Country accused of violating torture convention in hope of finding justice decade after incident in which at least 15 people died
A 25-year-old from Cameroon has filed a complaint to the UN against Spain, accusing the country of multiple violations of the convention against torture in hope of seeking justice after an incident in 2014 during which at least 15 people died while trying to enter Spanish territory from Morocco.
“A decade has passed and still not a single person has been held accountable for the death and injury of so many,” said the man, who asked to be identified by the pseudonym Ludovic.
New Zealand would likely continue funding the United Nations agency delivering aid in Palestine if concerns about its staff were dealt with, the Foreign Affairs Minister says.
It follows accusations by Israel that 12 agency staff were involved in the Hamas’ attacks on October 7, which left about 1140 dead and about 250 taken as hostages.
NZ Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters . . . “I think the New Zealand people would want us to respond to the crisis.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters told RNZ Morning Report the allegations warranted a proper investigation.
But he said the critical issue was the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
According to the Palestine Health Ministry more than 26,000 people have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched a war on the besieged enclave in response to October 7.
Awaiting UN investigation
Peters said it was possible there were a few “rotten apples” within UNRWA.
“If the matter has been dealt with, and with assurances that it does not happen in the future, then the crisis is of a level, we must, I believe, and I think the New Zealand people would want us to respond to the crisis rather than to react in that way and punish a whole lot of innocent people because of the actions of a few.” he said.
Peters said it would be premature to make a decision before the UN finished its investigation.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark, who led the UN Development Programme which oversees UNRWA, told RNZ Morning Report today it was the biggest platform for getting humanitarian aid into Gaza for a populations that is 85 percent displaced.
People are on the verge on starvation and going without medical supplies, she said.
“If you’re going to defund and destroy this platform, then the misery and suffering of the people under bombardment can only increase and you can only have more deaths.”
Clark said it was “most regrettable that countries have acted in this precipitous way to defund the organisation on the basis of allegations”.
Al Jazeera reports that top Palestinian officials and Hamas have criticised the decision by nearly a dozen Western countries led by the US to suspend funding (totalling more than US$667 million) for UNRWA — the UN relief agency for Palestinians — and called for an immediate reversal of the move, which entails “great” risk.
Ireland, Norway and Spain and others (with funding totalling more than $497 million) have confirmed continued support for UNRWA, saying the agency does crucial work to help Palestinians displaced and in desperate need of assistance in Gaza.
The Norwegian aid agency said the people of Gaza would “starve in the streets” without UNRWA humanitarian assistance.
Hamas’ media office said in a post on Telegram: “We ask the UN and the international organisations to not cave into the threats and blackmail” from Israel.
Defunding ‘not right decision’
Former PM Clark did not deny the allegations made were serious, but said defunding the agency without knowing the outcome of the investigation was not the right decision, RNZ reports.
“I led an organisation that had tens of thousands of people on contracts at any one time. Could I say, hand on heart, people never did anything wrong? No I couldn’t. But what I could say was that any allegations would be fully investigated and results made publicly known,” she said.
UNRWA funding cuts — why Israel is trying to destroy the UN Palestinian aid agency. Video: Al Jazeera
“That’s exactly what the head of UNRWA has said, it’s what the Secretary-General’s saying, that process is underway, but this is not a time to be just cutting off the funding because a small minority of UNRWA staff face allegations.”
Luxon suggested Clark’s plea would not affect New Zealand’s response.
“I appreciate that, but we’re the government, and they’re serious allegations, they need to be understood and investigated and when the foreign minister [Winston Peters] says that he’s done that and he’s happy for us to contribute and continue to contribute, we’ll do that.”
He compared the funding of about $1 million each year (in June) with the $10 million in humanitarian assistance provided by the government for the relief effort — “and we’ve split that money between the International Red Cross and also the World Food Programme”.
Clark said people could starve to death or die because they did not receive the medication they needed in the meantime.
If major donor countries like the United States and Germany continued to withhold funding, UNRWA would go down and there was no alternative, she said.
Clark did not believe there was any coincidence in the allegations being made known at the same time as the International Court of Justice’s ruling on the situation in Gaza.
According to the BBC, the court ordered Israel to do everything in its power to refrain from killing and injuring Palestinians and do more to “prevent and punish” public incitement to genocide. Tel Aviv must report back to the court on its actions within a month.
Clark said the timing of the UNRWA allegations was an attempt to deflect the significant rulings made of the court and dismiss them.
Israel had provided the agency with information alleging a dozen staff were involved in the October 7 attack by Hamas fighters in southern Israel, which left about 1300 dead and about 250 taken as hostages.
More than 26,000 people — mostly women and children — have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched a major military operation in response, according to the enclave’s Health Ministry.
UNRWA was founded in the wake of the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 to provide hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees who were forcibly displaced with education, healthcare, social services and jobs. It started operations in 1950.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
7 January 2024 Cyprus Mail reported that a demonstration will be held condemning the attack on the offices of refugee NGO Kisa.
Kisa’s offices were attacked on Friday, when an improvised explosive device went off outside their offices, smashing windows, destroying computers and photocopiers.
In their statement, the protest organisers said: “Kisa and its members have repeatedly received threats of various forms, against which the state authorities have shown unacceptable tolerance, which, together with government policies and their racist and xenophobic rhetoric on immigration issues, have not only allowed but also encouraged racist and fascist attacks against migrants and refugees, as well as their rights defenders, thus fostering fascism in society.”
Issuing a statement after the attack, the international NGO Amnesty International’s Cyprus Research Kondylia Gogou said: “Last night’s violent attack on anti-racist organisation Kisa is despicable and raises serious concerns over the safety of human rights defenders in the country. However, it did not happen in a vacuum. Racist violence is on the rise in Cyprus, and KISA and its volunteers have been the target of repeated threats, verbal attacks, and smear campaigns in connection with their work supporting refugees and migrants and denouncing hate crimes.”
According to Amnesty, authorities in Cyprus must send an unequivocal message that attacks on human rights defenders and NGOs will not be tolerated, and conduct a prompt, thorough, independent, and impartial investigation on the attack on the Kisa’s offices “that prioritises the hypothesis that the attack was related to their human rights and anti-racist work”.
In August and September 2023, racialised people including refugees and migrants were subjected to pogrom-like attacks in Chloraka and Limassol. Previously, in early 2023, racist attacks were carried out in Limassol and in January 2022 attacks were carried out in Chloraka. In 2023, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) found that the public discourse in the country had become “increasingly xenophobic”.
In December 2020, further to an amendment to the law on associations, KISA was removed from the Registry of Associations, and proceedings for its dissolution were initiated. KISA’s appeal to challenge the decision before the country’s Appeal Court remains pending, and despite its registration as a non-profit company, KISA operates with many obstacles.
There are six ongoing international court cases initiated by states or organisations seeking to clarify the law and hold other states to account on behalf of the international community.
These cases offer smaller countries, such as New Zealand, an opportunity to have a significant role in strengthening the international legal order and ensuring a pathway towards peace.
A departure from the legal norm? Normally, cases are brought to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) when a state’s direct interests are impacted by the actions of another state.
However, six recent court cases reflect a significant departure from this tradition and mark an important development for international justice.
These cases argue the international community has a collective interest in certain issues. The focus of the cases range from Israel’s actions in Gaza (brought by South Africa) through to the responsibility of states to ensure the protection of the climate system (brought by the United Nations General Assembly).
South Africa’s justice minister Ronald Lamola outlined the country’s genocide case against Israel, as a landmark hearing opened at the International Court of Justice pic.twitter.com/AvlM8BwhQI
Holding states accountable for genocide Three of the six cases seek to hold states accountable for genocide using Article IX of the 1948 Genocide Convention. Put simply, Article IX says disputes between countries can be referred to the ICJ.
In late December, South Africa asked the court to introduce provisional measures — a form of international injunction — against Israel for genocidal acts in Gaza.
These proceedings build on the precedent set by a 2019 case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar for its treatment of the Rohingya people.
In 2022, the ICJ concluded it had jurisdiction to hear The Gambia’s case on the basis that all parties to the Genocide Convention have an interest in ensuring the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide.
According to the ICJ, The Gambia did not need to demonstrate any special interest or injury to bring the proceedings and, in effect, was entitled to hold Myanmar to account for its treatment of the Rohingya people on behalf of the international community as a whole.
While Ukraine is directly impacted by Russia’s actions, 32 states, including New Zealand, have also intervened. These countries have argued there is an international interest in the resolution of the conflict.
In November 2023, following the example of intervention in Ukraine v Russia, seven countries — Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (jointly) and the Maldives — filed declarations of intervention in The Gambia v Myanmar, in support of The Gambia and the international community.
States can apply for permission to intervene in proceedings where they have an interest of a legal nature that may be affected by the decision in the case (in the case of the ICJ, under Article 62 of the ICJ Statute). That said, intervening in judicial proceedings in support of the legal order or international community more generally was relatively rare until 2023.
South Africa is taking Israel to the ICJ, accusing it of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
These cases can be similarly characterised as having been brought on behalf of the international community for the international community. New Zealand has intervened in the Law of the Sea case.
Collectively, these six cases comprise actions taken on behalf of the international community with the overarching purpose of strengthening the international legal order.
They demonstrate faith in and support for that legal order in the face of internal and external challenges, and constitute an important counter-narrative to the prevailing view that the international legal order is no longer robust.
Instituting proceedings does not guarantee a positive outcome. But it is worth noting that less than three years after the ICJ issued an advisory opinion condemning the United Kingdom’s continued occupation of the Chagos Archipelago, the UK is quietly negotiating with Mauritius for the return of the islands.
New Zealand’s support for the global legal order in 2024 The international legal order underpins New Zealand’s security and prosperity. New Zealand has a strong and internationally recognised track record of positive intervention in judicial proceedings in support of that order.
In 2012 New Zealand intervened in the case brought by Australia against Japan for whaling in the Antarctic. Following our contributions to cases before the ICJ and ITLOS in 2023, we are well placed to continue that intervention in future judicial proceedings.
Calls have already been made for New Zealand to intervene in South Africa v Israel. Contributing to this case and to The Gambia v Myanmar proceeding provides an important opportunity for New Zealand to make a proactive and substantive contribution to strengthening the international legal order.
European court of human rights orders Athens to pay €80,000 to family of Belal Tello, who died after 2014 incident
The European court of human rights has ruled that Greece violated a Syrian refugee’s right to life when coastguards fired more than a dozen rounds at the people smugglers’ boat he was on nearly a decade ago.
The Strasbourg-based court ordered Greece to pay €80,000 (about £68,000) in damages to the wife and two children of Belal Tello, who was shot in the head as Greek coastguards attempted to halt the boat he was travelling in. Tello died in 2015, after months in hospital.
Jane Stevenson joins Conservative party’s deputy chairs in resigning on a bruising night for Rishi Sunak
More than 60 Tory MPs have signed at least one of the various rebel amendments to the Rwanda bill tabled by hardliners. But very few of them have said publicly that, if the amendments are not passed, they will definitely vote against the bill at third reading. Suella Braverman and Miriam Cates are among the diehards in this category. But Simon Clarke, in his ConservativeHome, only says, that, if the bill is not changed, he will not vote for the bill at third reading, implying he would abstain.
In an interview with Sky News, Robert Jenrick, the former immigration minister who has tabled the rebel amendments attracting most support, said he was “prepared” to vote against the bill at third reading. He said:
I am prepared to vote against the bill … because this bill doesn’t work, and I do believe that a better bill is possible.
So the government has a choice. It can either accept my amendments … or it can bring back a new and improved bill, and it could do that within a matter of days because we know the shape of that bill.
South African lawyer Adila Hassim told judges at The Hague that “genocides are never declared in advance, but this court has the benefit of the past 13 weeks of evidence that shows incontrovertibly a pattern of conduct and related intention that justifies as a plausible claim of genocidal acts”.
“Israel deployed 6000 bombs per week . . . No one is spared. Not even newborns.
UN chiefs have described it as a graveyard for children,” she said told the court on the opening session of the two-day preliminary hearing.
“Nothing will stop the suffering except an order from this court.”
Israel’s ongoing three-month war in Gaza has killed more than 23,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, lawyers told the court.
Most of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million has been displaced, and an Israeli blockade severely limiting food, fuel and medicine has caused a humanitarian “catastrophe”, according to the UN.
‘Genocidal in character’
South Africa submitted its case against Israel at the ICJ last month and has said Israel’s actions in Gaza are “genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnic group”.
Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, another South African lawyer and legal scholar at the hearing, said Pretoria was not alone in drawing attention to Israel’s genocidal rhetoric.
He said that at least 15 UN special rapporteurs and 21 members of the UN working groups had warned that what was happening in Gaza reflected a genocide in the making.
Video: Middle East Eye
Ngcukaitobi added that genocidal intent was evident in the way Israel’s military was conducting attacks, including the targeting of family homes and civilian infrastructure.
“Israel’s political leaders, military commanders and persons holding official positions have systematically and in explicit terms declared their genocidal intent.”
Ngcukaitobi said the “genocidal rhetoric” had become common within the Israeli Knesset, with several MPs calling for Gaza to be “wiped out, flattened, erased and crushed”.
Israeli defence
On Wednesday, Nissim Vaturi, a member of Israel’s ruling Likud party, said it was a “privilege” for his country to appear at The Hague as he doubled down on earlier remarks where he said there were “no innocent people” in Gaza.
This is the first time Israel is being tried under the United Nations’ Genocide Convention, which was drawn up after the Second World War in light of the atrocities committed against Jews and other persecuted minorities during the Holocaust.
During yesterday’s proceedings, Professor Max du Plessis, another lawyer representing South Africa, said Israel had subjected the Palestinian people to an oppressive and prolonged violation of their rights to self-determination for more than half a century.
Dr Du Plessis added that based on materials shown before the court, the acts of Israel were plausibly characterised as genocidal.
“South Africa’s obligation is motivated by the need to protect Palestinians in Gaza and their absolute rights not to be subjected to genocidal acts.”
Genocide cases, which are notoriously hard to prove, can take years to resolve, but South Africa is asking the court to speedily implement “provisional measures” and “order Israel to cease killing and causing serious mental and bodily harm to Palestinian people in Gaza”.
Three hour hearing
Yesterday’s hearing consisted of three hours of detailed descriptions detailing what South Africa says is a clear example of genocide. Israel will today have three hours to respond on Friday.
The spokesperson of the Israeli Foreign Affairs, Lior Haiat, hit out at the comments made in the hearing, calling it “one of the greatest shows of hypocrisy,” and demonstrated “false and baseless claims.”
He also accused South Africa of “functioning as the legal arm of the Hamas terrorist organisation”.
As South Africa did in its 84-page legal filing ahead of the case, the country’s Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola repeated that he “unequivocally condemns Hamas” for the October 7 attack on southern Israel.
Human Rights Watch’s annual report highlights politicians’ double standards and ‘transactional diplomacy’ amid escalating crises
Human rights across the world are in a parlous state as leaders shun their obligations to uphold international law, according to the annual report of Human Rights Watch (HRW).
In its 2024 world report, HRW warns grimly of escalating human rights crises around the globe, with wartime atrocities increasing, suppression of human rights defenders on the rise, and universal human rights principles and laws being attacked and undermined by governments.
Sami Barkal filmed border guards beating fellow asylum seekers and is challenging Croatia in Europe’s court of human rights
A Syrian refugee who secretly filmed Croatian border guards beating his travel companions is to take Croatia’s authorities to the European court of human rights in the first challenge to its practice of pushbacks into Bosnia.
“I couldn’t forget that experience at the border,” says Sami Barkal. “I made that video because I wanted people to understand what was happening to us and how they play with our lives as if they are worth nothing. What else can we do to make it stop? So I really have hopes in the court. Do we really want borders with walls, violence and pushbacks? Or do we want to find a more humane way?”
For refugees living in settlements across Africa, life got more difficult in 2023. Shortfalls in the operating budget of the United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, and the World Food Program have brought increased precarity into the daily lives of millions of displaced people across the continent. Having fled violence, famine and insecurity in search of survival, many African refugees now find…
EU negotiators have reached agreement on rules aimed at spreading the cost and responsibility for hosting asylum seekers across the bloc, limiting the number of people coming in and making it easier to deport those whose claims fail.
After all-night talks, representatives from national governments, the European parliament and European Commission “reached a deal on the core political elements” of the pact on asylum and migration, the EU’s Spanish presidency said on Wednesday.
As the Biden administration faces accusations of being too slow to help Palestinian Americans and their families trapped in Gaza, we speak with Narmin Abushaban in Detroit whose mother died from lack of medical care while waiting to leave Gaza. She is working now to rescue the rest of her family members. This comes as calls grow for the U.S. to grant temporary protected status (TPS) to…
Refugees on board the Bibby Stockholm barge have told campaign group One Life To Live that access to food is heavily restricted. Additionally, portions are child-sized and canteen queues take up to an hour – with those at the end likely to be disappointed.
A significant amount of food is wasted because the quality is poor. It can also be unhygienic; for example, dirty salad leaves and hair regularly found in the food. And it is often culturally inappropriate. According to one individual, a group of men have been on hunger strike.
This picture is particularly disturbing because the Home Office pays the company which runs the barge, Corporate Travel Management, £44,369 by for each asylum seeker on board, which includes the provision of food (figures based on a maximum eventual cohort of 506 people). A year’s place at Eton would not cost much more.
No food is available for almost half of every 24-hour period
The asylum-seekers cannot get anything to eat between the canteen closing at 8pm and when it reopens for breakfast at 7am the following day – that’s 11 hours. If an individual returns to the barge after 8pm, which can happen and may be unavoidable, they will miss their evening meal and will have no food for 17 hours.
Furthermore, they have been told that packed lunches will not be provided if anyone will be away from the barge during the day. They cannot afford to buy their own meals when off the barge, because the asylum-seekers’ allowance is just £1.37 per day to cover all living expenses other than accommodation and on-board food.
So if someone is off the barge over lunchtime, which is quite feasible, they will have no food between breakfast ending at 9am one day and reopening at 7am the next – which means no food for 22 hours.
Promises made – and not kept
On 21 July 2023, before the first asylum-seekers arrived on the barge, the Home Office offered tours of the Bibby Stockholm for journalists. ITV News, for example, reported several commitments about catering arrangements. These do not correspond to what the asylum-seekers are experiencing:
Home Office statement:
Outside normal meal times, soup and bread will be available 24/7.
Reality according to an asylum-seeker on board on 16 December:
After 8pm the door is closed for dinner time, after that they clean for one hour. It’s open [again] at 10pm with just hot drinks. [So] when I get hungry… at night I must sleep hungry, for we are indeed imprisoned. I don’t even have access to any supermarket to get food for myself.
Asylum-seekers don’t have access to supermarkets because they are not permitted to leave the barge except by the buses provided, which only make one stop on Portland and two in Weymouth, and do not operate 24/7. Plus, they cannot afford to buy food.
Home Office statement:
Each meal will be served over a two-hour window to prevent overcrowding.
Reality according to a local supporter in November 2023:
The men queue for up to an hour for food, and apparently there isn’t much left for those at the end of the queue.
That was when there were 200 people on board; there are now around 350, rising to 506. According to an asylum-seeker on board in November:
The capacity of the dining hall is 120 people. There are 20 tables and 6 chairs for each table.
Furthermore, one asylum-seeker reported that portion sizes were inadequate:
The amount of food they give us is suitable for a 10-year-old child… they are stingy in the amount of food.
Home Office statement:
The menu is culturally sensitive.
Reality according to various asylum-seekers, as told to One Life To Live:
“Food is of poor quality and more than 70 per cent of the people waste their food. They do not eat because no one likes the food”.
“Some days the food is so awful that we can’t eat [and] sleep hungry at night”.
“We don’t have anywhere to prepare food for ourselves and there is no snack at all”.
“I haven’t had any necessary [sic] food for two weeks”.
“Several times I found hair in the food”.
“quality of [the food’s] cleanliness is very low” – with a photo of a salad leaf with dirt on it.
“The poor quality of the food… this place feels like a prison”.
‘Grandiose statements’ versus the reality of life on the Bibby Stockholm
In February 2023, Corporate Travel Management (CTM) was awarded a £1.6 billion contract over two years to run an unspecified number of vessels and hotels.
Following his appearance before the Home Affairs Select Committee on 29 November, permanent secretary Sir Matthew Rycroft told Dame Diana Johnson, the committee’s chair, via a letter dated 12 December that the value of the vessel accommodation services portion of the contract is £22,450,772.
There is only one vessel – the Bibby Stockholm – and One Life To Live has been unable to identify any hotels operated by CTM.
In that session before the committee on 29 November, Simon Ridley (interim second permanent secretary, Home Office) was asked whether it was an appropriate use of public-sector funding for companies housing asylum-seekers to be making ‘so much profit’.
Nicola David of One Life To Live said:
It’s extremely disappointing that all kinds of grandiose statements were made to the media during the press tour in July. The reality for the asylum-seekers is very different; people are reporting real hunger. Yet taxpayers are forking out over £22 million for board and lodging for just a few hundred men.
Where is the money going?
The Home Office and its subcontractors – CTM and Landry & Kling – have serious questions to answer. Not just about the treatment of the asylum-seekers in their care, but also the abuse of the public purse.
Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott continued his anti-migrant crusade on Monday with plans for a Brownsville signing ceremony for a pair of state bills that legal experts and rights groups say are dangerous and violate the U.S. Constitution. Senate Bill 3 allocates $1,540,000,000 for border security, including constructing contested new barriers to limit undocumented immigration from Mexico and…
For those on board, the Bibby Stockholm feels like a prison. It is cramped, restrictive and segregated. The barge is no place to accommodate people who have fled violence, persecution and torture, many of whom are traumatised and isolated. They are unable to get the help and specialist support they need. Their mental health has deteriorated and some have felt suicidal.
Content warning: this article contains discussion of self-harm and attempted suicide that some people may find upsetting.
The Helen Bamber Foundation (HBF) and Humans for Rights Network (HFRN) have gathered first-hand evidence that the government’s use of RAF Wethersfield airfield as a large ‘open-prison camp’ for refugee men seeking asylum for the last five months has already caused irreparable and profound harm to the residents. Some people have tried to take their own lives – with several people attempting to burn themselves to death.
Wethersfield: ‘no different to Libya’
HBF’s clinicians have carried out 10 detailed assessments and HFRN has conducted casework with over 140 individuals since the camp opened in July 2023, and have found that the men have displayed symptoms of worsening mental health following transfer to Wethersfield, including low mood, loneliness, flashbacks, reduced appetite, weight loss, feelings of despair and difficulty sleeping, and a worsening in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Men held there have reported anxiety and depression, suicidal ideation, intense desperation and fear, self-harm, and acute sleep deprivation. When one man shared his suicidal thoughts with members of staff at the site, he was simply told that it was “normal in this environment”.
Nasser, who like many of the men held in Wethersfield travelling through Libya when fleeing his country, said:
The hardest part for me after what I have been through in Libya, is what I am going through now in Wethersfield. People screaming at night, gunshots can be heard. When someone wakes up screaming, I don’t know what to do. I came through Libya this place is no different.
Salman, who came from Iran, said:
I have attempted suicide personally because of the conditions of the camp. Once I tried to hang myself and once there was a group of us six or seven people tried to set ourselves on fire, they didn’t let us in the camp and extinguished the fire, I had a part of my T-shirt burnt, many others as well, it has affected our mental health in a very bad way… We were told you only stay for two weeks here; it was a lie; it’s been two months nothing happened.
Unlawful detentions?
By the end of October 2023, 508 men had been placed in Wethersfield – the top countries of origin being Afghanistan (29%), Iran (20%) and Eritrea (16%). Many of them are survivors of torture and trafficking and those with severe mental health issues.
This is despite Home Office guidance making clear that these groups should not be placed there – in the first three months of being open, a quarter of residents were moved out of Wethersfield because they did not meet the camp’s ‘suitability criteria’ and had unlawfully been placed there. At least 11 children wrongly assessed to be adults have been identified in the camp.
The camp is extremely isolated, has overcrowded living conditions, and lacks the necessary healthcare provision, causing additional pain and trauma to people who have already endured conflict, oppression, abuse, torture and trafficking. The camp’s resemblance to a prison, with barbed wire and surveillance, triggers traumatic experiences among residents, many of whom have had experiences of other ‘camps’, in Egypt and Libya for example.
Wethersfield was initially proposed as a temporary site for 12 months, but the Home Office intends to extend the use of the site for a further three years. This would be a terrible development and the Home Secretary should instead act urgently on his recent commitment to close the site.
Wethersfield: nothing more than a prison
Maddie Harris, Director of Humans for Rights Network, said:
The most commonly used word by the men held in Wethersfield when describing their experience there is ‘prison’. The camp’s isolated setting, cutting these men off not only from their own communities but from society as a whole is causing profound distress and re-traumatisation amongst all those we have spoken to.
By placing men in Wethersfield, this government is ghettoising people seeking asylum in the UK, preventing them from accessing justice and other vital entitlements such as adequate medical care.
This government has a legal obligation to provide them with safe, secure accommodation. Wethersfield is unsafe, for both the mental and physical health of the men held there and must be closed with immediate effect as. It is our belief that it is only a matter of time before someone dies in Wethersfield.
Kamena Dorling, Director of Policy at the Helen Bamber Foundation, said:
The government claims that these horrific camps on former military sites are necessary to manage the record number of people arriving in the UK to seek asylum. But the real problem is the Home Office failure to efficiently process asylum claims in time, which would allow those who have been granted refugee status to move on and live independently.
Instead, hundreds of thousands of people seeking asylum are stuck in an ever-growing asylum backlog, dependent on Home Office temporary accommodation and financial support. The answer to that problem is not the creation of asylum camps that clearly and deliberately cause people seeking protection additional suffering and harm.
Rev Dr Noel Anthony Davies says Rishi Sunak’s government seems all too willing to breach the principles of the UN’s human rights declaration. Plus letters from Clive Stafford Smith, Jim King and Michael McLoughlin
We were therefore shocked to see that the UK government is prepared to turn its back on the declaration that has been the foundation of our common humanity and our shared sense of justice and freedom for all over the last 75 years merely to serve party political ends, and to implement an immigration policy that is clearly in contravention of the declaration. It is also a denial of what we, as Christians, would regard as a universal recognition, founded in the teaching of Jesus, of the dignity, freedom and equality of all people, irrespective of race, religion, sexuality, national identity or political conviction.
Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill passes its first Commons vote but only after rebellion by a collection of rightwing Tory MPs
Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, a former lord chief justice of England and Wales, has said the government should not try to ignore the jurisdiction of the European court of human rights. In an interview for a podcast called the Judges, he said:
If you have subjected yourself to a court, and it was our voluntary decision to do so, then you have to take the rough with the smooth and if they’ve decided [the court] have this jurisdiction then you ought to follow it.
You can’t expect others to respect the law if you say you won’t respect the law of someone else.
You ought to actually be able, within a set period of time, say a fortnight, to investigate, decide, give him one right of appeal – why you should have more than one right of appeal I simply don’t understand – and remove them.” But, he concedes, it costs money.
Britain is a practical nation – always has been. People can’t afford Christmas. If they call an ambulance this winter – they don’t know if it will come. 6,000 crimes go unpunished – every day. Common sense is rolling your sleeves up and solving these problems practically, not indulging in some kind of political performance art.
This goes for stopping the boats as well. It’s not about wave machines, or armoured jet skis, or schemes like Rwanda you know will never work.
The Tory government’s plan to deport refugees to Rwanda has been criticised for many things – not least of all the policy’s abject lack of humanity. Looking at Labour’s response, however, you’d be forgiven for thinking that the issue is that the Tories haven’t deported anyone yet:
Before we get into this, there’s a couple of points to be made about the government/media focus on immigration, both in terms of refugees and people who – for some unimaginable reason – want to live in Britain – a.k.a. ‘dog shit island’ – a.k.a. the birthplace of the world’s most moaniest cunts.
While immigration and refugees are distinct issues, they’re treated as being the same thing in the media because the people who get het up see the as the same thing – i.e. foreign invaders who want to steal the culture we barely have.
Point one is that the worse the cost of living crisis becomes, the more immigration in all its forms becomes an issue. Rarely do you look at the newspaper front pages without it being among the biggest stories of the day. Despite this – in my own experience – I’ve heard a lot less from people about immigration in real life.
At the same time, I can’t remember the last time I had a conversation in which the cost of living didn’t come up. In other words, it seems quite clear that the noise over immigration is to some degree an effort to distract people from the abysmal state of their lives. Don’t believe me? Then explain the next point.
The Tories have been in power for nearly 14 years, and despite their constant, public criticism of immigration, the figures have reached their highest point ever. Given that the Tories could have cut immigration at any point, the only realistic conclusion is that they haven’t wanted to.
Even the Tories need immigration
There are good reasons why they wouldn’t want to cut immigration under our current economic system – chiefly the reliance businesses have on people who’ll work for cheap, and the pension systems’ inability to function if the number of retired people falls out of balance with the number of working aged adults.
While refugees are a different thing to immigration, the visibility of people entering the UK on dinghies is more pronounced, and the Tories have seemingly focussed on it to distract from the ‘legal’ migration they’ve failed to align with their supposed ambitions.
The problem the Tories have made for themselves is that they’ve made immigration such an issue that they can’t get away with talking out of both sides of their mouth any longer. For those who care, nothing less than walling the entire country off will do, and so the Tories are becoming increasingly extreme in their public displays of anti-immigration rhetoric – whether its deporting refugees to Rwanda or putting a hard cap on authorised migration.
What the opposition should be doing is explaining the reality of the situation – namely that refugees are human beings who deserve care, and that if this country wants to continue with all this capitalism malarkey then we need to keep feeding working aged people into the system (that or implement an economic system which isn’t reliant on the majority of adults working themselves to the bone).
Instead, Labour are following the Starmer strategy of agreeing with everything the Tories say besides their ability to deliver on their horrible policy platform.
Backlash
People had broadly similar criticisms of Labour’s stance (‘stance’ might be too strong a word, to be fair – it’s more a case of ‘fence-sitting with vaguely insinuated purpose’):
The problem is that it’s a morally abject policy not that the tories are bad at doing it????? https://t.co/O6eprkdyPG
Is this Labour referring to asylum seekers as deliveries?
Like some kind of Amazon gift, or food parcel from Hello Fresh?
Labour has fallen so far into the gutter that it's hard to distinguish them from the rats#VoteGreen, please, end this nightmare https://t.co/t1dEXfojaT
The problem with questions is that the Labour Party are seldom willing to answer them:
NEW: Labour have DUMPED their promise to scrap the Tories' Rwanda deportation policy.
Asked three times by ITV's Shehab Khan if Labour would scrap the policy, Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper REFUSED to answer. pic.twitter.com/xw7ec4zZjc
Labour keen to emphasise that – when pressed – Yvette Cooper uses the word "replace" to emphasise Labour won't just get rid of the Rwanda policy but they intend on replacing with something else altogether
So, Labour will replace the policy with something else, but they won’t say what – only that their priority is on efficiency. In a sensible world, this would mean replacing it with a policy with some humanity to it; the worry is that Labour will instead find a way of cramming twice as many refugees on to every deportation plane.
Senior Tories from across the party are warning that Rishi Sunak’s emergency Rwanda plan will never become law in its current form, ahead of the most critical vote of his premiership.
Liberal Tories confirmed last night that, despite their desire to back the PM against the right, “serious concerns” remain about the plan and more reassurances will be required. Meanwhile, a self-styled “star chamber” of legal figures examining the proposals for the Tory right is understood to have found problems that are “extremely difficult to resolve”.
Seventeen groups issue statement sounding alarm at migration laws agreed by most EU members
The EU risks opening the door to increased discrimination and racial profiling in what is being described as a “potentially irreversible attack” on the international system offering asylum and refugee protection, human rights organisations have said.
Seventeen NGOs have together sounded the alarm before what is expected to be one of the final meetings on the text of a package of controversial new migration laws already agreed by most EU leaders.
Across the globe, refugees, always treated as the pox of public policy, continue to feature in news reports describing anguish, despair and persistent persecution. If they are not facing barbed wire barriers in Europe, they are being conveyed, where possible, to third countries to be processed in lengthy fashion. Policy makers fiddle and cook the legal record to justify such measures, finding fault with instruments of international protection such as the United Nations Refugee Convention of 1951.
A very dramatic example of roughing up and violence is taking place against Afghans in Pakistan, a country that, despite having a lengthy association with hosting refugees, has yet to ratify the primary Convention. Yet in March 2023, the UNHCR noted that Pakistan hosted 1.35 million registered refugees. The organisation praised Pakistan for its “long and commendable tradition of providing protection to refugees and asylum-seekers”, noting that the current number comprised “mainly Afghan refugees holding Proof of Registration (PoR), as well as a small number of non-Afghan refugees and asylum seekers from other countries such as Myanmar, Yemen, Somalia and Syria.”
Such a rosy assessment detracts from the complex nature of the status of Afghans in that country, characterised by, in some cases, the absence of visas and passports, the expiration of visas and the long wait for renewals. Then comes the tense, heavy mix of domestic politics.
On September 15, the federal government ordered all individual Afghans residing in the country illegally to leave the country by November 1 or face deportation. The order affects some 1.7 million Afghans residing in the country, though the figures on the undocumented vary with dizzy fluctuations.
It is proving disastrous for those vulnerable individuals who fled a country where the Taliban has returned to power. To date, 400,000 are said to have left Pakistan via border crossings in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan, with one estimate from the International Rescue Committee suggesting that 10,000 are being returned to Afghanistan each day. These include the whole spectrum of vulnerable persons: women, girls, human rights activists, journalists and those formerly in the employ of the previous Western-backed government.
The picture is an ugly one indeed, complicated by Pakistan’s own domestic ills and complex relationship with Kabul. During the course of the vacuously named Global War on Terror, Afghanistan came to be seen as a problem for Pakistani security, its refugee camps accused as being incubators for fractious Afghan militants. Kabul, at that point yet to return to Taliban control, accused Islamabad of destabilising its own security by providing sanctuary for those very same militants. In the aftermath of the killing of former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani in September 2011, the victim of a daring suicide attack on his residency, Pakistan’s then Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, proved roundly dismissive: “We are not responsible if Afghan refugees crossed the border and entered Kabul, stayed in a guest house and attacked Professor Rabbani.”
The latest chapter of demonisation comes on the coattails of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021. Brutal night raids by police, featuring beatings, ominous threats and detention, have become the hallmarks of the expulsion campaign. The police forces, themselves spoiled by corruption and opportunism, are prone to pilfering property, including jewellery and livestock.
In October, Mir Ahmad Rauf, who heads the Afghan Refugees’ Council in Pakistan reported “widespread destruction of Afghan homes in Islamabad’s B-17, Karachi, and other parts of Pakistan.” Last month, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a statement expressing concern at “reports of increased detainment, violence, and intimidation against the Ahmadiyya and Afghan refugee communities” in the country.
To add to this failure of protection is the status of many who, despite being Afghan, were born in Pakistan and never set foot in Afghanistan. In 2018, Pakistan’s then Prime Minister Imran Khan announced that his government would be amenable to granting citizenship to Afghans born in the country. The promise (amenability is always contingent) was never enacted into law, and Khan is now persona non grata with Pakistan’s usurpers.
The protective, humanitarian burden for processing claims by Afghans in other countries has also been reluctantly shared. To return to Afghanistan spells potential repression and persecution; but to find a country in the European Union, or to seek sanctuary in the United States, Australia and others, has been nigh impossible for most.
When asylum has been considered, it has often been done with an emphasis on prioritising the contributions of men who had performed military and security roles in the previous Western-backed Kabul administration. There is a delicious irony to this, given the evangelical promises of US President George W. Bush to liberate the country’s women from the clutches of obscurantist fundamentalism.
On December 1, a three-member bench of the Pakistani Supreme Court sought responses from the various arms of the government, including the apex committee led by the Prime Minister, foreign office, and army chief on their decision to expel Afghan nationals. Given the caretaker status of the current government, which has all but outsourced foreign policy to the military, including the “Afghan issue”, legal questions can be asked.
One of the petitioners to the court, Senator Farhatullah Babar, states that current government members are technically unelected to represent the country. “So, the court would need to decide whether a caretaker government with such a restrictive mandate can take such a major policy decision, and in my view, this is beyond the power of the caretaker government.” Those Afghans remaining in Pakistan can only wait.
With the recent outbreak of conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and Russia, the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, along with the continued conflict in Syria and Yemen, it’s clear that peace – or the lack of – is a global issue on many people’s minds.
In their latest global peace report (2023) – in which they provide a review of 163 countries – we saw the “ninth consecutive year that global peacefulness has deteriorated”.
Over the last year, peace decreased by an average of 0.42% per country, with 84 countries marked as more peaceful than in 2022, and 79 countries recording a deterioration of peace.
The global peace index (2023) (Source: Institute of Economics and Peace, 2023).
So, what lies behind the statistics?
Well, improvements and deteriorations were driven by changes a range of overlapping factors, including:
Conflict: the prevalence of internal and external conflict, along with the number of related deaths
Politics: the rate of military expenditure (% of GDP), political instability and relations with neighbouring countries
Displacement: the number of refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs)
Terrorism: current ranking on the political terror scale and the impact of terrorism
Weapons: the number of weapons imported and exported
Crime: the homicide rate and levels of violent crime and access to small arms
In this research, Iceland remained the most peaceful nation (a ranking held since 2008), followed by Denmark and Ireland.
Likewise, Afghanistan remained the “least peaceful nation” for the eighth year in a row, followed by Yemen and Syria.
These are countries that have found themselves in both groupings repeatedly. And with the outbreak of conflict, it’s no surprise.
Whilst terrorism-related deaths in the MENA region continue to decline (down by 23% in 2023), the largest increase of deaths has been in sub-Saharan Africa, with a rise of 8%.
In fact, the Sahel region of Africa has become the “epicentre of terrorism”.
In this region, 43% of deaths related to global terrorism occur.
Moreover, we’re also seeing the rise in ecological threats and the cyclical relationship to violence, including terrorism and conflict.
This is and will continue to have a monumental impact on populations, and the level of conflict:
“…without concerted international action, current levels of ecological degradation will substantially worsen, thereby intensifying a range of social issues, such as malnutrition and forced migration.
Current conflicts will escalate and multiply as a result, creating further global insecurity.
IEP estimates that by 2050, 2.8 billion people will reside in countries facing severe ecological threats, compared to 1.8 billion in 2023, with 1.1 billion of these people living in countries with low societal resilience.”
As communities are becoming increasingly displaced and lacking in critical resources, conflict and instability will inevitability increase.
The reality is this: if we want peace, we need to focus on more than ending conflict and violence (what’s known as “negative peace”).
Instead, we need a local, national and international effort towards “positive peace” – a holistic sustainable effort to prevent (rather than respond to) conflict.
To do this, we must build egalitarian resilient communities and transparent, accountable nations to collaborate on a global scale.
In short, if we want peace, we need to help communities thrive.
We have to tackle the rise of global terrorism, address the rise in climate change, promote intercommunal dialogue, address poverty and inequality – including gender inequality – and work on all levels.
This includes engaging at grassroots (community) level, with civil societies (expert organisations) and governmental and intragovernmental powers, to drive critical change.
Of course, this requires holistic change globally. And change starts with us!
Whatever our background, we can all make a difference.
How? Read on to find out!
1. Develop dialogue and human rights frameworks
Building dialogue among different communities is critical to building positive peace (Image credit: Freepik).
Inter-communal dialogue based on common shared values (our shared humanity!) is critical in building stronger relationships in our communities, regions, nations and globally.
Working across religious and cultural divides by communicating with each other and carving shared spaces, webuild a common sense of citizenship to come together and prevent conflict when disagreements and tensions rise.
By understanding individuals and communities’ diverse needs, we can better understand different lived experiences and carve more equitable spaces.
Promoting diversity and inclusion, and ensuring a broader sense of identity and citizenship, we can fight exclusion and develop the tools and understanding to prevent and respond to disagreements and larger-scale conflict:
“For decades the fields of conflict resolution, mediation and peace studies had been overlooking the positive political role that religion could play in all stages of peacebuilding.
Today there is growing attention to the contribution that religious peacebuilding can make to the stability, security, and justice of many divided societies around the world… through political application of religious ideals like reconciliation, forgiveness and mercy.”
We therefore need to amplify the role of intercommunal dialogue – including interfaith and intercultural dialogue – to unite among shared values, against (perceived) notions of difference.
These values however must lie within a framework of human rights (shared dignity and humanity).
In this way, we can build a mutual foundation of common values and unite to promote diversity (amongst all faiths and none).
We can therefore critically understand and promote the mutual rights of each and every one of us when building initiatives, policies and projects.
We can also confidently in collaboration reject harm, respecting and promoting cultural and religious diversity.
In this way, we can confidentially counteract religious extremism and harmful socio-cultural norms together, ensuring that we do not excuse harm under extreme variations of cultural relativism.
Local, regional, national or international, the sky’s your limit!
Plus, if you’re already a keen dialogue practitioner, why not apply for the KAICIID fellowship programme in intercultural and interreligious dialogue to expand your networks, resources and knowledge?
Keep an eye out on their website for submission deadlines.
Spread a counternarrative by promoting dialogue and humanism in religion, challenging dogmatism and extremism.
Create positive communities, talk with others inside and outside of the community, and speak out against hate.
Critically: report hate to relevant organisations and authorities (find out more here)
Support dialogue in peacebuilding:
Check out these great organisations working for peace in Israel-Palestineand support their crucial work through advocacy and fundraising.
Wherever your interest lies, we part of a positive solution!
Share positive stories, meet new people and promote peace not division
Promote human rights and peace education:
Promote the importance of human rights in practice, not just theory!
Expand your knowledge in human rights (perhaps by taking a course) and incorporate human rights into your work (implementing policies based on equity, inclusivity and no harm).
Dialogue is a key step to preventing conflict, with human rights building a key common framework of equality, justice and human dignity.
2. Challenge corruption and promote transparency
If we don’t tackle corruption, we can’t promote peace.
Bribery, nepotism, corruption are the anthesis to sound business, equity and well-functioning governments – and to peace:
“Corruption harms the poor and vulnerable the most, increasing costs and reducing access to basic services, such as health, education, social programs, and even justice.
It exacerbates inequality and reduces private sector investment to the detriment of markets, job opportunities, and economies.
Corruption can also undermine a country’s response to emergencies, leading to unnecessary suffering and, at worst, death.
Over time, corruption can undermine the trust and confidence that citizens have for their leaders and institutions, creating social friction and in some contexts increasing the risk of fragility, conflict, and violence.”
So, to tackle the issue of global poverty, inequity of systems and to drive real change, we need accountancy, transparency, development and growth.
This requires action across society, on all levels.
We need to call businesses to account for how they treat their employees.
We need to ensure that governments are investing money where they should be, that justice systems are fit for purpose and that grassroots communities are able to protect the most vulnerable people in our societies.
This includes people at increasing risk of modern slavery and displacement (see point #3) and gender-based violence (see points #3 and #4) as poverty and inequality meet the increasing drivers of climate change (see point #3) – amongst various other phenomenon.
It’s a task of monumental scale, but we can’t just sit back and do nothing.
Here’s how we can start.
Take action:
Call for accountability:
Report corruption wherever you see it. Call for investigations amid the misuse of power and the abuse of systems – be it locally, nationally or internationally.
Call people and systems to account. Report, fight and expose
Model the change:
Be the change in your own networks.
Whatever your work, position or line of work, ensure your systems are fair, transparent and open to feedback (as well as legally compliant!)
And this is having a monumental impact on communities worldwide – in particular the world’s most vulnerable.
In 2022 alone, a staggering 32.6 million people were displaced as a result of disasters.
98% of these were weather-related, such as floods, storms, wildfires and droughts.
And these are increasing the impact of poverty and risk of conflict.
As crops fail, livestock perish and people lose their livelihoods and homes, families and communities are left displaced – in search of food, shelter and work.
Such disasters/climatic changes aren’t a one off, they act as a “threat multiplier”:
“Not only did climate-related disasters trigger more than half of new reported displacements in 2022, but nearly 60 per cent of refugees and internally displaced people now live in countries that are among the most vulnerable to climate change.”
This will help communities to fight the effects of climate change, decreasing the rate of displacement, scarcity of resources, and ultimately conflict.
Climate change is about both the planet and people – and stemming the effects are critical to building and maintaining peace.
4. Fight global gender-based inequality
Peace requires gender equity – across the board.
Where poverty thrives and crisis hits, women are worst affected.
In any crisis (be it climate-related and/or conflict-related) – women and girls are always disproportionately affected.
At increasing risk of sexual violence, human trafficking and forced marriage (including child marriage), in times of conflict:
Teen girls are 90% more likely to be out of education
70% of women will experience gender-based violence
This however, simple falls in line with overall trends on gender inequality across the board.
We also know that when women are involved in peacekeeping efforts, peace is more likely to be sustainable:
“Female participation in both conflict prevention and conflict resolutionenhances security interests.
Studies have found that a significant inclusion of women and civil society groups in a peace negotiation makes the resulting agreement 64% less likely to fail and 35% more likely to last at least fifteen years.
…full and meaningful participation of women in peace operations broadens the perspective on conflict management, allows for more inclusive political resolutions, and, in the end, improves international peacebuilding strategies…”
So, when it comes to positive peace (preventing conflict) – we need to dismantle the political, social, cultural, religious and economic barriers that discriminate women and harm society as a whole.
These are barriers that both limit women’s participation in conflict prevention/resolution and also result in a disproportionate impact on conflict on women and girls in crisis situations (pre-, mid and post-conflict).
Take action:
Support education for women and girls:
Education is crucial for fighting the duality of poverty and gender inequality.
Women with an education are less likely to fight poverty (see point #5), and have greater means to leave abusive relationships.
When girls go to school, they’re building their future and fighting illiteracy, poverty and harmful practice such as child marriage.
Differently abled girls, menstruating girls and girls in rural communities all need access to quality education – which requires not just a change in attitudes, but the right resources.
Stand up against the social, cultural, religious and cultural norms that stigmatise and exclude women and girls from education, income-generation, community building and decision making.
From period shaming, victim-blaming of survivors of assault, exclusion of women from religious spaces and unfair burden of caring/household responsibilities, women and girls are denied the right to participate and contribute equally to build safer more equal societies.
They perpetuate misogynistic attitudes harmful to women and girls and to society as a whole.
Speak out, stand up and support crucial projects, such as Grandmother Project who are critically fighting FGM and promoting girls’ education
Empower women financially:
Help women to empower themselves financially by supporting microfinance projects, enabling them to fight the effects of gender-based inequality, challenge gender-based discrimination/harmful norms and stand up in their communities and societies.
This will ultimately help develop more inclusive peaceful societies for all.
Finally, call on your MP to ensure that the UK government puts gender at the heart of crisis-responsive policies.
5. Take action against poverty
Poverty is often a major factor behind the eruption of conflict.
As we’ve already seen, if we want to build peace and prevent conflict, we need to fight corruption, to work to ensure the mutual respect of human rights and to fight gender inequality and the increasing impact of climate change.
And so, a huge factor is also: fighting poverty.
Why?
Because poverty is a major driving factor behind the prevalence of harmful gender-based norms (see point #4), ill health and the exclusion of people in decision making and civil society.
Individuals and communities living in poverty are also further disproportionally affected by the increasing effects of climate change and risk of displacement (see point #3).
Taking also these factors into account, we’re left seeing the increased risk of conflict .
And of course, the further exclusion of women (see point #4) (remembering that women are also in fact key to building inclusive sustainably peaceful environments in pre and post-conflict rebuilding processes).
Poverty is complex, yet key part of the solution:
“…extreme poverty is … increasing in countries affected by fragility, conflict and violence (FCV)…by 2030, up to two thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in these situations.
These challenges threaten to reverse efforts to end extreme poverty, and they affect both low- and middle-income countries…
Violent conflict has spiked dramatically since 2010 — conflicts now drive 80% of all humanitarian needs and reduce gross domestic product (GDP) growth by two percentage points per year…
Social and economic exclusion, climate change, gender and other inequalities, demographic challenges, illicit financial flows and other global trends contribute to this complexity.”
It’s fundamentally clear that if we want to prevent conflict, we need to fight poverty.
And if we want to fight poverty, we need to fight conflict.
Communities need equitable, inclusive, safe and thriving societies to build and promote dialogue, stem the effects of climate change, fight corruption and ultimately prevent conflict.
Take action:
Challenge discrimination:
Speak out against the discrimination which traps people in poverty, makes them vulnerable to radicalisation and/or recruitment in armed groups, and builds tension in communities (see sections #1 and #2).
Donate towards, volunteer with or share information at projects supporting refugee children’s education to help these children get the critical education every child needs and help break the cycle of poverty.
Prevent the recruitment of child soldiers:
Poverty and lack of opportunities are major drivers behind the recruitment of child soldiers.
Help end this abuse by supporting dedicated work to prevent the recruitment of child soldiers by strengtheningchild protection systems, promoting peacebuilding and increasing access to education and work opportunities.
Tackle the attitudes behind gender-based discrimination and violence (see section #4)
Promote and support education (for children and adults) and livelihoods/business (see section #4)
Protect workers rights (see section #2)
Fund climate-resilience projects (see section #3)
In this way, we can tackle the cycle and roots causes of poverty and inequality which make individuals and communities vulnerable to conflict.
Peacebuilding is an ongoing process. A process that we need to be active in building and sustaining.
As a planet, we need to look beyond non-violence, towards wider building positive peace globally.
This means going beyond the idea of simply a “lack of violence” (known as “negative peace”).
Instead, real sustainable peace (“positive peace“) means developing and strengthening societies based on mutual dialogue, equity, diversity and inclusion.
Higher levels of peace have been proven to lead to:
Stronger resilience and adaptability
Better environmental outcomes
Higher measures of wellbeing
Better performance on development goals
Higher income per capita
Better business environments
(Source: IEP, 2023)
Most critically however, positive peace exists in societies that are more just and are fairer.
These are societies which should have the critical tools, resources and systems in place to embrace pluralism, promote equity and therefore de-escalate potential conflict.
From breaking the gender bias, supporting displaced communities and fighting for people and planet, we can all make a difference on many levels.
Whether locally, nationally or internationally, through your work, volunteering or simply in your day-to-day life, the time is now!
Plus, don’t forget we’ve got the world at our digital fingertips!
Be part of the change.Today.
Credits:
This blog was produced inline with participation requirements on the IEP Ambassador Programme (2023).
The Institute for Economics & Peace(IEP) is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. We aim to create a paradigm shift in the way the world thinks about peace.
Home Office contractors stationed at Manston to process small boat arrivals are being bussed to Europe’s largest immigration detention centre to plug a significant staff shortage, the Guardian has learned.
Heathrow immigration removal centre, next to the airport, has such a big shortage of guards that an agreement has been made with the outsourcing company Mitie to redeploy Home Office contractors from Manston, in Kent, on days when there are no small boat crossings. The shortages come at a time when the Home Office wants to expand detention tenfold as part of the new Illegal Migration Act.
Fears South Korean court will impose harsh penalty on Kwon Pyong to appease Beijing
The father of a Chinese dissident detained in South Korea said his son will die if he is sent back to China, a country he escaped from on a jetski in a life-threatening journey in August.
A court in South Korea will decide on Thursday the fate of Kwon Pyong, who is charged with violating the immigration control act. Kwon, 35, pleaded guilty and appealed for leniency as prosecutors requested a sentence of two and a half years, which experts say is unusually harsh.
The award ceremony took place on at the Palace Cultural Center in St. Gallen.
Paula Weremiuk from Narewka on the Polish-Belarusian border works as a teacher during the day and as a refugee aid worker in the Bialowieza forest at night. According to the Paul Grüninger Foundation, a refugee drama of enormous proportions has been taking place there since 2021.
Paula Weremiuk searches for people in need in the inaccessible areas of Bialowieza, providing them with clothing, food, sleeping bags and the most basic necessities, writes the Paul Grüninger Foundation. The Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenka is forcing thousands of refugees from the Middle East and Africa across the border to Poland, where they are met with strong political rejection.
At the border, in the primeval forest of Bialowieza, there is often brutal violence, abuse, rape and repeated deaths. The refugees, including women and small children, are helplessly abandoned to their fate in the inaccessible terrain and are chased back and forth across the border by the authorities. Refugee helpers are being harassed and criminalized, the press release continues.
Ayşe Gökkan’s award was accepted by her lawyer, Berfin Gökkan. The lawyer read out a letter from Ayşe Gökkan written in Kurdish: “I greet you with the warmth of the sun and the enthusiasm of Jin-Jiyan-Azadî. As a member of the Movement of Free Women, I accept this award on behalf of thousands of struggling Kurdish women. There are many fighting women in prison in Turkey.”
The foundation justified the awarding of the recognition prize of 10,000 francs to the Kurdish feminist and human rights defender Ayşe Gökkan for her civil society commitment and her criminalization:
“Ayşe Gökkan has particularly distinguished herself as a journalist and as an activist for women’s rights. For almost forty years, she has been writing newspaper columns against racial and gender discrimination, speaking at national and international podiums and seminars, leading workshops on the topic of gender inequality and taking part in peaceful demonstrations in this context.
From 2009 to 2014, Ayşe Gökkan was mayor of the Kurdish city of Nusaybin, which lies on the border between Turkey and Syria. When Turkey began to build a wall against refugees between Nusaybin and the neighbouring Syrian town of Qamishlo, the mayor protested against this “wall of shame” with, among other things, a sit-in strike.
Because of her civil society commitment, Ayşe Gökkan has been arrested in Turkey more than eighty times, subjected to more than two hundred investigations and, in 2021, sentenced to more than 26 in a grotesque court case based on the statements of a single “secret witness” for membership in a “terrorist organization”.
She is a victim of the criminalization of the political opposition in Turkey. Ayşe Gökkan is in prison, her sentence has not yet been confirmed by the Turkish Court of Cassation, and proceedings are also pending before the European Court of Human Rights.”
(@ZackPolanski) 
NEW: Labour have DUMPED their promise to scrap the Tories' Rwanda deportation policy.
(@LeftieStats) 
