radiofree.asia

Category: military

  • Jokowi is a ‘hero’ for Myanmar, what about justice for the Papuans?

    By Kristianto Galuwo in Jayapura

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) has responded to comments by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Joko Widodo, who recently condemned violence by the military junta against pro-democracy protesters in Myanmar.

    The executive director of the ULMWP in Papua, Markus Haluk, said that the Papuan people also strongly condemned the actions of the Myanmar military junta which had seized power by violating the principles of democracy and human rights of the Myanmar people.

    “We condemn the anti-democratic military action of Myanmar, that is the principle of the people of West Papua,” he said.

    “The West Papuans reject the Indonesian and American governments which had been anti-decolonisation by the Dutch government towards the West Papuans since 1963. The West Papuans oppose violence against anyone.”

    Haluk said that while watching President Jokowi’s calls over the situation in Myanmar he had felt upset and angry because the Indonesian government had made the public question its democratic principles.

    The Indonesian government condemned Myanmar’s military but at the same time the government’s actions against Papua were anti-humanitarian and anti-democratic.

    “Honestly, I was angry, emotional, upset, but also I laughed out loud.

    ‘The problem in your backyard’
    “You always talk about democracy, human rights, being a hero for those over there, but what about those in front of your eyes – the problem in your backyard is the problem of Papua,” Haluk said.

    “What did President Jokowi do [to solve Papuan conflict]? Has he finished [the Papuan conflict] with 11 visits? Has he finished [the Papuan conflict) with building the Port Numbay Red Bridge?

    “Is it by holding PON XX [National Sports Week in October 2021 in Papua] and building facilities with a value of trillions of rupiah? Is it by sending TNI/POLRI [Indonesian military and police] troops from outside Papua?” he said.

    Haluk said that all that Jakarta had done would never resolve the political conflict between West Papua and the Indonesian government for the past 58 years – 1963-2021.

    The Indonesian government must think about concrete steps to resolve the crisis.

    “I convey to President Jokowi that now is the time for him to talk about Myanmar and it is indeed time to resolve political conflicts and human rights violations, crimes against humanity that continue to increase in West Papua,” he said.

    Haluk said there were several concrete steps that President Jokowi could take.

    President must honour promises
    The President must fulfil his promise to the chair of the UN Human Rights Council to come to West Papua.

    “That is in accordance with President Jokowi’s promise to the chair of the UN Human Rights Council in February 2018 in Jakarta.”

    He said the president must also fulfil his promise in 2015 that foreign journalists would be  allowed to freely enter Papua. Not only journalists, but also for all international communities to visit Papua.

    “Allow access for international journalists, foreign diplomats, academics, members of the senate and congress as well as the international community to visit West Papua,” he said.

    Meanwhile, Selpius Bobi, an activist for the victims of March 16, 2006, said last week that the Indonesian government had never stopped suppressing the freedom of indigenous Papuans.

    The events that put him in prison 15 years ago were still ongoing. He said it was better for the state to admit its mistakes in West Papua.

    “The Indonesian state must courageously, honestly and openly acknowledge to the public the deadly scenario behind the March 16, 2006 tragedy which it was responsible for and apologise to the victims,” he said.

    Freeport clash and tragedy
    Three policemen and an airman were killed and 24 other people wounded during a clash with Papuan students who had been demanding the closure of PT Freeport’s Grasberg mine.

    Indonesia committed violence against the Papuan people to take away its natural wealth.

    “We declare that PT Freeport Indonesia must be closed and let us negotiate between the United States, Indonesia and West Papua as responsibility and compensation for the West Papuan people who were sacrificed because of the unilateral cooperation agreement related to mining exploitation,” he said.

    He also urged President Jokowi to immediately stop the crimes that were rampant in West Papua.

    “Stop violence, stop military operations, stop sending TNI-POLRI, stop kidnappings and killings, stop stigmatisation and discrimination, stop arbitrary arrest and imprisonment for West Papuan human rights activists, and immediately withdraw non-organic troops from the Land of Papua, revoke the Papua Special Autonomy Law and stop the division of the province in the Land of Papua.”

    This article has been translated by a Pacific Media Watch project contributor.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Jokowi is a ‘hero’ for Myanmar, what about justice for the Papuans?

    By Kristianto Galuwo in Jayapura

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) has responded to comments by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Joko Widodo, who recently condemned violence by the military junta against pro-democracy protesters in Myanmar.

    The executive director of the ULMWP in Papua, Markus Haluk, said that the Papuan people also strongly condemned the actions of the Myanmar military junta which had seized power by violating the principles of democracy and human rights of the Myanmar people.

    “We condemn the anti-democratic military action of Myanmar, that is the principle of the people of West Papua,” he said.

    “The West Papuans reject the Indonesian and American governments which had been anti-decolonisation by the Dutch government towards the West Papuans since 1963. The West Papuans oppose violence against anyone.”

    Haluk said that while watching President Jokowi’s calls over the situation in Myanmar he had felt upset and angry because the Indonesian government had made the public question its democratic principles.

    The Indonesian government condemned Myanmar’s military but at the same time the government’s actions against Papua were anti-humanitarian and anti-democratic.

    “Honestly, I was angry, emotional, upset, but also I laughed out loud.

    ‘The problem in your backyard’
    “You always talk about democracy, human rights, being a hero for those over there, but what about those in front of your eyes – the problem in your backyard is the problem of Papua,” Haluk said.

    “What did President Jokowi do [to solve Papuan conflict]? Has he finished [the Papuan conflict] with 11 visits? Has he finished [the Papuan conflict) with building the Port Numbay Red Bridge?

    “Is it by holding PON XX [National Sports Week in October 2021 in Papua] and building facilities with a value of trillions of rupiah? Is it by sending TNI/POLRI [Indonesian military and police] troops from outside Papua?” he said.

    Haluk said that all that Jakarta had done would never resolve the political conflict between West Papua and the Indonesian government for the past 58 years – 1963-2021.

    The Indonesian government must think about concrete steps to resolve the crisis.

    “I convey to President Jokowi that now is the time for him to talk about Myanmar and it is indeed time to resolve political conflicts and human rights violations, crimes against humanity that continue to increase in West Papua,” he said.

    Haluk said there were several concrete steps that President Jokowi could take.

    President must honour promises
    The President must fulfil his promise to the chair of the UN Human Rights Council to come to West Papua.

    “That is in accordance with President Jokowi’s promise to the chair of the UN Human Rights Council in February 2018 in Jakarta.”

    He said the president must also fulfil his promise in 2015 that foreign journalists would be  allowed to freely enter Papua. Not only journalists, but also for all international communities to visit Papua.

    “Allow access for international journalists, foreign diplomats, academics, members of the senate and congress as well as the international community to visit West Papua,” he said.

    Meanwhile, Selpius Bobi, an activist for the victims of March 16, 2006, said last week that the Indonesian government had never stopped suppressing the freedom of indigenous Papuans.

    The events that put him in prison 15 years ago were still ongoing. He said it was better for the state to admit its mistakes in West Papua.

    “The Indonesian state must courageously, honestly and openly acknowledge to the public the deadly scenario behind the March 16, 2006 tragedy which it was responsible for and apologise to the victims,” he said.

    Freeport clash and tragedy
    Three policemen and an airman were killed and 24 other people wounded during a clash with Papuan students who had been demanding the closure of PT Freeport’s Grasberg mine.

    Indonesia committed violence against the Papuan people to take away its natural wealth.

    “We declare that PT Freeport Indonesia must be closed and let us negotiate between the United States, Indonesia and West Papua as responsibility and compensation for the West Papuan people who were sacrificed because of the unilateral cooperation agreement related to mining exploitation,” he said.

    He also urged President Jokowi to immediately stop the crimes that were rampant in West Papua.

    “Stop violence, stop military operations, stop sending TNI-POLRI, stop kidnappings and killings, stop stigmatisation and discrimination, stop arbitrary arrest and imprisonment for West Papuan human rights activists, and immediately withdraw non-organic troops from the Land of Papua, revoke the Papua Special Autonomy Law and stop the division of the province in the Land of Papua.”

    This article has been translated by a Pacific Media Watch project contributor.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Terrorism Lawsuit Ties Radicalized Navy Shooter To Saudi Royal Family

    Via America’s Lawyer: The kingdom of Saudi Arabia continues to face lawsuits over its proven connections to terrorist attacks, including the 9/11 hijackings, the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, and the deadly mass shooting at a Pensacola naval base. Meanwhile, U.S. officials remain enamored by lucrative U.S.-Saudi arms deals while turning a blind eye to crimes of […]

    The post Terrorism Lawsuit Ties Radicalized Navy Shooter To Saudi Royal Family appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Journalists Are Still Trying To Rehab George W Bush’s Reputation

    New York Magazine ran an article recently saying that George W. Bush would be considered “too liberal” for the Republican Party today, and that’s quite possibly one of the dumbest statements of the year. Bush is still a rabid right-wing nutjob, but he doesn’t wear it on his sleeve the way that Trump and the […]

    The post Journalists Are Still Trying To Rehab George W Bush’s Reputation appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Donald Trump Jr. Freaks Out After Military Pushes Back Against Tucker Carlson

    Donald Trump, Jr. has put out another idiotic video, this time claiming that the United States military is being used to “attack” civilians. Ironically, he also calls them out for going after a sitting member of Congress, apparently forgetting what his father’s supporters did just a few months ago. The truth is that military members […]

    The post Donald Trump Jr. Freaks Out After Military Pushes Back Against Tucker Carlson appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • How the Milk Tea Alliance has teamed up with the ‘West Papua Spring’

    By Jasmine Chia in Bangkok

    It is an unlikely combination: the white stars of the West Papuan and Myanmar flags, side by side.

    “West Papua Stands with Myanmar,” the sign said, posted by Indonesian human rights lawyer Veronica Koman. In another poignant picture, a small group of West Papuans stand at Simora Bay at the port town of Kaimana holding a sign that reads: “We Stand With Myanmar.”

    Popular activist Twitter account @AllianceMilkTea responds: “And solidarity with you West Papua!”

    The latest member of the Milk Tea Alliance is a little-known region in ASEAN, south of the Pacific Ocean and bordered by the Halmahera, Ceram and Banda seas.

    West Papua is better known for its Raja Ampat or “Four Kings” Islands, the majestic archipelago which contains the richest marine biodiversity on earth. But, like other members of the Milk Tea Alliance, it is a region scarred by subjugation and tyranny.

    Milk Tree Alliance Tweet
    The Milk Tree Alliance tweet.

    While the brutality of Min Aung Hlaing’s army is horrifyingly public, West Papuans protest killings and an independence movement that has largely been erased from history.

    In December 2020, Benny Wenda, a political exile in Britain, declared himself head of West Papua’s first government-in-exile under the Papua Merdeka “Free West Papua” movement. That same month, the United Nations Human Rights Office called on all sides – West Papuan separatists and the Indonesian security forces – to de-escalate violence in the territory that has seen the deaths of activists, church workers and Indonesian officials.

    As the Papua Merdeka campaign picks back up, this article surveys the history and recent state violence in the region. Flickers of a “Papuan Spring” seem faint in a March that has emboldened Southeast Asian dictators. But that the voices of a region long suppressed are being heard is an achievement in and of itself.

    History of West Papuan independence claims
    History is always a fraught tool in the battle between states and their challengers. Indonesian claims to control over West Papua date back to the “restoration” of the region to the Republic of Indonesia in a pivotal 1969 referendum, the ironically named “Act of Free Choice” (AFC).

    Central to the AFC’s controversy was the musyawarah (consultation) system, agreed upon by the Foreign Ministers of Indonesia and Netherlands, which decreed that the vote for West Papuan “restoration” would be conducted by a select group of representatives rather than the entire West Papuan population.

    The AFC was overseen by representatives from the UN Secretary-General’s team, giving the Indonesian government its desired stamp of international legitimacy.

    Yet, as studies produced by the University of Sydney show, since 1963 President Suharto’s military government worked to deliberately quash expressions of a unique Papuan identity. Shows of Papuan culture were declared “subversion”, West Papuan nationalists were placed under detention, and representatives were carefully selected for what the musyawarah.

    The script is familiar to any observer of Thailand’s equally controversial 2016 “constitutional referendum”. As an AFP correspondent noted in 1969, “Indonesian troops and officials are waging a widespread campaign of intimidation to force the Act of Free Choice in favor of the Republic.”

    President Suharto declared that voting against the AFC was an act of treason. Eventually, 1026 voters were chosen of a population of 815,906, all of whom voted unanimously for integration.

    Detained West Papuan activists 1969
    Prominent West Papuan activists placed under detention during the 1969 “Act of Free Choice” referendum. Source: John Wing and Peter King, Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, The University of Sydney

    In the aftermath of the AFC vote, West Papua was immediately declared a Military Operation Zone. West Papuan historians like John Rumbiak highlighted the military and police repression that soon followed, especially against activists protesting the appropriation of traditional land and forests by mining firms and timber estates.

    Thousands of troops were deployed in response to growing protest movements in the 1990s, with planned “black operations” against independence leaders.

    Ever since, West Papua has been caught in a cycle of violence. Indonesian armed forces accuse guerillas of inciting separatist violence, justifying their crackdowns on various villages.

    Under Indonesian law, raising the West Papuan flag carries a sentence of up to 15 years in prison. Separatists like the armed West Papua National Liberation Army continue to wage a low-key insurgency in their quest for self-rule.

    According to rights group Human Rights and Peace in Papua, 60,000 West Papuans have been displaced in the conflict.

    “Our independent nation was stolen in 1963 by the Indonesian government,” Wenda said in an interview with the New York Times, “We are taking another step toward reclaiming our legal and moral rights.”

    Wenda, like the authors of the University of Sydney study, argues that there is a “silent genocide” taking place in West Papua, as thousands of Indonesians are killed by Indonesian state actors in their battle against West Papuan separatists.

    A 2004 Yale Law School report similarly concluded that “the Indonesian government has committed proscribed acts with the intent to destroy the West Papuans,” including subjecting Papuan men and women to “acts of torture, disappearance, rape, and sexual violence.”

    This is compounded systematic resource exploitation, compulsory (and often unpaid) labor, as well as the rapid spread of HIV/AIDS and malnutrition.

    West Papuan claims to independence date back to 1961, according to then Papua People’s Congress leader Theys Hiyo Eluay.

    Eluay, later murdered by Indonesian Kopassus soldiers, insisted that Papua had never been culturally and politically integrated with Indonesia – a claim seemingly reinforced by the ethnic difference of the majority Papua population that inhabit the region.

    In the narrative both Eluay and Wenda have shared, West Papua declared sovereignty on 1 December 1961 as the Dutch gave up claims to Indonesia.

    “This same vision of West Papua’s history and sovereignty can be found among ordinary Papuan people,” writes academic Nino Viartasiwi.

    Papuan Spring? The 2019 Uprising
    West Papuans’ newfound alliance with the Milk Tea Alliance is part of its renewed attempt to bring international attention to the violence they have faced at the hands of Indonesian security forces for half a century.

    Last year, a #PapuanLives Matter campaign spotlighted the death of a 19-year old student at the hand of security forces as part of the global focus on police brutality. Activists highlighted the racialized elements of the West Papuan struggle.

    In the words of UK-born Indonesian actor and activist Hannah Al Rashid, quoted in The Guardian: “I stand in solidarity with Papuan Lives Matter, because…I have observed the way in which people of darker skin [in Indonesia] have been treated unfairly.”

    These 2020-2021 movements are smaller resurrections of the larger 2019 West Papua Uprising, or simply, ‘The Uprising.’ From August to September 2019, protests swept 22 towns in West Papua and 3 cities in Indonesia in response to an incident in which Indonesian soldiers shouted ‘monkey’ repeatedly at West Papuan students in Malang.

    In response, over 6000 members of the Indonesian security forces were deployed to quell the Uprising. 61 civilians – including 35 indigenous West Papuans – died in the crackdown.

    According to TAPOL, a campaigning platform for human rights, peace and democracy in Indonesia, 22,800 civilians were displaced during the Uprising.

    The cycle of resistance and crackdown is not new to Southeast Asia. West Papuans face the additional struggle of opposing a security force that they do not claim as their own, but it is an experience the Karen, Kachin, Chin or Wa peoples in Myanmar currently share.

    Their solidarity with the Milk Tea Alliance is fitting, drawing on a movement that has built regional solidarity and momentum for other struggles against authoritarianism.

    With any luck, the unlikely solidarity across the two starred flags may bring the West Papuan struggle back into the international spotlight. If not, the conflict will continue in the shadows, as it has done since the dawn of the 21st century.

    Jasmine Chia is a writer and contributor to the Thai Enquirer.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Military Admits They Have A Major White Supremacist Problem

    A new report from the Pentagon says that the military has a major problem with extremists in their ranks, as these individuals seek to join the military to gain combat experience that they want to use on fellow Americans. But it isn’t just the military, the report says that the police are suffering from the […]

    The post Military Admits They Have A Major White Supremacist Problem appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Republicans Oppose Stimulus But Support Spending A TRILLION On Nuclear Weapons

    Republican politicians were united in their opposition to the $1.9 trillion COVID relief package, arguing that it was too costly. But they have absolutely no problem with a $1.5 trillion plan to upgrade nuclear weapons in the United States. The truth is that there is always money available for projects that politicians like, but when […]

    The post Republicans Oppose Stimulus But Support Spending A TRILLION On Nuclear Weapons appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Ian Hislop exposed the Tories BS live on Question Time

    It’s rarely hard work pulling apart Conservative Party policy. But it is sometimes tricky to do it in a concise manner. So, enter Ian Hislop to annihilate a key Tory policy, live on BBC Question Time.

    Nurses vs Nukes

    The UK’s nuclear weapons programme Trident has once again hit the headlines. This time it’s because changes were announced in the government’s Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy. This review has replaced previous defence-focused reviews. As The Canary previously reported, the government plans to up:

    the cap on the number of nuclear weapons the UK can have

    So, people have been angry about this. Not least because the Tories are only giving nurses a 1% pay rise while spending more on bombs.

    When the issue came up on Question Time on Thursday 18 March, Private Eye editor Ian Hislop tore it apart.

    Trident: what a waste

    He made clear that Trident is a waste of money. And Hislop noted that the Integrated Review prompted the question:

    Is there any other alternative apart from these submarines that go round the world and spend a lot of time in the dock… They do spend quite a lot of time being repaired. These are the ones that we’ve extended the life of, before we actually replace them with another, unbelievably expensive and complex one.

    He also gave his thoughts on another aspect of the review. The Guardian reported that:

    Britain is prepared to launch nuclear weapons if the country was faced with an exceptionally destructive attack using cyber or other “emerging technologies”

    It noted:

    The new policy says Britain would “reserve the right” to use nuclear weapons in the face of “weapons of mass destruction”, which includes “emerging technologies that could have a comparable impact” to chemical or biological weapons.

    Nukes for computers

    So, Hislop made clear the seeming ridiculousness of using nukes against a cyber-attack:

    The prime minister was asked ‘why do you need more warheads in order to respond to a cyber attack?’. Really? We need more of them? You need them? It made no sense at all.

    The Integrated Review outlined several threats to UK security. It said “Islamist” terrorism was the “primary” threat. The review also listed other threats as countries using:

    illicit finance or coercive economic measures, disinformation, cyber-attacks, electoral interference or even – three years after the Salisbury attack – the use of chemical or other weapons of mass destruction.

    Of course, the Tories would disagree with Hislop’s assertion that nukes were not needed for a cyber-attack. However, what we’re seeing with the Integrated Review is the Tories making excuses for nuclear weapons. Saying officially that a cyber-attack could need a nuclear response keeps these weapons relevant. But here’s the thing. Reviews have told the Tories for over a decade that a nuclear attack isn’t the biggest threat to UK security.

    Making excuses

    In October 2010, the-then strategic defence review identified four key risks to UK security. The highest risks (tier one) were:

    • “Hostile attacks upon UK cyber space”.
    • “International terrorism”.
    • “A major accident or natural hazard”, including a pandemic.
    • “An international military crisis between states, drawing in the UK, its allies as well as other states and non-state actors”.

    Note the lack of a mention a nuclear attack. This was because the review said this was a tier two risk. Another review in 2015 said the same thing. And now, here we are in 2021 with little having changed – except the Tories making excuses for having nuclear weapons.

    As Hislop inferred, even the government’s own evidence says we don’t need nuclear weapons. So the rationale to increase our stockpiles defies any logical explanation.

    Featured image via BBC iPlayer – screengrab 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The government wants to recruit EVERYONE to counter-terrorism

    The UK government wants to recruit everybody to its counter-terrorism effort. That is if its newly announced Integrated Review is anything to go by.

    Page 90 of the new review details plans to involve all levels of civil society, including business and individuals, in its new “resilience” plans. This will be for issues like flooding but also for things like “terrorism”.

    A ‘whole of society’ approach

    The relevant passage contains a pledge:

    To establish a ‘whole-of-society’ approach to resilience, so that individuals, businesses and organisations all play a part in building resilience across the UK. We will seek to develop an integrated approach, bringing together all levels of government, CNI [critical national infrastructure] criticial operators, the wider private sector, civil society and the public.

    The review expands on this in rather vague terms:

    As part of this, we will: improve government communications to the public on preparedness; consider strengthening the role and responsibilities of local resilience forums (LRFs) in England; and consider the scope and responsibilities of CNI owners and operators to ensure a consistent resilience standard across CNI sectors. This is in addition to any necessary sector-specific legislation, such as the Telecommunications (Security) Bill. The new cyber strategy will contribute to this overall approach, increasing the UK’s resilience to cyber risks. This will include raising the level of cyber security across CNI sectors and increasing the adoption of the NCSC’s Cyber Assessment Framework.

    Authoritarian assumptions

    The implications are not entirely clear and no detailed vision of what a ‘whole-of -society’ approach may look like has been laid out at this stage. The concept is mentioned in an international context on page 24 of the report, in a section on “continuities and changes” in defence policy, which is also laden with jargon.

    It readIt wants to establish a ‘whole-of-society’ approachs:

    Domestic and international resilience: we will improve our ability – and that of our allies and partners – to anticipate, prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from risks to our security and prosperity. It will be essential to take a whole-of-society approach to resilience across the Union, in addition to cooperating with international partners to address challenges such as climate change and global health risks. Learning from COVID-19, we will improve our ability to anticipate and respond to crises by establishing a cross-government Situation Centre in the Cabinet Office and developing a national capability in digital twinning.

    “Digital twinning” aside, it’s very hard to know what a whole-of-society approach will mean, but it seems to hinge on some fairly authoritarian assumptions about recruiting civil society, and even individual citizens, to the government’s cause.

    Featured image via Wikimedia

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Scientists warn Government’s Integrated Review reproduces ‘most militaristic and aggressive’ aspects of UK foreign policy

    The Integrated Review combines the worst elements of 20th century British foreign policy, a group of ethical scientists has warned. The Review is meant to set the tone of post-Brexit foreign and defence policy, but Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) warns that it will set off an arms race, fail the world’s poor, and embed an “uncritical nationalism.”

    SGR executive director Dr Stuart Parkinson writes:

    The government’s Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy was widely trailed in the media as “the most radical reassessment of Britain’s place in the world since the end of the Cold War”. In reality, it mixes grand ethical aspirations with many of the most militaristic and aggressive elements of the UK’s late twentieth century policies – such as ‘Great Power’ rivalry, technological arms racing (including with weapons of mass destruction), uncritical nationalism, and failure to give adequate help to the world’s poorest. It then adds a new, high technology edge to them.

    He said the government’s coronavirus (Covid-19) crisis response suggests that the UK couldn’t provide security against major threats at home, let alone to people around the world:

    Given over 125,000 British people have died in the COVID-19 pandemic, and the nation has one of the highest death rates from this disease in the world, it is not hard to see how badly the government is failing to live up to its own rhetoric of protecting its citizens – let alone improving security elsewhere.

    Parkinson said SGR, and its partner organisations like Rethinking Security, were developing a coherent approach to security:

    In early 2021, the Rethinking Security network – of which SGR is a member – took the first steps in carrying out an ‘Alternative Security Review’ for the UK. This aims to do what the government failed to – follow a radical and ethical examination of the UK’s approach to tackling security problems from the level of the individual to the international scale. Only approaches like these offer a chance for the UK – and other nations – to make the world a secure place.

    Tweeting about the issue, Rethinking Security said:

    The Review is also blind to the UK government’s domestic actions, which have at times undermined democracy, justice, equality and the Union. Resilience, as the Review reminds us, starts at home.

    Rethinking Security said its work to develop “a Human Security Strategy for the UK, its people and the planet” would continue.

    Featured image via Wikipedia/Andrew Linnett

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Tahitian academic says Paris must pay for impacts of French nuclear tests

    RNZ Pacific

    A Tahitian academic living in Auckland whose family and home island of Mangareva were impacted on by three decades of French nuclear weapons tests says Paris must pay for the full extent of health and other damage caused.

    Ena Manuireva is a doctoral candidate at Auckland University of Technology.

    He responds to RNZ’s Koroi Hawkins about the recent revelations by the Moruroa Files investigation and a new book, Toxique, that the impact of the the 193 nuclear tests in Polynesia was far worse than previously admitted by French authorities.

    Ena Manuireva
    Ena Manuireva … doctoral research on the nuclear testing impact on the Gambiers.

    Transcript
    On a more personal level a Tahitian whose family and home island was impacted by French nuclear weapons tests says Paris must pay for the full extent of the fallout.

    Maururu Ena, thanks for joining us on the show. So you were born in Mangareva in 1967 just one year after the French started testing nuclear weapons in French Polynesia?

    [More later]

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

     

    Moruroa atoll 6 June 2000
    Part of Moruroa atoll four years after the French nuclear testing was halted in 1996. Almost all the installations that sheltered up to 3000 people for 30 years have been dismantled , giving the natural vegetation a chance to grow again. Image: Eric Feferberg/AFP/RNZ

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Democrats Try To Stop Transfer Of Military Weapons To Police Forces

    Dozens of Democrats in the House of Representatives have signed onto legislation that would put severe limits on the amount and types of surplus military equipment that is sent to police departments across the country. This program – the 1033 Program – has, by all measures, been a complete failure, and it has resulted in […]

    The post Democrats Try To Stop Transfer Of Military Weapons To Police Forces appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Leaked documents reveal the government’s plan for more nukes and global conflict

    Leaked documents from the government’s review of foreign and defence policy show it will increase the number of nuclear missiles the UK can possess, amid anger over cuts to foreign aid.

    The integrated review of defence and foreign policy intends to remove the cap on the number of Trident warheads that can be stockpiled by more than 40%. This is the first time the UK could increase its nuclear arsenal since the Cold War.

    The decision comes after previous leaked documents showed the extent of foreign aid cuts to countries like Yemen and Syria. The leak received considerable opposition from charities such as Save the Children and Care International.

    Campaigners have criticised the review and the UK’s approach to foreign policy.

    The review

    The review contains a foreword from the prime minister that promises to increase foreign aid spending to 0.7% of gross national income “when the fiscal situation allows”, after it was cut to 0.5%. However, the review later states:

    As governments become able to finance their own development priorities, we will gradually move towards providing UK expertise in place of grants

    The review also says there is a “realistic possibility” that a terrorist group could “launch a successful CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear] attack” by 2030.

    The document restates the creation of a “national cyber force” which uses military and intelligence knowledge for offensive hacking. It’s further expected that the UK will expand its drone fleet to include “lethal loitering drones”.

    Criticism

    Kate Hudson of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) said:

    This is no time to start a new nuclear arms race. As the world wrestles with the pandemic and climate chaos, it beggars belief that our government is opting to increase Britain’s nuclear arsenal.

    Last month, Presidents Biden and Putin agreed to further reduce their nuclear arsenals by renewing the New START Treaty. Johnson should not be increasing ours.

    With the government strapped for cash, we don’t need grandiose, money-wasting spending on weapons of mass destruction. We need essential investment in health, jobs and dealing with the climate catastrophe.

    If this is part of a ‘Global Britain’ narrative, then Johnson needs to reframe it: we need to be at the heart of global cooperation to deal with the challenges the entire international community faces. Racheting up global tensions and squandering our resources is an irresponsible and potentially disastrous approach.

    This is the time to get out of nuclear weapons not escalate the problem.

    Daniel Willis, campaigns and policy manager at Global Justice Now, said:

    Far from looking to the future, this review is taking us back to the Cold War, treating international policy as a zero-sum game and embarking on a new wave of colonial sabre-rattling and nuclear militarisation.

    Tackling major challenges like Covid-19 and climate change requires co-operation and multilateralism. Yet the government is intent on cynically using international aid to wield ‘soft power’ rather than tackling poverty and inequality.

    We were promised a radical reassessment of Britain’s place in the world, but all we have is confirmation of the Prime Minister’s schoolboy view of foreign policy and deluded imperial fantasies.

    Featured image via Flickr/Defence Images

    By Jasmine Norden

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Dear President Widodo, be honest with Papua about the military operations

    OPINION: By Theo Hesegem in Wamena, Papua

    Indonesian President Joko Widodo has repeatedly made trips to two of Melanesian provinces, Papua and West Papua, in the easternmost part of Indonesia.

    However, the working visits made by the head of state to the land of Papua have actually not produced the results expected by indigenous Papuans.

    The President always prioritises infrastructure, while the hopes of indigenous Papuans have been that the President would be serious about handling and resolving cases of alleged human rights violations in Papua.

    The visit of the head of state is only ceremonial. It is as if the father comes and the child is happy. He does not have good intentions to resolve cases of alleged human rights violations in Papua.

    The president always prioritises the interests of the nation and the state, and never thinks of the interests of “humanity”. He should see the real interests for Papuans are self-esteem and dignity.

    Meanwhile, the conflict in Papua continues to claim casualties. As a president, he should think about the people who are experiencing casualties and also the refugees who have now lost their leader.

    As executive director of the Papua Justice and Human Integrity Foundation and a world human rights defender, I would say that the ability of a president is very limited and immeasurable, even though he has served for two periods as President of the Republic of Indonesia.

    In our encounters with the president, he has been aware that all this time the conflict in Papua continues to claim a lot of casualties. It appears that the president is unable to handle and resolve cases of alleged human rights violations in the Land of Papua.

    Indonesia’s focus is always on the strength of the military apparatus in Papua, thus they always send non-organic troops to carry out military operations.

    According to the president, sending thousands of troops to Papua is considered addressing the problem of Papua, and thus human rights violations in Papua will end. I believe the conflict will increase greatly.

    Does this president have no solutions and policies?
    In my opinion, no. The president seems incapable and he has no new policies and no initiatives against the violence that has just an adverse impact on civil society as his own citizens. He sits on a soft and comfortable chair and just orders the commander and the chief of police to send troops to West Papua.

    As a citizen of this country, I am ashamed that the president’s policy of always sending an extraordinary numbers of troops in Papua, thousands of Indonesia Military (TNI) and Police (POLRI) forces have now occupied the land of Papua.

    We know several countries around the world have highlighted Indonesian and the human human rights violations. However, the President has not taken this spotlight seriously, perhaps because he considered it is an ordinary thing.

    So, the situation of human rights violations in Papua are not taken seriously and resolved with the heart.

    Law enforcement operations?
    President Widodo needs to explain the status of the conflict in Papua to the Papuan people and the international community.

    Is it a military operation or a law enforcement operation? So that the Papuans and international observers can know clearly.

    The reason why the president has to explain these two things is that the status of the conflict in Tanah Papua is not yet clear, even though law enforcement officials often say that the operations in Nduga and Intan Jaya are for law enforcement.

    This situation is very worrying because civilians who do not have weapons and do not know about any problems are always victims. Therefore, this impacts seriously on indigenous Papuans experiencing an extraordinary humanitarian crisis, and almost every time there are victims.

    Failures and wrong operations
    Previously, we knew that the operations in Nduga and Intan Jaya regencies were law enforcement operations. However, law enforcement operations have failed.

    Law enforcement operations of the Indonesia military and police officers have not succeeded in arresting Egianus Kogoya and his friends who are alleged to have carried out the massacre at Mount Kabo on December 2, 2018, until now – three months into 2021.

    The capabilities and actions of the officers are actually worse in the process of searching for the Free Papua Organisation (OPM) suspects. To this day, we have never heard that the group led by Egianus Kogoya and his friends have been arrested and processed.

    Where are the thousands of military troops who have been assigned to Papua?

    The law enforcement process has not gone well according to the expectations of the Indonesian government.

    People who were suspected of being OPM have been immediately executed on the spot and members of the TNI only submitted evidence to the law enforcement apparatus without being accompanied by the person arrested.

    Is it by means of submitting evidence without the person that the law enforcement process can be run.

    The TNI/POLRI military apparatus needs to learn professional law enforcement processes, so that the application of the law in the field can be carried out in accordance with the mechanisms or laws in force in Indonesia.

    Civilians who were arrested were shot, then the authorities put the gun on their chest or body to show it as having belonged to them, then the TNI apparatus handed over only the evidence – pistol – to the law enforcement apparatus.

    Law enforcement officials do not dare to prove in an honest and fair investigation that the weapons really belonged to the OPM or were engineered by officers in the field.

    Missing serial numbers on firearms
    The law enforcement process is very important, so that anyone who has committed a violation of the law must be processed according to the applicable law in Indonesia.

    The confiscation of evidence of weapons in the hands of the OPM was a success of the TNI/POLRI apparatus, only the weapons in question could not be proven in the law enforcement process.

    For example, the police, as law enforcement officers can prove with the serial number of the pistol or weapon seized in the hands of the OPM to be able to prove it with the serial number registered in each police or military institution. This is ecause all weapons and pistols used by the TNI and POLRI officers have been officially registered with their respective institutions.

    Thus the serial number of the weapon needs to be proven. If the serial number of the weapon or pistol is not registered, it means that the weapon or pistol belongs to the OPM.

    Then in the process of proving the serial numbers of weapons and pistols registered with the military institution or POLRI, it means that there has been manipulation in the field by the authorities.

    For this reason, proving a weapon’s number is very important, but to my knowledge, the authorities as law enforcers have never done it. A serious failure.

    This is why I argue that the operations in Nduga and Intan Jaya are law enforcement operations that have failed and gone wrong.

    President does not respect citizens
    President Widodo does not respect its own people, which to this day, the indigenous Papuan people, as citizens, have always been victims of violence, but a president just chooses to remain silent.

    As a human rights defender, I am very disappointed with the attitude of a president who does not protect civilians, indigenous Papuans, as citizens who have the right to live and to freedom.

    The president also does not respect the international community which always urges open access to the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations and foreign journalists to enter Papua.

    Perhaps, according to the president, the humanitarian crisis in Papua is considered an ordinary thing, not an extraordinary thing, so that Jakarta always sends troops to carry out military operations in Papua.

    Honourable President, I, as a human rights defender in Papua, am very surprised and feel sad about the attitude of a president who always sends troops using warships to lean on Jayapura for military operations in Papua Land.

    I appeal to you, President Widodo, to please convey honestly to us as the Papuan region about sending of troops in such excessive numbers.

    If indeed Papua has been designated as a Military Emergency Operation area, we need to know that! Being honest is an important part of being a President.

    Theo Hesegem is the executive director of the Papua Justice and Human Integrity Foundation and a world human rights defender. This article was contributed to Asia Pacific Report.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Jakarta sends 21,000 troops to Papua over last three years, says KNPB

    By Arnold Belau in Nabire

    Victor Yeimo, international spokesperson for the West Papua National Committee (KNPB), has revealed that over the past three years the Indonesian state has sent 21,369 troops to the land of Papua.

    Yeimo said that based on data from the media and public official statements, the number of non-organic TNI (Indonesian military) that have been sent to the land of Papua over the last three years stands at 21,609, comprising 10,000 in 2019, 8000 in 2020 and 3609 in the first three months of 2021.

    In three years, Indonesia has sent 21,000 troops to Papua.

    “This doesn’t include data on the number of Kopassus (Special Forces) [troops], it doesn’t count the number of territorial troops in the two provinces (the Cenderawasih and Kasuari regional military commands). It doesn’t count the number of non-organic and organic Polri [Indonesian police] in the two provinces. [And] it doesn’t count the civilian militia armed by the state in Papua”, said Yeimo.

    Yeimo explained on his Facebook page at the weekend that this massive deployment of military to Papua reinforced the fact that Papua was a military operation zone.

    The aim of sending thousands of troops, he said, was to occupy and secure the state’s business interests and the illegal business belonging to the generals.

    This meant Papua had truly become a protectorate where life and death was controlled by military force.

    “The Papuan nation must confront the threat of militarism through the unity of the power of the ordinary people who are consolidated and led,” he said.

    “Trust that the subject and object of a revolution is the ordinary people who are in motion and do not submit to the colonialists. This is currently being proven in Myanmar: the ordinary people are resisting militarism by peaceful and dignified means.”

    As quoted by jubi.co.id, the Indonesian Christian Church (GKI) in Papua’s coordinator for justice, peace and oneness of creation, Pastor Leonora Balubun, said that the state continued to send troops to various parts of Papua, including Intan Jaya.

    According to Balubun, the government is unwilling to listen to the calls and criticism of those asking for all non-organic troops to be withdrawn from Indonesia’s eastern-most province.

    “We ask for the troops to be withdrawn from Papua. But the state responses by sending more troops. Yet the state knows that the Papuan people are afraid (traumatised) by the military” said Balubun.

    Hard to get data on TNI in Papua
    The Papuan Regional House of Representatives (DPRP) said that it was difficult to get data and information on the number of non-organic troops sent to the different parts of Papua every year.

    DPRP Deputy Speaker Yunus Wonda said that even Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe, as the regional leader, probably did not know how many non-organic troops were routinely sent to the land of the Cenderawasih, as Papua is known.

    “Indeed in relation to the number of non-organic troops we don’t know. Even perhaps the governor as the head of the region doesn’t know”, said Wonda as quoted by Jubi.com.id.

    According to Wonda, it is impossible that the DPRP would receive official reports each time troops are sent to Papua.

    The reason being that this is central government policy and the security institutions also have their own regulations and channels of command, separate from government regulations and systems.

    “We we are always asking the central government not to send excessive troops. The number of TNI and Polri personnel here are enough, it’s functional,” he said.

    It was unnecessary to sent excessive troops from outside, as if Papua was under a state of war, said Wonda.

    Wonda said it would be better if the central government trusted in the regional police chiefs and regional military commanders. The TNI and police leadership in Papua were capable of overcoming the problems in different parts of Papua because they understood and knew what approach to take.

    “This makes us ashamed in the eyes of the international community, right. We confront our own people as if we’re in a war zone. The troops which arrive from outside don’t understand the character of indigenous communities,” he said.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Victor Yeimo: Dalam Tiga Tahun Negara Sudah Kirim 21 Ribu Anggota ke Papua”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Protecting Kids from Abuse

    For years, the Pentagon mishandled sexual assault cases involving kids living on military bases, until an Associated Press investigation jolted lawmakers into action.

    Reporter Holly McDede brings us to Berkeley High School in California, where students were fed up with what they saw as a culture of sexual harassment and assault among their peers. 

    Don’t miss out on the next big story. Get the Weekly Reveal newsletter today.

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • Pentagon Mocks Tucker Carlson After He Calls Them Girly

    Fox News host Tucker Carlson thinks he is the arbiter of what is manly and what is not. After recent reports about the Biden administration promoting female officers that had been denied under Donald Trump, Carlson claimed that Biden was making our military “too feminine”.  There is nothing girly or weak about the women and […]

    The post Pentagon Mocks Tucker Carlson After He Calls Them Girly appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Teen killed as Indonesian police tell Papuans: ‘You’re legitimate target! Shoot!’

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    A 17-year-old youth has become the latest victim of Indonesia’s six-decades-long colonisation of West Papua, alleges the United Liberation Movement of West Papua.

    “Killed on March 6, Melianus Nayagau has been murdered in Intan Jaya, where Indonesian military operations have displaced thousands of my people,” said ULMWP interim president Benny Wenda in a statement today.

    Separately, a video has shown an Indonesian police chief in Java telling demonstrating West Papuan students that they are “a legitimate target”, and giving the order to “shoot”, said the ULMWP website.

    “This is the reality of what we face in West Papua. As the people of West Papua resist Jakarta’s re-imposition of ‘Special Autonomy’, Papuan students are being beaten by Indonesian nationalist gangs and arrested by colonial police,” Wenda said.

    The cold-blooded killing and viral video came just after the Indonesian military killed a 36-year-old deaf disabled man, Donatus Mirip, on February 27.

    “As I previously stated, three West Papuan men were tortured and murdered in a West Papuan hospital by Indonesian soldiers on February 15,” Wenda said.

    Late last year, West Papuan pastor Yeremia Zanambani, Catholic catechist Rufinus Tigau and other religious figures were tortured, shot and killed by troops, and three school children were executed by an Indonesian state death squad on November 20, 2020, reports the ULMWP website.

    Burning bodies
    Several soldiers were recently found to have killed two other family members of Pastor Zanambani last year, burning the bodies and throwing their ashes into a local river.

    Tens of thousands of West Papuans have been displaced by these military operations since December 2018.

    Hundreds have died from lack of water, food and medicine, in the middle of a global pandemic, said Wenda.

    “As the largest religious organisation in our nation, the West Papua Council of Churches, has stated, ‘The Land of Papua has become a Military Operation Area’.

    “No one can deny that this is an absolute humanitarian catastrophe, a pattern of systematic human rights abuses targeted at the Indigenous population of West Papua by the Indonesian colonial regime.

    “This is serial, repeated murder of the young, of religious figures, of displaced women and children. We are treated with inhumanity on our own land.”

    The ULMWP website said Indonesia’s response to this undeniable disaster had been to deploy 1350 more highly armed troops to West Papua yesterday, joining the thousands of additional security personnel deployed since 2019.

    ‘Concealing the blood’
    “The Indonesian state is trying to conceal the blood that is dripping from its hands,” said Wenda.

    At the UN Human Rights Council last month, the Indonesian Foreign Minister denounced “double standards” and “politicisation” of the council, something Indonesia had done more to promote than any other state, Wenda said.

    “While they take a noble stand on the Palestinian and Myanmar struggles, they lie to the world about what they are doing to their own neighbours in West Papua,” he said.

    “I’m calling on the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to pay urgent attention to the situation in West Papua. This is not one-off killings and human rights violations.

    “This is a systematic attempt to subjugate the Indigenous population, to destroy our will to resist, to eliminate our culture and way of life. But we will not give up until we win back our right to self-determination, stolen from us in the 1960s.

    “We need regional leaders in Melanesia and the Pacific to listen to our cry. All 83 countries that support the visit of the UN High Commissioner to West Papua must redouble efforts to ensure the visit takes place as a matter of extreme urgency, before more of my people are murdered.

    “As I have stated since 2019, I am ready to sit down with the Indonesian President to find a just solution to live in peace and harmony in West Papua.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • For this Filipina journalist, every day is a battle with fear – and defying silence

    Women journalists, feminists, activists, and human rights defenders around the world are facing virtual harassment. In this series, global civil society alliance CIVICUS highlights the gendered nature of virtual harassment through the stories of women working to defend our democratic freedoms. Today’s testimony on International Women’s Day is published here through a partnership between CIVICUS and Global Voices.

    By CIVICUS in Manila

    There has been a hostile environment for civil society in the Philippines since President Rodrigo Duterte took power in 2016. Killings, arrests, threats, and intimidation of activists and government critics are often perpetrated with impunity.

    According to the United Nations, the vilification of dissent is being “increasingly institutionalised and normalised in ways that will be very difficult to reverse.”

    There has also been a relentless crackdown against independent media and journalists.

    Threats and attacks against journalists, as well as the deployment of armies of trolls and online bots, especially during the covid-19 pandemic, have contributed to self-censorship—this has had a chilling effect within the media industry and among the wider public.

    One tactic increasingly used by the government to target activists and journalists is to label them as “terrorists” or “communist fronts,” particularly those who have been critical of Duterte’s deadly “war on drugs” that has killed thousands.

    Known as “red-tagging” in the Philippines, this process often puts activists at grave risk of being targeted by the state and pro-government militias.

    In some cases, those who have been red-tagged were later killed. Others have received death threats or sexually abusive comments in private messages or on social media.

    Rampant impunity means that accountability for attacks against activists and journalists is virtually non-existent. Courts in the Philippines have failed to provide justice and civil society has been calling for an independent investigation to address the grave violations.

    Filipina journalist Inday Espina-Varona tells her story:
    ‘Silence would be a surrender to tyranny’

    The sound of Tibetan chimes and flowing water transformed into a giant hiss the night dozens of worried friends passed on a Facebook post with my face and a headline that screamed I’d been passing information to communist guerrillas.

    Old hag, menopausal bitch, a person “of confused sexuality”—I’ve been called all that on social media. Trolls routinely call for my arrest as a communist.

    But the attack on 4 June 2020 was different. The anonymous right-wing Facebook page charged me with terrorism, of using access and coverage to pass sensitive, confidential military information to rebels.

    That night, dinner stopped at two spoonsful. My stomach felt like a sack with a dozen stones churning around a malignant current. All my collection of Zen music, hours of staring at the stars, and no amount of calming oil could bring sleep.

    Strangers came heckling the next day on Messenger. One asked how it felt to be “the muse of terrorists”. Another said, “Maghanda ka na bruha na terorista” (“Get ready, you terrorist witch”).

    A third said in vulgar vernacular that I should be the first shot in the vagina, a reference to what President Rodrigo Duterte once told soldiers to do to women rebels.

    I’m 57 years old, a cancer survivor with a chronic bad back. I don’t sneak around at night. I don’t do countryside treks. I don’t even cover the military.

    Like shooting range target
    But for weeks, I felt like a target mark in a shooting range. As a passenger on vehicles, I replaced mobile web surfing with peering into side mirrors, checking out motorcycles carrying two passengers—often mentioned in reports on killings.

    I recognised a scaled-up threat. This attack didn’t target ideas or words. The charge involved actions penalised with jail time or worse. Some military officials were sharing it.

    Not surprising; the current government doesn’t bother with factual niceties. It uses “communist” as a catch-all phrase for everything that bedevils the Philippines.

    Anonymous teams have killed close to 300 dissenters and these attacks usually followed red-tagging campaigns. Nineteen journalists have also been murdered since Duterte assumed office in 2016.

    Journalists, lawmakers, civil liberties advocates, and netizens called out the lie. Dozens reported the post. I did. We all received an automated response: It did not violate Facebook’s community standards.

    It feels foolish to argue with an automated system but I did gather the evidence before getting in touch with Facebook executives. My normal response to abusive engagement on Facebook or Twitter is a laughing emoji and a block. Threats are a different matter.

    We tracked down, “Let’s see how brave you are when we get to the street where you live,” to a Filipino criminology graduate working in a Japanese bar. He apologised and took it down.

    Threat against ‘my daughter’
    After I fact-checked Duterte for blaming rape on drug use in general, someone said my “defending addicts” should be punished with the rape of my daughter.

    “That should teach you,” said the message from an account that had no sign of life. Another said he’d come to rape me.

    Both accounts shared the same traits. They linked to similar accounts. Facebook took these down and did the same to the journalist-acting-as-rebel-intel post and page.

    The public pressure to cull products of troll farms has lessened the incidence of hate messages. But there’s still a growth in anonymous pages focused on red-tagging, with police and military officials and official accounts spreading their posts.

    Some officers were actually exposed as the masterminds of these pages. When Facebook recently scrapped several accounts linked to the armed forces, government officials erupted in rage, hurling false claims about “attacks on free expression.”

    This reaction shows the nexus between unofficial and official acts and platforms in our country. It can start with social media disinformation and then get picked up by the government, or it leads with an official pronouncement blown up and given additional spin on social media.

    Official complaints
    We’ve officially filed complaints against some government officials, including those involved with the top anti-insurgency task force. But justice works slowly. In the meantime, I practise deep breathing and try to take precautions.

    Officials dismiss any “chilling effect” from these non-stop attacks because Filipinos in general, and journalists in particular, remain outspoken. But braving dangers to exercise our right to press freedom and free expression isn’t the same as having the government respect these rights.

    Two years ago, journalist Patricia Evangelista of Rappler asked a small group of colleagues what it could take for us to fall silent.

    “Nothing,” was everyone’s response.

    And so every day I battle fear. I have to because silence would be a surrender to tyranny. That’s not happening on my watch.

    Inday Espina-Varona is an award-winning journalist from the Philippines and contributing editor for ABS-CBNNews and the Catholic news agency LiCASNews. She is a former chair of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) and the first journalist from the country to receive the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Prize for Independence.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Royal Family Knew History Of Radicalized Trainee Before Attack On US Navy Base

    Via America’s Lawyer: Following the 2019 terrorist attack at a Pensacola naval base which left 3 dead, families of victims sue the Saudi Arabian government for being complicit. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more.

    The post Royal Family Knew History Of Radicalized Trainee Before Attack On US Navy Base appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • President Biden Facing Backlash From Congress Over Syria Airstrikes

    Via America’s Lawyer: President Biden faces scrutiny for green-lighting airstrikes in Syria, justifying them as retaliation for last month’s rocket attacks on a U.S. base in Iraq. RT Correspondent Brigida Santos joins Mike Papantonio to discuss the way these strikes are authorized, and how Biden’s own press secretary is backpedaling on her previous defense of sovereign countries. Transcript: *This transcript […]

    The post President Biden Facing Backlash From Congress Over Syria Airstrikes appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Veronica Koman challenges Jakarta’s different stands on Burma and Papua

    Asia Pacific Report

    Human rights lawyer Veronica Koman has challenged the contrasting positions taken by the Indonesian government in response to calls to resolve the Papua problem and in its response to the military coup in Myanmar.

    Koman said Indonesia’s position on the Myanmar coup had been very good, but not its attitude on the Papua issue.

    “It’s funny, Indonesia pays no attention to international pressure to resolve the conflict in Papua, but has the courage to stand up to Myanmar, which is actually a very good move”, said Koman during a webinar held by the Milk Tea Alliance Indonesia last Sunday.

    Koman said the Indonesian public could not take a position of indifference in addressing the coup in Myanmar.

    This is because, according to Koman, what has happened in Myanmar could well happen in Indonesia as well.

    “I think that the problem of the coup d’etat in Myanmar is a mutual problem, it doesn’t mean that with the coup in Myanmar we as Indonesians can just be ambivalent, let alone our ASEAN neighbours, so it’s very important that Indonesia stands in solidarity [with the Burmese people],” she said.

    “Because, what is happening in the region is actually very influential. Don’t consider it something inconsequential, because if we look at the Arab Spring it took place [across an entire] region.

    Militarism ‘can spread too’
    “Revolutions can spread, so why can’t militarism [too],” said Koman.

    Koman noted that the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) and the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) had stated that the military in Indonesia were becoming more of a problem because they were now taking part in guarding demonstrations by civil society.

    According to Koman, the thing that actually differentiates Indonesia from Myanmar is only the coup itself.

    “Actually it’s the same, just in Indonesia there hasn’t been an obvious coup d’etat, yet the military in Indonesia is already involved in civil [affairs] through regulations which allow the TNI [Indonesian military] at civil demonstrations,” said Koman.

    Leaving this aside, Koman is calling on the Indonesian public to speak out in order to pressure the government to take a firmer stand on the Myanmar coup d’etat.

    Koman said that this represents a moment for the people of Southeast Asia to rise up against undemocratic tendencies in the region.

    “Because there is something which is known in international circles as the ASEAN way, and this has been criticised by many people, it means just staying quiet as if they support each other’s non-democracies,” she said.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Veronica Koman Singgung Sikap RI di Isu Papua dan Myanmar”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Myanmar’s Bloody Sunday – security forces ‘live tracking’ media, protesters

    By Phil Thornton in Bangkok

    The Myanmar army, police and militia’s use of violence against peaceful protestors reached another level on Sunday, February 28.

    By 5pm, local media reported at least 19 confirmed killings and another 10 unconfirmed. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) spoke to journalists covering the nationwide protests.

    Toe Zaw Latt, a video journalist and production director with Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB), is not surprised by the brutality or the extreme force used by the security forces.

    “It’s their assignment,” he said. “This is what they’re trained to do. Arrest people for exercising their democratic rights. Shoot them, beat them with iron bars, use powerful slingshots to fire bolts, and metal spikes.

    “Use tear gas and fire live ammunition into crowds of unarmed people. They want to silence journalists, but we need to report.”

    Toe Zaw Latt was 17 in 1988 when he first faced the military’s violence. He prays the violence in 2021 does not reach the level experienced in 1988 when security forces fired live ammunition into crowds of peaceful protesters, killing thousands.

    “Thousands of us had to take refuge in neighbouring countries. Protest leaders and other activists were jailed for years, tortured and denied any human rights in prison,” he said

    Military blackouts
    DVB, an independent media company, has managed to keep broadcasting, despite the crisis and enforced country wide military blackouts.

    “They pulled the plug on us, but we now rely on our satellite being outside the country,”  said Toe Zaw Latt. “We’re managing to operate 24/7 and every two hours we have a 30-minute news bulletin plus our live social media platform.”

    In 2021, technology is changing how journalists and protesters record abuses, he says.

    “Everyone now has a smartphone and everyone can record the military’s crimes against humanity. But I fear for my staff’s security.

    “We are easily identified as journalists by our equipment and PRESS signage, but we are still targeted by security forces because they don’t want their brutality and crimes recorded.”

    Protesters and journalists are not the only ones using technology. Security forces are using surveillance tools to “live” track protesters’ locations, listen in on conversations and trawl through computers and phones.

    Justice for Myanmar, undercover advocates who campaign for justice and accountability in the country, released a number of reports implicating Western companies in the supply of surveillance technology now used by the military to track its pro-democracy opponents.

    Israeli surveillance technology
    The Ministry of Home Affairs budget files, obtained by Justice for Myanmar and reported in The New York Times, “indicate that dual-use surveillance technology made by Israeli, American and European companies made its way to Myanmar, despite many of their home governments banning such exports after the military’s brutal expulsion of Rohingya Muslims in 2017.”

    Justice for Myanmar spokesperson Yadanar Maung said:“The military are now using those very tools to brutally crack down on peaceful protesters risking their lives to resist the military junta and restore democracy, and to move against journalists who are exercising their right to report on protests.”

    Despite military surveillance, arrests and violence, Toe Zaw Latt says journalists seem determined to keep reporting.

    “It’s challenging for reporters working in these conditions. They [security forces] just start walking into residential streets and start shooting, they’re like mad dogs. Our professional equipment marks us as a target, but we’ll continue to do our job.”

    Aye Win, (not her real name) works for an international news agency in a major city, said it’s the unseen violence that worries her the most. “We fear most what we can’t see – snipers and the thought of what they will do to you when they take you to the barracks or jail,” she said.

    Gunshots, loud can be heard in the background as Aye Win describes an army truck outside delivering more troops to the area. “It’s now 5.30pm and it’s not safe to go out. My female colleagues are scared…not of the crackdown, but of the unseen brutality. I worry about my freelancers, they have no protection, media laws are weak. Police have no respect for journalists, if you get too close they grab and steal your equipment.”

    Evolving security tactics
    Ng Maung has been on the frontline since the coup started on February 1 and has noticed how the security forces tactics have evolved.

    “They have started to remove their identification badges. Our PRESS logo is now a target. Not knowing where snipers are is a huge fear, we now need protection from bullets.

    “If I can see them I’m not scared. It’s not safe to be on the streets at any time. Ten journalists have been arrested already.”

    Toe Zaw Latt explained even if journalists work for international agencies or for a small local media outlet or as a freelancer there is no guarantees for their safety or protection of their right to work without interference from security forces.

    “No one is safe under this military government. We’re all in immediate danger, but at the same time we have to report, we can’t stay silent.”

    The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners an independent organisation founded and run by former political prisoners reported as of March 1 that 1,213 people have been arrested and 913 remain in detention.

    AAP said security forces fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protestors and journalists and live ammunition was also fired at residential homes. Reports of security forces looting and robbing have been confirmed by video footage shared by credible sources on social media.

    Toe Zaw Latt said people have responded by trying to secure their neighbourhoods. “Residents are blocking the roads to stop the police and army from entering, the community are protecting student protestors.

    “There’s no rule of law in Myanmar, but people are helping activists and journalist with food, refuge and lifts. They treat people battling the effects of tear gas.

    “They have even given us masks to stop the risk of covid spread. People say the military is a bigger risk than covid – they’re far more dangerous to the people of Myanmar.”

    Phil Thornton is an adviser for IFJ in South East Asia.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Myanmar’s Bloody Sunday – security forces ‘live tracking’ media, protesters

    The Myanmar army, police and militia’s use of violence against peaceful protestors reached another level on Sunday, February 28.

    By 5pm, local media reported at least 19 confirmed killings and another 10 unconfirmed. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) spoke to journalists covering the nationwide protests.

    Toe Zaw Latt, a video journalist and production director with Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB), is not surprised by the brutality or the extreme force used by the security forces.

    “It’s their assignment,” he said. “This is what they’re trained to do. Arrest people for exercising their democratic rights. Shoot them, beat them with iron bars, use powerful slingshots to fire bolts, and metal spikes.

    “Use tear gas and fire live ammunition into crowds of unarmed people. They want to silence journalists, but we need to report.”

    Toe Zaw Latt was 17 in 1988 when he first faced the military’s violence. He prays the violence in 2021 does not reach the level experienced in 1988 when security forces fired live ammunition into crowds of peaceful protesters, killing thousands.

    “Thousands of us had to take refuge in neighbouring countries. Protest leaders and other activists were jailed for years, tortured and denied any human rights in prison,” he said

    Military blackouts
    DVB, an independent media company, has managed to keep broadcasting, despite the crisis and enforced country wide military blackouts.

    “They pulled the plug on us, but we now rely on our satellite being outside the country,”  said Toe Zaw Latt. “We’re managing to operate 24/7 and every two hours we have a 30-minute news bulletin plus our live social media platform.”

    In 2021, technology is changing how journalists and protesters record abuses, he says.

    “Everyone now has a smartphone and everyone can record the military’s crimes against humanity. But I fear for my staff’s security.

    “We are easily identified as journalists by our equipment and PRESS signage, but we are still targeted by security forces because they don’t want their brutality and crimes recorded.”

    Protesters and journalists are not the only ones using technology. Security forces are using surveillance tools to “live” track protesters’ locations, listen in on conversations and trawl through computers and phones.

    Justice for Myanmar, undercover advocates who campaign for justice and accountability in the country, released a number of reports implicating Western companies in the supply of surveillance technology now used by the military to track its pro-democracy opponents.

    Israeli surveillance technology
    The Ministry of Home Affairs budget files, obtained by Justice for Myanmar and reported in The New York Times, “indicate that dual-use surveillance technology made by Israeli, American and European companies made its way to Myanmar, despite many of their home governments banning such exports after the military’s brutal expulsion of Rohingya Muslims in 2017.”

    Justice for Myanmar spokesperson Yadanar Maung said:“The military are now using those very tools to brutally crack down on peaceful protesters risking their lives to resist the military junta and restore democracy, and to move against journalists who are exercising their right to report on protests.”

    Despite military surveillance, arrests and violence, Toe Zaw Latt says journalists seem determined to keep reporting.

    “It’s challenging for reporters working in these conditions. They [security forces] just start walking into residential streets and start shooting, they’re like mad dogs. Our professional equipment marks us as a target, but we’ll continue to do our job.”

    Aye Win, (not her real name) works for an international news agency in a major city, said it’s the unseen violence that worries her the most. “We fear most what we can’t see – snipers and the thought of what they will do to you when they take you to the barracks or jail,” she said.

    Gunshots, loud can be heard in the background as Aye Win describes an army truck outside delivering more troops to the area. “It’s now 5.30pm and it’s not safe to go out. My female colleagues are scared…not of the crackdown, but of the unseen brutality. I worry about my freelancers, they have no protection, media laws are weak. Police have no respect for journalists, if you get too close they grab and steal your equipment.”

    Evolving security tactics
    Ng Maung has been on the frontline since the coup started on February 1 and has noticed how the security forces tactics have evolved.

    “They have started to remove their identification badges. Our PRESS logo is now a target. Not knowing where snipers are is a huge fear, we now need protection from bullets.

    “If I can see them I’m not scared. It’s not safe to be on the streets at any time. Ten journalists have been arrested already.”

    Toe Zaw Latt explained even if journalists work for international agencies or for a small local media outlet or as a freelancer there is no guarantees for their safety or protection of their right to work without interference from security forces.

    “No one is safe under this military government. We’re all in immediate danger, but at the same time we have to report, we can’t stay silent.”

    The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners an independent organisation founded and run by former political prisoners reported as of March 1 that 1,213 people have been arrested and 913 remain in detention.

    AAP said security forces fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protestors and journalists and live ammunition was also fired at residential homes. Reports of security forces looting and robbing have been confirmed by video footage shared by credible sources on social media.

    Toe Zaw Latt said people have responded by trying to secure their neighbourhoods. “Residents are blocking the roads to stop the police and army from entering, the community are protecting student protestors.

    “There’s no rule of law in Myanmar, but people are helping activists and journalist with food, refuge and lifts. They treat people battling the effects of tear gas.

    “They have even given us masks to stop the risk of covid spread. People say the military is a bigger risk than covid – they’re far more dangerous to the people of Myanmar.”

    Phil Thornton is an adviser for IFJ in South East Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Americans Want The Government To Spend More Money Making Our Lives Better

    According to a new poll from The Hill, a majority of Americans want the federal government to spend more money on things like anti-poverty measures, education, and healthcare. In other words, Americans want the government to spend money to protect them and make their lives better. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, and […]

    The post Americans Want The Government To Spend More Money Making Our Lives Better appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Masters of War: Labour pledges commitment to NATO and Trident as Biden drops first bombs

    It’s back to business as usual for British and American centrists. As Keir Starmer’s Labour prepared to announce its commitment to NATO and Trident (with newspapers inaccurately claiming that commitment had been abandoned during the Corbyn-era), US president Joe Biden launched his first airstrikes to the glee of US liberals.

    Trident

    According to a Labour press release, shadow defence lead John Healey is set to announce the party’s commitment in a speech. Healey is expected to say that the party is determined to see “defence spending produce jobs, growth and innovation in this country”:

    He will say that the foundations for the Government’s long-delayed Integrated Review have been undermined by the last decade of cuts to defence.

    And he will set out tests that the Review must meet if it is to end what the Prime Minister himself has called ‘the era of retreat.’

    The press release includes the following sections of the speech:

    First, Labour’s commitment to NATO is unshakeable. Second, Labour’s support for the UK’s nuclear deterrent is non-negotiable and we want to see Britain doing more to lead efforts to secure multilateral disarmament.

    Now the published sections of the speech don’t mention Corbyn directly. But both the Mirror and the Guardian have framed the speech as a turning point away from the previous leadership’s attitudes to nuclear weapons and NATO membership.

    The Mirror claims:

    The link between Labour and the military suffered under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership as he was accused of repeatedly undermining NATO and rendering the Trident nuke deterrent system effectively useless by revealing he would never order the firing of a missile.

    While the Guardian writes:

    Party’s commitment to Nato is also ‘unshakeable’, John Healey to say, in shift from Jeremy Corbyn era

    Fact check: Labour’s position under Corbyn

    But under Corbyn, the Labour party remained committed to both Trident renewal and membership of NATO. This is evident in both the 2017 and 2019 manifestos. And this was despite Corbyn’s personal and enduring opposition to nuclear arms and longstanding criticism of NATO.

    There are a number of interesting footnotes to the debate.

    As esteemed defence journalist Richard Norton-Taylor argued ahead of the 2019 general election, the Labour Party during the Corbyn period was surprisingly mainstream on Trident:

    This is one important issue on which his party’s manifesto is very far from being radical.

    The specifics of the former leader’s position on NATO are also contested. A 2019 piece by Channel 4′s FactCheck looked over Corbyn’s past statements on NATO. It concluded that:

    Jeremy Corbyn’s stance on NATO before he became Labour leader is often paraphrased as “wanting to pull out” of the alliance, but we can’t find evidence of him using this form of words.

    It may be a pedantic point, but Mr Corbyn generally talked about wishing that NATO would restrict its role in world affairs or agree to dissolve itself, rather than actively calling for Britain to pull out.

    Biden’s first bombings

    News of Labour’s defence speech came alongside reports that president Joe Biden had launched his inaugural air strikes.

    NBC reported that the strikes were against Iranian-backed militias operating within Syria. And they came despite Biden’s efforts to re-start the 2015 nuclear deal abandoned by his predecessor Donald Trump.

    The airstrikes were carried out early morning on 26 February. The report claimed that they were retaliation for rockets fired at US bases in Iraq. A US government spokesperson said the strikes were “proportionate” and “defensive”.

    Some Biden-backing US centrists took to Twitter to mark the new president’s inaugural bombing. They claimed that unlike under Trump, these attacks were “quiet”.

    So as far as the military industrial complex and neo-imperialism goes, it looks like it’s back to business as usual for both US and British centrists.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Naval Historical Center, Washington D.C.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Biden Bombs Syria Before Getting COVID Relief To Americans

    It took fewer than two months in office before the Biden administration approved an airstrike on a foreign country, and he actually managed to get that done before he got Americans the COVID relief that he had promised them. To add insult to injury, the minimum wage increase that Democrats were pushing was killed by […]

    The post Biden Bombs Syria Before Getting COVID Relief To Americans appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • The National Security State Doesn’t Protect Us. Let’s Redefine Security for All.

    National Guard troops stand outside the U.S. Capitol on February 13, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

    After the nation watched white supremacists take over the Capitol building, the failure of the national security state to appropriately recognize and address the threat became a national scandal. But this “failure” shouldn’t have surprised us. If there is one thing that the trillion-dollar national security apparatus is good at, it’s under-hyping and misinterpreting threats that aren’t based on threats from “outsiders,” while overhyping the threats that are.

    It’s not just white supremacy that the national security state often overlooks. The downplayed threats are often those that aren’t suggestive of national security “solutions.” Everyone knows that bombs can’t stop climate change, a virus or a hurricane (with the exception of one former president). In the case of white supremacist violence, the failure to appreciate the danger reflects a reluctance to use the full violence of state power against white citizens, but the effects are similar. And when it isn’t ignoring them, the national security state co-opts these threats rather than relinquish power to other arms of government.

    Of course, the bread and butter of the national security state is the idea that we need plenty of bombs (and ships, jets, troops and so on) to deal with threats posed by terrorists from “over there,” or countries that would threaten U.S. global primacy. The overhyping of a supposed threat posed by China is particularly insidious, as it threatens not only to ignite a new Cold War, but to drag climate negotiations, future pandemic preparations and the rest of the world down with it.

    National security needs to be reimagined twice: once to refocus it on real threats like climate change, global pandemics and authoritarianism, and again to refocus the response to those crises away from a militarized response and toward real solutions. It will take significant outside pressure to make that happen.

    Overhyped Threats and Military Overreach

    The U.S. military reaches around the globe, with approximately 800 foreign military installations in nearly half the world’s countries, and takes up more than half the discretionary budget that Congress allocates each year. Every decade or two, there is a new rationale for all this, with a new threat.

    In recent decades, the threats have shifted from Russia (the first time), to terrorists in the Middle East, to “rogue states” like North Korea and Iran, and most recently to economic and ideological rivals like China and Russia. Each of these overhyped threats has generated a military response out of all proportion to what might reasonably be deemed necessary, both because the U.S. military already has more capacity than it needs to rebuff any military threat, and because in most of these cases, the threat can’t be addressed through military means anyway.

    Through the 1980s, the U.S. and Russia engaged in an arms race that led to the two countries possessing enough nuclear weapons to destroy each other, and the planet, many times over. The primary justification on the U.S. side was an ideological fear of communism — a problem (if you can call it that) without a military solution. To this day, no other country comes even close to the number of nuclear weapons these two nations still hold, and the national security state continues to demand more resources for nuclear weapons. The same fear of communism was used to justify the U.S. war in Vietnam.

    The next big threat was terrorism. Twenty years after the “war on terror” began, the U.S. continues to fight aimlessly and at great cost in lives and riches. According to the Brown University Costs of War project, more than 800,000 people have died, 37 million people have been displaced, and the U.S. has spent $6.4 trillion on the war on terror to date. The continuing violence in the region has spread and mutated beyond what anyone imagined in 2001. The ongoing U.S. war against terror is a case of an overblown threat without a military solution. And yet many national security voices insist that the U.S. military must not abandon the cause.

    Today, the new oversold threats come from China and Russia. Recent national security strategy has set “great power competition” as the newest raison d’être for U.S. military hegemony, and signs point to the Biden administration largely continuing on this track, at great peril to crucial diplomatic efforts on climate. However, despite some disturbingly hawkish signs from the new administration, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, has acknowledged that the primary U.S. response to China must be domestic “economic renewal” — in other words, not primarily a beefed-up military, but rather, a rejuvenation of U.S. education and jobs. It’s not that there aren’t real problems associated with these countries. It’s just that those problems have little to do with the supposed threats to the U.S., and they certainly have no military solutions.

    Fear the Neighbors and Feed the Security State

    The national security state reaches inside the United States, too, with its own mythology to justify its continued growth. The national security state justifies its existence by overhyping the threat from crimes ranging from drug selling and possession to the act of crossing the border without the right papers.

    Even before the Trump administration, we witnessed the deportation of millions of people, falsely justified by fictions about “crime.” Today, overhyped fears about rising crime rates and scaremongering around demands to defund the police are accompanied by new calls for increased securitization. The supposed “threats” that justify the growth of the security state inside the U.S. are mostly our own neighbors.

    If You Can’t Ignore It, Militarize It

    The national security state inflates threats that justify its existence, but it also downplays or co-opts threats that in a different world would be the sole province of government agencies for energy, the environment, health care and so on. Instead of solving our problems, the national security state co-opts them for more resources and power.

    The most obvious and immediate threat, the COVID-19 pandemic, has now killed more people in the United States than every war except the Civil War — as many as 165 9/11s in a row. It is abundantly clear that the U.S. did not adequately prepare for a pandemic. While a pandemic plan developed by the national security apparatus during the Obama administration was famously thrown out by the last president, it also raised the question of whether the national security apparatus is where pandemic plans should come from in the first place.

    Likewise, the National Guard has deployed for everything from the pandemic to an unprecedented storm in Texas (and of course, the siege in Washington, D.C.). The constant reliance on the National Guard reflects the extent to which the national security state is the only arm of government that is resourced well enough to attempt to tackle big problems. In a vicious cycle, this fact continues to draw even more resources into the national security state — resources which are often misused. In a twist that seems all too cruel, the CIA co-opting of a vaccination program in Pakistan may now contribute to vaccine hesitation around COVID-19.

    With white supremacist extremism now harder to deny, the national security state is moving from an attitude of avoidance to securitizing the response there, too. The military and law enforcement have chosen to excuse blatant white supremacy in their own ranks: In fact, throughout history, white supremacy has driven and shaped the growth of police departments in the U.S. and around the world. But here too, the national security state adopts the problem by calling for new domestic terrorism laws and more enforcement — another expansion of the national security state. Of course, it’s all too easy to imagine enhanced domestic terrorism laws enacted ostensibly to fight white supremacy being used against Black and Brown people, racial justice activists, environmental justice activists, and others.

    Following the same pattern, the national security state alternately ignores, contributes to, and seeks to co-opt climate change. In military circles, climate change has long been recognized primarily as a “threat multiplier” — a factor that could increase conflict (and therefore opportunities for war) — and as a threat to military infrastructure like sea-level naval bases. The Pentagon has begun to recognize the problem with plans to “green” the military by reducing its own emissions, chasing an opportunity to burnish its own image in the process.

    The Search for True Security

    Living under COVID for the past year has driven home the reality that militarization doesn’t buy security. The new administration and Congress have an opportunity to redefine security, so that it encompasses justice, health, housing, food, education, civil rights and more. That’s a necessary step, but it’s not enough.

    The next step has to be demilitarizing security by downsizing the massive security state. Movements like the Poor People’s Campaign, Defund Hate, Black Lives Matter, Dissenters, and People Over Pentagon have made real inroads at building power and accomplishing both, but the road ahead is long. The solution is to keep building power until these movements and others are strong enough to push back.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • West Papua needs urgent Red Cross intervention over crisis, says Wenda

    Asia Pacific Report

    The Indonesian state is causing a renewed humanitarian crisis in West Papua. Three young West Papuan men have been murdered by the Indonesian military in Intan Jaya Regency, and hundreds of residents have now fled the area in fear.

    Indonesia must urgently allow the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights into West Papua, says the leader of a “provisional” Papuan government.

    The authorities in Jakarta have been blamed for “causing a renewed humanitarian crisis”.

    Benny Wenda, interim president of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua provisional government, said in a statement that three young Papuan men had been murdered by the Indonesian military in Intan Jaya regency.

    Hundreds of residents had now “fled the area in fear”.

    Wenda also called on Pacific nations to pay close attention to what was happening in West Papua.

    The three men, Janius Bagau were, Justinus Bagau and Soni Bagau, were alleged to have been tortured and killed on February 15 in a health centre where one of them was receiving treatment after being shot in the arm by a soldier.

    Amnesty statement of concern
    Amnesty Indonesia has issued an urgent statement of concern over the killings.

    “Fearing more acts of violence, at least 600 men, women and children have been displaced by the military’s actions, seeking shelter in a Catholic compound,” said the statement.

    “They join over 50,000 West Papuans internally displaced by Indonesian operations since December 2018. Over 400 have died from a lack of medical treatment and supplies. Indonesia is ethnically cleansing my people.”

    Wenda said that people displaced by the operations would have no access to healthcare.

    “They cannot tend to their crops. The children cannot go to school. In the middle of a pandemic, Indonesia continues to kill us West Papuans and force us from our homes by our thousands.

    “The Indonesian state has imposed martial law, using the covid-19 crisis as a cover to conduct military operations.

    “As the West Papua Council of Churches, the four Protestant denominations in our nation, put it in a statement on February 5, ‘The Land of Papua has become a military operation area’.

    International monitoring
    The ULMWP provisional government demanded that Indonesia immediately allow the international community into West Papua to assist civilians affected by military operations. It said:

    • Indonesia must allow the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights into West Papua to conduct an investigation into the human rights situation, in accordance with the call of 83 international states; and
    • Indonesia must invite the International Committee of the Red Cross into West Papua. The Red Cross was banned from entering in 2009.

    “Regional leaders must pay attention to what is taking place in West Papua,” said Wenda.

    “Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands Forum: Indonesia is hiding behind claims of ‘sovereignty’ to crush my people.

    “This is not an ‘internal matter’, this is a question of military occupation and colonialism.

    “Our right to self-determination under international law is bullet-proof. Indonesia has lost the moral, political and legal argument, and has turned to the last thing it has left: brute violence.

    “We need urgent action to protect my people.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.