radiofree.asia

Category: military

  • Top level Chinese delegation headed to Kiribati – questions over Kanton

    By Barbara Dreaver, TV1 News Pacific correspondent

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is to visit Kiribati on Friday for four hours as part of a Pacific tour to strengthen security ties in the region.

    It is the first top level bilateral meeting between the two countries since Kiribati switched allegiance to China from Taiwan in 2019.

    Concern is mounting over a potential security deal following the PRC’s recent controversial agreement with Solomon Islands which allows it to have military presence in the island nation if requested.

    Speaking to 1News, Kiribati Opposition leader Tessie Eria Lambourne said she was “gravely concerned” about any potential security arrangement as she believed it would involve the militarisation of one of its atolls, Kanton Island, and Chinese control over the area.

    “Our rich marine territory in the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) will be under China’s control for sure,” she said.

    The area is valuable for its geo-strategic location, including proximity to United States military installations, along with its rich fisheries resources.

    Last year, 1News revealed how the Kiribati government was ditching PIPA, a marine reserve and World Heritage site to open up to commercial fishing in a move believed to have been driven by Beijing.

    China funding feasibility study
    China is also funding a feasibility study to upgrade the runway and causeway on Kanton Island which has raised alarm in the US and Australia.

    Friday’s bilateral meeting which is expected to include discussions about the Kanton Island development was announced late on Tuesday.

    A Facebook post from President Taneti Maamau’s office said the high-level state visit was “an important milestone for Kiribati-Chinese relations, as it will strengthen and promote partnership and cooperation between our two countries”.

    An exemption is being made for the delegation as Kiribati borders remain closed as a covid-19 safety measure.

    While the group will undergo PCR testing when they arrive at the airport, Lambourne said the visit demonstrated the influence the superpower had there.

    “Since the lockdown there have been exemptions extended to Chinese nationals who have been coming in and going out of our country without restrictions while our seafarers and other nationals had to wait more than three years to be repatriated,” she said.

    “Our democratic system, in fact our very sovereignty , is under attack and we need support to ensure our survival as a democratic nation.”

    Delegation arriving in Honiara tonight
    The Chinese delegation is expected to arrive in Solomon Islands tonight and meet with the government on Thursday. The group will also be visiting Fiji on Sunday and Monday and Papua New Guinea next week.

    Speaking to media from New York today, Jacinda Ardern said it was no surprise Yi was set to visit a number of Pacific countries.

    Asked if it was a concern, Ardern said: “We’re very firm that yes of course we want collaboration in areas where we have shared concerns.

    “Issues like climate mitigation and adaptation, we want quality investment and infrastructure in our region.

    “We don’t want militarisation, we don’t want an escalation of tension, we want peace and stability so we will remain firm on those values.”

    Republished with permission.

  • Tamil refugees detained by UK on Chagos Islands go on hunger strike

    Forty-two hunger strikers are part of group of 89 Sri Lankans whose boat was intercepted in Indian Ocean by UK military

    Dozens of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees who have been detained for more than seven months in a military base on an overseas territory claimed by Britain have gone on hunger strike in despair at their plight.

    The 42 hunger strikers are part of a group of 89 Sri Lankans, including 20 children, whose boat was intercepted and escorted to Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian Ocean by the British military after running into distress while apparently headed to Canada from India in October.

    Continue reading…

  • Gavin Ellis: As if the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh wasn’t enough…

    The global response to the killing of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. Video: Al Jazeera

    COMMENTARY: By Gavin Ellis of Knightly Views

    Nothing justifies the killing of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and the wounding of her colleague Ali al-Samoudi during an Israeli raid on Jenin in the Occupied West Bank. Nothing.

    I believe the renowned reporter died at the hands of Israeli armed forces and that she was deliberately targeted because she was a journalist, easily identified by the word PRESS on the flak jacket and helmet that did not protect her from the shot that killed her. Her wounded colleague was identically dressed.

    I am left in no doubt about the culpability of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) on a number of grounds.

    Several eyewitnesses, including an Agence France-Presse photographer and another Al Jazeera staffer, were adamant that there was no shooting from Palestinians near the scene of the killing. Shatha Hanaysha, the Al Jazeera journalist who had been standing next to Abu Akleh against a high wall when firing broke out, stated they were deliberately targeted by Israeli troops.

    Israeli spokesmen who initially laid the blame on Palestinian militants became more equivocal in the face of the eyewitness accounts, although they would go no further than saying she could have been accidentally shot from an armoured vehicle by an Israeli soldier.

    That is about as close to an admission of guilt as the IDF is likely to get.

    However, perhaps the strongest evidence of IDF culpability is the fact that the killing of Abu Akleh is part of a pattern of targeting journalists. Reporters Without Borders — which has called for an independent international investigation of the death that it says is a violation of international conventions that protect journalists — says two Palestinian journalists were killed by Israeli snipers in 2018 and since then more than 140 journalists have been the victims of violations by the Israeli security forces.

    30 journalists killed since 2000
    By its tally, at least 30 journalists have been killed since 2000.

    Of course, those deaths are but one consequence of the IDF’s disproportionate response — in terms of the number of victims — to actions by Palestinian militants over the occupation of the West Bank. Since the present Israeli government took office last year, 76 Palestinians have died at the hands of Israeli forces.

    There has been condemnation of such deaths, particularly when they include a number of children. So the reaction to the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh was sadly predictable. In other circumstances the outcry would dissipate and Israeli forces would continue to carry out their government’s wishes.

    However, three things may make the condemnation louder, longer and more effective.

    First was the fact that, although she was born in Jerusalem, she was a United States citizen. This could well explain the US Administration’s statement condemning the killing and its willingness to back a similarly reproachful UN Security Council resolution.

    The second factor was that, although a Palestinian, Abu Akleh was not a Muslim. She was raised in a Christian Catholic family. It may not be a particularly becoming trait but the ability of the West to identify with a victim affects the way in which it reacts.

    However, it is the third factor that may have the most telling effect on the long-term consequences of her death. I am referring to the desecration of her funeral by baton-wielding armed Israeli police.

    Pallbearers assaulted by police
    The journalist’s coffin was carried in procession from an East Jerusalem hospital to the Cathedral of the Annunciation of the Virgin in the Christian Quarter of the Old City where a service was held before burial in a cemetery on the Mount of Olives. However, shortly after the pallbearers left the hospital the procession — waving Palestinian flags and chanting — was assaulted by police.

    Desecration of Shireen Abu Akleh's funeral by baton-wielding armed Israeli police
    It is the third factor that may have the most telling effect on the long-term consequences of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh’s death … the desecration of her funeral by baton-wielding armed Israeli police. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR

    Mourners were hit with batons, stun grenades were detonated, and a phalanx of armed police in riot gear advanced on the coffin. The procession scattered in disarray and, as the pallbearers tried to avoid the police action, the coffin tilted almost vertical and was in danger of falling to the road.

    At that point, an Al Jazeera journalist providing commentary on live coverage of the funeral said an an anguished voice: “Oh my God. Such disrespect for the dead, for those mourning the dead. How is that a security threat? How is that disorderly? Why does it require this kind of reaction, this level of violence on the part of the Israelis?”

    The horrifying scene was captured by international media and shown around the world

    Why did the police act as they did? Apparently because it is illegal to display the Palestinian flag and chant Palestinian slogans. Even after Abu Akleh’s coffin was transferred to a vehicle, police ran alongside to tear Palestinian flag from the windows.

    The message was clear: There was no contrition on the part of Israeli authorities for the death of the Al Jazeera journalist. The justification for the police action was pathetic. There were lame excuses that stones had been thrown at them. In other words, it was business as usual.

    That may not be the way the world sees it. Nor, indeed, the way it may be seen by many ordinary Israelis who would have been affronted by the indignity shown to the remains of a widely respected woman who died doing her job.

    ‘Time for some accountability?’
    Yaakov Katz, the editor of the Jerusalem Post, an English-language Israeli newspaper, said on Twitter: “What’s happening at Abu Akleh’s funeral is terrible. This is a failure on all fronts.” In a later message he asked: “Is it not time for some accountability?”

    The targeting of journalists aims to intimidate and to prevent them from bearing witness, particularly where authorities have something to hide. That is why, for example, we have seen seven journalists killed in Ukraine, 12 of their colleagues injured by gunfire, and multiple reports of clearly identified journalists coming under fire from Russian forces.

    One might have thought the international community — and in particular Israel’s close friend the United States — would have put significant pressure on Tel Aviv to cease such intimidation a year ago after Israeli aircraft bombed the Gaza City building that was home to various media organisations including Al Jazeera and the US wire service Associated Press.

    Israel claimed, without any evidence and contrary to AP’s own knowledge, that the building was being used by Hamas, the Palestinian nationalist organisation.

    Associated Press chief executive Gary Pruitt said after that attack that “the world will know less about what is happening in Gaza because of what happened today”. Aidan White, founder of the Ethical Journalism Network described the bombing as a “catastrophic attempt to shut down media, to silence criticism, and worst of all, to create a cloak of secrecy”.

    That, no doubt, was what Tel Aviv intended.

    Yet there were no recriminations sufficient to change the course Tel Aviv was on. As the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh so tragically illustrates, Israel has continued its policy of intimidation and violence against journalists.

    Sooner or later, it will come to realise that such actions diminish a government in the eyes of the world. The death of Abu Akleh and the indignity shown to her remains have added significantly to the damage to its reputation.

    Dr Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies. He is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications — covering both editorial and management roles — that spans more than half a century. Dr Ellis publishes a website called Knightly Views where this commentary was first published and it is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

    The targeting of journalists aims to intimidate and to prevent them from bearing witness, particularly where authorities have something to hide … One of the images of slain journalist Shireen Abu Akleh shown in a “guerilla-projection” by a pro-Palestinian group at Te Papa yesterday to mark the 74th anniversary of the Nakba, the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland in 1948. Image: Stuff screenshot APR

  • Kanak delegate warns France against ‘recolonising’ New Caledonia with a lie

    By Walter Zweifel, RNZ French Pacific reporter

    The Kanak people will not accept France’s attempt to “recolonise” New Caledonia, a pro-independence delegate has told the United Nations.

    Addressing a UN Decolonisation Committee seminar on the Pacific in Saint Lucia, Dimitri Qenegei said since 2020 the French President, Emmanuel Macron, and his Overseas Minister Sebastien Lecornu had been taking unilateral decisions.

    Qenegei said the signatories to the 1998 Noumea Accord stopped having their annual meetings in 2019 and the date for the referendum on independence last year was set without the consent of the Kanak people.

    Paris decided to go ahead with the third and last referendum last December under the Noumea Accord despite pleas by the pro-independence camp to delay the vote because of the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on the Kanak people.

    France insisted that the timetable for the vote had to be upheld.

    Amid a boycott by the pro-independence camp, fewer than half of the voters took part in the referendum but of those who did vote more than 96 percent were in favour of staying with France.

    Qenegei said Macron declared after the referendum that New Caledonia showed it wanted to stay French although it was known that 90 percent of Kanaks wanted independence.

    Claims of manipulation and lies
    To therefore proclaim that New Caledonia chose to stay French was not legitimate, he said, adding that it was a “manipulation and a lie” by France and the heirs of the colonial system.

    He said France, as the administrative power, had reorientated its policies to the methods of bygone centuries to hold on to its non-autonomous territories.

    Qenegei said France had reneged on its undertaking given in 1998 to accompany New Caledonia to its decolonisation.

    He pointed out that in case of three rejections of independence in the referenda under the Noumea Accord, the political parties needed to be convened to discuss the situation.

    Qenegei said nowhere did it say that in a case of three “no” votes, New Caledonia remained French.

    He said on the international stage, France had been losing influence, which prompted President Macron in 2018 to work towards an Indo-Pacific axis from Paris to Noumea that included India and Australia.

    However, he said France suffered a first humiliation when Australia backed out of a multi-billion dollar contract for French submarines.

    New Caledonia becoming independent would be another blow to the military axis aimed at containing China, he said.

    Parallel drawn with China
    Qenegei drew a parallel between China and France, saying France decried the possibility of Chinese troops in Solomon Islands as imperialism while France had placed troops in New Caledonia to “contain the Kanaks”.

    While France criticised China’s lending policies, Qenegei said France regarded its loans to New Caledonia, given with interest to be paid, as something different.

    Qenegei said the recent French policies were nothing but a return to the source of colonisation.

    He warned that France’s intention to open up the electoral rolls to French people who arrived after 1998 was the ultimate weapon to drown the Kanak people and recolonise New Caledonia.

    The Kanaks would be made to disappear and that would not be accepted but inevitably lead to conflict.

    Qenegei said his outline was not a threat a but a call for help to bring the administrative power to its senses.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Mali’s Military Ejects France, But Faces Serious Challenges

    On May 2, 2022, a statement was made by Mali’s military spokesperson Colonel Abdoulaye Maïga on the country’s national television, where he said that Mali was ending the defense accords it had with France, effectively making the presence of French troops in Mali illegal. The statement was written by the military leadership of the country, which has been in power since May 2021.

    Colonel Maïga said that there were three reasons why Mali’s military had taken this dramatic decision. The first was that they were reacting to France’s “unilateral attitude,” reflected in the way France’s military operated in Mali and in the June 2021 decision by French President Emmanuel Macron to withdraw French forces from the country “without consulting Mali.”

    The post Mali’s Military Ejects France, But Faces Serious Challenges appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • North Korean soldiers spread COVID-19 during April 25 military parade

    A massive military parade in North Korea has been identified as a COVID-19 super-spreader event, after several servicemen who marched in it tested positive for the virus, sources in the country told RFA.

    Held on April 25 to commemorate the guerilla operation  that started 90 years ago and grew into the country’s military, the parade brought together about 20,000 soldiers. At the time, North Korea was still claiming that it was 100% “virus free.” This week, Pyongyang finally confirmed its first cases of COVID-19 and at least one death from the disease.

    The country’s leader, Kim Jong Un, has since declared a “maximum emergency epidemic prevention system” is in effect. 

    Several soldiers stationed as border guards in the border city of Sinuiju, which lies across the Yalu River from China, began exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19 at the beginning of this month, a border security official in the northwestern province of North Pyongan told RFA’s Korean Service on condition of anonymity for security reasons.

    “They had high fevers and acute respiratory symptoms … and after testing by the health authorities, it was confirmed that they were infected with the Omicron variant,” the source said.

    “Most of the ones who tested positive are officers and soldiers who took part in the military parade …  on April 25. The health authorities reported the incident to the national emergency quarantine command, who in turn sent it in as a No. 1 report,” he said, referring to communications of the highest level, sent across the desk Kim Jong Un.

    The revelation that the border guards could have contracted the virus at the parade and may have spread it to others upon their return led authorities in North Pyongan to declare a state of emergency.

    “As a result, the border area has been further sealed up and traffic between the border guard units has been suspended,” the source said.

    “Soldiers in each battalion, company and platoon cannot enter or exit the barracks, and movement restrictions are in place to prevent even a single solder from joining or leaving a unit. They are even prohibiting private conversations between soldiers within the same unit,” he said.

    Another border security official, in nearby Uiju county, told RFA that soldiers there have been ordered to wear gas masks to prevent the virus from spreading.

    “No one is allowed to go outside the unit barracks except the soldiers on duty in outposts who work in shifts,” said the second source, who requested anonymity to speak freely.

    “The number of confirmed cases among the border guard soldiers stationed in Uiju County has been increasing since early this month,” he said. “Most of the sick soldiers took part in the military parade to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Revolutionary Army in Pyongyang on April 25th.”

    If the soldiers indeed caught the virus during the parade, then it could have spread to all branches of the military in every part of the country, the second source said.

    “The military parade mobilized a large number of personnel. Not only the border guards, but also officers and soldiers selected from the army and marines, navy, and air force across the country participated. Therefore, it should be considered that the coronavirus has spread to every military base everywhere,” the second source said.

    “The authorities quickly … started up the maximum emergency quarantine system nationwide and began locking everything down,” he said. “But it is already too late.”

    Sources told RFA that people are angry an event purely for propaganda purposes may be the source widespread illness.

    According to a North Korean state media report on Friday, there are currently 187,800 people in quarantine in North Korea, and six people have died after showing COVID-19 symptoms. One of the dead was confirmed to be infected by the omicron variant of COVID-19.

    Translated by Leejin J. Chung. Written in English by Eugene Whong.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Hyemin Son.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Japan is becoming more militarist – and the US is driving it

    Plans to double Japan’s defence budget to around £86bn may mark the final winding down of the country’s anti-militarist posture. But the move will only make the world more dangerous, according to one Japanese foreign policy expert. University of East Anglia scholar Ra Mason also said that the US is driving the shift.

    Writing in The Conversation, Mason said that the defence hike reflected those in European countries and signalled a bonanza for arms firms.

    Imperial ambitions?

    Mason said the change:

    had been prompted by the conflict in Ukraine, but also reflected growing regional pressure from China, North Korea and Russia.

    However, the pressure to militarise is not necessarily home grown. As Mason wrote:

    The US has been pressuring Japan for some time to increase its defence spending to share the security bill in the Asia-Pacific region.

    Japan’s post-war constitution still bans particular kinds of militarist behaviour, including the possession or development of nuclear weapons. However, in recent years defence reforms have still gone ahead under different governments. Article 9 of the constitution was created to prevent Japan becoming a military power again. Article 9 reads:

    Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

    In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

    Recent polls suggest that while many Japanese people oppose abandoning it, a clear majority of elected politicians back reform.

    Other experts also point to the gradual move away from a pacifist-type foreign policy over many years. Japan deployed troops to Iraq and Afghanistan (albeit in support roles) and it’s navy sank a North Korean ship in 2001. And, as the Council on Foreign Relations has pointed out:

    Pressure from Washington has only increased since the 9/11 attacks.

    US influence

    Mason argued that US relations have been key to the change:

    In the current era, relations with Washington have been paramount. But with America seemingly overstretched and in decline, Tokyo’s move to strengthen its military and deepen the alliance poses questions about Japan’s security identity.

    There is an increasing danger for Japan of:

    entrapment into American proxy wars and increasing economic involvement in the US “military-industrial complex”, the system by which the defence sector encourages arms spending and war.

    Big-money reforms

    Mason added that the current push for a more militarist Japan would allow big profits for defence firms. Much as we have seen in the West since the war in Ukraine began:

    It also paves the way for Japan to contribute billions of dollars to an arms and security infrastructure industry that is booming in the wake of Russia’s invasion into Ukraine.

    Mason also argued that Japan’s ministers are using goodwill over Ukraine to fuel militarism at home. Japan has taken refugees, and large donations have been made to help those affected by the war. But, he warns, that goodwill should not be used to ramp up Japanese militarism in the region.

    Japan’s involvement in international politics since WW2 has been very different to other former imperial powers. It would be a tragedy if that shifted to a more aggressive foreign policy, but this seems to be occurring despite public pride in Japan’s role in the world. There will be few winners from a re-militarised Japan, least of all the Japanese people.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/JGSDF, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY 2.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • John Minto: NZ government and media must own up to their silence over Shireen Abu Akleh

    COMMENTARY: By John Minto

    The absolute impunity which the Aotearoa New Zealand government has given to Israel’s racist apartheid regime over many decades and the cowering of the Aotearoa New Zealand media in the face of threats of false smears of anti-semitism from the racist pro-Israel lobby are key factors in the daily murder and mayhem conducted by Israeli troops in Palestine.

    The latest killing is of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh which was described by Al Jazeera and eyewitnesses as an “assassination in cold-blood”.

    This veteran journalist has been the “voice of the voiceless” as she has fearlessly reported for Al Jazeera on Israel’s military occupation of Palestine over many decades.

    Her fearlessness is in sharp contrast to local media reporting on Israel/Palestine which includes multiple, repeated inaccuracies which reinforce Israel’s “justifications” for its brutality.

    Most New Zealanders do not even know that Israel runs a military occupation over the entire area of historic Palestine.

    With rare exceptions, our media simply provide a safe portal for Israeli propaganda.

    Israel’s unbridled brutality
    Meanwhile, our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, if they say anything at all about Israel’s occupation or unbridled brutality are much more likely to criticise Palestinians than they are to criticise Israel.

    If they spoke out about the Russian invasion of Ukraine like they do with the situation in the Middle East, they would be blaming Ukrainians for “provocations against Russian troops” and asking Ukrainians to exercise “maximum restraint” in the face of Russian brutality.

    It’s hypocrisy on a grand scale.

    We call out human rights abuses to a US agenda. We condemn Russia and China but look the other way with Israeli or Indonesian brutality (as in West Papua).

    Al Jazeera's video report
    Al Jazeera’s video tribute on The Stream on the assassination of Shireen Abu Akleh. Image: Screenshot APR

    None of this has changed under the current minister Nanaia Mahuta who has been silent for more than 18 months on the Palestinian struggle.

    Silence is never an option when it comes to human rights. It is the position of cowards.

    Until Israel is called out for its racist apartheid policies and the consequences which flow from that, it will continue to murder with impunity.

    We have yet again asked the minister to speak out and demand an independent investigation and accountability for Shireen Abu Akleh’s assassination.

    John Minto is a political activist and commentator, and spokesperson for Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article was first published by The Daily Blog and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • PNG police order crackdown on illegal firearms as deadline looms

    By Miriam Zarriga in Port Moresby

    Papua New Guinea’s policemen and women around the country have been ordered to arrest and charge anyone in possession of illegal firearms — which carries life imprisonment under the amended law — from the May 19 deadline.

    Police Commissioner David Manning, who is also the Registrar of Firearms, said that the directives were now being enforced.

    Manning is urging all police officers around the country to enforce the law and implement the Firearms Amendment Act 2022 that was tabled and supported by all members of the 10th National Parliament recently.

    “I gave a two-week amnesty period for people to come forward and surrender their firearms to the nearest police station,” he said.

    “I am now appealing to anyone who has any information about the existence of any such illegal firearms to please come forward and assist your police force to remove these individuals and firearms from our communities.”

    Papua New Guinea faces a general election starting in late July and security is an issue.

    Miriam Zarriga is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Finland will join NATO, but some question where it will lead

    Finland will apply to join NATO, the country’s leadership has announced. Sweden is expected to follow suit. Both nations have historically been neutral, but the Russian war in Ukraine has shifted attitudes. In Finland, according to some figures, support for NATO membership shot up to 76% after the Russian invasion.

    On Thursday morning, Finnish president Sauli Niinistö said he had spoken with Ukraine’s Volodyymr Zelenskyy about the application:

    Boris Johnson has been a central figure in the decision. On Wednesday, he pledged the UK would respond with force if Finland was attacked. This effectively makes Finland a NATO member already:

    NATO’s Article 5 ties allies into responding militarily if partners are attacked:

    The principle of collective defence is at the very heart of NATO’s founding treaty. It remains a unique and enduring principle that binds its members together, committing them to protect each other and setting a spirit of solidarity within the Alliance.

    Militarisation

    Others have questioned whether the move would increase the likelihood of war:

    While some suggested that the trade-off wasn’t worth it, especially given that Russia is unlikely to invade Finland:

    Another social media user suggested that if Donald Trump were to be re-elected in the US, he might leave NATO, leaving the countries unprotected anyway:

    Sweden?

    Swedish president Carl Bildt also announced that his country would seek membership:

    This is significant because Sweden has been a neutral country since the 1800s. As such, joining a military alliance would be a serious change in the balance of European politics.

    However, as one Twitter user pointed out, Russia’s Vladimir Putin is likely to cite the new applications as evidence of NATO expansion:

    Militarism

    Sweden and Finland have the right to apply for NATO membership. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it is understandable that such a move would have public support. However, it is also true that Europe is becoming increasingly militarised as what looks like a new Iron Curtain hardens across the continent.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/David Smith, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY 2.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Protester critically injured by rubber bullet, 7 arrested in protest over West Papua carve up

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Papua Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) director Emanuel Gobay says a participant of a demonstration in Jayapura opposing the creation of new autonomous regions (DOB) in Papua is in a critical condition after being shot by a rubber bullet allegedly fired by a police officer.

    Earlier, police forcibly broke up a demonstration opposing new autonomous regions in Papua.

    “Yes [the critical injury] was at an action in Waena,” said Gobay when contacted by CNN Indonesia.

    Although Gobay said he did not know the exact chronology of events leading up to the shooting, he confirmed that the victim was taking part in an action in front of Mega Waena department store in Jayapura.

    “So right when they arrived in front of Mega Waena [the protest] was forcibly broken up, it was at this time that police used rubber bullets and the like. When a rubber bullet was fired it hit one of the protesters,” he said.

    According to Gobay, the victim was immediately taken to a Mimika boarding house for treatment by students. He did not have any further information on the victim’s condition.

    Gobay added that aside from the person shot by a rubber bullet, another participant suffered injuries after being assaulted by police.

    Kicked in the chest
    He said the victim was kicked in the chest by a police officer.

    “This person ended up unconscious, then they were picked up and taken to the boarding house. Earlier I managed to meet with them, they complained that their chest still hurt because of being kicked. There were several others who were injured,” said Gobay.

    Demonstrations against the creation of new autonomous regions and Special Autonomy (Otsus) in several parts of Jayapura were forcibly broken up by police on Tuesday.

    One incident, in which police forcibly broke up a peaceful action using a water cannon, was recorded on video and shared on Twitter by Papuan People’s Petition (PRP) spokesperson Jeffry Wenda.

    At least seven people were arrested by police during the action, including Wenda, West Papua National Committee (KNPB) spokesperson Ones Suhuniap and Omizon Balingga.

    Police have yet to provide detailed information on the person shot by the rubber bullet.

    So far they have only announced that they sized a number of pieces of evidence in the form of sharp weapons and materials with the banned Morning Star independence flag motif on them, which were confiscated during a sweep of demonstrators in the Sentani area of Jayapura regency.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was Satu Peserta Demo Tolak DOB Papua Tertembak Peluru Karet.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Behind the tears for Shireen, more evidence of Israel’s daily crimes with impunity

    Al Jazeera Media Network has condemned the “blatant murder” of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh that violates “international laws and norms”. Video: Al Jazeera

    COMMENTARY: By Mazin Qumsiyeh

    It is so hard for me to write today — too many tears. The US-supported Israeli occupation forces’ crimes continue daily but some days are harder than others.

    Shireen Abu Akleh, wearing a blue helmet and vest with “PRESS” written over it has been assassinated by Israeli occupation forces.

    All journalists on the scene explained how Israeli snipers simply targeted journalists. The first three bullets were a miss, then a hit on one male journalist (in the back). Then when Shireen shouted that he was hit, she was killed with a bullet beneath the ear.

    Shireen was also a US citizen (she was a Bethlehemite Christian who lived in Jerusalem). But that is no protection.

    Rachel Corrie was run over by an Israeli military bulldozer and killed intentionally in Rafah two decades ago and the killers were rewarded. Both killings happened as the world was distracted by other conflicts (Iraq and now Ukraine).

    The US government cares nothing about its own citizens because politicians are under the thumb of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Thousands of others were killed and the murderers still roam free and are funded by US taxpayers.

    War crimes and crimes against humanity continue daily here. The US government is a partner in crime (just note how the US Ambassador simply hoped for an investigation — why not send the FBI to investigate the murder of countless US citizens). The events and the reaction in Western corporate (“mainstream”) media and Western governments makes us so mad.

    Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh
    Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh … “If you are not outraged to act, you are not human.” Image: AJ screenshot APR

    Same day murder of teenager
    If you are not outraged to act, you are not human. In the same day today the apartheid forces murdered 15-year-old Thaer Alyazouri as he was returning from school.

    As we pointed out before, Palestine remains the fulcrum and the litmus test and it exposes hypocrisy and collusion.

    It is actually the achilles heel for Western propaganda. Like with South Africa under apartheid, Western leaders’ empty rhetoric of human rights and democracy is exposed by their direct support for apartheid and murder.

    May this intentional murder of a journalist finally be the straw that breaks the back of hypocrisy, Zionism and imperialism.

    Millions of people mourn this brave journalist murdered by a fascist racist regime. Millions will rededicate themselves to challenge Western hypocrisy and US-supported Israeli crimes against humanity.

    The Nakba atrocities
    My 90-year-old mother born before the Nakba told me about the atrocities done since 1948 and before by the terrorist Zionist militias in their quest to colonise Palestine. From the first terrorist attack (and yes, Zionists were first to use terrorism like bombing markets or hijacking airplanes) to the 33 massacres during the 1948-1950 ethnic cleansing of Palestine (Tantura, Deir Yassin etc).

    We will not forget nor forgive. Justice is key to peace here and justice begins with ending the nightmare called Zionism and prosecuting its leaders and collaborators and funders in real fair trials.

    Only then will Jews, Christians, Muslims, and all others flourish in this land of Palestine. Palestine will then retun to be a multiethnic, multicultural, and multireligious society instead of a racist apartheid state of Israel.

    It is inevitable but we can accelerate it with our actions.

    We honour Shireen, Rachel and more than 110,000 martyrs by acting as they did: telling truth, challenging evil deeds, working for justice (which is a prerequisite for peace).

    Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh teaches and does research at Bethlehem and Birzeit Universities. He previously served on the faculties of the University of Tennessee, Duke, and Yale Universities. He and his wife returned to Palestine in 2008, starting a number of institutions and projects such as a clinical genetics laboratory that serves cancer and other patients. Qumsiyeh has been harassed and arrested for non-violent actions but also received a number of awards for these same actions.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Amnesty calls for halt to planned Wabu Block gold mine in Papua

    By Yance Agapa in Paniai

    Amnesty International Indonesia executive director Usman Hamid is asking the government to halt the planned gold mine at Wabu Block in Intan Jaya regency until there is agreement from the Papua indigenous people in the area.

    “We have asked that the planned mine be halted until the state obtains agreement from the Papuan indigenous people,” said Hamid in a press release received by Suara Papua.

    From the results of its research, Amnesty said that one of the largest gold reserves identified in Indonesia was located in an area considered to be a hot spot for a series of violent acts by Indonesian security forces against local civilians.

    Hamid explained that Papuan indigenous people reported that violence was often committed by security forces along with restrictions on personal and public life such as restrictions of movement and even the use of electronic devices.

    “Amnesty International Indonesia is quite relived by the attitude of the Papua governor who has officially asked the central government, in particular the ESDM [Energy and Mineral Resources] Ministry to temporarily hold the planned mining bearing in mind the security situation in Intan Jaya which is not favourable,” he said.

    Most of the area, which is inhabited by the Moni (Migani) tribe, is still covered with forest.

    According to official estimates, the Wabu Block contains 8.1 million tonnes of gold, making it the fifth largest gold reserve known to exist in Indonesia.

    Relieved after meeting
    Hamid also said he was relieved after meeting with Coordinating Minister for Security, Politics and Legal Affairs (Menkopolhukam) Mahfud MD in Jakarta.

    “We also feel relieved after meeting with the Menkopolhukam who explained that the plan was still being discussed between ministries and would not be implemented for some time”, said Hamid.

    Amnesty is concerned over the potential impact of mining in the Wabu Block on human rights, added to by the risk of conflict in the Intan Jaya regency.

    “So this special concern is obstacles to holding adequate and meaningful consultation with the Papuan indigenous people who will be impacted upon in order to obtain agreement on initial basic information without coercion in relation to mining in the Wabu Block”, said Hamid.

    Amnesty added, “We very much hope that the central government and the Papua provincial government will work together to ensure that the planned mine really does provide sufficient information, consultation and agreement obtained from the Papuan indigenous communities”.

    Based on existing data, the Indonesian government has increased the number of security forces in Intan Jaya significantly. Currently there are around 17 security posts in Sugapa district (the Intan Jaya regional capital) when in October 2019 there were only two posts.

    This increase has also been accompanied by extrajudicial killings, raids and assaults by military and police, which have created a general climate of violence, intimidation and fear.

    A Papuan protest over the Wabu Block plans
    A Papuan protest over the Wabu Block plans. Image: AI

    Restrictions on lives
    Based on reports received by Amnesty, said Hamid, indigenous Papuans in Intan Jaya faced restrictions on their daily activities and many had had to leave their communities in order to find safety in other cities or the forests.

    Hamid hopes that the government will pay attention to reports released by human rights organisations in Papua.

    “The government must pay attention to human rights reports which are conducted by human rights organisations such as ELSHAM [the Institute for Human Rights Studies and Advocacy] Papua,” he said, bearing in mind the recent situation in which there had been an escalation in conflict.

    Earlier, the central government was urged to halt the prolonged conflict in Intan Jaya by the Intan Jaya Papua Traditional Community Rights Advocacy Team (Tivamaipa) in Jakarta.

    During an audience with the House of Representatives (DPR), Tivamaipa revealed that the armed conflict in Intan Jaya over the last three years began with the deployment of TNI (Indonesian military) troops which were allegedly tasked with providing security for planned investments in the Wabu Block by Mining and Industry Indonesia (Mind Id) through the company PT Aneka Tambang (Antam).

    According to Tivamaipa, on October 5, 2020 Intan Jaya traditional communities declared their opposition to planned exploration in the Wabu Block.

    Four demands
    In order to avoid a prolonged conflict, the Tivamaipa made four demands:

    1. That the DPR leadership and the leaders of the DPR’s Commission I conduct an evaluation of government policies on handling conflicts in Papua and West Papua provinces involving the Coordinating Minister for Security, Politics and Legal Affairs, the Defense Minister, the Minister for Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM), the Minister for State Owned Enterprises (BUMN), the TNI commander and the Indonesian police chief.
    2. That the Commission I leadership invite the Papua and West Papua provisional governments, the Papua Regional House of Representatives (DPRP), the Papua People’s Council (MRP), the Papua and West Papua regional police chiefs, the Cenderawasih XVII and Kasuari XVIII regional military commanders, the regional governments of Intan Jaya, the Bintang Highlands, Puncak, Nduga, Yahukimo and Maybrat along with community representatives to attend a joint meeting.
    3. It urged the central government to withdraw all non-organic TNI and police security forces which have been sent to Intan Jaya regency.
    4. That the central and regional government must repatriate internally displaced people from Intan Jaya and return them to their home villages and prioritise security and peace in Intan Jaya by providing social services which are properly organised and sustainable.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Usmad Hamid Minta Rencana Tambang Blok Wabu Dihentikan”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Sri Lanka: Protesters demand regime change, demilitarisation of the state

    The institutional integration of sports with the military has reproduced authoritarian sports cultures, writes Janaka Biyanwila. Popular protests demanding regime change are also about demilitarising the state.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • 100 PNG security forces arrive in Porgera, tension eases

    By Miriam Zarriga in Mt Hagen

    About 100 Papua New Guinea security personnel have arrived in Porgera, Enga Province, amid the fighting that saw 17 dead, 100 families displaced and homes destroyed over the weekend.

    The arrival of the PNG Defence Force (PNGDF) in Porgera on late Sunday evening has eased the tension inside the mining township.

    On Sunday about 5pm, more than 15 ten-seater vehicles with PNGDF soldiers arrived in Mt Hagen, Western Highlands, to be deployed to Porgera.

    The contingent arrived late in Porgera with only a few war cries heard around the township.

    Police Commissioner David Manning said: “A significant number of police and military personnel will be on the ground to address the issue at Porgera”.

    When asked if armoured vehicles may be deployed to Porgera, Manning said: “The vehicles will not be deployed for this incident, an assessment of the situation on the ground is requiring a quicker response and that is the option I took.”

    Mobile Squad 5 arrives
    Mobile Squad 5 has arrived in Porgera to assist PNGDF with provincial police commander Chief Inspector Epenes Nili.

    Police in Enga are seeking assistance from the Enga provincial government.

    “The provincial government will be assisting with logistics and other necessary assistance,” Chief Inspector Nili said.

    “Mobile Squad 5 arrived in Wabag late yesterday afternoon.

    “They got organised last night and departed to Porgera at 4am.”

    He said the situation had cooled down.

    Miriam Zarriga is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Fierce fighting continues in PNG’s Porgera with death toll reaching 17

    By Miriam Zarriga in Port Moresby

    Seventeen people have been killed, hundreds of families made homeless, dozens of houses razed and government services ground to a halt in Enga Province’s Porgera district in Papua New Guinea as warring clans took up arms against each other.

    Calls for government help went unanswered at the weekend.

    Police in Porgera said the number of deaths had shot up to 17 as fighting continued.

    The sounds of gunfire could be heard as all government assets, including the Porgera mine staff, remained locked in their homes and behind gates.

    An employee of the mine said the sounds of gunfire could be heard on Sunday evening with war cries echoing through the town centre of Paiam.

    The fresh violence — which got worse following the withdrawal of security personnel to the provincial capital Wabag to prepare for election duties — ended a fragile, two-month peace truce between the warring Nomali and Aiyala clans of Paiam in Porgera.

    The sitting MP of Lagaip-Porgera, Tomait Kapili, said the ongoing feud between two clans also meant the planned reopening of the world class Porgera mine was “slim” and “may not happen within the timeframe wanted by the government”.

    Disappointed with ‘inaction’
    Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas was disappointed with the inaction by the PNG Defence Force and police hierarchy.

    “I have been asking for security forces for the last three weeks,” a frustrated Sir Peter said.

    He confirmed with the Post-Courier that Prime Minister James Marape had been informed of the situation in Porgera.

    PNG Post-Courier 09052022
    Today’s PNG Post-Courier front page … “Porgera burns” banner headline.

    Police Commissioner David Manning said that the violence erupted after a man from the Nomali clan was chopped on his hand by a man from Aiyala.

    Last Tuesday, a security guard was attacked and slashed. He died of his injuries in front of the shop he was protecting.

    The killing of the guard saw a confrontation flare up, which led to police firing several shots to deter the two clans.

    In retaliation, the Nomali clan chopped the hand of a man from Aiyala on Friday morning.

    Outnumbered by tribal fighters
    “A fight broke out, with Mobile Squad 11 who were on mine operation in Porgera taking command of the township but were outnumbered by tribal fighters who were in possession of high powered firearms,” Manning said.

    “The two clans have destroyed properties.”

    On Saturday, battle lines were drawn as the two warring clans faced off in the streets of the Paiam.

    Continuous gunshots could be heard as both clans continue a feud that escalated to the burning of several homes belonging to settlers around the mining town.

    The confrontation continued with the withdrawal of police units back to Wabag to await further orders to be deployed into other provinces of the Highlands region.

    The withdrawal led to a fierce confrontation between the two clans that saw more than 50 people injured, homes destroyed and the Paiam town centre coming to a standstill.

    Local police could only stand by and watch the removal of property from homes as the two clans ruled the streets of the township.

    Awaiting deployment orders
    Police Mobile Squad 5 was supposed to be in Enga. However, it is understood the unit had yet to receive its deployment orders.

    According to a source, new PNG Defence Force soldiers had been tasked to go into Enga, but this had been delayed given that the national government did not settle outstanding debts for service providers and troops.

    Porgera remains without any security support, with reports that local police — who are grossly outnumbered and without support — are exhausted and could not do much.

    Sources in Paiam also indicated that the Paiam district hospital was still operating but staff are scared because of the lack of security. They were only taking in emergency cases.

    A medical officer said casualties from the tribal conflict were not taken to the hospital due to security fears.

    He said the hospital had not been targeted by the clans but buildings around the hospital grounds had been razed to the ground.

    In developments late Sunday afternoon, more than 15 ten-seater vehicles with PNGDF personnel had arrived for deployment to Porgera.

    Miriam Zarriga is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Prasad accuses FijiFirst of ‘political gimmick’ in highlighting 1987 coup

    By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

    Opposition National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad has questioned the motive of the FijiFirst government to continuously highlight the 1987 coup during the girmit celebrations while refusing to mention the devastation brought about by the 2000 and 2006 coups on Fijians.

    He highlighted this issue during a rally in Tadevo, Navua, on Saturday.

    “They are talking about 1987 coup which happened 35 years ago, but they never mention anything about the 2000 and 2006 coup,” Professor Prasad said.

    “They are talking about the 1987 coup because they want to stoke fear in the minds of people, especially on the Fijians of Indian descent voters.

    Professor Prasad said the government should also apologise to the family of the late Professor Brij Lal for banning him from the country of his birth and who died at his home in Brisbane, Australia, last year.

    “Every government minister and every government member in the FijiFirst party, if they have any shame left in every girmit function that they organise, they should apologise to the family of late Professor Lal and to all the descendants of the girmitya in this country on how they brutally banned him from Fiji.”

    He said it was hypocritical for the Minister for Education, Heritage and Arts Premila Kumar and other senior government officials to be parading and giving speeches about the struggles of Fijians of India descent, yet forget the extremely shameful act of banning the historian who had written everything on girmit about Fijians of Indian descent.

    “It’s obvious they are using the situation to campaign for the next general elections by highlighting what happened in 1987 and forgetting what happened in 2000 how people were terrorised, forgetting who was a RFMF commander at that time, forgetting the 2006 coup, how many people including women were brutally treated by those were in power at that time,” he said.

    Professor Prasad said the girmitya would be “turning in their graves looking at how the shameless government used this occasion for a political gimmick”.

    Questions sent to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama remained unanswered when this edition went to press.

    Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘Our blood is boiling’ – victims angry as dictator’s son edges closer to Philippine presidency

    Rappler

    Former political prisoner Cristina Bawagan still has the dress she wore the day she was arrested, tortured and sexually abused by soldiers during the late Philippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos’s brutal era of martial law.

    Bawagan fears the horrors of Marcos’s rule would be diminished if his namesake son wins the presidency in Monday’s election, a victory that would cap a three-decade political fightback for a family driven out in a 1986 “people power” uprising.

    Also known as “Bongbong”, Marcos Jr has benefited from what some political analysts describe as a decades-long public relations effort to alter perceptions of his family, accused of living lavishly at the helm of one of Asia’s most notorious kleptocracies.

    As Philippine president, Marcos could control hunt for his family’s wealth

    Rivals of the family say the presidential run is an attempt to rewrite history, and change a narrative of corruption and authoritarianism associated with his father’s era.

    “This election is not just a fight for elected positions. It is also a fight against disinformation, fake news, and historical revisionism,” Vice-President Leni Robredo, Marcos’s main rival in the presidential race, told supporters in March.

    TSEK.PH, a fact-checking initiative for the May 9 vote, reported that it had debunked scores of martial law-related disinformation it said was used to rehabilitate, erase or burnish the discreditable record of Marcos Sr.

    No reply to questions
    Marcos Jr.’s camp did not reply to written requests for comment on Bawagan’s story.

    Marcos Jr., who last week called his late father a “political genius”, has previously denied claims of spreading misinformation and his spokesperson has said Marcos does not engage in negative campaigning.

    Bawagan, 67, said martial law victims like her needed to share their stories to counter the portrayal of the elder Marcos’s regime as a peaceful, golden age for the Southeast Asian country.

    “It is very important they see primary evidence that it really happened,” said Bawagan while showing the printed dress which had a tear below the neckline where her torturer passed a blade across her chest and fondled her breasts.

    The elder Marcos ruled for two decades from 1965, almost half of it under martial law.

    During that time, 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3240 were killed, according to figures from Amnesty International — figures which Marcos Jr. questioned in a January interview.

    Bawagan, an activist, was arrested on 27 May 1981 by soldiers in the province of Nueva Ecija for alleged subversion and brought to a “safehouse” where she was beaten as they tried to extract a confession from her.

    “I would receive slaps on my face every time they were not satisfied with my answers and that was all the time,” Bawagan said. “They hit strongly at my thighs and clapped my ears. They tore my duster (dress) and fondled my breasts.”

    “The hardest thing was when they put an object in my vagina. That was the worst part of it and all throughout I was screaming. No one seemed to hear,” said Bawagan, a mother of two.

    ‘No arrests’
    In a conversation with Marcos Jr. that appeared on YouTube in 2018, Juan Ponce Enrile, who served as the late dictator’s defence minister, said not one person was arrested for their political and religious views, or for criticising the elder Marcos.

    However, more than 11,000 victims of state brutality during Martial Law later received reparations using millions from Marcos’s Swiss bank deposits, part of the billions the family siphoned off from the country’s coffers that were recovered by the Philippine government.

    Among them was Felix Dalisay, who was detained for 17 months from August 1973 after he was beaten and tortured by soldiers trying to force him to inform on other activists, causing him to suffer hearing loss.

    “They kicked me even before I boarded the military jeep so I fell and hit my face on the ground,” Dalisay said, showing a scar on his right eye as he recounted the day he was arrested.

    When they reached the military headquarters, Dalisay said he was brought to an interrogation room, where soldiers repeatedly clapped his ears, kicked and hit him, sometimes with a butt of a rifle, during questioning.

    “They started by inserting bullets used in a .45 calibre gun between my fingers and they would squeeze my hand. That really hurt. If they were not satisfied with my answers, they would hit me,” Dalisay pointing to different parts of his body.

    The return of a Marcos to the country’s seat of power is unthinkable for Dalisay, who turned 70 this month.

    “Our blood is boiling at that thought,” said Dalisay.

    “Marcos Sr declared martial law then they will say nobody was arrested, and tortured? We are here speaking while we are still alive.”

    Republished with permission from Rappler.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • US issues vague warning ‘to respond’ if China builds military base in Solomons

    By Mar-Vic Cagurangan in Tumon, Guam

    The United States would “respond” if China takes steps to establish a permanent military presence in the Solomon Islands, says a US official said, noting the “potential regional security implications” of a newly signed pact between the two countries.

    “We outlined clear areas of concern with respect to the purpose and scope of the agreement,” Daniel Kritenbrink, assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said at a press briefing yesterday following his trip to Honiara, where he led a US delegation last week.

    US officials met with Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and his cabinet following separate announcements by China and the Solomon Islands that the controversial Security Cooperation Agreement has been signed.

    US diplomat Daniel Kritenbrink
    US diplomat Daniel Kritenbrink … “I’m not going to speculate on what [our goal] may or may not involve.” Image: SI govt
    “We outlined that of course we have respect for the Solomon Islands’ sovereignty, but we also wanted to let them know that if steps were taken to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities or a military installation, then we would have significant concerns and we would very naturally respond to those concerns,” Kritenbrink said.

    However, the State Department official did not provide a clear answer when asked to explain how exactly the US would respond.

    “I’m not going to speculate on what that may or may not involve, but I think our goal was to be very clear in that regard,” Kritenbrink said.

    “I’m not in a position to talk about what the United States may or may not do in such a situation.”

    US still worried
    Despite Sogavare’s repeated assurance that the pact was intended only for domestic implementation, Kritenbrink said the US is worried about the “potential regional security implications of the agreement, not just for ourselves, but for allies and partners across the region.”

    Kritenbrink said what troubled the US was “the complete lack of transparency” behind the pact.

    “What precisely are the motivations behind the agreement? What exactly are China’s objectives and the like?

    “I think they’re completely unclear because this agreement has not been scrutinised or reviewed or subject to any kind of consultation or approval process by anyone else,” Kritenbrink said.

    He linked the Solomons-China agreement to Beijing’s relentless bid to expand the People’s Liberation Army’s footprint in the region.

    “I think it’s important in this context to keep in mind that we do know that [China] is seeking to establish a more robust overseas logistics and basing infrastructure that would allow the PLA to project and sustain military power at greater distances,” Kritenbrink said.

    He added that the US “would follow developments closely in consultation with regional partners.”

    Opening US embassy plans
    Kritenbrink was accompanied by Kurt Campbell, Indo-Pacific coordinator for the National Security Council; Lt. Gen. Steve Sklenka,deputy commander of the Indo-Pacific Command; and Craig Hart, USAID’s acting senior deputy assistant administrator for Asia.

    During the visit, the US delegation announced Washington’s intention to expedite the process of opening a US embassy in Honiara, strengthen the ties between the US and the Solomon Islands.

    “Our purpose in going to the Solomons was to explain to our friends there our approach to the region and the steps we’re taking to step up our engagement across the Pacific Islands, the specific programmes and activities that are ongoing in the Solomons and that we expect to expand and accelerate in the months ahead,” Kritenbrink said.

    “We reiterated our commitment to enhancing our partnership with the Solomon Islands, including expediting the opening of the US embassy there, advancing cooperation on addressing unexploded ordnance, and increasing maritime domain awareness, as well as expanding cooperation on climate change, health, people-to-people ties, and other issues as well,” he added.

    Mar-Vic Cagurangan is chief editor and publisher of the Pacific Island Times. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Graham Davis: Behind the saga of the ‘seized’ Russian super yacht Amadea

    COMMENTARY: By Graham Davis

    If you’re as confused as most people by the exact circumstances surrounding the continuing presence in Fiji of the Russian super yacht Amadea, join the club. Here’s our modest attempt to cut through the fog.

    Twelve days ago — on April 14 — the CJ Patel Fiji Sun newspaper trumpeted an exclusive with Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qilihio, reporting that the Amadea had been seized. It had not. In fact, it still hasn’t been formally seized.

    What happened last week is that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) obtained a restraining order from the High Court to prevent the Amadea from leaving Fiji. Until that order was granted, there was every possibility in the intervening period of the vessel leaving.

    In fact, lawyers for the owners were arguing that there was no legal justification to detain the Amadea any longer after they had reportedly paid an amount in fines for customs infringements.

    It was only when the High Court granted the restraining order that leaving was no longer a legal option.

    Indeed, all along there has been a suspicion that the vessel might try to make a run for it. It has a significant armoury and the security forces would have already factored in their ability to prevent a determined attempt to leave.

    This application was lodged by the Office of the DPP on a warrant issued by the United States government. The papers are from Washington DC and passed through the Attorney-General’s Office before carriage of the matter was given to the DPP under the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act.

    A second case
    Now there is a second case that has been brought before the High Court for the Amadea to be seized. Yes, taken from the owners altogether in line with the American-led sanctions that have been imposed on the nautical playthings and other toys of Russian oligarchs and Vladimir Putin’s cronies the world over.

    The Amadea at the Fijian port of Lautoka
    The Amadea at the Fijian port of Lautoka reported as “seized” 12 days ago … Russian super yacht’s fate still to be decided. Image: Fiji Sun screenshot APR

    The High Court will hand down its judgment next Tuesday (May 3), which is expected to be in Washington’s favour.

    And sometime after that, the Amadea will presumably become the property of the US government and sail off into the sunset under the command of Uncle Sam in the direction of the US.

    It has been an astonishing saga. The original, mostly European crew, had orders to sail from the Mexican port of Mazanillo across the entire Pacific to the Russian port of Vladivosok via Lautoka, where the Amadea has been refuelled and resupplied.

    Their services have evidently been terminated and an entirely Russian crew has been on standby to take over when it finally gets permission to sail. Alas for them, their journey to Fiji will have been in vain.

    Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov
    Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov … still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. Image: Wikipedia

    Incredibly, there is still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. The whole world has been told that it belongs to the Russian oligarch, Suleiman Kerimov, but there is still evidently no conclusive proof — the vessel’s ownership evidently buried in a labyrinth of multiple shelf companies in places like the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands.

    For the purposes of the High Court case in Suva, the owner is officially stated as being Millemarin Investment Limited. Is it Suleiman Kerimov?

    No evidence about Kerimov
    Millemarin Investment’s local lawyer, Feizal Hannif, told the court there was no evidence that it is. He said the vessel’s beneficial owner was in fact one Eduard Khudaynatov. But counsel for the DPP, Jayneeta Prasad, argued that the ownership of the vessel was not an issue. It was subject to a US warrant and the ownership issue was for the American courts to decide.

    So fortunately unravelling all of this is not Fiji’s problem. But what was Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho doing 12 days ago telling the Fiji Sun that the Amadea had been seized when we won’t know that for certain until next Tuesday, nearly three weeks after the Sun “scoop”?

    And is there going to be any attempt to set the official record straight?

    Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Solomons security shambles, and now it’s time for realism over hype

    ANALYSIS: By Terence Wood

    A spectre is haunting the Pacific. It is focused on Solomon Islands today, but has eyes everywhere and might pounce anywhere next.

    No, I’m not talking about China. I am talking about us.

    More specifically, I’m talking about a particular type of Western security pundit, who hypes danger and itches for confrontation. And I am talking about the way our politicians behave when they strive to win votes by stoking fear of the world outside our borders.

    The saga of China’s “military base” in Solomon Islands demonstrates how unhelpful such behaviour is, both to our own interests, and to the people of the Pacific.

    If you had the good fortune of missing the last few weeks, here’s what happened.

    In late March, journalists revealed that China and Solomon Islands had signed a policing agreement. Someone from within the Solomon Islands government also leaked a broader draft security agreement with China.

    In April, this agreement was finalised and signed. (Its text hasn’t been released but appears likely to be very similar to the draft.) You can see the draft here. It’s short and clear.

    Ship visits and stopover
    Solomons can ask China to provide police and military assistance. If, and only if, the Solomon Islands government of the day consents, China can “make ship visits to, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands, and relevant forces of China can be used to protect the safety of Chinese personnel and major projects in Solomon Islands.”

    Permanent bases are not mentioned.

    This, however, didn’t stop antipodean pundits from racing to hype the threat of a Chinese base. To be fair, few went as far as David Llewellyn-Smith, who demanded that Australia preemptively invade Solomons.

    He was an outlier (although it didn’t stop him from being uncritically quoted in the Courier-Mail). But all spoke of a base as a near certainty.

    Then politicians piled on. Penny Wong, who normally displays an impressive understanding of aid and the Pacific, decried the agreement as the “worst failure of Australian foreign policy in the Pacific since the end of World War II”.

    Peter Dutton warned that Australia could now expect “the Chinese to do all they can”. (Although he added optimistically they were unlikely to do so before the election.)

    Barnaby Joyce fretted about Solomons becoming a, “little Cuba off our coast”. (Solomons is more than 1500km from Australia; Cuba is about 200km from the US.)

    Australian agreement similar
    Amidst the racket, much was lost. Australia has its own security agreement with Solomon Islands. It’s more carefully worded, but it affords Australia similar powers to China.

    And China already has a security agreement with Fiji. Indeed, there was real talk of a base when that agreement was signed, but no base materialised, and the agreement has had no effect on regional security.

    And as Scott Morrison pointed out, Manasseh Sogavare, the Solomon Islands Prime Minister, has explicitly ruled out a Chinese base.

    True, Sogavare is a political maneuverer who can’t be taken at his word. But a Chinese base in Solomons serves neither his interest, nor that of the Chinese.

    It doesn’t serve Sogavare’s interests because it won’t give him what he wants — a stronger hold on power. Seen as the embodiment of a corrupt elite, he’s unpopular in Honiara. His election brought riots.

    As did his standoff with Malaitan Premier Daniel Suidani. So he wants Chinese police training and maybe military assistance in times of instability. But a base won’t help.

    Solomons is a Sinophobic country and the obvious presence of a base will increase Sogavare’s unpopularity. It would also jeopardise the security support he gets from Australia, as well as Australian aid. (By my best estimate, based on Chinese promises, which are likely to be overstatements, Australia gave more than 2.5 times as much aid to Solomons in 2019, the most recent year with data.)

    Base isn’t in China’s interest
    I’m not defending Sogavare. I’d rather Chinese police weren’t helping him. But a base isn’t in his interest. And he’s no fool.

    A base isn’t in China’s interests either. I don’t like China’s repressive political leaders. But their military ambitions are limited to places they view as part of China. What they’ve done, or want to do, in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan is odious.

    But Australia isn’t next on their list. Outside of their immediate sphere of influence they want trade. They need trade, and the wealth it brings, to sustain the political settlement that keeps them prosperous and in power. Any war that saw China menace Australia from Solomon Islands would bring ruinous sanctions in its wake. (US bases in Guam and Okinawa would be a headache too, I’d imagine.)

    The broader security agreement is helpful to China: it gives them the ability to protect Chinese nationals and Chinese business interests if riots break out.

    But they don’t need a base for that. A base would be costly, hard to establish in a country with little available land, and quite possibly useless next time the Solomons government changes.

    I’m not a supporter of the security agreement. But it’s not a base. And it’s not a catastrophe.

    Our behaving like it’s a catastrophe is harmful though.

    Harmful to Australia and NZ
    It’s harmful to countries like Australia and New Zealand, because the main advantage we have over China in the Pacific is soft power. Thanks to anti-Chinese racism and a healthy wariness of China’s authoritarian government, most people in Pacific countries, including political elites, are more hesitant in dealing with China than with us.

    Sure, money talks, and China can procure influence, but we are a little better liked. And that helps. Yet we lose this advantage every time we talk of invading Pacific countries, or call the region our “backyard”, or roughly twist the arms of Pacific politicians.

    The Pacific is not some rogue part of Tasmania. It’s an ocean of independent countries. That means diplomacy is needed, and temper tantrums are unhelpful.

    Worse still, our propensity to view the Pacific as a geostrategic chessboard has consequences for the region’s people. Geopolitical aid is too-often transactional and poorly focused on what people need. It is less likely to promote development.

    There’s an alternative: to choose realism over hype in our collective commentary. And to earn soft power by being a respectful and reliable partner. It’s not always easy. But it’s not impossible. Yet it has completely escaped us in the shambles of the last few weeks.

    Dr Terence Wood is a research fellow at the Development Policy Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. His research focuses on political governance in Western Melanesia, and Australian and New Zealand aid. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • British Brinkmanship And Myth Of German Neutrality In Ukraine War

    Russia’s state investigative body issued a stark warning that it was looking into media reports alleging “sabotage experts” from Britain’s special forces had been deployed to western Ukraine. On Saturday, a defense source told RIA Novosti that at least two teams from the UK’s elite Special Air Service (SAS) forces arrived at a military base near the city of Lviv in western Ukraine.

    In a statement, the Investigative Committee said it would follow up the report that covert operators had been sent in “to assist the Ukrainian special services in organizing sabotage on the territory of Ukraine.” It was not clear what steps Russia planned to take in response to SAS involvement in Ukraine. But the fact of possible presence of forces from a NATO country is significant, given that Russia had issued warnings it would target weapons supplies in Ukraine.

    The post British Brinkmanship And Myth Of German Neutrality In Ukraine War appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Anzac Day remembered at dawn services across the Pacific

    RNZ Pacific

    Pacific countries held dawn services today to commemorate Anzac Day and recognise the 107th anniversary of the landings at Gallipoli in Turkey.

    Tonga paid tribute to its war veterans with a dawn ceremony held in Nuku’alofa this morning.

    The ceremony took place on the Royal Palace grounds of King Tupou VI with prayers and hymns sung by His Majesty’s Armed Forces.

    Ambassadors from Australia, Japan, China, the United Kingdom and New Zealand attended the ceremony.

    Navy Officer Sione Ulakai acknowledged the sacrifices of Anzac soldiers in Gallipoli.

    “We are celebrating the life of brave soldiers who at this time, 107 years ago, fell on the beaches of Gallipoli,” he said.

    Anzac Day is a public holiday in Tonga held to honour the country’s contribution to World War I and World War II.

    Two Tongans killed in battle for Solomon Islands
    Two Tongan soldiers were killed in World War II during the battle for the Solomon Islands.

    In the Cook Islands, Prime Minister Mark Brown has called on Cook Islanders to remember their almost 500 soldiers who served in World War I.

    The men were part of the New Zealand Expeditionary Force’s Māori Pioneer Battalion.

    Some died during the conflict and others died later from war-related illness.

    Brown called on people to pay tribute to all Cook Islanders who have served, or are currently serving, in various forces around the world.

    Anzac Day dawn services
    Thousands of New Zealanders gathered today for Anzac Day dawn services. Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ

    Thousands of New Zealanders gathered for dawn services around the country today.

    World War II and Defence Force aircraft were flying over numerous towns and cities as part of Anzac commemorations.

    Veteran aircraft on display
    Spitfire and Harvard aircraft, a P3K2 Orion, NH90 helicopters and other aircraft have been in the air.

    The Auckland War Memorial Museum hosted a slimmed down version of its Anzac Day commemorations this year.

    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was in attendance.

    In Wellington, Governor-General Dame Cindy Kiro spoke at both the Dawn Service and the National Commemorative Service at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park.

    Returned and Services Associations national president BJ Clark said the public was welcome to come into their local RSA and be part of remembrance events, and to chat with veterans.

    Anzac Day, which was first held in 1916, honours more than 250,000 New Zealanders who have served overseas either in military conflicts or other roles, such as peacekeeping missions, said the Ministry for Culture and Heritage Te Pae Mahara manager Brodie Stubbs.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Former Solomons PM says country needs economic solution not security

    By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific journalist

    Former Solomon Islands Prime Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo says the country needs an economic solution to its instability problems, not a security solution.

    Lilo said he could not understand how current Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare could justify signing a security cooperation agreement with China to quell public discontent in his government’s handling of national affairs.

    Earlier this week Honiara and Beijing confirmed the signing of a security treaty despite serious concerns raised locally and internationally about the deal.

    Lilo was supporting calls for the document to be made public in the interest of transparency and accountability.

    “The best thing to help our people … to understand better on government is for government to take responsibility to manage our economy,” Lilo said.

    “Create more employment, create more investment, that to me is a better way of securing a better society for our country, than to militarise this country,” he said.

    Lilo served as prime minister of Solomon Islands from 2011 to 2014.

    ‘Beggars have no choice’
    Meanwhile, another former prime minister, Danny Philip, who is now a backbencher in the Sogavare government, said Solomon Islands was “open to all sorts of things” because “beggars do not have a choice”.

    He said Solomon Islands was mindful of the interplay between the superpowers in the Pacific, but the country did not want to be drawn into geopolitical battles.

    “Yes, the US has always been there. But for the first time ever in 80 years they’ve sent very high officials to the Solomon Islands at the moment,” he said.

    “We have with arrangements with Australia, which is very much US-mandated agreement. Australia is referred to by President Bush, I think as the as the ‘deputy sheriff’ of the United States in the Pacific.”

    Solomon Islanders treated with ‘disrespect‘
    A senior journalist in Honiara said Solomon Islanders were being treated disrespectfully and kept in the dark over the government’s security pact with China.

    Speaking at a panel on the contentious treaty, Dorothy Wickham said most of the news coverage on the security arrangement had been focused on Australia and America’s positions.

    “The government’s handling of the way it went about handling this treaty shows disrespect … to Solomon Islanders that there was no discussion, no consultation,” she said.

    “Even a press release on the eve of the signing would have been a standard procedure and until today we have not had a press briefing or a press statement for a press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Office,” Wickham added.

    She said the government had not meaningfully engaged with journalists to ensure that they could inform Solomon Islanders about what the security deal meant for them.

    Wickham said local media had been struggling to refocus the narrative so that it was about Solomon Islands.

    Pacific Islands Forum best place to discuss contentious security pact
    Meanwhile, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta said discussions on the security agreement signed between China and Solomon Islands needed to be inclusive of other Pacific nations.

    Mahuta said the Pacific Islands Forum was the best platform for discussing regional security concerns.

    “I have concerns that based on a number of representations to ensure that this is fully discussed because of the regional implications that this has not been given priority, certainly by Solomon Islands, they have given us assurances, we must take them at their word, respecting their sovereignty,” Mahuta said.

    “However, regional security issues, regional sovereignty issues are a matter of a broader forum. We see the Pacific Islands Forum as the best place for this.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Sustainable warfare: new ‘green’ Elbit drones are a masterclass in military weirdness

    The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) is no stranger to a bad idea. Nobody who has spent more than five minutes in or round the UK military would deny it. The MOD’s latest project is a ‘green’ drone. In itself, this is a symptom of a broader global push towards ‘sustainable’ brands of warfare. This increasingly sees national militaries, and their worldviews, being used to grapple with an issue which has no military solution. Being oppressed or killed by green military equipment, let’s be honest, is hardly different from being oppressed or killed by the usual hardware.

    So what’s the story?

    In their quest for some good green optics, the MOD have enlisted none other than Elbit Systems. Yes, the firm which supplies 85 percent of Israel’s drones. The same Elbit Systems whose London HQ was blockaded by anti-arms-trade activists just days ago. Elbit’s latest offering: the Sustainable Aviation Pathfinder. Alongside their partner, global defence contractor KBR, Elbit announced they would begin initial test flights soon:

    Affinity Flying Training Services Ltd (Affinity), has embarked on a series of battery-powered flight tests for the UK Ministry of Defence to assess the feasibility of environmentally friendly alternatives to current military aircraft.

    Yes, you read correctly: “environmentally friendly alternatives to current military aircraft”. War is going green, and the MOD are trying extremely hard to make this sound like a feasible idea. This seems like a good opportunity to have a look at the MOD’s record on the environment.

    Little green men?

    Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) have compiled data which can help the MOD. That is, if the department is really serious about the environment. For example, the MOD produced 3.2mn tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) in 2016.2017. That is 3 percent of the UK’s national CO2e.

    But this does not include CO2e produced by actual warfighting or defence contractors. Indeed, the UK was a key party in the War on Terror, which SGR say produced 3000mn tonnes of CO2e between 2001 and 2017.

    Let’s be clear. Recent campaigns have made the climate worse. As The Canary reported previously:

    The Costs of War Project has also asserted that the enduring military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan have resulted in “the degradation of the natural resources in these countries and a radical destruction of forest cover”. It said “the animal and bird populations have also been adversely affected”.

    A global problem

    The issue is not limited to the UK military. Globally, militaries have started to position themselves as a leading force in climate politics. However, some campaigners ask what the implications of this really are. According to Nick Buxton from the Transnational Institute (TNI), we should be very cautious about letting militaries lead on climate change:

    …by framing climate change as a security matter, it also has significant consequences in shaping how we respond to a warming planet. As the climate crisis unfolds, is the military the institution we want to turn to for solutions?

    And as TNI point out in their climate security primer:

    The fundamental problem with making climate change a security issue is that it responds to a crisis caused by systemic injustice with ‘security’ solutions, hardwired in an ideology and institutions designed to seek control and continuity.

    They add:

    At a time when limiting climate change and ensuring a just transition requires a radical redistribution of power and wealth, a security approach seeks to perpetuate the status quo.

    Ignoring the threat?

    Despite the green rhetoric around, for example, the new drone project, the UK’s own review suggests that the country’s leaders are unwilling to change course in order to counter climate change.

    As the militarism monitor Forces Watch has it:

    …the government’s recent Integrated Defence and Security Review gives a strong indication that, despite some discussion of the challenges posed by climate change, the nation state and national interest will continue to be prioritised. The new competitive age – powered by defence and security industries – envisioned by the review falls far short of facilitating the kind of cooperative approaches we need in the face of climate emergency.

    Zero solutions

    As we’ve heard here, national militaries and arms firms have no solutions to the biggest security threat facing humanity. However, they are desperate to tick some ‘environmental’ boxes, whilst continuing to be major polluters.

    At its core, the Elbit ‘eco-drone’ project is a gimmick. Its one which allows a morally dubious firm to tout its environmental credentials, all whilst making money, contributing to emissions, and causing harm. Because, at the end of the day, a missile fired from a ‘sustainable’ drone has the same effect as one fired from any other – at least for the people at the receiving end.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Nehemia Gerhsuni-Ayhlo, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Pacific Elders call on Indonesia to allow UN visit to Papua before Bali

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    The Pacific Elders’ Voice has expressed deep concern about reports of deteriorating human rights in West Papua and has appealed to Indonesia to allow the proposed UN high commissioner’s visit there before the Bali G20 meeting in November.

    A statement from the PEV says the reports suggest an “increased number of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances and the internal displacement of Melanesian Papuans”.

    The Pacific Elders said that they recalled the Pacific Island Forum Leaders’ Communique made in Tuvalu in 2019 which welcomed an invitation by Indonesia for a mission to West Papua by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

    PACIFIC ELDERS’ VOICE

    “The communique strongly encouraged both sides to finalise the timing of the visit and for an evidence-based, informed report on the situation be provided before next Pacific Island Forum Leaders meeting in 2020,” the statement said.

    “Despite such undertaking, we understand that the Indonesian government has not allowed UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit West Papua.

    “We find this unacceptable and believe that such behaviour can only exacerbate the tensions in the region.”

    The Pacific Elders said Indonesia must “take responsibility for its actions and abuses and make amends for the harm” caused to the Indigenous people of West Papua.

    The statement said the elders urgently called for the Indonesian government to allow the UN High Commission for Human Rights to visit West Papua and to prepare a report for the Human Rights Council.

    “We call on all members of the Human Rights Council to pass a resolution condemning the current human rights abuses in West Papua,” the statement said.

    “We further call on the Human Rights Council to clearly identify the human rights abuses in Indonesia’s Universal Periodic Review and to identify clear steps to rectify the abuses that are taking place.

    “We further note that the next G20 Heads of State and Government Summit will take place [on November 15-16] in Bali. We call on all G20 member countries to ensure that a visit by the UN High Commission for Human Rights is allowed to take place before this meeting and that the HCHR is able to prepare a report on her findings for consideration by the G20.

    “We believe that no G20 Head of State and Government should attend the meeting without a clear understanding of the human rights situation in West Papua” .

    Pacific Elders’ Voice is an independent alliance of Pacific elders whose purpose is to draw on their collective experience and wisdom to provide thought leadership, perspectives, and guidance that strengthens Pacific resilience.

    They include former Marshall islands president Hilde Heine, former Palau president Tommy Remengesau, former Kiribati president Anote Tong, former Tuvalu prime minister Enele Sopoaga, former Pacific Island Forum Secretariat secretary-general Dame Meg Taylor, former Guam University president Robert Underwood, former Fiji ambassador Kaliopate Tavola, and former University of the South Pacific professor Konai Helu Thaman.

    ‘State terrorism’ over special autonomy
    Meanwhile, United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP) interim president Benny Wenda has detailed “disturbing reports” of increased militarisation and state terrorism in a recent statement about the region.

    “Our people have been taking to the streets to show their rejection of Indonesia’s plan to divide us further by the creation of 7 provinces and to demonstrate against the imposition of ‘special autonomy’,” Wenda said.

    “Peaceful protestors in Nabire and Jayapura have been met with increasing brutality, with water cannons and tear gas used against them and fully armed police firing indiscriminately at protesters and civilians alike.

    “This is state terrorism. Indonesia is trying to use their full military might to impose their will onto West Papuans, to force acceptance of ‘special autonomy’.

    The pattern of increased militarisation and state repression over the past few years had been clear, with an alarming escalation in violence, said Wenda.

    Last month two protesters were shot dead in Yahukimo Regency for peacefully demonstrating against the expansion of provinces.

    “History is repeating itself and we are witnessing a second Act of No Choice. West Papuans are being forced to relive this trauma on a daily basis,” said Wenda.

    “The same methods of oppression were used in 1969, with thousands of troops harassing, intimidating and killing any West Papuans who spoke out for independence.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Sogavare adamant deal with China won’t undermine regional security

    By Kelvin Anthony, RNZ Pacific regional correspondent and Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific journalist

    The Solomon Islands prime minister is adamant a security co-operation agreement his government has signed with China will not undermine regional security.

    In Parliament yesterday, Manasseh Sogavare confirmed the controversial security agreement with China had been signed despite strong opposition to the deal from the other side of the house.

    The pact, a draft of which was first leaked online last month, raised domestic and regional anxieties about Beijing’s increasing influence in the South Pacific.

    It is feared that it could open the door to China’s military presence in Honiara — a claim rejected both by China and Solomon Islands.

    Sogavare has defended the intention behind the move, saying its aim is for the nation to diversify its security ties “to improve the quality of lives” of its people and to “address soft and hard security threats facing the country”.

    “I ask all our neighbours, friends and partners to respect the sovereign interests of Solomon Islands on the assurance that the decision will not adversely impact or undermine the peace and harmony of our region,” Sogavare said.

    In response, opposition leader Matthew Wale called on Sogavare to make the signed document public “to allay any regional fears of any hidden parts of it”.

    ‘Disclosure of the agreement’
    “And now that the agreement has been signed whether the Prime Minister will allow a disclosure of the agreement so that members may have a perusal of it,” Wale said.

    The leader of the Solomon Islands' opposition party, Matthew Wale
    Opposition leader Matthew Wale … call to make the signed document public “to allay any regional fears of any hidden parts of it”. Image: RNZ

    Wale’s sentiments were echoed by another opposition MP, the chairman of the foreign relations committee, Peter Kenilorea Jr.

    Kenilorea Jr said Sogavare’s decision to strike a military cooperation deal with China lacked transparency and he believed whatever efforts partners were putting in from the region were not going to make a difference.

    But he also expressed concern, now that the two countries have made the agreement official, that it could become the source for domestic tensions.

    “It will just further inflame emotions and tensions and again underscores the mistrust that people have on the government,” Peter Kenilorea Jr said.

    “It is cause for concern for many Solomon Islanders, but definitely a certain segment of the society will now feel even more concerned and might want to start to take certain action which is not in the best interest of Solomon Islands in our own unity as a country.”

    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
    NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern … “serious concerns” about the security pact. Photo: Image Robert Kitchin/Stuff/Pool/RNZ

    New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern had raised “serious concerns” about the security pact when the news initially broke two weeks ago.

    ‘No need’, says Ardern
    And following the announcement on Wednesday that the deal was done, Ardern reiterated her concerns.

    “We see no need for this agreement,” Ardern said.

    “We’re concerned about the militarisation of the Pacific and we continue to call on the Solomons to work with the Pacific with any concerns around their security they may have.”

    RNZ Pacific’s Honiara-based correspondent Georgina Kekea said the issue had divided public opinion in the country.

    Kekea said people were already anticipating the signing of the pact.

    “From what we’ve seen there are some who are with the signing, there some who are not. Some who are a bit sceptical about what the future will be like in the Solomon Islands with such an agreement being signed with China,” she said.

    “So, there’s mixed feelings I would say on the ground, especially with the signing.”

    US officials confer with Honiara
    Meanwhile, senior US officials are meeting with Solomon Islands government this week with the security deal expected to be a major point of discussions.

    Writing on his Village Explainer website in an article entitled “Pacific stuff up?”, Vanuatu columnist Dan McGarry writes that “if the coming election goes to Australia’s Labor party, Penny Wong is very likely to become Foreign Minister. So when she speaks, people across the region prick up their ears.

    “Without the least disrespect to her recent forebears, she could be one of the most acute, incisive and insightful FMs in recent history.

    “Whether she’ll be any more effective than them is another matter.”

    The main port in Honiara.
    The main port in Honiara … fears of a door opening to a Chinese military presence in Solomon Islands. Image: Solomon Islands Ports Authority

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Corbyn: Disband military alliances like Nato to bring about peace

    Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has suggested that military alliances like Nato could build up “greater danger” in the world, and should ultimately be disbanded.

    Corbyn acknowledged the transatlantic alliance was not going to be scrapped immediately but added that people should:

    look at the process that could happen at the end of the Ukraine war.

    He said he did not blame Nato for Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine but asked:

    Do military alliances bring peace?

    ‘The best way of bringing about peace’

    The Islington North MP said he wanted to see:

    some kind of much deeper security discussion, as indeed Nato was having a security discussion with Russia until last year.

    Corbyn, a long-standing critic of Nato, told Times Radio:

    I would want to see a world where we start to ultimately disband all military alliances.

    The issue has to be what’s the best way of bringing about peace in the future? Is it by more alliances? Is it by more military build-up?

    Or is it by stopping the war in Ukraine and the other wars… that are going on at the present time, which are also killing a very large number of people?

    And ask yourself the question, do military alliances bring peace? Or do they actually encourage each other and build up to a greater danger?

    I don’t blame Nato for the fact that Russia has invaded Ukraine, what I say is look at the thing historically, and look at the process that could happen at the end of the Ukraine war.”

    POLITICS Ukraine
    (PA Graphics)

    ‘You have to appeal to people’

    The ex-opposition leader lost the Labour whip over his response to the equalities watchdog’s report into antisemitism in the party.

    Although he was reinstated as a Labour member after a suspension, Keir Starmer has refused to readmit him to the parliamentary party.

    Corbyn said:

    I think it’s a wrong, totally unjustified decision.

    He declined to rule out starting a breakaway party, possibly based on his peace and justice project.

    I don’t know what the future is going to bring. I am focused on representing my constituency, being a Member of Parliament and on saying to the Labour Party: to win the next election, you have to appeal to people.

    And you have to appeal to people on the basis of economic justice and changes in the power structures within our society.

    Abandoning policies that would achieve that, particularly public ownership, is not going to excite people.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • MP warns Solomons-China security pact could ‘inflame tensions’

    By Kelvin Anthony, RNZ Pacific regional correspondent

    A senior Solomon Islands MP has warned that the controversial security agreement with China could result in action among local opponents of the deal.

    The government in Honiara signed a controversial security agreement with China despite concern from local political figures, as well as Australia, New Zealand and the United States.

    There are regional concerns the deal could open the door for Beijing to base its military in Honiara, but Prime Minister Manasseh Sovagare denies that that is the purpose of the security pact.

    Solomon Islands parliamentarian and chair of the Foreign Relations Committee Peter Kenilorea Jr said Sogavare’s decision to seal the deal — despite significant opposition — could lead to domestic ramifications.

    He said certain sections of the nation’s population have been strongly against China since the diplomatic switch from Taiwan in 2019.

    Kenilorea said some people would not take this lightly and it was going to cause further tensions that were already at play locally.

    “It will just further inflame emotions and tensions. And again underscores the mistrust that people have in the government,” he said.

    ‘A cause for concern’
    “And it is cause for concern for many Solomon Islanders, but definitely a certain segment of the society will now feel even more concerned and might want to start to take certain action which is not in the best interest of Solomon Islands in our own unity as a country.”

    Solomon Islands prime minister Manasseh Sogavare
    Solomon Islands PM Manasseh Sogavare … defied Australian, NZ and Pacific pressure over the security pact. Image: SIG news/RNZ

    Kenilorea said the government needed to make the security document signed with China available to the public.

    “It is that important that it should be made public. We have a security treaty with Australia, and that can be accessed online.

    “So why couldn’t this be and I will be calling for that signed copy to be made available so that all Solomon Islanders as well as a region can see what is in there,” he said.

    Opposition Leader Matthew Wale made that a formal request in Parliament “to allay any regional fears” and received a non-commital response from Sogavare.

    Australia’s disappointment with Honiara
    The Australian federal government has declared it is “deeply disappointed” that Solomon Islands has pressed ahead and signed the security pact with China.

    The announcement came just days after Australia’s Minister for the Pacific Zed Seselja travelled to Honiara and met Sogavare in a last-ditch effort to dissuade him from going ahead with the deal.

    Senator Seselja and Foreign Minister Marise Payne said the government was “disappointed” by the agreement and that it was not reached in a transparent way.

    “Ultimately, this is a sovereign decision of the government of Solomon Islands and we absolutely recognise that, but … declarations and these engagements on security issues have been dealt with in a Pacific-wide manner,” Payne said.

    “That is the traditional approach for these issues and it’s why some Pacific partners have also raised concerns.”

    Senator Payne said the government’s position was still that Pacific neighbours were the best to delivery security in the region and said it was an “unfair characterisation” to say the region had become less secure while Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been in power.

    The ministers said while Solomon Islands had the right to make sovereign decisions about national security, Australia still believed the “Pacific family” was best placed to provide security guarantees.

    In Washington, the White House, which is sending a high-level US delegation to Honiara this week, said it was concerned about “the lack of transparency and unspecified nature” of the pact.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • We owe it to the victims of conflict to tell the unsanitised truth about war

    Warning: this article includes graphic descriptions and images of injury and death

    Almost every day we see reports of horrific atrocities committed in Ukraine, with images of dead or mutilated bodies often sanitised by blurring. But as a Labour MP argues, the public should not be protected from seeing the true horrors of such atrocities.

    This is not about sensationalising, but standing witness to what is happening because we owe it to the victims of those crimes.

    The tragedies we are witnessing in Ukraine are devastating for the people there. Sadly they are not exceptional. The Canary has a long history of reporting on such war crimes – from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Yemen, to Turkey, and beyond.

    It’s essential the horror of all of these conflicts is told.

    Revealing the truth

    UK Labour MP Chris Bryant tweeted that media –  in this case BBC World – should not protect the public from seeing the truth about atrocities taking place in Ukraine:

    Byline Times executive editor Peter Jukes argues that we owe it to the victims of war and their families to reveal the full truth of such crimes:

    Unsanitised crime scenes

    Over many days tweets from independent sources provide unsanitised images of alleged war crimes, mostly discovered in Bucha. For example, one tweet claims to show more murdered civilians with their hands tied behind their backs. Another shows dead bodies of civilians left lying in the streets.

    This tweet shows the burnt bodies of dead civilians, apparently families:

    And this video shows the horrible scene that followed the bombing of the railway station at Kramatorsk, with at least 50 people dead:

    As for the total devastation of Mariupol, this level of destruction is reminiscent of what happened in Grozny (Chechnya) and Aleppo (Syria).

    Butchery in Bucha

    There are also other reports about alleged atrocities committed in Bucha.

    On 4 April it was claimed that the bodies of 410 civilians had been found in towns near Kyiv after the Russian military retreated. A mass grave was also discovered in Bucha. It was alleged that Russian soldiers had fired on men fleeing the town, and had killed civilians at will.

    Regarding atrocities in Bucha and the other towns of Hostomel and Irpin, Ukraine’s ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko commented:

    We see civilians’ dead bodies lying around the city, many of them have their hands tied up… Multiple rapes of women, children killed. This is a massacre.

    Many other atrocities were reported by a number of papers, including the Daily Mirror.

    Anatomy of murder captured by drone

    Then there was the now infamous murder, captured by drone, of what appears to be a civilian who simply stepped out of his car, with hands raised, after being ordered to by the military.

    Zdf commented:

    The pictures from March 7 show Russian soldiers dragging the body of the man away from his car and into a ditch. A woman and a child were also travelling with him. They are later led by soldiers into the nearby forest. What happens to them then, the pictures do not show.

    A BBC report takes up the story – and it is shocking:

    Some answers already exist for a couple who were killed by the Russians and left to decompose on 7 March. Their rusty, shrapnel riddled car lies in the road next to one of the petrol stations, reduced to a shell by fire. Next to it are the burnt and twisted remains of a body that is just about recognisable as the remains of a man. A wedding ring is still on the corpse’s finger. Stretched out inside the hulk of their car is what is left of the incinerated body of a woman, the mouth opened in what looks like a scream. …

    The bodies, the BBC discovered in an investigation this month, are of Maksim Iowenko and his wife Ksjena. They were part of a convoy of 10 civilian vehicles who were trying to escape the Russians and get to Kyiv.

    The report continued:

    Also in the car were their six-year-old son and the elderly mother of one of Maksim’s friends. Both of them survived and were eventually released by the Russian soldiers.

    They were found walking back down the road, and the woman told her family that Maksim was shouting that a child was in the car when he was killed.

    The elderly woman and the boy are now safe but traumatised.

    The report added: “Under the laws of war civilians are protected, and when they are killed in defiance of those laws, their deaths amount to war crimes”.

    But that was just one event, amongst hundreds of similar atrocities. It demonstrates all loss of morality.

    Dehumanising the enemy

    From the beginning of this war there have been reports of countless numbers of civilians murdered and tortured. These and similar acts are war crimes, says Amnesty International. They may even be considered acts of genocide.

    It’s now understood that as many as 20,000 civilians may have lost their lives in the city of Mariupol alone. And Iryna Venediktova, Ukraine’s prosecutor general, understands that more than 6,000 cases of war crimes have been opened for investigation.

    But why are civilians dealt with in this way? The answer is that, as with most wars, the protagonists are made to see the enemy – military or civilian –  as less than human.

    The following tweet includes an audio recording of what’s claimed to be Russian soldiers being ordered to kill in this way. The man giving the orders says “Here is a whole village of civilians. Shoot the civilian cars”:

    According to the Guardian, the recording was intercepted by Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany’s foreign intelligence service, in relation to the attacks in Bucha. If it proves to be authentic, it demonstrates not just the dehumanising of civilians but also the brutalisation of the combatants.

    “Unspeakable, deliberate cruelty”

    Human Rights Watch’s European media director posted a thread, commenting on some of the recent examples of atrocities:

    Human Rights Watch has documented many alleged war crimes, in a number of locations in Ukraine.

    Hugh Williamson, Human Rights Watch’s Europe and Central Asia director, commented.

    The cases we documented amount to unspeakable, deliberate cruelty and violence against Ukrainian civilians. Rape, murder, and other violent acts against people in the Russian forces’ custody should be investigated as war crimes.

    The HRW report added:

    The laws of war prohibit willful killing, rape and other sexual violence, torture, and inhumane treatment of captured combatants and civilians in custody. Pillage and looting are also prohibited. Anyone who orders or deliberately commits such acts, or aids and abets them, is responsible for war crimes. Commanders of forces who knew or had reason to know about such crimes but did not attempt to stop them or punish those responsible are criminally liable for war crimes as a matter of command responsibility.

    The accounts listed in the report, detailing horrific atrocities, will no doubt add to other evidence to be examined by the international courts.

    Denials or in denial

    And then there’s another narrative: the denial by Russia of any involvement in war crimes and atrocities:

    This separate statement, issued by the Russian ministry of defence via its Telegram account, was in response to claims of war crimes committed in Bucha.

    It concludes:

    All this confirms conclusively that the photos and video footage from Bucha are another hoax, a staged production and provocation by the Kiev regime for the Western media, as was the case in Mariupol with the maternity hospital, as well as in other cities.

    Moscow also has its many supporters and apologists. For example, there’s this article in the Orinoco Tribune. It in turn refers to another article, published on the ‘War On Fakes’ site.

    And there’s this lengthy article by Jacques Baud, former member of Swiss strategic intelligence. He argues that Ukraine made serious errors in the years leading up to the war and it could have been averted.

    Justice?

    Putting aside the geopolitics, what is undeniable in this conflict, as with many others, is the way civilians and their homes have been criminally targeted from day one. And it is these civilians, not governments, who ultimately deserve our support.

    Moreover, journalists have an obligation to reveal, as far as they can, the truth about the horrors of war – for to do anything less would arguably equate to complicity. Indeed, over the years The Canary has not shirked from revealing the horrors of such crimes, sometimes publishing images and videos that bring home the full truth of what took place.

    And the more the truth of war is revealed, the more likely the perpetrators of war crimes will be exposed and hopefully brought to justice.

    Featured image via Flickr Creative Commons / manhhai cropped 770×403 pixels

    By Tom Coburg

    This post was originally published on The Canary.