resolution on the situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol was adopted by vote. The resolution strongly condemns intensifying crackdowns against journalists and other media workers, human rights defenders and civil rights activists, as well as forcible transfers of Ukrainian children and other civilians to the temporarily controlled or occupied territories of Ukraine and their deportation to the Russian Federation. The resolution further calls on Russia to cease all violations and abuses, including discriminatory measures and practices, arbitrary detentions and arrests within the framework of the so-called filtration procedures, enforced disappearances, torture, sexual and gender-based violence, including compeling apprehended persons to self-incriminate or ‘cooperate” with law enforcement, ensure fair trial, and revoke all discriminatory legislation.
CIVIL SOCIETY ACCESS While we welcome the action by some States to invite civil society organisations to join informals as observers this session, it was disappointing that only a few States extended this invitation. This year, once again, civil society encountered challenges in staying informed about informal negotiations. The schedule of these informal sessions, previously available in the UN journal until 2019, was once again absent from the said journal. Instead, it was exclusively published on the e-deleGATE platform, to which civil society does not have access.These critical barriers to civil society access to Third Committee negotiations deprive the Committee of civil society’s technical expertise and mean that its outcomes fail to leverage the contributions of a crucial stakeholder in promoting the implementation of human rights.
SIGNATORIES
Access Now
Amnesty International
ARTICLE 19
Association for Progressive Communications – APC
Center for Reproductive Rights
CIVICUS
Fòs Feminista
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Human Rights in China
Human Rights Watch
International Center for Not-for-Profit Law
International Service for Human Rights
Outright International
Women Deliver
This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.
Nasrin Sotoudeh arrested at funeral of Armita Garawand, who died after alleged encounter with morality police
Iranian authorities have arrested a prominent lawyer and human rights defender as she attended the funeral of a teenage girl who died after a disputed metro incident, her husband has said.
Nasrin Sotoudeh was arrested on Sunday in Tehran during the funeral of 16-year-old Armita Garawand, who died a day earlier after nearly a month in intensive care.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
Armita Geravand had been in a coma after alleged incident with Iran’s ‘morality police’ on Tehran metro
The United States has spoken of its deep sadness over the death of a young Iranian girl, Armita Garawand, who had been in a coma after a controversial incident in Tehran’s metro.
“I am deeply saddened to learn that Amita Geravand has died after being beaten by Iran’s morality police for not wearing a hijab in public,” US National Security advisor Jake Sullivan said on X. “Iran’s state sponsored violence against its own people is appalling and underscores the fragility of the regime.”
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
Armita Geravand, 16, fell into coma on 1 October and was pronounced brain dead last week
A 16-year-old Iranian girl has died after an alleged encounter with officers over violating the country’s hijab law, state media and activists have said.
Iran has denied that Armita Geravand was hurt after a confrontation on 1 October with officers enforcing the mandatory Islamic dress code in the Tehran metro. She had been pronounced brain dead last week after falling into a coma on 1 October.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
The U.S. military early Friday carried out airstrikes on two sites in eastern Syria that the Pentagon claims are used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and allied groups, a move that came amid mounting fears that Israel’s ongoing, U.S.-backed assault on Gaza could spark a broader regional war in the Middle East. The strikes were carried out at the direction of U.S.
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Hamas has used weapons sourced from North Korea and Iran to target Israel, the Israeli military said, supporting Radio Free Asia’s earlier report on the alleged arms connection between the North and Hamas.
Hamas used Iranian-made mortar rounds and North Korean rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) in its attack against Israel on Oct. 7, the Israeli military stated during an official media tour Thursday, as reported by AFP.
“I think about five to 10 percent of the weapons here [were] made in Iran,” an Israeli military official, who asked for the condition of anonymity, was cited as saying. “And 10% [are] North Korean. The rest of it was made inside the Gaza Strip.”
“I think the most surprising thing was the amount of weapons that they brought inside Israel,” the official added.
Earlier this month, RFA reported on the potential use of North Korean weapons by Hamas militants. RFA’s thorough analysis was based on a video that displayed a man holding what seemed to be North Korean-made rocket launchers.
Following the report, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff confirmed the findings, with its intelligence indicating a military connection between North Korea and Hamas.
The latest confirmation from Israel followed as Pyongyang has been issuing statements, blaming the United States in the Middle East conflict. The conflict was a “tragedy created entirely by the United States,” North Korea’s official Korea Central News Agency said on Monday, claiming that Washington “has turned a blind eye to Israel, its illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, continuous armed assaults, civilian casualties, and the expansion of Jewish settlements.”
The move is widely seen as the North’s attempt to bolster its anti-American coalition, which could potentially strengthen its leverage against the U.S. and its allies. Over the past few weeks, North Korea’s foreign policy has shown signs of a larger strategy at play. From supporting Hamas to bolstering ties with Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, Pyongyang appears keen on crafting a united front against Washington.
The strategy appears to bear results by aligning those opposed to U.S. policy. Last week, a portrait of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was displayed at an anti-U.S. protest in the West Bank, underscoring the deep sentiments of the Palestinian people against the U.S.
The Oct. 7 attack, in which North Korean and Iranian weapons are used, killed over 1,400 individuals in Israel, primarily civilians, according to an official figure. In response, Israel has launched airstrikes that have led to approximately 7,000 deaths from the Palestine side, with the majority also being civilians, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry.
Casualties are anticipated to increase on both sides as Israel’s military announced on Thursday that it had conducted a ground operation in the Gaza Strip. The Israel Defense Forces reported that its tanks and infantry units “struck numerous terrorist cells, infrastructure and anti-tank missile launch posts” before withdrawing to Israeli territory.
Edited by Elaine Chan and Taejun Kang.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Lee Jeong-Ho for RFA.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Euronews reported on 19 October 2023 that Mahsa Amini and the Woman, Life and Freedom Movement in Iran were awarded the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought.
“The 16 September 2022 is a date that will live in infamy and the brutal murder of 22-year-old Jina Mahsa Amini marked a turning point. It has triggered a women-led movement that is making history,” European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said after announcing the winner.
Two other nominees made it on the finalist shortlist: Women rights’ defenders and Nicaraguan activists. See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/10/18/sakharov-prize-2023-finalists-announced/
This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.
Top MEP says Iranian woman’s death in police custody last year ‘triggered a movement that is making history’
Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Kurdish Iranian woman who died in police custody in Iran last year, sparking worldwide protests against the country’s conservative Islamic theocracy, has been awarded the EU’s top human rights prize.
The award, named for the Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov, was created in 1988 to honour individuals or groups who defend human rights and fundamental freedoms. Sakharov, a Nobel peace prize laureate, died in 1989.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
Top MEP says Iranian woman’s death in police custody last year ‘triggered a movement that is making history’
Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Kurdish Iranian woman who died in police custody in Iran last year, sparking worldwide protests against the country’s conservative Islamic theocracy, has been awarded the EU’s top human rights prize.
The award, named for the Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov, was created in 1988 to honour individuals or groups who defend human rights and fundamental freedoms. Sakharov, a Nobel peace prize laureate, died in 1989.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.
On 18 October, 2023 European Parliament published the names of the finalists of the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. For more on this and other awards, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/BDE3E41A-8706-42F1-A6C5-ECBBC4CDB449. The finalists were chosen in a vote by the foreign affairs and development committees on 12 October.
The 2023 Sakharov Prize finalists are:
2023 Sakharov Prize: finalists chosen
This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.
I was “interviewed” by an Iranian journalist online (15 October) about the Hamas-Israel conflict and Iran’s involvement. My answers are below.
I have written about this accusation in the United States. For your readers, I want to lay out the reasoning behind the accusations in the United States. The reasons for these accusations are complex, and they have more to do with partisan politics in the United States than about Iran.
First, the accusations of the tie between the Iranian settlement and the Hamas attack was launched exclusively by Republicans, and it was a ploy to try and blame President Biden for the Hamas attack. There were many misstatements made, but “truth” is irrelevant when it comes to partisan politics. The main goal is to “score” points rhetorically.
The most ignorant comments claim that Iran received the money and immediately used the funds to support the Hamas attack. This is of course a total lie, but for people who are ill-disposed toward Iran and toward President Biden, this was an easy lie to sell, and looking at the commentary from right-wing media and comments on new stories shows that many people heard this and immediately believed it.
A slightly more sophisticated version of this same lie is that Iran received the funds, and couldn’t use them to support Hamas because they were earmarked for humanitarian purposes, but because they received the funds, they were able to “offset” other government funds which were sent to support Hamas.
When the Biden administration decisively pointed out that first, the funds did belong to Iran, and that none of them had been disbursed from Qatar, a third version of this story started circulating, and that is that Iran anticipated these funds after the settlement, and so disbursed other existing funds to support Hamas.
Of course all of these were complete lies. Hamas had planned this attack for months. The Iranian settlement took place long after the planning and preparation for the Hamas attack was underway. Iran could not have anticipated that the $6 billion of its own money would be released as a condition of the prisoner exchange, because negotiations were not finalized before the planning for the Hamas attack. So these accusations are false and illogical.
However, that still did not stop Republicans from continuing the narrative that President Biden was “soft on Iran” and that concessions made to Iran “somehow” led to the Hamas attack, and so ultimately President Biden was responsible. The Republican narrative that the attack was engineered, directed and supported by Iran continues and now has been cemented in the Republican political narrative, and the Biden administration has been unable to counteract it.
Another narrative that has emerged claims that Iran will instigate Hezbollah to attack Israel from Lebanon, thus proving that Iran was behind the Hamas attack. This is illogical, of course, but the demonization of Iran has become such a complete fixture in American politics, this kind of narrative has been extremely easy to promulgate.
So, in response to these falsehoods, the Biden administration froze the Iranian assets in Qatar. It was a violation of the agreement between Iran and the United States. But it was necessary to try and stop the Republican lies. It highlighted the fact that the funds were never disbursed, and that Iran could not now anticipate receiving them.
And the other move by the Biden administration to counter this rhetoric was to engage in a full-throated, loud and very public support for Israel. Sending Secretary of State Blinken to Israel for a highly emotional presentation citing his own Jewish roots, and President Biden making many public statements in support of Israel blunted some of the Republican criticism. I am not suggesting that these sentiments were insincere, but they were a very deliberate, highly public and emotional display of support for Israel. And it appears to have worked.
No one should expect these funds to be released very soon. There is a possibility that they could be quietly released after the 2024 elections when President Biden’s fate concerning his presidency is settled. If Trump were to win re-election in 2024 the funds would never be released while Trump was in office. One again, I emphasize that this is not about Iran. This is about electoral politics in the United States, where sadly,, any politician who does anything to support or provide any benefit to Iran will be attacked.
The Israeli-Hamas conflict will result in a halt to any progress in the Iranian nuclear negotiations until after the 2024 presidential elections. Senator Lindsay Graham (Republican from South Carolina) said today that Iran was totally to blame for the Hamas attack. Other Republicans have said the same. Some have called for bombing of Iran’s oil facilities to destroy Iran’s economic base. Sadly, anything the United States would now do that would result in any improvement in Iran’s economic condition is on hold for now. It is too politically dangerous for the Biden administration to do this. At best the talks will “tread water” until after January 2025 when the new presidential administration is in office.
Let me also point out that if Hezbollah attacks Israel from the North, any talks between Iran and the United States over the nuclear negotiations will be immediately abandoned.
One of the narratives that is being widely spread in the United States by Republicans is that: Iran engineered the Hamas attack on Israel in order to prevent the establishment of diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran has recently improved relations with Saudi Arabia. So the question of whether Iran sees establishment of Saudi Arabian-Israeli relations as a danger, or something to be prevented is a very potent issue that Iran will have to deal with diplomatically. If American conservative politicians have their way (including Trump), the Saudi Arabia-Israel accords will go forward, not only because that is seen as positive for Israeli security, but also because it will “deal a blow” to Iran–a double benefit for these politicians. But the Iranian government should take this accusation of Iranian support for the attack as a way to prevent this new alliance very seriously, because it is a major narrative in the United States.
See my answer above. This has emerged in some political circles as the root cause for the Hamas attack, and the supposed motivation for Iranian support of the Hamas attack–to prevent this normalization of Saudi Arabian-Israeli relations. It is assumed that Iran wants to prevent this, and it is also assumed that Hamas sees this as a blow to their cause.
Because this has been put forward so strongly as a motivation for the attack, every effort will now be made on the part of the United States to see that the normalization takes place.
Ass a final observation, however, many supporters of the Palestinians point out that normalization of Israel’s relations with Arab states will have no effect on the Palestinian cause, because in fact, Arab States have not been supporting Palestinians at all historically. There are individuals and groups within Arab states that have supported the Palestinian cause, but the Arab states themselves have never been supportive. This underscores Iran’s support for Palestinians–and the fact that Iran, as a non-Arab state has been the chief reliable support for the Palestinian cause.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Photo Credit: The Cradle
Hamas’ Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was meticulously planned. The launch date was conditioned by two triggering factors.
First was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flaunting his ‘New Middle East’ map at the UN General Assembly in September, in which he completely erased Palestine and made a mockery of every single UN resolution on the subject.
Second are the serial provocations at the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, including the straw that broke the camel’s back: two days before Al-Aqsa Flood, on 5 October, at least 800 Israeli settlers launched an assault around the mosque, beating pilgrims, destroying Palestinian shops, all under the observation of Israeli security forces.
Everyone with a functioning brain knows Al-Aqsa is a definitive red line, not just for Palestinians, but for the entire Arab and Muslim worlds.
It gets worse. The Israelis have now invoked the rhetoric of a “Pearl Harbor.” This is as threatening as it gets. The original Pearl Harbor was the American excuse to enter a world war and nuke Japan, and this “Pearl Harbor” may be Tel Aviv’s justification to launch a Gaza genocide.
Sections of the west applauding the upcoming ethnic cleansing – including Zionists posing as “analysts” saying out loud that the “population transfers” that began in 1948 “must be completed” – believe that with massive weaponry and massive media coverage, they can turn things around in short shrift, annihilate the Palestinian resistance, and leave Hamas allies like Hezbollah and Iran weakened.
Their Ukraine Project has sputtered, leaving not just egg on powerful faces, but entire European economies in ruin. Yet as one door closes, another one opens: Jump from ally Ukraine to ally Israel, and hone your sights on adversary Iran instead of adversary Russia.
There are other good reasons to go all guns blazing. A peaceful West Asia means Syria reconstruction – in which China is now officially involved; active redevelopment for Iraq and Lebanon; Iran and Saudi Arabia as part of BRICS 11; the Russia-China strategic partnership fully respected and interacting with all regional players, including key US allies in the Persian Gulf.
Incompetence. Willful strategy. Or both.
That brings us to the cost of launching this new “war on terror.” The propaganda is in full swing. For Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Hamas is ISIS. For Volodymyr Zelensky in Kiev, Hamas is Russia. Over one October weekend, the war in Ukraine was completely forgotten by western mainstream media. Brandenburg Gate, the Eiffel tower, the Brazilian Senate are all Israeli now.
Egyptian intel claims it warned Tel Aviv about an imminent attack from Hamas. The Israelis chose to ignore it, as they did the Hamas training drills they observed in the weeks prior, smug in their superior knowledge that Palestinians would never have the audacity to launch a liberation operation.
Whatever happens next, Al-Aqsa Flood has already, irretrievably, shattered the hefty pop mythology around the invincibility of Tsahal, Mossad, Shin Bet, Merkava tank, Iron Dome, and the Israel Defense Forces.
Even as it ditched electronic communications, Hamas profited from the glaring collapse of Israel’s multi-billion-dollar electronic systems monitoring the most surveilled border on the planet.
Cheap Palestinian drones hit multiple sensor towers, facilitated the advance of a paragliding infantry, and cleared the way for T-shirted, AK-47-wielding assault teams to inflict breaks in the wall and cross a border that even stray cats dared not.
Israel, inevitably, turned to battering the Gaza Strip, an encircled cage of 365 square kilometers packed with 2.3 million people. The indiscriminate bombing of refugee camps, schools, civilian apartment blocks, mosques, and slums has begun. Palestinians have no navy, no air force, no artillery units, no armored fighting vehicles, and no professional army. They have little to no high-tech surveillance access, while Israel can call up NATO data if they want it.
Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant proclaimed “a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we will act accordingly.”
The Israelis can merrily engage in collective punishment because, with three guaranteed UNSC vetoes in their back pocket, they know they can get away with it.
It doesn’t matter that Haaretz, Israel’s most respected newspaper, straight out concedes that “actually the Israeli government is solely responsible for what happened (Al-Aqsa Flood) for denying the rights of Palestinians.”
The Israelis are nothing if not consistent. Back in 2007, then-Israeli Defense Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin said, “Israel would be happy if Hamas took over Gaza because IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state.”
Ukraine funnels weapons to Palestinians
Only one year ago, the sweaty sweatshirt comedian in Kiev was talking about turning Ukraine into a “big Israel,” and was duly applauded by a bunch of Atlantic Council bots.
Well, it turned out quite differently. As an old-school Deep State source just informed me:
“Ukraine-earmarked weapons are ending up in the hands of the Palestinians. The question is which country is paying for it. Iran just made a deal with the US for six billion dollars and it is unlikely Iran would jeopardize that. I have a source who gave me the name of the country but I cannot reveal it. The fact is that Ukrainian weapons are going to the Gaza Strip and they are being paid for but not by Iran.”
After its stunning raid last weekend, a savvy Hamas has already secured more negotiating leverage than Palestinians have wielded in decades. Significantly, while peace talks are supported by China, Russia, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt – Tel Aviv refuses. Netanyahu is obsessed with razing Gaza to the ground, but if that happens, a wider regional war is nearly inevitable.
Lebanon’s Hezbollah – a staunch Resistance Axis ally of the Palestinian resistance – would rather not be dragged into a war that can be devastating on its side of the border, but that could change if Israel perpetrates a de facto Gaza genocide.
Hezbollah holds at least 100,000 ballistic missiles and rockets, from Katyusha (range: 40 km) to Fajr-5 (75 km), Khaibar-1 (100 km), Zelzal 2 (210 km), Fateh-110 (300 km), and Scud B-C (500 km). Tel Aviv knows what that means, and shudders at the frequent warnings by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah that its next war with Israel will be conducted inside that country.
Which brings us to Iran.
Geopolitical plausible deniability
The key immediate consequence of Al-Aqsa Flood is that the Washington neocon wet dream of “normalization” between Israel and the Arab world will simply vanish if this turns into a Long War.
Large swathes of the Arab world in fact are already normalizing their ties with Tehran – and not only inside the newly expanded BRICS 11.
In the drive towards a multipolar world, represented by BRICS 11, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), among other groundbreaking Eurasian and Global South institutions, there’s simply no place for an ethnocentric Apartheid state fond of collective punishment.
Just this year, Israel found itself disinvited from the African Union summit. An Israeli delegation showed up anyway, and was unceremoniously ejected from the big hall, a visual that went viral. At the UN plenary sessions last month, a lone Israeli diplomat sought to disrupt Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi’s speech. No western ally stood by his side, and he too, was ejected from the premises.
As Chinese President Xi Jinping diplomatically put it in December 2022, Beijing “firmly supports the establishment of an independent state of Palestine that enjoys full sovereignty based on 1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital. China supports Palestine in becoming a full member of the United Nations.”
Tehran’s strategy is way more ambitious – offering strategic advice to West Asian resistance movements from the Levant to the Persian Gulf: Hezbollah, Ansarallah, Hashd al-Shaabi, Kataib Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and countless others. It’s as if they are all part of a new Grand Chessboard de facto supervised by Grandmaster Iran.
The pieces in the chessboard were carefully positioned by none other than the late Quds Force Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps General Qassem Soleimani, a once-in-a-lifetime military genius. He was instrumental in creating the foundations for the cumulative successes of Iranian allies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Palestine, as well as creating the conditions for a complex operation such as Al-Aqsa Flood.
Elsewhere in the region, the Atlanticist drive of opening strategic corridors across the Five Seas – the Caspian, the Black Sea, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Eastern Mediterranean – is floundering badly.
Russia and Iran are already smashing US designs in the Caspian – via the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) – and the Black Sea, which is on the way to becoming a Russian lake. Tehran is paying very close attention to Moscow’s strategy in Ukraine, even as it refines its own strategy on how to debilitate the Hegemon without direct involvement: call it geopolitical plausible deniability.
Bye bye EU-Israel-Saudi-India corridor
The Russia-China-Iran alliance has been demonized as the new “axis of evil” by western neocons. That infantile rage betrays cosmic impotence. These are Real Sovereigns that can’t be messed with, and if they are, the price to pay is unthinkable.
A key example: if Iran under attack by a US-Israeli axis decided to block the Strait of Hormuz, the global energy crisis would skyrocket, and the collapse of the western economy under the weight of quadrillions of derivatives would be inevitable.
What this means, in the immediate future, is that he American Dream of interfering across the Five Seas does not even qualify as a mirage. Al-Aqsa Flood has also just buried the recently-announced and much-ballyhooed EU-Israel-Saudi Arabia-India transportation corridor.
China is keenly aware of all this incandescence taking place only a week before its 3rd Belt and Road Forum in Beijing. At stake are the BRI connectivity corridors that matter – across the Heartland, across Russia, plus the Maritime Silk Road and the Arctic Silk Road.
Then there’s the INSTC linking Russia, Iran and India – and by ancillary extension, the Gulf monarchies.
The geopolitical repercussions of Al-Aqsa Flood will speed up Russia, China and Iran’s interconnected geoeconomic and logistical connections, bypassing the Hegemon and its Empire of Bases. Increased trade and non-stop cargo movement are all about (good) business. On equal terms, with mutual respect – not exactly the War Party’s scenario for a destabilized West Asia.
Oh, the things that a slow-moving paragliding infantry overflying a wall can accelerate.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
On February 12, 2002 at a Pentagon news conference, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was asked by Jim Miklaszewski, the NBC Pentagon correspondent, if he had any evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was supplying them to terrorists. Rumsfeld delivered a famous non-answer answer and said:
Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.
When he was pressed by Jamie McIntyre, CNN’s Pentagon correspondent, to answer the question about evidence, he continued to talk gobbledygook, saying, “I could have said that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, or vice versa.”
He never said he had evidence, because he didn’t.
Rumsfeld, who enjoyed his verbal games, was the quintessential bullshitter and liar for the warfare state. This encounter took place when Rumsfeld and his coconspirators were promoting lie after lie about the attacks of September 11, 2001 and conflating false stories about an alliance between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden in order to build a case to wage another war against Iraq, in order to supplement the one in Afghanistan and the war on “terror” that they launched post September 11 and the subsequently linked anthrax attacks.
A year later on February 5, 2003, U. S. Secretary of State Colin Powell went before the U. N. Security Council and in a command performance assured the world that the U.S. had solid evidence that Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction,” repeating that phrase seventeen times as he held up a stage prop vial of anthrax to make his point. He said, “My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources — solid sources. These are not assertions. What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.” He was lying, but to this very day his defenders falsely claim he was the victim of an “intelligence failure,” a typical deceitful excuse along with “it was a mistake.” Of course, Iraq did not have “weapons of mass destruction” and the savage war waged on Iraq was not a mistake.
Scott Ritter, the former Marine U.N. weapons inspector, made it very clear back then that there was no evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but his expertise was dismissed, just as his current analysis of the war in Ukraine is. See his recent tweet about Senator Diane Feinstein in this regard:
Thirteen months after Rumsfeld’s exchange in the news conference, the United States invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003, knowing it had no justification. It was a war of aggression. Millions died as a result. And none of the killers have been prosecuted for their massive war crimes. The war was not launched on mistaken evidence; it was premeditated and based on lies easy to see. Very, very easy to see.
On January 28, 2003, eleven days before Powell performance, I, an independent writer, wrote a newspaper Op Ed, “The War Hoax,” saying:
The Bush administration has a problem: How to start a war without having a justifiable reason for one. No doubt they are working hard to solve this urgent problem. If they can’t find a justification, they may have to create one. Or perhaps they will find what they have already created. . . . Yet once again, the American people are being played for fools, by the government and the media. The open secret, the insider’s fact, is that the United States plans to attack Iraq in the near future. The administration knows this, the media knows it, but the Bush scenario, written many months ago, is to act as if it weren’t so, to act as if a peaceful solution were being seriously considered. . . . Don’t buy it.
Only one very small regional Massachusetts newspaper, the North Adams Transcript, was willing to publish the piece.
I mention this because I think it has been very obvious for a very long time that the evidence for United States’ crimes of all sorts has been available to anyone who wished to face the truth. It does not take great expertise, just an eye for the obvious and the willingness to do a little homework. Despite this, I have noticed that journalists and writers on the left have continued to admit that they were beguiled by people such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joseph Biden, con men all. I do not mean writers for the mainstream press, but those considered oppositional. Many have, for reasons only they can answer, put hope in these obvious charlatans, and some prominent ones have refused to analyze such matters as the JFK assassination, September 11th, or Covid-19, to name a few issues. Was it because they considered these politicians and matters known unknowns, even when the writing was on the wall?
Those on the right have rolled with Reagan, the Bushes, and Trump in a similar manner, albeit for different reasons. It causes me to shake my head in amazement. When will people learn? How long does it take to realize that all these people are part of a vast criminal enterprise that has been continuously waging wars and lying while raking in vast spoils for the military-industrial complex. There is one party in the U.S. – the War Party.
If you have lived long enough, as have I, you reach a point when you have, through study and the accumulation of evidence, arrived at a long list of known knowns. So with a backhand slap to Donald Rumsfeld, that long serving servant of the U.S. war machine, I will list a very partial number of my known knowns in chronological order. Each could be greatly expanded. There is an abundance of easily available evidence for all of them – nothing secret – but one needs to have the will for truth and do one’s homework. All of these known knowns are the result of U.S. deep state conspiracies and lies, aided and abetted by the lies of mass corporate media.
My Known Knowns:
Donald Rumsfeld, as a key long time insider to U.S. deep state operations, was surely aware of my list of known knowns. He was just one of many such slick talkers involved in demonic U.S. operations that have always been justified, denied, or kept secret by him and his ilk.
One does not have to be a criminologist to realize these things. It is easy to imagine that Rumsfeld’s forlorn ghost is wandering since he went to his grave with his false “unknown unknowns” tucked away.
When he said, “I could have said that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, or vice-versa,” he did say it, of course. Despite double-talkers like him, evidence of decades of U.S. propaganda is easy to see through if one is compelled by the will-to-truth.
“Ancestral voices prophesying war; ancestral spirits in the danse macabre or war dance; Valhalla, ghostly warriors who kill each other and are reborn to fight again. All warfare is ghostly, every army an exercitus feralis (army of ghosts), every soldier a living corpse.” – Norman O. Brown
Note: If you think I too have no evidence, look at this for many of them.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has hailed the news that Narges Mohammadi — an Iranian journalist RSF has been defending for years — has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her “fight against the oppression of women in Iran,” her courage and determination.
Persecuted by the Iranian authorities since the late 1990s for her work, and imprisoned again since November 2021, she must be freed at once, RSF declared in a statement.
“Speak to save Iran” is the title of one of the letters published by Mohammadi from Evin prison, near Tehran, where she has been serving a sentence of 10 years and 9 months in prison since 16 November 2021.
She has also been sentenced to hundreds of lashes. The maker of a documentary entitled White Torture and the author of a book of the same name, Mohammadi has never stopped denouncing the sexual violence inflicted on women prisoners in Iran.
It is this fight against the oppression of women that the Nobel Committee has just saluted by awarding the Peace Prize to this 51-year-old journalist and human rights activist, the former vice-president of the Defenders of Human Rights Centre, the Iranian human rights organisation that was created by Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer who was herself awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003.
It is because of this fight that Mohammadi has been hounded by the Iranian authorities, who continue to persecute her in prison.
She has been denied visits and telephone calls since 12 April 2022, cutting her off from the world.
White Torture: The infamy of solitary confinement in Iran with Narges Mohammadi.
New charges
At the same time, the authorities in Evin prison have brought new charges to keep her in detention.
On August 4, her jail term was increased by a year after the publication of another of her letters about violence against fellow women detainees.
Mohammadi was awarded the RSF Prize for Courage on 12 December 2023. At the award ceremony in Paris, her two children, whom she has not seen for eight years, read one of the letters she wrote to them from prison.
“In this country, amid all the suffering, all the fears and all the hopes, and when, after years of imprisonment, I am behind bars again and I can no longer even hear the voices of my children, it is with a heart full of passion, hope and vitality, full of confidence in the achievement of freedom and justice in my country that I will spend time in prison,” she wrote.
She ended the letter with a call to keep alive “the hope of victory”.
RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said:
“It is with immense emotion that I learn that the Nobel Peace Prize is being awarded to the journalist and human rights defender Narges Mohammadi.
At Reporters Without Borders (RSF), we have been fighting for her for years, alongside her husband and her two children, and with Shirin Ebadi. The Nobel Peace Prize will obviously be decisive in obtaining her release.”
On June 7, RSF referred the unacceptable conditions in which Mohammadi is being detained to all of the relevant UN human rights bodies.
During an oral update to the UN Human Rights Council on July 5, the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran expressed concern over the “continued detention of human rights defenders and lawyers defending the protesters, and at least 17 journalists”.
It is thanks to Mohammadi’s journalistic courage that the world knows what is happening in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s prisons, where 20 journalists are currently detained.
They included three other women: Elaheh Mohammadi, Niloofar Hamedi and Vida Rabbani.
Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Majid Tavakoli, taken from his family in handcuffs, urges dissidents to ‘frankly analyse’ why opposition to the regime has successively failed
One of Iran’s foremost public intellectuals and critics of the Iranian regime was taken to prison in handcuffs on Saturday to start serving a five-year sentence.
Majid Tavakoli, who has a three-year-old child, was found guilty of spreading propaganda against the state. His dispatch to jail had been deferred for three weeks, but security officials came to take him away on Saturday, the day after another jailed Iranian human rights activist, Narges Mohammadi, was given the Nobel peace prize.
Continue reading…This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.