radiofree.asia

Category: refugees

  • Trump Targets Latino Migrants

    By escalating deportations, ending humanitarian protections, and cutting remittances, Trump’s immigration policy threatens to destabilize Latin American economies and exacerbate humanitarian crises. Ironically, this might trigger a new wave of migration.

    The importance of Latinos living and working in the US is enormous: if they were in a separate country, it would be the world’s fifth largest economy, bigger than even India. President Trump is recklessly attacking Latino migrants, inflicting calculated cruelty and disregarding the consequences for their home countries.

    Disastrously, US immigration policy affects the very victims of Washington’s destabilization campaigns in Latin America and Caribbean, which drive people to leave their homelands in the first place. In effect, by exporting chaos, the hegemon paradoxically ends up importing immigrants. Then, the US contradicts itself by claiming that sanctioned countries are deemed safe for deportation.

    Further, implementation is selective, privileging right-wing allies and punishing progressive states. The economic fallout from reduced remittances and mass deportations is not only politically opportunistic but has grave humanitarian consequences.

    Take the case of Haiti, which Human Rights Watch says is on the “edge of collapse.” Armed gangs control most of the capital, over a million Haitians have been displaced and there is acute food insecurity. The State Department’s travel advisory puts Haiti at its highest level of risk (level 4): avoid travelling there because gun crime is “common” and kidnapping is “widespread.”

    Yet, over at Homeland Security, Haiti is declared “safe” for people to return. Secretary Kristi Noem wants to force 348,000 Haitians who have temporary protected status (TPS) and another 211,000 who have humanitarian parole to leave for what Black Agenda Radio describes as “a country in turmoil.”

    Migrants – a threat worse than communism to nativist America

    Under President Biden, Washington’s ideology-driven immigration policy led to the “humanitarian parole” program. Citizens of the targeted countries – Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela – were said to be “fleeing communism” and warranted preferential treatment. Trump has ended the parole scheme for those countries and the TPS protection for Nicaraguans and Venezuelans (Cubans never had TPS protection), yet their revolutionary governments now suffer even tougher US coercive economic measures than with Biden.

    Come Trump’s second term, US immigration policy sharply limits the pathways for Cubans to enter the US legally. Over a half a million Cubans in the US lost their status and work permission with the termination of humanitarian parole. Visa restrictions limit family, student, and visitor entry. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is now allowed to deport Cubans and other migrants to countries other than their own, with as little as six hours’ notice. Meanwhile US-Cuba bilateral immigration talks are indefinitely suspended.

    Trump’s malice against Cuba – a nation already teetering under the six-decade illegal US blockade – is causing a mounting humanitarian crisis. Tightening the economic embargo followed further restrictions on foreign investment and expanded sanctions. Biden’s earlier attempts to strangle the Cuban economy cut remittances sent by migrants from about $800 million in 2019 to just $35 million by May 2024. Trump’s new measures could sever the lifeline completely.

    Meanwhile Nicaragua, which has 93,000 in the parole scheme and about 4,000 under TPS, is deemed “safe enough” for its citizens to return home, according to US Homeland Security:

    “Nicaragua has become a worldwide tourist destination, while also promoting sustainability and revitalizing local communities. Technological innovation is empowering local farmers and fishers, making the agriculture industry more competitive and profitable… Nicaragua continues to show stable macroeconomic fundamentals, including a record-high $5 billion in foreign reserves, a sustainable debt load, and a well-capitalized banking sector.”

    No one seems to have told Kristi Noem that her cabinet colleague Marco Rubio regards Nicaragua as an “enemy of humanity.” His officials briefed the New York Times that the country was “perilous for tourists.”

    Last month, President Daniel Ortega reassured Nicaraguans that the country’s “doors are open,” urging them to leave the “terror” of the US. Nicaraguan Eddy García, who along with 77 others arrived on a deportation flight in February, said that they were welcomed by officials, given refreshments and then offered transport home: “I’m extremely happy to be back because now no one is going to throw me out.”

    Opponents of Nicaragua’s Sandinista government have, until Trump’s shift in policy, chorused that an “unprecedented wave” of migrants fled the country as a result of government “repression” following the failed coup attempt in 2018. Opposition figures are struggling to explain why, if this were the case, so few Nicaraguans are being sent back. In the six months until June, they accounted for less than one percent of the 239,000 migrants deported.

    Another political shift has been the marked hostility to Venezuelan migrants. By the end of Biden’s term, over half a million Venezuelans had been accepted under TPS and 117,000 given “humanitarian parole.” Under Trump, these Venezuelans are denounced for “invading” the US. Some are even accused of being affiliated to the violent Tren de Aragua gang which, Trump baselessly asserted, is directed by Nicolas Maduro’s government.

    Meanwhile, US-Venezuela talks on migration continue. The Venezuelan government, for its part, has welcomed returning migrants under its “Return to the Homeland Plan.” Over 200 Venezuelans dubiously linked to gangs, incarcerated and tortured in El Salvador’s CECOT prison, have recently been freed. Caracas’s other priority is to reunite children, thrust into foster care in the US, back with their deported Venezuelan parents.

    Driven out by ICE

    Apart from the prospect of being dispatched to one of El Salvador’s notorious prisons or being abandoned to an unknown fate in a remote country like South Sudan, thousands of Latino migrants are leaving the US on their own faced with escalating threats from ICE.

    Wilfredo, from the city of Masaya, Nicaragua, had voluntarily flown back from Miami with two others. Many more Nicaraguans were on the same flight anxious to leave, he told us, before ICE officials kidnapped them, took all their belongings and put them, handcuffed, on deportation flights. “The ‘American Dream’ has become a nightmare,” he said.

    Even long-time naturalized citizens in the US are terrorized. In liberal Marin County, CA, Venezuelan-born Claudia now takes her passport with her whenever she leaves the house for fear of being seized. It’s happened already to other naturalized citizens.

    Costa Rica and Panama were persuaded by Trump to accept around 500 deported asylum seekers from third countries as diverse as Iran, Cameroon and Vietnam. These migrants are now in limbo, receive little assistance and – in most cases – are unable to speak Spanish. Those in Panama have been pressured to accept repatriation flights but many face persecution if they return to their home countries.

    Duplicitous immigration policy

    The treatment of migrants from most Latin American countries contrasts sharply with Washington’s approach towards El Salvador. It has 174,000 citizens living in the US with TPS and – like Haiti – this protection was offered after the country suffered severe earthquake damage. However, El Salvador has been conveniently judged as “unable” to accept the return of so many of its citizens; their TPS continues.

    Despite the supposedly unsafe conditions used to justify TPS, the State Department downgraded the risk of travel to El Salvador to its lowest level, ranking it as one of the safest countries in Latin America. “Just got the US State Department’s travel gold star: Level 1: safest it gets,” Bukele boasted.

    Remittances from the country’s estimated 1.4 million migrants in the US provide El Salvador with a vital 23.5% of its national income. Bukele’s White House visits, hosting Marco Rubio at his home and, above all, incarcerating migrants on behalf of the US – along with groveling before Trump – paid off.

    In a further attack on migrants, Trump is hitting them with new taxes on the remittances they send, which provide 23% of Central America’s GDP. Migrants struggling for survival are taxed in this way while the wealthy can move money abroad – through bank wires, investment accounts, shell companies, and real estate purchases – without similar penalties.

    Many Latin American economies will be further strained by a combination of falling remittances, returning migrants who initially lack jobs, and, in some cases, harsher economic sanctions. Meanwhile, their exports to the US are being hit by new tariffs. Trump appears to be exacerbating the economic conditions that drove many migrants north under his predecessor’s administration.

    The post Trump Targets Latino Migrants first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • It shouldn’t need saying but cops were NOT escorting anti-racist protesters in Essex

    A Telegraph article has framed recent Essex police failures as cops escorting pro-asylum seeker protesters to the Bell Hotel. However, what the Torygraph failed to mention is that this is from the typical UK police playbook.

    In reality, they’re following protesters while trying to extract information along the way.

    ‘Facilitating free assembly’ at the Bell Hotel

    Essex Police have come under fire on social media for ‘escorting’ left-wing protesters to the Bell Hotel housing asylum seekers, where far-right lunatics were gathering.

    Essex police have denied escorting them to the hotel. However, videos online very clearly showed police walking alongside protesters. The Assistant Chief Constable, Stuart Hooper, defended their actions. He said:

    We have a reasonable duty to protect people who want to exercise their rights. In terms of bringing people to the hotel, the police have a duty to facilitate free assembly.

    ‘Facilitating free assembly’ – apart from when that assembly involves protesting a genocide, right?

    Racism, plain and simple

    Some of the protesters were seen with signs saying:

    I’m not far right I’m worried about my kids

    Well, we say ‘protesters’. They were actually Karens (one of them quite literally a Karen) from Reform – most of who were bussed in (ironically):

    There was also the predictable ex-BNP Karens there:

    Are they planning to protest outside the house of every single one of the 117 people accused of violent and sexual offences in the Epping area? Or is it only the Black and brown ones that are a problem?

    Most days in the UK, white men are accused of, or charged with, sexually abusing children. Where is the moral outrage? Where’s the protests and the riots? Or the uproar? That’s right, there is none because its plain and simple racism disguised as ‘protecting children’.

    If they really cared about protecting children, there would be a hell of a lot more protests.

    In a statement to the BBC, Essex police said:

    Officers did provide a foot cordon around protesters on their way to the protest, where they and others were allowed to exercise their right to protest.

    Later some people who were clearly at risk of being hurt were also escorted by vehicle away from the area for their safety.

    To reiterate, we categorically did not drive any counter-protesters to the site on any occasion.

    Caught with their pants down

    The right wing have kicked up a fuss about police escorting the left-wing protesters for all the wrong reasons. They were incensed that the police might have driven the anti-racist counter-protesters to the site, which the grovelling Essex Constabulary were quick to deny.

    The issues were instead that:

    •⁠ ⁠The police focused on non-violent protesters, rather than forming a barrier around those committing violence.

    •⁠ ⁠It craftily used this as an excuse to tail left-wing protesters while letting the right-wing thugs get away with bigotry and violence, no doubt making the situation worse because they viewed it as ‘protection’.

    But no matter what the police were actually trying to do, we have caught them with their pants down – because they lied. 

    ‘Facilitating freedom of assembly’ is just a pretence for gathering intelligence on those dangerous anti-racist, anti-genocide, tofu-eating, planet-protecting wokerati – truly a terrifying national security risk! Cops in Essex just did what they do best: protect the status quo. With successive Tory governments – and now this despicable Labour one, the far-right sit comfortably within that.

    In 2025 Britain, fascist thugs can sidle up to a hotel housing men, women, kids, and families fleeing Western-fueled conflict, persecution, and climate ruin, and the state enables them. But is it any wonder when the prime minister is spouting rancid, depraved plans to go after migrants like it’s his (warped) Liam Neeson moment?

    Either way, time and again, police have used this underhanded tactic – and we’re sure as hell not buying.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By HG

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • “Our First Country Is Palestine,” Say Refugees in Syria’s Yarmouk Camp 

    An arch crowns the entrance of a long, dusty, multi-laned street in the outskirts of Syria’s capital, Damascus. The text on the arch has been freshly painted — “Yarmouk camp” — with the Palestinian and Syrian Independence flags ensconced between the two words. The street is dotted with small businesses getting back on their feet after over a decade of war in Syria.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • DWP lies from the Sun about ‘migrants’ claiming benefits spread like wildfire

    Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) figures about Universal Credit have been jumped on by the corporate media. This is because they are the latest stats on the nationalities of benefit claimants. However, instead of reporting the reality of the situation, right-wing tabloids like the Sun have manipulated the figures to fuel racism and xenophobia on behalf of the Tories and Reform; oh – and Labour as well.

    Not that facts matter when you’re on social media – as the Sun’s bullshit spread like wildfire.

    DWP new figures on Universal Credit

    On 15 July, the DWP published it latest stats on Universal Credit. These showed that the overwhelming majority (83.6%) of Universal Credit claimants were British citizens. However, this didn’t stop the Sun and the Telegraph screaming about the number of “migrants” claiming benefits.

    The Sun ran with the headline:

    More than 1 MILLION migrants are claiming Universal Credit in Britain – with majority unemployed

    While the Telegraph did similar:

    More than 1m foreigners claim Universal Credit every month

    The Sun claimed that, of the DWP figures:

    The number of foreign nationals on Universal Credit has surged from 883,470 in 2022 to 1.26million last month…

    The majority of immigrants getting the taxpayer handouts are not in work.

    It then went on to quote the actual figures:

    Most of the migrants getting Universal Credit are EU nationals, comprising 770,379 of the claims.

    Non EU nationals with indefinite leave make up 211,090 of the claims, followed by 118,749 refugees, 54,156 on humanitarian visas, 75,267 on time-limited visas, and 33,240 “others”.

    Hold up.

    Lie after lie

    So, in reality most of the one million “migrants” the Sun mentions are not migrants at all. The key omission? Nearly three-quarters of these claimants are EU citizens who hold settled status or indefinite leave. That means they are legally entitled to public funds. Therefore, they are not “migrants”.

    EU citizens who lived in the UK pre-Brexit were granted equal access to welfare—including DWP benefits and the NHS—as part of the Settlement Scheme. That system didn’t create a “new wave” of “migrant” benefit claimants, as the headline falsely implies it did.

    Of course, if we want to play ‘divide and conquer’ like the Sun is, then actually the employment rate for EU citizens on Universal Credit is higher than that of British nationals. Also, employment rates for most other nationalities is the same as British nationals, too.

    Moreover, note the images the Sun uses in the article: they are all of Black or brown people – when in fact, the majority of foreign nationals claiming Universal Credit are white.

    By failing to clarify any of this, the Sun exploits a baseline far-right bias that equates “migrant” with “undeserving,” when in fact these are people whose immigration status explicitly permits them to claim social security.

    With regards to the other figures, the Sun rightly says there are 118,749 refugees and 54,156 people on humanitarian visas claiming Universal Credit. But yet again, it misses crucial context which even the DWP has to admit.

    It explained that:

    “Refugee” has the lowest rate of employment at 22%. Asylum seekers are not permitted to work, so those granted refugee status will not be in work at the point they are granted this status.

    That is, refugees by default will not be in work because of the government’s own rules.

    Far-right racism via the DWP

    When readers are fed repetitive “one million migrants” rhetoric without context, it sells the idea that foreigners are draining taxpayers dry. This lie stokes fear and racism – which is the goal of the far-right Sun and its lackeys like Nigel Farage. In reality, this is simply not true.

    Of course, none of this matters to the toxic, far-right Sun. It has irresponsibly spun the DWP figures to sow racist division – with a deliberate omission: the overwhelming majority of these ‘migrants’ are not migrants at all, but legal, settled residents or refugees.

    That’s not just poor journalism—it’s far-right political messaging dressed up as news.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Superman is causing right-wing temper tantrums – and we’re here for it

    Right-wing Americans have labelled the latest Superman movie as ‘superwoke’. Despite its strong opening reviews and debuting on Rotten Tomatoes with 91%, it has sparked political debate about immigration.

    Obviously, as soon as Superman director James Dunn pointed out the political subtext, the right-wing media threw a tantrum.

    Superman: a history of political commentary

    Here’s the thing – comic books like Superman, and therefore the films they have been turned into, have a history of political and social commentary.

    The pro-Trump, anti-immigration gammons are clearly not smart enough to figure out that almost every previous superhero movie is optical. They had to wait until the director pointed it out.

    The earliest Superman comics featured him fighting against slum landlords and corrupt orphanages, both deeply political issues.

    Similarly, in the Marvel universe Spider-Man was the working-class hero. Peter Parker was moving from job to job when he wasn’t wearing his Spider-Man suit.

    Then, the Iron Man series explores what happens when one person has unchecked power, especially in a military-industrial context. Tony Stark goes from being a selfish arms dealer to a heroic figure.

    Additionally, two Jewish artists created Captain America in the lead-up to the US entering World War II. They did this amongst rising antisemitism and Nazism in the US.

    In DC, both Batman and Wonder Woman often tackle the issues of corruption and inequality.

    DC films like Superman often touch upon themes of social justice, with characters like Batman and Wonder Woman often taking on issues of inequality and corruption.

    In the Superman animated series, Superman himself said: “There is a right and wrong in the universe and that distinction is not hard to make.”

    Also, Superman is literally an immigrant. Do they want him locked up in an ICE detention centre, too?

    A glimmer of hope

    Often, people look to movies, books and music for some small sense of hope in what has become a very dark world.

    I would argue that the very concept of superheroes like Superman and the amount of power that they yield is, in fact, political. With power comes great responsibility, and we are living in a world where those with the most power are abusing it time and time again, and – much like Tony Stark – are completely unchecked.

    As usual, Superman has given the people on Earth an ideal to strive towards.

    Feature image via the Canary

    By HG

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Future Of Sanctuary

    In the summer of 1984, a caravan of vehicles full of religious activists sped across the United States. Moving from Tucson to Los Angeles to Denver and finally ending in Detroit, this self-styled “Sanctuary Freedom Train” was transporting a Salvadoran family of four that had fled their war-torn country and arrived in the United States seeking political asylum. Raul and Valeria Gonzalez had escaped with their two children after Raul, a teacher, had been arrested and beaten by government soldiers and threatened with worse if he were to continue his literacy work among the country’s poor.

    The post The Future Of Sanctuary appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Meet The Moment For Refugees


    This content originally appeared on International Rescue Committee and was authored by International Rescue Committee.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • For Families Sheltering in Nylon Tents, Gaza’s Scorching Summer Is Unbearable

    Before the war began, summer in Gaza was a season of joy. Families thrived on creating small moments of happiness, even amid daily electricity cuts and the suffocating siege. Many loved to flock to the beach or spend time at the water chalets, hoping to find some refreshing relief from the scorching sun. They would sit beneath wide umbrellas, spread blankets across the golden beach sand…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • More than €1bn in EU funds used in discriminatory projects, report says

    Examples from six countries include segregated housing for Roma and holding centres for asylum seekers

    Hundreds of millions in European Union funds have been used in projects that violate the rights of marginalised communities, a report alleges, citing initiatives such as segregated housing for Roma, residential institutions for children with disabilities and holding centres for asylum seekers.

    The report, based on information compiled by eight NGOs from across Europe, looks at 63 projects in six countries. Together these projects are believed to have received more than €1bn in funding from the European Union, laying bare a seemingly “low understanding” of fundamental rights across the bloc, according to one of the authors of the EU-funded report.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Here’s how a Nigel Farage-led government would actually increase immigration

    Stoking anti-immigrant sentiment is a key plank of Nigel Farage’s politics and he says he’ll bring down immigration. But his party Reform’s climate crisis-denying proposals would actually contribute to the opposite and risk greatly increasing immigration.

    Oh the irony for Nigel Farage

    Nigel Farage has outright questioned the science behind the climate crisis. On GB News in 2021, he said:

    What annoys me… is this complete obsession with carbon dioxide almost to the exclusion of everything else, the alarmism that comes with it, based on dodgy predictions and science.

    Yet 97% of publishing scientists agree that man made climate change is happening, primarily because of burning fossil fuels. There has been a steady increase in global temperature since the industrial revolution.

    Farage also says he’d re-open the coal mines in government, taking us back to more fossil fuel use.

    The thing is, climate change risks dramatically increasing immigration and it looks like Nigel Farage would make it worse.

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned that the Persian Gulf, parts of India and the southern Gulf of Mexico are “already experiencing heat stress conditions approaching the upper limits of labour productivity and human survivability”. And around 50-75% of the entire global population could face life threatening climate conditions by the end of the century, meaning immigration to the global north would go through the roof.

    Extreme weather and sea level rises

    And man-made climate change is already driving extreme weather events, causing crop failures and rising sea levels, bringing particularly global south countries into peril. Between 1970 and 2019, climate related extreme weather events including floods, droughts and fires increased five fold. The steady increase in disasters and uninhabitable conditions risks becoming the key driver of immigration.

    Yet DeSmog research shows Nigel Farage’s party has accepted £2.3 million from fossil fuel interests, big polluters and climate deniers since 2019. They clearly do not take even the issue of immigration seriously.

    At the 1.5C level of warming we are already experiencing, sea level rises will become unmanageable and lead to “catastrophic inland migration” according to a recent study by scientists at Durham University. But the scientists behind the study emphasised that any reductions in the incoming sea rises, however small, will make a huge difference.

    That’s why Farage is childish to assert that:

    I think we should scrap the net zero targets… they’re going to make zero difference to the world…you better go and talk to the Chinese… we make no difference whatsoever

    Nigel Farage’s drifting between pro-fossil fuel use and outright climate denialism actually risks increasing immigration to the UK in the long term. His policies would only backfire in government.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Rohingya groups condemn ‘global neglect’ after 427 refugees feared drowned at sea

    Rohingya rights groups on Thursday decried “regional inaction and global neglect” over the plight of the Muslim minority from Myanmar after more than 400 refugees were feared drowned when two boats sank this month after setting sail from Bangladesh.

    Last week, the U.N. refugee agency said that while details remained unclear, it had collected reports from family members and others about two separate boat tragedies on May 9 and May 10 in which 427 people may have died. It said both boats left from Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, where about 1 million Rohingya shelter in camps.

    Twenty-six Rohingya diaspora groups, including the U.K.-based Burmese Rohingya Organization, co-signed Thursday’s statement that said just 87 people had survived the two incidents. It added authorities had intercepted a third vessel with 188 people aboard as it attempted to leave Myanmar on May 18.

    “These back-to-back disasters are the worst loss of Rohingya lives at sea this year, and they expose the deadly consequences of regional inaction and global neglect,” the statement said, adding that most of those on board were Rohingya who had already been displaced from their homes in Myanmar’s western Rakhine State.

    “They were fleeing a growing campaign of widespread violence by the Arakan Army, amounting to a continuation of the ethnic cleansing first started by the Burmese military,” the statement said, referring to a rebel group that has seized control of most of Rakhine state from the Myanmar military.

    “Those confined to displacement camps in Burmese military-controlled zones are starving, children are suffering from acute malnutrition, and many families are completely without food,” the statement said.

    Most Rohingya are from Rakhine state and most are stateless, regarded as migrants from South Asia and not one of the ethnic groups classified as indigenous in Buddhist-majority Myanmar’s constitution.

    In this March 21, 2024, photo Rohingya refugees wait to be rescued from their capsized boat off west Aceh.
    In this March 21, 2024, photo Rohingya refugees wait to be rescued from their capsized boat off west Aceh.
    (Zahlul Akbar/AFP)

    About 750,000 Rohingya fled a violent Myanmar military clearance campaign in Rakhine in 2017 and crossed into Bangladesh. The U.S. government determined the killings and rapes by the military amounted to genocide.

    Now each year, thousands of Rohingya attempt to leave Bangladesh and Myanmar aboard rickety vessels for other destinations in Southeast Asia. Reports of boats sinking and mass fatalities are common.

    The Arakan Army, consisting Buddhist ethnic Rakhine people, has also been implicated in serious rights abuses against Rohingya, human rights groups say, although the AA denies it.

    In recent years, the AA’s position on the persecuted Muslim minority has vacillated. After the 2021 coup in Myanmar when the military seized power from a civilian government, the AA evinced a moderate and inclusive position on the Rohingya. But it has since been accused of mass killings after a campaign by the Myanmar junta to recruit Rohingya men, sometimes forcibly, into militias to fight the AA.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Wealthy Countries Are Outsourcing Border Operations to Restrict Immigration

    Each year, thousands of migrants attempt to cross the Mediterranean Sea in the hope of finding refuge in Europe. And each year, European countries use every tool in their arsenal to keep those migrants out of their borders – from bureaucratic processes to militarization, and now, increasingly, through outsourcing the control of the border itself. In April, Italy carried out its fourth mass…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Council of Europe chief warns against politicising court of human rights

    Alain Berset says no judiciary should face political pressure after nine countries make intervention over migration

    Europe’s leading human rights body has criticised nine governments that have urged a rethink of the interpretation of the European convention on human rights on migration issues.

    The Council of Europe secretary general, Alain Berset, spoke out against “politicising” the European court of human rights after nine European leaders signed a letter organised by Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen, calling for an “open-minded conversation” about the interpretation of the convention.

    Continue reading…

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

  • A Refugee’s Arrival, Detention, and Disappearance Under U.S. Policy | Podcast Trailer


    This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • New Report Condemns Trump Admin’s Deportations of Non-Costa Ricans to Costa Rica

    Dozens of non-Costa Rican nationals who were deported to Costa Rica by the Trump administration in February say they did not receive an asylum screening interview before being expelled, according to a report released by Human Rights Watch on Thursday. The report alleges that the U.S. government did not follow the “minimal, if deficient” protections around the right to seek asylum and the…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Indonesian military operations spark concerns over displaced indigenous Papuans

    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    A West Papua independence leader says escalating violence is forcing indigenous Papuans to flee their ancestral lands.

    It comes as the Indonesian military claims 18 members of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) were killed in an hour-long operation in Intan Jaya on May 14.

    In a statement, reported by Kompas, Indonesia’s military claimed its presence was “not to intimidate the people” but to protect them from violence.

    “We will not allow the people of Papua to live in fear in their own land,” it said.

    Indonesia’s military said it seized firearms, ammunition, bows and arrows. They also took Morning Star flags — used as a symbol for West Papuan independence — and communication equipment.

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) interim president Benny Wenda, who lives in exile in the United Kingdom, told RNZ Pacific that seven villages in Ilaga, Puncak Regency in Central Papua were now being attacked.

    “The current military escalation in West Papua has now been building for months. Initially targeting Intan Jaya, the Indonesian military have since broadened their attacks into other highlands regencies, including Puncak,” he said.

    Women, children forced to leave
    Wenda said women and children were being forced to leave their villages because of escalating conflict, often from drone attacks or airstrikes.

    Benny Wenda at the 22 Melanesian Spearhead Group Leaders' Summit in Port Vila. 22 August 2023
    ULMWP interim president Benny Wenda . . . “Indonesians look at us as primitive and they look at us as subhuman.” Image: RNZ Pacific/Kelvin Anthony

    Earlier this month, ULMWP claimed one civilian and another was seriously injured after being shot at from a helicopter.

    Last week, ULMWP shared a video of a group of indigenous Papuans walking through mountains holding an Indonesian flag, which Wenda said was a symbol of surrender.

    “They look at us as primitive and they look at us as subhuman,” Wenda said.

    He said the increased military presence was driven by resources.

    President Prabowo Subianto’s administration has a goal to be able to feed Indonesia’s population without imports as early as 2028.

    Video rejects Indnesian plan
    A video statement from tribes in Mappi regency in South Papua from about a month ago, translated to English, said they rejected Indonesia’s food project and asked companies to leave.

    In the video, about a dozen Papuans stood while one said the clans in the region had existed on customary land for generations and that companies had surveyed land without consent.

    “We firmly ask the local government, the regent, Mappi Regency to immediately review the permits and revoke the company’s permits,” the speaker said.

    Wenda said the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) had also grown.

    But he said many of the TPNPB were using bow and arrows against modern weapons.

    “I call them home guard because there’s nowhere to go.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Ethnic Cleansing of Gaza: Israel’s Operation Gideon’s Chariots

    The latest phase of slaughter and seizure on the part of Israeli forces in Gaza has commenced. Following relentless airstrikes that have left hundreds of Palestinians dead, Operation Gideon’s Chariots is now in full swing, begun even as Israel and Hamas concluded a second day of ceasefire talks in Doha. The intention, according to the Israeli Defense Forces, is to expand “operational control” in the Strip while seeking to free the remaining Israeli hostages. In the process, it hopes to achieve what has, to date, been much pie in the sky: defeating Hamas and seizing control of the enclave.

    The mendacious pattern of the IDF and Netanyahu government has become clearer than ever. It comes in instalments, much like a distasteful fashion show. The opening begins with unequivocal, hot denial: famine is not taking place, and any aid to Gaza has been looted by the Hamas authorities; civilians were not targeted, let alone massacred; aid workers were not butchered but legitimately killed as they had Hamas militants among them. And there is no ethnic cleansing and genocide to speak of. To claim otherwise was antisemitic.

    Then comes the large dollop of corrective, inconvenient reality, be it a film, a blatant statement, or some item of damning evidence. The next stage is one of quibbles and qualifications: Gaza will receive some necessaries; there is a humanitarian crisis, because we were told by the United States, our main sponsor, that this was the case; and there might have been some cases where civilians were killed, a problem easily rectified by an internal investigation by the military.

    Just prior to the latest assault, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in leaked quotes, revealed another dark purpose of the new military operation.  “We are destroying more and more homes. They have nowhere to return to,” he said in testimony before the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee.  “The only inevitable outcome will be the desire of Gazans to emigrate outside the Gaza Strip.”  Here was a state official’s declaration of intent to ethnically cleanse a population.

    Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich was even blunter, something praised by Netanyahu.  Israel’s objective, he revealed in a statement on March 19, was to destroy “everything that’s left of the Gaza Strip”.  What was currently underway involved “conquering, cleansing, and remaining in Gaza until Hamas is destroyed”.

    The Netanyahu government has also added another twist to the ghastly performance. On March 18, the provision of various “basic” forms of humanitarian aid into Gaza was announced. The measure was approved by a security cabinet meeting pressed by concerns from military officials warning that food supplies from UN sources and other aid groups had run out. The pressure had also come from, in Netanyahu’s words in a March 19 video address, Israel’s “greatest friends in the world”, the trying sort who claimed that there was “‘one thing we cannot stand. We cannot accept images of hunger, mass hunger. We cannot stand that. We will not be able to support you’”. How inconveniently squeamish of them.

    That same day, United Nations aid chief Tom Fletcher said nine aid trucks had been cleared by Israeli authorities to enter Gaza through the Karem Abu Salem crossing.  This was an absurd, ineffectual number, given the 500 trucks or more that entered Gaza prior to October 2023.

    Fanatics who subscribe to the ethnic cleansing, rid-of-Palestine school were understandably disappointed, even at this obscenely modest provision of aid. “Any humanitarian aid that enters the Strip… will fuel Hamas and give it oxygen while our hostages languish in tunnels,” moaned National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. “We must crush Hamas, not simultaneously give it oxygen.” He also wished that Netanyahu “explain to our friends in the White House the implications of this ‘aid’, which only prolongs the war and delays our victory and the return of all our hostages.”

    Israel’s Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, also of Ben Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party, was in a similar mood, making the farcical resumption of aid sound like criminal salvation for a savage people. “This is our tragedy with Netanyahu’s approach. A leader who could have led to a clear victory and been remembered as the one who defeated radical Islam, but who, time after time, let this historic opportunity slip away. Letting humanitarian aid in now directly harms the war effort to achieve victory and is another obstacle to the release of the hostages.”

    The picture emerging from Israel’s latest mission of carnage is one of murderous dysfunction. It made little sense to Knesset member Moshe Saada, for instance, that a broader, ever more lethal offensive was in the offing with five new IDF divisions even as aid was being provided.  This was implicitly telling.  Did Palestinian civilians matter insofar as they should be fed, even as they were being butchered and encouraged into fleeing?

    The extent of the horror has now reached the point where it is being acknowledged in the capitals of Israel’s close allies. A joint statement from the UK, France, and Canada affirmed opposition to “the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza.” Israel’s permission of “a basic quantity of food into Gaza” was wholly inadequate in the face of “intolerable” human suffering. Denying essential humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population in the Strip “is unacceptable and risks breaching International Humanitarian Law. We condemn the abhorrent language used recently by members of the Israeli Government, threatening that, in their despair at the destruction of Gaza, civilians will start to relocate.”

    For a long time, the notion of consciously eliminating the Palestinian presence in Gaza, through starvation, massacre, and displacement, was confined to the racial, ethnoreligious fringes of purist lunacy typified by Smotrich and Ben Gvir.  Their vocal presence and frank advocacy have now made that ambition a grotesque, ongoing reality.

    The post The Ethnic Cleansing of Gaza: Israel’s Operation Gideon’s Chariots first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • #SwindonsSundaySermon: if you can’t beat ’em – make sure you’re even worse

    If you can’t beat them, join them. Right? If Keir Starmer hasn’t joined them, he certainly has just made the daunting prospect of a Farage-led government just that bit more likely.

    Addressing the nation this past Monday, Keir Starmer finally came up with his response to the advance of the reactionist right and claimed that Britain risks “becoming an island of strangers” if net migration doesn’t come down.

    The wholly unedifying spectacle of a Labour, I repeat LABOUR PARTY Prime Minister, desperately attempting to out-Farage, Farage himself by using language designed to provocatively enflame rather than enlighten doesn’t sit well with me.

    Does Keir Starmer even know what he is ‘protecting’?

    This deeply unpleasant amoral tabloid-speak, aping the rhetoric of the far-right, doesn’t deliver the change that Keir Starmer promised, but it does quite clearly guarantee a path of continuity with the demonisation of migrants set to intensify for the foreseeable future.

    Does anyone with just a degree of sensibility honestly believe a care worker from Cameroon or a bus driver from Bangladesh is a risk to the British way of life?

    What is this British way of life that Keir Starmer thinks that he is protecting?

    A tin of beans costs nearly as much as a pint, and if you do your weekly shop at Waitrose you might want to consider selling a kidney on the black market.

    We used to have wet springs. Do you remember something called “April showers”? That’ll be the title of a Bonnie Blue movie these days. Bognor is the new Benidorm, thanks to climate change.

    The notion of a generous benefits system is a whopping great lie. If I can find that out with a quick Google, so can a migrant, so can an ignorant right-wing headbanger with the likability of haemorrhoids.

    For the record, the UK has the third lowest welfare value across the OECD and is no more than a middle ranker when it comes to welfare spending (as a percent of GDP).

    Britain does not have a generous benefits system.

    The poorest parts of the UK are now poorer than the poorest parts of Malta and Slovenia. You won’t hear Keir Starmer scream that from the rooftops, front door ablaze.

    What other British values is he trying to protect? Record NHS waiting times? We love a queue, after all.

    Illusion – or delusion?

    Starmer seems to have this illusion of a Britain that is characterised by politeness, social etiquette, and individual liberty. Perhaps it’s supposed to be that way, maybe it used to be that way (although I doubt it), but this isn’t a Britain that I recognise in 2025.

    Keir Starmer isn’t interested in protecting the British way of life, however you may define it. Keir Starmer is only interested in protecting himself and the assets of those that pull his strings.

    This disastrous immigration speech — which even had the liberal media screaming “rivers of blood” — felt very anti-British, if like me you also feel that tolerance and compassion are amongst our greatest unspoken strengths.

    We mobilise in our hundreds of thousands for Palestine. We are good people and we are so much better than the way our compromised politicians represent us on the global stage.

    While Starmer himself must always take ultimate responsibility for his government and what they stand for, surely there must be someone in power that needs to take his speechwriter to one side and help them clear their desk?

    The substance of the speech was entirely lost in the hateful and divisive language of the speech. That didn’t happen by accident. How bad does it have to be to receive a nod of approval from the far-right Orban Hungarian government?

    I remember one of Jeremy Corbyn’s speechwriters, a very talented man named Alex Nunns. I got a mention, and a signed copy of his fantastic book The Candidate once upon a time.

    Alex used to write about togetherness, peace, decency, the importance of community, solidarity with the oppressed, dignity for the vulnerable, and every single speech that Jeremy delivered had hope at its very core.

    This felt like patriotism to me, not this overt hostility that has been scrambled together with the help of Grok and some highly questionable and completely dishonest data from a shitty right-wing clickbait website.

    We’re a little over ten months into the Starmer era and barely a day goes by without me feeling just a bit more disgusted by their behaviour than I was the day before.

    There was never any doubt that we were in for a very bumpy ride under neoliberal Labour, but even I thought this Reform-esque rhetoric might be beneath the Labour leader.

    Starmer’s Britain: where racists are the victims

    Talking of hate speech, I came across the case of Lucy Connolly, this past week.

    Mrs Connolly, who is married to a former Tory Councillor, was jailed for 31 months for a hateful social media post, much to the anger of the hard-right and that irrelevant attention whore, Dan Wootton.

    By the time you get around to reading this, Lucy may well be free, but has she learned the very simple difference between free speech and hate speech?

    The criminal, Connolly, got no less than what she deserved, and yes, I have read the notes from the appeal and I feel nothing but absolute sympathy for any parent that has lost a child.

    But let’s turn the content of Connolly’s ugly social media post around for a moment.

    What if Mrs Connolly was instead a British Muslim, calling for hotels full of white “bastards” to be burned to the ground?

    Would we all gather outside of the Court of Appeal to hold hands and sing Kum Ba Yah until the British Muslim was released from prison to a sea of ISIS flags and Kalashnikov gun fire?

    I rest my case, your honour.

    Featured image via Rachael Swindon

    By Rachael Swindon

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • South African ‘Refugees’ May Find The Grass Is Not Greener In America

    Not much is publicly known about the nearly 60 white South Africans who arrived May 12, 2025, at Dulles National Airport in suburban Washington DC, fleeing what the Trump administration describes as racial discrimination and political violence from the country’s Black majority. But in classifying South Africa’s privileged white minority as “refugees” and fast-tracking their path to US citizenship, the White House, in typical fashion, overlooks a salient point which is that statistically speaking, South Africa is arguably the most comfortable place in the world for white settlers to live while the US is among the least.

    The post South African ‘Refugees’ May Find The Grass Is Not Greener In America appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Plaid Cymru Commons leader just hit a nerve with this biting question to Keir Starmer

    Plaid Cymru Westminster leader Liz Saville-Roberts MP remarked that she “clearly struck a nerve”, following her question to Keir Starmer at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs). She also said the sombre faces of Labour MPs like Angela Rayner proved she was making a cutting point:

    Two-faced Starmer taken down by Plaid Cymru

    Saville-Roberts said:

    This prime minister once spoke of compassion and dignity for migrants and for defending free movement. Now he talks of ‘islands of strangers’ and ‘taking back control’. Someone here has to call this out Mr Speaker. It seems the only principle he consistently defends is whatever he last heard in a focus group. So I ask him: is there any belief he holds which survives a week in Downing Street?

    In response, Starmer resorted to a personal attack:

    Yes, the belief that she talks rubbish

    Hearing Starmer talk about migration while he was running to be Labour leader demonstrates Saville-Robert’s point. On Twitter, people have compared what he said then with his words now:


    Manipulating the democratic base of the Labour party to elevate himself to the leadership, Starmer said:

    We welcome migrants. We don’t scapegoat them. Low wages, poor housing, poor public services are not the fault of migrants and people who’ve come here. They’re political failure… So we have to make the case for the benefits of migration.

    When he’s actually in government, he does and says the opposite. In a speech on 12 May, Keir Starmer included the soundbite that the UK is becoming an “island of strangers” because of immigration. He was introducing an immigration white paper that would raise the skill level migrants need to enter the country, curtail overseas students coming to less prestigious universities and seek to inspire Britons to do menial jobs.

    At PMQs, Nigel Farage was delighted with Starmer’s capitulation:

    We at Reform, a party that is alive and kicking, very much enjoyed your speech on Monday. You seem to be learning a great deal from us.

    Instead of opposing Farage, Starmer is establishing fertile ground for the rise of the far right.

    The deceit continues

    What’s more, Starmer’s lies go beyond immigration and what he said to become Labour leader. Whether it’s living standards, energy bills, disabled people’s support, council tax, austerity or cronyism, the Labour leadership has done the opposite of what it has promised.

    No wonder Chancellor Rachel Reeves said “promise made, promise kept” on April Fool’s Day.

    Featured image via the House of Commons

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The far-right’s latest attack on Jeremy Corbyn is its most preposterous yet

    Reform MP Lee Anderson has called for Jeremy Corbyn to be deported in the Commons. Anderson, who has also been a Labour MP and a Conservative one, said:

    Today over 600 illegal migrants have entered this country. They could get up to all sorts of mischief, commit crimes and maybe even acts of terrorism. So does she agree with me that these young men crossing the channel should be immediately detained and deported, along with the member for Islington?


    In response, immigration minister Angela Eagle stood by Corbyn:

    The right honourable member for Islington has a complete right to his opinions and a complete right to express them… I have a great deal of respect for him. So I’m quite shocked that the honourable gentleman thinks that’s an appropriate thing to say

    Corbyn’s foreign policy

    What’s ironic is that there would likely be less terrorism if Jeremy Corbyn had become prime minister. This is the complete opposite of what Anderson suggests.

    At one of the biggest protests in UK history in 2003, Corbyn said:

    Thousands more deaths in Iraq will not make things right. It will set off a spiral of conflict, of hate, of misery, of desperation that will fuel the wars, the conflict, the terrorism, the depression, and the misery of future generations.

    Corbyn seems to be on the right side of history. The 2003 invasion of Iraq led to the death of around a million Iraqis, sowed destruction throughout the country, and gave the forerunners of Daesh (Isis/Isil) fertile ground to grow. It also paved the way for the terrorism we see today, and created the regional destabilisation that eventually led to today’s refugee crisis.

    The invasion was based on Tony Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier’ – a fabrication paraded as conclusive evidence across the media. And as even Blair would eventually acknowledge, the rise of Daesh was a direct consequence of the conflict he and the Conservatives voted through parliament.

    Libya

    As well as opposing the invasion of Iraq, Corbyn was one of just 13 MPs to vote against military action in Libya. A parliamentary report on the 2011 military intervention in Libya later vindicated Corbyn’s decision, concluding:

    The limited intervention to protect civilians had drifted into an opportunist policy of regime change. That policy was not underpinned by a strategy to support and shape post-Gaddafi Libya.

    Within its damning report, the foreign affairs committee concluded that the risk of extremist groups like Daesh benefiting from the rebellion should not have been “the preserve of hindsight”. Especially given the rise of terrorism following the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    Anderson has got this completely backwards.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Just when you thought Starmer couldn’t stoop any lower – he does this

    In yet another attempt to woo the far right, prime minister Keir Starmer has announced his government is “in talks with a number of countries about return hubs”. He called this a “really important innovation”, but even right-wingers can see it’s just a rehashing of the Conservatives’ failed Rwanda scheme.

    Rwanda failure (Starmer remix)

    As is now his routine, Starmer is boosting the far right by echoing their talking points, while offering no meaningful steps to address the immigration question.

    Let’s remember that the Tories’ Rwanda plan failed because: it threatened to violate international law and Britain’s human rights obligations; there were serious domestic legal concerns; it was expensive and wasteful; and because dodgy assessments meant the UK would send people in a vulnerable situation to a country with its own poor human rights record and defective asylum system (risking their return to home countries where they might be in significant danger), and with which they had no connection.

    Let’s also remember that this type of plan does absolutely nothing to deal with the fact that Britain desperately needs immigration, or with the actual root causes of people making the difficult choice to leave their countries behind.

    Racism and state propaganda

    Britain quickly welcomed reasonably well-off Ukrainians with open arms. Poor people from elsewhere who’ve risked their lives on long, tortuous trips to end their journey in a small, dangerously fragile boats – not so much.

    Why?

    Because the British state wanted people to sympathise more with Ukraine (to justify fanning the flames of war with Russia), so the mass media suddenly developed empathy they’d never shown to immigrants of colour. Racism and xenophobia against the latter, meanwhile, have long been an effective tool to distract people in Britain from the super-rich and their lackeys who are actually responsible for the country’s problems.

    Want to stop immigration? Try addressing these issues

    People in vulnerable situations around the world know that there’s significant demand for immigrant workers in Britain, though. So that’s a big pull factor. And the push factor away from their own countries is the poverty, war, and/or human rights abuses that the Global North – including the UK – has played a key role in fostering. Britain has faithfully backed the global campaign of death and destruction led by Washington for decades, fueling abuses abroad for economic benefit. The most common countries people on the small refugee boats came from last year were Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Iran – all of which have a long history of brutal Western meddling. Just this week, for example, we heard about the cover-up of British war crimes in Afghanistan.

    If British governments took responsibility for their global actions, they would welcome in civilians who suffer as a result. But they consistently hide from that responsibility.

    If they truly wanted to stop people seeking asylum in Britain, meanwhile, they could simply stop destructive meddling abroad and focus on investing at home instead. They could also stop blocking a global crackdown on tax avoidance and actually stand up to the small number of obscenely wealthy people (many in Britain) who accumulate extreme levels of wealth as a direct or indirect result of the poverty or suffering of ordinary people around the world.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Ed Sykes

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Is Keir Starmer capable of killing?

    “But is he capable of murder, doc?” asks the hard-bitten TV detective. You’ve seen the shows.
    It’s really two questions. “Does he have the wherewithal?”: the strength, the skill, the capacity to plan. And, “Is he callous enough to kill?”: the absence of any restraint, compassion or conscience.

    It’s a toss-up whether Keir Starmer will be defined by his “Island of Strangers” speech, as Enoch Powell was defined by Rivers of Blood. Powell’s speech was objectively far more racist. I read an interview with Powell where he denied his speech was racist at all. His defence boiled down to “I am not claiming racial superiority”. Refusing to house, employ, or even interact with people based on ethnicity was not racist in his worldview.

    Our detective would have his answer: yes, he is capable of gross inhumanity. There is no internal restraint. The only thing stopping atrocity is whether he thinks he can get away with it.

    Keir Starmer’s ‘Island of Strangers’ speech: channeling the racist rhetoric of Enoch Powell

    I watched the whole of the “Island of Strangers” speech. Keir Starmer, the golden boy who championed a second referendum to prevent Brexit, referred to free movement as “squalid”. The former human rights lawyer said:

    some people think immigration is some kind of freedom

    And that it:

    for years seems to have muddled our thinking.

    He’s talking about you, Labour voters, who voted for him to stop the xenophobia of Braverman and Farage. It’s your thinking that’s muddled, not the xenophobes, according to him.

    Starmer said:

    Settlement is a privilege that’s earned, not a right.

    The same Keir Starmer who changed the Labour Party rule book so that:

    the rules of natural justice do not apply.

    Facts don’t seem to matter. Sir Keir banged on about a million extra people. Importing cheap labour. Downward pressure on wages.

    But like a good detective, I like to check. The Office of National Statistics data on net migration tells a different story.

    42% of the total increase in visa grants was from overseas students. Well, Sir Keir, overseas students contribute £41.9bn to the UK economy each year. That’s all paid in foreign currency. It’s one of Britain’s most successful exports. You didn’t mention that in your speech.

    A quarter of a million immigrants have come from Ukraine and Hong Kong. Sir Keir is very keen to get photographed with tanks and Ukrainians when it suits him. But apparently he’s not so keen on Ukrainians fleeing a war zone. They make us feel like strangers on our own island.

    The data on migration tells a different story to Starmer’s rancid xenophobia…

    Work visas account for 27% of the post 2019 increase in visa grants. The health and care sector accounts more than every other sector combined, 59.7% of that increase. In February 2022, the Johnson government made care workers eligible for skilled work visas.

    Around 57,000 overseas care workers were recruited that year. They all pay £1,035 a year NHS surcharge, plus a £2,885 immigration fee. They also pay visa fees between £710 and £1,639. In total, it costs from £11,200 to £38,000 to settle in the UK.

    There’s a crisis in social care. The wages are low. The work is hard. Terms and conditions are poor. If you haven’t seen it, watch Ken Loach’s 2019 film Sorry We Missed You.

    What is Labour’s response? Do nothing. Have a review. Report back in 2028. And now blame foreigners for driving down wages.

    Councils should take the initiative here. They are legally allowed to use social value requirements in their contracts. They can enforce good terms and conditions on suppliers. Some councils do. If you are a councillor, or know someone who is, start asking your council about becoming a Real Living Wage employer. It includes being paid for the actual time you work, and secure employment. I implemented that for the North of Tyne in 2019, shortly after I was elected Mayor.

    If the government wanted higher wages, it could do it. It’s pretty simple. End privatisation, implement a wealth tax, and just pay higher wages.

    Keir Starmer has the capacity to kill and he’s following through on it

    Sir Keir said he’s:

    not doing this targeting these voters, responding to that party. I’m doing this because it’s right… It is what I believe in.

    Our detective has his answer. Starmer has the capacity to kill. Through austerity. Through supplying arms for genocide. Through poverty and diseases of despair.

    When he praised Thatcher those in denial said it was just a ploy to win over Tory voters. Well it wasn’t. This is a Thatcherite government. When Starmer says he wants control, he means it. Next in line is your right to protest. Your right to privacy. Your right to own your own information. All up for sale, to Sir Keir’s donors.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Jamie Driscoll

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Keir Starmer may as well roll out the red carpet to Nigel Farage at this point

    In a speech on 12 May, Keir Starmer suggested the UK is becoming an “island of strangers” because of immigration. This is music to the ears of Nigel Farage because it concedes to the thrust of his main argument.

    On one level, this stokes a racist sentiment that just because someone appears different, say through skin colour, they are less likely to be a friend at a human level. It suggests we should desire for people to have the same background, rather than celebrating cultural differences. But most of all, it obscures the fact that each person is unique beyond where they are from.

    And it plays right into the hand of Nigel Farage. The Reform leader branded the immigration white paper as a “knee jerk reaction” to the party’s success at the local elections.

    Starmer: “shameful and dangerous”

    On social media, people were outraged with Starmer’s approach:


    What’s more, there are already controls on immigration. To emigrate to the UK, one needs either a job offer, significant capital, education prospects, UK ancestry, family or humanitarian reasons. Additionally, UK employers usually must pay an ‘immigration skills charge’ for hiring abroad. The white paper is raising that by 32%.

    The idea the UK is ‘full’ is also misguided. Only 5% of land is used for homes and gardens. That means all 67m of us live in a country where 95% of the land is used for other things. To be sure, 71% of UK land is used for agriculture. And no one’s saying we should develop all of it. But it’s not ‘full’.

    The fact is that 64% of the UK believe immigration has had a positive or neutral impact on the country.

    So, Starmer should not be responding to Reform through presenting immigration from a mainly negative perspective. That only hands power to Farage.

    But then again, during the election the Labour Party leader pretty much gifted Farage his seat. He pulled the campaign of the Labour candidate in Farage’s constituency: Jovan Owusu-Nepaul, a 27 year old Black man. This can only be explained through Starmer actually wanting to boost Farage in order to keep UK political discourse right-wing.

    We know from Starmer’s sabotage of Jeremy Corbyn that he would opt for a conservative regime over left-wing progression. It’s the same with his view on Farage.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By James Wright

  • Neighbours resist police and ICE attack on mother and her child

    Neighbourhood resistance to an abduction by US immigration agency ICE last week prompted local police to back agents up by pinning a child to the ground.

    Police back up ICE with violence amid neighbourhood outrage

    A mother in Worcester, Massachusetts, was seeking asylum. She reportedly didn’t have a deportation order against her. But amid an increasingly aggressive and possibly unconstitutional assault on immigrants under the Donald Trump administration, things like due process don’t seem to matter.

    Immigration officials (mostly bulky men) abducted the mother, but “crowds of neighbors” (many of them women) quickly came out to try and intervene, “surrounding the ICE vehicles and trying to stop them from leaving”. ICE panicked and called in police officers, who backed the agents up. Viral footage of the mother’s 16-year-old daughter show police holding her face down to the ground. Her understandably strong reaction to the abduction saw officers arrest her, along with another woman. The daughter’s 21-year-old sister, whose daughter’s father had been taken by ICE the day before, said she had been left “very traumatized”. Massachusetts Department of Children and Families are currently holding both her 16-year-old sister and 13-year-old sister.

    Hundreds of people attended a peaceful protest in Worcester on 11 May, with one protester insisting that “the Safe Communities Act provides due process for these immigrants”. Another protester said:

    We don’t want to live in a community where our neighbours are pulled off the street.

    Resistance is fertile

    In March, masked agents elsewhere in Massachusetts abducted PhD student Rumeysa Ozturk, focusing on her opposition to Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Critics have called her kidnapping a “chilling violation of civil liberties“. But after protests, legal action, and a six-week stay in a Louisiana abduction facility, this weekend saw a judge order her release on bail. The legal battle is not over, but the pressure seems to be paying off.

    Another anti-genocide abductee, Mohsen Mahdawi, had received a similar release order previously. His battle continues, but has now launched “a legal defence fund to help immigrants like himself who are facing deportation hearings”.

    Intensifying the Joe Biden administration‘s repression of anti-genocide students, Donald Trump’s government has gone after prominent activist voices like Ozturk, Mahdawi, and Mahmoud Khalil. The latter is now about two months into his ordeal, having to miss the birth of his son in the process. A judge has blocked Khalil’s deportation, while pushing Trump’s regime to justify using an obscure law to persecute the campaigner over potential “foreign policy consequences”.

    The rise of Trump-style politics very much relies on lack of popular engagement in the political process. But as recent weeks have shown, challenges both on the street and in the courts can be incredibly powerful. And the more the Trump administration oversteps, the more resistance it will face.

    Featured image via screengrab

    By Ed Sykes

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • ‘Under no illusions’ about France, says author of new Rainbow Warrior book

    Pacific Media Watch

    The author of the book Eyes of Fire, one of the countless publications on the Rainbow Warrior bombing almost 40 years ago but the only one by somebody actually on board the bombed ship, says he was under no illusions that France was behind the attack.

    Journalist David Robie was speaking last month at a Greenpeace Aotearoa workship at Mātauri Bay for environmental activists and revealed that he has a forthcoming new book to mark the anniversary of the bombing.

    “I don’t think I had any illusions at the time. For me, I knew it was the French immediately the bombing happened,” he said.

    Eyes of Fire
    Eyes of Fire . . . the earlier 30th anniversary edition in 2015. Image: Little Island Press/DR

    “You know with the horrible things they were doing at the time with their colonial policies in Kanaky New Caledonia, assassinating independence leaders and so on, and they had a heavy military presence.

    “A sort of clamp down in New Caledonia, so it just fitted in with the pattern — an absolute disregard for the Pacific.”

    He said it was ironic that four decades on, France had trashed the goodwill that had been evolving with the 1988 Matignon and 1998 Nouméa accords towards independence with harsh new policies that led to the riots in May last year.

    Dr Robie’s series of books on the Rainbow Warrior focus on the impact of nuclear testing by both the Americans and the French, in particular, on Pacific peoples and especially the humanitarian voyages to relocate the Rongelap Islanders in the Marshall Islands barely two months before the bombing at Marsden wharf in Auckland on 10 July 1985.

    Detained by French military
    He was detained by the French military while on assignment in New Caledonia a year after Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior was first published in New Zealand.

    His reporting won the NZ Media Peace Prize in 1985.


    David Robie’s 2025 talk on the Rainbow Warrior.     Video: Greenpeace Aotearoa

    Dr Robie confirmed that Little island Press was publishing a new book this year with a focus on the legacy of the Rainbow Warrior.

    Plantu's cartoon on the Rainbow Warrior bombers
    Plantu’s cartoon on the Rainbow Warrior bombers from the slideshow. Image: David Robie/Plantu

    “This edition is the most comprehensive work on the sinking of the first Rainbow Warrior, but also speaks to the first humanitarian mission undertaken by Greenpeace,” said publisher Tony Murrow.

    “It’s an important work that shows us how we can act in the world and how we must continue to support all life on this unusual planet that is our only home.”

    Little Island Press produced an educational microsite as a resource to accompany Eyes of Fire with print, image and video resources.

    The book will be launched in association with a nuclear-free Pacific exhibition at Ellen Melville Centre in mid-July.

    Find out more at the Eyes of Fire microsite
    Find out more at the microsite: eyes-of-fire.littleisland.co.nz

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Future of Sanctuary

    Sanctuary activists face new challenges under Trump’s second term—but their work has always entailed great personal risk.

    This post was originally published on Dissent Magazine.

  • Schengen Surveillance

    By removing checks on borders between European countries while hardening those on the edges of Europe, the EU has redrawn borders along civilizational lines.

    This post was originally published on Dissent Magazine.

  • Israel faces legal pressure at UN’s top court over Unrwa ban

    Hearings over bar on cooperation with Palestinian aid agency are test of Israel’s defiance of international law

    Israel will come under sustained legal pressure this week at the UN’s top court when lawyers from more than 40 states will claim the country’s ban on all cooperation with the UN’s Palestinian rights agency Unrwa is a breach of the UN charter.

    The five days of hearings at the international court of justice (ICJ) in The Hague have been given a fresh urgency by Israel’s decision on 2 March to block all aid into Gaza, but the hearing will focus on whether Israel – as a signatory to the UN charter – acted unlawfully in overriding the immunities afforded to a UN body. Israel ended all contact and cooperation with Unrwa operations in Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem in November, claiming the agency had been infiltrated by Hamas, an allegation that has been contested.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Pope Francis has died, aged 88. These were his greatest reforms – and controversies

    ANALYSIS: By Joel Hodge, Australian Catholic University and Antonia Pizzey, Australian Catholic University

    Pope Francis has died on Easter Monday, aged 88, the Vatican announced. The head of the Catholic Church had recently survived being hospitalised with double pneumonia.

    Cardinal Kevin Farrell’s announcement began:

    “Dear brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis. At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father.”

    There were many unusual aspects of Pope Francis’ papacy. He was the first Jesuit pope, the first from the Americas (and the southern hemisphere), the first to choose the name “Francis” and the first to give a TED talk.

    He was also the first pope in more than 600 years to be elected following the resignation, rather than death, of his predecessor.

    From the very start of his papacy, Francis seemed determined to do things differently and present the papacy in a new light. Even in thinking about his burial, he chose the unexpected: to be placed to rest not in the Vatican, but in the Basilica of St Mary Major in Rome – the first pope to be buried there in hundreds of years.

    Vatican News reported the late Pope Francis had requested his funeral rites be simplified.

    “The renewed rite,” said Archbishop Diego Ravelli, “seeks to emphasise even more that the funeral of the Roman Pontiff is that of a pastor and disciple of Christ and not of a powerful person of this world.”

    Straddling a line between “progressive” and “conservative”, Francis experienced tension with both sides. In doing so, his papacy shone a spotlight on what it means to be Catholic today.


    The Pope’s Easter Blessing    Video: AP

    The day before his death, Pope Francis made a brief appearance on Easter Sunday to bless the crowds at St Peter’s Square.

    Between a rock and a hard place
    Francis was deemed not progressive enough by some, yet far too progressive by others.

    His apostolic exhortation (an official papal teaching on a particular issue or action) Amoris Laetitia, ignited great controversy for seemingly being (more) open to the question of whether people who have divorced and remarried may receive Eucharist.

    He also disappointed progressive Catholics, many of whom hoped he would make stronger changes on issues such as the roles of women, married clergy, and the broader inclusion of LGBTQIA+ Catholics.

    The reception of his exhortation Querida Amazonia was one such example. In this document, Francis did not endorse marriage for priests, despite bishops’ requests for this. He also did not allow the possibility of women being ordained as deacons to address a shortage of ordained ministers. His discerning spirit saw there was too much division and no clear consensus for change.

    Francis was also openly critical of Germany’s controversial “Synodal Way” – a series of conferences with bishops and lay people — that advocated for positions contrary to Church teachings. Francis expressed concern on multiple occasions that this project was a threat to the unity of the Church.

    At the same time, Francis was no stranger to controversy from the conservative side of the Church, receiving “dubia” or “theological doubts” over his teaching from some of his Cardinals. In 2023, he took the unusual step of responding to some of these doubts.

    Impact on the Catholic Church
    In many ways, the most striking thing about Francis was not his words or theology, but his style. He was a modest man, even foregoing the Apostolic Palace’s grand papal apartments to live in the Vatican’s simpler guest house.

    He may well be remembered most for his simplicity of dress and habits, his welcoming and pastoral style and his wise spirit of discernment.

    He is recognised as giving a clear witness to the life, love and joy of Jesus in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council – a point of major reform in modern Church history. This witness has translated into two major developments in Church teachings and life.

    Pope Francis on respecting and protecting the environment
    Pope Francis on respecting and protecting the environment. Image: Tandag Diocese

    Love for our common home
    The first of these relates to environmental teachings. In 2015, Francis released his ground-breaking encyclical, Laudato si’: On Care for Our Common Home. It expanded Catholic social teaching by giving a comprehensive account of how the environment reflects our God-given “common home”.

    Consistent with recent popes such as Benedict XVI and John Paul II, Francis acknowledged climate change and its destructive impacts and causes. He summarised key scientific research to forcefully argue for an evidence-based approach to addressing humans’ impact on the environment.

    He also made a pivotal and innovative contribution to the climate change debate by identifying the ethical and spiritual causes of environmental destruction.

    Francis argued combating climate change relied on the “ecological conversion” of the human heart, so that people may recognise the God-given nature of our planet and the fundamental call to care for it. Without this conversion, pragmatic and political measures wouldn’t be able to counter the forces of consumerism, exploitation and selfishness.

    Francis argued a new ethic and spirituality was needed. Specifically, he said Jesus’ way of love – for other people and all creation – is the transformative force that could bring sustainable change for the environment and cultivate fraternity among people (and especially with the poor).

    Synodality: moving towards a Church that listens
    Francis’s second major contribution, and one of the most significant aspects of his papacy, was his commitment to “synodality”. While there’s still confusion over what synodality actually means, and its potential for political distortion, it is above all a way of listening and discerning through openness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

    It involves hierarchy and lay people transparently and honestly discerning together, in service of the mission of the church. Synodality is as much about the process as the goal. This makes sense as Pope Francis was a Jesuit, an order focused on spreading Catholicism through spiritual formation and discernment.

    Drawing on his rich Jesuit spirituality, Francis introduced a way of conversation centred on listening to the Holy Spirit and others, while seeking to cultivate friendship and wisdom.

    With the conclusion of the second session of the Synod on Synodality in October 2024, it is too soon to assess its results. However, those who have been involved in synodal processes have reported back on their transformative potential.

    Archbishop of Brisbane, Mark Coleridge, explained how participating in the 2015 Synod “was an extraordinary experience [and] in some ways an awakening”.

    Catholicism in the modern age
    Francis’ papacy inspired both great joy and aspirations, as well as boiling anger and rejection. He laid bare the agonising fault lines within the Catholic community and struck at key issues of Catholic identity, triggering debate over what it means to be Catholic in the world today.

    He leaves behind a Church that seems more divided than ever, with arguments, uncertainty and many questions rolling in his wake. But he has also provided a way for the Church to become more converted to Jesus’ way of love, through synodality and dialogue.

    Francis showed us that holding labels such as “progressive” or “conservative” won’t enable the Church to live out Jesus’ mission of love – a mission he emphasised from the very beginning of his papacy.The Conversation

    Dr Joel Hodge is senior lecturer, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, Australian Catholic University and Dr Antonia Pizzey is postdoctoral researcher, Research Centre for Studies of the Second Vatican Council, Australian Catholic University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.