On 22 July 2022 Brian Dooley and Quinn Fulton wrote for Human Rights First a post: “Ten Years But Still Counting – UAE Fails To Release Jailed Activist Al-Roken“
Human Rights First has covered their cases and others for many years, and urged a succession of U.S. administrations to use the influence they have accrued – not least through supplying the Emirates with billions of dollars of weapons – to push for the release of jailed human rights activists there.
The U.S. government knows exactly who Al-Roken is and what he stands for. He has been featured in a succession of U.S. reports describing him as “a human rights activist” (2007), “a lawyer…reportedly held incommunicado and without charge for unknown reasons” (2012), and a “lawyer, academic and human rights defender” (2021).
In 2015, Human Rights First wrote about his wrongful imprisonment, and noted in a report that year on human rights in the Emirates that “Former heads of the Jurists Association are now political prisoners, including renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Mohammed Al-Roken. He is one of dozens serving long prison sentences after being convicted in mass trials.”
We have continued to raise cases through the media of human rights defenders wrongfully detained in the Emirates, and we successfully campaigned for the release of American citizens Mohammed and Kamal Al Darat when they were tortured and detained in the Emirates for over a year.
When calling for Al-Roken’s release, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders noted that he was jailed on charges of “plotting against the government,” and “subjected to intermittent periods in solitary confinement, allegedly without justification or explanation.” The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said Al-Roken “is reportedly well known for defending victims of human rights violations in the United Arab Emirates,” and deemed his detention as arbitrary.
We know that getting people who have been wrongfully detained in the Emirates out of prison is difficult, but it sometimes can be done if there is substantial international public pressure – as with the Al Darats and the British academic Matthew Hedges.
That’s why it’s important that the Biden administration speaks out publicly about Al-Roken. Our years of advocacy experience tells us that behind-the-scenes diplomacy is unlikely to work..
When it comes to the world’s two biggest emitters, we are caught between a secretive autocracy and an oversharing corrupted democracy.
Most media attention is focused on the latter. The United States this week raised hopes of a compromise climate spending bill and quashed it again before you could say “Joe Manchin is a bad-faith actor”.
Having somebody to blame does not make it any easier to address a system rigged in favour of fossil fuel interests.
At Climate Home, we bypassed that news cycle (come back to us when you’ve achieved something, America!) and took a longer look at the former.
Because the fact that so little climate journalism comes out of China at a certain point becomes newsworthy in itself. And once Chloé Farand started asking around, we knew this story’s time had come.
It has never been easy for journalists and civil society to operate in Xi Jinping’s China. As he looks to secure a third term as president over the coming months, it is harder than ever.
Beijing’s zero-covid policy is, most sources said, no longer just about public health, but a tool of control at a politically sensitive time. Conferences are cancelled indefinitely and travel restricted. Officials up and down the hierarchy are afraid to speak to the media.
Out of six China-based climate reporters who spoke to Climate Home for the article, four had left or were preparing to leave the country.
This is a problem. Not just for the international community, which has an interest in holding China to account for its emissions performance, but for China. In the vacuum, misinformation and Sinophobia flourish.
From the slivers of news that do emerge, we can see that Chinese experts have much to teach the rest of the world. Ok, so they might want to keep their advantage in mass producing solar panels, but when it comes to smart deployment policy, they have every incentive to share tips.
Perhaps they could give US climate campaigners, who are in despair right now, some fresh ideas.
During Donald Trump’s four year term as President of the United States of America, three vacancies occurred in the ranks of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court. He nominated three ultra conservative judges to replace them and made it clear to those judges that he expected them to remove the constitutional right of women …
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern called the US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade “incredibly upsetting” as New Zealand politicians reacted to the controversial ruling.
Millions of American women have lost the constitutional right to abortion, after the 50-year-old Roe v Wade decision protecting the right to an abortion was overturned yesterday.
Ardern said in a statement that the decision was a loss for women everywhere.
“Watching the removal of a woman’s fundamental right to make decisions over their own body is incredibly upsetting,” she said.
“Here in New Zealand we recently legislated to decriminalise abortion and treat it as a health rather than criminal issue.
“That change was grounded in the fundamental belief that it’s a woman’s right to choose. People are absolutely entitled to have deeply held convictions on this issue. But those personal beliefs should never rob another from making their own decisions.
“To see that principle now lost in the United States feels like a loss for women everywhere.
‘We need progress … not move backwards’
“When there are so many issues to tackle, so many challenges that face woman and girls, we need progress, not to fight the same fights and move backwards.”
In a statement last night, he reaffirmed that, saying that abortion laws “laws will not be relitigated or revisited under a future National government”.
Roe v Wade is an issue for the American people who have a different set of constitutional arrangements than us. NZ’s abortion laws were voted on and ultimately settled in the last parliament. These laws will not be relitigated or revisited under a future National government.
Green Party MP Chlöe Swarbrick blasted the decision, expressing “solidarity with Americans fighting for restoration of their rights to healthcare.”
Prohibiting abortions doesn’t stop abortions. It prevents safe, regulated abortions. It prevents access for those without the resources to travel to areas where abortion is legal.
Solidarity with Americans fighting for restoration of their rights to healthcare.
ACT leader David Seymour said that “It may be that this is just returning the question to a state one, but half the states are going back a century in just a few days.”
What’s happening, Twitter? Great question. It may be that this is just returning the question to a State one, but half the States are going back a century in just a few days. pic.twitter.com/BFM0U0wFNB
Seymour, who supported New Zealand’s Abortion Legislation Bill to decriminalise abortion, said he was deeply concerned for the rights of American women and the future of US politics.
“I think that this will bring about a political earthquake in America. And this is a time when New Zealand really needs America to be focused on trade and security, rather than re-litigating battles of the 1950s.”
‘We cannot be complacent’
Green Party MP Jan Logie did not expect the decision would encourage people to push for changes to the abortion laws in New Zealand.
“We’ve seen a result of that an increasing number of New Zealanders who recognise the importance of reproductive justice. But this tells us also that we cannot be complacent.”
Logie said she feared the decision would increase the rate of unsafe abortions in the US.
Family Life International’s Michelle Kaufman said she wanted New Zealand’s abortion laws to change.
“I hope one day that we will see an end to abortion, that people will see that it’s the unthinkable choice, that there are better ways.”
Kaufman said abortion was violence and that it did not solve problems.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The United States Supreme Court has handed down a ruling overturning Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that found there was a constitutional right to abortion.
In Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organisation, the Court ruled 6-3 that
The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.
Abortion regulation has now been returned to the individual states. Yet rather than resolving the debate over abortion in the US, we will likely see a dramatic escalation of abortion lawsuits and legislation.
That is because the goal of abortion opponents has always been to stop abortion nationwide. Overturning Roe v Wade is just the beginning.
Roe v Wade has been under constant attack For 49 years, Roe v Wade has been under constant attack from opponents of reproductive rights, surviving repeated legal challenges and reaffirmed on multiple occasions by the Supreme Court.
Despite the political controversy and polarising rhetoric from Republican politicians, 2021 polling indicated 80 percent of Americans support abortion in all or most cases, and at least 60 percent support Roe v. Wade.
However, after former President Donald Trump was able to fill three Supreme Court vacancies, conservatives had a 6-3 majority on the bench.
The end of Roe v Wade seemed inevitable and the question became whether the judgement would be gradually gutted or overturned in one fell swoop.
What can Biden and the Democrats do? In early May, a draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s majority decision was leaked, indicating it would be overturned.
Protests from abortion rights supporters erupted, including outside the Supreme Court and the homes of conservative justices.
President Joe Biden swiftly issued a statement insisting a “woman’s right to choose is fundamental” and his administration has spent the intervening months meeting with abortion rights advocates. However, there is little of substance the president or Congressional Democrats can do to reverse the decision.
And although Democrats have a majority in both houses of Congress, without filibuster reform they do not have the numbers to pass legislation, which has stymied much of the Democratic agenda during Biden’s presidency.
While Biden promised to issue Executive Orders on reproductive rights if Roe v Wade is overturned, these would work to offset only some of the likely consequences of the new abortion landscape.
Such a move would shift the contours of the abortion fight back to the national stage and would ensure abortion is front and centre in the 2024 presidential elections.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responds to Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade: “They chose to endanger the lives of all women and all birthing people in this country. But not only that, they have chosen to strip rights of men too.” https://t.co/p3tvxQxVTzpic.twitter.com/kZm8sdo3s8
State laws on abortion access and provision With the overturning of Roe v Wade, abortion access and provision will be shaped by a patchwork of state laws.
Thirteen states already have “trigger” laws on the books that criminalise abortion if Roe is overturned. A further 10 are expected to move quickly to ban the procedure.
States hostile to abortion have also begun debating how to close legislative “loopholes”, considering laws that are more extreme than any previously proposed.
In addition to pursuing abortion bans, including from the moment of conception, many of the new laws no longer allow for abortion in cases of rape or incest.
Provisions that would allow abortion to protect maternal health are being so narrowly defined as to render them almost meaningless.
In Oklahoma, one Republican complained the proposed law did not ban abortion in instances of ectopic pregnancy, a condition fatal to the pregnant person if left untreated.
The National Right to Life Committee has drafted model state legislation that would make it illegal to provide information on self-managed abortion via phone, internet, or website, effectively targeting the First Amendment right to free speech.
MEET THE BENCH: Chief Justice John Roberts didn’t join his conservative colleagues in overturning Roe v. Wade — saying he would ‘take a more measured course.’ https://t.co/BeXTvQzwnvpic.twitter.com/cyFi21Q83A
Advocates are pushing the White House to challenge any law criminalising out-of-state travel to receive an abortion.
A Jewish synagogue is suing the state of Florida, claiming the state’s abortion ban violates religious freedoms protected by the First Amendment.
Impact on abortion patients Politically and legally, the struggle over abortion rights is primed to explode nationwide, with no foreseeable end in sight.
Yet the impact of today’s Supreme Court decision will be most acutely felt by abortion patients.
Most of the toughest abortion bans and regulations are in the South and Midwest, rendering abortion inaccessible in a vast geographic stretch of the country.
Overturning Roe v Wade will result in the closure of more than a quarter of the nation’s abortion clinics, placing huge pressure on the remaining providers to offer time-sensitive care to patients likely travelling hundreds of kilometres from home.
Banning abortion does not stop abortion Banning abortion does not stop abortion, nor does it reduce the number of abortions. Regardless of their home state, pregnant people will still seek abortions, although they may need significant resources to do so and could face criminal sanctions.
Following the United Kingdom’s decision to extradite Julian Assange to face trial in the United States, the International Federation of Journalists’ (IFJ) Australian affiliate, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) has called on the Australian government to take swift steps to lobby for the dismissal of all charges against Assange.
The IFJ stands with the MEAA in condemning the extradition order and calls for Assange to be pardoned and allowed to be with his family.
On June 17, UK Home Secretary Priti Patel approved Assange’s extradition to the US to face charges, primarily under the nation’s Espionage Act, for releasing US government records that revealed the US military committed war crimes against civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq, including the killing of two Reuters journalists.
Assange, a member of the MEAA since 2007, may now only have a slim chance of challenging the extradition.
If found guilty, Assange faces up to 175 years in prison.
The WikiLeaks founder is highly likely to be detained in the US under conditions of isolation or solitary confinement, despite the US government’s assurances, which would severely exacerbate his risk of suicide.
WikiLeaks was awarded the Walkley Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism in 2011, an annual prize to reward excellence in Australian journalism, in recognition of the impact of WikiLeaks’ actions on public interest journalism by assisting whistleblowers to tell their stories.
According to the MEAA, Walkley judges said WikiLeaks applied new technology to”‘penetrate the inner workings of government to reveal an avalanche of inconvenient truths in a global publishing coup”.
Whistleblowers have since been used by other media outlets to expose global tax avoidance schemes, among other stories.
In the case of WikiLeaks, only Julian Assange faces charges, with no other WikiLeaks media partners cited in any US government legal actions.
In 2017, Chelsea Manning, a US Army intelligence analyst who released classified information to WikiLeaks, was pardoned by former US President Barack Obama.
MEAA media section federal president Karen Percy said: “We urge the new Australian government to act on Julian Assange’s behalf and lobby for his release. The actions of the US are a warning sign to journalists and whistleblowers everywhere and undermine the importance of uncovering wrongdoing.
“Our thoughts are with Julian and his family at this difficult time.”
The IFJ said: “The United Kingdom Home Secretary’s decision to allow the extradition of Julian Assange is a significant blow to media freedom and a dire threat to journalists, whistleblowers, and media workers worldwide.
“The IFJ urges the government of Australia to act swiftly to intervene and lobby the United States and United Kingdom governments to dismiss all charges against Assange. Journalism is not a crime.”
A media freedom advocacy group has called on New Zealand to end its silence over the Julian Assange case in what it called a “dark day for global press freedom”.
The UK Home secretary Priti Patel yesterday signed the extradition to send Australian journalist Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, to the US, which has charged him for publishing leaked evidence of their war crimes.
The Guardian’s editorial said the decision “ought to worry anyone who cares about journalism and democracy”.
Assange, 50, has been charged under the US Espionage Act, including publishing classified material. He faces up to 175 years in jail if found guilty by a US court. This action potentially opens the door for journalists anywhere in the world to be extradited to the US for exposing information deemed classified by Washington.
The International Federation of Journalists, representing more than 600,000 journalists tweeted: “The UK decision to allow the extradition of Assange is vindictive and a real blow to media freedom.
“He has simply exposed issues that were in the public interest and Patel’s failure to acknowledge this is shameful and sets a terrible precedent.”
Lack of accountability
Aotearoa 4 Assange (A4A) said in a statement that the New Zealand government could no longer remain silent on this case.
A4A’s Matt Ó Branáin asked: “What will our government’s position be when it’s a New Zealand investigative journalist being imprisoned or extradited?
“What will this total lack of accountability mean the next time the US asks us to send our troops to die in another war?.”
The Guardian warned this “potentially opens the door for journalists anywhere in the world to be extradited to the US for exposing information deemed classified by Washington”.
The editorial said: “The charges against him should never have been brought. As Mr Assange published classified documents and he did not leak them, Barack Obama’s administration was reluctant to bring charges.
“His legal officers correctly understood that this would threaten public interest journalism. It was Donald Trump’s team, which considered the press an ‘enemy of the people’, that took the step.”
Ó Branáin said: “We reiterate our call for Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to stand with Australian Prime Minister Albanese’s calls for our allies the UK and US to bring an end to this, and bring Assange home.”
A detailed study of the killing of journalists released this week by Countercurrents shows that Israel leads the world in this grimmest of statistics:
Apartheid Israel tops the ranking by “average number of journalists killed per 10 million of population per year” that yields the following order:
Occupied Palestine, over 6.164; Syria, 4.733; Afghanistan, 2.563; Israel-Palestine, over 2.190; Somalia, 1.751; Yemen, 1.278; Iraq, 0.897; Mexico, 0.750; Colombia, 0.366; Philippines, 0.283; Pakistan, 0.152; World, 0.084; India, 0.027.
On a per capita basis, the killing of journalists by Apartheid Israel in Occupied Palestine leads the world, and is 73.4 times greater than for the world as a whole. In contrast, India scores 3.1 times lower than the world. The present data shows that Apartheid Israel leads the world by far for killing journalists.
Israel has a long sordid history of targeting and murdering journalists reporting on its war crimes against the Palestinian people and last month’s killing of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh should be seen as part of this pattern.
Shireen’s killing hit the headlines because she had such a high profile across the Arab world and was an American citizen.
The New Zealand government waited a week before issuing an insipid tweet calling for an independent investigation into Shireen’s killing.
The US has also been embarrassed into claiming it is “deeply upset” about the killing — usually the US looks the other way, giving impunity to its racist, apartheid proxy in Palestine.
Journalists in US speak up
But journalists in the US are speaking up — even mainstream journalists are beginning to speak out. CNN, for example, has conducted its own probe into the killing and in part concluded:
“From the strike marks on the tree it appears that the shots, one of which hit Shireen, came from down the street from the direction of the IDF troops. The relatively tight grouping of the rounds indicate Shireen was intentionally targeted with aimed shots and not the victim of random or stray fire”
During a Summit of the Americas event last night in Los Angeles, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was questioned by journalist Abby Martin about the killing of Al Jazeera correspondent Shireen Abu Akleh and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.
“Secretary Blinken, what about Shireen Abu Akleh?,” asked Martin. “She was murdered by Israeli forces. CNN just agreed to this. These are our two greatest allies in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
“They have murdered American journalists and there have been absolutely no repercussions . . . you’re sitting up here talking about the freedom of press and democracy. The United States is denying sovereignty to tens of millions of people around the world with draconian sanctions for electing leaders that you do not like.
“Why is there no accountability for Israel or Saudi Arabia for murdering journalists?”
“I deplore the loss of Shireen,” Blinken responded. “She was a remarkable journalist, an American citizen…We are looking for an independent, credible investigation. When that investigation happens, we will follow the facts, wherever they lead. It’s as straightforward as that.”
Deafening silence on Assange
Meanwhile, there has been a deafening silence from most journalists about the plight of Julian Assange who has been persecuted by the US and its allies for exposing the truth behind the US pursuit of endless wars around the globe.
Exposing Israel’s horrific record in the targeted killing of journalists is journalism at its best. Silence about the fate of Julian Assange is journalism at its worst.
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.
Newly elected Māori Pati president and columnist John Tamihere has launched a blistering criticism of New Zealand’s negative media attitude to Chinese trade and security overtures to the South Pacific, saying “it’s none of our business”.
Writing in The New Zealand Herald today, former Labour cabinet minister Tamihere argued that China had every right to “korero with our Pacific brothers and sisters” without being sneered at.
He said China had handed out a “master class in diplomacy” to Australia, NZ and the US.
An Asia Pacific Reportlast week noted China had no “colonial baggage in the Pacific” and was a developing country itself, having “made impressive leaps in development and poverty reduction”.
Tamihere, also chief executive of Whānau Ora and West Auckland Urban Māori organisation Te Whānau o Waipareira, said: “I just don’t like the stilted narrative that China is always the bad guy and I don’t buy it because I don’t see the evidence in it.”
He said he would “lower myself for a moment to acknowledge the media reports that China is allegedly buying voting support from the Pacific with military and security intentions in their backyard”.
However, “none of that matters because any sovereign nation has a right to determine its own foreign policy and its own destiny.
‘Pacific taken for granted’
“Meanwhile, [Pacific nations] have been taken for granted and mistreated by the rest of us.
“When was the last time the Americans, Australians and Kiwis entered into trade agreements with our Pacific neighbours?” he asked.
“When you treat people as second-class citizens in your so-called area of interest, why is it so bizarre that they enter into their own trade relationships like we did [with China] in 2008?
In a world first for any developed country, New Zealand entered into a free trade agreement with China that year and opened a competitive advantage.
“Why is it that those eight Pacific nations are currently being ‘manipulated’ [by China] yet we weren’t?
“So it’s okay for the US, Australian and Aotearoa to engage in free trade agreements with China but it’s not okay for the Pacific and Melanesian nations?”
Tamihere said “Aotearoa cannot be drafted without our sovereign consent into any play by Australia or the US”.
He added: “The Australians buying nuclear-powered American submarines demonstrates that they may as well be the 51st state of the USA. Gone is the Anzac brotherhood, it is a myth.
“It is about time we shaped our own foreign policy rather than being dragged along by others.”
It is easy to forget why Julian Assange has been on trial in England for, well, seemingly forever.
Didn’t he allegedly sexually assault two women in Sweden? Isn’t that why he holed up for years in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid facing charges?
When the bobbies finally dragged him out of the embassy, didn’t his dishevelled appearance confirm all those stories about his lousy personal hygiene?
Didn’t he persuade Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning to hack into the United States military’s computers to reveal national security matters that endangered the lives of American soldiers and intelligence agents? He says he is a journalist, but hasn’t The New York Times made it clear he is just a “source” and not a publisher entitled to first amendment protection?
If you answered yes to any or all of these questions, you are not alone. But the answers are actually no. At very least, it’s more complicated than that.
To take one example, the reason Assange was dishevelled was that staff in the Ecuadorian embassy had confiscated his shaving gear three months before to ensure his appearance matched his stereotype when the arrest took place.
Julian Assange arrives at Westminster Magistrates Court in London, Britain, on April 11, 2019. His shaving gear had been confiscated. Image: The Conversation/EPA/Stringer
That is one of the findings of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, whose investigation of the case against Assange has been laid out in forensic detail in The Trial of Julian Assange.
What is the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture doing investigating the Assange case, you might ask? So did Melzer when Assange’s lawyers first approached him in 2018:
I had more important things to do: I had to take care of “real” torture victims!
Melzer returned to a report he was writing about overcoming prejudice and self-deception when dealing with official corruption. “Not until a few months later,” he writes, “would I realise the striking irony of this situation.”
Cover of The Trial of Julian Assange … “the continuation of diplomacy by other means”. Image: Verso
The 47 members of the UN Human Rights Council directly appoint special rapporteurs on torture. The position is unpaid — Melzer earns his living as a professor of international law — but they have diplomatic immunity and operate largely outside the UN’s hierarchies.
Among the many pleas for his attention, Melzer’s small office chooses between 100 and 200 each year to officially investigate. His conclusions and recommendations are not binding on states. He bleakly notes that in barely 10 percent of cases does he receive full co-operation from states and an adequate resolution.
He received nothing like full co-operation in investigating Assange’s case. He gathered around 10,000 pages of procedural files, but a lot of them came from leaks to journalists or from freedom-of-information requests.
Many pages had been redacted. Rephrasing Carl Von Clausewitz’s maxim, Melzer wrote his book as “the continuation of diplomacy by other means”.
What he finds is stark and disturbing:
The Assange case is the story of a man who is being persecuted and abused for exposing the dirty secrets of the powerful, including war crimes, torture and corruption. It is a story of deliberate judicial arbitrariness in Western democracies that are otherwise keen to present themselves as exemplary in the area of human rights.
It is the story of wilful collusion by intelligence services behind the back of national parliaments and the general public. It is a story of manipulated and manipulative reporting in the mainstream media for the purpose of deliberately isolating, demonizing, and destroying a particular individual. It is the story of a man who has been scapegoated by all of us for our own societal failures to address government corruption and state-sanctioned crimes.
Collateral murder
The dirty secrets of the powerful are difficult to face, which is why we — and I don’t exclude myself — swallow neatly packaged slurs and diversions of the kind listed at the beginning of this article.
Melzer rightly takes us back to April 2010, four years after the Australian-born Assange had founded WikiLeaks, a small organisation set up to publish official documents that it had received, encrypted so as to protect whistle-blowers from official retribution.
Assange released video footage showing in horrifying detail how US soldiers in a helicopter had shot and killed Iraqi civilians and two Reuters journalists in 2007.
Apart from how the soldiers spoke — “Hahaha, I hit them”, “Nice”, “Good shot” — it looks like most of the victims were civilians and that the journalists’ cameras were mistaken for rifles. When one of the wounded men tried to crawl to safety, the helicopter crew, instead of allowing their comrades on the ground to take him prisoner, as required by the rules of war, seek permission to shoot him again.
As Melzer’s detailed description makes clear, the soldiers knew what they were doing:
“Come on, buddy,” the gunner comments, aiming the crosshairs at his helpless target. “All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.”
The soldiers’ request for authorisation to shoot is given. When the wounded man is carried to a nearby minibus, it is shot to pieces with the helicopter’s 30mm gun. The driver and two other rescuers are killed instantly. The driver’s two young children inside are seriously wounded.
US army command investigated the matter, concluding that the soldiers acted in accordance with the rules of war, even though they had not. Equally to the point, writes Melzer, the public would never have known a war crime had been committed without the release of what Assange called the “Collateral Murder” video.
The video footage was just one of hundreds of thousands of documents that WikiLeaks released last year in tranches known as the Afghan war logs, the Iraq war logs, and cablegate. They revealed numerous alleged war crimes and provided the raw material for a shadow history of the disastrous wars waged by the US and its allies, including Australia, in Aghanistan and Iraq.
Julian Assange in 2010. Image: The Conversation/ Stefan Wermuth/AP
Punished forever Melzer retraces what has happened to Assange since then, from the accusations of sexual assault in Sweden to Assange taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in an attempt to avoid the possibility of extradition to the US if he returned to Sweden. His refuge led to him being jailed in the United Kingdom for breaching his bail conditions.
Sweden eventually dropped the sexual assault charges, but the US government ramped up its request to extradite Assange. He faces charges under the 1917 Espionage Act, which, if successful, could lead to a jail term of 175 years.
Two key points become increasingly clear as Melzer methodically works through the events.
The first is that there has been a carefully orchestrated plan by four countries — the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden and, yes, Australia — to ensure Assange is punished forever for revealing state secrets.
Assange displaying his ankle security tag in 2011 at the house where he was required to stay by a British judge. Image: The Conversation/Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
The second is that the conditions he has been subjected to, and will continue to be subjected to if the US’s extradition request is granted, have amounted to torture.
On the first point, how else are we to interpret the continual twists and turns over nearly a decade in the official positions taken by Sweden and the UK? Contrary to the obfuscating language of official communiques, all of these have closed down Assange’s options and denied him due process.
Melzer documents the thinness of the Swedish authorities’ case for charging Assange with sexual assault. That did not prevent them from keeping it open for many years. Nor was Assange as uncooperative with police as has been suggested. Swedish police kept changing their minds about where and whether to formally interview Assange because they knew the evidence was weak.
Melzer also takes pains to show how Swedish police also overrode the interests of the two women who had made the complaints against Assange.
It is distressing to read the conditions Assange has endured over several years. A change in the political leadership of Ecuador led to a change in his living conditions in the embassy, from cramped but bearable to virtual imprisonment.
Since being taken from the embassy to Belmarsh prison in 2019, Assange has spent much of his time in solitary confinement for 22 or 23 hours a day. He has been denied all but the most limited access to his legal team, let alone family and friends.
He was kept in a glass cage during his seemingly interminable extradition hearing, appeals over which could continue for several years more years, according to Melzer.
Julian Assange’s partner, Stella Morris, speaks to the media outside the High Court in London in January this year. Image: The Converstion/Alberto Pezzali/AP
Assange’s physical and mental health have suffered to the point where he has been put on suicide watch. Again, that seems to be the point, as Melzer writes:
The primary purpose of persecuting Assange is not – and never has been – to punish him personally, but to establish a generic precedent with a global deterrent effect on other journalist, publicists and activists.
So will the new Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, do any more than his three Coalition and two Labor predecessors to advocate for the interests of an Australian citizen? In December 2021, Guardian Australia reported Albanese saying he did “not see what purpose is served by the ongoing pursuit of Mr Assange” and that “enough is enough”.
Since being sworn in as prime minister, he has kept his cards close to his chest.
The actions of his predecessors suggest he won’t, even though Albanese has already said on several occasions since being elected that he wants to do politics differently.
Melzer, among others, would remind him of the words of former US president Jimmy Carter, who, contrary to other presidents, said he did not deplore the WikiLeaks revelations.
They just made public what was the truth. Most often, the revelation of truth, even if it’s unpleasant, is beneficial. […] I think that, almost invariably, the secrecy is designed to conceal improper activities.
News of the massacre in Uvalde, Texas has focussed on the shocking one hour delay before police entered the building where 18 year-old shooter Salvador Ramos was still at large. Altogether Ramos killed 19 elementary school children and two teachers.
In the aftermath US president Joe Biden pleaded that “It’s time to turn this pain into action”, but without specifying what form that action could take. In contrast, the National Rifle Association (NRA) went ahead with its annual convention in Houston, arguing against gun controls and for more arms training for teachers and other school personnel. Around 500 protesters gathered outside the convention to jeer at the NRA attendees, though the speakers inside the building gave no ground.
And so America’s obsession with guns remains unabated, with little or no change to the gun culture expected.
Then again…
Who is to blame?
A tweeter made it clear who in their mind is to blame for these killings – it’s not just the shooter:
One response pointed out that the article in the US constitution on the right to bear arms was perhaps valid for the War of Independence but not since:
The right to bear arms was written during the American Revolution when people needed to defend themselves, their families & their land from the British. So, why do we need AR 15s or other assault weapons in the 21st century? With whom are we at war?
Golden State Warriors basketball coach Steve Kerr gave his early and very emotional reaction to the news of the massacre in Uvalde. He also spoke about the killing of Black people by a white supremacist in a Buffalo (New York state) supermarket, and the shooting of parishioners at a Taiwanese church in southern California. Kerr went on to say how “50 senators”, in order to retain power, are refusing to vote on H.R.8 legislation to require background checks for all people buying arms:
— Prof. Christina Pagel (@chrischirp) May 25, 2022
Blood on their hands
The gun used by the Uvalde shooter was made by Daniel Defense (DD):
Can you imagine a beer or tobacco company using a toddler to sell, promote, justify the selling of its products the way gun maker Daniel Defense did with this ad?
And yet this ad was barely noticed or condemned until an 18 year old bought a similar rifle and shot up a school. pic.twitter.com/apAebpYPFT
Semi-automatic weapons made by DD were also used in the 2017 Las Vegas massacre that saw 58 people killed and nearly 500 wounded.
Donald Trump, meanwhile, made it clear that the latest massacres are a threat to the NRA – which must “prevail”, he added:
"We will prevail. As our Bill of Rights says in those clear and immortal words: 'The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"
And Republican senator Ted Cruz trotted out the usual mantra that “armed bad guys” are stopped by “armed good guys”. That is ironic, given the armed police in Uvalde failed to do just that:
— Laurent Mazzotti (@MazzottiLaurent) May 24, 2022
Calls for class action
The individuals who carried out these shootings are ultimately responsible for the killings. But responsibility also lies with the arms manufacturers and the store owners that sell the guns – never mind the politicians who enable widespread gun ownership and the gun lobby. They each and all play a part in these massacres.
Indeed, one person tweeted:
Cgeck out the "Personal Defense" section on their website and tell me if it's EVER appropriate for them to appear ANYWHERE to promote their weapons of mass slaughter.
Attorneys should begin specializing in Mass Shooting Civil Litigation. Class Action Lawsuits should be filed against State Legislatures who have passed lax gun laws with no background checks.
Over many, many years, America has seen massacre after massacre. Since 1970, there have been an average of 40 school shootings every year in the US. This amounts to 2052 incidents with 661 people killed.
But it’s not just guns that kill people. It’s the shooters and the thousands of people who make up the gun supply chain. That supply chain includes the NRA, the gun manufacturers and sellers, and those federal and state politicians who refuse to restrict gun availability. Here is a list of US senators who reportedly have received the most donations from the NRA.
Perhaps class action against individuals involved in this supply chain is the only option left that might break the log-jam on gun reforms. For citizens need to take the initiative if they are to ever free themselves from their nation’s crazed obsession with guns and killings.
With the Australian general election largely done and dusted, and with a clear (if still-to-be-quantified) mandate, Anthony Albanese faces greater and more immediate international challenges than any Australian Prime Minister since the Cold War began.
Between climate change and an increasingly truculent — not to say belligerent — China, Pacific island countries are searching for reassurance, safety and support. Reassurance that we are valued and respected, and that a rules based order has the same rules for everyone else as it has for us.
Safety, from the increasingly violent buffeting of climate change, and from the risk of losing our balance in the increasingly straitened geopolitical space we occupy. And support for our own self-determination, territorial integrity and survival.
Each if these will have significant impacts on the Albanese government’s domestic policies.
Each will have lasting impact on the Pacific islands region.
Let’s hope they’ve got a plan in place. They do not have the luxury of time.
Part of this fight will have to happen while they’re still strapping on the gloves. We’ve already looked at some of the challenges Penny Wong is likely to face when she (almost certainly) becomes Foreign Minister.
In this issue, we’ll enumerate some of the immediate challenges faced by Wong and her cabinet colleagues.
PIF Secretariat in shambles
The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat is in a shambles right now, in no small part because of Australia’s call for a vote during the selection of its most recent Secretary-General, rather than enduring more painstaking but traditional method of consensus-building our leaders learned in the village meeting house.
The voting split the membership, and the Micronesian contingent still have not reconciled themselves completely.
There is little Australia can do to fix that. But they can offer unconditional support to the body itself, and for the idea it embodies. They can formally uphold the Boe Declaration, which lists climate change as the single greatest security threat faced by the Pacific islands region, by re-basing (sorry) their security stance on this premise.
They can fund and support the Blue Pacific strategy. They can fund the Secretariat’s climate indemnity scheme. They can show our reluctant leaders that the PIF is worth being part of.
More importantly, they can promote our voices in Washington and at the UN. Our plight on the world stage resembles the challenges women have faced since… forever. Ignored, subverted, explained to, denied agency over our own body politic. We don’t need people to speak for us. We need people to listen when we speak for ourselves.
Endorsement and sponsorship for voices like those of our esteemed Pacific Elders would go a long way to achieving that.
Even more ambitiously: Is a Pacific COP possible? I’d be pleasantly surprised if this Labor government proved willing to spend the time and effort reaching a landmark such as this.
Port Vila’s Bauerfield airport … flooded for the first time in living memory. Image: The Village Explainer
Immense time, resources needed The time and resources required would be immense, and would compete with dozens of looming challenges in the foreign relations/defence space.
Despite the massive victory it could bring, the opportunity costs are immense. If a COP were achieved, it would build a legacy that could be relied on for years to come, but as we’ve stated before, all this would have to be achieved with a lethargic, hidebound DFAT bureaucracy.
It’s sadly much easier to imagine Australia lurching from crisis to crisis, as it has for decades.
In terms of bilateral relations, the stakes are even higher. It is clear now that China intends to build on its perceived momentum in the Pacific, and to test Labor’s mettle from the very start.
Wang Yi’s tour of four (or five?) Pacific island nations is only days away. His diplomats have been working hard to replicate the success they achieved with Solomon Islands PM Manasseh Sogavare, who signed an unprecedented security agreement that would allow personnel to be stationed in-country and ships to visit and re-victual.
It doesn’t appear that Wang will get what he wants. The pressure is on in Kiribati, but the government there has paid a hefty political price for its whole-throated support of China.
Since 2020, it’s been feeling much more phlegmatic than it was in the past.
Chinese base in Kiribati a worry
Good thing, too. A Chinese base in Kiribati is one that even I worry about. Having AA/AD capabilities just a hop, skip and a jump from Honolulu would force a fundamental re-evaluation of the US Navy’s Pacific stance.
I’ve pooh-poohed talk of bases in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands in the past. I worry about Kiribati.
Vanuatu, at least, has managed to keep dancing on the head of an increasingly pointy pin. Resisting pressure at the highest level to include an overt security component in Wang Yi’s gift bag, it has instead signed on to a massive upgrade for its Luganville airport, which will allow wide-body aircraft to fly there directly from Asia.
The island of Espiritu Santo has some of the most beautiful beaches in the world. An upgrade to its international airport is part of Vanuatu’s 2018 tourism development strategy.
Yes, it’s undeniably true that any airport that can handle an A330 NEO can also handle a C17 or a Xi’an Y-20. But Vanuatu has — for the moment, at least — avoided explicitly allowing any such flights, except possibly for humanitarian reasons.
Vanuatu’s example is illuminating. They appear to have translated a high-stakes geopolitical gambit into an economic development gain that fits the country’s plans, and which will provide a massive economic boost to its moribund tourist industry.
But they are faced with increased stridency from all sides, and if they lose the space to manoeuvre, either through rising geopolitical tensions or because climate change pushes us past the point of resilience, then we will be more at risk ourselves, and more of a risk to our neighbours.
A precarious truth in the Pacific
This precarious truth applies even more so in Solomon Islands, in PNG, in Fiji … in fact everywhere in the region. Security begins with stability and predictability. We need to know we’ll be around in a generation’s time before we make any other promises.
And we need to know that Australia’s promises will be kept this time, rather than sacrificed at the altar of domestic politics, as they have under every Liberal and Labor government since the millennium began.
Can Penny Wong unilaterally undo these all tensions? No. But she can fight for a foreign policy that changes Australia’s trajectory, rather than one that attempts to change ours.
Rather than trying to align us to Australia, she can fight to align Australia to confront our common existential threats, to listen to how we expect to address them, and then to be a proper friend, and act on our words.
The Village Explainer by Dan McGarry is a semi-regular newsletter containing analysis and insight focusing on under-reported aspects of Pacific societies, politics and economics. Republished with permission.
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Bureau for Development, Democracy, and Innovation, Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DDI/DRG) Center is inviting applications for the Justice, Rights, and Security (JRS) Annual Program Statement (APS). Deadline: 11 May 2023
The purpose of the JRS APS is to empower USAID and its Missions to seek solutions to JRS-related challenges, to engage new and underutilized partners, to solve problems not adequately addressed by other USAID investments, and to offer USAID Missions and USAID/Washington Offices a mechanism through which such work can be innovatively accomplished with dedicated support and expertise from USAID Washington DRG Center’s JRS team.
Objectives
Promote Justice, including the following objectives:
To ensure the independent, efficient, and open administration of justice.
To enhance the quality and accessibility of justice.
To guarantee impartial application of the law and due process.
To improve justice seeker experiences and outcomes.
To strengthen effective checks and balances and accountable institutions as foundations of democratic governance.
Protect Rights, including the following objectives:
To improve enabling environments for the protection and advancement of human rights.
To facilitate, develop, and implement effective remedies to address human rights violations and abuses to ensure non-recurrence.
To promote equal and equitable enjoyment of human rights by all.
To empower people to know, use, and shape the law in their daily lives to protect and advance human rights.
To facilitate the work of all types of human rights defenders and activists.
Promote Security, including the following objectives:
To constrain the arbitrary exercise of power and tempering the use of force by civilian law enforcement.
To strengthen the accountability, professionalism, capacity, and integrity of police and other civilian law enforcement actors.
To safeguard all members of society from crime and violence, including gender-based violence, so they may live safely and recognize their full potential.
Both U.S. and Non-U.S. Non-Profit Organizations NGOs) are eligible to apply for this APS
The 2022 laureates are: professional basketball player and human rights advocate Enes Kanter Freedom, Iranian artist project PaykanArtCar, and Ukrainian-born Russian journalist Marina Ovsyannikova. This year’s laureates will receive their awards on Wednesday, May 25, during the 2022 Oslo Freedom Forum.
Enes Kanter Freedom is a professional basketball player and vocal advocate for human rights. Since the start of the 2021 NBA season, he has used his global platform to consistently raise awareness of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s human rights abuses. Using his basketball shoes as the canvas for his messages, he wore multiple artistic designs highlighting issues such as the Uyghur genocide, the occupation of Tibet, slave labor at the Nike shoe factories, and the intolerance of China’s dictator. As a result of his creative dissent, he is now banned from China and was dropped by both the Boston Celtics and the Houston Rockets, despite being only 29 years old and in the prime of his career. Freedom’s perseverance has captured the attention of international media and informed millions of sports fans about the global struggle for individual rights in places like Tibet and the Uyghur region. At a time when professional athletes display incessant hypocrisy, unlimited greed, and double standards, Freedom emerges as the moral conscience of professional basketball. Freedom first came to international attention as an outspoken critic of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, making him a target of Turkey’s government — he was deemed a “terrorist” by the regime, stripped of his passport, and was publicly disowned by his family. In late 2021, he changed his name and added “Freedom” as his official last name. See: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/525e5018-7f56-4009-85b8-3f3cce9a8810
The PaykanArtCar unites the talents of contemporary Iranian artists in the diaspora with a beloved symbol of Iranian national pride — the Paykan automobile — to advocate for human rights in Iran. The car used was once gifted by Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran to the Romanian dictator, Nicolae Ceaușescu, and was purchased at an auction to serve as the canvas for artwork by Iranian artists in exile. Each year, PaykanArtCar commissions an exceptional Iranian artist-in-exile to use the car to capture the Iranian struggle for human dignity and basic freedoms. The inaugural PaykanArtCar was designed by Alireza Shojaian and features a historic Persian design with a provocative message about the brutality and ruthlessness faced by the marginalized and oppressed LGBTQ+ community inside Iran. The PaykanArtCar represents brave, creative dissent against the human rights abuses of Iran’s theocratic dictatorial regime. The PaykanArtCar will travel to Norway to be present at the Oslo Freedom Forum as part of Human Rights Foundation’s Art in Protest exhibit and will be parked at the event venue. The second edition of PaykanArtCar will be painted by a female Iranian artist and will advocate for women’s rights in Iran.
Marina Ovsyannikova is a Ukrainian-born Russian journalist and activist, who staged a live protest against the war in Ukraine during a news broadcast of Russian state TV. Ovsyannikova was a longtime editor at Russia’s Channel One, where her job was to assist those engaged in disinformation to be distributed to the Russian people. After thinking through ways in which she could protest, she chose to interrupt a live broadcast, holding a sign calling for “no war.” Following her demonstration on live TV and a subsequent anti-war video, Ovsyannikova was held overnight in a police station, denied access to a lawyer, and ultimately fined 30,000 roubles — she disappeared without contact for more than 12 hours. The Kremlin denounced her protest as “hooliganism,” and Ovsyannikova faces up to 15 years in prison under Russia’s disinformation laws. In a recent article, she expressed profound regret for her years as a participant in “the Russian propaganda machine” where her job was to create “aggressive Kremlin propaganda – propaganda that constantly sought to deflect attention from the truth, and to blur all moral standards,” she says: “I cannot undo what I have done. I can only do everything I possibly can to help destroy this machine and end this war.”
We are once again witnessing history being made, folks. Today, in the Year of our Lord two thousand and twenty-two, we get the great privilege of bearing witness to the single most American thing that has ever happened.
The Biden administration has asked top Democrats to decouple the federal government’s Covid relief spending package from its much larger bill for funding of the US proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, because one of those two things is too controversial and contentious to pass quickly.
Guess which one.
NEW: President Biden has asked congressional leadership to decouple a Ukraine aid package from COVID relief money in an attempt to pass the aid for Ukraine without having to deal with thorny partisan opposition to the COVID relief funds, a Congressional source tells NBC News.
Congressional Democratic leaders reached a bipartisan accord to send $39.8 billion to Ukraine to bolster its monthslong battle against a brutal Russian assault.
And that deal is now expected to move swiftly to President Joe Biden’s desk after Democrats agreed to drop another one of their top priorities — billions of dollars in pandemic aid that has stalled on the Hill. The Ukraine aid could come to the House floor for a vote as soon as Tuesday, according to a person familiar with the discussions who spoke candidly on condition of anonymity.
That nearly $40 billion worth of proxy war funding eclipses the paltry $10 billion in Covid relief funding that was being debated in congress, and is in fact well in excess of the already massive $33 billion sum requested by the White House.
“President Joe Biden and top Democrats have agreed to a GOP demand to disentangle a stalled COVID-19 response package from a separate supplemental request for military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine so the latter can move more quickly,” Roll Call reports. “At the same time, House and Senate Democrats have upped the price tag on the Ukraine package by $6.8 billion above Biden’s initial $33 billion request. Democrats proposed including an additional $3.4 billion for food aid and $3.4 billion more to replace U.S. military equipment sent to Ukraine, according to a source familiar with the offer.”
Biden initially requested $33 billion for Ukraine and $22.5 billion for Covid in an emergency funding bill; now Biden says he’s willing to sign off on $40 billion for Ukraine and $0 for Covid: https://t.co/U3yGtDiIYL
I defy you to find me anything more American than Washington decoupling relief for its own citizens from its proxy war funding because it wants to make sure the proxy war funding actually passes.
It’s almost too perfect. You couldn’t come up with a better summation of the US empire in a nutshell if you tried. Taking money away from needful Americans because congressional opposition to helping them so was putting too much inertia on Washington’s games of nuclear brinkmanship is the single most American thing that has ever happened.
There’s actually a real poetic beauty to it, if you look close enough. The government which runs a globe-spanning empire is dubious about the need to help its own citizenry recover from an economy-flattening pandemic, but throws its full bipartisan support behind a proxy war which threatens the life of every living organism.
That’s it. That’s the whole entire point I wanted to make here. It’s so insane you’ll cry if you don’t laugh. And we’ll always have those little moments of laughter. Even if these psychos get us all killed.
____________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my American husband Tim Foley.
Fiji’s Court of Appeal has ruled that the Russian luxury yacht Amadea, seized by the US government but docked in western Fiji, will stay in the country for at least another month.
Defence lawyers acting for the vessel’s registered owners, Millemarin Investment Limited, sought a stay order in the Fiji Court of Appeal after High Court judge Justice Deepthi Amaratunga refused their application.
The Amadea, which arrived in Fiji on April 12 after an 18-day crossing from Mexico, is according to the US government owned by Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov.
Kerimov faces money laundering charges in the US and is also part of a wider network of oligarchs, close associates of the Russian President Vladimir Putin who are sanctioned by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.
“The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Kerimov as part of a group of Russian oligarchs who profit from the Russian government through corruption and its malign activity around the globe, including the occupation of Crimea,” the Department of Justice said in a statement issued Thursday morning in Washington DC.
“According to court documents, Kerimov owned the Amadea after his designation. Additionally, Kerimov and those acting on his behalf and for his benefit caused US dollar transactions to be routed through US financial institutions for the support and maintenance of the Amadea.”
US police boarded boat
On Thursday, Fijian police with US law enforcement who have been in the country since the Amadea arrived in Fiji from Mexico, boarded the yacht.
Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov … reported to be facing money laundering charges in the US and a close associate of President Vladimir Putin. Image: Wikipedia/RNZ
Justice Amaratunga told the court on Friday afternoon the Fiji Mutual Assistance Act, which facilitated the enforcement of US seizure action, limited his ability to stay his earlier order.
Haniff and Tuitoga lawyers received their stay on Friday evening, keeping the Amadea in Lautoka while they take the 30 days allowed to appeal the ruling to execute US seizure orders.
Meanwhile, the boat has a team of US marshals, the US Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and Fiji police.
The skipper and some crew are believed to still be on the vessel.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Steven Donziger, the human rights lawyer who took on Chevron, spent nearly a thousand days in jail or on house arrest. Amnesty says it was corporate retaliation.
This article originally appeared on 26 April at Common Dreams:
Human rights lawyer Steven Donziger walked free Monday after 993 days of detention stemming from his decades-long legal fight with Chevron, which deployed its vast resources in a campaign to destroy Donziger after he won a $9.5 billion settlement against the fossil fuel giant over its pollution of the Amazon rainforest.
“It’s over. Just left with release papers in hand,” Donziger wrote on Twitter. “Completely unjust that I spent even one day in this Kafkaesque situation. Not looking back. Onward.”
“We are relieved that Steven Donziger will finally recover his freedom after almost 1,000 days of arbitrary detention, which included 45 days in prison and over 900 days under house arrest,” Daniel Joloy, senior policy advisor at Amnesty International, said in a statement Monday. “He should have never been detained for even one day, as it has been clear the whole process against him has been in retaliation for his human rights work that exposed corporate wrongdoings.”
“Corporations must not be allowed to continue abusing the U.S. justice system to silence and intimidate human rights defenders or anyone else exposing their wrongdoing,” Joloy added.
…In 2014, a federal judge with ties to Chevron ruled that Donziger was guilty of a “pattern of racketeering activity,” a charge he has denied. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan’s decision was based on testimony from a witness who later admitted to lying.
If you’re as confused as most people by the exact circumstances surrounding the continuing presence in Fiji of the Russian super yacht Amadea, join the club. Here’s our modest attempt to cut through the fog.
Twelve days ago — on April 14 — the CJ Patel Fiji Sun newspaper trumpeted an exclusive with Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qilihio, reporting that the Amadea had been seized. It had not. In fact, it still hasn’t been formally seized.
What happened last week is that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) obtained a restraining order from the High Court to prevent the Amadea from leaving Fiji. Until that order was granted, there was every possibility in the intervening period of the vessel leaving.
In fact, lawyers for the owners were arguing that there was no legal justification to detain the Amadea any longer after they had reportedly paid an amount in fines for customs infringements.
It was only when the High Court granted the restraining order that leaving was no longer a legal option.
Indeed, all along there has been a suspicion that the vessel might try to make a run for it. It has a significant armoury and the security forces would have already factored in their ability to prevent a determined attempt to leave.
This application was lodged by the Office of the DPP on a warrant issued by the United States government. The papers are from Washington DC and passed through the Attorney-General’s Office before carriage of the matter was given to the DPP under the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act.
A second case Now there is a second case that has been brought before the High Court for the Amadea to be seized. Yes, taken from the owners altogether in line with the American-led sanctions that have been imposed on the nautical playthings and other toys of Russian oligarchs and Vladimir Putin’s cronies the world over.
The Amadea at the Fijian port of Lautoka reported as “seized” 12 days ago … Russian super yacht’s fate still to be decided. Image: Fiji Sun screenshot APR
The High Court will hand down its judgment next Tuesday (May 3), which is expected to be in Washington’s favour.
And sometime after that, the Amadea will presumably become the property of the US government and sail off into the sunset under the command of Uncle Sam in the direction of the US.
It has been an astonishing saga. The original, mostly European crew, had orders to sail from the Mexican port of Mazanillo across the entire Pacific to the Russian port of Vladivosok via Lautoka, where the Amadea has been refuelled and resupplied.
Their services have evidently been terminated and an entirely Russian crew has been on standby to take over when it finally gets permission to sail. Alas for them, their journey to Fiji will have been in vain.
Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov … still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. Image: Wikipedia
Incredibly, there is still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. The whole world has been told that it belongs to the Russian oligarch, Suleiman Kerimov, but there is still evidently no conclusive proof — the vessel’s ownership evidently buried in a labyrinth of multiple shelf companies in places like the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands.
For the purposes of the High Court case in Suva, the owner is officially stated as being Millemarin Investment Limited. Is it Suleiman Kerimov?
No evidence about Kerimov
Millemarin Investment’s local lawyer, Feizal Hannif, told the court there was no evidence that it is. He said the vessel’s beneficial owner was in fact one Eduard Khudaynatov. But counsel for the DPP, Jayneeta Prasad, argued that the ownership of the vessel was not an issue. It was subject to a US warrant and the ownership issue was for the American courts to decide.
So fortunately unravelling all of this is not Fiji’s problem. But what was Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho doing 12 days ago telling the Fiji Sun that the Amadea had been seized when we won’t know that for certain until next Tuesday, nearly three weeks after the Sun “scoop”?
And is there going to be any attempt to set the official record straight?
Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. Republished with permission.
As a child, Efika Kora remembers watching planes glide over her remote village in the Pacific.
Transfixed, she imagined that one day she would be the one flying them.
Now, just two semesters away from completing a diploma of aviation at an Adelaide school, the 24-year-old has been told by Indonesian authorities she must return to her home country.
It came as a complete shock to Kora, who is among a group of more than 140 Indigenous West Papuan students in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States who had their Papuan government scholarships terminated without warning.
It means they would have to return home part way through their degrees or diplomas, a situation that has been described as highly unusual.
“To be honest, I cried,” Kora said.
“In a way, [it’s] like your right to education has been stripped away from you.”
16 students ordered home
In Australia, 16 students have been told to return home.
A letter to the Indonesian embassy in Canberra, dated February 8, from the Papuan provincial government said the students were to be repatriated because they had not finished their studies on time.
The letter said they had to return to West Papua by February 15, but it wasn’t until a month later — on March 8 — that the students were first told about the letter in a meeting with the Indonesian embassy.
“I was very, very shocked. And my mind just went blank,” Kora said.
The Indonesian Embassy and the Papuan provincial government have not responded to the ABC’s questions, including about the delay in relaying the message.
Students told ‘you have to take turns’ When the students asked for more details, they were told by the Indonesian Embassy that the five-year duration of their scholarships had now lapsed.
The ABC has seen text messages from an embassy official to one of the students, saying the decision was final.
“There will be no extension of the scholarship because there are still many Papuan students who also need scholarships. So you have to take turns,” one message read.
Like Efika Kora, Jaliron Kogoya (right) was told to return home to Papua, even though his scholarship is guaranteed until July this year. Image: ABC Pacific Beat
Kora said she wasn’t aware of a five-year limit to her scholarship.
“We never had like a written letter [saying] our scholarship will be going for five years,” she said.
She said she was told, verbally, she had been awarded the scholarship in 2015, and began her aviation diploma in 2018 after completing language studies.
A number of students have told the ABC they were also not given a formal offer letter or contract stipulating the conditions and duration of their scholarship.
Some students signed contract
Some students said they signed a contract in 2019 — well after their scholarships had commenced — which outlined durations for certain degrees, but Kora said she didn’t sign this document.
Business student Jaliron Kogoya said he also didn’t sign any such agreements.
A sponsorship letter from the Papuan government, issued in 2020, guarantees funding for his degree at the University of South Australia until July this year.
He has also been cut off.
“They just tell us to go home and then there is no hope for us,” Kogoya said.
The University of South Australia said it had been working closely with the students and the Papuan government since they began studying at the university two years ago.
“We are continuing to provide a range of supports to the students at this challenging time,” a spokeswoman said.
About 84 students in the United States and Canada, plus 41 in New Zealand, have also been told by the Papuan government that their scholarships had ended and they must return home.
Programme plagued with administrative issues While the Papuan government scholarship aims to boost education for Indigenous students, the programme has been plagued with administrative problems.
Several students told the ABC their living allowances, worth $1500 per month, and tuition fees, were sometimes paid late, meaning they could not enrol in university courses and struggled to pay rent.
Kora said late payments held back her academic progression.
West Papuan students hope to gain new skills by studying in Australia and New Zealand.Image: ABC Pacific Beat
Her aviation degree takes approximately four semesters to complete, but Kora said there were certain aspects of her training that she could not do because of unpaid fees.
The ABC has seen invoices from her aviation school, Hartwig Air, that were due in 2018 but were not paid until two years later.
Fees for her current semester, worth $24,500, were paid more than three months late, in October last year.
Kora said there were moments when she felt like giving up.
‘What’s the point?’
“What’s the point of even studying if these things are delaying my studies?” she said.
Kora believes she may have been able to graduate sooner if her fees had been paid on time.
Hartwig Air would not comment on her situation.
But an academic report issued by the school in February this year said Kora was “progressing well with her flying” and getting good results on most of her exams.
Kora said it did not make sense to send her home now because her fees for the current semester had already been paid.
“It’s a waste of investment,” she said.
“If we’re not bringing any qualifications back home, it’s a shame not just for us, but also for the government in a way.”
Students turn to food banks, churches In the United States, Daniel Game has faced similar struggles.
He was awarded a Papuan government scholarship in 2017.
Game said he was told the scholarship would last five years but did not receive a formal offer letter or contract at the time.
After completing a general science degree, he was accepted into Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Oregon, to begin studying aeronautical science in 2019.
It is a prestigious institution and he was proud to get in.
But, when it came time to enrol, he couldn’t because the government did not issue a sponsorship letter to guarantee his funding.
Game sent multiple emails and made calls to the government’s human resources department requesting the document.
The letter never came
He said he was told the letter would be issued, but that never happened.
During this time, Game continued to receive a living allowance from the Papuan government and was told his scholarship was still valid.
In 2020, Game paid for his own flight back to West Papua in the middle of the pandemic to try to resolve the issue in person.
When he visited the department office, his sponsorship letter was issued immediately.
The ordeal set Game’s studies back more than 18 months.
Papuan student Daniel Game in the United States is fulfilling his dream of flying, despite setbacks over his scholarship. Image: ABC Pacific Beat
His sponsorship letter, seen by the ABC, guarantees his funding until July 2023 but now he’s also been told to return home.
“Most of us, we spend our time and energy and work really hard … it’s not fair,” Game said.
Staying in the US
With just a few months until he’s due to graduate, Game has decided to stay in the US.
His family are funding his university tuition, but without a living allowance, Game said he was struggling to make ends meet.
“It’s really hard, especially being in the US,” he said.
“For food, I usually go out searching local churches and food pantries where I’ll be able to get free stuff.”
‘It doesn’t make sense’
Back in Australia, students are also in financial strife.
Kora has started picking fruit and vegetables on local farms to make ends meet since her living allowance was cut off in November last year.
Tried to find part-time jobs
“We tried to find part-time jobs here and there to just cover us for our rent,” she said.
She and other students are hoping to stay in Australia and finish their degrees.
From a low-income family, Kora cannot rely on her parents, so she is calling on Australian universities and the federal government for support.
“I just want to make my family proud back home to know that actually, someone like me, can be something,” she said.
The Australian West Papua Association of South Australia has launched a fundraising campaign to pay some students’ university fees and rent.
Kylie Agnew, a psychologist and association member, said she was concerned for their wellbeing.
“Not being able to finish your studies, returning to a place with very low job prospects … there’s a lot of stress that the students are under,” she said.
Perplexing decision
Jim Elmslie is co-convenor of the West Papua Project at the University of Wollongong, which advocates for peace and justice in West Papua.
He said the decision to send students home so close to finishing their degrees was perplexing.
“After having expended probably in excess of $100,000, or maybe considerably more, in paying multiple years’ university fees and living allowances … it doesn’t make sense,” Dr Elmslie said.
In a text message to one student in Australia, an Indonesian Embassy official said the students could seek alternative funding for their studies, but they were “no longer the responsibility” of the Papuan provincial government.
The text message also said the students would receive help to transfer to relevant degrees at universities in Indonesia when they returned home.
But Dr Elmslie said the alternatives were not ideal.
“If you start a degree course in Australia, to me, it’s much better … to finish that degree course,” he said.
“And then you have a substantial academic qualification.”
President of the Council of International Students Australia Oscar Ong said the situation was highly unusual.
He said that, while some international students weren’t able to graduate within the duration of their scholarship, for so many to be recalled at once was unprecedented.
Legislative change and redistribution of funding The Papuan provincial government did not respond to the ABC’s detailed questions about the scholarship program.
Local media reports suggest the issue may be linked to a redistribution of funding.
The scholarship programme was set up by the Papuan provincial government, with money from the Indonesian central government under a Special Autonomy Law.
Passed in 2001, the bill granted special autonomy to the West Papua region, following a violent and decades-long fight for independence.
The old law expired in November and new legislation was passed, with an overall boost in finance to the region but with certain funds, including support for education, going towards districts and cities instead of provincial governments.
That revised law has sparked protests in West Papua, with critics claiming it is an extension of colonial rule that denies Indigenous peoples’ rights to self-determination.
An Interior Ministry official from the Indonesian government is quoted in local media as saying there needed to be a joint conversation between the Papuan provincial government and the region’s districts and cities about the future of scholarship funding.
The ABC has been unable to independently verify whether the students’ scholarship terminations are linked to this legislative change.
Additional reporting for Pacific Beat by Hellena Souisa and Erwin Renaldi. Republished with permission.
Former Solomon Islands Prime Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo says the country needs an economic solution to its instability problems, not a security solution.
Lilo said he could not understand how current Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare could justify signing a security cooperation agreement with China to quell public discontent in his government’s handling of national affairs.
Lilo was supporting calls for the document to be made public in the interest of transparency and accountability.
“The best thing to help our people … to understand better on government is for government to take responsibility to manage our economy,” Lilo said.
“Create more employment, create more investment, that to me is a better way of securing a better society for our country, than to militarise this country,” he said.
Lilo served as prime minister of Solomon Islands from 2011 to 2014.
‘Beggars have no choice’
Meanwhile, another former prime minister, Danny Philip, who is now a backbencher in the Sogavare government, said Solomon Islands was “open to all sorts of things” because “beggars do not have a choice”.
He said Solomon Islands was mindful of the interplay between the superpowers in the Pacific, but the country did not want to be drawn into geopolitical battles.
“Yes, the US has always been there. But for the first time ever in 80 years they’ve sent very high officials to the Solomon Islands at the moment,” he said.
“We have with arrangements with Australia, which is very much US-mandated agreement. Australia is referred to by President Bush, I think as the as the ‘deputy sheriff’ of the United States in the Pacific.”
Solomon Islanders treated with ‘disrespect‘
A senior journalist in Honiara said Solomon Islanders were being treated disrespectfully and kept in the dark over the government’s security pact with China.
Speaking at a panel on the contentious treaty, Dorothy Wickham said most of the news coverage on the security arrangement had been focused on Australia and America’s positions.
“The government’s handling of the way it went about handling this treaty shows disrespect … to Solomon Islanders that there was no discussion, no consultation,” she said.
“Even a press release on the eve of the signing would have been a standard procedure and until today we have not had a press briefing or a press statement for a press briefing from the Prime Minister’s Office,” Wickham added.
She said the government had not meaningfully engaged with journalists to ensure that they could inform Solomon Islanders about what the security deal meant for them.
Wickham said local media had been struggling to refocus the narrative so that it was about Solomon Islands.
Pacific Islands Forum best place to discuss contentious security pact Meanwhile, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta said discussions on the security agreement signed between China and Solomon Islands needed to be inclusive of other Pacific nations.
Mahuta said the Pacific Islands Forum was the best platform for discussing regional security concerns.
“I have concerns that based on a number of representations to ensure that this is fully discussed because of the regional implications that this has not been given priority, certainly by Solomon Islands, they have given us assurances, we must take them at their word, respecting their sovereignty,” Mahuta said.
“However, regional security issues, regional sovereignty issues are a matter of a broader forum. We see the Pacific Islands Forum as the best place for this.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
On 12 April, 2022, the annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices was made public. The Human Rights Reports 2021 cover internationally recognized individual, civil, political, and worker rights, as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international agreements. The U.S. Department of State submits reports on all countries receiving assistance and all United Nations member states to the U.S. Congress in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Trade Act of 1974. For nearly five decades, the United States has issued the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, – in 2021, covering 198 countries and territories. The preface states that: “The Biden Administration has put human rights at the center of U.S. domestic and foreign policy. We have also recognized our nation has not always succeeded in protecting the dignity and rights of all Americans, despite the proclamations of freedom, equality, and justice in our founding documents. It is through the continued U.S. commitment to advance human rights, both domestically and internationally, that we best honor the generations of Americans who are Black, Brown, or other people of color, indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, LGBTQI+ persons, immigrants, women and girls, and other historically marginalized groups whose advocacy for their rights and for others has pushed America toward a “more perfect union.
President Biden has called the defense of democracy and human rights the defining challenge of our time. By convening the first Summit for Democracy in December 2021 – bringing together representatives from 100 governments as well as civil society and the private sector – he sparked global attention and vigor toward democratic renewal and respect for human rights. Participating governments made significant commitments to revitalize democracy at home and abroad at the first Summit on which we expect meaningful progress during the current Year of Action and before the time of a second Summit.
The reports paint a clear picture of where human rights and democracy are under threat. They highlight where governments have unjustly jailed, tortured, or even killed political opponents, activists, human rights defenders, or journalists, including in Russia, the People’s Republic of China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, and Syria. They document abuses of peaceful protestors demanding democracy and fundamental freedoms in countries such as Burma, Belarus, Cuba, Hong Kong, and Sudan. They highlight worrying cases of transnational repression – where governments reach across borders to harass, intimidate, or murder dissidents and their loved ones – as exemplified in the dangerous forced diversion by Belarus of an international commercial flight for the sole purpose of arresting a critical independent journalist.
But they also contain signs of progress and glimmers of hope, as the indomitable will to live freely can never be extinguished. In Iraq, people cast their votes to shape the future of their country in more credible and transparent parliamentary elections than in 2018. In Botswana, a court advanced the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons by upholding the decriminalization of same-sex relations. In Turkmenistan, all imprisoned Jehovah’s Witnesses conscientious objectors to military service were pardoned, a win for freedom of religion or belief. The stability, security, and health of any country depends on the ability of its people to freely exercise their human rights – to feel safe and included in their communities while expressing their views or gender, loving who they love, organizing with their coworkers, peacefully assembling, living by their conscience, and using their voices and reporting from independent media to hold governments accountable. There is much progress to be made, here in the United States and globally. But I know that by working together in the Year of Action and using resources like the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, we can come closer to building a world where respect for human rights is truly universal.
In a reaction on the report human rights activists focused on China said theat they want the State Department to reboot the report’s format to address documentation blind spots and connect it to policy and initiatives to stop the violations and provide accountability for victims.
“It’s a descriptive, objective document but largely of human rights developments that had been already extensively reported by the media, by NGOs, and by human rights bodies within the UN and in many cases at greater detail and length. … It is essentially a recap,” said Sharon Hom, executive director of the New York City-based nonprofit Human Rights in China. “Since it appears to take quite a bit of resources to produce each year, I’d say that going forward, they reference and aggregate some of the developments within three very important, bigger trends like digital authoritarianism, [foreign] influence operations, and [China’s] growing extraterritorial reach.” [from https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/13/china-activists-state-dept-human-rights-00024876]
The Inland Empire of Southern California is located about an hour and half east of Los Angeles and encompasses the largest county in the US, San Bernardino County, as well as Riverside County, and a myriad of diverse cities. In two neighbouring Southern California cities, Colton and San Bernardino, are where you’ll find Frank Ibarra – a walking gold mine of information, particularly in education and non-profit management.
Nearly everyone in the field of education in these parts has heard of Frank. He’s been on the Colton School Board as an elected official longer than anyone and also teaches for the San Bernardino Unified School District. He’s had experience as a sports coach and a mental health counsellor too.
I was therefore delighted to interview Frank, who was my colleague for several years. His combination of positive attitude, experience and faith in people’s ability to learn and grow that makes everyone like Frank.
Even though he and I worked with a challenging population—the formerly incarcerated—any problem was easy to surmount with Frank. He always has time to listen and has a ready smile.
Here are his seven top tips for building (and sustaining!) a thriving non-profit!
1. Don’t cut founding corners
Have a mission statement and a vision formally written down. Identify goals to reach your vision and steps to reach the goals.
Take time to draft the correct paperwork and ensure that you’ve fulfilled all legal obligations. There may be need for a board to oversee the organisation. Don’t take shortcuts; this is your foundation.
2. Be resource-driven
Try to make the organisation holistic in its outlook. Identify services you can offer via your funding. See who your organisation can link with to utilise their resources and refer clients to. Offer cooperation to your resource organisations.
3. Value each and every individual
Work with each individual and their needs. Always leave each person better off than when they came to you. Continually search for ways to teach new things to both staff and clients. You can’t assume what people know.
Keep an open door philosophy by being flexible, prepared, and willing to add to services.
4. Create a solid spirit of solidarity
Keeping fresh and open to change leads to dynamic, exciting and motivated staff – a team that can spot and utilise opportunities.
Don’t overlook volunteer power too; learn how to manage volunteers from someone experienced at engaging with volunteer groups.
5. Encourage communication
Not everyone is (always) in touch with everyone else in an organisation, so there’s a need for sit-downs on a regular basis. Make sure to share and communicate solid information and beat isolation.
Arrange team meetings and socials and further enhance communication with new techniques and workshops. Whatever the means, be sure to focus on working together as a team.
6. Take your commitment seriously
Search out internal and external methods that work well, and a responsible person for each area of work. Citizen participation is also important. A pitfall to avoid is autocratic leadership and a closed-minded approach.
Cheques and balances, and evaluation are important. They need to be inclusive, fair, and adaptable. They should be drafted and implemented in accordance with national laws.
7. Value change
Keep the organisation up to date. Other programmes out there will be changing, so yours should be adapting too!
Staff need to research what’s happening in the field and see how your organisation can best adapt. Remember: change is a friend, not an enemy.
If you’ve detected an underlying thread of love for one’s fellow human herein, you’re correct. It is this combination of care and dynamism on a solid foundation of goals and techniques that gets non-profit staff through difficult times, and that is what has kept Frank Ibarra going for some 40 years.
I’m in no doubt that his positive mark will be left on many long after he retires. Kudos to you Frank!
Find out more
For more information about charitable organisations in the UK, including how to register an organisation, please visit the Charity Commission website.
On Monday, 14 March, 2022 Secretary of State, Antony J. Blinken, hosted the annual International Women of Courage (IWOC) Awards in a virtual ceremony at the U.S. Department of State. The 2022 IWOC Award ceremony honours a group of twelve extraordinary women from around the world. The First Lady of the United States, Dr. Jill Biden, delivered remarks in recognition of the courageous accomplishments of this year’s IWOC awardees. For more on this award and its laureates, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/A386E593-5BB7-12E8-0528-AAF11BE46695
Out of an abundance of caution due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in order to practice safe social distancing, the ceremony was live streamed on www.state.gov.
Now in its 16th year, the Secretary of State’s IWOC Award recognizes women from around the globe who have demonstrated exceptional courage, strength, and leadership in advocating for peace, justice, human rights, gender equity and equality, and the empowerment of women and girls, in all their diversity – often at great personal risk and sacrifice. U.S. diplomatic missions overseas nominate one woman of courage from their respective host countries and finalists are selected and approved by senior Department officials. Following the virtual IWOC ceremony, the awardees will participate in an International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP) Virtual exchange to connect with their American counterparts and strengthen the global network of women leaders. The 2022 awardees are:
In a letter to President Biden, the organizations state: “More than four months since a discerning opinion by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention that found Steven Donziger’s detention to be arbitrary, U.S. judicial authorities have thus far failed to take any action to remedy the situation and implement the Working Group’s call to ensure Mr. Donziger’s immediate release.” See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/08/17/steven-donziger-speaks-out-himself-about-being-targetted-by-chevron
In a statement in October 2021, President Biden promised the U.S. would “stand in solidarity with, and continue to work tirelessly in support of, the activists, human rights defenders, and peaceful protestors on the front lines of the struggle between freedom and tyranny.”All the while, the administration has failed to side with the brave human rights defenders within the United States and respond to the demand of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Congress, and the international community to free Steven Donziger.
“Steven Donziger is a human rights defender that bravely stood up against one of the most powerful corporations in the world,” said Daniel Joloy of Amnesty International. “In response, he has endured years of harassment, intimidation, smear campaigns and more than two years in arbitrary detention. President Biden must now listen to the over 100 human rights and environmental organizations calling to pardon Steven Donziger and ensure he is released immediately and unconditionally. Allowing this ordeal to continue only sends a chilling message that corporations around the world can continue attacking human rights defenders without consequences.”
Paul Paz y Miño of Amazon Watch said “Instead of supporting the people of Ecuador who were poisoned by Chevron’s admitted deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste, Biden has turned a blind eye to the persecution of a key lawyer who worked to win a historic judgment against Chevron. The U.S. government’s responsibility should be to make Chevron clean up its waste and support efforts to hold the fossil fuel company accountable, not allow the appointment of a private prosecutor with ties to the very same oil company to imprison human rights lawyer Steven Donziger. This travesty has gone on for over two years, and Biden has ignored members of the E.U. parliament, members of the House and Senate, and even the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Well over 100 organizations are now demanding action, and Biden’s lack of action continues to be a dark stain on his alleged claims to respect human rights. Oil companies do not prosecute and imprison people in the U.S. This must end now.”
Chevron’s legal attack on Donziger is not the first, nor will it be the last case of its kind. Right now, the right to dissent is being repressed by both our government and corporations
Annie Leonard, co-Executive Director Greenpeace USA
Simon Taylor, Co-Founder & Director, Global Witness said “I have spent much of the past 25 years seeking accountability of the fossil fuel industry for its gross human rights abuses and other crimes. Amongst the judicial authorities we have liaised with during this time, the Southern District of New York has stood as a beacon in this fight against criminality. Shockingly, just as Biden gears up this struggle, New York’s judicial authorities seem instead intent on destroying their reputation, thanks to their apparent complicity in the unprecedented corporate prosecution and judicial harassment of Steven Donziger. These acts, in my experience, are more what I would expect from one of the ‘Banana Republics’ we have investigated around the world. These are shameful acts. If Biden is serious about tackling the climate crisis, he cannot allow the fossil fuel industry to weaponise the US judicial system to go after its detractors – Biden must act now and release Steven Donziger.”
The Wall Street Journal has an article out titled “U.S. Aims to Thwart China’s Plan for Atlantic Base in Africa“, subtitled “An American delegation wants to convince Equatorial Guinea against giving Beijing a launchpad in waters the U.S. considers its backyard.”
The article quotes the former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Tibor Nagy saying “We’d really, really not like to see a Chinese facility” on the Atlantic, and discusses “American concern about China’s global expansionism and its pursuit of a permanent military presence on waters the U.S. considers home turf.”
The Quincy Institute’s Trita Parsi has discussed the irony of WSJ yelling about China’s “global expansionism” over a potential military base in Equatorial Guinea without applying that label to the US, when the US has hundreds of times the number of foreign military bases as China. Antiwar’s Daniel Larison wrote an article back in December eviscerating the ridiculous claim that a military base some six thousand nautical miles from the US coastline could be reasonably framed as any kind of threat to the American people.
But what really jumps out is the insane way the US political/media class routinely talks about virtually every location on this planet as though it is a territory of the United States.
The Wall Street Journal referring to the entire Atlantic Ocean as “America’s backyard” and “waters the U.S. considers home turf” follows a recent controversy over the US president proclaiming that “Everything south of the Mexican border is America’s front yard.” This provoked many references to the so-called “Monroe Doctrine”, a nineteenth-century imperialist assertion that Latin America is off limits to any power apart from the United States, effectively declaring the entire Western Hemisphere the property of Washington, DC.
It also follows another incident in which Press Secretary Jen Psaki remarked on the ongoing tensions around Ukraine that it is in America’s interest to support “our eastern flank countries”, which might come as a surprise to those who were taught in school that America’s eastern flank was not Eastern Europe but the eastern coastline of the United States.
The casual way these people say such things reflects a collectively held worldview that you won’t find on any official document or in any schoolchild’s textbook, but which is nonetheless a firmly held perspective among all the drivers of the modern empire: that the entire world is the property of the US government. That the US is not just the most powerful government in the world but also its rightful ruler, in the same way Rome ruled the Christian world.
It’s not something they can come out and directly say, because admitting they see themselves as the rulers of the world would make them look tyrannical and megalomaniacal. But it’s certainly something they believe.
They’re about as obvious about it as could be. They make almost no effort to conceal it. And yet you’ll still get empire apologists like Michael McFaul saying nonsense like this:
class=”twitter-tweet” data-width=”550″>
There was a time, not long ago, when imperial powers like UK, France, Portugal etc claimed their colonies as their "sphere of influence." Thank God we didn't listen o them back then. So why now is it ok to let Russia exercise a sphere of influence over its former colony, Ukraine?
McFaul knows very well that the US is an imperial power and that it demands a very large “sphere of influence”.
Would you like to see a picture of America’s sphere of influence? Here you go:
To be a westerner is to be constantly inundated with made-up stories about tyrants who want to terrorize the world while living under a globe-spanning power structure that is actually terrorizing the world. It’s just so bizarre watching these imperial spinmeisters try to frame nations like China and Russia as freakish and backwards while working to literally rule the world like a comic book supervillain.
The US-centralized empire is quantifiably the single most destructive and evil power structure in today’s world. We shouldn’t want anyone to rule over the entire planet with an iron fist, but these monsters are the very least qualified among us to do so.
___________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here.
An umbrella organisation representing Papuan students worldwide has been formed with a renewed commitment to strengthening their efforts to gain “quality education”.
Five country groups affiliated to the International Alliance of Papuan Students Associations Overseas (IAPSAO) met virtually yesterday to make a united stance on Papuan education, affirming their appeal last month for Indonesian President Joko Widodo to hear their concerns.
Opening the meeting, Dessy F. Itaar, president of the Papuan Student Association in Russia (IMAPA Russia), declared that the organisation was committed to achieving quality education for Papuans.
“That’s our main goal. Whatever happens, we will keep fighting until we get our rights,” she said.
The virtual meeting was a continuation of an earlier consultation on January 26 when the students expressed concern over policy changes that they believed would impact on education and Papuan students studying abroad.
Other Papuan student associations affiliated to IAPSAO besides the Russian-based one include the Papuan Students Association in the United States and Canada (IMAPA USA-Canada), the Papuan Students Association in Japan (IMAPA Japan), the Papuan Students Association in Germany (PMP Germany) and the Papuan Students Association in Oceania (PSAO).
Previously, student presidents united under the IAPSAO name were known as the Association of Papuan Students Abroad.
Renaming witnessed
Witnessed during the virtual conference by hundreds of Papuan students from countries such as Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Russia, Germany, Indonesia and the United States, PSAO president Yan Piterson Wenda declared the renaming of the international organisation IAPSAO on behalf of the five presidents who were signatories.
Earlier, Itaar had stressed that although Papuan students were sent overseas to focus on their studies, it was important for the presidents to unite and speak out about the problems faced by fellow students.
“As presidents who represent every organisation that we lead, there is one moral burden that we carry — which is not thinking about ourselves, we must think about all members in each organisation,” she said.
Only Papuans know the struggle of Papuan inner souls, so Papuans should first help each other before other people help Papuans, Itaar said.
“The only people who can wake us up are Papuans.
When “our friends from the USA and New Zealand shared their struggles”, fellow Papuans from Japan, Russia and Germany agreed to support them.
“We Papuan children must get a quality education, whatever it is,” she said.
No political agenda
“Meilani S. Ramandey, president of IMAPA Japan, said the working team demanding the rights of the current and future Papuan generations had no political agenda. It worked only for educational issues.
“As Papuan students, we stick to this principle, it is not affiliated with any kind of political agenda.”
The students want to know the status of their scholarship programme, which is run under the policies of Papua provincial Governor Lukas Enembe.
“This is important so that all of us do not misunderstand,” said Ramandey.
Reporting on a meeting last week between representatives of the Papuan Students Association in Oceania and the Indonesian Ambassador to New Zealand, Fientje Maritje Suebu, and the head of the Papua Province Human Resources Development Bureau (HRDB), Aryoko Rumaropen, and his staff, PSAO president Yan Piterson Wenda recalled that the bureau had no power to respond to demands by the students.
“The Head of HRDB appreciates the steps taken by the students. The HRDB is disappointed with the policies taken by the central government, so the Indonesian Embassy must respond to this problem,” Wenda said.
“Then, the HRDB said frankly that they had no money. That’s why now all of my friends can’t buy food and pay for accommodation and other needs.
“In principle, HRDB is with us and will forward our aspirations to the Governor. We are waiting for the embassy to proceed with our demands.”
Embassy responded well
Dimison Kogoya, president of the Papuan Students Association in the United States and Canada, reported that the Indonesian Embassy in USA and Canada had responded well to the students’ letter.
“We have held a meeting and at the time of the meeting, we emphasised that our demands should be forwarded to the President,” said a computer science student at Johnson and Wales University in North Carolina.
President Reza Rumbiak of the Papuan Students Association in Germany said Papuan students who were studying in Germany remained in solidarity with students in the USA and New Zealand.
He said a letter had been received from the Indonesian Embassy in Berlin in response to the request by students for a meeting with the President – but the reply contained 18 points of rebuttal.
“The pressure on me as president is very intense. But we in Germany support our brothers and sisters in the USA and New Zealand, because our DNA as Papuans is communal,” said Rumbiak.
IAPSAO issued a four-point declaration to:
Make the International Alliance of Papuan Student Associations Overseas (IAPSAO) an umbrella organisation for all Papuan student organisations domiciled overseas;
Improve and maximise coordination and communication in efforts to protect, prevent, anticipate, and defend the educational rights of Papuan students overseas;
Affirm IASAO is an independent and academic forum; and
Make decisions in this forum based on mutual consensus.
In Newsweek of 3 February 2022 Omar Baddar, Director of the Arab American Institute, published an opinion piece entitled “Amnesty Settles It: It’s Time for U.S. Accountability on Israel”.
Amnesty International, issued on 1 February 2022 an extensive report titled “Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime against Humanity.” As the report documents, “Israel has imposed a system of oppression and domination over Palestinians wherever it exercises control over the enjoyment of their right.” The report further found that Israel’s policies are part of a “systematic as well as widespread attack directed against the Palestinian population, and that the inhuman or inhumane acts committed within the context of this attack have been committed with the intention to maintain this system and amount to the crime against humanity of apartheid.“
Omar Baddar, states: The most important consequence of this consensus is that it lays to rest the false but popular notion of an “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” between two equal sides. The new consensus instead frames the issue more accurately as a struggle between an oppressor and an oppressed people. In the same way that Apartheid in South Africa and Jim Crow segregation in the American South denied people the ability to live in freedom with their full rights simply because of who they are, Israel also denies freedom to Palestinians and many basic rights to Palestinians just because they are Palestinians.
Like the Human Rights Watch report before it, what’s remarkable about the new Amnesty report is how extensive and detailed it is. Amnesty did its due diligence and made sure that its central claims are backed by a mountain of evidence, meticulously documenting unlawful killings, forced displacement and systemic discrimination on a massive scale. Unsurprisingly, the devastating and irreproachable nature of this report triggered a meltdown among Israel’s apologists. See for this also: https://yubanet.com/world/human-rights-organizations-from-israel-condemn-vicious-attacks-on-amnesty-international/
Unable to argue with the substance of the Amnesty report, pro-Israel groups have resorted either to blindly asserting—as AIPAC did—that Amnesty was lying, or baselessly claiming—as the ADL did—that the report would spark antisemitic attacks. The latter is nothing short of a cynical weaponization of antisemitism—which, in fact, is a serious and rising scourge in America and across the world—unscrupulously exploited in order to silence criticism of Israeli government policy.
We cannot have the open debate we need in a free society if speaking honestly about Israeli policy results in smears of bigotry. By misusing the charge of antisemitism in this fashion, Israel’s apologists aren’t just harming the human rights defenders being smeared by it; they’re also harming the real effort to eliminate antisemitism—a goal that we all have a moral obligation to come together and accomplish.
What this Amnesty report should have done is serve as a wake-up call to an American political establishment that prioritizes pandering over sensible policy, and that has turned a blind eye to a grave injustice for far too long. After all, it is U.S. military funding, to the unrivaled tune of $3.8 billion per year, which enables the Israeli military to maintain its suffocating grip on the occupied Palestinian population, and it is U.S. diplomatic protection, through more than 40 vetoes at the UN Security Council and beyond, that shields Israel from accountability for its crimes.
And yet, despite repeatedly claiming to prioritize human rights in its foreign policy, the Biden administration’s reaction to this report was utterly disappointing. The administration rejected it out of hand.
The Amnesty report bemoans the fact that, “for over seven decades, the international community has stood by as Israel has been given free rein to dispossess, segregate, control, oppress and dominate Palestinians.” It criticizes countries like ours that have “actively supported Israel’s violations by supplying it with arms, equipment and other tools to perpetrate crimes under international law and by providing diplomatic cover, including at the UN Security Council, to shield it from accountability.” The report also reiterated its call for “states to immediately suspend the direct and indirect supply, sale or transfer of all weapons, munitions and other military and security equipment.”
A global Papuan students abroad umbrella organisation has appealed for a meeting with President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to air their grievances over changes to the scholarship system which they say are unfairly impacting on their studies.
In a statement today responding to a letter by the Indonesian Ambassador to New Zealand and the Pacific to Asia Pacific Report yesterday, the International Alliance of Papuan Students Association Overseas (IAPSAO) said: “Our demands are clear. So, the Indonesian Embassy should not obscure our demands.
“When the Indonesian Embassy does not fight to save 42 students in New Zealand and 84 students in the USA, we suspect that the Indonesian Embassy is also involved in the attempt to kill Papuan human resources.”
The student alliance which represents Papuan affiliates in Canada, Germany, Oceania (including Australia and New Zealand), Japan and Russia, challenged statements made by Ambassador Fientje Maritje Suebu published in Asia Pacific Report yesterday.
The embassy’s claim that students were being repatriated because of no progress “is not true and baseless”, according to the data issued by the Papua Province Human Resources Development Agency.
“Currently, all the students whose names are listed in the letter, are all studying in their respective programmes. Some are already in their second year, third year and some are finishing their final project or thesis,” said the IAPSAO statement signed by Oceania president Yan Piterson Wenda and four other student presidents.
The statement said that IAPSAO and the coordinator of the Papua province scholarship in New Zealand, “have investigated this … Some of the names listed on the list have completed their studies.
‘What is the motive?’
“We cannot find any reason why students who are making good progress are also listed. Therefore, we question what is the motive for this incorrect data?”
The statement cited a letter issued by the Papua Province Human Resources Development Agency dated 17 December 2021 regarding the termination of overseas scholarships — 42 students in New Zealand and 84 students in the USA.
“So, the numbers issued by the Indonesian Embassy — 39 students in New Zealand and 51 students in the United States — are incorrect.”
The IAPSAO reply to the Indonesian Embassy. Image: APR
While IAPSAO conceded there were no actual education budget cuts, it said the Jakarta central government had revoked the authority held by the governor as a regional head.
“The problem is not about the budget, but about the authority to set the budget and other important things,” the statement said.
“The sending and financing of Papuan students abroad are based on the ‘policy of the Governor’ Lukas Enembe, not from the central government.
“Once the Special Autonomy Law volume two was passed, the governor’s authority was also limited, and automatically it is affecting students, the recipients of Papua province Foreign Scholarship.”
The students added: “We have no political agenda in issuing public statements. We demand our right to study in peace and quiet.”
The Indonesian government has denied claims by an umbrella group representing Papuan students on scholarships abroad that it is “assassinating” the provincial programme supporting studies in New Zealand and several other countries.
An open letter last week signed by the presidents of the International Alliance of Papuan Student Associations Overseas (IAPSAO) and five affiliated associations headed “Do not disturb and hinder [us] — leave us [to] study in peace” declared that funding policy changes created under the controversial new autonomy statute would impact on their education.
Student sources said that at least 125 Papuan students — 41 of them studying in New Zealand — had been ordered home under a new policy reallocating education funds.
Some Papuan students studying in Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United Sates were also affected, the alliance said.
The IAPSAO open letter was also signed by the presidents of five affiliated Papuan student associations around the world.
But the recently appointed new Indonesian Ambassador to New Zealand and the Pacific, Fientje Maritje Suebu, said in a letter to Asia Pacific Report today that the repatriation of students was based on a “thorough assessment” begun in 2017 by the provincial government of Papua over their achievements at their respective educational institutions.
“On 5 January 2022, the provincial government of Papua informed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the planned repatriation of 98 students – 51 students in the US, 5 students in the Philippines, 3 students in Canada and 39 students in New Zealand,” she said.
593 students on Papua scholarship
The recalled students were part of a total of 593 students receiving the “Papua Autonomy Scholarship”.
The Indonesian Embassy letter to Asia Pacific Report today. Image: APR screenshot
The ambassador said the repatriation decision did not impact on students who remained “on-track” with their studies abroad.
The assessment was also conducted to “ensure that other eligible students from Papua province” would have the same opportunity to study.
Ambassador Suebu said there were no budget cuts for Papuan autonomy funds, including for education.
She said the government was “committed to ensuring the fulfilment of the right to education and capacity building for all Indonesian citizens, including through the provision of scholarships to pursue academic degrees overseas”.
She criticised “those elements who shamelessly manipulate the situation of Papuan students abroad for their own deceitful political agenda”.
The ambassador also criticised Asia Pacific Report over publishing the “baseless account” by the students, a criticism rejected by the APR editors who said the news website was one of the very few news portals that consistently gave comprehensive and fair coverage on West Papuan and human rights affairs in the region.
The editors also pointed out that the ambassador failed to acknowledge either the students’ open letter or their concerns.
The IAPSAO open letter was signed by the presidents of the Papuan Students Association in Oceania, Papuan Students Association in the United States of America and Canada, Papuan Students Association in Russia, Papua Students Association in Germany and the Papua Students Association in Japan.
Papuan students in New Zealand with the Papuan provincial Governor Lukas Enembe in Palmerston North during his visit to New Zealand in 2019. Image: APR File
(@MonicaFalk64) 
