Category: refugees

  • When Israel steals Palestinian land … Image: imgflip.com

    COMMENTARY: By John Minto

    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has exposed so much hypocrisy in Aotearoa New Zealand and around the Western world that’s it’s hard to keep track.

    Israel has racism down to a fine art.

    While the world was putting their hand up for Ukrainian refugees — Israel put its hand up only for Jewish Ukrainian refugees (at least one grandparent must be Jewish).

    As early as January 2022, Israel began planning to transfer Ukrainian Jews to become colonists in the land of the Palestinians. Israel’s Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption proclaimed: “We call on the Jews of Ukraine to immigrate to Israel – your home.”

    The refugees/colonists began to arrive in early March, receiving preferential treatment, while Ukrainians who could not prove their Jewishness according to Israel’s racist criteria for refugees face myriad difficulties.

    Meanwhile, the World Zionist Organisation’s Settlement Division has begun preparing 1000 housing units for Ukrainian Jews on stolen and occupied Palestinian and Syrian land in the occupied West Bank and the occupied Golan Heights.

    When there was an outcry from Israeli liberals saying, quite rightly, that this was not a reflection of Jewish values, the government said they would take non-Jewish refugees as well.

    Predictable reaction
    The predictable reaction from racist Israelis was “We are a Jewish state — why are we taking in these gentiles?”

    The government, however, says the non-Jewish refugees won’t be able to claim Israeli citizenship — they will have to leave when the fighting stops.

    Important to point out here that Israel is NOT a Jewish state. Twenty percent of Israeli citizens are Palestinians. Israel is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multicultural state dominated by a racist regime which has made indigenous Palestinians second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth class inhabitants in the land of their birth and the land of their ancestors, Palestine.

    This is well described in Amnesty International’s short video on Israeli apartheid.


    The Amnesty International video.

    Jewish Ukrainian refugees are being welcomed because it helps Israel maintain a majority Jewish population. It’s a country obsessed with demographics and determined to maintain what Israel’s largest and most respected Human Right Group, B’Tselem, calls “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea”.

    It is proposed that most of the Jewish Ukrainian refuges will be settled in illegal Jewish-only settlements on stolen Palestinian land while Israel’s apartheid government continues its refusal to allow Palestinians to return to their homes and land after around 800,000 were ethnically cleansed from vast swathes of Historic Palestine by Israeli militias in 1948 — a process which continues to this day.

    And Jewish Ukrainian refugees will qualify for automatic Israeli citizenship — something denied the big majority of Palestinians in their homeland Palestine – all of which has been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.

    Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali — “I’ve killed a lot of Arabs in my time and there’s nothing wrong with that” — Bennett has been promoting himself as an international mediator.

    International condemnation
    Israel didn’t join the international condemnation of Russia and has repeatedly refused Ukrainian appeals for military assistance, but Bennet flew to Moscow for a three-hour meeting with Putin and was then on the phone to Zelensky suggesting to him he should think about the cost in death and destruction in Ukraine and agree to Russian terms.

    Bennett followed up by trying to get the parties together for a mediation meeting in Jerusalem.

    This is the same Israeli leader who refuses to meet with Palestinian leaders, refuses to negotiate any peace deal with Palestinians and says he will never agree to a Palestinian state being established on his watch. Not the credentials for an international mediator.

    And in case readers missed the recent news a further two high-profile groups have joined the international human rights condemnation of Israel as an apartheid state.

    A short summary of the highest profile groups that have described Israel in this way over the past 18 months is here:

    Racism on steroids
    It’s racism on steroids in Israel just as it was in apartheid South Africa. And increasingly Jews around the world are seeing it as such. From an opinion poll last year 25 percent of American Jews already regard Israel as an apartheid state and 38 percent of young American Jews say the same thing.

    We need regime change in Israel and everyone living in historic Palestine enjoying equal rights.

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

  • Western countries have opened their doors to millions of Ukrainians fleeing the war in their homeland, presenting a model of how refugees should be welcomed. But their experience stands in stark contrast to how African refugees are treated when attempting to reach Europe to escape war, hunger and despair. In her new book, My Fourth Time, We Drowned: Seeking Refuge on the World’s Deadliest Migration Route, author Sally Hayden details how a single message from an Eritrean refugee held in a Libyan detention center led her on a years-long journey to document the human rights disaster on Europe’s doorstep. She says that since a 2017 European Union agreement with Libya to stop migrants before they cross the Mediterranean, many refugees have been imprisoned in hellish detention centers run by armed groups with little care for the safety or well-being of the people inside. “Tens of thousands of people have been locked up in detention centers that Pope Francis, among many others, have compared to concentration camps,” says Hayden. “The situation is absolutely horrific.”

    TRANSCRIPT

    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.

    As the world embraces Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion and presents a model for how refugees should be welcomed, we look now at how refugees from Africa face a very different story. The Western world has largely turned its back on the horrific conditions African migrants face inside Libyan detention centers. And this is the focus of a new book titled My Fourth Time, We Drowned: Seeking Refuge on the World’s Deadliest Migration Route. It’s just out this week. We’re joined by Sally Hayden, its author, Africa correspondent for The Irish Times.

    Welcome to Democracy Now!, Sally. Can you lay out how a single message to you from an Eritrean refugee being held in a Libyan detention center led to your interviews with hundreds of refugees and migrants who were fleeing to Europe but detained in Libya?

    SALLY HAYDEN: Yeah, sure. And thank you for having me.

    So, like you said, in August 2018, I got a Facebook message. It just said, “Hi, Sister Sally. I need your help. I’m under” — I think something like — “detention in Libyan prison.” They said “a Libyan prison.” “And if you have time, I’ll tell you all the story.” And I was kind of skeptical, because I didn’t really know where this had come from, why I had been contacted, like how someone in a prison would have my name or phone even. But I messaged back, and I said, “OK, tell me about it.”

    So, what this person said was there were 500 of them, men, women and children. They were in, effectively, a detention center. They had all pretty much tried to reach Europe by crossing the Mediterranean Sea and been intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard, and at that point forced back to detention and locked up indefinitely, with no legal recourse, no way to get out. And a war had broken out around them, and the guards that had imprisoned them had run away, leaving them with no food and no water.

    And so, this one message basically led me on what’s been now nearly four years of an investigation. And what I found out was that tens of thousands of people — I mean, to date now, since 2017, around 90,000 people — have been caught at sea under what is an EU policy which supports the Libyan Coast Guard, because under international law it’s illegal for — it’s illegal for European boats to return people to a place where their lives are in danger. And so, their lives are in danger in Libya, but if the EU supports the Libyan Coast Guard, then Libyan boats do the intercepting, that’s not illegal under international law. So it’s effectively a circumnavigation of international law. And yeah, like thousands of people — tens of thousands of people have been locked up in detention centers that Pope Francis, among many others, have compared to concentration camps, where every sort of abuse happens. And the situation is absolutely horrific. It’s ongoing.

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Sally, could you talk about the role of technology and social media in what is happening with many of these refugees?

    SALLY HAYDEN: Yeah. I mean, social media is obviously the way that they contacted me. And what happened after that initial message, I actually started also posting the messages on social media, on Twitter, in a Twitter thread, and that ended up being viewed millions of times. And the result of that was that my name and my number and my contact details were passed around many detention centers. So I suddenly had many refugees in many different detention centers sending me messages on WhatsApp, on Facebook, on Twitter.

    But social media, I mean, it kind of has good and bad aspects, but, you know, very, like, life-changing aspects. What I found out was that, for example, when smugglers detain people in Libya, they’re now crowd-funding. So they’ll post photos of people who are being tortured online so that they can crowd-fund larger and larger ransoms. It’s really contributed to how captivity is being monetized. So it’s kind of raising the cost, but it’s also giving people a lifeline to try and be able to escape these situations.

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And could you talk about how the — what the situation with Libya, and in terms of refugees, is like after the overthrow of Gaddafi and the NATO-backed bombing campaign that occurred in Libya, in terms of the EU utilizing Libya as a gatekeeper to Africa?

    SALLY HAYDEN: Yeah. I mean, I’m sure many people know, after the 2011 revolution, Libya has been in turmoil. It’s effectively a country that’s run between militias, like many different militias. There are multiple governments. There hasn’t really been a stable leadership since, since that revolution. And, of course, you had, like, smugglers, human smugglers, taking advantage of that in the beginning. So there were a lot of refugees and migrants who come to Libya to try and cross into Europe.

    But what has happened since 2017, particularly since the European Union is now spending hundreds of millions of euro on trying to effectively stop migration from Libya, that has turned into a monetization of captivity. So it’s more likely now that people, like refugees, are being moved around different detention centers, or even smuggling gangs, in these kind of, like, cycles there. It’s not so clear-cut always, you know, what is an official government-associated detention center and what is something being run by smugglers. I mean, they all kind of work together. And that includes the Coast Guard, as well. The Coast Guard is a looser entity than you would believe, but still the EU still continues to work with them.

    AMY GOODMAN: Sally, we just have a minute to go. Explain the title, My Fourth Time, We Drowned.

    SALLY HAYDEN: It actually comes from a quote by a Somali refugee who’s now in Europe, and he was speaking about the amount of times that they’ve tried to cross the sea before reaching safety. He tried three times, when he was intercepted. The fourth time, two of his family members actually died. That’s what the “we drowned” refers to. The fifth time, he alone made it to safety, but, I mean, he even says himself, like, he feels like part of him has drowned by going through this process. You know, part of him is dead because of the suffering he’s witnessed and the family members that he’s lost.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, Sally, we’re going to do Part 2 of this interview, where we’re going to talk about how, actually, the war in Ukraine will affect famine in Africa, and also talk about the role of organizations like the European Union in using Libya for these detention camps, what some have called concentration camps, for refugees fleeing poverty and persecution. Sally Hayden, Africa correspondent for The Irish Times. Her new book, My Fourth Time, We Drowned: Seeking Refuge on the World’s Deadliest Migration Route.

    That does it for our show. Democracy Now! has an immediate opening for a news writer/producer. Visit democracynow.org for details. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Stay safe.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Obscenities occupy the annals of State behaviour, revolting reminders about what governments can do.  One of Australia’s most pronounced and undeniable obscenities is its continuing effort to gut and empty international refugee law of its relevant foundations.  Instead of being treated as a scandal, populists and governments the world over have expressed admiration, even envy: If they can get away with that, what might we do?

    Along the way, Australia has also made its greatest contribution to deterring unwanted arrivals, creating the most ruthless, tropical detention network for individuals who, unblessed by paperwork, arrive by boat with the aid of people traffickers and are duly told they will never settle in Australia.  These “unlawful” arrivals – language itself in contravention of the UN Refugee Convention – are duly passed on the refugee camp conveyor belt, where they face ruination, despair and sadistic prison wardens.  To Manus Island or Nauru they go, awaiting settlement in another country.

    In 2013, New Zealand offered some mitigation to these ghastly conditions.  Australia might have expressed no interest in resettling such arrivals, but New Zealand did.  Thus, that great tradition of outsourcing obligations and responsibilities was continued, with Australia preferring to let others do the heavy lifting.

    That agreement involved Australia’s neighbour accepting 150 of its annual intake of refugees from Australian detention centres.  But the fall of the Labor government, and the coming to power of a conservative Coalition crazed by “turning back the boats”, all but killed the arrangement.

    This did not stop other inglorious attempts on Canberra’s part to abdicate human rights responsibilities with the connivance of other countries.  In 2014, a resettlement deal was struck with Cambodia costing in the order of AU$55 million.  Unsurprisingly, only a few refugees availed themselves of this less than impressive arrangement.  The next year, Australia tried, in vain, to coax the Philippines with an offer worth AU$150 million.

    The 2016 agreement with the United States, hammered out in the last days of the Obama administration, was seen as a diplomatic coup, obliging Washington to take between 1,250 to 2,000 refugees.  All would be subject to stringent US vetting.  Australia, in turn, would accept a much smaller complement of refugees from Central America.

    These arrangements, with much justification, were rubbished by the newly arrived President Donald J. Trump.  In a now notorious phone call between Trump and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, the President suggested that this “stupid deal” might facilitate the import of terrorists into the United States.  “I do not want to have more San Bernadinos or World Trade Centres.  I could name 30 others, but I do not have enough time.”

    In another action that could only be seen as ingratiating, Australia agreed, in 2017, to resettle 17 Cubans who were found desperately clinging to a lighthouse off the Florida Keys.  The pattern here should be obvious: Australia will do everything it can to evade, circumvent and subvert a refugee processing scheme that is humane and generous.

    Under the current, revived understanding, New Zealand will accept 150 refugees from Australia each year for three years, but only those who are already in detention.  Canberra has made it clear that the deal will not apply to those subsequently making an effort to travel to Australia by sea.  “Australia remains firm,” stated Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews, “illegal maritime arrivals will not settle here permanently.  Anyone who attempts to breach our borders will be turned back or sent to Nauru.”

    Another nasty proviso is also applicable.  Those refugees resettled in New Zealand will be looked at as a special category should they wish to enter Australia.  According to the Australian Department of Home Affairs, they will be allowed “to apply for visas to enter Australia on a short-term or temporary stay basis only”. This would also apply even after the grant of New Zealand citizenship.

    Government acceptance of this plan was only reached after what were described as “bullish” and “intimidating” negotiations between Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and non-government parliamentarians in 2019.  Independent Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie even claims that she was threatened with jail were she to reveal any details of the plan.  “So, for the sake of humanity, I had no other choice but to shut up anyway to make sure that job was done.”

    Lambie’s sense of humanity should not be exaggerated.  Negotiations with the government centred on securing her support for the repeal of laws permitting the evacuation of gravely ill refugees to the Australian mainland for medical treatment.  Compassion for refugees tends to be in short supply in the nation’s capital.

    The opposition Labor Party, hardly a shining light in the refugee debates, have tried to make hay from the Morrison government’s change of heart.  “This is an absolutely humiliating backflip,” cheered Shadow Assistant Minister for Immigration, Andrew Giles.  “It should not have taken nine years and that is the other big thought in my mind, the cost to those individual lives and the cost to all of us in this pointless, cruel intransigence by Mr Morrison.”

    While Australian Labor mocked, New Zealand Immigration Minister Kris Faafoi was self-congratulatory and business-like of his country’s record.  “New Zealand has a long and proud history of refugee resettlement and this arrangement is another example of how we are fulfilling our humanitarian international commitment.”  In marketing speak, Faafoi expressed his pleasure that NZ could “provide resettlement outcomes for refugees who would otherwise have continued to face uncertain futures.”

    While 450 refugees will find safety and sanctuary in New Zealand, that does little for 500 others.  The beastly, cruel system remains in place, and promises to cost AU$2 billion next year.  If anything, this revived agreement shows how far countries have pitifully fallen in their responsibilities in providing safety for the vulnerable and damaged.

    The post A Nine-Year Obscenity: The Australia-NZ Resettlement Deal first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Hewn in to human rights legislation borne of fascism’s decline in the mid twentieth century is a pool of glorious protections of civil liberties and press freedoms. It is deep, but it is not entirely immune from attack. Political opportunists undermine it in regular waves, repressing dissidence in their states and satellite states, even and especially in the West. Victims pile up, the criminalisation of journalism gathering steam, the propaganda to justify this awful retrenchment of civil liberties rising in the background. This is fascism resurgent.

    Glasnost translates to ‘transparency’, and it was assumed to be a core value of western government when Gorbachev’s administration began to dismantle socialism in Russia in the 1990s. The liberal democratic system prevalent in the world today is in theory buoyed by open, transparent government, and in every area where it is practised as the predominant form of government, gives rise to the rule of civil liberties said to be inalienable, universal, and non-negotiable. Being as old as democracy itself, they’re deeply rooted in history, representing progress and democratic status. Insofar as it remains worth defending, there remains no better way to adhere to “civilised” culture than to defend civil liberty and constitutional freedoms. While it may be a world away from the current zeitgeist among western leaders for criminalising dissent, journalism, and whistleblowing, reaching its zenith in the prosecution of Julian Assange, it’s nonetheless only a few fights away from restoration.

    All around the world are corrupt governments torturing and oppressing citizens critical of the regimes that rule, not serve, them. True to Orientalist stereotypes, this type of place is reflexively assumed by the privileged commentariat to be an anomaly, in some remote region of the East, where the rule of law is alien and everybody’s neighbour knows someone in the gulag. Taking the American tradition of world policing to new heights, however, the most advanced superpower in the advanced industrial west will supply everything you could want if you were seeking examples of archetypal tyranny, and its satellites are all too happy to turn this practice from an isolated infraction to standard, common practice. Being emboldened in power, the US jurisdiction, and those under its spell, practice extraterritorial prosecutions, extraordinary renditions, in which foreign citizens are either extradited to the empire state for trial and punishment bordering on and oft crossing the rubicon into illegal torture, or have it enforced upon them in US bases overseas.

    Unluckily, the CIA oversee these cases and will bend over backwards to accommodate torture, and to offend the constitution. Set in the context of the Patriot Act (an unconstitutional abomination of law rafted through congress during the hysteria after 9/11) they have unlimited powers to break non-refoulement law in the human rights convention. The principle of non-refoulement forms the crux of many internationally binding contracts in which signatory states agree to uphold and abide by the practice of not forcing refugees or asylum seekers to return to a country in which they are liable to be subjected to persecution.

    Despite power’s collective disgrace of the law by breaking the principles enshrined in non-refoulement law, missing the irony, the Tory government has said the arrest of Julian Assange is just and serves to show he is not above the law. Likewise the official line from Ecuador that Assange’s work constitutes “cyber-terrorism.” Such talk from the government evidences not the culpability of Assange for any crime, but precisely the establishment’s desire to invert the real narrative: ironically, Assange has been arrested for exposing corruption that posits powerful organisations and politicians above the law, and for so doing he is now deemed beneath justice.

    Assange had previously said it was not the prospect of answering to British or Swedish justice that worried him and put forward a robust case for the proximity of a British or Swedish trial to a US extradition during the debate about the moral ambiguity of his self-imposed exile, in which he credibly suggested he feared a kangaroo court in the US which would punish him to life, or gruesome death, for abiding by first amendment ethics, a claim that many thought was paranoid but has been vindicated.

    Like all young people looking out to the world today, I am acutely conscious we are growing up in a times of extreme volatility and complex global politics marred by violence, war and corruption, one yet borne aloft by revolutionary dreams of a better world that have come to fruition in hopeful global rebellions, which I cheered on as a socially conscientious teenager.

    Perhaps the defining note of optimism for me is that I am emboldened by hope in the face of an insurgency of brave truth telling, of righteous civil disobedience against corrupt and ossified power, but at once, the defining note of pessimism for me is that I am equally as worried by the way insurgent bearers of truth are being treated like mice in the maze of a Goliath American state, one that treats the whole world order as if it were its sole domain, its entire extraterritorial jurisdiction, a caliphate, whose subjects are treated with increasingly wanton whim at the behest of the senate, military and intelligence agencies in the empire state.

    Notorious names — Schwartz, Assange, Lauri, Manning, Winner — correspond to notorious cases. While the case specifics encompass a varied range of actions and activities associated with subversion of US imperial strategy, they encompass and are united by concerted efforts to subvert imperial activism of the US state decidedly through electronic means — whistle blowing, data dumping, hacking — activity which, rendered through the realpolitik filter with which hawk politicians have been conditioned in the corridors of Yale and The Pentagon, is tantamount to treason. Thinking logically it is obvious treason is an untenable accusation against those who — with the exception of Manning, Schwartz, Winner — have never been American citizens. Indeed such charges sullying the names of these renegades seems designed to inculcate fear and obedience to American objectives not just within but beyond domestic spheres of influence. Silencing dissent, then, can be seen as core imperial strategy, and one with terrifying, unprecedented extraterritorial reach.

    Hard working, principled journalists — who’d be legends and treasures in a long lost era of good press ethics in society — and their sources are paying a high price out of their human rights under the aegis of a craven new age of US imperialism. Most modern states bar the integration of legitimate journalistic activity with the penal code, like those currently being deployed to get Julian Assange. But in the data age, with less developed laws around the link between technology and sources, criminalisation is being embraced, or at least is being seized upon in the moment before laws and regulation are clarified and tightened up to get Assange.

    But it stinks. For one evidence cited in attempts to justify his arrest and pursuit under the law are at best dubious, at worst slanderous. Moreover in a zeitgeist defined by Brexit negotiations steeped deep in the rhetoric of protecting parliamentary sovereignty it ought to worry us British courts are willing to yield to the whims of US courts who are willing to put Assange away for life, or kill him, for the crime of doing journalism.

    It’s time that the establishment drops pretences and stops using the phrase “no man is above the law” as if the mantra is still meaningful. Either justice is a right or its not. For so many, conspicuously all in the business of exposing corruption, they don’t get it. It’s time to reform society’s treatment of whistleblowers and remove all legal obstructions to their freedoms.

    In theory, we are equal under the law. In practice, some are beneath justice. Equality under the law — from which the maxim “no one above the law” — is a bastion of liberal democracy. It is oft cited in defence of the moral superiority of the western way of life over other systems that have preceded it or stand in opposition. A fair legal system is seen to be the sign of an ethically mature democracy. Yet it is precisely because the law is administered to prosecute whistleblowers on elite crimes and reward elite corruption that this truism about our equivalence in the contemporary justice system is an anachronism with a diluted meaning. In war, justice is always the biggest casualty.

    The post Julian Assange is Not above the Law, but He Shouldn’t be Beneath Justice first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Rights group’s annual report accuses Britain of setting ‘worrying reverse course’ in bills on refugees, policing, protest and welfare

    The government’s attack on fundamental rights and protections enshrined in UK law is an “act of human rights vandalism” that would curtail the ability of people to hold the state to account, Amnesty International has claimed.

    In its annual report on the state of human rights across the world, Amnesty strongly criticised the British government for its attempts to dismantle the Human Rights Act and a battery of new “draconian” legislation on refugees and policing.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Russia’s invasion of Ukraine prompted an exodus of nearly 4 million people and an outpouring of support for many of the refugees. But a new report finds dozens of nonwhite people who fled Ukraine are being held in long-term detention centers in Poland and Estonia. We speak with Maud Jullien, investigations editor at Lighthouse Reports, which just published a series of reports in collaboration with The Independent, Der Spiegel, Radio France and others on the detention of African students fleeing Ukraine. She describes how the European Union’s temporary protection directive sets a double standard by permitting the safe entry of Ukrainian citizens into neighboring countries while withholding protection to third-party nationals escaping the same conflict.

    Please check back later for full transcript.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Having pointed to football clubs’ bad behaviour on several occasions [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/03/25/premier-league-football-and-human-rights-continuing-saga/], it is fair to point out good examples: UNHCR, along with its National Association in Spain, Spain for UNHCR, announced 24 March 2022 a new partnership with FC Barcelona and the FC Barcelona Foundation.

    The partnership will span the next four years. From next season, the UNHCR logo will appear on the back of the iconic FC Barcelona jerseys worn by the men’s and women’s first team and the Barça Genuine Foundation team, below each player’s number, with the aim of raising awareness of the plight of refugees and forcibly displaced people around the world.

    In addition, the Foundation will make a cash contribution of €400,000 per football season towards four UNHCR projects on four continents (€100,000 per project), plus a separate donation (valued by the club at €100,000 per season) of FC Barcelona sports equipment, as well as the technical expertise of the FC Barcelona Foundation’s sports specialists.

    The president of FC Barcelona, Joan Laporta, has stressed the club’s desire to respond to the growing number and complexity of refugee crises. UNHCR has been increasing its focus on the power of sport to help forcibly displaced people – and local communities that host them – to rebuild their lives.

    FC Barcelona, through its Foundation, has collaborated with UNHCR since 2009 in various initiatives and programmes for people forced to flee. The Foundation has developed several of its own programmes in refugee settlements in Greece and Lebanon, and for unaccompanied children in Italy and Spain. In 2019, the FC Barcelona Foundation joined the Sport for Refugees Coalition, which was set up at UNHCR’s Global Refugee Forum, where it pledged to increase availability and access to organized sports and sport-based initiatives for refugee and hosting communities.

    https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2022/3/623c47ef4/fc-barcelona-unhcr-unite-forcibly-displaced-children-worldwide.html

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

  • As the war in Ukraine enters its fourth week, EU authorities are increasingly revealing their double standards in how they treat refugees. European countries have welcomed white Ukrainian refugees, quickly integrating them into the labor market and schools. Meanwhile, Black and Brown refugees from the Global South continue to experience Europe’s racist border regime.

    The post Eat NATO For Breakfast: Abolish Frontex And Demilitarize Europe’s Borders appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Poland’s populist government has been under pressure over rights and democracy. Now it feels it has the moral high ground

    Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine was a pivotal moment for Poland: proof positive it had been right about Russia all along, and the start of an immense national humanitarian effort. For its government, it is also an opportunity to score some points in Brussels.

    Poland has “never had such an excellent brand, all over the world”, its prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, declared last week. It is “in the right position in international politics”, he said, no longer behind a “wall of unfair isolation”. The US president, Joe Biden, is due to visit the country on Friday.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Despite the take-up of the resettlement offer, nine years after it was first made, the architecture of Australia’s offshore detention policy remains

    After nine years, having borne witness to an immeasurable toll on human life, having poured hundreds of millions of dollars into a failing system, and after repeated international condemnation, Australia has belatedly accepted New Zealand’s resolute offer – an almost nagging entreaty – to resettle 150 refugees from Australia’s punitive offshore processing system, every year, for three years.

    The offer has been on the table since 2013 – politely but persistently put by three New Zealand prime ministers to five Australian ones.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Chisinau, Moldova – Nestled above the Black Sea, between the war zone in Ukraine and the eastern limits of NATO territory in Romania, sits the tiny, oft-forgotten landlocked nation of Moldova. Among the poorest countries in Europe by just about any relevant metric, it has been overwhelmed by Ukrainian refugees in the three weeks since the outset of what Russia calls its “special military operation” (спецоперация) in Ukraine.

    More than 359,000 people of the 3.38 million who have fled Ukraine since February 24 have passed in and out of the country, according to the United Nations Commissioner for Refugees. Roman Macovenco of the Moldovan Consular Directorate confirmed at least 300,000 Ukrainians had crossed through Moldova.

    The post Ukrainian Refugees Spare No Words On Zelensky Government appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Investigation reveals former rebel-held areas are being levelled under the guise of mine clearance to make way for high-end developments – leaving refugees nothing to return to

    The Syrian regime is bulldozing former rebel-held neighbourhoods in Damascus under the guise of mine clearance to make space for a “new Syria” of upmarket new building developments and pristine gardens.

    An investigation by the Guardian, Lighthouse Reports, Syrian Investigative Reporting for Accountability Journalism (Siraj) and Rozana Radio has analysed the almost wholesale demolition of Qaboun, a Damascus suburb, one of many neighbourhoods in the capital that is being cleared and redeveloped beyond recognition after former residents have either been displaced by fighting or become refugees abroad.

    Continue reading…

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

  • The government is not doing enough for refugees. After showing reluctance to allow any refugees fleeing Ukraine to come to the UK, there is finally a scheme in place, but it still falls extremely short of the mark. The French interior minister quite rightly accused the UK government of showing a “lack of humanity” towards Ukrainian refugees. He also warned that some refugees may try to cross the English channel by boat if they have no other options available.

    The plan now in place is the Homes for Ukraine Scheme. However, this requires the sponsorship of refugees by British citizens. This is a wonderful step, but the government should take more responsibility for receiving and re-homing refugees – not just rely on the public to do its job for it.

    Justice secretary Dominic Raab attempted to justify reports that 150 Ukrainian refugees had been turned away for not having correct visas. He stated that the government won’t “just open the door” because that would “undermine the popular support” for helping “the genuine refugees”. It’s unclear whether Raab thinks that some Ukrainians are not “genuine refugees” or is simply taking the opportunity to bash non-European refugees who also need help.

    Deadly alternatives

    Denying entry to refugees or reducing their rights is also an issue of international law. The Nationality and Borders Bill has now made it’s way through the House of Lords and is awaiting votes on amendments in the House of Commons. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is urging the government not to overturn the removal of Clause 11, which would give most refugees a lower status and fewer benefits The UNHCR states that this would:

    cause unnecessary suffering to refugees fleeing war and persecution

    It also says it would be in “direct breach” of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention (and its 1967 Protocol).

    The alternative to allowing safe entry is already a well-documented tragedy. Entering the country via small boats is extremely dangerous. In 2021 alone, 44 people died or went missing attempting to cross the British Channel via boat. Other routes can be as equally deadly. In October 2019, 39 Vietnamese people died in a lorry in Essex. It’s our duty as a country to welcome and help those in need, not to turn the journey into a deadly gauntlet or to turn people away at the border.

    We should remember that refugees are human beings – not just statistics or a commodity to put an arbitrary value on. They should be given a safe and welcoming space that respects their human rights and treats them humanely.

    Not a new issue

    Of course, resistance to immigration is not a new issue. The Windrush Scandal provides both current and historic evidence that migrants faced pushback for entering the country, as well as trying to remain here. When Windrush migrants arrived in 1948, politicians on both sides of the aisle in Britain reacted negatively. 11 Labour MPs wrote a letter to prime minister Clement Atlee stating their displeasure:

    An influx of coloured people domiciled here is likely to impact the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life and to cause discord and unhappiness among all concerned.

    Conservative MP Cyril Osborne spoke on People of Colour entering the country:

    they have altogether a different standard of civilisation, to begin with.

    Both reactions are xenophobic, but not a far cry from Tory statements in the last few years.

    Ongoing struggles

    Unfortunately, fleeing war and persecution is, of course, not an issue unique to Ukraine. I spoke to Anwar, a refugee from Afghanistan, and asked him about his experience.

    When asked how he travelled to the UK, Anwar said:

    I came by a very difficult way… Iran first, then to Turkey, Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Austria, Germany, France, then to England. I travelled through the borders via trucks, cars and a lot of walking. The chance of dying was 75%.

    I asked Anwar how he was treated when he got to the UK border. He replied:

    I was in a holding cell for 48 hours but still very well.

    When asked if there was anything that would make his life in the UK better, he said:

    Now that I am here, all I want is to be equal. I want to work and pay my own way. Make a family and live life.

    His experience will parallel those coming from Ukraine. People have a high chance of injury or death en route to the Ukrainian border followed by travel through unfamiliar countries. The goal is also clearly the same. Refugees just want equal treatment, to be with their families, and to live life. However, they are not all treated the same:

    Racism at the Borders

    The unequal treatment is also visible between Ukrainian refugees. The majority of refugees evacuating Ukraine are white. But People of Colour are also trying to escape the conflict in Ukraine and have experienced racism and attacks trying to leave. And in Poland, for example, People of Colour are being attacked by white nationalists. The Canary has previously reported on the racism refugees face.

    Meanwhile, refugees from Afghanistan or Syria are treated like a burden, and a problem to solve, with mention of military bases alluding to notions of invasion. By contrast, Ukrainian refugees are shown as desperate and worthy of help. This is an abhorrent comparison. Without international condemnation and attention, Ukrainian refugees would likely face the same media hostility as other refugees.

    Enough is enough!

    The government needs to consider the trauma that refugees have experienced en route as well as the situation that caused them to leave their home country in the first place. For Ukraine and many other countries, that situation is war. Instead of refusing entry to refugees, we should be respecting their human rights and giving them fair treatment and care.

    We need to take note of the history of the hostile environment that has been created in the UK. We should be taking a stand against the ever-tougher measures imposed on those entering this country. And we must say enough is enough and have our voices heard by those in power. International law must be followed and the government must treat refugees like human beings.

    Featured image via Danny Howard/Flickr cropped to 770 x 403 licensed under CC BY 2.0

    By Daniel Winder

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • By Craig McCulloch, RNZ News deputy political editor

    The Green Party says New Zealand has put its relationship with the NATO security alliance ahead of saving lives in Ukraine.

    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern yesterday announced $5 million would go to a NATO fund for the purchase of “non-lethal military assistance” such as fuel, rations and first aid equipment.

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, or NATO, is a security alliance including the United States, Canada and 28 European nations.

    Green Party Foreign Affairs spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman told RNZ the funding appeared to be a “diplomatic nod” and could have been put to better use.

    “It looks like we’re trying to be part of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ — so to speak — when that’s not actually our best contribution,” Ghahraman said.

    “That $5m could have gone to aid where it would immediately be saving lives … versus us ticking-the-box of being in the NATO circle while giving very little by way of actually helping people in this conflict.”

    Ghahraman said Ukrainian refugees were desperately in need of food, blankets, medicine and shelter.

    ‘Contending with covid’
    “They are contending with covid at the same time they’re living through a European winter — millions upon millions, displaced in refugee camps or in need of resettlement.”

    To date, New Zealand has contributed $6m in humanitarian aid, mostly through the Red Cross. The government has also created a special visa to assist Ukrainians to join their relatives in New Zealand.

    Speaking at a media conference on Monday, Ardern said the “extraordinary measures” to help Ukrainian forces were in direct response to requests from Ukraine.

    Asked to explain the pivot from humanitarian aid to military assistance, Ardern described Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as “a massive disruption to the international rules-based order”.

    The Defence Force will also donate surplus stock of 1066 body armour plates, 571 camouflage vests and 473 helmets to Ukrainian forces.

    ACT leader David Seymour said New Zealand’s contribution was “pathetic” and should include direct weapon support.

    “How long do we want to be the weakest link in the West? We have to answer the call and provide what we have to help these people defend their homes.”

    Send missile launchers
    Seymour said New Zealand should immediately send Ukraine its supply of Javelin medium-range missile launchers.

    “They’re not doing much here — I haven’t seen any Russian tanks in New Zealand lately — but they could do a lot over there,” Seymour said.

    Ardern said directly providing weapons would be a “fundamental change” in the country’s approach to the conflict, but the option remained on the table.

    She noted New Zealand did not have a large supply of such equipment.

    National Party Foreign Affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee told RNZ the government’s response, so far, was appropriate.

    “The circumstances here are very different than anything we’ve had to deal with before,” Brownlee said. “We should be doing our bit.”

    Providing firepower
    Brownlee said the option of providing firepower could potentially be considered “further down the track”.

    “Our contribution would be so small compared to that from the United States or Great Britain,” Brownlee said.

    “Whatever we do, clearly we’re going to have to operate through NATO and their connections into Ukraine to make sure that whatever assistance is given does get to the right place.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Tamil Refugee Council held a speak-out to mark Tamil Genocide Day before a refugee rights rally on the UN declared day for the elimination of racial discrimination. Pip Hinman reports.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Since 2017 about 206 refugees have been released but their freedom highlights the ‘random’ way others remain locked up

    Fifty-one asylum seekers who were brought to Australia for medical treatment continue to languish in detention in Australia, including 18 in the Park hotel in Melbourne, with no indication of when they might be released, according to a prominent refugee support group.

    Their ongoing detention comes despite a string of recent releases, including high-profile campaigner and Iranian refugee Mehdi Ali, who was allowed to resettle in the US two weeks ago.

    Continue reading…

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

  • This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.

  • People cross a destroyed bridge as they evacuate the city of Irpin, northwest of Kyiv, during heavy shelling and bombing on March 5, 2022, 10 days after Russia launched a military invasion on Ukraine.

    As of Thursday, more than 3.1 million Ukrainian refugees have left the country since the Russian invasion ordered by President Vladimir Putin began, according to the United Nations Refugee Agency.

    Most refugees have fled the country to Poland, but large numbers of Ukrainians have also sought refuge from the conflict in Romania, Moldova, Hungary and Slovakia.

    Children make up almost half of all the refugees counted, the agency overseeing the refugee crisis said. More than 1.5 million children have left Ukraine since February 24, the UN said, amounting to around 75,000 kids fleeing the country daily on average.

    “Every single minute, 55 children have fled their country. That is, a Ukrainian child has become a refugee almost every single second since the start of the war,” UNICEF spokesperson James Elder noted.

    Other UN officials recognized the large number of refugees leaving Ukraine.

    “Today we have passed another terrible milestone: three million refugees have fled from Ukraine,” Filippo Grandi, UN High Commissioner for Refugees, tweeted earlier this week. “The war has to stop. Now.”

    “The people of Ukraine desperately need peace,” UN Secretary General António Guterres said on Wednesday. “And the people around the world demand it. Russia must stop this war now.”

    In addition to the 3.1 million who have left the country, there are an estimated 2 million Ukrainians who have been internally displaced. The UN is working “to ensure safe passage from besieged areas, and to provide aid where security permits,” Guterres said in a separate statement.

    Still, as of Monday, only around 600,000 Ukrainian refugees have received some form of aid from the UN. To increase that number, Guterres announced that the UN would release $40 million from the organization’s Central Emergency Response Fund.

    The international community’s response to the refugee crisis has generally been positive, with several neighboring nations welcoming Ukrainians at their borders. In the United States, politicians from all political stripes have expressed the need to help and welcome Ukrainian refugees, leading some to point out the disparity in the treatment of refugees from Ukraine and from the Global South.

    “How the world treats Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees should be how we are treating all refugees in the United States,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) said earlier this month, “especially when you look at such stark juxtapositions where so many of the factors are in common.”

    Refugee aid workers from around the world have also noted the hypocrisy in how different peoples have been treated.

    “The situation is very different,” compared to previous years, Warsaw-based human rights lawyer Marta Górczyńska said to Al Jazeera. In 2021, for instance, while trying to help Iraqi refugees enter Poland, “you had to deal with the hostility from the authorities, harassing and intimidating you, telling you that actually, it’s not legal to help people who are crossing the border from Belarus to Poland.”

    “There was a state of emergency introduced and a ban of entry to the border area, which meant that no humanitarian organizations, human rights organizations, or even journalists were allowed to enter,” Górczyńska added. “[Now], the Polish authorities [are] welcoming refugees fleeing Ukraine with open arms and providing them with assistance.”

    The refugee crisis is also highlighting hypocrisy and racism in a different way: nonwhite refugees from Ukraine say they’re being treated much differently than their white counterparts. African students attempting to flee Ukraine noted that white residents got preferential treatment as they crossed the Ukraine border, CBS News reported.

    “Mostly they would, they would consider White people first. White people first, Indian people, Arabic people before Black people,” a student from Ghana, Ethel Ansaeh Otto, said.

    “We went to the train station and they will not let us in,” said Selma El Alaui, a student from Morocco. “And when they did let us in, they were like, ‘You have to give us money because this is, this is not for free for you because you are foreign. This is not free for you.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • By: Andrew MacAskill

    Original Post: https://news.yahoo.com/brits-350-pounds-month-open-001431626.html

    (Reuters) -Britain will pay people to open their homes to Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion as the government moves to deflect anger over its response to the fastest-growing refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two.

    The new scheme called “Homes for Ukraine” will let refugees from the war come to Britain even if they do not have family ties, the government said on Sunday.

    Britain will pay people 350 pounds ($456) a month if they can offer refugees a spare room or property for a minimum period of six months.

    Prime Minister Boris Johnson has sought to portray Britain as helping lead the global response to the Russian invasion – which Moscow calls a “special operation” – but his government has faced criticism over delays in accepting refugees.

    Lawmakers from all the main political parties have attacked the government’s insistence that Ukrainians seek visas and biometric tests before arriving in Britain, saying this prioritised bureaucracy over the welfare of those fleeing war.

    Under the new scheme, members of the public, charities, businesses and community groups should be able to offer accommodation via a web page by the end of next week, the government said.

    “The UK stands behind Ukraine in their darkest hour and the British public understand the need to get as many people to safety as quickly as we can,” Michael Gove, the minister for housing, said in a statement.

    “I urge people across the country to join the national effort and offer support to our Ukrainian friends. Together we can give a safe home to those who so desperately need it.”

    Anyone offering a room or home will have to show that the accommodation meets standards and they may have to undergo criminal record checks.

    In an interview on Sky News, Gove estimated tens of thousands of Ukrainians could come to Britain via this route, with the first arrivals likely in around a week’s time.

    Gove said local authorities would be given just over 10,000 pounds per Ukrainian to help fund the additional demands on public services, with extra funding for school-age children.

    The number of refugees fleeing Ukraine could rise to more than 4 million, double the current estimates of about 2 million, the UN’s Refugee Agency said last week. Britain has so far issued visas to around 3,000 Ukrainians.

    ($1 = 0.7671 pounds)

    The post Britons to get 350 pounds a month to open homes to Ukraine refugees appeared first on Basic Income Today.

    This post was originally published on Basic Income Today.

  • Cases of human trafficking and exploitation also reported as more than 2.5 million refugees try to escape fighting

    Children are going missing and cases of human trafficking are being reported by aid groups and volunteers along Ukraine’s borders amid the chaos of the refugee crisis triggered by the Russian invasion.

    Charities and rights groups working in neighbouring countries to receive refugees said they had seen cases of trafficking, missing children, extortion and exploitation as more than 2.5 million people crossed into neighbouring countries to escape the escalating violence.

    Continue reading…

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

  • A roundup of the coverage of the struggle for human rights and freedoms, from International Women’s Day in Istanbul to ‘kill the bill’ protests in Cambridge

    Continue reading…

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


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Seg2 train station

    Poland continues to be a vital destination for refugees fleeing the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, who risk cold winter temperatures and travel for days to cross the border into safety. Humanitarian aid relief workers are calling for the European Union to put more pressure on Russia to agree to a ceasefire and find a diplomatic solution to end the war. Speaking from Lublin, Poland, Becky Bakr Abdulla of the Norwegian Refugee Council says that as the world focuses its attention on Ukraine and Russia, refugees from countries such Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen are experiencing less hospitable treatment. “Let’s not also forget tens of millions of other refugees and displaced people around the globe that need equal amount of support,” she says.


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Nicola Sturgeon has branded the refugee situation for Ukrainians wanting sanctuary in the UK as “unconscionable and indefensible” and called for the UK government to remove the “wall of bureaucracy” they currently face.

    “Unconscionable”

    Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion can enter the European Union without a visa and live there for three years, but if they want to come to the UK, they have to either have relatives here already and apply for a family visa, or have a British sponsor for their visa application.

    Scotland’s first minister said her government is working with the Scottish Refugee Council to plan a “refugee programme” that would match people with accommodation and provide them with support. Sturgeon told the PA news agency that the UK government barriers some people currently face as “beyond unacceptable”, and added:

    It’s unconscionable that the UK Government is making it so difficult.

    Speaking during a visit to the Ukrainian Club to watch donations of food and supplies being packed, Sturgeon said that she had asked Michael Gove, the UK’s intergovernmental relations minister, to “open the doors” to Ukrainians and “get away from this unconscionable and indefensible situation where people are having to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order to get here”.

    She told PA:

    I’ve heard from one Ukrainian living here in Scotland right now about how a family member who has fled Ukraine, managed – after an arduous journey – to get to Poland and one of the things they’ve had to prove is that they were living in Ukraine before a certain date.

    This person left with nothing. That is just beyond acceptable.

    Russian invasion of Ukraine
    Nicola Sturgeon (right) speaks to Senia Urquhart at the Edinburgh Ukrainian Club (Jeff J Mitchell/PA)

    Sturgeon added:

    We’ve also put a proposition to the UK Government about how the Scottish Government, working with councils, the Refugee Council here, would effectively run a refugee programme, that we would match people with accommodation and provide the support.

    The family route to that is open, which is the only route open right now for Ukrainians, (and) is proving horrendously bureaucratic.

    The other route they hope to open is the community sponsorship route. It cannot be allowed to be mired in that bureaucracy.

    But what we’re saying to the UK Government is make the requirements minimal, allow them to be done in this country, and allow the Scottish Government working with agencies here to deliver that on the ground.

    Russian invasion of Ukraine
    Nicola Sturgeon meets Linda Allison (left), Senia Urquhart, Hannah Beaton-Hawryluk (right) at the Edinburgh Ukrainian Club (Jeff J Mitchell/PA)

    Lengthy bureaucracy

    UK transport secretary Grant Shapps said there were “lessons to be learned” in its response to the crisis which has seen more than two million people leave the country to escape the Russian invasion. Shapps said 760 visas have now been granted, with 22,000 applications “on their way through”. He told BBC Breakfast:

    With 6,000 appointments a day available now, you should see the processing rate increase

    Yvette Cooper, shadow home secretary, said the government should start issuing emergency visas rather than requiring people to deal with lengthy bureaucracy.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Russian attack on Ukraine has already produced refugees in the hundreds of thousands. This is already producing a growing capital of hypocrisy on the part of receiving states who have shown deep reluctance in accepting refugees of other backgrounds from other conflicts.  Tellingly, some of these conflicts have also been the noxious fruit of campaigns or interventions waged by Western states.

    The post The Ukraine War And The “Good” Refugee appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Guest ilhan omar

    As the U.S. considers a ban on importing Russian oil as part of sanctions for its invasion of Ukraine, senior advisers to President Biden are reportedly planning to visit Saudi Arabia to secure more oil to make up the shortfall. We speak to Minnesota Congressmember Ilhan Omar about Saudi Arabia’s devastating war in Yemen, which has caused the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. “If our issue is that we don’t want to buy oil from a powerful country that is conducting a devastating war on its weaker neighbor, I just don’t see Saudi Arabia hardly being a principled solution,” says Omar. She also discusses the need to institute policies so all refugees of war can be treated with the same level of hospitality as Ukrainians, the need to ban members of Congress from trading stocks and more.

    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

  • Ukrainian servicemen assist a person while people cross a destroyed bridge as they evacuate the city of Irpin, northwest of Kyiv, during heavy shelling and bombing on March 5, 2022, 10 days after Russia launched a military invasion on Ukraine.

    Imagine that you, as a refugee from extreme violence in Ukraine, called your family across the border for help — and were flatly told they did not believe you, that there was no war. You’ve witnessed the indiscriminate shelling of your city, including your own apartment building. You have been hiding in a train station with a thousand others as the crash and smash of an artillery bombardment shakes the rubble from the cracked ceiling. You’ve seen dead people, soldiers and civilians, left in the street. If this is not real, “real” does not exist. How can your relatives in Russia not know this is happening?

    The Washington Post explains:

    As Ukrainians deal with the devastation of the Russian attacks in their homeland, many are also encountering a confounding and almost surreal backlash from family members in Russia, who refuse to believe that Russian soldiers could bomb innocent people, or even that a war is taking place at all.

    These relatives have essentially bought into the official Kremlin position: that President Vladimir V. Putin’s army is conducting a limited “special military operation” with the honorable mission of “de-Nazifying” Ukraine. Mr. Putin has referred to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a native Russian speaker with a Jewish background, as a “drug-addled Nazi” in his attempts to justify the invasion.

    Those narratives are emerging amid a wave of disinformation emanating from the Russian state as the Kremlin moves to clamp down on independent news reporting while shaping the messages most Russians are receiving.

    It is estimated that there are approximately 11 million people in Russia with relatives in Ukraine. It would be an act of stupendous hubris for Russian President Vladimir Putin to believe he could keep so many in the dark about the reality of Ukraine, but this is exactly what he has endeavored to do. Most of what passed for an independent press in Russia has been swept away, and overwhelmingly, the information being provided comes from Russian state media. There is no war, they preach, no mass civilian displacement. This is a limited act of liberation to free Ukraine from Nazi control by way of precision strikes on military targets only, they say, with Russian soldiers bringing food and warm clothes to all affected civilians.

    It is an absolute wonder, however thoroughly horrifying, that Putin is attempting to pull off a gaslighting of such magnitude. Russia is not North Korea, isolated nearly entirely by an all-controlling authoritarian state. Russia is a world power, and has a booming international oil and gas business that has made itself globally indispensable even as Putin rains war crimes down on a neighbor. Indeed, it is that very energy sector that has saved it from the worst possible sanctions so far. Attack Russia’s oil economy and the rest of Europe — which depends heavily on Russian oil — could go dark, badly rattling the resolve of NATO in the face of crumbling economies and a restive population.

    However, Russia’s disinformation campaign should not look entirely unfamiliar to us in the United States. Let us not forget that, not so long ago, we were led into a long and bloody war under the false pretenses of “weapons of mass destruction,” which reverberated across mainstream media. In certain media sectors, those official lies echo strongly to this day.

    And then, there is the lie-based future Donald Trump and his allies have been striving to construct for the U.S. for the last seven years. Any story not in praise of Trumpism is immediately labeled false, backed by an anti-logic that mangles civic discourse beyond recognition. Even trying to deconstruct a Trumpist’s “fake news” charge is a victory for the one leveling it, because it means you have accepted the premise that it could be fake news, thus giving partisans just enough of a peg to hang their hat on.

    With a tight enough media bubble, reinforced by the long-espoused idea that other viewpoints stem from evil sources and must be shunned as a moral imperative, a segment of any population can be manipulated and even controlled in ways that leave those outside looking in astonished and stunned. While Trump likely would not have been able to hide a whole war with a neighbor, he has painted a masterwork of disinformation about COVID-19, masks, vaccines and basic safety measures. Tens of millions have bought what he is peddling, to the ongoing detriment of the COVID fight, leaving the country badly fractured and unable to escape the gravity well of the pandemic.

    Yet, we in the U.S. independent media know well that state attempts to manipulate public opinion cannot easily quell grassroots movements. Where there is war and repression, there is resistance, and the same is true in Russia in this moment. More than 13,000 antiwar protesters have been arrested in Russia, and still they come.

    And resistance to the tyranny of the outside invaders is a touchstone of the Ukrainian ethos. They will not surrender it lightly.

    Meanwhile, those of us in the United States, confronting Putin’s disinformation machine, must not assume that it can be torn down by sanctions, our own military and state mechanisms of information warfare. Rather, we must take note of the fact that if many thousands of Russians are protesting in the face of massive state repression, grassroots channels of information are being used and new ones created. We must work our hardest to amplify our own channels for truth, particularly those that lift up grassroots resistance movements. As Khury Petersen-Smith writes in Truthout, “Our challenge is to build protest across borders that stands in solidarity with those facing the violence of war, and is independent — and defiant of — the governments where we reside.”

    If Voice of America can do it in the name of U.S.-sponsored propaganda, we can do it for the truth, for Ukraine, and for people everywhere suffering through a starvation diet of lies.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Overview 

    For over seven decades, Palestinian refugees in Lebanon have suffered from inhuman conditions in overcrowded camps rife with poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to education. This commentary argues that despite these conditions, which are continuously deteriorating along with the economic and political collapse in Lebanon, Palestinian refugees in Lebanon have repeatedly demanded their social, political, and economic rights by collective action and mass mobilization. 

    The most recent mass mobilization in the Palestinian camps against discriminatory Lebanese policies took place in the summer of 2019. This commentary will examine the 2019 Palestinian Hirak al-Mukhayyamat, or the Movement of the Camps, and the different ways Palestinians made their voices heard. Indeed, in addition to the Hirak, Palestinians joined the revolutionary Lebanese street in the autumn uprising of that same year, effectively defying the institutionalized discrimination that has contained them in sequestered and destitute refugee camps. 

    Despite the continuous violations of their rights by the Lebanese government, the complicity of UNRWA and their funders in these violations, and most importantly, the neglect of what remains of Palestinian leadership in the diaspora and in Palestine, Palestinians in Lebanon have sought justice time and again. Through their activism, they have achieved visibility in Lebanon, and have challenged policies and regulations that maintain their stateless status in destitute camps.

    Excluding Palestinians from Refugee Rights

    According to UNRWA, more than 479,000 Palestinian refugees are registered with the agency in Lebanon. About 45% of them live in the country’s 12 refugee camps. However, this number is not necessarily accurate. According to the Population and Housing Census in Palestinian Camps and Gatherings in Lebanon (PHHCCG), led by the Lebanese-Palestinian Dialogue Committee (LPDC), in partnership with the Central Administration of Statistics (CAS) and the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), there were only 174,422 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon in 2017. 

    The discrepancy in numbers is due to multiple social, economic and political factors. While UNRWA’s statistics may be inflated to obtain funding, the PHHCCG numbers may be deflated to absorb the increasing anti-refugee sentiment in the country, and to show that Palestinians do not constitute an economic or demographic threat to the Lebanese public. While exact figures may be unascertainable, Palestinian refugees are consistently isolated in international refugee registers. 


    The Hirak highlighted the ability of Palestinians in Lebanon to reinvent themselves and produce new, young, and diverse leadership
    Click To Tweet


    In 2020, UNHCR reported 82.4 million forcibly displaced people worldwide. Palestinian refugees, registered under the mandate of UNRWA in Palestine and the diaspora, constitute 5.7 million of them. As Graph 1 below indicates, Palestinian refugees are reported independently from the global numbers. This is due to their separate legal status, confirmed with an exclusion clause in Article 1(D) of the 1951 UN Convention, which states that the convention does not apply to persons already being assisted by other UN agencies. As Palestinian refugees receive services from both UNRWA and the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine, they are thus excluded from UNHCR’s mandate. This exclusion is supported by Arab states, under the pretext of preventing Palestinians’ tawteen, or resettlement and naturalization, in their different host countries, which they claim would harm refugees’ right of return to Palestine. This has left Palestinian refugees stateless and deprived of the rights granted to those who fall under the UNHCR mandate, namely the right to resettlement. 

    As a result, Palestinians in Lebanon face persistent discrimination and isolation, and are deprived from ownership of property and the right to work in a number of professions. They also experience recurring violence and attacks from inside and outside the camps. The ghettoized communities in which they live are, in many cases, surrounded by walls and Lebanese army checkpoints, rendering them vulnerable to Lebanese army attacks, such as the case of Nahr el-Bared in 2007. Moreover, Palestinian factions regularly engage in armed clashes within the camps, which last for days and lead to casualties and significant disruption to daily life. 

    Life-threatening disasters also occur in the camps, such as the mysterious explosion that took place in Burj al-Shamali camp in December 2021. This and other explosions often go unnoticed and unreported, either because they occur in areas inaccessible to Lebanese security forces, or because they are considered internal affairs that should be dealt with by the Palestinian factions. Hence, Palestinian casualties are often uncounted, and extensive infrastructural and property damages go unreported. The perpetrators of these crimes are likewise rarely held accountable.  

    Hirak al-Mukhayyamat: When the Camps Speak

    On June 3, 2019, Lebanese Labor Minister Camille Abu Suleiman introduced a campaign titled “Only Your Countrymen Can Help You Stimulate Your Business.” The campaign, which claimed to be part of an effort to regulate foreign workers, granted businesses and other institutions a one-month period to “correct” employee rosters and register undocumented non-Lebanese workers. On July 10, a nationwide crackdown started in which many foreign-owned businesses, particularly Syrian and Palestinian, were forcibly shut down; and in cases where undocumented or unregistered workers were found, businesses were forced to pay substantial fines. Some Palestinians working in NGOs reported that they had to take mandatory time off work, and even hide in bathrooms during inspection visits from the Ministry of Labor and municipal staff to avoid losing their jobs or causing disruption to their institutions and colleagues.1

    Abu Suleiman’s campaign was a reflection of increasing anti-refugee sentiment across the country, exacerbated by the influx of Syrian refugees in recent years. Nonetheless, Palestinians in Lebanon’s refugee camps continue to agitate to claim justice and dignity. While Abu Suleiman, the Lebanese government, and Palestinian leadership believed this crackdown would pass as had many previous waves of violations against refugees, a significant response emerged from within the camps. On July 15, Palestinians across the camps called for mass demonstrations and a joint Lebanese-Palestinian march towards parliament the following day. However, Lebanese and Palestinian officials stopped the march based on the long-standing PLO policy that Palestinians will not interfere in the affairs of host countries. This further benefited Palestinian factions aiming to suppress the emergence of new leadership from within the camps, particularly among youth unaffiliated with, and often against, the factions. 

    Contrary to the demands of Palestinians in Lebanon, Palestinian factions’ representatives conducted a number of meetings with the Lebanese government to “contain” the situation. These meetings failed, however, as representatives of the factions boycotted the last negotiations meant to take place on July 29. Mass demonstrations subsequently took place inside the large camps of Rashidieh and Ein el-Hilweh in southern Lebanon, and in Nahr el-Bared in the north. 

    These camps are surrounded by Lebanese neighborhoods, and as part of the demonstrations, Palestinians in Ein el-Hilweh announced they would boycott Lebanese markets during the Eid al-Adha celebrations, opting to only trade inside the camp. Organizers used various methods to promote the boycott, including writing messages on Lebanese Lira notes calling for the boycott and explaining its justification. The movement proved effective, as Lebanese merchants impacted by the boycott began calling on their government to exclude Palestinians from Abu Suleiman’s discriminatory decision. On July 31, demonstrations in Sidon included both Palestinians and Lebanese calling for the rights of Palestinian refugees. Chanting anti-discrimination slogans, this collective mobilization demonstrated the significant impact of Palestinians on the Lebanese market. 


    Change in the dire situation of Palestinian refugees (in Lebanon) will not be a result of policymakers’ decisions, but in spite of them
    Click To Tweet


    In their call, Palestinians demanded all civil rights just short of full naturalization through citizenship. Their narrative focused on dignity, and the majority of the slogans were variations on the same theme: “We want to live in dignity until we return.” The Hirak highlighted the ability of Palestinians in Lebanon to reinvent themselves and produce new, young, and diverse leadership – a fact that threatens the power of the old Palestinian regime. Indeed, Palestinian leadership sought to sabotage the Hirak by either disrupting demonstrations or threatening those who participated. 

    Palestinians continued to organize mass demonstrations and various actions, such as hunger strikes, until late September 2019. Multiple factors led to its dissolution, including the deteriorating political, economic, and security situation in Lebanon throughout the summer of 2019, the subsequent start of the Lebanese revolution in October, as well as Abu Suleiman’s repeated claims that the campaign does not apply to Palestinian refugees. Still, no official announcement has been made that the crackdown on the right to work for Palestinian refugees will end.

    Through their activism, however short and contained within the camps, Palestinians created a space for themselves to stake claims to their own rights — as well as the rights of other refugees and migrants in Lebanon — to equality within the context of the October 17 revolutionaries’ demands. Indeed, the Lebanese revolutionaries even used symbols and songs from the Palestinian struggle. Many donned the Palestinian kufiyyeh and blared the sounds of Palestinian revolutionary songs in spaces where Palestinians previously would have previously been excluded. In many narratives, the October revolution was called an Intifada. 

    The Hirak spotlighted the reality that, despite over seven decades of governmental efforts to isolate Palestinian refugees from Lebanese society, Palestinians remain an integral part of the country’s social, economic, cultural, and political fabric – a part that cannot be ignored or trapped behind the walls and checkpoints surrounding the camps. This will remain the case until their right of return to Palestine is fulfilled.  

    Breaking the Cycle of Oppressive Policies

    On December 8, 2021, the Lebanese Minister of Labor, Mustafa Bayram, announced a ministerial decision that would potentially allow Palestinians born in Lebanon and registered with the Ministry of Interior to work in professions previously only open to Lebanese nationals. These professions are regulated by trade unions and syndicates from which Palestinians have historically been barred. While the decision was arguably a positive step towards the fulfilment of the rights of Palestinian refugees to work in Lebanon, and towards eradicating discrimination in the labor market, it was condemned by Lebanese politicians who claimed that it opens the door for tawteen and, consequently, will increase unemployment among Lebanese nationals. 

    A month after announcing the decision, Bayram stated that it would not impact the labor law or any laws and regulations of labor syndicates. Hence, the decision should ultimately be considered, at best, as a gesture of goodwill rather than an actual change of Lebanese state policy. It is also arguable that the decision was circumstantial; with the rapid deterioration of the situation in Lebanon, many Lebanese who are able to leave the country have done so, creating a massive brain drain and major gaps in the market that necessitated extending employment to non-Lebanese. In February 2022, the Maronite League contested Bayram’s decision and submitted an appeal to the Shura Council to cancel it on the basis that Bayram exceeded the limits of his authority. The Shura Council approved the appeal and suspended the implementation of the decision, thus maintaining the status of discrimination and violations against Palestinians in Lebanon, and prohibiting them from their right to work. 

    Palestinians’ rights as refugees within Lebanon are thus continually exploited for political ends, depending on the economic and political conditions in the country. This extends to both Palestinian and Lebanese politicians, as well as to different UN agencies and donor countries that benefit from the status quo. In this context, refugee rights are partially extended to Palestinians by the Lebanese government as a privilege, rather than as an inalienable right — a privilege that can be taken away when the balance of interests and powers change. 

    In spite of this exploitation, Palestinians have for decades staked claims to and defended their own rights by mass mobilization, whether against cuts to UNRWA’s funding and services, or ongoing violations by the Lebanese government and Palestinian factions. The 2019 Hirak was the most recent iteration of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon demanding these rights. Their actions must be seen as a product of heightened awareness among Palestinian youth that their leadership, as well as international refugee agencies and their donors, are complicit in their continued dispossession. 

    As a result, this generation of Palestinians is poised to create its own form of leadership, taking to the streets in revolutionary spirit, demanding rights and dignity, and effecting change in policies that directly impact them. While the change is often nominal or temporary, ultimately, these movements break the narratives of Palestinian refugees’ victimhood and dependency — narratives that underpin the so-called “relief efforts” of the UN, the Lebanese government, and the Palestinian factional leadership in Lebanon and Palestine that only further entrench the status quo. In this way, change in the dire situation of Palestinian refugees will not be a result of policymakers’ decisions, but in spite of them. 

    The post The Mobilizing Power of Palestinians in Lebanon appeared first on Al-Shabaka.

    This post was originally published on Al-Shabaka.

  • People arrive to the Western Railway Station from Zahony after crossing the border at Zahony-Csap as they flee Ukraine on March 6, 2022, in Budapest, Hungary.

    Despite evacuation efforts hampered by Russian shelling, Ukraine is enduring Europe’s most rapidly escalating refugee crisis since the second world war, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees said Sunday.

    “More than 1.5 million refugees from Ukraine have crossed into neighboring countries in 10 days — the fastest-growing refugee crisis in Europe since World War II,” tweeted the commissioner, Filippo Grandi.

    Also highlighting the crisis created by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the U.N. Refugee Agency warned Sunday that “in the coming days millions more lives will be uprooted, unless there is an immediate end to this senseless conflict.”

    Putin, whose deadly assault has been marked by mounting war crime allegations, has shown no signs that he is willing to withdraw Russian forces or cease air attacks that have made it harder for civilians to seek safety. In the Ukrainian city Mariupol, for example, shelling on Sunday led an evacuation effort to be canceled the second day in a row.

    During a televised meeting with Russian flight attendants on Saturday, Putin blamed the war on Ukraine’s leaders and slammed Ukrainian resistance to the invasion.

    “If they continue to do what they are doing, they are calling into question the future of Ukrainian statehood,” he said. “And if this happens, it will be entirely on their conscience.”

    The Russian president also attacked economic sanctions that Western governments have imposed in response to the Russian invasion.

    “These sanctions that are being imposed, they are akin to declaring war,” Putin said. “But thank God, we haven’t got there yet.”

    Putin’s rhetoric since launching the assault of Ukraine on February 24 has heightened concerns about potential nuclear war.

    While Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues to pressure Western governments and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine, anti-war activists and experts fear such action would trigger a further escalation that could have catastrophic consequences on a global scale.

    Global anti-war protests were held throughout the weekend demanding an immediate end to Russia’s war on its neighbor as well as an end to NATO expansion that has long fueled tension in the region.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.