Category: refugees

  • Aftonbladet, the biggest daily newspaper of Sweden published a call where it was stated that the Turkish authorities and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan among them, are making calls, at every opportunity, for Sweden to repatriate some authors, journalists, academicians, and human rights defenders living freely in Sweden by obtaining refugee status, the number of whom ranges between 33 and 130. 

    Simultaneously with Turkey requesting Sweden to repatriate its opponents, Sweden is facing the largest organized criminal actions in its history. Almost every day comes reports of armed attacks and killings from all parts of Sweden,” the call states*.  

    “It is as if anyone can be killed anywhere at any time. Most of these cruel attacks are being organized by Swedish criminals now living in luxury in Turkey. These criminals have obtained Turkish citizenship and Turkey is therefore arguing that they cannot be returned to Sweden.” 

    One such leader of a criminal gang threatening security in our country is Rawa Majid, the leader of the criminal organization called “Foxtrot” (with nickname Kurdish Fox). Another one organizing these crimes belongs to the group called Bandidos .”

    “On the one side, Turkey claims to be fighting terrorism and requests that people who are in Sweden because of their political opinions to be returned to Turkey. On the other side, the country is rejecting to return to Sweden criminals of grave offences, people who risk the security and the future generations in Sweden. 

    No, this cannot go on Turkey! It is time to act like a serious state. Return the “Kurdish Fox” and the other criminal people from Sweden to Sweden.” 

    The signatories of the call:

    Kurdo Baksi, Author
    Göran Eriksson, Ex-Chief of Stockholm Workers Education Center (ABF) 
    Göran Greider, Author, Dala-Demokraten Gazetesi Baş Redaktörü
    Pierre Schori, Ex-Minister responsible for Refugees and UN Ambassador
    Olle Svenning, Author

    https://bianet.org/english/politics/281229-swedish-newspaper-calls-turkey-to-return-to-sweden-the-criminals-who-live-in-luxury-here

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

  • The now-infamous Bibby Stockholm barge is currently moored in Falmouth, Cornwall. The Tory government plans on using it to detain hundreds of refugees. However, since it arrived on the south west coast, activists have made it clear the barge is not welcome in Cornwall – and they’ve continued to protest its presence despite cops “harassing” them.

    Meanwhile, 40 organisations – including the Refugee Council – have signed an open letter to the Bibby Stockholm’s owner. It highlights the company’s links to the slave trade – and also calls out its current association with “quasi-detention”.

    Cornwall: currently home to the Bibby Stockholm

    As the Canary previously reported, the Home Office is planning to forcibly detain around 500 male refugees on the Bibby Stockholm. This is despite Dutch authorities’ alleged human rights abuses aboard the vessel when its government used it to detain refugees in the 2000s. The UK government’s plans have also prompted outrage from groups like Amnesty International.

    However, while a company refits the Bibby Stockholm in Cornwall, local people and campaign groups have not let its presence go by quietly. They have repeatedly protested it being there, and what it represents. This included a week of resistance, and ‘redecorating’ the premises of A&P, the company refitting the barge:

    Cornwall Resists is a network of grassroots anti-fascist groups in the county. As the Canary has documented, it has been prominent in resisting both the far-right and the state’s racist abuse of refugees in Cornwall. The group has also been at the forefront of the resistance to the Bibby Stockholm. So, on 30 June, it and other campaigners once again made some noise.

    Direct action, and cops siding with corporations

    The group said in a press release:

    Cornwall Resists delivered a loud and clear message to A&P workers currently refitting the Bibby Stockholm refugee prison ship: lay down your tools! The noise demo was part of a protest that marched through Falmouth making it clear that Cornwall will not be complicit in border violence.

    The protest was originally called as an emergency demo as the Bibby was listed as leaving on shipping websites. However, campaigners decided to continue with their plans to protest once it was clear this was not happening, and to take their message of resistance straight to A&P.

    As Cornwall Live reported, activists marched through Falmouth before going to A&P’s premises. However, cops were on hand to “protect” the company:

    Cornwall Resists said in a press release:

    Campaigners have also accused the police of harassment after several incidents that included contacting one campaigner on their personal number and turning up to a public meeting. Despite police claims that they want to facilitate protest, their actions at the protest on Friday made it clear that they are only interested in protecting A&P.

    The police were not present during the protests in town, but only attended at A&P, and only cared about whether protesters crossed an invisible line on the road where it becomes A&P property.

    When Pendennis workers, who were not connected to A&P, came to speak to protesters to ask them to let them leave, the police attempted to physically stop campaigners from talking to them. Despite this aggression, Cornwall Resists were able to talk to the workers, and immediately moved to allow them to leave.

    Of course, cops in Cornwall siding with the racist state and its proponents like A&P is nothing new. They had already targeted Cornwall Resists’ meeting about its Bibby Stockholm action:

    Moreover, when far-right Patriotic Alternative organised a protest against refugees staying in a Newquay hotel, cops sided with them while targeting anti-fascists who’d come out to oppose the demo. This is symptomatic of the police’s wider role in enforcing the UK’s racist state.

    Taking a stand in Falmouth and beyond

    The Bibby Stockholm remains moored in Falmouth. Campaigners are unclear when it will be leaving for its final destination in Dorset. A spokesperson for Cornwall Resists said:

    The resistance to the Bibby Stockholm and refugee prison ships is growing. Most people do not agree with this government’s hostile environment policy – they want to see refugees and asylum seekers treated with empathy and respect, not locked up on boats or in camps.

    Those seeking sanctuary have made incredibly traumatic journeys to get here, often fleeing from wars the UK has perpetrated or from devastation caused by bombs manufactured by UK companies. Many of those who’ll be imprisoned on the Bibby will already have suffered immense sea-related trauma, and it is utterly obscene and heartbreaking to think they’ll then face being imprisoned on a boat.

    Meanwhile, 40 organisations including the Refugee Council have published their open letter to Bibby Marine, the barge’s owner. You can read it in full here. It said:

    We… believe that your company’s alleged historical association with the slave trade makes it all the more important that you reflect deeply on whether a contract which leads to the effective detention of people fleeing war and persecution is where your company wishes to position itself in 2023.

    Links between your parent company Bibby Line Group (BLG) and the slave trade have repeatedly been made. If true, we appeal to you to consider what actions you might take in recompense.

    Cornwall’s and the broader resistance to the Bibby Stockholm cannot be viewed in isolation. It may seem bizarre that an inanimate floating vessel can be the subject of such anger. However – like slave trader statues, banks, or parliament itself – it is what the Bibby Stockholm represents that makes it a target.

    Cornwall Resists’ actions serve to highlight the colonialist, racist, and classist government policies that allow it to be in Falmouth in the first place.

    Featured image via Cornwall Resists 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • COMMENTARY: By John Minto

    No government likes to be called out for human rights abuses and it’s uncomfortable to do so, particularly when the abuser is either a friend or a country with which we have strong economic links.

    In our relations with China, this is a difficult issue for us.

    However, we should always expect our government to speak out for human rights and the case can be made that Chris Hipkins was too soft on his visit to China last week. The impression was of a laid-back Prime Minister failing to convey any of the serious concerns expressed by credible and principled human rights organisations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

    It seems New Zealand is leaving the heavy lifting on human rights to Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta who, in her own words, had a robust discussion with China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs on these issues earlier this year.

    An Australian report said she was “harangued” from the Chinese side, although this was denied by Mahuta.

    Hipkins, as Prime Minister, has our loudest voice and he should have publicly backed up our Foreign Minister.

    If we want to be regarded as a good global citizen, we have to speak out clearly and act consistently, irrespective of where human rights abuses take place. This is where New Zealand has fallen down repeatedly.

    Looking the other way
    We have been happy to strongly condemn Russia and announced economic and diplomatic sanctions within a few hours of its invasion of Ukraine but we look the other way when a country guilty of abuses is close to the US.

    In regard to the longest military occupation in modern history, Israel’s occupation of Palestine, we have been weak and inconsistent over many decades in calling for Palestinian human rights.

    It hasn’t always been like that.

    In late 2016, the National government, under John Key as prime minister, co-sponsored a United Nations Security Council resolution (UNSC2334 – NZ was a security council member at the time) which was passed in a 14–0 vote. The US abstained.

    The resolution states that, in the occupied Palestinian territories, Israeli settlements had “no legal validity” and constituted “a flagrant violation under international law”. It said they were a “major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace” in the Middle East.

    So why does this matter now?

    Because Israel has elected a new extremist government that has declared its intention to make illegal settlement building on Palestinian land its “top priority”. Early this week it announced plans for 5000 more homes for these illegal settlements, which a Palestinian official described as “part of an open war against the Palestinian people”.

    Israel shows world middle finger
    Israel is showing Palestinians, and the world, its middle finger.

    At least nine people have been killed and scores wounded in the latest Israeli military attack on Palestinians in what is being described as a “real massacre” in Jenin refugee camp.

    UNSC 2334 didn’t just criticise Israel. It called for action. It also asked member countries of the United Nations “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967″.

    In practical terms, this means requiring our government and local authorities to refuse to purchase any goods or services from companies (both Israeli and foreign-owned) that operate in illegal Israeli settlements.

    A map showing the location of the Jenin refugee camp in Israeli Occupied Palestine
    A map showing the location of the Jenin refugee camp in Israeli Occupied Palestine . . . 5.9 Palestinian refugees comprise the world’s largest stateless community. Map: Al Jazeera/Creative Commons

    This ban should also be extended to the 112 companies identified by the UN Human Rights Council as complicit in the building and maintenance of these illegal Israeli settlements.

    The government should be actively discouraging our Superannuation Fund and KiwiSaver providers from investing in these complicit companies but an analysis earlier this year showed the Super Fund investments in these companies have close to doubled in the past two years.

    Some countries have begun following through on UNSC 2334 but New Zealand has been inert. We have not been prepared to back up our words at the United Nations with action here.

    West Papua deserves our voice
    Following through would mean we were standing up for human rights for everyone living in Palestine. We could expect our government to face false smears of anti-semitism from Israel’s leaders and their friends here but we would receive heartfelt thanks from a people who have suffered immeasurably for 75 years.

    Palestinians are the largest group of refugees internationally — 5.9 million — after being driven off their land by Israeli militias in 1947-1949. Every day, more of their land is stolen for illegal settlements while we avert our gaze.

    The Indonesian military occupation of West Papua and Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara also deserve our voice on the side of the victims.

    Standing up for human rights is not comfortable when it means challenging supposed friends or allies. But we owe it to ourselves, and to those being brutally oppressed, to do more than mouth platitudes.

    These peoples deserve our support and solidarity. Let’s not look the other way. Let’s act.

    John Minto is national chair of Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article was first published in The New Zealand Herald but is republished with the permission of the author.

  • Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) welcomes the renewal of Canada’s funding to Palestinian refugees for the next four years, but is disappointed that the latest pledge represents a cut of $5 million annually. CJPME urges Canada to increase its funding to meet the needs of the current humanitarian and human rights crisis, and to complement its financial support with political support for UNRWA and Palestinian refugees on the international stage.

    “75 years after the Nakba and the creation of the world’s longest-running refugee crisis, it is time for Canada to finally commit to supporting Palestinian refugees,” said Michael Bueckert, Vice President of CJPME. The Palestine refugee crisis began in 1948, when more than 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly expelled during the creation of Israel. “Canada must bolster its funding to meet the needs of the current moment, and put its political support behind the rights of Palestinian refugees – including their fundamental right to return to their homes,” added Bueckert.

    The Canadian government announced on Monday that it was pledging up to $100 million over the next four years to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the UN agency that provides services to 5.9 million Palestine refugees. Compared to its $90 million funding commitment over the previous three-year period, this amounts to a cut of $5 million per year, or $20 million in total. Meanwhile, UNRWA faces a chronic crisis of underfunding which poses an imminent threat to its ability to provide services.

    CJPME remains concerned that despite its financial support to UNRWA, Canada has failed to provide political support for the agency or the rights of Palestinian refugees. Earlier this year, Canada boycotted the first-ever UN event commemorating the Palestinian Nakba and the creation of the refugee problem. Starting in 2011 under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada has abstained every year on a resolution to renew UNRWA’s mandate at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), and has voted “No” on another motion supporting the activities of UNRWA. According to internal documents obtained by CJPME, Global Affairs Canada has long determined such resolutions to be consistent with Canada’s foreign policy and thus deemed worthy of support.

    CJPME also notes that Canada’s pledge of $25 million per year is similar to the value of weapons that Canada has exported to Israel over the past three years, which has ranged from $20 million to $27 million. CJPME has long warned about the possible human rights risk that these weapons will be used against Palestinians under occupation, including refugees. Last week, two Palestinian children who were students in UNRWA schools were killed by Israeli forces in the Jenin refugee camp. Last month, many Palestinian refugees were killed during Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, including several students in UNRWA schools.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Evacuating the last refugees but paying $350m of Australian taxpayers’ money to keep the gates open? That’s plucking defeat from the jaws of victory

    The trauma and torture of Australian border violence and its offshore detention centre has never left me, even though it’s been four years since I left Nauru and came to the US to start my new life here.

    I became a refugee when I naively assumed that Australia was a nation that respected human rights and international law. I came seeking freedom under a democratic system, where my opinions could be expressed without fear of persecution or prosecution. I had so much faith in that ideal that I boarded a boat bound for Christmas Island. But instead, I was transferred to Nauru, a place without hope.

    Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup

    Continue reading…

  • By Giff Johnson, Editor, Marshall Islands Journal and RNZ Pacific correspondent

    Following widespread media coverage of the collapse of what was a more than US$70 million trust fund for Bikini islanders displaced by American nuclear weapons testing, the United States Congress has demanded answers from the Interior Department about the status of the trust fund.

    Four leading members of the US Congress put the Interior Department on notice last Friday that Congress is focused on accountability of Interior’s decision to discontinue oversight of the Bikini Resettlement Trust Fund.

    In their three-page letter, the chairmen and the ranking members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the House Committee on Natural Resources — which both have oversight on US funding to the Marshall Islands — wrote to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland with questions about what has happened to the Bikinians’ trust fund.

    It was initially capitalised by the US Congress in 1982 and again in 1988 for a total investment of just under US$110m.

    Protests in Majuro
    The Congressional letter is the first official US action on the Bikini Resettlement Trust Fund and follows several demonstrations in Majuro over the past six weeks by members of the Bikini community angered by the current lack of money to support their community.

    The letter notes that on November 16, 2017, Interior accepted Kili/Bikini/Ejit Mayor Anderson Jibas and the local council’s request for a “rescript” or change in the system of oversight of the Resettlement Trust Fund.

    As of September 30, 2016, the fund had $71 million in it, the last audit available of the fund.

    “Since then (2017), local officials have purportedly depleted the fund,” the four Senate and House leaders wrote to Haaland.

    “Indeed, media reports suggest that the fund may have been squandered in ways that not only lack transparency and accountability, but also lack fidelity to the fund’s original intent.

    “If true, that is a major breach of public trust not only for the people of Bikini Atoll, for whom the fund was established, but also for the American taxpayers whose dollars established and endowed the fund.”

    They refer to multiple media reports about the demise of the Resettlement Trust Fund, including in the Marshall Islands Journal, The New York Times, Marianas Variety and Honolulu Civil Beat.

    No audits since 2016
    The Resettlement Trust Fund was audited annually since inception in the 1980s. But there have been no audits released since 2016 during the tenure of current Mayor Jibas.

    The lack of funds in the Resettlement Trust Fund only became evident in January when the local government was unable to pay workers and provide other benefits routinely provided for the displaced islanders.

    Since January, no salaries or quarterly nuclear compensation payments have been made, leaving Bikinians largely destitute and now facing dozens of collection lawsuits from local banks due to delinquent loan payments.

    Bikini women load their belongings onto a waiting US Navy vessel in March 1946
    Bikini women load their belongings onto a waiting US Navy vessel in March 1946 as they prepare to depart to Rongerik, an uninhabited atoll where they spent two years. Image: US Navy Archives

    ‘Fund is in jeopardy’
    The letter from Energy Chairman Senator Joe Manchin and ranking member Senator John Barrasso, and Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman and ranking member Raul Grijalva says American lawmakers “have a duty to oversee the management of taxpayer dollars appropriated for the resettlement and rehabilitation of Bikini Atoll”.

    The letter also repeatedly makes the point that the money in the trust fund was only to rehabilitate and resettle Bikini Atoll, with projects on Kili or Ejit islands limited to only $2 million per year, subject to the Interior Secretary’s prior approval.

    “Regrettably, the continued viability of the fund to serve its express purpose now appears to be in jeopardy,” the US elected leaders said.

    The US leaders are demanding that Haaland explain why the Interior Department walked away from its long-standing oversight role with the trust fund in late 2017.

    Specifically they want to know if the Office of the Solicitor approved the decision by then-Assistant Secretary Doug Domenech to accept the KBE Local Government’s rescript “as a valid amendment to the 1988 amended resettlement trust fund agreement.’

    They also suggest Interior’s 2017 decision has ramifications for US legal liability.

    Key questions
    “Does the department believe that the 2017 rescript supersedes the 1988 amended resettlement trust fund agreement in its entirety?” they ask.

    “If so, does the department disclaim that Congress’s 1988 appropriation to the fund fully satisfied the obligation of the United States to provide funds to assist in the resettlement and rehabilitation of Bikini Atoll by the people of Bikini Atoll?

    “And does that waive any rights or reopen any potential legal liabilities for nuclear claims that were previously settled?”

    They also want to know if KBE Local Government provided a copy of its annual budget, as promised, since 2017.

    The letter winds up wanting to know what Interior is “doing to ensure that trust funds related to the Marshall Islands are managed transparently and accountably moving forward?”

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

    The "Baker" underwater nuclear weapons test at Bikini Atoll in 1946.
    The Baker underwater nuclear weapons test at Bikini Atoll in 1946. Dozens of World War II vessels were used as targets for this weapons test, and now lie on the atoll’s lagoon floor. Image: US Navy Archives
  • Sunak insists Rwanda is safe country to be sent after court rules in favour of charities and 10 asylum seekers

    The bitter legal battle over the government’s flagship immigration policy is set to reach new heights after Downing Street insisted it would fight to overturn a ruling that sending refugees to Rwanda was unlawful.

    Charities and others were jubilant on Thursday after judges at the court of appeal ruled in favour of campaign groups and 10 affected asylum seekers, while the opposition claimed the policy at heart of Rishi Sunak’s “Stop the Boats” pledge was now unravelling.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Appeal court judges in London have ruled the UK government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful, after a legal challenge by migrants and campaigners. Since the ruling, PM Rishi Sunak has pledged to contest the decision.

    The judges said home secretary Suella Braverman had not properly considered the circumstances of the eight claimants in the case.

    Unravelling?

    Tackling asylum claims has become a political headache for the Conservative government. Ultimately, their plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda triggered a wave of protests from rights groups and charities, while last-gasp legal challenges successfully blocked the first deportation flights in June 2022.

    Several individuals who arrived in small boats, along with organisations supporting migrants, brought a case to the High Court in London. They argued that the policy was unlawful on multiple grounds, including the assessment of Rwanda as a safe third country.

    Meanwhile, an unhappy sounding Sunak tweeted about criminal gangs – a common Tory strawman argument in relations to refugees:

    The Tories’ cruel plans were dead, according to former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn:

    Meanwhile, civil rights organisation Liberty said this was a huge blow against the government, but the racist Illegal Immigration Bill must still be opposed:

    Cruella!

    Dr Shola Mos-Shignamimu took the opportunity to laugh at Braverman’s misfortune and call for the Tories to be prosecuted:

    And Labour’s Zarah Sultana called for a powerful pro-refugee movement:

    Author Kit Yates said the vast amounts wasted on the deportation plan should be used to pay for public services:

    Rwanda ruling

    In court, the three judges said they were not satisfied by government assurances:

    The deficiencies in the asylum system in Rwanda are such that there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that persons sent to Rwanda will be returned to their home countries, where they faced persecution or other inhumane treatment.

    They added:

    In consequence, sending anyone to Rwanda would constitute a breach of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

    Article 3 itself says:

    No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

    It’s true this is a substantial victory for human rights. But we must not forget that the Tories aren’t going to stop their assault on asylum seekers anytime soon.

    There’s more to come, and – as Liberty point out – the Tory’s racist immigration bill will still need to be stopped.

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Alisdaire Hickson, cropped to 1910 x 1000, licenced under CC BY 2.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Home secretary says government will seek leave to appeal against judgment as she gives statement to MPs

    Jacob Rees-Mogg declined to comment on the privileges committee report when he was doorstepped by reporters this morning. He told ITV he was going to church, and then to the Test match.

    The Suella Braverman statement in the Commons on the court of appeal judgment on the Rwanda deportations policy will take place at about 5pm.

    Continue reading…

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

  • The last refugee has now been evacuated from Nauru. Yet the Australian-run detention centre remains ‘ready to receive and process’ any new unauthorised maritime arrivals at an annual cost of $350m.

    Guardian Australia chief political correspondent Paul Karp and reporter Eden Gillespie tell Jane Lee about what refugees and asylum seekers detained for more than a decade make of the decision, and what it means for Australia’s deterrence policy

    You can subscribe for free to Guardian Australia’s daily news podcast Full Story on Apple Podcast, Spotify and Google podcasts

    Read more:

    Continue reading…

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

  • Sometimes you wake up from a dream to realize it is telling you to pay close attention to the depth of its message, especially when it is linked to what you have been thinking about for days.  I have just come up from a dream in which I went down to the cellar of the house I grew up in because the basement light was on and the back cellar door had been opened by a mysterious man who stood outside.

    I will spare you additional details or an interpretation, except to say that my daytime thoughts concerned the media spectacle surrounding the Titan submersible that imploded two miles down in the ocean’s cellar while trying to give its passengers a view of the wreck of the Titanic, the “unsinkable” ship nicknamed “the Millionaire’s Special.”  The ship that no one could sink except an ice cube in the drink that swallowed it.

    Cellar dreams are well-known as the place where we as individuals and societies can face the flickering shadows that we refuse to face in conscious life.  Carl Jung called it “the shadow.”  Such shadows, when unacknowledged and repressed, have a tendency to autonomously surface and erupt, not only leading to personal self-destruction but that of whole societies.  History is replete with examples.  My dream’s mysterious stranger had lit my way through some dark thoughts and opened the door to a possible escape.  He got me thinking about what all of us tend to want to deny or avoid because its implications are so monstrous.

    The obsession with the alleged marvels of technology together with naming them after ancient Greek and Roman gods are fixations of elite technologues who have lost what Spengler called “living inner religiousness” but wish to show they know the classical names even though they miss the meaning of these myths.  Such myths tell the stories of things that never happened but always are.  Appropriating the ancient names without irony – such as naming a boat Titanic or a submersible Titan – unveils the hubristic ignorance of people who have never descended to the underworld to learn its lessons.  Relinquishing  their sense of god-like power doesn’t occur to them, nor does the shadow side of their Faustian dreams.

    They will never name some machine Nemesis, for that would expose the fact that they have exceeded the eternal limits with their maniacal technological extremism, and, to paraphrase Camus, dark Furies will swoop down to destroy them.

    Nietzsche termed the result nihilism.  Once people have killed God, machines are a handy replacement in societies that worship the illusion of technique and are scared to death of death and the machines that they invented to administer it.

    The latter is not a matter fit to print since it must remain in the dark basement of the public’s consciousness.  If it were publicized, the game of nihilistic death-dealing would be exposed.  Because power, money, and technology are the ruling deities today, the mass media revolve around publicizing their marvels in spectacular fashion, and when “accidents” occur, they never point out the myth of the machines, or what Lewis Mumford called “The Pentagon of Power.”  Tragedies occur, they tell us, but they are minor by-products of the marvels of technology.

    But if these media would take us down to see the truth beneath the oceans’ surfaces, we would see not false monsters such as the Titanic or Moby Dick or cartoon fictions such as Disney’s Monstro the whale, but the handiwork of thousands of mad Captain Ahabs who have attached the technologues “greatest” invention – nuclear weapons – to nuclear-powered ballistic submarines.

    Trident submarines. First strike submarines, such as the USS Ohio.

    These Trident subs live and breathe in the cellars of our minds where few dare descend.  They are controlled by jackals in Washington and the Pentagon with polished faces in well-appointed offices with coffee machines and tasty snacks.  Madmen.  They hum through the deep waters ready to strike and destroy the world.  Few hear them, almost none see them, most prefer not to know of them.

    But wait, what’s the buzz, tell me what’s happening: the Titan and the Titanic, wealthy voyeurs intent on getting a glance into the sepulchre of those long dead, while six hundred or so desperate migrants drown in the Mediterranean sea from which the ancient gods were born.  These are the priorities of a society that worships the wealthy; a society of the spectacle that entertains and distracts while the end of the world cruises below consciousness.

    The United States alone has fourteen such submarines armed with Trident missiles constantly prowling the ocean depths, while the British have four.  Named for the three-pronged weapon of the Greek and Roman sea gods, Poseidon and Neptune respectively, these submarine-launched ballistic missiles, manufactured by Lockheed Martin (“We deliver innovative solutions to the world’s toughest challenges”), can destroy the world in a flash. Destroy it many times over. A final solution.

    While the United States has abrogated all treaties that offered some protection from their use and has declared their right of first use, it has consistently pushed toward a nuclear confrontation with Russia and China.  Today – 2023 June – we stand on the precipice of nuclear annihilation as never before.

    A single Trident submarine has 20 Trident missiles, each carrying 12 independently targeted warheads for a total of 240 warheads, with each warhead approximately 40 times more destructive than the Hiroshima bomb.  Fourteen submarines times 240 equals 3,360 nuclear warheads times 40 equals 134,400 Hiroshimas.  Such are the lessons of mathematics in absurd times.

    James W. Douglass, the author of the renown JFK and the Unspeakable and a longtime activist against the Tridents at Ground Zero Center for Non-Violent Action outside the Bangor Submarine Base in Washington state, put it this way in 2015 when asked about Robert Aldridge, the heroic Lockheed Trident missile designer who resigned his position in an act of conscience and became an inspirational force for the campaign against the Tridents and nuclear weapons:

    Question: “What did the Nuremberg attorneys say about war crimes that had such a deep impact on Robert Aldridge?”

    Douglass: “They said that first-strike weapons and weapons that directly target a civilian population were war crimes in violation of the Nuremberg principles. Those Nuremberg principles, which are the foundations of international law, are violated by both by electronic warfare – which is why we poured blood on the files for electronic warfare [at the base] – and also by the Trident missile system, which is what Robert Aldridge was building.”

    Robert Aldridge saw his shadow side.  He went to the cellar of his darkest dreams. He refused to turn away.  He became an inspiration for James and Shelley Douglass and so many others.  He was a man in and of the system, who saw the truth of his complicity in radical evil and underwent a metanoia.  It is possible.

    If those missiles are ever launched from the monsters that carry them through the hidden recesses of the world’s oceans, there will never be another Nuremberg Trial to judge the guilty, for the innocent and the guilty will all be dead.

    We will have failed to shed light on our darkest shadows.

    Writing in another context that pertains to today’s high-flying nuclear madmen whose mythic Greek forbear Icarus would not listen, the poet W. H. Auden put it this way in Musée des Beaux Arts:

    About suffering they were never wrong,
    The Old Masters: how well they understood
    Its human position; how it takes place
    While someone else is eating or opening a window or just walking dully along
    How, when the aged are reverently, passionately waiting
    For the miraculous birth, there always must be
    Children who did not specially want it to happen, skating
    On a pond at the edge of the wood:
    They never forgot
    That even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course
    Anyhow in a corner, some untidy spot
    Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer’s horse
    Scratches its innocent behind on a tree.

    In Brueghel’s Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
    Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
    Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
    But for him it was not an important failure; the sun shone
    As it had to on the white legs disappearing into the green
    Water; and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
    Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky
    Had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.

    We turn away at our peril.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The last refugee, for now, has left the small, guano-producing state of Nauru.  For a decade, the Pacific Island state served as one of Australia’s offshore prisons for refugees and asylum seekers, a cruel deterrent to those daring to exercise their right to seek asylum via the sea.

    Since July 2013, 3,127 people making the naval journey to Australia to seek sanctuary found themselves in carceral facilities in Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island, told that they would never resettle on the Australian mainland.  Such persons were duly euphemised as “transitory persons” to be hurried on to third country destinations, if not returned to their country of origin, a form of vacant reasoning typical of a callous bureaucracy.

    The wisdom here was that other countries would not only be more suitable for such persons, but keener candidates to pull their weight in terms of processing and accepting refugees.  For the Australian Commonwealth, outsourcing responsibilities from protecting citizens to shielding vulnerable arrivals from harm, has become a matter of dark habit.

    Many of those remaining refugees held on the Australian mainland are the subjects of acute care, and all await transfer to third countries such as Canada under its private sponsorship program, the United States, New Zealand or other destinations.

    In the meantime, 80 remain in PNG.  The situation there is marred by a fundamental legal peculiarity.  In October 2017, the Supreme Court of Papua New Guinea found the Manus Island Centre to be both illegal and unconstitutional.  (PNG, unlike Australia, has a constitution prohibiting violations of personal liberty, even for non-PNG nationals.)  Its closure led to the removal of the detainees to various transition centres devoid of basic amenities, including water, electricity and medical support.

    Both PNG and Australia proceeded to squabble over responsibility, despite the obvious fact that the latter exercises effective control over the facilities and those being held in them.  Emilie McDonnell of Human Rights Watch deems it indisputable “that Australia bears primary responsibility for those in offshore detention under its policies and has an ongoing legal duty to find a durable solution.”

    The offshore concentration camp system established and prosecuted by respective federal governments has become the envy for autocrats, populists and reactionaries the world over.  Fact-finding missions have been made by European Union member states.  The model is mesmerising officials in the UK.  Its credentials of cruelty and suffering are beyond doubt: 14 deaths since 2012, marked by gross medical neglect, suicide and murder by overly enthusiastic guards.  Spokesperson for the Refugee Action Collective, Ian Rintoul, suggested that the legacy on Nauru “will forever stain the record of both sides of Australian politics”.

    The absence of any refugee inmates in Nauru’s detention facility does not herald its closure.  Far from it: the Albanese government has, according to Federal Budget figures, promised to spend A$486 million this year on the facility.

    The Department of Home Affairs continues to tersely state that the position of the government “on maritime smuggling and irregular maritime ventures has not changed.  Any person entering Australia by boat without a valid visa will be returned or taken to a regional processing country for protection claims assessment.  Unauthorised maritime arrivals will not settle in Australia.”

    For anyone concerned about the welfare of such persons held in captivity, the department makes a feeble assurance: “All transitory persons in Nauru reside in community accommodation and have access to health and welfare services.  Transitory persons have work rights and can operate businesses.”  These people have evidently not been to the prison idyll they so praise.  But not to worry, a wounded conscience could also be put to rest by the fact that there were “currently no minors under regional processing arrangements” on the island.

    In Senate estimates, it was also revealed that the government would continue forking out A$350 million annually to maintain the Nauru facility as a “contingency” for any future arrivals.  According to a spokesperson for the Department of Home Affairs, the processing centre was “ready to receive and process any new unauthorised maritime arrivals, future-proofing Australia’s response to maritime people-smuggling”.  And so, old canards are recycled in their staleness and counterfeit quality.

    Another unsavoury aspect to this needless cost to the Australian budget is the recipient of such taxpayer largesse.  The Albanese government has an ongoing contract with the US prison company, Management and Training Corporation (MTC), which is responsible for running the facilities till September 2025 at the cost of A$422 million.

    MTC has a spotty resume, though it trumpets its record as a “leader in social impact”.  Impact is certainly not an issue, if maladministration, wrongful death, poor medical care and a failing performance in rehabilitation count in the equation.  In 2015, then Arizona governor Dough Ducey cancelled MTC’s contract after a withering state department of corrections report into a riot at Kingman prison identifying “a culture of disorganisation, disengagement and disregard for state policies”.  As a 2021 lawsuit filed in the District Court of the Southern District of California pungently alleged, MTC “is a private corporation that traffics in human captivity for profit.”

    The very fact that MTC Australia advertises itself as a provider of “evidence-based rehabilitation programs and other services to approximately 1,000 male inmates in Australia” begs that old question as to why they need to oversee refugees and asylum seekers in the first place.  But the answer is glaringly evident: anyone daring to make the perilous journey across the seas to the world’s largest island continent are seen as presumptively criminal, trafficked by actual criminals.  Such a sickness of attitude and policy continues to keep the Australian political imagination captive and defiant before law and decency.

  • Through a WhatsApp message from Portugal, my friend Eunice Neves asked to share a moment with me. She was with an Afghan couple, Frishta and Mohammad, and their baby son, Arsalan. The young family has resettled in Mértola, a small city in southern Portugal. They looked forward to celebrating World Refugee Day as part of a project which the Portuguese government lauds as a model for refugee…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Mortality at sea is becoming a theme of late. The nature of how that mortality has been represented, however, has varied. The death of a billionaire on a quest to see the sunken ruins of the Titanic is treated with saturating interest; the deaths of those making their way across the Mediterranean to seek sanctuary receives a relative footnote of interest.

    News has now emerged that the five occupants on the Titan submersible have perished, joining those other unfortunates already entombed in the watery ruins of the steamship that sank in April 1912 off the coast of Newfoundland. They include Stockton Rush, the CEO of OceanGate, the company funding the venture, British-Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood and his son, Suleman, British businessman Hamish Harding and renowned explorer Paul-Henri Nargeolet.

    It was occasion enough to lead Hollywood film director James Cameron, himself a veteran of 33 dives to the vessel whose story he brought to the big screen in 1997, to make a few queries. On hearing of the sub’s disappearance, contacts in the deep submersible community were chased up. “Within about an hour I had the following facts. They were on descent. They were at 3,500 metres, heading for the bottom at 3,800 metres.”

    The loss of both communications and navigation could only lead to one conclusion: “an extreme catastrophic event or high, highly energetic catastrophic event.” On June 22, an official in the US Navy revealed that “an acoustic anomaly consistent with an implosion” had been detected.

    For almost a week, the coverage on the fate of the Titan remained unrelenting. Commentators with varying degrees of expertise were consulted over speculative minutiae and details. When would oxygen supplies run out? Were there banging sounds detected, suggesting signs of life? How would the Titan be retrieved?

    None of this got away from the obvious point: the mission had been one of sheer folly and recklessness, a doomed reminder of humankind’s overconfidence. The submersible lacked standard certification protocols. Notables in the deep submersible community had also expressed their concerns to OceanGate, warning of the dangerously experimental nature of the vehicle. In March 2018, a letter from three dozen individuals, including oceanographers, deep-sea explorers and industry leaders, stated that “the current ‘experimental’ approach adopted by Oceangate could result in negative outcomes (from minor to catastrophic) that would have serious consequences for everyone in the industry.”

    Within the company itself, the director of maritime operations, David Lochridge, wrote a damning report warning of “the potential dangers to passengers of the Titan as the submersible reached extreme depths.”

    Indeed, the company was the subject of a 2018 lawsuit questioning the safety credentials of the craft. “It is, despite the exorbitant cost of what was supposed to be a short trip,” writes Alex Shephard for The New Republic, “almost comically shoddy, bolted together with parts intended for R.V.s and piloted with a video game controller.”

    Those in the company, evidently aware of such risks, went so far as to make anyone making the journey sign multiple waivers. “To even get on the boat that takes you to the Titanic, you sign a massive waiver that you could die on the trip,” one former OceanGate passenger, Mike Reiss, told the BBC. “It lists one way, after another, that you could die on the trip. They mention death three times on page one. It’s never far from your mind.”

    Perversely enough, the fate that befell the Titan had a resonance with the Titanic’s own fate. The point was not missed on Cameron, who was “struck by the similarity of the Titanic disaster itself, where the captain was repeatedly warned about ice ahead of his ship, and yet he steamed at full speed into an ice field on a moonless night and many people died as a result.”

    While the focus on the Titan has become something of a mania, a different narrative, also featuring deaths at sea, has struggled to occupy the news. The Mediterranean has again become the watery grave for those making hazardous journeys to seek sanctuary. Deaths occur, not merely because of shoddy naval construction, but due to the continuing program of preventing desperate arrivals from entering Fortress Europe.

    On June 14, up to 600 individuals may have perished off Pylos, Greece. Questions are being asked about the role played by the European border and coast guard agency, Frontex, the Hellenic coast guard, and the Italian and Maltese authorities. Certain testimonies from survivors, for instance, suggest that the Hellenic coast guard towed the boat away from Greek waters, a hazardous move that led to its capsizing. While the Greek State is being castigated, it is operating with an EU mandate increasingly hostile to irregular migrants. What a relief the TitanTitanic affair must have been for policymakers.

    Those who perished on the Titan should be grieved. But the incessant coverage of their fates has shown a latent snobbery towards the nature of death. Foolhardy explorers and doomed adventurers are to be admired, their names venerated; the anonymous refugee and asylum seeker is to be judged and reviled, their rights curbed, and coverage of their fates minimised.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Spanish authorities rescued nearly 170 migrants from three boats drifting off the Canary Islands overnight on 21 June. This was just hours after at least two people died when their packed dinghy sank in the area.

    Spain’s coast guard saved 53 migrants “in good condition” near the island of Lanzarote. According to a local emergency services tweet, they saved another 61 – including a mother and her baby – near the island of Gran Canaria. The tweet added that the migrants found near Gran Canaria were all taken to hospital for “mild conditions”.

    Spain’s coast guard intercepted another boat early on 22 June. 54 migrants “in good condition” were on board near Lanzarote.

    The rescue operations came after a dinghy carrying migrants sank about 160 kilometres (100 miles) southeast of Gran Canaria. The Spanish coast guard found the body of a minor and later a man in the area.

    A Moroccan patrol boat rescued 24 people, according to Spain’s coast guard, which said it did not know how many people were missing.

    Perilous crossing

    However, Spanish non-profit group Walking Borders said that 39 people had died. These included four women and a baby. Walking Borders monitors migrant boats to try to help them, and also receives calls from people on the boats or their relatives

    The group’s founder, Helena Maleno, said the migrants had waited for over 12 hours for assistance.

    The number of boats heading for the Canaries from northwestern African has increased in recent days due to favourable weather conditions. Over 1,500 migrants arrived in the Canaries during the first two weeks of June, according to interior ministry figures.

    The migrant route from West Africa to the Canary Islands across the Atlantic has become more popular in recent years, as authorities have cracked down on illegal migration in the Mediterranean Sea. Just last year, the Spanish prime minister called migrants trying to find safety a attack on Spanish “territorial integrity.” Such a remark demonstrates the callousness with which governments approach people trying to find safety.

    Over 11,200 people have died or disappeared since 2018 while trying to reach Spain by sea, according to a report published by Walking Borders at the end of 2022.

    Alarm Phone, who provide independent support for people crossing the Mediterranean, expressed their anger:

    As Alarm Phone point out, borders – and the maintenance of those borders – kills. People were left for many hours, waiting to die. This kind of thing keeps happening – just days ago, hundreds of people died off the coast of Greece whilst waiting for help. There’s no point any more asking when people will care – it’s obvious that nobody does care because it’s Black and Brown refugees dying in the sea.

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Press

    Featured image via YouTube screenshot/Al Jazeera English

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

    A Papua New Guinean academic says the new security deals with the United States will militarise his country and anyone who thinks otherwise is naïve.

    In May, PNG’s Defence Minister Win Barki Daki and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken signed the Defence Cooperation Agreement and the Shiprider Agreement.

    Last week they were presented to PNG MPs for ratification and made public.

    The defence cooperation agreement talks of reaffirming a strong defence relationship based on a shared commitment to peace and stability and common approaches to addressing regional defence and security issues.

    Money that Marape ‘wouldn’t turn down’
    University of PNG political scientist Michael Kabuni said there was certainly a need for PNG to improve security at the border to stop, for instance, the country being used as a transit point for drugs such as methamphetamine and cocaine.

    “Papua New Guinea hasn’t had an ability or capacity to manage its borders. So we really don’t know what goes on on the fringes of PNG’s marine borders.”

    But Kabuni, who is completing his doctorate at the Australian National University, said whenever the US signs these sorts of deals with developing countries, the result is inevitably a heavy militarisation.

    “I think the politicians, especially PNG politicians, are either too naïve, or the benefits are too much for them to ignore. So the deal between Papua New Guinea and the United States comes with more than US$400 million support. This is money that [Prime Minister] James Marape wouldn’t turn down,” he said.

    The remote northern island of Manus, most recently the site of Australia’s controversial refugee detention camp, is set to assume far greater prominence in the region with the US eyeing both the naval base and the airport.


    Kabuni said Manus was an important base during World War II and remains key strategic real estate for both China and the United States.

    “So there is talk that, apart from the US and Australia building a naval base on Manus, China is building a commercial one. But when China gets involved in building wharves, though it appears to be a wharf for commercial ships to park, it’s built with the equipment to hold military naval ships,” he said.

    Six military locations
    Papua New Guineans now know the US is set to have military facilities at six locations around the country.

    These are Nadzab Airport in Lae, the seaport in Lae, the Lombrum Naval Base and Momote Airport on Manus Island, as well as Port Moresby’s seaport and Jackson’s International Airport.

    According to the text of the treaty the American military forces and their contractors will have the ability to largely operate in a cocoon, with little interaction with the rest of PNG, not paying taxes on anything they bring in, including personal items.

    Prime Minister James Marape has said the Americans will not be setting up military bases, but this document gives them the option to do this.

    Marape said more specific information on the arrangements would come later.

    Antony Blinken said the defence pact was drafted by both nations as ‘equal and sovereign partners’ and stressed that the US will be transparent.

    Critics of the deal have accused the government of undermining PNG’s sovereignty but Marape told Parliament that “we have allowed our military to be eroded in the last 48 years, [but] sovereignty is defined by the robustness and strength of your military”.

    The Shiprider Agreement has been touted as a solution to PNG’s problems of patrolling its huge exclusive economic zone of nearly 3 million sq km.

    Another feature of the agreements is that US resources could be directed toward overcoming the violence that has plagued PNG elections for many years, with possibly the worst occurrence in last year’s national poll.

    But Michael Kabuni said the solution to these issues will not be through strengthening police or the military but by such things as improving funding and support for organisations like the Electoral Commission to allow for accurate rolls to be completed well ahead of voting.

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

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

  • Through a WhatsApp message from Portugal, my friend Eunice Neves asked to share a moment with me. She was with an Afghan couple, Frishta and Mohammad, and their baby son, Arsalan. The young family has resettled in Mértola, a small city in southern Portugal. They looked forward to celebrating World Refugee Day as part of a project which the Portuguese government lauds as a model for refugee resettlement.

    I had first met Frishta in 2015 when she was a volunteer teacher, in Kabul, Afghanistan. At a school for “street kids” she helped young child laborers gain literacy and math skills, while also learning basic ideas about nonviolence. The children could be rowdy and boisterous, but when Frishta entered the classroom, they were eager to please their talented teacher. Frishta’s altruism and skill made her a target for persecution when the Taliban ascended to power. Following death threats to her and her husband, the couple fled their home just prior to the Taliban takeover of Kabul. Days later, on August 21st, 2021, Frishta gave birth to Arsalan.

    Eventually, after harrowing and harsh months seeking refuge in Pakistan, the family found a safe haven in Portugal. An international group of activists familiar with the former volunteer group helped devise a model resettlement project. Now, 25 young Afghans have been integrated in Portuguese cities. Eight of the young people have spent thirteen months in Mértola, helping rehabilitate arid land through syntropic farming and permaculture. Together, they pursued a program designed to fully integrate them into Portuguese society.

    During today’s conversation, Arsalan amused himself with a garden hose by watering the flowers, the walls and himself. “Look where he is now,” said Eunice, shifting the phone to show Arsalan, fully clothed, splashing contentedly in a small tub he had partially filled with water. From his makeshift boat, he blew me a kiss!

    Arsalan’s security, in sharp contrast to the dangerous circumstances surrounding his birth, should epitomize the story of every vulnerable refugee seeking a safe haven. Sadly, tragically, and shamefully, on this World Refugee Day, we must recall a tragedy all too familiar which took place last week. In the deepest part of the Mediterranean Sea, a ship carrying at least 100 children, among hundreds of others, capsized.

    Irish author Sally Hayden, who, for years, has accompanied migrants attempting to enter Europe, writes: “The dead are victims of the world’s inequality. They are victims of the fact that the privileged of this planet have freedom of movement simply due to the luck of where they were born, while much of the rest must risk their lives in the hope of accessing a secure, dignified life….Those who survive that journey live with huge trauma – many have told me how they are haunted by memories of watching family members or friends drown; how they appealed for help, but their distress calls were ignored; how, when the boat engines failed or fuel ran out and they drifted, they were certain they would die of thirst one by one.”

    The mind revolts and simply will not consent to imagine the terror felt by a single child, much less the hundred or so who drowned and sank to the ocean’s deepest depths inside that boat last Wednesday. Photos of the boat before it sank showed the upper decks entirely packed with would-be migrants, meaning that, horrifically, the lower decks were crammed with migrants – including most of the children – as well. It’s estimated 500, or even 750, people were on board. There were only 104 survivors, mostly young adult males with the strength to cling for hours onto available wreckage. There were no life preservers; legal migration had been made near-impossible.

    Writing from Ireland, Ed Horgan, a campaigner for Irish neutrality, calls this a tragedy in which “hundreds of migrants were fleeing wars and dire poverty and human rights abuses.” (Irish Examiner, Opinion, 17 June)

    Horror spreads everywhere when militarism reigns and weapon sales proliferate, causing displacement and rising numbers of people fleeing violence.

    Horgan holds the European Union’s Border and Coast Guard agency, FRONTEX, partly accountable, noting they and the Greek Coast Guard, “had been monitoring this ship for up to 12 hours prior to the disaster, and failed to offer any practical assistance until it was too late.”

    Here in the United States, where I live, similar tragedies unfold. One of my closest friends, Laurie Hasbrook, has worked to accompany refugees arriving in Chicago for over two decades. Last weekend, with two other volunteers, she was almost arrested for attempting to serve food and supply warm clothing to shivering and famished migrants who had newly arrived in Chicago. U.S. activists in the southwest face criminal charges for attempting to save the lives of migrants by dropping off water and food supplies along routes where needy people might access the supplies.

    We have much to learn from people in Portugal who’ve created model projects based on mutual respect and creative problem-solving as they’ve welcomed young Afghans to become integral members of Portuguese society.

    Upholding the right to safety, we should stop pouring money into the coffers of military contractors. These merchants of death take us down the road of militarism and exploitation. Rather than be led by fortress Europe or US-led NATO full spectrum dominance, we should find security by extending the hand of friendship and seeking reciprocal, survivable plans to rehabilitate lands and communities. It’s vital that people worldwide persuade governments to promote global peace and justice instead of wars and military domination which inevitably lead to tragedies like the one which occurred last week in the Mediterranean Sea.

    Photo Credit: Hellenic Coast Guard

  • Throughout the week, the mainstream media have obsessively been giving us live updates about billionaires missing inside a submarine in the Atlantic Ocean. The Titan submersible has five people on board, including three UK citizens. It was on a scheduled dive to explore the wreckage of the Titanic. The chief executive of OceanGate, the firm which runs the voyages, was also inside the vessel.

    The people onboard have been described by the media using colonial terms, such as explorers and adventurers. In reality, it was their money that allowed them to embark on such a mission. Each of the passengers paid $250,000 (£195,600) for the opportunity to get close to the Titanic. The minute-by-minute updates about their whereabouts are perhaps unsurprising, given that we live in a society obsessed with the antics of the rich.

    Billionaires need saving, refugees are left to drown

    The lives of these billionaires are deemed so important that there is a massive rescue operation. The US coastguard has teamed up with the US Navy, as well as the Canadian coastguard, to find the Titan. Meanwhile, the French government vowed to send a ship, along with a deep-diving vessel. The odds of saving the people onboard are said to be around 1%, but that doesn’t stop the efforts.

    Now let’s compare that to the lack of action from governments after up to 600 refugees drowned off the coast of Greece on Wednesday 14 June. Think about that figure for a second. 600 people are all thought to have been killed, many trapped in a trawler’s hold. Where was the live tracker on the BBC website? Why wasn’t the Guardian‘s ‘most viewed’ section filled with pieces about this tragedy? How was it allowed to even happen?

    750 people were on board the trawler that sank. Greek authorities evaded any responsibility, despite their patrol boats shadowing the trawler for many hours. Indeed, AlarmPhone – a hotline for refugees in distress in the Mediterranean – alerted authorities that the boat was in distress. The Hellenic Coast Guard insisted:

    From (1230 GMT to 1800 GMT) the merchant marine operations room was in repeated contact with the fishing boat. They steadily repeated that they wished to sail to Italy and did not want any contribution from Greece.

    Yet survivors from the ship have stated that Greece’s Hellenic Coast Guard towed the boat, causing it to capsize.

    27,047 dead: it’s far past time we cared

    This latest tragedy marks ten years since around 600 people died in two shipwrecks off the island of Lampedusa, Italy. A decade later, nothing has changed. Since Lampedusa, at least 27,047 people have drowned in the Mediterranean. Only one of these people sparked headline news: two-year-old Alan Kurdi. His aunt, Tima Kurdi, spoke out about the 14 June drowning, and pleaded with people to actually take notice:

    This shipwreck brings back my pain, our pain. I am heartbroken. I am heartbroken for all the innocent souls lost that are not just numbers in this world. “Never again” we heard in 2015, I heard it countless times. And what changed? How many innocent souls have been lost at sea since then? I want to take you back to September 2, 2015, when all of you saw the image of my nephew, the 2-year-old baby lying on the Turkish beach. What did you feel when you saw his image? What did you say, what did you do? Me, when I heard about my nephew drowning, I fell to the floor crying and screaming as loud as I could because I wanted the world to hear me! Why them? Why now? And who’s next?

    She continued:

    Since then, I decided to raise my voice and speak up for everyone who is not heard. And most importantly for my nephew, the boy on the beach, Alan Kurdi, whose voice will never be heard again. Please do not be silent and add your voice to mine. We cannot close our eyes and turn our backs to people seeking protection. Open your heart and welcome people fleeing to your doorstep.

    Why worship capitalists?

    These two incidents, of refugees dying and billionaires trapped in a submersible, should make us reflect on the state of the world we live in. Those on the Titan had signed disclaimers agreeing that they were risking death, and knew the risks. Nevertheless, five international vessels are currently at the site of the Titanic wreckage, with more set to arrive. Meanwhile, US and Canadian aircraft plough the skies in the desperate search.

    At the same time, off the coast of Greece hundreds of people are still missing in one of the deepest spots of the Mediterranean; their bodies not yet recovered. Their lives are seen as expendable: only worth a few news headlines, if that. Where are the submarines searching for them? And where is the French deep diving vessel? It is being sent to rescue the billionaires.

    Europe is to blame

    To be clear, Greek authorities and Frontex (the European Union’s border police force) allowed these people to drown. Determined to wash its hands of any responsibility, Greece has arrested and held nine Egyptian men in detention, accusing them of people smuggling.

    Since the bombing of Afghanistan in 2001, capitalist and power-hungry policies around the world have caused millions of people to have to flee their homes. Despite what comfortable white people in Europe might think, very few people actively want to leave their roots, say goodbye to their homes, and risk their children’s lives – heading across continents and into the unknown. They are forced to do so by countries like the UK, which historically and currently have participated in destabilising whole regions.

    Yet in the global north, we continue to be enthralled by the lives of capitalists and billionaires, completely disconnected from the fact that it is power and greed that is causing the forced displacement of 108.4 million people worldwide.

    In time, I’m sure a movie will be made about the rescue effort to save the Titan, just as there was about the very ship the billionaires were so desperate to catch a glimpse of. There will be no film about the 600 who have died off the coast of Greece.

    Dehumanised

    As the mainstream media obsesses about how much oxygen the billionaires have left, readers of the Guardian, the BBC, and others will no doubt be wondering about how the men are coping in such a small space, what they’re going through, and whether they will actually be saved. But for the most part, white people in Europe or the US don’t give a second thought about what it must be like to drown on a cramped ship in the Mediterranean.

    Black and Brown people trying to make safer lives for themselves are seen as a scourge on our society. Governments relentlessly make racist laws, militarise borders, and imprison those who have the audacity to come to Europe for safety. White people, meanwhile, moan that “illegal” refugees steal our precious resources (which have been built from pillaging other countries, anyway).

    We need to reflect on why we worship celebrity and power, and why five rich people’s lives are deemed more significant than 600 poor Black and Brown people’s. It is time that as white people, we take a long, hard look at ourselves.

    Featured image via OceanGate / screenshot

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on Canary.


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

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • As state legislatures across America proliferate anti-transgender legislation, a growing crisis is unveiling itself. Transgender individuals and their loved ones are increasingly criminalized by their home states and their care, banned. This is prompting a growing number to seek refuge elsewhere. The scale of this issue remained under wraps until a recent Data For Progress survey brought to light…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Downing Street crisis meeting hears that about 8,000 who arrived under Operation Warm Welcome will be evicted this summer with nowhere to go

    Thousands of Afghan refugees in the UK face homelessness this summer, the government was warned last week at a secret crisis meeting in Downing Street.

    Council officials told No 10 and Home Office civil servants that about 8,000 Afghan refugees, allowed into the country in 2021 under the slogan Operation Warm Welcome, are due to be evicted from hotels as early as August because of a government deadline, yet have nowhere to go.

    Continue reading…

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

  • UN child rights experts have slammed the UK for its anti-child policies. A committee met in Geneva to discuss the state of child rights in the UK. Experts were particularly critical of military recruitment policy and migration in the UK.

    But there’s a bigger story there too, only grasped at in the UN findings. The treatment of children across military recruitment but also as refugees are deeply connected. When it comes to the demands of global power, kids don’t stand a chance.

    UN criticism

    The UN report noted:

    …with concern reports of advertising of and marketing for military service aimed at children and the overrepresentation of socioeconomically disadvantaged children in the armed forces.

    The experts urged to UK to take two measures. Firstly:

    Consider raising the minimum age of voluntary recruitment into the armed forces to 18 years.

    And secondly:

    Prohibit all forms of advertising and marketing for military service targeted at children, in particular at schools and targeting children belonging to ethnic minority groups and socioeconomically disadvantaged children.

    Optimistic calls, because all the evidence suggests the UK is determined to keep recruiting minors – malleable as they are – into the ranks.

    Recruiting kids

    The UK currently accepts 16-year-olds into the military. And it seems determined to keep doing it. This is in spite of a vast body of evidence that doing so benefits neither the child nor the military.

    Organisations like Forces Watch have compiled substantial bodies of evidence and argument on this issue. And, the Before You Sign Up website details how opaque and dishonest military recruiters are.

    Reports like The Last Ambush examine the mental health impacts of service, not least on the very young. Another report, The First Ambush, unpacks the grimy reality of military training and its outcomes.

    The overwhelming evidence here is that military recruiting brutalises young people and diminishes their prospects. But, the institution and government don’t seem to care.

    Migrants rights

    The committee was just as withering about the Tory’s racist Illegal Migration Bill. They said they had noted:

    The potential impact of the Illegal Migration Bill on children, which includes a ban on the right to claim asylum, allows for the prolonged detention and removal of children, creates barriers for acquiring nationality, and lacks a consideration of the principle of the best interests of the child.

    The committee urged the government to:

    …amend the Illegal Migration Bill to repeal all draft provisions that would have the effect of violating children’s rights.

    They also said the government should “bring the Bill in line with the State party’s obligations under international human rights law” as well as a number of other measures.

    Two sides of a coin

    The committee is absolutely correct that the UK government has failed in its commitment to children. What sits slightly outside the scope of their report is the correlation between the two.

    The two best-represented nationalities for migrants and refugees coming into Europe are Afghanistan and Syria. The UK recently bombed both countries, and they are both historically affected by British ‘influence’ – by which we mean violence. Iraq features prominently. Needless to say, Bangladesh and Pakistan are up there too.

    In Iraq and Afghanistan in particular, the wars featured massive military occupations. Thousands of ground troops, many of whom had been so-called ‘boy soldiers’, cycled through these warzones.

    They come back to the kind of outcomes described in the reports above. Meanwhile, many children and young people from those places have suffered war and loss before undertaking a long, arduous journey. And that journey into Europe, which was never welcoming to refugees in the first place, seems to be getting even more febrile by the day.

    Indifferent power

    The lesson is this: for consecutive British governments, children do not matter. At least not working-class kids from council estates in the UK or children displaced from the war zones that British administrations themselves have created around the world.

    All this is worth bearing in mind when we talk about anything from migration to welfare. As a veteran myself, few things anger me quite as much as that well-worn, far-right slogan about favouring ex-military personnel over refugees. Because the truth is the people who say things like that couldn’t give a toss about either. And that is nowhere more evident than in the UN’s latest report.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Ggia, cropped to 1910 x 1000, licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The UK government is secretly funding Turkey’s border forces to keep migrants out. A freedom of information (FOI) request revealed that it has handed £3m to the Turkish government to stop refugees from entering Europe.

    The FOI request by the Guardian detailed that the Home Office has diverted money to Turkish security forces to stem the flow of desperate refugees and migrants. This included practical training and material support. The money was taken from a fund meant for overseas development.

    The £3m figure is for the last year. But, the report suggests that the payments have been steadily increasing since 2019. The Guardian reported:

    The funding was diverted from the official development assistance (ODA) budget and delivered through Home Office International Operations, part of the department’s Intelligence Directorate.

    The UK also gifted security equipment, including nine vehicles to Turkey. This is despite, as the Guardian pointed out, Turkey’s track record of using violent force including live rounds against migrants.

    Refugee plight ignored

    Human rights lawyer Mahmut Kaçan told the paper that the UN overlooked Turkish brutality against refugees. And he said donor countries were responsible too:

    The UNHCR never criticises or mentions what Turkey is doing at the border. They are complicit in the deaths of these people, as are the EU and other countries that are giving money to Turkey for border security.

    And an anonymous Home Office source explained how the process of funding worked:

    We offer our expertise and provide officials [locally] with evidence, showing the routes we think illegal migrants or gangs are operating along… It’ll probably be along the lines of: ‘This is a route smugglers and illegal migrants use to get to the UK, we need to do more to stop it.’

    The source added:

    The Turkish government will then respond by saying: ‘This is what we need to be able to do that’, and then we fund it, basically.

    Accountability?

    The same source said that accountability wasn’t high on the agenda for the UK government:

    We don’t tend to hold local forces to account with any targets but certainly if we say: ‘We need to bolster X area of border security’, Turkey might respond by saying they need Y in order to boost border officer numbers and we’ll help them to do that.

    A spokesperson for the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants said the revelation exposed the British government’s real attitudes:

    This government has shown that it will break international law to prevent people from exercising the fundamental human right to seek safety.

    The UK government has been caught out again. Whether on the English Channel or at the Turkish border, it is absolutely committed to putting the boot into some of the most desperate people on earth. And, as ever, the unwitting taxpayer is funding it.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Amada44, cropped to 1910 x 1000, licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Col Rabih Alenezi received advice after reporting death threats, of which he says he receives 50 a week

    A Saudi Arabian dissident living in London was told to “emulate” the life of the US whistleblower Edward Snowden by a Metropolitan police officer, amid death threats he received after fleeing his country.

    Col Rabih Alenezi, 44, had been a senior official in Saudi Arabia’s security service for two decades, but sought asylum in the UK after he claimed to have been ordered to carry out human rights violations. His life was threatened for criticising the regime of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Residents of Cornwall are urgently asking for people to join a protest on the evening of Wednesday 31 May. They are gathering to demonstrate against the Bibby Stockholm, a floating barge which is to detain 500 male asylum seekers. The barge is currently docked for a refit in Falmouth. However, it is due to make its way to Portland port in Dorset on Wednesday night, where it will, effectively, become an offshore prison.

    Imprisoned and traumatised by the British state

    Cornwall Resists, which is a network of grassroots anti-fascist groups in the county, said:

    The Bibby is the first of its kind to be refurbished here, but it won’t be the last. The boat represents the hostile, fascist and illegal approach the Conservative party is taking towards vulnerable people, who have risked everything to flee war and persecution only to be imprisoned and retraumatised by the state.

    We will not allow this to happen. We will gather to remember migrants who have died making their way to safety, and Rachid Abdelsalam, who died on board the Bibby Stockholm.

    Indeed, Rachid Abdelsalam suffered heart failure and died onboard the barge in 2008, when it was used by the Dutch government to lock up those seeking asylum. Detainees onboard had warned the prison guards of Rachid’s deteriorating health, but the guards only opened his cell door two hours after he had died.

    The Dutch government only took the barge out of service after a Dutch media investigation uncovered horrors onboard, including rape, fire safety failings, and abuse by prison staff.

    This wasn’t the only death on Dutch prison barges. Diabetic Ahmad Mahmud El Sabah also died on another Rotterdam detention barge after he suffered from an infection of the liver.

    None of this has phased Suella Braverman. In fact, the Home Office plans to hire a second barge, which would imprison four times as many people.

    Community outrage over the Bibby Stockholm

    Cornwall Resists said of the Bibby Stockholm:

    We have seen a huge swell of community outrage and resistance to this human rights atrocity. It’s been incredible to see so many groups come together to show resistance to the Bibby Stockholm and to definitively prove that Cornwall Resists border violence!

    The group continued:

    On Wednesday we will take our place in protest of the use of this boat – and others like it. We must continue to show our collective power in action against the Bibby Stockholm. We must come together as a community in our last chance to show the full force of our resistance, and the strength of our community. We will gather in solidarity with refugees, migrants, asylum seekers and all people who are victims of state oppression. We will give voices to those unable to voice their struggle, we will show the true nature of our communities and we will continue to build on this coalition of amazing organisations fighting for what is right.

    See you on the streets.

    Join the protest

    To join the protest, head to the Bar Road carpark in Falmouth at 5pm on 31 May. Or if you have access to a boat, you can meet fellow protesters on the water.

    Cornwall Resists says that it is preparing to “stay the course“. It advises people to bring warm layers, as well as:

    banners, candles, blankets, camping chairs, warm layers, noise making devices, your friends and family, flask of hot tea and a picnic.

    We can not quietly sit back while the racist Tory government treats Brown and Black people – who have come to the UK in hope of safety and stability – with complete contempt. Together we must continue to resist the Bibby Stockholm, as well as all racist policies of the Tory government.

    Featured image via Cornwall Resists

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • On Tuesday 30 May, the trial begins of three protesters who tried to stop a government deportation flight to Jamaica. The controversial flight caused uproar at the time – but thanks to the actions of lawyers and campaigners, the Home Office hardly managed to deport anyone. However, activists are now paying the price for defending people’s basic human rights. 

    Government deportation flights have rightly caused outrage in recent years. The Home Office runs these when it claims people are not British citizens, and sometimes when they’ve committed a crime. However, many of the people the government tries to deport have lived in the UK most of their lives. One particular flight in November 2021 summed up the scandal.

    Deportation flights in the spotlight

    SOAS Detainee Support is an abolitionist activist group. It supports people facing deportation. In November 2021, it was involved in protests against a flight to Jamaica. The government claimed the people it was deporting were “foreign national offenders” with “no right to be in the UK”. But SOAS Detainee Support tells a different story.

    It said in a press release that:

    The deportation flight to Jamaica in November 2021 was initially intended to carry as many as 50 people. They included a 20-year-old woman who had been in the country since she was 13 and has no relatives in Jamaica. Three allegedly had direct Windrush connections through grandparents or other older relatives.

    At least ten had come to Britain aged 16 or younger, and five had come at 10 or younger. Nine of them had been in the UK for 20 years or longer. Many of them have British children, and up to 24 children would have lost their fathers had the flight left with all intended.

    In the build-up to this flight on 9 November 2021, three protestors locked on to each other using metal pipes on a road outside the Brook House Immigration Removal Centre. In the end, just four people boarded the flight from Birmingham airport, from an original list of more than 50. So the protests as well as legal issues stopped most of the government’s planned deportations.

    But now, some protesters are facing the wrath of the state. 

    Protesters: penalised for defending human rights

    SOAS Detainee Support said in a press release that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has:

    charged [three protesters] with causing a public nuisance for blocking a road outside Brook House Immigration Removal Centre at Gatwick Airport in November 2021 to prevent people being forcibly removed on a flight to Jamaica. They will be tried by a jury, with the trial listed for seven days.

    They have crowdfunded almost £20,000 to support the costs of their case, with more than 750 people donating.

    The trial of these three protestors is taking place as the government cracks down further not only on the right to protest, but on people’s right to asylum, too. For example, as the Canary recently reported, the Public Order Act coupled with the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts (PCSC) Act will effectively allow police to stop all sorts of protest actions:

    The new Public Order Act powers include penalties of a year in custody for blocking roads, railways and airports. In addition, protesters who use the tactic of locking-on could face up to six months in prison.

    At the same time, the racist Nationality and Borders Act and the 2023 Illegal Migration Bill are entrenching the Tories’ hostile environment for Black, brown, and foreign-born people. 

    Fighting back against the government

    However, people are fighting back. On Saturday 27 May, thousands of people protested in London over the Public Order Act:

    Meanwhile, groups like Stop Deportations continue to fight the government’s racist agendas. Stop Deportations is supporting the three protesters on trial:

    A spokesperson for the group said:

    Blocking Brook House detention centre prevented people from being violently and cruelly taken away from their families and loved ones on a deportation flight. Many of those who were due to be deported to Jamaica arrived in the UK as children and have family here, including children of their own, some had Windrush connections and some are potential trafficking survivors. They did not receive proper legal advice or time to challenge their deportation, so direct action was necessary to prevent it.

    The government is now aggressively trying to suppress opposition and scare people from protesting and similar direct action by charging three people with such serious offences.

    Blocking the immigration detention centre condemns not only this charter flight but also seeks to show solidarity with all those locked in detention centres, subject to deportations and otherwise oppressed by racist border controls.

    On the racism inherent in forced deportations, they added:

    We reject the legitimacy of the entire deportation regime. It is premised on racist notions of racialised people – from their disproportionate treatment in the criminal injustice system to their demonisation by the Home Office.

    Racist borders, racist governments

    Overall, it is shocking yet predictable that the state would criminalise protesters who were defending people from its racist attacks on their human rights. SOAS Detainee Support said in a press release:

    The three blockaders should be praised, not prosecuted, for taking direct action to prevent a racist charter flight. Deportations destroy lives, tear families apart, and instill fear in our communities. If they are convicted, it will be a dark day for migrants in the UK – and for anyone who believes in the right to dissent against a government that is determined to divide, impoverish and disempower ordinary people.

    Against the backdrop of legislation designed to dismantle the remains of the asylum system, acts of resistance and solidarity will only become more urgent and necessary.

    So, not only is the government hell-bent on upholding neo-colonialist, white supremacist policies – it will also criminalise anyone who opposes them. While this isn’t new, in the case of the ‘Brook House Three’ it is particularly insidious, given the deportation flight was largely a failure, anyway.

    The trial will last around seven days. You can donate to the crowdfunder for the defendants here.

    Featured image via Stop Deportations

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The European Union is waging war on refugees. Italy’s far right government recently declared a state of emergency and hermetically sealed its ports. The other EU member states look the other way. In February the leaders of the 27 EU countries agreed on tougher measures to tackle “illegal migration.” This includes, above all, the mutual recognition of deportation decisions and asylum rejections and…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Undeterred by the scale of challenges in her in-tray, the new head of Human Rights Watch, Tirana Hassan, says ‘We need to be standing with those people’

    Tirana Hassan may be responsible for calling out abuses around the world, but the new global head of Human Rights Watch remains shocked by her home country of Australia’s “dehumanising” treatment of asylum seekers and refugees.

    Hassan visited the notorious Woomera immigration detention facility in central Australia when she was in the final year of a law degree and found “hundreds and hundreds of Iraqis, Iranians and Afghans who had just been wallowing without access to legal representation”.

    Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup

    Continue reading…

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

  • Council of Europe committee warns new legislation risks breaching internal convention rights and the rule of law

    The UK has been accused of wrongly labelling refugees and trafficking victims as criminals in a critical report from European representatives.

    The report from a committee of the Council of Europe’s parliamentary assembly has warned ministers they could be at risk of breaching their international obligations and the rule of law with their new legislation.

    Continue reading…

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

  • A Myanmar government team arrived in Bangladesh on Thursday 25 May as part of a pilot scheme to repatriate around 1,200 Rohingya refugees in the coming weeks. However, Rohingya people have expressed major misgivings about the scheme.

    The refugees have been stuck in ramshackle camps in southeastern Bangladesh since 2017. They fled there during a crackdown by the Myanmar military, which is now subject to a United Nations genocide investigation.

    Rohingya: second class citizens

    Bangladesh and Myanmar are looking to return around 1,100 of an estimated one million Rohingya refugees to the violence-racked state of Rakhine. However, rights organisations and Rohingya people in particular have raised concerns about the safety and living conditions of repatriated refugees.

    Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report on 18 May that said:

    Bangladesh and Myanmar are organizing returns of Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh to Myanmar’s Rakhine State without consulting the community or addressing the grave risks to their lives and liberty

    Shayna Bauchner, HRW’s Asia researcher, added:

    Bangladesh is frustrated with its burden as host, but sending refugees back to the control of a ruthless Myanmar junta will just be setting the stage for the next devastating exodus.

    The team of 14 Myanmar officials arrived by boat in the Bangladeshi border town of Teknaf on Thursday morning. They made no comment to reporters, an AFP journalist there said.

    Rohingya demands

    “We have no permanent representative in this repatriation process,” Khin Maung, a prominent Rohingya leader, told AFP. He added that:

    This repatriation process is just an eyewash. If they didn’t ensure our dignity, there is no point returning to IDPs (internally displaced people)

    One refugee up for repatriation in the pilot project told AFP – on condition of anonymity – that they did not want to go back and live in Myanmar “as non-citizens and stay in IDP camps”. They said:

    Our place should be given back to us, our right to live like other ethnic groups should be legally guaranteed. Otherwise we cannot believe the mass murderers.

    Another refugee, Semon Ara, said:

    What will we do living in IDP camps? We are citizens of Myanmar, not guests. Myanmar should give back our rights and repatriate us.

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Foreign and Commonwealth Office, licensed under the Open Government Licence version 1.0 (OGL v1.0), resized to 1910*1000.

    By Afroze Fatima Zaidi

    This post was originally published on Canary.